FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE

This is just creepy

2008-09-30T10:15:00.005-05:00

There’s a very old saying that goes “Crazy people should never be allowed to lead seminars.” Ok, so it’s not an old saying. In fact, I just made it up. But, the statement remains true.

Case in point, the following audio clip is from a training seminar that I took part in last week.

Click here to listen.

As if her voice isn’t creepy enough, she actually tells people to hug and sooth themselves. Psycho.

(In case you’re wondering, I chose to not take part in this little “exercise.”)

Perhaps, though, you don’t find that crazy at all. Hugging and soothing yourself may seem completely rational. OK. How about this? The next audio clip is from a July teleseminar that was hosted by the same company. This clip is a longer, but it’s also much, much creepier.

Click here to listen.

This supposed “expert” in marketing recommended that a career coach should imply in her advertisements that she is psychic. Unbelievable.

AJ Parker Media

2008-09-22T09:23:00.002-05:00

This blog post is a plug for one of the most talented videographers that I have had the pleasure of knowing. AJ Parker has been involved in videography and editing for several years now. In addition to freelance projects with groups like Kiwanis and Crown Ministries, AJ also serves as the director of videography for Lakewood Baptist Church.

Recently, AJ worked with Lakewood Baptist’s Real Life Worship Band on their first music video. The Real Life Band leads worship music for Lakewood’s Real Life service. If you have ever attended one of these services, you know that this is extremely talented group of musicians. Coupled with AJ’s amazing abilities with video, you really can’t go wrong when these groups team up for a project.

The result was their first music video called “Unto the One.”

(Click here to view the video on YouTube)

Feel free to leave your comments on YouTube. And, if you like to see some of AJ Parker’s other video projects, you can view them on his website, http://www.ajparkermedia.com/.

You can also share this video on your Facebook or MySpace profile by visiting http://www.lakewood-baptist.com/.

Credits
Director: AJ Parker
Lead Vocals: Eric Elliott
Backup Vocals: Erika Parker
Acoustic Guitar: Anthony Evans
Electric Guitar: Andrew Darragh
Electric Guitar: Greg Moore
Bass Guitar: Jeremy Clark
Drums: Joe Haulbrook
Keyboard: Mark Dowdy

Gadget Review - M810 Cell Phone Wristwatch

2008-08-26T14:37:00.009-05:00

The time has come.

I recently purchased my geekiest gadget to date, and the time has come for me to write my review. To many of you, it will come as no surprise that I bought this item. Not only am I a gadget nerd, but I’m also a watch enthusiast. Anytime the two of those things are merged together in an unholy alliance, I am all over it.

Months ago, I put the M500 cell phone wrist watch on my wish list. At the time, it was the most advanced, feature-packed, best looking cell phone watch on the market. While it still may hold the title as the most aesthetically pleasing, the M500 has been far surpassed technologically by many of the newer cell phone watches. As I did a little research into the market, I settled on the one that I wanted.

The M810.

Manufactured by CECT in China, the M810 is also known on the Internet as the M801, M800i, and the M815. You would think that they would settle on a single model number. But, that is apparently way too much to ask. Of course, for the product I am getting at the price that I am paying, you won’t hear me complain about the inconsistency in the model number.

The M810 is a fully-functioning cellular phone, PDA, MP3, and video player. And, just as icing on the cake, the M810 also comes equipped with a 1.3 megapixel camera which can take still images as well as video. Just to give you an idea of how packed this unit is, take a look at the specs:

Frequency: Tri-band 900 / 1800 / 1900 MHz
Display: 1.33" TFT-LCD, 260'000 colors, 128 x 160 pixel resolution, touchscreen
Languages: English, Deutsch, Czech, Dutch, Thailand, Russian, Vietnamese, Rabbinic/Hebrew, Arabic, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Turkish, Chinese, etc.
Ringtone: 64 Polyphonic, MP3, MIDI, WAV, Incoming ringtone, Incoming photo, Incoming movie
Music: MP3 and back-end playback support, Support output to bluetooth headset
Video: 3GP, MP4 support, 128 x 160 fullscreen play
Camera: 1.3M pixels, supports max 1280x960 photo output
File formats: JPG, GIF, MP3, MIDI, WAV, AMR, 3GP, MP4
Memory: Free 512M TF card, supports maximum 2G memory (MicroSD)
Data transfer: USB data cable / USB disk / Bluetooth 2.0
Internet: GPRS, WAP
Phonebook: Containing up to 250 card-style records, photo of caller/ support ring tone setup for different groups/play movie for incoming call
Messaging: 300 short messages storage, supports MMS messages, message group sending
Power switch: Custom power-on/off picture, can set downloaded MP4 as power-on/off movie
Alarm: Support MP3 alarm ring, can set downloaded mp3 songs as ring of alarm
Talk time: 180-240 minutes
Standby time: 160 - 200 hours
Miscellaneous: Handsfree, recording, handwriting + keypad input, memory extension, e-book, incoming call firewall, calculator, health management

As you can see, this watch leaves almost nothing out. Just about anything that modern smartphones can handle, the M810 can handle. Plus, it fits on your wrist! How cool is that? (I know what you’re thinking. Not very. Bite me.)

As with my other reviews, the best way to handle this is to go through the main features and point out the positives and the negatives. So, here we go:

The Phone

This seems like the perfect place to start. After all, most people would be attracted to this little gadget because it is, primarily, a cellular phone. Well let’s take a look at the phone feature.

Reception and Call Quality
Call quality can really depend on the area that you are in. If you are in a strong cellular site, then you should have no problems using this phone. Of course, it doesn’t offer the same signal strength as a normal handset. For instance, there are certain areas in North Georgia where I can only get about 1 bar of signal strength on my Motorola RAZR. In those same areas, using the M810, I have no bars. There is a bit of a difference when it comes to low coverage areas such as those. But, in strong coverage areas, the M810 works very well. Call quality can also depend on the way you make and receive calls.

Bluetooth
The M810 is Bluetooth capable. This means that you can use your standard Bluetooth headset to make and receive calls. Some people don’t want to talk into their watch like Michael Knight. I understand that. For those people, the Bluetooth option is perfect. The M810 actually includes a pair of Bluetooth A2DP earphones for listening to music and receiving calls. Using these earphones, call quality is crystal clear. The drawback is, you would need to carry around these earphones everywhere. That’s not really something I want to do. A better option is to use a normal Bluetooth headset. But, please…don’t wear your Bluetooth headset everywhere you go. Don’t wear it in a restaurant, a movie theatre, or a gas station when you know you aren’t expecting a call. Don’t be that guy. You look like a tool.

Speakerphone
While call quality is far superior using a Bluetooth headset, I actually prefer to use the speakerphone function. What can I say? I was a huge fan of Knight Rider. Besides, it’s much quicker and more convenient for me to simply press a button on the watch and answer my phone instead of searching my pockets for my Bluetooth headset. It just makes sense. And, the sound quality from the speaker is decent. It can be difficult to understand people in a very noisy environment, but I’m not in the habit of answering calls in those situations anyway.

One drawback of the speakerphone is that I do have to hold the watch fairly close to my mouth in order for the other person to hear me. If I hold the watch any further than 6 or 7 inches from my mouth, the microphone does not pick up my voice very well. It would be nice to be able to hold it several feet away from my mouth, and still be heard.

Another drawback with any speakerphone is that everyone around can hear both sides of your conversation. In general, this isn’t a problem for me because, as I have already explained, I am not in the habit of answering calls in noisy or crowded areas. Many people don’t seem to realize that there are certain situations when answering a call is just crappy behavior (i.e. a restaurant, movie theatre, or when you are in the middle of a conversation with someone else!). So, having people around me hearing my phone conversation is not usually a problem.

The final drawback in the speakerphone feature isn’t really a problem with the speakerphone itself. It is really a problem with the watch software. In order to answer a call on speakerphone, you must first push the “answer” button on the side of the watch, then you have to tap the “H-Free” button the screen. That’s two steps, when only one should be needed! This is a problem if the person calling begins speaking as soon as you press the “answer” button. You miss their first few words. Also, this can be really irritating when making a call. When you dial a number, it begins to ring. But, it does so in “handheld” mode, which I will discuss in a moment. In this mode, the speakerphone isn’t activated so you can’t actually hear the other person answer the phone. When they do pick up, the watch screen will change. This new screen gives you the option to turn on the speakerphone. In other words, when making a call, you have to continually watch the screen to see the other person answer. As soon as they do, you have to quickly turn on the speakerphone. Otherwise, you won’t be able to hear them.

This gets really annoying. Why not simply have an option for setting speakerphone as the default option? That would simplify the whole process.

The “Other” Option
There is another option for answering calls on this watch. That is the “handheld” method. Basically, you can hold this watch up to your ear as you would a normal phone. The sound is projected through a small speaker in the top of the phone at a reduced volume. This resolves the issue of having people around you hear the other end of your phone conversation. But, it also makes you look like an idiot. In order to use this function, you would basically have to take the watch off and hold it to your ear. I’m not doing that. So, this option doesn’t work for me.

Text Messaging
I’m not big into texting, but I thought I might as well include this in the review. The watch is SMS and MMS capable. I have already sent and received messages, and everything works as it should. Although, I should mention, when you are typing anything on this watch, you better have steady hands and decent eyesight. Otherwise, this isn’t going to work for you. The keypad is kind of small. It’s a 1.33” screen! What did you expect? But, the upside is that it has a full QWERTY keyboard. You don’t have to cycle through letters like you do with most cell phones. If you have steady hands, you may be able to type messages faster with this than you would with a telephone keypad. I know that I do.

Ringtones
As you saw in the specifications, the M810 supports MP3, MIDI, WAV, and polyphonic ringtones. Although, the polyphonic tones that come with this watch are absolutely heinous. You’ll probably want to load your own MP3s as soon as possible.

As with most phones, this watch also comes equipped with vibration mode. That may surprise you considering the size of this watch. What will surprise you even more is the fact that the vibration on this phone isn’t just strong…it’s too strong. I used the “Ring and Vibrate” mode for a few days, but I just didn’t like it. The vibration was almost as loud as the ringtone. Of course, this also means that the “Vibrate Only” mode is a bad idea for quiet situations. Most of us set our phones on vibrate when we go into class or a movie (If you don’t, you should be punched in the face). But, with the M810, the vibration mode is still quite loud. So, I don’t use it.

Unfortunately, the M810 doesn’t come equipped with a silent ringtone. In order to make it completely silent, you basically have to turn it off. I didn’t want to do that. So, I found a simple solution. I loaded a blank MP3 (which I labeled “Silent”) onto my watch. And, I set that as the default ringtone for my “Meeting” sound profile. Now, when I go to a meeting or a movie, I activate the “Meeting” profile which switches my phone to silent.

The Keypad
Obviously, you can load your contacts on to your SIM card which will keep you from having to dial their number every time. But, you can’t load every number in there, so you will occasionally have to dial a number using the numbers on the keypad. The M810 has an impressively large digital keypad on the screen. It is accessible from various menus. Near the bottom of the screen, there is a phone icon. Pressing this icon brings up the keypad which fills the entire screen. The numbers are actually large enough that I don’t have to use the included stylus. I can dial with my fingers. This is especially helpful when you consider how difficult it is to actually use the stylus. But, more on that later. The keypad is accessible during calls. So, if you dial into an automated system which requires you to “press 1 for English,” you will have no problems.

The MP3 Player

I have to begin by saying that I have been very impressed with the MP3 player on the M810. Since, the M810 is capable of supporting up to 2GB of expandable memory, you will have plenty of space for your favorite music. And, when paired with the Bluetooth A2DP earphones, the sound quality is excellent.

I even like the software skin that was chosen for the MP3 player. There are 3 options to choose from, but I prefer Skin1 because of the extra large buttons. Everything is easily accessible with your fingers.

The volume output is also excellent. As it is with the speakerphone, for the best results, you’ll want to use the included Bluetooth earphones to listen to music. But, if you don’t have them handy, you can also play music through the built-in speaker.

And, yes…that is SPEAKER…not SPEAKERS. At first glance, the M810 appears to have 4 speakers surrounding the screen. It looks impressive, but it is just for show. 3 of these are “dummy” speakers. They don’t actually work. Only one of them (the top right speaker) puts out sound. Still, with one speaker, the volume and quality are quite impressive.

The Video Player

I was close to having an aneurysm over this video player. The specifications say that the M810 is capable of playing 3GP and MP4 video. So, I tired converting a couple of movie clips to these formats and loading them onto the watch. Yet, I kept getting a message that read “Invalid Video File.” I discovered that you can’t simply convert video to any 3GP or MP4 format. You have to be mindful of the codec you are using. Through my research, I found out that videos must be converted to the 3GP format using the MPEG4 codec. Confused? Let me make you even more confused.

