Hi Friends;
As some of you know, I work midnight shift. I like my job, for the most part, but I don't like the effect it has had on my body. I don't sleep well at all, I eat poorly, and I can consume coffee in buckets only to still be sleepy.
One of my goals this year is to get a grip on my weight problem. I'm about 100 pounds over weight, spread over a 6'5" body - not too terrible but still not very attractive or healthy. A portion of that is due to the sleep problems and metabolism problems, but a great deal is due to very poor decisions as well. So, as I begin to research this and try to find my way, I will post things now and again. Wish me luck.
I found the following on the web. It's not my writing, but it seems good information.
Posted on March 24, 2012
For us midnight shifters, its often hard to come up with a meal that will satisfy us all night long and not leaving us with a stomach ache. The Center of Disease and Control states that 3rd shifters experience a higher rate of digestive problems than “normal people”. Well, why is this? The answer is that the body’s digestive system slows down at night, and this poses a problem when we eat greasy, fatty foods during our shift. These foods can trigger digestive problems such as heart burn or acid reflux. This is where it turns into a nasty cycle. Who relies on coffee or soda to stay awake during the shift? Who drinks this stuff the entire shift? The problem this creates is we are not tired when we get home. Add this to the heart burn and you’re in for a full day of broken sleep. The lack of sleep can cause an increased risk of Heart Disease, Diabetes and a decreased ability to fight off infections. This might be why we see more sick call outs from midnight shifters.
So what can we do?
Focus on Complex Carbohydrates and Vitamin D-Rich foods. It is obvious that we have less exposure to sunlight than everyone else, no, the florescent lights and computer monitors do not make up for this lack of Vitamin D.
Foods such as Oat Meal, Cereals, Milk…they are all high in Vitamin D. Eating foods high in Vitamin D will help your body produce the needed hormones to function properly and will also assist the bones with absorbing calcium. Complex Carbohydrates are high in fiber. Fiber is proven to improve digestion, stabilize your blood sugar, keep your energy at an even level all while keeping you satisfied longer. These carbs take longer to break down and will release a steady stream of energy for a longer time, lasting your entire shift.
It is suggested that you make your meals ahead of time, maybe at the beginning of the week. Separate them out in portion sized containers. Its all about portions. Also, pack some bottled water instead of sodas or drinks high in sugar. If you must have a soda or iced tea, pack a diet soda or unsweetened tea. Along with your meal, be sure to pack a healthy, light snack. AVOID THE VENDING MACHINE!!!
A list of some Complex Carbs
Spinach
Apples
Pears
Oranges
Oatmeal
Brown Rice
Strawberries
Broccoli
Eggplant
Skim Milk
Potatoes
Carrots
Celery
Dill Pickles
Low Fat Yogurt
Now, on to the exercise part…bla…
It is best to work out before your shift. Working out in the morning before going home will make it much more difficult to fall asleep. Find a gym with a 24 hour membership to join.
So, in conclusion…remember these things. No greasy foods, they mess up your digestive system, making it harder to sleep, giving you more health risks. Eat Complex Carbs and Vitamin D-Rich foods. NO coffee and NO sugar. Exercise before your shift and stretch and walk for a few minutes during your shift.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Incarceration and Debt
Hello friends;
I can't imbed the video. Please click on the link and watch it on CNN.
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/30/zakaria-incarceration-nation-2/?hpt=hp_c2
March 30th, 2012
By Fareed Zakaria, CNN
Something caught my eye the other day: Pat Robertson, the high priest of the religious right, had some startling things to say about drugs.
"I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol," Mr. Robertson said in a recent interview. "I've never used marijuana and I don't intend to, but it's just one of those things that I think. This war on drugs just hasn't succeeded."
The reason Robertson is for legalizing marijuana is that it has created a prison problem in America that is well beyond what most Americans imagine.
"It's completely out of control," Mr. Robertson said. "Prisons are being overcrowded with juvenile offenders having to do with drugs. And the penalties - the maximums - some of them could get 10 years for possession of a joint of marijuana. It makes no sense at all."
He’s right. Here are the numbers: The total number of Americans under correctional supervision (prison, parole, etc.) is 7.1 million, more than the entire state of Massachusetts. Adam Gopnik writes in the New Yorker, "Over all, there are now more people under 'correctional supervision' in America...than were in the Gulag Archipelago under Stalin at its height."
No other country comes even close to our rates of incarceration. We have 760 prisoners per 100,000 people. Most European countries have one seventh that number (per capita, so it's adjusted for population). Even those on the high end of the global spectrum - Brazil and Poland - have only a quarter the number we do.
If you say this is some kind of enduring aspect of America's "Wild West" culture, you would be wrong. In 1980, our rates of incarceration were a quarter what they are now. What changed was the war on drugs and the mindless proliferation of laws that created criminal penalties for anything and everything. If you don’t believe me, listen to Pat Roberston again. Here's a quote:
"We here in America make up 5% of the world's population, but we make up 25% of jailed prisoners....We have now over 3,000 - the number must be might higher than that - but over 3,000 federal crimes, and every time the liberals pass a bill - I don't care what it involves - they stick criminal sanctions on it. They don't feel there is any way people are going to keep a law unless they can put them in jail.... So we have the jails filled with people who are white collar criminals.
In the past two decades, the money that states spend on prisons has risen at six times the rate of spending on higher education. In 2011, California spent $9.6 billion on prisons, versus $5.7 billion on higher education. Since 1980, California has built one college campus; it's built 21 prisons. The state spends $8,667 per student per year. It spends about $50,000 per inmate per year.
Why is this happening? Prisons are a big business. Most are privately run. They have powerful lobbyists and they have bought most state politicians. Meanwhile, we are bankrupting out states and creating a vast underclass of prisoners who will never be equipped for productive lives.
I never thought I'd say this, but God bless you, Pat Robertson
Hi Friends;
Gees! I find myself in the same boat here.... I never would have thought I'd see Pat Robertson as a voice of reason and logic. Go figure.
One of the odd things I realized as I was reading this and thinking on what I wanted to say about it.... we in America, where "liberty" seems such a catch word, have made a practice and knee-jerk jovial reaction that includes the very elimination of said liberty. Is crime acceptable? Of course not. I don't advocate it, but I also don't advocate the ruination of a life for it. You've all heard my take on the so called "juvenile justice system". Drug offenses, the big evil of the 80's and 90's, filled a lot of cells for a very long sentence. And, if you are convicted of a sex offense, once you have done your time the state continues to punish you - in some cases for life. What have we become?
hugs.
randy.
I can't imbed the video. Please click on the link and watch it on CNN.
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/30/zakaria-incarceration-nation-2/?hpt=hp_c2
March 30th, 2012
By Fareed Zakaria, CNN
Something caught my eye the other day: Pat Robertson, the high priest of the religious right, had some startling things to say about drugs.
"I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol," Mr. Robertson said in a recent interview. "I've never used marijuana and I don't intend to, but it's just one of those things that I think. This war on drugs just hasn't succeeded."