Not only do you have to be mindful of the codec, you have to be mindful of every other setting on the video conversion. I had to go through several different settings until I found the one that would actually play on the watch. Then, I adjusted the settings to find the optimal video and audio settings that will play on the M810. Here is what I found.

Using the program Freez 3GP Converter, change the settings to the following:

File Format: 3GP
Video Codec: MPEG4
Resolution: 160 x 120
Video Quality: 1
Framerate: 14.985
Zoom Mode: Letterbox
Audio Codec: AAC-LC
Audio Bitrate: 48 KBPS
Audio Frequency: 48000 Hz
Channels: Stereo

The Camera

The camera on the M810 is…well…OK. I don’t plan on using this much, if ever. I have tested it, and it seems to work just fine. It is only a 1.3 megapixel camera, so you can’t expect the highest quality of images. But, if you absolutely needed to take a picture and you didn’t have another camera on you, this would do the trick.

The Organizer

The organizer is packed. If you have used a PDA, you know the drill. You can schedule your tasks along with their dates, star times, and end times. You can also setup alarms to remind you of tasks. The organizer also includes a calculator.

But, the organizer on the M810 has a few features that you may have not seen on other PDAs. There is a Unit Converter (Weight and Length), Currency Converter, World Clock, and BMI calculator. It also has a Menstrual Cycle calculator…but I don’t plan on using that any time soon.

The Flash Drive

When you connect the watch to your computer, it has the ability to act as a USB flash drive. Depending on the size of the MicroSD card that you use in your M810, you can have as much as 2GB of free space to store your files. The only downfall that I can see with this function is the exact same downfall that I had with my MP3 Watch. In order to connect it to a computer, you must use the USB cable that is included. The cable is 3 feet long. Do you want to carry a cable like that around with you? I don’t. So, I’m trying to find a more compact solution. The problem is that the port on the M810 is not a normal mini-USB port. It almost looks custom. If I could identify it, it would probably be easier to find a small adapter. Until then, I guess I’ll have to use the cable.

**UPDATE**
I have said "goodbye" to that long USB cable, and I replaced it with my own custom-made USB adapter. It is only 2 inches long! It is much more convenient to carry in my pocket.

If you are interested in creating your own USB adapter for the M810, I can tell you how. Email me at dsimms@usa.com.

The Screen

The screen on the M810 is very clear and easy to view. Watching movies on this could strain your eyes. But, the screen size and resolution are great for other functions. In fact, unlike most cellular phones, the main screen is capable of displaying animated GIFs. You can actually set an animation as your wallpaper. I like to customize things like this. And, having the ability to set something besides a static image as my wallpaper was a welcomed surprise.

The Size

I can imagine that most people would be concerned about the size of this watch. That’s certainly understandable. No one wants to wear a brick on their wrist. And, for all of these features, you really wouldn’t expect the M810 to be very small.

Though the M810 is a little bulky, it’s surprisingly compact. It is approximately 2.75” long, 1.8” wide, and .75” thick. However, since the watch has a lot of curvature to it, it looks smaller. Ideally, I would prefer for the watch to be thinner. But, you wouldn’t want the watch face too much smaller. Otherwise, it would make it quite difficult to use many of the functions.

The Battery

Most of the M810’s thickness is due to the battery. Still, it is quite small for the amount of power that it puts out. I have been very impressed with the battery life. It lasts almost as long as the battery on my RAZR. Plus, it comes with an extra battery. If you forget to recharge it, just slip in the spare battery and go!

The Stylus

I hate the stylus. There…I said it. I don’t know what the designers were thinking when they developed this stylus. But, I swear that a blind fish with A.D.D. could have come up with something better. To start with, it is incredibly small. I suppose it has to be to fit inside the watch band (where it is hidden). But, there had to be a way to make a larger stylus that is easier to write with.

Also, as I said, it is hidden inside the band. That seems like a great idea. The problem is, they put it in the worst place possible. When you are wearing the watch, it is extremely difficult to dig the stylus out of its hiding place. It is hidden on the bottom (close to your wrist), near the camera. It would have made much more sense to put the stylus near the opposite side of the watch, near the top. I know that there is some available space there.

The Conclusion

I have to say that I love the M810. It has a few shortcomings, but all of those are overshadowed by the great things about this watch. Plus, I look super cool wearing it. Trust me…I do.

Overall, I would recommend the M810 for people who don’t spend the majority of their time on the phone. If your job, or daily routine requires you to spend hours every day on a mobile phone, this probably isn’t for you.

But, if you love gadgets, and you’ve always wanted a watch like Dick Tracy’s, try this one out. I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.

The M810 can be found on eBay listed as the M810, M801, M800i, or the M815.

Bigfoot

2008-08-14T13:34:00.002-05:00

Why, oh why do people like this have to be from Georgia? Isn't the southern stereotype bad enough?

Hulu

2008-08-14T08:24:00.002-05:00

In recent years, more television broadcasters have realized how important it is to market themselves on the internet. Television is by no means obsolete, and probably won’t be for many decades. However, as people spend more of their time on the Internet, it becomes an added convenience for them to watch their favorite shows while cruising the information superhighway.

Broadcasters realize this, and many are using their websites to host full episodes of their most popular shows. NBC hosts on their website shows like My Name Is Earl, The Office, and Heroes. ABC hosts shows like Grey’s Anatomy, Ugly Betty, and Lost. CBS hosts…wait…does anybody actually watch CBS anymore?

One way or another, you can probably find full episodes of your favorite show on the Internet. It just takes a little bit of searching. But, for those of you who want to find episodes of older shows, the searching is a little bit tougher.

Hopefully, I can help with this. There is a great website that can act as a one-stop website for many of your favorite shows currently on the air, as well as popular shows from the 80s and 90s. It’s called Hulu.com.

Hulu primarily hosts shows from NBC and FOX. But, it is by no means limited to these networks. Hulu also offers full episodes of shows from networks like USA, Comedy Central, Bravo, Sci-Fi, G4, and more. The best part is that Hulu videos have very few commercial interruptions, and all of them are 30 seconds or less!

Make some time to check it out. And, let me know what you think of Burn Notice.

P.S. There are extra cool points for anyone who remembers a little show called Airwolf. It's available on Hulu as well.

The Regular Guys 3.0

2008-08-12T09:51:00.002-05:00

If you are a regular listener to the radio, you will probably agree with me. If you are not a regular listener to the radio, I’m sure that there is a very good reason why. Radio shows, for the most part, suck. The music that they play is terrible. I could live with that if they would stick to playing truly crappy songs only once. But, alas, they play the same songs over and over and over and over. Can’t I just say “uncle” and have it over with?

To top it off, DJs aren’t even remotely funny. Naturally, they all believe that everything they say is comedy gold. For that, they should be punched in the face. It’s time for a great radio show to come along and kick some collective radio show ass.

Never fear. I have found “The One.”

If you have seen my new MySpace page, you have probably seen a button labeled “RG 3.0.” That stands for “The Regular Guys 3.0.” If you have lived in Atlanta for any length of time, you have probably heard The Regular Guys on the radio. If you haven’t, you have missed out.

Larry Wachs, Eric Von Haessler, and “Southside” Steve Rickman make up the dynamic team known as “The Regular Guys.” The current version of their show is called “Regular Guys 3.0” because they have already been fired from the airwaves twice before. The first and second incarnations of the show were on 96.1 FM which used to be known as 96 Rock. At the time, 96 Rock was owned and operated by Clear Channel who apparently had no problems firing their best radio personalities for no damn reason.

The first time that the guys were terminated in 2004, one of the show’s producers accidently left a microphone on during a commercial break. During the break, a very graphic interview with a pornstar was played over a Honda commercial. Yet, instead of simply firing the careless producer who was actually responsible for the incident, Clear Channel decided to fire Larry and Eric. Not cool.

The guys returned to 96 Rock in 2005, but the return was short-lived. In 2006, the guys were fired again after an incident involving Larry Wachs recording fellow radio hosts in a bathroom. DJs Yoga and Panda of Viva 105.7 filed a lawsuit against The Regular Guys which led to the 2nd firing of Larry and Eric as well as the arrest of Larry Wachs. Apparently, the over-zealous police of Fulton County believed that it was illegal to record people in a public bathroom without their knowledge. Of course, it isn’t, and the case against Wachs was dropped. Essentially, the guys were fired twice for no reason whatsoever.

These days, 96 Rock is known as Project 9-6-1. Even though the name has changed, they are still owned by Clear Channel, which means they will still suffer from the same problems in bad management. However, that is no longer The Regular Guys’ problem.

They are back and on a brand new station! It’s a good thing too. I was beginning to go through serious withdrawal.

I should mention that The Regular Guys have been back for quite some time now. Version 3 hit the airwaves in January of 2008. Amazingly, however, I still meet people who used to be fans of their show on 96 Rock and don’t know that they are back!

The Regular Guys can be heard every weekday morning from 6am-10am on 100.5 FM. Rock 100 is based in Atlanta. If you are in the area, tune in. If not, there are plenty of other ways to hear The Regular Guys. The show is streamed live over the Internet from regularguys.com. Eric Von Haessler also has a live streaming webcam in the studio which broadcasts the entire show! That video feed can be found on his Stickam page at stickam.com/ericvon100_5.

If, for some reason, you can’t listen to the guys live, they also podcast their entire show sans commercials! Their daily podcast is available for download from cumuluspodcasting.com/RadioWeb/PodCast/WNNX-25-239.xml.

One way or another, you have the best Atlanta radio show at your fingertips.

Movie Review - The Dark Knight

2008-08-08T14:31:00.003-05:00

I wanted to wait until I saw The Dark Knight for a second time before I wrote my review. I did this for two main reasons. First, it is almost mandatory to see a film like this twice before you can objectively comment on it. Depending on your preconceived notions of the Batman franchise, your first viewing will probably be biased (this is especially true for someone like me).

Secondly, my first viewing was almost ruined by poor theatre management. Of course, I would be remiss in my review of The Dark Knight, if I did not begin by explaining this story.

Even though my friends made fun of me for it, I bought tickets for The Dark Knight online more than 1 month in advance. I have been excited about this film for quite some time. I had to see it on opening night and I had to see it on IMAX. My friends laughed, but I’m glad I did. Every single show for the first two weekends was sold out almost two days after I bought tickets!

A group of 8 of us showed up almost 2 hours before the show. We got perfect seats and waited for the show to start. When the movie began, we were all blown away by the opening sequence which had been filmed with IMAX cameras. The screen is HUGE, and the IMAX scenes filled the entire thing!

We were all enjoying the movie…for about an hour and a half. Then, almost half way through the film…disaster struck.

The IMAX projector shut down. Apparently, some jerk forgot to check the coolant levels which keep the projector bulb from overheating. Of course, if you don’t check the coolant levels, the projector WILL overheat, and it will shut down.

We waited for them to fix the problem and resume the movie. But after 15 minutes of waiting, they announced that the show was cancelled. Every person in the theatre was ready to revolt.

We were all compensated for the trouble, but that didn’t solve our biggest problem. We still were not going to see the ending of the movie! So, we did what any crazed film fan would do. We found another theatre in the Mall of Georgia showing The Dark Knight, and we snuck in. We had to sit on the very front row (the only available seats in the entire theatre). They were the worst seats that you could possible imagine, and it wasn’t an IMAX theatre. But, at least we were able to finish the movie.

Of course, I had to watch the movie again, and I had to watch the entire thing on IMAX. So, Katie and I went to see it again. And, it was well worth it.

Even on a Thursday during the third week of the film’s release, the show was still sold out. This isn’t surprising at all. The Dark Knight is, in a word, “incredible.”

I suppose the best way to format this review is to break it into categories, which I have listed below. But, in order to keep this relatively concise, I have posted my review of the three main characters on a separate posting.

Click here to read my character review.

So, without further adieu, here is my review of The Dark Knight:

The Plot
It seems like the perfect place to start. After all, the plot is the reason the film is supposed to exist. Sadly, too many films these days are made to sell toys, boost an actor’s celebrity status, promote a musical artist, or to simply make a quick buck. The story takes a backseat to the hype. I hate that.

But, this certainly isn’t true with The Dark Knight. The plot has so many levels and nuances to it, I’m still not sure that I fully grasp them all. The main story centers around Bruce Wayne and his desire to hand over his mantle. He looks forward to the day when Gotham City doesn’t need Batman anymore. After all, that was the whole point of becoming Batman in the first place. Batman Begins perfectly established that Bruce wanted to act as a symbol for Gotham. His symbol would be one that would terrify the criminal element in Gotham, but at the same time, it would inspire others to be courageous enough to fight back against evil.

This is certainly an interesting theme that has not been explored much in the comics, and certainly never played a role in previous films. But, it was a major part of Christopher Nolan’s Batman. The Dark Knight picks up on this theme and takes it to the next level.