The reason Robertson is for legalizing marijuana is that it has created a prison problem in America that is well beyond what most Americans imagine.
"It's completely out of control," Mr. Robertson said. "Prisons are being overcrowded with juvenile offenders having to do with drugs. And the penalties - the maximums - some of them could get 10 years for possession of a joint of marijuana. It makes no sense at all."
He’s right. Here are the numbers: The total number of Americans under correctional supervision (prison, parole, etc.) is 7.1 million, more than the entire state of Massachusetts. Adam Gopnik writes in the New Yorker, "Over all, there are now more people under 'correctional supervision' in America...than were in the Gulag Archipelago under Stalin at its height."
No other country comes even close to our rates of incarceration. We have 760 prisoners per 100,000 people. Most European countries have one seventh that number (per capita, so it's adjusted for population). Even those on the high end of the global spectrum - Brazil and Poland - have only a quarter the number we do.
If you say this is some kind of enduring aspect of America's "Wild West" culture, you would be wrong. In 1980, our rates of incarceration were a quarter what they are now. What changed was the war on drugs and the mindless proliferation of laws that created criminal penalties for anything and everything. If you don’t believe me, listen to Pat Roberston again. Here's a quote:
"We here in America make up 5% of the world's population, but we make up 25% of jailed prisoners....We have now over 3,000 - the number must be might higher than that - but over 3,000 federal crimes, and every time the liberals pass a bill - I don't care what it involves - they stick criminal sanctions on it. They don't feel there is any way people are going to keep a law unless they can put them in jail.... So we have the jails filled with people who are white collar criminals.
In the past two decades, the money that states spend on prisons has risen at six times the rate of spending on higher education. In 2011, California spent $9.6 billion on prisons, versus $5.7 billion on higher education. Since 1980, California has built one college campus; it's built 21 prisons. The state spends $8,667 per student per year. It spends about $50,000 per inmate per year.
Why is this happening? Prisons are a big business. Most are privately run. They have powerful lobbyists and they have bought most state politicians. Meanwhile, we are bankrupting out states and creating a vast underclass of prisoners who will never be equipped for productive lives.
I never thought I'd say this, but God bless you, Pat Robertson
Hi Friends;
Gees! I find myself in the same boat here.... I never would have thought I'd see Pat Robertson as a voice of reason and logic. Go figure.
One of the odd things I realized as I was reading this and thinking on what I wanted to say about it.... we in America, where "liberty" seems such a catch word, have made a practice and knee-jerk jovial reaction that includes the very elimination of said liberty. Is crime acceptable? Of course not. I don't advocate it, but I also don't advocate the ruination of a life for it. You've all heard my take on the so called "juvenile justice system". Drug offenses, the big evil of the 80's and 90's, filled a lot of cells for a very long sentence. And, if you are convicted of a sex offense, once you have done your time the state continues to punish you - in some cases for life. What have we become?
hugs.
randy.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Ah, yes. The "sanctity" of marriage...
Hi friends;
I had the tv on while checking my email, visiting friend's sites, etc. This came across the so called "news" as I just read a comment about the previous post. I will ask you to simply click on the link and then ask yourself.....Sanctity? http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/46903172/ns/today-relationships/t/first-divorce-expo-us-aims-empower-attendees/
hugs.
I had the tv on while checking my email, visiting friend's sites, etc. This came across the so called "news" as I just read a comment about the previous post. I will ask you to simply click on the link and then ask yourself.....Sanctity? http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/46903172/ns/today-relationships/t/first-divorce-expo-us-aims-empower-attendees/
hugs.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
I would like to see his "evidence".
"Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the garden between Adam and Eve. One man, one woman for life till death do you part," says Cameron. "So do I support the idea of gay marriage? No, I don't."
Morgan then asked the born-again Christian if he thought homosexuality was a sin. To that, Cameron replied, "I think that it's unnatural. I think that it's -- it's detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization."
http://mxp.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/07/kirk-cameron-responds-to-backlash-over-anti-gay-comments/?iref=obnetwork
Hi Friends;
I really liked Kirk in the show he did as a teenager. Over the years, he has found himself a lifestyle and outlook that seems to work well for him. For him. I do support his right to it, even his right to his opinion and freedom of speech. My question regarding his claims that homosexuality is "unnatural, detrimental and ultimately destructive...." is to ask - says who?
I will agree to a point. For someone oriented heterosexual, homosexual activites may be unnatural. But, to someone who is homosexual, it's the very definition of natural.
How is homosexuality detrimental to the foundation of civilization? The atomic bomb is destructive to the foundation of civilization. The loving and nurturing relationship shared between two men cannot be seen as anything but positive. Further, it is a positive and productive union, resulting in all the same general positives as a good heterosexual marriage. The only difference, the homosexual relationship in of itself does not produce children.
So, tell me Kirk, and anyone else... how again is that destructive?
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
At first I was going to leave this one be.... nah!
The Hoodie!
As our good friend Geraldo Rivera spelled out so earnestly in his recent cant oddly clearly heard despite having his head so far up his ass, it is the hoodie, that terrible and terrifying garment from hell, that has once again taken a fine young man to his grave and cast the innocent and pure George Zimmerman into legal limbo. God Damn those Hoodies!!!!!!!
I, for instance, always quake in the presence of a hoodie sweatshirt. They frighten me. How can it not? Obviously a creation of satan, designed purely for the criminal element. An artifice of evil. Men stand in awe, in outright fear from the very concept. Yet, the garment persists.
There can be no Peace with hoodies. There can be no love with hoodies. They are the devil's spawn, my people. Don't you see!
Ok, mayhap I've over sold my point. It's happened before.
For those of you who don't know, a young man by the name of Treyvon Martin was stalked, eventually killed, by a man who was supposedly the local neighborhood watch captain. An armed watch captain, which is against the rules, and one who was told by the police dispatcher to stay away from the kid. This man, George Zimmerman, failed to pass the tests required to be a police officer, most likely those dealing with aggression, delusions of grandeur and self importance, autocracy, etc. He stalked this young man for "looking like he was into something:" - yeah, he was into a jug of sweet tea and a bag of Skittles.
Geraldo Rivera, that bastion of broadcasting, that poet laureate of journalism, that epic man of morality and authenticity, declared that George Zimmerman may be at fault. It could be true. He's sort of holding his opinion there. But, the hoodie sweatshirt that the lad was wearing was "just as much at fault". Huh? SEE LINK George Zimmerman has not been charged with a crime. Yet.
Why? Well, it was the hoodie, of course. Of course! Of course. It couldn't be that the lad was of dark complexion. So-called Black. Nope. It was that damn hoodie sweatshirt.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
The Apology
- Paul Boese
One of the oddest conversations I had with my father was over the "apology" to the Afghan people. Dad said it is repugnant to apologize to the enemy.
Oops....
Who is my enemy? To some, anyone of the Muslim faith is an enemy. Any Arab, Palestinian, Syrian, Iraqi or Iranian, any Afghan... is that what we as a people want to understand as 'My Enemy'?