I thought the central theme of Bruce’s desire to hand over his mantle was excellent, but it was seriously overshadowed by a subplot in the film – The Joker.

For me, The Joker was the most memorable thing about the film. He stole the show! I found myself waiting for him to come back on screen. He is truly twisted and truly sociopathic. But, his characterization was something I have never seen before. For more information on that, click here.

The other major sublot concerned Harvey Dent and his transformation into Two-Face. Harvey Dent’s descent into chaos was an interesting subplot, but it was too short lived. It’s almost as if it didn’t belong in the film. It seemed out-of-place. There was so much other stuff going on that it felt crammed-in for the big finale.

I suppose that I understand why they didn’t want to dedicate an entire film to Two-Face as the villain. For a guy as good as Harvey Dent, his descent into chaos would have to be short-lived. It would have to be almost akin to temporary insanity brought on by the death of a loved one. It would be all-consuming for a short time, but I just don’t buy that Harvey’s entire nature would suddenly change when he becomes disfigured.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve always liked the character of Two-Face, and I think they handled it fairly well in this movie. But, I just wanted to see more in order to be truly convinced.

However, the love triangle between Bruce, Rachel, and Harvey is utterly forgettable. I wasn’t invested in the relationship between Bruce and Rachel in the first film, and I certainly wasn’t invested in it this time. I know why they did it. I just don’t think that was handled as well as it could have been.

Gary Oldman
I’m glad they’ve given Jim Gordon a more central role. In the past, Commissioner Gordon has been relegated to a supporting role, offering police backup when it’s needed or giving Batman particular assignments. But, in Christopher Nolan’s Batman, Gordon fights alongside the Caped Crusader.

This gives Gary Oldman a real opportunity to shine. He is a great actor. I’ve always thought of him as playing a lot of bad guys on film, but it’s good to see him as a good guy. Plus, he brings a lot of depth to Jim Gordon. No longer is he a stuffy high-ranking cop who sits in his arm chair in his office and attends political functions. He’s a fighter. He’s as fearless and dedicated as Batman, but without the cape.

Michael Caine
What can I say? I love Michael Caine. Ever since I first saw him in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, I’ve been a fan. He can handle serious drama, and he is funny as hell.

When I first saw Batman Begins, I was hesitant to accept Alfred as having a low-British Accent. Typically, Alfred has been portrayed as having a very formal British accent. That’s what I have been accustomed to. There was just something about Caine’s accent that didn’t sit right with me.

But, I realized that I was quite wrong. Why would Alfred necessarily have a formal British accent? I’m sure that he was probably raised with very formal education, but Alfred isn't some stuffy, stereotypical British butler who wears ascots and white gloves. He’s Alfred! He’s witty, sarcastic, and tough. He has to be to put up with someone like Bruce.

Michael Caine’s accent makes perfect sense to me.

Maggie Gyllenhaal
Maggie’s performance was unbelievable. And, I don’t mean that in a good way. I did not believe for one second that she was an unstoppable Assistant DA or the love interest of two of the most powerful men in Gotham City. It’s not that she’s a bad actress. This just wasn’t the right role for her.

I should point out that I wasn’t a big fan of Katie Holmes either. She made a terrible attorney. But, at least I could believe that Bruce was interested in a girl who looked like Katie. Maggie just doesn’t have that kind of appeal that could snag guys like Bruce and Harvey.

Ultimately, I like the idea or Rachel’s character if it were done right. But, in both films she seemed to be more of a distraction than anything else.

Aaron Eckhart
If you haven’t seen the film Thank You For Smoking, go rent it. This was the film that really established Aaron in my mind. I love this guy’s work. He can play a great smart ass like he does in Thank You For Smoking, or he can play a hard ass like Harvey Dent. Aaron has the look of a guy you want to hang out. If you’re friends, he can be the nicest guy in the world. But, he’s also not afraid to kick your ass if you get on his bad side. That’s who Harvey Dent is, and that really comes through during his transformation into Two-Face. He plays the good and the bad equally well.

As I stated above, the Two-Face plot was a bit out-of-place for my tastes. But, this is in no way Aaron’s fault. He did a great job of playing Harvey and Two-Face. If Two-Face was the main villain in a Batman sequel (which seems highly unlikely considering the ending of The Dark Knight), I have no doubts that Aaron could carry the role.

Christian Bale
I feel that I have to preface this review by stating unequivocally that I am a huge fan of Christian Bale. I first saw him in a little film called Newsies. Since then, I’ve seen most of his films and loved almost all of them (The exception being Reign of Fire, but it wasn’t his fault. The script sucked). From Equilibrium to The Machinist, Christian can take on just about any role, make it his own, and excel. He is one of my favorite actors of all time.

With that said, his Batman voice has got to go. I think he makes an ideal Bruce Wayne. He’s dark and guarded. He doesn’t wear a mask, but you know you aren’t seeing the real Bruce Wayne. He comes off as a typical playboy millionaire without a care in the world except for himself. But, underneath lies something…abstruse (look it up).

Yet, as Batman, it is the one time that I hate hearing him speak. Bale is from Wales, yet he can perfectly mimic any accent on the planet. Watch any movie he’s ever been in. He rarely uses the same voice. He changes his voice to fit the characters that he is playing, and he does it flawlessly. So, why is his Batman voice so over-the-top?

I agree that Bruce has to disguise his voice when he is Batman. He has to whisper and sound very scruffy. But, when Bale does it, it comes off sounding so contrived. His words are broken up too much, and he occasionally sounds like he is congested. Of course, some of this is due to the cowl he is wearing.

Here’s a little trivia for you. No other Batman cowl has ever had a nose piece which covered the actor’s entire nose. It’s always open at the bottom so he can breathe. Why Nolan decided to do this, I am not sure. But his cowl covers Bale’s entire nose at the bottom. There may be some holes there so he can breathe. But, he is still covered up. That alone can make him sound congested.

Because the nose piece completely covers his nose, it also pulls his upper lip up. This would also affect his voice (and make him unable to ever close his mouth, which is another issue that I had).

Overall, I am just not sold on his Batman. He looks the part, he just isn’t sounding the part.

Heath Ledger
I have saved the best for last. I don’t really know what to say besides…Heath Ledger stole the freakin’ show! I knew, as everyone did, that his death would surround this film and his performance with hype. His passing was a tragedy. And, I honestly regret that I will never be able to see him on screen again. That is especially true after The Dark Knight.

His portrayal of The Joker went far beyond anything I had anticipated. For this film, it was a perfect representation of The Joker. It would have been out-of-place for Burton’s 1989 Batman film, which is why it is probably not fair to compare Heath Ledger and Jack Nicholson. But, Heath took a well-established character and introduced the audience to a Joker they had never seen while maintaining all of the original intent of the character. He treated this role with the utmost respect, and it shows. Too many times, actors, writers, and directors take part in making a superhero film, and have no background and/or no respect for the source material. That becomes blatantly obvious when they make a superhero film for the sole purpose of selling toys and making a quick buck.

Heath, however, spent an entire month living alone in an apartment, surrounding himself with Batman comics, and working out The Joker’s voice and personality. He was dedicated to delivering more than just a surface-level characterization for one of the most intriguing and disturbing criminal masterminds ever put on paper. That is why I say that his performance was perfect.

I would say the same had he not died. If he were still alive, he would still merit the Oscar talk that is happening now. He deserves it.

The Suit
I was unsure about the new Batsuit. Of course, I said the same thing about the Batman Begins suit, but it grew on me. Before Batman Begins, I had always thought of the Batsuit being closer to Tim Burton’s Batman. It’s sleek, but it still looks like armor (and NO nipples!). But, the Batman Begins suit looked very "industrial" to me. I hated it at first. But, I realized that with Christopher Nolan’s “real world” approach to the character, it made perfect sense.

In The Dark Knight, Bruce asks Lucius Fox to build him a new suit. He needs something that will provide more flexibility but still give him some level of protection. He also wants to be able to turn his head. That all makes sense to me. But, the new suit came out looking like a mix between Motocross armor (which is actually what it was designed after) and SWAT riot gear.

Again, I understand and appreciate the reasoning behind it. But, it still looks a little funky to me. I’m getting used to it. But, I hate the cowl. I’ve explained why.

The Batpod
The Batpod was kind of forgettable to me. Yes, it’s cool that Batman has his own version of a motorcycle (which apparently only about a dozen stuntmen in the world are actually qualified to drive), and yes it makes for an impressive escape vehicle. But, I just didn’t get it. For all the realism that Nolan tried to inject into the movie, why this thing? I’m just sad that they destroyed the Tumbler. It took me a while to get to the point where I loved it. Now, it’s gone. Or, is it?

Christopher Nolan
Despite the few criticisms that I have, I am absolutely sure that Christopher Nolan is the man for this job. He has brought Batman back to the real world and given the Caped Crusader back a lot of the dignity that Joel Schumacher robbed him of. Christopher said that he wanted to create a world where Batman could really exist. That was his mindset when they created the Tumbler, the Batsuit, the Utility Belt…all of the things that make Batman who he is. He formed all of the characters in this same fashion. They are characters you can believe.

He has returned Batman to an elemental state where he can thrive as a hero, but is grounded by laws of reality. A few of the effects may be over-the-top. But, what’s a summer blockbuster without a Semi-truck being flipped over in the middle of a metropolitan?

All I can say is, “Thank you, Christopher Nolan.”

Final Thought
In the end, I have to say that The Dark Knight went far beyond all of my expectations. Rarely does such a movie live up to the hype, much less surpass it. But, this movie did just that. I was a huge fan of Batman Begins. The Dark Knight is far superior. It took the Batman mythos to a new level by introducing new ideas that gave the characters more complexity while retaining and expanding on established themes.

It is the best film of 2008 without a doubt. And, to think, it was almost ruined by some jerk who forgot to check the coolant levels in a projector. Unbelievable.

The Dark Knight - Character Review

2008-08-08T14:26:00.002-05:00

Harvey Dent
Throughout the course of the film, Bruce tries to secure Harvey’s future as Gotham’s District Attorney and even keeps Harvey on the right path when he believes that Harvey is perilously close to blurring the lines between good and evil.

Of course, as it is in the comics, Harvey ultimately becomes the villain Two-Face. With his new persona, Harvey is capable of seeing and acting on both sides of the law. On one side, he is still Gotham’s "White Knight." But, on the other, he is driven to madness by the death of Rachel Dawes. Unable to make his own choices about which side to take, his actions are determined by the only thing he can see as being truly fair – Chance. With the flip of his coin he determines the life or death of those he deems responsible for Rachel’s death. The flipping of his coin represents total chaos. The outcome is anyone’s guess.

This idea of chaos was introduced to Two-Face by the main villain of the film – The Joker.

The Joker
The Joker in The Dark Knight is far different than any Joker we have seen before. The Joker in the Batman comics has always been a sociopathic clown who masterminds grand schemes to entrap Batman and amuse himself. But, generally his plans have had some sort of financial gain to them, and his violent actions, though gruesome, have always had a level of “comedy” to them. This is certainly apparent with his portrayal in the 60s TV show, when he was played by Cesar Romero, and in the 1989 film, when he was played by Jack Nicholson.

Nicholson, arguably the most well-known Joker, made me laugh at times. Sure, he was killing people throughout the film. But, the deaths weren’t nearly as bloody, and he tried to put a smile on people’s faces. Well, sort of. His antics, though mildly disturbing, did not make me cringe.

The Joker in The Dark Knight, however…that is a different story. This Joker is…disturbing. Played by Heath Ledger, the Joker in The Dark Knight is simply one of the best villains ever put on screen. This Joker has no origin. He has no back story. He simply is what he is. He retains his original sociopathic-nature and his twisted sense of humor. But, as someone put it to me, he is the only one laughing at his jokes. His antics are disturbing enough to make even a strong-stomached person avert their eyes. He uses a knife as his primary weapon so that he can, as he put it, “savor the little emotions of people before they die.” On top of his actions, his physical appearance has been altered to represent his more gruesome persona. He still wears the traditional clown make-up. But, it isn’t a discoloration of his skin (as in the 1989 film) or a reflection of his comedic character. Instead, it is referred to by one character as “war paint.” That’s a fitting description considering Joker’s war with society. It’s also interesting to note that his classic “smile” is no longer just painted on. It is scarred into his face. How he got the scars is never made clear (he changes the story at least 2 different times). But, one thing is certain. These scars are not just skin deep. They reflect this maniac’s true nature.

In one of his first scenes he performs a “magic trick” which sets the tone of this character. He claims that he can make a pencil disappear, then slams a henchmen’s face into the pencil, embedding it in his skull. Afterwards, he concludes the “trick” with a traditional “Tada.” That is The Joker. Without any fear, empathy, or remorse, he destroys what he can get his hands on. And, he treats it as a performance, with himself as his main audience.