I've always thought that we as a people, in many ways all western society, seem to excel in those environments where we are sure who our enemy is and can hate them without hesitation. It's usually best to have someone far away, of course, so that we never really get to know them. And, it's usually best if they think different than we do, wear different clothes, have different beliefs, and especially if they look different.
In war it is easy to understand the enemy. He's the one pointing a rifle at you, right? Well, for the soldier, that is true. But, if you widen your scope you begin to see not the soldier, but the troop movement. Widen further, and you see not just the troop movement, but how that movement can effect your own goals and security. Widen further and we begin to see perhaps the man behind the movement. We see the Field Marshal, the King, the President.
If I am a soldier and I defeat another soldier, well, he is doing his job and I am doing mine. If I am a General and I defeat the enemy's expansion, well, I've done my job while that other general did his best to do his. If I am a king or a president, and I defeat the leader of the other country, well, I've done my job and he failed to do his. All is relatively well in this scenario, outside the nightmares of the soldier or the general, or even the president for the cost of actions taken. What happens, though, when a soldier kills not another soldier but a civilian? What happens when a general takes over a land and subjugates a people, changing their very way of life? What happens when a president gives an order that decimates a country? It is out of ones job.... the actions go beyond the rules of civility.
It's easy to say 'kill them all' when the trigger is in someone else's hands. It's easy to play 'couch-potato quarterback'. After all, I can spout out my little hatreds far from the killing fields, far from the action, far from the consequences. I can declare my leaders incompetent and weak without recrimination because I live a cushy life. But, if we are to place a man/woman in leadership, we expect them to lead, to seek out the future, to create a world we would want to live in. I don't know if admitting when one is wrong is able to be considered "aiding and comforting the enemy". I don't know if making war upon a people or a religion is what some think we are doing. I do know that if we are so wild as to be incapable of defining our objectives, declaring our enemies, and deciding our course of achieving our goals, we best stay home and bitch from the couch.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Please see this site...
Hi Friends;
I've not pushed SadCat's site for a little bit now, so I think it's time. Please click on the pick of Billy Lucas' shoes in my side bar, or HERE, and it will link you to the site "The Price of Hate". I've included SadCat's header bar here. The highlighted section at the bottom really caught my attention today, had me reread some things.
Also, please see this vid. I can't capture it for repost here, but I have a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsfkKzAbfhA
What struck me were the comments under the video. People remembering being bullied, and kids being bullied - as the song say, 'for being who they are'.
The Price of Hate
The purpose of this blog is to list the children who commit suicide or are killed because of their sexual orientation, or their perceived sexual orientation. The various professional religious hate organizations out there are fond of telling everyone how they are being victimized because their religious beliefs apparently force them to hate LGBT people. But what about the rights of these children who really pay the price for their attempts to institutionalize their bigotry and hate?
That's what this admittedly depressing site is going to try to do. Remind these people that hatred does have a price. You don't get to go around proclaiming "Protect the Children!", while contributing to their deaths.
I'm talking to you FRC*, AFA*, NOM, CWA*, ADF, FOtF and so many others.
* These groups are listed as hate groups by the SPLC.
I've not pushed SadCat's site for a little bit now, so I think it's time. Please click on the pick of Billy Lucas' shoes in my side bar, or HERE, and it will link you to the site "The Price of Hate". I've included SadCat's header bar here. The highlighted section at the bottom really caught my attention today, had me reread some things.
Also, please see this vid. I can't capture it for repost here, but I have a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsfkKzAbfhA
What struck me were the comments under the video. People remembering being bullied, and kids being bullied - as the song say, 'for being who they are'.
The Price of Hate
The purpose of this blog is to list the children who commit suicide or are killed because of their sexual orientation, or their perceived sexual orientation. The various professional religious hate organizations out there are fond of telling everyone how they are being victimized because their religious beliefs apparently force them to hate LGBT people. But what about the rights of these children who really pay the price for their attempts to institutionalize their bigotry and hate?
That's what this admittedly depressing site is going to try to do. Remind these people that hatred does have a price. You don't get to go around proclaiming "Protect the Children!", while contributing to their deaths.
I'm talking to you FRC*, AFA*, NOM, CWA*, ADF, FOtF and so many others.
* These groups are listed as hate groups by the SPLC.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Great Questions
Hi Friends;
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but these are some incredible quesitons. How come we don't hear more of them?
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but these are some incredible quesitons. How come we don't hear more of them?
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Jordan Brown Update - a link to Melissa's blog
There has been a blue ribbon on my site for some time with a name underneath. It is the name of a boy, now a teenager, and the horrifying story of what has gone on in the "name" of justice.
Jordan Brown is just one of a growing number of children caught in the legal system of our "caring and Christian country". I've blogged about him before, but reading Scottie's article about the concern in the high courts for life sentences given to juveniles has brought this young man's plight back to mind.
I encourage you to go to Melissa's blog and read about this boy arrested at age 11 and some three years later has yet to have his day in court. As you read this, consider if this was your child, your niece/nephew, your neighbor - going through this. Consider how you would want that child treated. Then ask yourself if this is something worth attention. Is this how you expect juvenile defendents to be treated in your community.
http://justice4juveniles.wordpress.com/2012/02/19/jordan-browns-three-year-fight-for-justice/
hugs;
randy
Is It 1984 Already?
The SOPA and PIPA bills that went down in flames earlier this year for their unbearable intrusiveness, used content piracy as an excuse to give the government powerful tools with which to censor Internet content.
SOPA replacement uses child porn as excuse to spy on 99.7 percent of Americans
For 2012 the primary author of those bills has switched to a fallback tactic: using child porn as an excuse to create a vast surveillance network from which the government can demand data on every email sent, site visited or link clicked on by all but a fraction of one percent of the U.S. population.
Internet anti-censorship advocates including Anonymous are calling for the ouster of Texas Congressman Lamar Smith, who is following his co-sponsorship of the failed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) with a bill critics call "Big Brother" disguised as an effort to curb child porn and sexual abuse.
Last May Smith, a Texas Republican credited as primary author of both SOPA and PIPA, the Senate version, also introduced H.R. 1981, a bill called the "Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011″ (PCFIPA).
The anti-child-porn provisions in the bill are a "fig leaf for its true purpose: A sweeping data retention requirement meant to turn Internet Service Providers and online companies into surrogate snoops for the government’s convenience," according to Julian Sanchez, Internet privacy and censorship researcherat the center-right Cato Institute.
The bill amends existing laws empowering the U.S. Marshals Service to issue subpoenas and chase fugitives.
The amendments expand the Marshals' ability to issue subpoenas and adds online pornographers to their list of top targets.
The important, though administrivia-looking part of the bill is this: "A provider of an electronic communication service... shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account... records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code..." – FCPIFA, H.R. 1981
ISPs are already required to keep some customers' activity records for 180 days, so this doesn't look like a big change.
Except, PCFIPA, HR 1981, requires ISPs keep track of every single IP address they assign (except to wireless users) and all the activity flowing across that link.