Some might say that The Joker is without reason. He even tries to convince Dent that he is not a man with a plan. He just acts.

As we see in the film, this isn’t true. He has a plan. And, he is smart enough and capable enough to carry it out. Alfred surmises that The Joker may be a man “who just wants to watch the world burn.” This is not far from the truth.

Ultimately, The Joker’s plan is not to control the mob, Gotham City, or the world. He is not doing any of this for infamy or wealth (After all, he burned his very large stack of cash). No, he does this for one reason.

He does this to show that he is not the ”freak.” He may be a little more twisted or theatrical than most. But, when faced with the ultimate choice, “normal” people can be just as chaotic and destructive as he is. He wants to watch the world burn, but he wants to watch the so-called “normal” citizens to be the ones who set the fires. His primary target is Harvey Dent. To him, Harvey represents the ultimate good guy. He is Gotham’s “White Knight” who has dedicated his life to restoring peace and justice in Gotham. He has no fear of fighting crime lords, psychopaths, or mob bosses. And, he can’t be bought, terrorized, or corrupted.

But, The Joker isn’t the only one who sees Dent this way. Batman does as well.

Bruce Wayne/Batman
It’s interesting that the Bruce Wayne in Christopher Nolan’s Batman is nothing more than a face. Traditionally, Bruce Wayne has been a “tortured soul” who tries to find a balance between having a personal life as Bruce Wayne and a “night life” as Batman. In Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne, for all intents and purposes, isn’t real. Batman is real. Bruce Wayne is the persona that he adopts to get certain things done. Bruce finances Batman’s crusade, Bruce provides various cover stories for Batman’s actions, and Bruce provides Batman with rest when he needs it. But, ultimately, Bruce Wayne is a facade. As I stated before, he does look forward to the day when he is not needed as Batman. But, until that day comes, he uses the character of Bruce Wayne to aid him in his crusade.

There is another interesting element of The Dark Knight that differs from the comics and previous films. Occasionally in the comics, Batman is seen a danger to Gotham. There are times when certain plots characterize him as an outcast. But, ordinarily, he is a beloved hero to Gotham’s citizens. In the beginning of the 1989 film, Batman was a wanted man by the police. But, he quickly secures his role as a protector and accepted by the citizens of Gotham.
In Christopher Nolan’s universe however, Batman is never fully accepted by Gotham. Even at the end of Batman Begins, Gordon is the only one who trusts him. In The Dark Knight, citizens still see him as an unwelcomed vigilante who is responsible for the death’s of Gotham’s citizens and police officers who had died at the hands of The Joker. He is blamed for the very thing Gordon warned about at the end of Batman Begins – Escalation. Gotham’s citizens panic when The Joker begins his rampage, and they lash out at Batman. The cops, never ones to be outdone by a masked crusader, never trust Batman and denounce him as a vigilante.

Knowing this, The Joker tells Batman, “To them, you’re just a freak…like me” (My favorite line in the entire film). He’s right. To them, Batman is a freak, on par with The Joker. Both are menaces. Neither can be trusted. In the end of the film, Batman seems to give them even more reason not to trust them as he willingly takes the blame for the heinous crimes perpetrated by Harvey Dent as Two-Face. He escapes into the night being chased by Gotham’s police force and branded an outcast.

This introduces what I think is one of the most interesting elements of the plot…the title. It’s a weird thing to say, but this is one of the best titles I have ever seen. “The Dark Knight” is a commonly used nickname for Batman. In the past, it has simply referred to the fact that he crusades for Gotham and is shrouded in darkness.

Yet, this title introduces an entirely new element into the name. If Harvey Dent truly is the “White Knight” of Gotham with his goodness and purity, then Batman truly is the “Dark Knight” who continues to fight for Gotham even though he is an outcast. The irony is that, to those he tries to protect, he is considered evil.

Jim Gordon put it best when he said that Batman is the hero that Gotham deserves, but he is not the hero that Gotham needs right now.

I'm going to keep this very simple

2008-08-07T08:32:00.000-05:00

While on vacation recently, my cousin Peter and I came to conclusion. And, here it is:

All men’s collared shirts should have a phrase printed on the inside of the fold. That phrase is “I am a Tool.” As long as the collar is folded down, the way it is supposed to be worn, the phrase will never be visible. However, the second some douchebag pops his collar, he will let the entire world know.

Douchebaggery has become an epidemic. Popped collars are merely one symptom of this debilitating disease. But, with any luck, we may find a cure by treating the symptoms.

Burn Notice

2008-08-06T09:14:00.002-05:00

For my first blog posting since my hiatus, I thought it would be a good idea to write about a new television show that I have really become a fan of in the last few months. You have probably seen several advertisements for it which feature the song “Everybody Wants You” by Billy Squier. But, you may have not taken the time to actually watch the show. Trust me, you should make the time.

The show is called Burn Notice. It is on the USA Network, Thursdays at 10pm (Eastern). In the ads, you have probably seen the main character, Michael Westen (played by Jeffrey Donovan) being shot at and running for his life. Michael is a former spy who gets “burned” in the pilot episode. He is blacklisted and confined to Miami, Florida where he is left with no resources and constantly tailed by the FBI.

This premise is the underlying plot of the series. Michael is trying to find out who burned him and why. But, without any real resources at his disposal, or, more importantly, money, he is forced to use his talents and training to work as a private detective of sorts in Miami. He helps people who find themselves in situations where they are unable or unwilling to go to the police.

If this sounds a bit familiar, it should. The show The A-Team had a similar theme. The A-Team characters were “Soldiers of fortune” who helped people in need when they had no where else to turn.

With many of the plot lines and even the characterization of Michael Westen, Burn Notice runs the risk of being an updated hybrid of MacGyver and The A-Team. In Burn Notice, Michael regularly showcases his ability to improvise cool and effective weapons and to create fully-functional gadgets out of seemingly irrelevant household items.

If the show relied on these types of “gimmicks,” I would say that it falls in that updated hybrid category. But, fortunately, Burn Notice offers a lot more.

For starters, Michael’s improvised weapons and gadgets are far more believable than anything seen on MacGyver or The A-Team. I was a fan of both of those shows, but they both suffered from the same misfortune. They were scripted by cheesy ‘80s writers. As a result, the action scenes were way over the top and the gadgets they developed, with very few exceptions, defied reality. Fortunately, Burn Notice doesn’t fall in this category.

Secondly, Burn Notice does an excellent job of balancing laugh-out-loud comedy, quick wit, and coolness. The closest film example of this balance would be Ocean’s 11. Ocean’s perfectly balanced great comedy with an immeasurable “cool” factor. While I wouldn’t even consider equating Burn Notice with Ocean’s 11, I would say that Burn Notice maintains a similar equilibrium between humor and style.

Thirdly, Burn Notice actually provides a little thing called “character development.” So many television shows are nothing more than a collection of self-contained one-dimensional episodes. There is no underlying theme or plot that is developed throughout the series. No single episode has any effect on the other episodes. You can literally pick a single episode in any season of the show and learn everything there is to learn about those characters. They don’t build on one another, and they don’t maintain any sense of continuity. They simply are what they are. If you need a clear-cut example of this, consider the differences between a show like The A-Team and 24. Can you watch a single episode of 24 and know everything you need to know? Try it, and let me know how that works out for you. Personally, I love shows that you have to be a fan of to really understand. There simply isn’t enough time in a half-hour or hour-long television show to understand characters with any sense of depth.

But, I have saved the best element of the show for last. Burn Notice is told from a first person narrative. Michael Westen speaks to the audience as though he is training them on how to be a spy. His training and experience give him a distinct advantage in most of the situations he finds himself in, and it’s always interesting to hear him describe how he is going to handle that particular situation. He tells the viewer exactly what he is thinking when trying to develop a tactical strategy or quickly improvising an escape. It’s kind of like getting into the mind of 007, except a lot more realistic.

In conclusion, Burn Notice has a lot going for it. It’s a great show. The only problem is that it is on the USA Network, which means the advertising and marketing for the show is somewhat limited. It is a well-known fact that even great shows can be killed off by crappy marketing (i.e. Arrested Development). I can only hope that Burn Notice survives and continues on for several more seasons.

It is currently in its second season, although the first season is available on DVD. Rent it from Blockbuster Online or Netflix. You can also watch it online at Hulu.com. Do what you have to do. But, definitely check out Burn Notice.

Back from my hiatus...sort of.

2008-08-05T15:25:00.001-05:00

Since I have become increasingly nauseated by the state of politics and political discourse, I have resolved to avoiding newscasts all together and even discussing politics or social issues of any kind. I simply can’t take it anymore.

Many of my friends have wondered how long this hiatus will last. Some have speculated that I will give in any day. A few of them, in particular, have tried to hurry my “inevitable” surrender by trying to goad me into a heated political debate. But, it’s not going to work, Andrew.

Nevertheless, I am left with a decision. If I have determined myself that politics will no longer be a topic on this blog, then what will? I haven’t posted anything for months. It’s not as though readers have been pounding on my door, crying out for answers as to why I have forsaken them (though I suspect that type of reaction is due any day now). But, I really should post something here. Outside of politics, I feel as though I still have plenty of things to talk about.

So, that is exactly what I am going to do. I am going to start posting again on topics ranging from cool gadgets to movie news, and from television to technology (or, “Technology Magic” as the Adams prefer to call it). I may even throw in a few more of those “Pet Peeves” lists. Trust me…I have plenty more.

As always, I’ll try to keep it interesting, so check back often. And, if there is something in particular you’d like for me to talk about, I’m open to any suggestion.

Well, almost any suggestion.

MP3 Watch Update

2008-04-01T14:59:00.002-05:00

I know…I know. I am beginning to obsess over this thing. My MP3 Watch has been a great purchase, and I wear it every day. Granted, I don’t use the MP3 or flash drive functions every day. But, I always have my accessories on hand, just in case.

I purchased a pair of retractable headphones with a 2.5mm audio plug on them. They were hard to find. But, after some Google searching, I found an affordable pair.

The problem was that the first pair the company shipped was the wrong kind. They shipped retractable headphones with a 3.5mm plug. Obviously, these wouldn’t fit my MP3 watch. So, I emailed the company and they replaced them without any problems. They shipped out the correct pair the very next day!

Once they arrived, I quickly discovered a new problem. I knew that the 2.5mm plug on the headphones had to be a 4-pin plug (meaning that it would have 3 black rings on it instead of the more common 2 black ring plugs).

But, like an idiot, I forgot to check on this little detail before I ordered the headphones. Even the correct headphones that I ordered wouldn’t work with my watch.

Obviously, the first thing I thought about doing was cutting the 2.5mm (2 ring) plug off of these headphones and soldering on the proper 2.5mm (3 ring) plug. After many attempts to find the correct wiring pattern, I finally discovered the proper way to wire the correct plug to the headphones. I soldered it all together, and…

It was total crap. The sound was awful. It was coming through both ears. But, the bass and treble were way off. I assume that those particular headphones simply didn’t have enough power for that 2.5mm (3 ring) plug. They weren’t compatible.

So, I did the only thing I could do. I took the 3.5mm plug headphones that the company incorrectly sent to me the first time (which they allowed me to keep), and I put a 3.5mm to 2.5mm adapter on them.

*NOTE – The 3.5mm to 2.5mm adapter will not work for the USB cable. The 2.5mm plug must be directly wired to the USB plug to transmit data. Only audio will transmit through the adapter.

I had originally decided against using such an adapter because the only 3.5mm to 2.5mm (4-pin) adapters that I could find were 5 inches long. This doesn’t sound like much, but when the retractable headphones coil up into a nice little package, it’s a shame to have an extra 5 inch cable hanging off of the end.

It isn’t the best-looking solution. But, it gets the job done. It’s portable, it’s virtually clutter-free, and the sound is great.

I thought I had it all together. Then, I ran into a new problem. Actually, it’s a problem that I created. Remember the 2.5mm to USB adapter that I made? Yeah…I broke it.

The 2.5mm plug is so small that it snapped quite easily. I suppose it happened one day when I threw my keys down (which it was attached to). I can’t say for sure because I didn’t see it happen. I just pulled it out to use it one day and noticed that the plug was snapped in two.

Not cool.

Naturally, I decided to make a new one. This time I would protect the 2.5mm plug by covering it, and I would improve the design so I could detach it from my key ring quickly and easily. I thought I came up with a pretty clever idea.

I constructed the new adapter much like the last one. But, for the 2.5mm plug cover, I modified an actual 2.5mm jack that I purchased at Radio Shack.

I could attach the modified 2.5mm jack to my key ring, and plug up the adapter to the jack. The 2.5mm plug would be protected, and I could quickly detach it by “unplugging it” from my key ring.

This idea worked very well…for a while.

A few weeks ago, I noticed that my MP3 watch wasn’t being recognized by my computer right away. I would have to unplug it and plug it back in several times. Over the next few days, the problem continued to get worse. It would be recognized by the computer for a while. Then, all of a sudden, it wouldn’t recognize it at all. It was as if it were being continuously unplugged and plugged back in. The connection was obviously bad.

So, I took it a part to diagnose the problem. But, I couldn’t find anything wrong. The wires were soldered on correctly, and everything seemed to be intact.

Then I noticed it. The 2.5mm plug was very badly scratched. As it turns out, the style of jack that I used was too tight for the 2.5mm plug on my adapter. Continuously unplugging it and plugging it into the jack on my key ring had scratched the plug. My design simply wouldn’t work.

Now, I’ve created a third adapter.

I am trying to figure out the best way to attach it to my key ring and protect the 2.5mm plug. I'd rather not risk damaging another plug by using a better 2.5mm jack.

I’m sure I’ll come up with a new design soon, so I’ll keep you posted.

Top 10 Interview Mistakes

2008-03-25T09:15:00.003-05:00

As most of you know, I work in the staffing industry. Part of my job is to interview applicants for our open jobs. Perhaps, it's just the industry that I work in, or the area in which I live, but I have encountered some of the dumbest people trying to apply for a job.

They ask inappropriate questions, dress like they are going to a Monster Truck rally, and lack any sense of self-awareness. At times, it seems easier to dismantle a nuclear weapon than to get some applicants to answer a question with more than one-word answers. But, what's even worse than the ones who refuse to speak are the one's who say way too much.

They will not hesitate to tell me in graphic detail about their druken escapades with their ex-wives or about their pending Stalking charges. In case you haven't figured it out yet, the world is full of morons.

Today, I received an email from CareerBuilder. It was their monthly newsletter. In this issue, they had an article titled "Interview Blunders." It was a survey they conducted about mistakes applicants have made during an interview. They came up with a list of the top ten worst mistakes made by job applicants. According to CareerBuilder, all of these are true stories.

Take a look and marvel at the stupidity:
1. Candidate answered cell phone and asked the interviewer to leave her own office because it was a "private" conversation.

2. Candidate told the interviewer he wouldn’t be able to stay with the job long because he thought he might get an inheritance if his uncle died - and his uncle wasn’t "looking too good."

3. Candidate asked the interviewer for a ride home after the interview.

4. Candidate smelled his armpits on the way to the interview room.

5. Candidate said she could not provide a writing sample because all of her writing had been for the CIA and it was "classified."

6. Candidate told the interviewer he was fired for beating up his last boss.

7. When applicant was offered food before the interview, he declined saying he didn’t want to line his stomach with grease before going out drinking.

8. A candidate for an accounting position said she was a "people person" not a "numbers person."

9. Candidate flushed the toilet while talking to interviewer during phone interview.

10. Candidate took out a hair brush and brushed her hair.

My Hiatus

2008-03-14T13:24:00.001-05:00

With the current state of politics, and the saturation of election coverage, I’m starting to feel more and more disheartened about even discussing political issues. For quite some time now, I have been disgusted by both Republicans and Democrats alike. Neither party has the ideals of individual liberty or freedom at the top of their priority list. They simply aren’t interested in them. They are more concerned with their own reelection.

In addition, I have begun to feel that blogging about these issues is really a waste of time. It really doesn’t help my psyche to focus on all of the crap that is coming out of Washington (or coming from the average uninformed American voter), and to further perpetuate my frustration by writing about it.

I used to be able to rationalize it by saying that I am trying to start a discussion. I wanted to have serious, informed, logical debates. But, for the life of me, I can’t seem to get people to leave comments on any of my blogs. For those of you who do leave comments (all 3 of you), I thank you. I really am appreciative. But, the comments are few and far between, and cannot really be considered a “discussion.”

If blogging about these issues accomplishes nothing but making me more frustrated, and people aren’t reading my blogs or aren’t responding to them, then there is really no reason to continue.

So, for now, I am taking a hiatus. I won’t be blogging about political issues. I really won’t even discuss it in person. I need a break.

Thanks again to those who choose to read. But, I am out.

Pet Peeves: Part Two

2008-03-12T12:03:00.002-05:00

1. No one seems to understand the idea behind the left lane of traffic. Apparently, everyone skipped over the page in the driver’s handbook which specifically states that the left lane is for PASSING.

2. Despite the millions of dollars that we spend on road construction each year, many drivers avoid turning lanes like the plague. Instead, they will opt for coming to a complete stop in the middle of their lane, severely impede the traffic flow behind them, and VERY slowly cross over 3 lanes of traffic to make their turn.

3. Regardless of the fact that one cannot find the word “stop” anywhere in the term “speed bump,” I will inevitably always drive behind the person who will come to a complete stop for up to 30 seconds before proceeding over a speed bump at 0.0000000001mph.

4. Movie tickets and movies have an inverse relationship. Ticket prices for movies continue to increase exponentially while the quality of movies being spawned out of Hollywood is plummeting at free-fall speed.

5. Tyler Perry.

6. Tyler Perry. No, this isn’t a typo. He, and everything he produces, is so unbelievably annoying (and devoid of humor) that it necessitates giving him two spots on this list.

7. No one seems to understand that the phrase “I could care less” actually means that they DO, in fact, care. The phrase they are looking for is “I couldn’t care less.”

8. Despite the multiple warnings before a movie begins, and the general consensus that it is incredibly annoying and rude, people will still refuse to turn off their cell phones in a movie theatre. Even worse is the observation of a growing trend…people engaging in complete conversations on their cell phones during a movie.

9. The vocabulary of today’s teenagers consists of approximately 50 words, and that is in sharp decline.

10. A single sentence from the mouth of a teenager consists of a maximum of 10 words, at least half of those being the word “like.”

11. When teenagers use the word “like,” it is rarely used in the proper context. No longer does the word “like” mean “fond of” or “similar to.” Today, the word “like” is used as sentence filler.

12. When a natural disaster, or some other major event, takes place in the South, news outlets will send reporters into the field to get reactions from the public. Despite the large number of intelligent, articulate, and well-groomed citizens who may be available for comment, reporters will inevitably interview the inspiration for the movie “Deliverance” who speak with an unintelligible country accent and couldn’t string a coherent sentence together if their mullets depended on it.

13. Southern accents, in general. They are the predominate reason why most of the civilized world views Southerners as being stupid.

14. The average customer in a retail store has the observational ability of a blind monkey. They will not hesitate to ask how much an item is, despite the fact that the front of the package has a bright orange price tag the size of a billboard. (Fortunately, I no longer work in retail. But, for those of you who do…I feel your pain.)

15. A lot of people claim to love the platitudes of personal freedom and liberty, right up until the point where they have to take responsibility for their own bad decisions. At that point, they claim to be a part of the “less fortunate,” and demand that the Government engage in wealth redistribution in order to “level the playing field.”

Another "Isolated Incident"

2008-03-11T07:59:00.000-05:00

Do you need yet another story of Government school outrage? How about this? Two 4-year-old boys were handcuffed and arrested…because they didn’t take a nap.

I…kid…you…not.

The parents of two Bronx preschoolers are suing the city, charging that their kids were tossed out of class - and handcuffed by a school-safety officer - for refusing to take a nap.

The school-safety officer entered the room, cuffed the boys' wrists - and further terrified them by telling they that they would never see their parents again.

Don’t’ worry. I’m sure this was just an “isolated incident.”

The Penny Prank

2008-03-03T09:24:00.002-06:00

I normally express my disgust with Government schools when they do something ridiculous like charging a kindergartener with sexual harassment for hugging a teacher, or arresting a 10-year old for using a knife to cut a steak which she was eating for lunch.

Today’s example of Government school stupidity is slightly different.

The students involved aren’t being punished because their actions were misinterpreted by hyper-sensitive teachers. They aren’t even being punished because they violated some absurd zero-tolerance policy. To be honest, I can’t figure out why they are being punished:

Got pennies!

It's plastered on their shirts and these eighth graders wear it proudly because on Thursday they pulled a prank at the Readington Middle School, paying for their lunches entirely in pennies.
The penny prank has earned 29 students two days of detention.
They paid for their lunch in pennies. Umm…OK. Why are they being punished? Seriously. Why are they being punished? Pennies are legal United States currency. Readington Middle School is a Government-run organization. They are charging the students for a service (though, I use the word “service” very loosely). That debt is being paid for in-full.

So, why are they being punished? Oh, here’s why:

Several lunch ladies who had to do the counting didn't think it was funny, even though some of the students put the coins in rolls. They're not authorized to put in their two cents but school officials say they felt disrespected.

School officials and the lunch ladies felt “disrespected.” Cry me a freakin’ river. You have no legal standing. As I said, pennies are official United States currency. And, the school handbook has absolutely no rule against paying for something in pennies.

It may annoy school officials. It may even piss them off. But, they have absolutely no grounds for punishing these kids. Granted, their punishment is only 2 days detention. It’s not that severe. But, it’s really the principle of the thing.

They are being punished because some Government school bureaucrat didn’t like the way the students paid for their lunch.

More demands from Islam

2008-02-29T09:38:00.003-06:00

I didn't know that there were any Europeans left who actually had a backbone. I guess I was wrong.

In this video, Pat Condell unloads on the peaceful, serene, loving religion of Islam. He is disgusted to see that every demand made by the "Religion of Perpetual Outrage" is met in the U.K. with spineless submission.

The New Ice Age

2008-02-27T10:38:00.003-06:00

I am about to share a news story with you. Despite any impressions you may get from this article or any conclusions that you may draw from it, always remember one thing. No matter what happens with our climate, it is all caused by Global Warming. After all, that is what the Church of Global Warming has been trying to convince us of.

Freak snow storms or extreme heat waves? Global Warming.
Increased hurricane activity or a complete lack of hurricanes? Global Warming.
Bridge collapses and decreases in African circumcisions? Global Warming (I really wish I was kidding about that, but it’s true).

So, we all know that no matter what happens, it is all due to Global Warming. With that in mind, I give you this story from DailyTech:

Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming.

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.

No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out nearly all the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

Interesting. The planet is cooling down…and fast. In fact, the cooling is so dramatic, that it stands to “wipe out” the 1 degree of warming that took place in the past 100 years. So, what is causing this dramatic temperature decrease?

Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases.

What? Man is not the largest factor when it comes to climate change? Don’t these people know that nothing is more threatening to this planet or more able to upset the perfect harmony of nature than man? Don’t they know that man and his evil idea of industrialization is the most destructive force in the known universe?

Are they trying to suggest that a huge ball of nuclear fusion measuring 870,000 miles in diameter is actually more powerful than man?

Of course, even if such cooling could be attributed to sun activity, I’m sure that man is responsible for it. Our CO2 has obviously traveled into space and polluted the sun, thus causing it to cool.

It makes perfect sense.

Pork Spending

2008-02-26T10:14:00.002-06:00

Because I am no shill for the Republican Party, I have no problem admitting this. Both Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty of wasting our money in order to buy votes. It’s called pork barrel spending, and it is a staple of politics in Washington. Need I remind you that it was a Republican who proposed the $315 million “bridge to nowhere,” while it was the Democrats who hid in a war appropriations bill more than $220 million to be spent on things like peanut storage, spinach production, and the shrimp industry.

These people are wasting our money.

However, last month, there seemed to be a slight chance of hope for curbing this earmark spending. House Republicans urged the Democrats to join them in an immediate moratorium on earmark spending. The Democrats refused. No one was going to stop them from wasting tax payer dollars on their pet projects.

Of course, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has argued that Democrats have adopted “tough” earmark reforms and will reduce the number of pork barrel projects (both of which are provably false).

So, the Republicans decided to hold them to that promise. They established a website called Earmark Reform, which would serve as a hub of information regarding GOP efforts to hold Democrats accountable for their earmark policies. It would offer a modicum of transparency into the pork-barrel spending habits of the Congressional majority.

The website was launched on February 12. Nine days later, on February 21, House Republican leader John Boehner was ordered by Democrats to shut the website down. In a letter sent to him by House Democrats, Boehner was told that the website violated House rules and must be shut down and moved to a different location with a different domain name.

It is strange, however, that the Democrats did not mention that the website violated House rules when they approved the URL last August.

The truth of the matter is that Democrats know that moving the URL of the website will confuse visitors to the website, and, most likely, result in decreased traffic. I guess things were getting just a little too transparent for them.

Pet Peeves

2008-02-22T13:47:00.005-06:00

I have heard that if you bury your anger and never openly express it, it can destroy you. To avoid any future psychological trauma, I feel it necessary to reveal a few things that have been on my mind for quite some time. These things don’t just annoy me. They don’t just irritate me. They infuriate me.