It doesn't limit itself to just ISPs, either. By addressing the bill to cover any company providing "electronic communications" or "remote computing" services, the bill effectively covers any site offering services online.
PCFIPA, HR 1981, reverses that point of view (as did PIPA and SOPA), to create a vast database of every action of ever American online – a deep pool of data on the activity of millions of Internet users, through whose private activity they can sift at will until they find something that looks like evidence of a crime.
That's exactly the opposite of the intent of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment prevents police from searching, questioning, holding or otherwise harassing suspects unless a judge agrees there's a good reason to investigate a specific person for a specific crime.
Accusations that PCFIPA is a universal surveillance bill in disguise cite two specific problems with the bill:
The first is language in the existing federal law, which requires ISPs to provide, under warrant: all of a customer's Internet activity, including email, web browsing, downloads, IM, social networking and anything else done across the public Internet;
•the customer's name address, phone number and IP address;
•a list of all local and long distance phone calls;
•a list of all electronic communications;
•means of payment – all credit-card, bank account or other method the customer used to pay;
•silence – ISPs under warrant or subpoena to give up private records aren't allowed to alert the customer.
The second is the phrase "unregistered sex offenders" and the power it gives the U.S. Marshals Service to issue its own subpoenas to investigate 99.762 percent of the U.S. population.
By addressing "unregistered sex offenders," Lamar Smith's PCFIPA expands its powers of comprehensive surveillance over everyone in the U.S. who has not already been convicted of a sex crime.
According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children's Map of Registered Sex Offenders (PDF) there are about 748,000 registered sex offenders in the United States and territories.
That's an average of 238 offenders per 100,000 who are not sex offenders – approximately .238 percent of the total U.S. population.
Since it is empowering U.S. Marshals to investigate people who have not yet been convicted, under PCFIPA, the only thing required to get a valid subpoena to examine all the online activity 99.762 percent of the U.S. population, is an investigating officer willing to say the subpoena has something to do with investigation of online child porn.
They don't even have to accuse a specific person or limit themselves to a specific geographic area. Geographically surveillance targets have to be within 500 miles of a specific target of investigation.
Online the bill allows for usage connections – anyone you called, who called you, any sites you may have visited or spammers who might have sent you email.
Not only are you a criminal; every web site you ever visit has to collect 'evidence' on you
The requirement that ISPs and essentially every site on the Internet keep 18 months worth of records on every visitor would create a complete record of every site visited, every email sent, every link clicked on by every resident of the U.S. and its territories – a vast and comprehensive database of everything any American does online, into which curious cops can dip almost at will, whether they have a good reason to do so or not.
"The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American," according to Kevin Bankston, an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Requiring Internet companies to redesign and reconfigure their systems to facilitate government surveillance of Americans' expressive activities is simply un-American."
“The bill is mislabeled,” Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) told CNET in July, when PCFIPA went through brief review in the House judicial committee. “This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It’s creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.”
Smith argued in committee that the bill involved investigation only of those suspected of the sexual abuse of children.
No so, countered the ACLU, which argued it would actually impact "hundreds of millions of individuals who have no connection to the sexual exploitation of children whatsoever. ..There is nothing in the bill that would limit the use of these records to child exploitation cases," countered the American Civil Liberties Union, which sent a letter carrying protests from it and 29 other civil rights groups to Smith last summer, without result.
"In fact, the records would involve all internet users everywhere and they would be available to law enforcement for any purpose. This new mandate is a direct assault on the privacy of internet users," the letter said.
So what's the upshot?
There is no conclusion to this story yet.
PCFIPA, H.R. 1981, is on the House legislative calendar to be debated, changed, approved or denied sometime during the coming year.
Oddsmakers rate its chances as good, considering it sailed through committee by a vote of 19 to 10.
SOPA and PIPA had similarly good odds before being brought down in flames.
PCFIPA, HR 1981, should have much worse chances, considering that powers it grants are much more sweeping than those of either Internet censorship bill and that it adds a huge burden to both ISPs and anyone providing content or software services across the web.
Together the constituency opposing PCFIPA should be at least as large as that opposing SOPA and PIPA.
Opposing those two bills took a lot of effort and unity among independent-minded Internet users.
Both unity and the ability to project opposition appear to have dissipated in the weeks since.
Especially given the effort of Lamar Smith and his backers to conceal unconstitutional powers of surveillance and censorship behind child pornographer straw men, it's entirely possible HR 1981 will come up for a vote without nearly as much outcry for the 'net.
If that happens, all the complaining about privacy done by anyone online until now will be moot. PCFIPA requires your ISP to keep track of what you do when it can see you and requires other sites to keep records of what you do when it can't.
By comparison, losing your email password to a keylogger or having your iPhone give away your location data are small potatoes.
Lamar Smith wants to know more than a password or location. He wants to know what sites you click on, what spam you get, what sites you visit that you delete from your history cache so no one else can see them.
Lamar Smith wants to know who you email, who you text and what links you click on in blogs complaining about his irrational, insatiable need to spy on Americans who have done nothing wrong and nothing to arouse suspicion that they have.
Lamar Smith doesn't believe in innocent until proven guilty. Lamar Smith doesn't believe in innocent at all.
He only believes in "unregistered offenders" – meaning "those who haven't been caught yet.
Give Lamar Smith his way and every site on the Internet will have to keep records to turn over to Lamar and his cronies, so people who don't like you can sift through everything you do, looking for something you've done wrong.
Putting unconstitutional limits on the freedom of 99.7 percent of Americans is a fair exchange for a law that might give cops a slightly greater advantage in chasing the .238 percent of Americans who may actually be involved in child pornography.
Isn't it?
http://www.itworld.com/security/251584/sopa-replacement-uses-child-porn-excuse-spy-997-percent-americans
SOPA replacement uses child porn as excuse to spy on 99.7 percent of Americans
For 2012 the primary author of those bills has switched to a fallback tactic: using child porn as an excuse to create a vast surveillance network from which the government can demand data on every email sent, site visited or link clicked on by all but a fraction of one percent of the U.S. population.
Internet anti-censorship advocates including Anonymous are calling for the ouster of Texas Congressman Lamar Smith, who is following his co-sponsorship of the failed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) with a bill critics call "Big Brother" disguised as an effort to curb child porn and sexual abuse.
Last May Smith, a Texas Republican credited as primary author of both SOPA and PIPA, the Senate version, also introduced H.R. 1981, a bill called the "Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011″ (PCFIPA).
The anti-child-porn provisions in the bill are a "fig leaf for its true purpose: A sweeping data retention requirement meant to turn Internet Service Providers and online companies into surrogate snoops for the government’s convenience," according to Julian Sanchez, Internet privacy and censorship researcherat the center-right Cato Institute.
The bill amends existing laws empowering the U.S. Marshals Service to issue subpoenas and chase fugitives.
The amendments expand the Marshals' ability to issue subpoenas and adds online pornographers to their list of top targets.
The important, though administrivia-looking part of the bill is this: "A provider of an electronic communication service... shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account... records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code..." – FCPIFA, H.R. 1981
ISPs are already required to keep some customers' activity records for 180 days, so this doesn't look like a big change.
Except, PCFIPA, HR 1981, requires ISPs keep track of every single IP address they assign (except to wireless users) and all the activity flowing across that link.
It doesn't limit itself to just ISPs, either. By addressing the bill to cover any company providing "electronic communications" or "remote computing" services, the bill effectively covers any site offering services online.
PCFIPA, HR 1981, reverses that point of view (as did PIPA and SOPA), to create a vast database of every action of ever American online – a deep pool of data on the activity of millions of Internet users, through whose private activity they can sift at will until they find something that looks like evidence of a crime.
That's exactly the opposite of the intent of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment prevents police from searching, questioning, holding or otherwise harassing suspects unless a judge agrees there's a good reason to investigate a specific person for a specific crime.
Accusations that PCFIPA is a universal surveillance bill in disguise cite two specific problems with the bill:
The first is language in the existing federal law, which requires ISPs to provide, under warrant: all of a customer's Internet activity, including email, web browsing, downloads, IM, social networking and anything else done across the public Internet;
•the customer's name address, phone number and IP address;
•a list of all local and long distance phone calls;
•a list of all electronic communications;
•means of payment – all credit-card, bank account or other method the customer used to pay;
•silence – ISPs under warrant or subpoena to give up private records aren't allowed to alert the customer.
The second is the phrase "unregistered sex offenders" and the power it gives the U.S. Marshals Service to issue its own subpoenas to investigate 99.762 percent of the U.S. population.
By addressing "unregistered sex offenders," Lamar Smith's PCFIPA expands its powers of comprehensive surveillance over everyone in the U.S. who has not already been convicted of a sex crime.
According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children's Map of Registered Sex Offenders (PDF) there are about 748,000 registered sex offenders in the United States and territories.
That's an average of 238 offenders per 100,000 who are not sex offenders – approximately .238 percent of the total U.S. population.
Since it is empowering U.S. Marshals to investigate people who have not yet been convicted, under PCFIPA, the only thing required to get a valid subpoena to examine all the online activity 99.762 percent of the U.S. population, is an investigating officer willing to say the subpoena has something to do with investigation of online child porn.
They don't even have to accuse a specific person or limit themselves to a specific geographic area. Geographically surveillance targets have to be within 500 miles of a specific target of investigation.
Online the bill allows for usage connections – anyone you called, who called you, any sites you may have visited or spammers who might have sent you email.
Not only are you a criminal; every web site you ever visit has to collect 'evidence' on you
The requirement that ISPs and essentially every site on the Internet keep 18 months worth of records on every visitor would create a complete record of every site visited, every email sent, every link clicked on by every resident of the U.S. and its territories – a vast and comprehensive database of everything any American does online, into which curious cops can dip almost at will, whether they have a good reason to do so or not.
"The data retention mandate in this bill would treat every Internet user like a criminal and threaten the online privacy and free speech rights of every American," according to Kevin Bankston, an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Requiring Internet companies to redesign and reconfigure their systems to facilitate government surveillance of Americans' expressive activities is simply un-American."
“The bill is mislabeled,” Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) told CNET in July, when PCFIPA went through brief review in the House judicial committee. “This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It’s creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.”
Smith argued in committee that the bill involved investigation only of those suspected of the sexual abuse of children.
No so, countered the ACLU, which argued it would actually impact "hundreds of millions of individuals who have no connection to the sexual exploitation of children whatsoever. ..There is nothing in the bill that would limit the use of these records to child exploitation cases," countered the American Civil Liberties Union, which sent a letter carrying protests from it and 29 other civil rights groups to Smith last summer, without result.
"In fact, the records would involve all internet users everywhere and they would be available to law enforcement for any purpose. This new mandate is a direct assault on the privacy of internet users," the letter said.
So what's the upshot?
There is no conclusion to this story yet.
PCFIPA, H.R. 1981, is on the House legislative calendar to be debated, changed, approved or denied sometime during the coming year.
Oddsmakers rate its chances as good, considering it sailed through committee by a vote of 19 to 10.
SOPA and PIPA had similarly good odds before being brought down in flames.
PCFIPA, HR 1981, should have much worse chances, considering that powers it grants are much more sweeping than those of either Internet censorship bill and that it adds a huge burden to both ISPs and anyone providing content or software services across the web.
Together the constituency opposing PCFIPA should be at least as large as that opposing SOPA and PIPA.
Opposing those two bills took a lot of effort and unity among independent-minded Internet users.
Both unity and the ability to project opposition appear to have dissipated in the weeks since.
Especially given the effort of Lamar Smith and his backers to conceal unconstitutional powers of surveillance and censorship behind child pornographer straw men, it's entirely possible HR 1981 will come up for a vote without nearly as much outcry for the 'net.
If that happens, all the complaining about privacy done by anyone online until now will be moot. PCFIPA requires your ISP to keep track of what you do when it can see you and requires other sites to keep records of what you do when it can't.
By comparison, losing your email password to a keylogger or having your iPhone give away your location data are small potatoes.
Lamar Smith wants to know more than a password or location. He wants to know what sites you click on, what spam you get, what sites you visit that you delete from your history cache so no one else can see them.
Lamar Smith wants to know who you email, who you text and what links you click on in blogs complaining about his irrational, insatiable need to spy on Americans who have done nothing wrong and nothing to arouse suspicion that they have.
Lamar Smith doesn't believe in innocent until proven guilty. Lamar Smith doesn't believe in innocent at all.
He only believes in "unregistered offenders" – meaning "those who haven't been caught yet.
Give Lamar Smith his way and every site on the Internet will have to keep records to turn over to Lamar and his cronies, so people who don't like you can sift through everything you do, looking for something you've done wrong.
Putting unconstitutional limits on the freedom of 99.7 percent of Americans is a fair exchange for a law that might give cops a slightly greater advantage in chasing the .238 percent of Americans who may actually be involved in child pornography.
Isn't it?
http://www.itworld.com/security/251584/sopa-replacement-uses-child-porn-excuse-spy-997-percent-americans
Monday, March 19, 2012
Site recommended by Doug regarding "ex-gay"
Hi Friends;
I received this comment from Doug and wanted you all to be aware of it, if not already. I looked up the link and it was a good read, but like Scottie I couldn't copy/post it. So, please follow the link.
What amazed me is the obvious double standard employed. The very people who will stand up and tell you that homosexuality is a choice are the same who will also say that sexual orientation is not something that can be changed nearly so easily as they say it can. In fact the very people espousing this theory still admit to being same sex oriented.
This also speaks on the definitions of words used, the expectations and experiences of the participants, the reckless and dangerous methodology used. They even took in a client as young as three! ?? !
Well, please read for yourself. Thank you Doug.
Doug said...