1. Larry the Cable Guy actually has a career. And, it is gaining momentum, despite the fact that he is, in no way, funny.

2. The same can be said for Carlos Mencia. “Mind of Mencia” has been picked up for a 4th season.

3. Regardless of the fact that the phrase “Git-r-done” doesn’t mean anything (and, is actually just a random, ridiculous collection of letters and punctuation) people will still use it in everyday conversation, emblazon it across the rear window of their vehicle, and stitch it onto a Confederate flag displayed outside of their house (i.e. trailer).

4. Original and smart comedy is being replaced by catch phrases.

5. No one seems to notice that every episode of “Everybody Loves Raymond” is exactly the same. Yet, it ran for nine seasons and is still in syndication. The same can be said for “Home Improvement.”

6. While ridiculously vapid and redundant shows like “Everybody Loves Raymond” or “Home Improvement” are allowed to run for 9 seasons, “Arrested Development” was cancelled after 3 seasons. And, it wasn’t even allowed to run a full 3rd season.

7. Movies like “Stomp the Yard” and “Who’s your Caddy” are actually produced.

8. Not only were “Stomp the Yard” and “Who’s your Caddy” produced. They were released nationally. Yet, I had to drive over an hour to find a theatre showing “Juno.”

9. Huge marketing campaigns are put behind television shows such as “Lipstick Jungle.” But, barely any attention is given to a show like “Journeyman,” causing it to be cancelled after only 13 episodes.

10. Commercial jingles did not die out in the 1950’s. Instead they are growing in number and their level of annoyance is multiplying exponentially (I’m looking at you FreeCreditReport.com).

11. Television and radio stations will even run these same annoying commercials multiple times during every commercial break of the same show. Yet, the truly funny and entertaining commercials which required at least a modicum of talent to put together are rarely put on the air.

12. “Reality TV” still thrives.

13. No one seems to understand the definition of “reality.”

14. American Idol is in its 7th season. Yet, in their commercials, they still use the phrase “There can be only 1.”

15. Similarly, 97.1 “The River” (an Atlanta-based radio station) has been on the air for over 2 years. Yet, they still refer to themselves, on the air and on their website, as the “NEW 97.1 The River.”

16. Rap “music” has become the juggernaut of the music industry.

17. Concordantly, Rap has inflicted on society a severe loss of basic grammar and communication skills, a culture which celebrates criminal behavior and lionizes thugs, and a perpetuation of the victim mentality.

18. Rap artists don’t seem to understand the basic idea of spelling in the English language. Instead, they mispronounce and redefine words, effectively creating a new word, then spell out the new word phonetically. (i.e Flo Rida, Shawty, or Soulja)

19. Apparently unaware that it looks like they have taken a wrong turn off of the ski lift, girls are still wearing Ugg boots.

20. In addition, girls are still unaware that oversized sunglasses actually make them look more like a Geocoris than an attractive human female.

21. It is still possible to walk into a public place and see males ages 13-30 with popped collars.

22. Regardless of how much noise, commotion, and trouble their child makes, parents will always believe that their child is an adorable little angel, and that everyone else around them is in complete agreement.

23. Though they fear that children are being oversexualized, parents apparently have no problem buying their 5 year old daughters Bratz dolls, or dressing them like underage prostitutes at age 12.

24. The average American can name all of Brad and Angelina’s children, and they could name the previous 6 winners of American Idol. The average man could tell you the names of every quarterback currently playing college and professional football. Yet, these same people couldn’t name their 2 United States Senators if their lives depended on it. Thus is the nature of our celebrity worship culture.

25. No one seems to understand the definition of the word “racist.” Nine times out of ten, when someone labels something as “racist,” in reality the term does not apply. To quote Íñigo Montoya, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Those are just a few of mine. What are yours?

Obamamania knows no bounds

2008-02-21T08:50:00.003-06:00

Obamamania has been ridiculously over-the-top for quite some time now. Anytime, a politician’s supporters begin having fainting spells at the very sound of his voice (or, like Chris Matthews, they admit to having a “thrill” run up their leg) you know that the hysteria surrounding that particular politician has reached unbelievably absurd levels.

All of that is absurd. But, this is just stupid:

It's probably safe to say that you have arrived as a politician when your audience applauds when you blow your nose.

Yes, just a day before a debate in Texas, Sen. Barack Obama has a head cold.

And about a half-hour into a speech here, the Illinois Democrat announced that he had to take a quick break. "Gotta blow my nose here for a second," Obama said.

Out came a Kleenex (or perhaps it was a hankie), and he wiped his nose.

The near-capacity audience at the Reunion Arena, which his campaign said totaled 17,000, broke out in a slightly awkward applause.

Oh, come on people. You applaud when a politician blows his nose? You have got to be freakin’ kidding me.

Make your own USB to 2.5mm adapter

2008-02-15T12:05:00.002-06:00

In my review of the A218 MP3 watch, I discussed the primary problem with the watch. It has a 2.5mm port which serves as the data port and the headphone port.

If you know anything about modern audio electronics, you know that most of them utilize a 3.5mm port. Almost any headphones you have ever seen have a 3.5mm jack. The same goes for products such as the 2nd Generation iPod Shuffle which utilizes a multi-function audio port. It can be used as an audio port or as a data transfer port. But, all of these products will still utilize a 3.5mm port.

The A218 MP3 watch is a little different. Because it uses a 2.5mm port, you are limited on the types of cables and adapters that you can use.

Of course, the watch does come with a USB cable and headphones which will fit this 2.5mm port. However, the primary problem with this is the fact that the USB cable which comes with the watch is 12 inches long. In order to use this watch as a flash drive, you have to carry this long cable around with you everywhere. The purpose of the watch is portability. The 12 inch cable completely defeats this purpose.

So, I attempted to find a solution.

I found a USB adapter for the 2nd Generation iPod Shuffle. It is a very small adapter with a male USB on one end and a 3.5mm jack on the other. In order for this to fit the watch, the 3.5mm jack had to be reduced to a 2.5mm jack. These adapters are very easy to find. So, I ordered the iPod Shuffle adapter from eBay and picked up the 3.5mm/2.5mm adapter at Radio Shack. Once the iPod Shuffle adapter arrived in the mail, I connected the pieces together, plugged them into my MP3 watch, and waited for the magic. Much to my disappointment, nothing happened.

Apparently, the USB data signal will not transmit through a 3.5mm/2.5mm adapter. The 2.5mm jack has to be directly wired to the USB plug.

So, I tried to find an adapter that made a direct connection from a male USB to a male 2.5mm jack. I searched the Internet thoroughly. I even emailed manufacturers. No success. There isn’t an adapter like this anywhere on the market…none that I could find anyway.

So, what do we do when we can’t find what we need? We make it.

I started gathering the necessary materials, and studying up on the proper procedures. I found an old USB cable and a 2.5mm jack. But, during my research, I discovered a crucial aspect of the 2.5mm jack. The jack has to be a 4 pin jack. This means it has 4 connection points on it. You will know if it is a 4 pin jack because the tip will have 3 black rings on it. Most only have 2. Some even have 1.

So, I had to find a 2.5mm, 4 pin jack. Luckily, the MP3 watch came with an extra USB cable. So, I robbed the 2.5mm jack from that.

I had all of my parts:

Now comes the hard part…putting it together.

First, I had to figure out which cable connects to which. The USB plug has 4 cables…Red, Green, Black, and White. During my research, I discovered this page which is a guide on making a similar adapter for the iPod shuffle. Though the adapter on this page uses a 3.5mm jack, the principle is essentially the same.

There was a small problem, however. The diagram on this page told me which wire to put on which connection, but on the wrong end. It points to the tip of the 2.5mm jack which plugs into the watch. Obviously, you can’t solder to that end. So, I had to use an ohmmeter to figure out which connection corresponded to which soldering point. To save anyone else the hassle, I have revised the diagram to reflect this.

Once I had this diagram, I started the soldering process. It’s not easy. The parts are so small, and the plastic on the 2.5mm jack has a tendency to melt from the heat. But, I eventually got all the wires soldered on to the 2.5mm jack.

I plugged it in to the watch, plugged the USB cable into my Computer, and witnessed the most amazing thing. It actually worked!

The hard part was over with. After that, I made a basic casing for the adapter which consisted of the original USB casing and a little epoxy. I then connected a key ring to it and…Voila. I had a USB/2.5mm adapter that I could carry around with me anywhere.

The work gets a little tricky, but it’s really worth the effort.

Gadget Review - A218 MP3 Watch

2008-02-15T12:02:00.005-06:00

As I have said before, I am a sucker for cool gadgets. Admittedly, they are probably only cool by my standards. To everyone else, they are just geeky. But, nevertheless, I love them. This is especially true for gadget watches.

If you read this previous post, you know what I am talking about.

I recently purchased a new gadget watch, and I just had to share my opinion on it. It has always frustrated me that there are so many seemingly cool gadgets available for sale on the Internet. But, finding a helpful review on them is next to impossible. I am always hesitant to buy something over the Internet unless I can read a review on the product. But, for this particular watch, I made an exception.

Without further adieu, here is my review of the A218 MP3 watch.

Different brands and styles of MP3 watches are available all over the Internet. I found this particular watch on eBay. If you browse around eBay you can find MP3 and MP4 watches with capacities of 256MB to 4GB. I wanted a simple MP3 watch with a descent storage capacity. But, I also wanted one that didn’t look like an MP3 player. It had to look like a regular dress watch so I could wear it to work and on an everyday basis.

The A218 MP3 Watch fit the bill. Take a look:

As you can see, it looks like a regular watch. But, there is so much more to it. It serves as a flash drive, an MP3 player, an FM radio, and a voice recorder! I’ll never be bored again.

One of the most amazing things about this watch is the storage capacity. It has 2GB of storage built-in. That’s enough for 400-500 MP3s and any files you need to take with you.

I’ve had the watch for a couple of weeks which has given me enough time to review all of the features. Here are my opinions…

MP3 Player:

Positive
I have been very impressed with the sound quality on this player. Some people, like myself, will be able to tell a slight difference in the sound quality of this player versus an iPod. But, then again, that could simply be attributed to the earbuds that come with this MP3 player. I will discuss more on that subject later. But, the MP3 player is simple to use. It’s really the best feature on this watch.

Negative
I should point out that when you add songs to this player, it will play them in the order that you add them, and will only play them in that order. You can’t rearrange them once they are on there. This might be a drawback if you already have 100-200 songs on there, and you want to add a new song to play first. You will have to delete all of your music, and then add them back on in the correct order. This can be a hassle if you really care about the order of your music.

FM Radio:

Positive
It’s a nice idea, but…

Negative
You can’t expect much out of this radio. Depending on your location, you may pick up more stations than other locations. But, the internal antenna leaves a lot to be desired. I am only able to pick up 3 or 4 stations, and I am in a good location for radio reception. The stations you can pick up will come in very clearly. But, as I said, there are very few of those. The FM radio isn’t that impressive.

Flash Drive:

Positive
It’s a simple plug and play USB flash drive. If you have ever used a flash drive, you know the drill. There is nothing different here. Once the watch is plugged in, it acts as a separate drive. You can drag and drop files, create and organize folders, etc.

Negative
Nothing. It is a basic 2GB flash drive. Everything works as it should.

Voice Recorder:

Positive
This has been very surprising. When I originally saw this on eBay, the voice recorder was a main focus of the seller’s description of the watch. He marketed it as a “Spy Voice Recorder.” I guess that is true since you can’t see the microphone at all. I still can’t find it! But, I didn’t think I would actually use this recorder.

I was wrong. I love the voice recorder! It is so handy for keeping notes and reminders. I have already used it several times. The sound quality is very good. Even if you hold the watch 12-18 inches away from your mouth, the microphone will still pick up your voice clearly. I have even recorded in a loud environment where there was a lot of noise in the background. Listening to the note, I could barely hear the background noise. My voice came through clearly.

Negative
There are two negative aspects to the voice recorder, and neither of them are very important. First, since the watch has no outer speaker, you have to plug up the headphones to hear your notes. You can also listen to them through your computer. Once, you plug up the watch to your computer, and open up the folders, you will see a folder named “Mic.” This is the folder where all of your voice notes are stored. You can simply open them from there and listen to them through your computer speakers. It would be nice, though, to not have to do any of this or plug up headphones. A speaker could come in handy.

The second problem is that, in order to record a note, you have to start the watch, wait for it to start up, put it in “record” mode, then press the record button. All-in-all, it takes about 20 seconds and 3 button-presses to do all of this. One-touch recording would be preferable. But, like I said, it isn’t a big deal.

Equalizer:

The watch claims to have 5 equalizer settings, and even has a button labeled “EQ” (though this button also serves other functions). However, the differences in the Equalizer settings are so insignificant that you can’t really consider them an important function.