I sent this to Scottie. Maybe you should post it too.
http://www.truthwinsout.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/exgay_booklet1.pdf
I received this comment from Doug and wanted you all to be aware of it, if not already. I looked up the link and it was a good read, but like Scottie I couldn't copy/post it. So, please follow the link.
What amazed me is the obvious double standard employed. The very people who will stand up and tell you that homosexuality is a choice are the same who will also say that sexual orientation is not something that can be changed nearly so easily as they say it can. In fact the very people espousing this theory still admit to being same sex oriented.
This also speaks on the definitions of words used, the expectations and experiences of the participants, the reckless and dangerous methodology used. They even took in a client as young as three! ?? !
Well, please read for yourself. Thank you Doug.
Doug said...
I sent this to Scottie. Maybe you should post it too.
http://www.truthwinsout.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/exgay_booklet1.pdf
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Pray the Gay Away. Really?
Saturday, March 17, 2012
No Second Class!
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..."
These words from the Declaration of Independence are among the most influential ever put on paper. The countless pleas for liberty and equality that have used the Declaration as a model are proof of its lasting power. The original Declaration challenged the authority of the British crown. Just within the United States, subsequent declarations have targeted capitalism, land owners, white supremacy, and the patriarchy. Time and again, those unhappy with the status quo have invoked the Declaration. Tyranny has meant different things to different people since 1776, but the search for liberty, however defined, goes on.
by Bob Blythe
Friday, March 16, 2012
OK to be Gay in Ireland, but NOT at the NY St. Partrick's Day Parade
The St Patrick's day parade in Dublin, Ireland is a gay-friendly event, unlike its New York city counterpart. Photograph: Julien Behal/PA
Richard Conway
guardian.co.uk, Friday 16 March 2012 11.22 EDT Article history
As an Irish person, it's an event I say I like a little less every year. But with a sort of playful resignation: it's the St Patrick's Day parade again, is it?
I suppose I'd better complain about leprechaun hats and jarring racial stereotypes, but eventually, wear some sort of green thing and drink too much beer, in spite of myself. Admittedly, the celebration in Dublin can be a lot of fun, even if it is an unabashed kitsch-fest. This year, I actually had even higher hopes, because I recently moved to New York – home of the world's largest St Patrick's parade. Surely, it would be better here, I thought: the Fifth Avenue march could only be exciting.
I was wrong. It's not the green outfits, it really isn't, and it's not the promotional websites that look like they were somehow designed in 1950. No, as a gay person, my negative attitude stems from something completely different: its organizers ban me, and other gay people, from openly participating. In one of the most diverse cities on earth, gay groups and individuals, Irish or otherwise, cannot march under their own banners at the Fifth Avenue St Patrick's Day Parade.
Why? And indeed, how? Put simply, its organizers say the parade is a religious procession, and it is technically a private event. For many years, the Catholic group Ancient Order of Hibernians sponsored the parade. It strictly enforced a gay ban, asserting its legal right to do so based on a unanimous 1995 US supreme court decision over a similar ban in Boston – a ruling that said sponsors of a parade can exclude whomever they like. And while the Ancient Order has now stepped back from direct parade organization, some on the current voluntary committee are still Order members. The ban stands.
This is nothing new for gay Irish Americans. The parade was the front line for the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization – a now-defunct lobby group asserting its right to march – in the 1990s. In 1993, many of its members were arrested while protesting the parade, while others later set up an alternative event, St Pat's for All, in Queens. The ILGO's present-day equivalent, Irish Queers, continues to protest.
Many in the gay community see it as an ongoing fight to define Irishness. As Brendan Fay, co-founder of the Queens parade, says of the Fifth Avenue parade organizers, "They think if you're gay, you can't be Irish, and you must be anti-Catholic".
Today, the Fifth Avenue committee operates a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" policy. It insists that gay people are allowed to march – so long as they don't advertise their sexuality. To me, this attitude is outmoded, misrepresents modern Ireland, and as a Dubliner, is not something I recognize.
What this committee might be ignoring is a simple fact about modern Ireland: It's okay with gay stuff. Recent surveys have shown that a significant majority of Irish people approve of gay marriage, with a 2012 poll showing that 73% approve of gay marriage being allowed in the country's constitution. Civil unions have been legal in Ireland since 2010, and received all-party support. And, notably, the Dublin St Patrick's Day parade has regularly included gay-themed floats.
In 2010, our former president even refused an invitation to be grand marshal on the grounds that the New York parade excludes gay groups; and our current foreign minister has responded to the ban by saying that "exclusion is not an Irish thing."
For my money, I won't be heading down to Fifth Avenue this year. Give me the embarrassing tackiness of the Dublin celebrations, any day. The New York City parade is celebrating an Ireland that no longer exists.
Richard Conway
guardian.co.uk, Friday 16 March 2012 11.22 EDT Article history
As an Irish person, it's an event I say I like a little less every year. But with a sort of playful resignation: it's the St Patrick's Day parade again, is it?
I suppose I'd better complain about leprechaun hats and jarring racial stereotypes, but eventually, wear some sort of green thing and drink too much beer, in spite of myself. Admittedly, the celebration in Dublin can be a lot of fun, even if it is an unabashed kitsch-fest. This year, I actually had even higher hopes, because I recently moved to New York – home of the world's largest St Patrick's parade. Surely, it would be better here, I thought: the Fifth Avenue march could only be exciting.
I was wrong. It's not the green outfits, it really isn't, and it's not the promotional websites that look like they were somehow designed in 1950. No, as a gay person, my negative attitude stems from something completely different: its organizers ban me, and other gay people, from openly participating. In one of the most diverse cities on earth, gay groups and individuals, Irish or otherwise, cannot march under their own banners at the Fifth Avenue St Patrick's Day Parade.
Why? And indeed, how? Put simply, its organizers say the parade is a religious procession, and it is technically a private event. For many years, the Catholic group Ancient Order of Hibernians sponsored the parade. It strictly enforced a gay ban, asserting its legal right to do so based on a unanimous 1995 US supreme court decision over a similar ban in Boston – a ruling that said sponsors of a parade can exclude whomever they like. And while the Ancient Order has now stepped back from direct parade organization, some on the current voluntary committee are still Order members. The ban stands.
This is nothing new for gay Irish Americans. The parade was the front line for the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization – a now-defunct lobby group asserting its right to march – in the 1990s. In 1993, many of its members were arrested while protesting the parade, while others later set up an alternative event, St Pat's for All, in Queens. The ILGO's present-day equivalent, Irish Queers, continues to protest.
Many in the gay community see it as an ongoing fight to define Irishness. As Brendan Fay, co-founder of the Queens parade, says of the Fifth Avenue parade organizers, "They think if you're gay, you can't be Irish, and you must be anti-Catholic".
Today, the Fifth Avenue committee operates a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" policy. It insists that gay people are allowed to march – so long as they don't advertise their sexuality. To me, this attitude is outmoded, misrepresents modern Ireland, and as a Dubliner, is not something I recognize.