Size:

Positive
I specifically looked for an MP3 watch which didn’t look like an MP3 watch. That includes being the size of a normal watch. This one definitely is. It’s not too wide, and it fits well on my wrist. I guess my only slight complaint is…

Negative
It’s a little thicker than I thought it would be. Normal dress watches these days are ridiculously thin. It would be nice if this watch was equally as thin, but I suppose that is too much to ask for all of these features. The watch is about 5/8 inch thick, so it still can’t be defined as “bulky.” Also, once it is on my wrist, I hardly notice the thickness.

Ease of Use:

Positive
This is an interesting subject. Once you get the hang of it, all of the functions are very straightforward and easy to understand. The only problem is getting to the point where you understand how to use the watch.

Negative
The instructions that come with the watch are completely useless. The watch is made in China, so the instruction manual was originally written in Chinese. If you know anything about the language, you know that many things in Chinese don’t translate well into English. I am guess that the company used an automated translation system to print an “English” translation of the instructions. It’s really just random English words thrown together in a pseudo-sentence format. Like I said, the instructions are useless. You just have to play around with the watch, and figure out how everything works. I’m pretty good with just pressing random buttons, so I figured it out fairly quickly.

Data port/Headphone port:

This is an important topic, and something to consider before buying this item. As you can see in the picture below, the Data and Headphone port is on the side of the watch.

It is similar to the port on a 2nd Generation iPod shuffle due to the fact that it serves 2 different functions depending on the type of cable that is plugged into it. However, there is one crucial difference.

This is a 2.5mm port (Some people may refer to it as a 3/32 port). It will only accept a 2.5mm jack. iPods, CD players, and almost any other electronic device being made today use a 3.5mm (1/8) port. I’m not sure why the manufacturer did this, other than to save space. But, it creates a small problem. You cannot use your regular headphones with this watch. The watch comes with 2.5mm jack earbuds, and the quality of these earbuds is decent. Most people may be perfectly happy with them. But, for comfort reasons, I prefer to use rubber tipped earbuds. But, due to the 2.5mm port, I can’t use my regular earbuds. And, finding 2.5mm earbuds in retail stores is very difficult. If you want a different style of headphones, you may have to find them online.

This watch also comes with a USB data cable. One end is a male USB which plugs into your computer. The other end is a male 2.5mm jack which plugs into the watch. This cable is crucial to using the watch, but consider this. The cable is about 12 inches long. In order to use this watch as a flash drive, you have to carry this long cable everywhere. It’s not very convenient or portable.

This is a problem. But, I found the solution. You can read about it here.

Final Assessment:

Overall, I rate the A218 MP3 watch very positively. It is a purchase that is well worth the money. In fact, the price is probably the best part. I found this watch on eBay for $25. That includes shipping!

$25 for all of these features? It’s a fantastic deal!

(You can find the A218 on eBay listed as: 2GB SPY VOICE RECORDER FM FLASH DRIVE MP3 WATCH A218)

***UPDATE***
I have been asked to post pictures of the watch on my wrist, so that you can see how thick the watch really is. Never one to disappoint my readers, here you go:

(Click the image for a full-size view)

As you can see, it really isn't that thick. I have had it for several months now, and I never think about it. When it is on my wrist, it never feels bulky. I hope that helps!

New Blog!

2008-02-15T11:40:00.004-06:00

I swore to myself that I wouldn't turn this into a techy blog. But, apparently, my word isn't worth very much. I have made several technology-related posts on here, and I'm about to make another one.

However, in order to prevent these types of posts from becoming regular features on here, I started a new blog called Q Branch (Fans of the James Bond series will recognize the reference). Check it out!

(In order to get some extra exposure for Q Branch, I will be cross-posting here for the next few weeks.)

Respect My Authority!

2008-02-14T09:30:00.002-06:00

Before I go any further, let me preface this blog by stating that I absolutely do respect law enforcement officers. Many of them face terribly dangerous situations on a daily basis, and they do so to protect all of us. Their motto is “to protect and serve,” and many of them perform this duty with honor.

I know police officers. My brother is a police officer. This post is not a personal attack against them, and should not be construed as a gross generalization or overstatement.

With that said, I give you Baltimore Police Officer Salvatore Rivieri:

This guy is completely out of control, and should never be allowed to wear a badge. Completely unprovoked, he attacks this kid, puts him in a headlock, berates him and his parents, and repeatedly accuses this kid of “disrespecting” him. Officer Rivieri deserves absolutely NO respect. He is a nut-case. He is an egotistical jackass who got a badge to compensate for his own failures and shortcomings. He pursued a career in law enforcement in order to achieve the one thing he truly cares about…power.

So, how was this badge-wearing excrement punished? According to the Baltimore Sun:

A Baltimore police officer was suspended yesterday after a YouTube video surfaced on the Internet showing him berating and manhandling a teenage skateboarder at the Inner Harbor.

Sterling Clifford, a spokesman for the Baltimore Police Department and the mayor's office, said authorities have begun an internal-affairs investigation.

Suspended? Suspended? I would assume that this suspension is the first-step of his punishment pending the internal investigation. At least, one would hope. Suspension is not nearly enough for Rivieri. With no provocation, whatsoever, he attacked this kid!

Rivieri should be fired. Then, he should be brought up on assault charges. His actions were completely uncalled for. He shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a badge.

Granted, I am no fan of punk skateborders, and this was an area of the park that didn’t allow skateboarding. Tell these kids to leave the park! Don’t attack them!

But, I’m sure this simple solution never occurred to Officer Rivieri. He is a power-hungry jackass. Unfortunately, there are too many of these wearing a uniform which they have no right to wear.

This thrill up my leg

2008-02-13T09:17:00.002-06:00

I…I…I…I don’t know what to say. Wait, a minute. Yes, I do. Chris Matthews is a liar.

I have written many times before about specific instances of Chris Matthews’s left-wing bias. This is not a baseless, unfounded statement. It has bearing in actual fact. Chris Matthews has an unmitigated bias toward leftist thinking, and he thoroughly incorporates his bias into his supposedly “objective reporting.”

Today’s example was from a broadcast last night on MSNBC. The unabashed leftist Chris Matthews was joined by the unabashed leftist Keith Olbermann to “report” on the evening’s Presidential primary race. Matthews’s favorite politician, Barack Obama, won the Potomac Primary and delivered his victory speech. After the speech was over, Matthews gave his assessment. Watch the video:

MATTHEWS: I have to tell you, you know, it’s part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama’s speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don’t have that too often. No, seriously. It’s a dramatic event. He speaks about America in a way that has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with the feeling we have about our country. And that is an objective assessment.

“This thrill going up my leg.” That was Matthews's reaction to Obama’s speech. Not only did it thrill him. The thrill, which he apparently does get to often, ran up his leg. Are you people hearing this?

To top it off, after admitting to the fact that hearing Barack Obama speak gives him borderline sexual excitement, Matthews has the chutzpah to claim that it is an “objective assessment.”

AN OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT?!!! ARE YOU FREAKIN’ KIDDING ME?

Is Environmentalism Really About The Environment?

2008-02-11T09:44:00.000-06:00

A couple of months ago, I wrote about an interesting admission made by the Church of Global Warming at the Bali Conference. The “Friends of the Earth” promoted Global Socialism by suggesting that our “climate crisis” can be solved by a simple redistribution of wealth.

“A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources.”

Nice huh? Well, it doesn’t stop there. A couple of “Environmentalists,” David Shearman and Joseph Wayne Smith, have even published their anti-capitalist dogma in a book titled, “The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy.”

If you’re amazed by the title, you’re really going to love the description of this book:

In this provocative book, Shearman and Smith present evidence that the fundamental problem causing environmental destruction--and climate change in particular--is the operation of liberal democracy. Its flaws and contradictions bestow upon government--and its institutions, laws, and the markets and corporations that provide its sustenance--an inability to make decisions that could provide a sustainable society.

Having argued that democracy has failed humanity, the authors go even further and demonstrate that this failure can easily lead to authoritarianism without our even noticing. Even more provocatively, they assert that there is merit in preparing for this eventuality if we want to survive climate change. They are not suggesting that existing authoritarian regimes are more successful in mitigating greenhouse emissions, for to be successful economically they have adopted the market system with alacrity. Nevertheless, the authors conclude that an authoritarian form of government is necessary, but this will be governance by experts and not by those who seek power. There are in existence highly successful authoritarian structures--for example, in medicine and in corporate empires--that are capable of implementing urgent decisions impossible under liberal democracy. Society is verging on a philosophical choice between "liberty" or "life."

Oh, boy. Where do I start? Notice how the authors completely vilify free markets and, the favorite villain of leftists, eeeevil corporations. They suggest that the real problem with existing authoritarian regimes is that “they have adopted the market system” in order to be economically stable. They imply that these societies could take great measures to save the planet if it weren’t for their evil market systems.

An authoritarian form of government is necessary, but this will be governance by experts and not by those who seek power.

Basically, they are saying that an Authoritarian government is the only way to save our planet, but only as long as Environmentalists are in charge. Wonderful.

But, lest you believe that the authors are actually promoting the shift of world Governments to Authoritarian control, they save the last chapter of the book to convince you otherwise.

There is a third way between democracy and authoritarianism that the authors leave for the final chapter. Having brought the reader to the realization that in order to halt or even slow the disastrous process of climate change we must choose between liberal democracy and a form of authoritarian government by experts, the authors offer up a radical reform of democracy that would entail the painful choice of curtailing our worldwide reliance on growth economies, along with various legal and fiscal reforms. Unpalatable as this choice may be, they argue for the adoption of this fundamental reform of democracy over the journey to authoritarianism.

So, they don’t necessarily believe that Authoritarian control is the ultimate answer. They simply believe in a “radical reform of democracy” which includes the “curtailing our worldwide reliance on GROWTH economics, along with various legal and fiscal reforms.” Without reading the book, I can’t say exactly what these “various legal and fiscal reforms” are. But, it is clear, based on their hatred of growth economics, that their "reforms" would seek the slowing, stopping, or even reversing of economies worldwide.

(You might be interested to know that former President Bill Clinton has made a similar proposal.)

We can also look to other writings by these authors to get a good idea of the types of reforms they desire. Take, for instance, this article written by David Shearman, one of the authors of “The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy.”

At OnlineOpinion.com, Shearman writes:

Liberal democracy is sweet and addictive and indeed in the most extreme case, the USA, unbridled individual liberty overwhelms many of the collective needs of the citizens.

There must be open minds to look critically at liberal democracy. Reform must involve the adoption of structures to act quickly regardless of some perceived liberties.

If we do not act urgently we may find we have chosen total liberty rather than life.

I believe Patrick Henry once faced a similar choice between Liberty and Life.

Has the surge been successful?

2008-02-11T08:16:00.000-06:00

Has the surge in Iraq been successful? You tell me…

Al-Qaeda in Iraq faces an “extraordinary crisis”. Last year's mass defection of ordinary Sunnis from al-Qaeda to the US military “created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight”. The terrorist group's security structure suffered “total collapse”.

These are the words not of al-Qaeda's enemies but of one of its own leaders in Anbar province — once the group's stronghold. They were set down last summer in a 39-page letter seized during a US raid on an al-Qaeda base near Samarra in November.

That second document is a bitter 16-page testament written last October by a local al-Qaeda leader near Balad, north of Baghdad. “I am Abu-Tariq, emir of the al-Layin and al-Mashahdah sector,” the author begins. He goes on to describe how his force of 600 shrank to fewer than 20.

He said of the loss of Anbar province: “This created weakness and psychological defeat. This also created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight. The morale of the fighters went down . . . There was a total collapse in the security structure of the organization.” The emir complained that the supply of foreign fighters had dwindled and that they found it increasingly hard to operate inside Iraq because they could not blend in. Foreign suicide bombers determined to kill “not less than 20 or 30 infidels” grew disillusioned because they were kept hanging about and only given small operations. Some gave up and went home.

You can read the English translation of the letter here.

The Marxist Agenda

2008-02-08T08:35:00.000-06:00

I just thought this was a very interesting article, and I wanted to share it.

Via Townhall.com:

Twenty years ago, a Marxist Scholars conference in New York City featured a seminar on how to use the classroom to convert students into Marxists. Covering the event, I was surprised to learn that the radical professors, for the most part, were no longer trying to turn English majors into Molotov cocktail throwers.

As early as the 1920s, many Marxists realized they could never persuade fat, happy capitalists to overthrow their governments, so they concluded they could only create their egalitarian utopia through a nonviolent cultural revolution. The strategy for this new style of revolution was to get people to reject traditional Western Judeo-Christian values and start thinking like Marxists, even if they would never apply the term to themselves.