What this committee might be ignoring is a simple fact about modern Ireland: It's okay with gay stuff. Recent surveys have shown that a significant majority of Irish people approve of gay marriage, with a 2012 poll showing that 73% approve of gay marriage being allowed in the country's constitution. Civil unions have been legal in Ireland since 2010, and received all-party support. And, notably, the Dublin St Patrick's Day parade has regularly included gay-themed floats.
In 2010, our former president even refused an invitation to be grand marshal on the grounds that the New York parade excludes gay groups; and our current foreign minister has responded to the ban by saying that "exclusion is not an Irish thing."
For my money, I won't be heading down to Fifth Avenue this year. Give me the embarrassing tackiness of the Dublin celebrations, any day. The New York City parade is celebrating an Ireland that no longer exists.
A vid I'm listening to right now... wanted to share it with you.
Hi All;
This is Joe Bonamassa. He's not so well known as some, but makes up for it in skill. His true brilliance is in Blues Guitar. He's got a style that digs deep into my soul. I hope you like his music and will search out other songs by him. Should this not post well, which I've had trouble with lately, I'll provide a link JOE
This is Joe Bonamassa. He's not so well known as some, but makes up for it in skill. His true brilliance is in Blues Guitar. He's got a style that digs deep into my soul. I hope you like his music and will search out other songs by him. Should this not post well, which I've had trouble with lately, I'll provide a link JOE
Joe Bonamassa, Blues Delux, on his album of the same name... Blues Delux.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Captions...
Hi Everyone;
Another sunny day! Whoo Hoo! After months of being cold, it's so cool :) to be warm. Sometime about July I'll probably be willing to eat those words. Oh well.
I saw the below picture and I had all of these thoughts running through my head for captions, writing down my imagined thoughts running through this beast's magnificent head.
Got any of your own? Put them in the comments. Hugs!
Another sunny day! Whoo Hoo! After months of being cold, it's so cool :) to be warm. Sometime about July I'll probably be willing to eat those words. Oh well.
I saw the below picture and I had all of these thoughts running through my head for captions, writing down my imagined thoughts running through this beast's magnificent head.
Got any of your own? Put them in the comments. Hugs!
1. Damn..... Did I leave the iron on?
2.
3.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Isolation effects on "normal" well adjusted people...
Hello Friends;
We live in an era in which the United States has increased and become addicted to incarceration. Is it so very necessary or is it a byproduct of profit centered prison corporations, guard and service worker unions, suppliers....etc? Part of prison, for years, has been the use of isolation cells.
I'd rather not debate the necessity of isolation cells. I'm sure there are pro's and con's for it all, and I just don't have the information. What I'd like to share with you is this vid about the effects of isolation on the 'normal well adjusted' person in only 48 hours. What greater deterioration could we expect on those who are struggling with things a bit more, such as someone who experienced years of abuses?
As you watch this video, ask yourself this one question: If a person who has been subjected to this is one day to return to civilization, what type of person will he/she be?
We live in an era in which the United States has increased and become addicted to incarceration. Is it so very necessary or is it a byproduct of profit centered prison corporations, guard and service worker unions, suppliers....etc? Part of prison, for years, has been the use of isolation cells.
I'd rather not debate the necessity of isolation cells. I'm sure there are pro's and con's for it all, and I just don't have the information. What I'd like to share with you is this vid about the effects of isolation on the 'normal well adjusted' person in only 48 hours. What greater deterioration could we expect on those who are struggling with things a bit more, such as someone who experienced years of abuses?
As you watch this video, ask yourself this one question: If a person who has been subjected to this is one day to return to civilization, what type of person will he/she be?
I cannon get this vid to post. I think I saved it wrong. Here is the link:
Is it Summer?
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Agravated, Saddened, and somewhat Confused
Hi Friends;
I began this blog to begin to understand a bit more about me. Who I was/am, and how can I be more? I thought that along the way I would share some things that I read, things that interest me and share my thoughts on them, hoping to hear the thoughts of others. At times I've found things that just break my heart, that make me angry, or even joyful. But, there is something going on in this country that just has me baffled.
Like most of us, I read about the "Junkyard Prophets" See Here - a conglomeration of terms that tells me more than would make that group comfortable - going into a school, a general assembly, and sharing a message of hope? No. Of peace? No. Of uplifting and positive direction? No.
Of indoctrination? Yep!
Somehow, this school felt that the students were so far ahead of the curve on Reading, Writing, Mathematics, Logic, Government and Social issues that it needed time for hatred, indoctrination, anger and bigotry. Who knew the American students were so far along.
But, what has me lost is... why? Why is there such a hatred for that which is different? Why are people so willing to be mean and nasty to a relatively small segment of society? Why so much energy?
For a breeder, the absence of other challenging males ought to engender sublime joy! All the more females for him, right? For a Christian, it isn't an issue of public law or direction of the social construct of a country, it's about a relationship with his/her Creator. For a patriot, seeking to strengthen a country... what has my bedroom got to do with it? There are gays in the military - have been forever. Remember the Spartans? Being gay has nothing to do with pulling a trigger - as our military effectiveness with gays in the service demonstrates. But further, for a true patriot, the ideals of this country would demand that he/she stand up for the rights of citizens; for Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - not seek to take it away for religious reasons. That's antithetical to the creation of the country!
I'm feeling really dejected and lonely about all of this. It seems to leave an ache in me that I just can't explain. I'm past anger, outrage. I'm sliding head long into nausea as I read these stories and I just keep asking why. Why, my friends, is this such an issue?
I began this blog to begin to understand a bit more about me. Who I was/am, and how can I be more? I thought that along the way I would share some things that I read, things that interest me and share my thoughts on them, hoping to hear the thoughts of others. At times I've found things that just break my heart, that make me angry, or even joyful. But, there is something going on in this country that just has me baffled.
Like most of us, I read about the "Junkyard Prophets" See Here - a conglomeration of terms that tells me more than would make that group comfortable - going into a school, a general assembly, and sharing a message of hope? No. Of peace? No. Of uplifting and positive direction? No.
Of indoctrination? Yep!
Somehow, this school felt that the students were so far ahead of the curve on Reading, Writing, Mathematics, Logic, Government and Social issues that it needed time for hatred, indoctrination, anger and bigotry. Who knew the American students were so far along.
But, what has me lost is... why? Why is there such a hatred for that which is different? Why are people so willing to be mean and nasty to a relatively small segment of society? Why so much energy?
For a breeder, the absence of other challenging males ought to engender sublime joy! All the more females for him, right? For a Christian, it isn't an issue of public law or direction of the social construct of a country, it's about a relationship with his/her Creator. For a patriot, seeking to strengthen a country... what has my bedroom got to do with it? There are gays in the military - have been forever. Remember the Spartans? Being gay has nothing to do with pulling a trigger - as our military effectiveness with gays in the service demonstrates. But further, for a true patriot, the ideals of this country would demand that he/she stand up for the rights of citizens; for Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - not seek to take it away for religious reasons. That's antithetical to the creation of the country!
I'm feeling really dejected and lonely about all of this. It seems to leave an ache in me that I just can't explain. I'm past anger, outrage. I'm sliding head long into nausea as I read these stories and I just keep asking why. Why, my friends, is this such an issue?
Saturday, March 10, 2012
The direst four letter word of them all...
How often does someone ask for help and they are given advice? How often are we in society shown a wrong and the government forms a committee to throw money at it? How often does one say "someone should do something about that"?
And, then, I'm reminded of a joke.... the first shows this family, clinging to the roof of their home as a river rages around it, sweeping the home and the hapless family floating on the roof as it bumps on its wet little way. The family, devout all, clasp their hands in prayer. Soon a boat appears and calls out to the family to grasp the rope. The father shakes his finger and replies that he is standing on faith and waiting on God. The boaters argue, but soon have to move on to others. Another boat comes along, seeing the family in prayer and again calls out to them to quickly grasp the rope. Again, the boaters are turned away with the admonishment that God will provide. Lastly, with water swirling about their knees as the family hold tight to the few remaining upright portions of the roof, a helicopter appears, tossing down a ladder. The father crosses himself, points to the heavens and waves the chopper off.
Sure enough, the flood waters take the family. There they stand with St.Peter at the gate, complaining that God never saved them. Then, from the mountains and mists within the gates came a rumbling voice.... "What do you want from me? I sent you two boats and a helicopter?".
I guess the moral would be: "Help" always accompanies the phrase "it is better to have it be said 'Well Done' than 'well said'" and when given help, accept it in the form in which it comes. Sometimes that's all that is coming.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
This is why it's important to know the candidates lest such be given power.
GOP Bill Labels All Single-Parent
And All Gay Households As Child Abuse
by David Badash on March 2, 2012
in Bigotry Watch,Civil Rights,Discrimination,News,Politics
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/gop-bill-outlaws-all-single-parent-and-all-gay-households-as-child-abuse/politics/2012/03/02/35633
A GOP lawmaker in Wisconsin is trying to pass a bill that would classify “non marital parenthood” as a cause of child abuse. Since gays cannot legally mary in Wisconsin, the bill automatically includes single and coupled gays and lesbians, plus any single person regardless of orientation.
The bill “requir[es] the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect.” Republican State Senator Glenn Grothman, who has a long history of radical positions, wants to spend tax dollars “educating” the public — with no scientific proof (because there is none) — that gays, lesbians, single mothers, and single fathers should not be allowed to be parents because their children will grow up in an abusive home.
In fact, Senator Grothman is claiming that the very lack of two married opposite sex parents in a household constitutes child abuse. Apparently, Senator Grothman believes that marriage is for procreation, and therefore only married people should be allowed to raise children.
In essence, the bill could, if it became law, be used to outlaw all gay couples raising children, and all single-parent households.
It truly boggles the mind, how stupid these radical conservatives are.
What is supposed to happen to all those children who, tragically, lose a parent to, say, cancer? A car accident? Divorce? Does the State come in the day of the parent’s funeral and rip the young boy or girl from their surviving parent’s loving arms and place them in an orphanage?
Yes, we all know these small government conservatives who want government just small enough to fit under our bedroom doors, in women’s uteruses, and now, determining who can and who cannot raise their own child.
By the way, the good Senator Grothman in the past has opposed sex education in schools claiming teachers would promote an “agenda” to make student become gay.
Although Grothman has said, ”Everybody knows you’re not supposed to smoke!” he voted against a law banning smoking in bars and restaurants, but supported a bill allowing smoking in hotel rooms. And Grothman called a proposed Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, “an insult to all the other taxpayers around the state,” and opposed any possibility of a Kwanzaa holiday, stating Americans should “treat Kwanzaa with the contempt it deserves before it becomes a permanent part of our culture.”
Grothman has also “advocated the hiring of more business-friendly individuals to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,” according to Wikipedia.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Politicans in an election year - who needs the truth?
Well, gee wiz, Mitt. Let's look at the truth for just a moment, shall we? If it's not too much trouble for you.
Energy policy... yep, as you surely know, the wind blows. Not much stopping it. So, why not harness it? Sun shines, capture the energy. Electric cars - no dependence on oil for that to run. Hmmm... what was your point again?
Coal: yes, crazy as it seems, the President did ask that we seek CLEANER methods of extracting coal, than, you know, strip mining and poisoning the environment, etc. What a bastard, huh? How dare he actually ask that we try not to destroy the country?
Oil: As I recall, Obama has allowed an increase in drilling off shore and in other formerly protected zones. The Gulf region really enjoyed that spill... no sense in limiting drilling.
Pipeline: Here's a crazy idea; let's have a pipeline stretch across our country, incur the threat of damage from spills, the ugliness of it stretching across a very populated area, the disruption to people and animals, and in the end not necessarily get any benefit. Yep, you fool and liar, the President vetoed the thing because the oil was slated for sale to China, not the U.S.
So, yep... you are right Mitt. Can't put a windmill on a car. No getting that one by you.
Energy policy... yep, as you surely know, the wind blows. Not much stopping it. So, why not harness it? Sun shines, capture the energy. Electric cars - no dependence on oil for that to run. Hmmm... what was your point again?
Coal: yes, crazy as it seems, the President did ask that we seek CLEANER methods of extracting coal, than, you know, strip mining and poisoning the environment, etc. What a bastard, huh? How dare he actually ask that we try not to destroy the country?
Oil: As I recall, Obama has allowed an increase in drilling off shore and in other formerly protected zones. The Gulf region really enjoyed that spill... no sense in limiting drilling.
Pipeline: Here's a crazy idea; let's have a pipeline stretch across our country, incur the threat of damage from spills, the ugliness of it stretching across a very populated area, the disruption to people and animals, and in the end not necessarily get any benefit. Yep, you fool and liar, the President vetoed the thing because the oil was slated for sale to China, not the U.S.
So, yep... you are right Mitt. Can't put a windmill on a car. No getting that one by you.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
things that seem right... at the moment.
I have been watching Star Trek: Enterprise on Net Flix for the past weeks. I never did manage to watch much of the show when it was on tv, so this is my chance. You may recall, this is the one with Scott Bakula, not Patrick Stewart.
Anyway, as I was watching over these past days, one particular theme came to the rise. And, perhaps it is because of the turmoil that election years bring and all the weird things Republicans say that then make it into my conversations with my father that made me sensitive to it. The point is: doing what seems right, expedient, and even acceptable under the circumstances can lead to truly devastating results.
Case in point: the above picture. Here is a man beloved by most Trekkies, speaking patiently on the concepts of freedom. Equality. How could we continually be fighting the same fights for so long? It's been 150 years since it was declared that treating another person as a slave was unacceptable. It's been 70 years since we locked up a whole race of people for the fear of what they may do. Then the same general things come about and we call them "Patriot" laws, or name them after some poor soul who should only be remembered fondly. And, we still have folks campaigning for president on those very same tennants, those same ideas that bypassing the very ideals of this country's founding and subjecting people to unfair and unequal treatment is just fine.
Why can we not grow up?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)