In the classroom, the strategy required professors to convince students that America is an evil place desperately in need of change. Their tactic was to direct students’ attention away from America’s accomplishments and values, such as establishing freedom of speech and religion, and focus instead on America’s flaws and social injustice. Don’t praise George Washington for his sterling character and stunning achievements—condemn him because he owned slaves. Don’t let students think of themselves as citizens of a great nation, but as members of a victimized class or as potential victimizers.

Gee…does any of that sound familiar?

The Trojan Horse For Fascism

2008-02-04T08:22:00.000-06:00

Someone once told me that Hillary’s plan for our Healthcare system is not about power or control. It is simply about helping “the poor” to get the medical care they need and deserve. She wouldn’t force anyone to buy health insurance if they didn’t want it. People will remain free to do what they want with their own healthcare. She simply wants to lend a helping hand to those who need it.

I guess Hillary didn’t get that memo.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Will you garnish wages of people who don’t comply, don’t buy the insurance?

CLINTON: George, we will have an enforcement mechanism. Whether it’s that or it’s some other mechanism through the tax system or automatic enrollments.

Under our inevitable system of Government-controlled healthcare, you can kiss your freedom goodbye. It is a Trojan horse for fascist control.

I want people disarmed

2008-01-27T07:36:00.000-06:00

Question: How far would MSNBC’s Chris Matthews have to go for people to realize what a left-wing hack he really is? What exactly would it take?

I only ask, because it seems as though there are still people in this country who actually believe him to be a completely objective, unbiased, fair-and-balanced reporter. After all, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell told us that he was.

But, as I have shown on more than a few occasions, he is nothing of the sort. He routinely injects his own worldviews into his supposedly “unbiased” newscasts. Today’s example of Chris Matthews’ unabashed bias, and unbelievable ignorance, came from Friday’s broadcast of “Hardball” on MSNBC.

Chris Matthews was “moderating” a debate on gun-control laws. I put the word “moderating” in quotation marks because he wasn’t really moderating at all. He was a participant in the debate, bringing his own Statist, anti-gun views into the discussion.

Marvel at the limitless ignorance that is Chris Matthews:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Go ahead Deroy, you live in the city. I don't understand how we want to get on the subway at night knowing that everybody else in the subway is armed, and because I have a gun I'm OK.

DEROY MURDOCK: Well, there have been studies that have shown that in cities where are concealed-carry laws, the gun, rather, the crime rate goes down because criminals are afraid that people may retaliate. As for this particular --

MATTHEWS: What do you think of that? What do you think of that? What's your view?

MURDOCK: On this race, what's interesting is that Romney --

MATTHEWS: You don't want to give me your view because it requires you to actually say what you think, because I'm asking you Deroy --

MURDOCK: I happen to agree with that. I think that --

MATTHEWS: You think we should have a concealed gun law in New York?

MURDOCK: Yah, I think that would probably be helpful. There are people who do conceal guns here, and to the extent that people think that criminals might be retaliated on, I think that helps keep the place safe. I would point out that Romney, who claims to be Mr. Second Amendment now, actually increased the cost for gun permits, and he claimed when he ran for governor that he wasn't a man of the NRA, and now that he's running for president he claims to be a lifetime member of the NRA -- lifetime being defined as joining in August of 2006. So even on the gun issue he's sort of all over the map.

MATTHEWS: You know what I think? In big cities they ought to check people on sidewalks like getting on airplanes. And why an airplane should be safer than an American sidewalk is crazy to me. Why you can walk down the sidewalk of an American city carrying a concealed weapon without a license is wacky.

MURDOCK: I think [you should have to have] a license.

MATTHEWS: But that's what's going on. I'm talking about a different point here.

So many things to point out, and so little time. First, note that Chris Matthews completely changed the essence of the debate when he said, “Why you can walk down the sidewalk of an American city carrying a concealed weapon without a license is wacky.”

No one ever said that people should be allowed to walk around concealing an unlicensed weapon. Concealed carry laws specifically state that citizens are allowed to carry a firearm, as long as they have REGISTERED for a concealed carry permit. Deroy Murdock stated this. And, Chris Matthews knows it, because HE ASKED THE QUESTION!

MATTHEWS: You think we should have a concealed gun law in New York?

MURDOCK: Yah, I think that would probably be helpful.

So, when Chris Matthews states, “I'm talking about a different point here,” HE’S LYING!

Next, let me point out to you the unbelievably Statist views of this “objective, unbiased” reporter.

MATTHEWS: You know what I think? In big cities they ought to check people on sidewalks like getting on airplanes.

Every day, we hear from hacks like Chris Matthews that President Bush is violating the civil rights of American citizens by spying on them, tapping their phones, warrantless searches….the list goes on. Yet, here is Chris Matthews supporting the idea of a fascist state where police officers can randomly stop people on the street without probable cause and search them from head to toe.

Read Chris Matthews’ statement and tell me that he is not in favor of a fascist police-state.

But, I haven’t even told you the best part yet. If you haven’t seen Chris Matthews Statist, anti-gun opinions on full-display yet, this should take care of that…

MATTHEWS: I want to see people disarmed. I want people disarmed in our major cities. How's that for a plan? I don't think we should all be armed, and I don't think more guns is the answer. I think it's wacky to say that the solution to armed robbery and killing in our streets in big cities is to put more arms in the streets.

He is actually calling for gun-owners in New York city to be disarmed. Second amendment? Who needs it?

Matthews blatantly states his opinion on the issue without any restraint. Hey, Chris, you’re supposed to be REPORTING the news. We don’t give a damn what you think.

I’m not going to dwell on the fact that Chris Matthews’ opinion on gun-control is provably wrong. The statistics and studies of gun crimes stand in direct contrast to everything that he is saying.

The real point here is that Chris Matthews, this “objective, unbiased, fair-and-balanced reporter,” is using his show on MSNBC as a soapbox to spread his own worldview to his viewers.

This is not a news report. It is news commentary.

No Matter What...

2008-01-25T10:12:00.001-06:00

For a while now, I have said that the Church of Global Warming has the most ingenious marketing campaign ever devised. They have positioned themselves in such a way that no matter what happens with our climate, they claim that it supports their beliefs. No matter what happens (unusual snow falls in Baghdad or heat waves in Canada) it can all be blamed on Global Warming.

Remember, if you will, the film “An Inconvenient Truth.” In that film, Al Gore claims that Global Warming will cause an increase in natural disasters such as floods and hurricanes. In 2005, after Hurricane Katrina, the media immediately started hyping the idea that Global Warming was causing more frequent and more intense hurricanes.

So, it’s settled then. Global Warming causes more frequent and more intense hurricanes.

Wait…what’s this?

Global warming could reduce how many hurricanes hit the United States, according to a new federal study that clashes with other research. The new study is the latest in a contentious scientific debate over how manmade global warming may affect the intensity and number of hurricanes.

In it, researchers link warming waters, especially in the Indian and Pacific oceans, to increased vertical wind shear in the Atlantic Ocean near the United States. Wind shear — a change in wind speed or direction — makes it hard for hurricanes to form, strengthen and stay alive.

You really can’t make this stuff up, folks. No matter what happens with our climate, it can always be blamed on Global Warming. Record high temperatures or record low temperatures, a record high number of hurricanes or a record low number of hurricanes, a snowfall or a heat wave, it’s really all the same.

It’s “Climate Change.” And, it’s all our fault.

Secret Clinton Memos

2008-01-19T07:39:00.000-06:00

Hillary Clinton has been campaigning for the Presidency her entire life. But, ever since she OFFICIALLY announced her candidacy, she has claimed that she is “uniquely qualified” for the job of President of the United States. In her own words:

“I wouldn't be in this race and working as hard as I am unless I thought I am uniquely qualified at this moment in our history to be the president we need.”

Of course, no one can really figure out what her “unique qualifications” are. Is it because she was First Lady? In that case, I guess Laura Bush is “uniquely qualified” as well. How about Lady Bird Johnson, for that matter? Was she “uniquely qualified?”

Perhaps, it is Hillary’s 7 years as a junior Senator which "uniquely qualifies" her. Although, the major problem there is that, since being elected to the Senate, SHE HASN’T DONE ANYTHING. She hasn’t authored a single piece of meaningful legislation. She has no major Senatorial accomplishments to speak of. So, what in her entire career as a junior Senator from New York “uniquely qualifies” her to be President of the United States?

Going back to her days as First Lady, perhaps it was the important projects that she spearheaded. In 1993, she chaired a cabinet-level Task Force to devise a new plan for our Health Care System. This new plan became known as HillaryCare. Perhaps HillaryCare is what “uniquely qualifies” her to be President of the United States.

Although, that is doubtful. You see, HillaryCare was an abysmal failure (If you don’t know much about the plan, look it up. It was the epitome of socialized medicine with fascist controls to maintain it).

For the past several years, the Clinton camp refused to release any of the internal memos and documents concerning HillaryCare. Why did it fail? What plans did they have in place? What was going on behind-the-scenes? The public wanted to know, but the Clintons wanted to keep all of that in the dark.

That is, until now.

You see, the Clinton Library has released some of the memos from those involved with the HillaryCare Task Force. Looking over them, it is not hard to figure out why the Clinton’s didn’t want this stuff to see the light of day.

Via Judicial Watch:

A June 18, 1993 internal Memorandum entitled, “A Critique of Our Plan,” authored by someone with the initials “P.S.,” makes the startling admission that critics of Hillary’s health care reform plan were correct: “I can think of parallels in wartime, but I have trouble coming up with a precedent in our peacetime history for such broad and centralized control over a sector of the economy…Is the public really ready for this?... none of us knows whether we can make it work well or at all…”

“P.S.” is, most likely, Paul Starr, senior advisor for President Clinton’s health care reform plan. In this memo, P.S. admits that HillaryCare would be a broad, centralized control over a huge section of the economy. In addition, P.S. clearly states that the Federal Bureaucracy might not even be able to make the new health care plan work.

Go figure that the Government wouldn’t be able to make something work properly. Who would have ever guessed that?

But, if Statist controls over your health care isn’t enough to open your eyes, how about this? Witness some of the tactics this Task Force wanted to use to deal with critics of HillaryCare:

A “Confidential” May 26, 1993 Memorandum from Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) to Hillary Clinton entitled, “Health Care Reform Communications,” which criticizes the Task Force as a “secret cabal of Washington policy ‘wonks’” that has engaged in “choking off information” from the public regarding health care reform. The memorandum suggests that Hillary Clinton “use classic opposition research” to attack those who were excluded by the Clinton Administration from Task Force deliberations and to “expose lifestyles, tactics and motives of lobbyists” in order to deflect criticism.

“Classic opposition research.” That’s what they call it. It’s Washington-talk for “Let’s dig up some dirt.” Rockefeller specifically says that they should “expose the lifestyles, tactics, and motives” of their opposition. For a party of “Liberals” who are supposed to be so ACCEPTING of different lifestyles and individual choices, they certainly don’t seem to be too accepting or open-minded. They are willing to use those lifestyles as weapons against their opponents.

Are you seeing the big picture?

But, get this. This is one of my favorite parts. In the same memo, Senator Rockefeller discusses several strategies for using the media to push their agenda. Here is a very eye-opening line:

“Senator Rockefeller also suggested news organizations “are anxious and willing to receive guidance [from the Clinton Administration] on how to time and shape their [news] coverage.”

The media was “anxious and willing” for President Clinton to instruct them on how to sell this health care plan. Bias? What media bias?

They were ANXIOUS to receive their marching orders from the Clinton Administration! Amazing.

Then we come to the last memorandum in this report. It further reveals the fascist tactics that this Task Force was willing to use to see HillaryCare implemented:

A February 5, 1993 Draft Memorandum from Alexis Herman and Mike Lux detailing the Office of Public Liaison’s plan for the health care reform campaign. The memorandum notes the development of an “interest group data base” detailing whether or not organizations “support(ed) us in the election.” The database would also track personal information about interest group leaders, such as their home phone numbers, addresses, “biographies, analysis of credibility in the media, and known relationships with Congresspeople.”

Does this not scare you? This database would track whether or not particular groups supported them, as well as any and all personal information the Clinton Administration would need to destroy their opponents!

So let’s recap. The HillaryCare Task Force tried to implement a plan that would represent an unprecedented broad and centralized control over a huge section of the economy the likes of which have never been equaled during peacetime in the history of our country. In order to see this Fascist plan established, they relied on equally fascist methods involving secrecy, smear tactics, and a vast misuse of Government resources to gather and track personal information about American citizens.

To top it all off, President Clinton’s own health care advisor didn’t know if the Federal Bureaucracy could effectively establish and maintain such a sweeping control over America’s health care system.

I guess this is what “uniquely qualifies” Hillary Clinton to be President of the United States. God, help us.

Is An Obama Rally A Spiritual Experience?

2008-01-18T08:10:00.000-06:00

Is an Obama Rally on par with a spiritual awakening? According to the objective, unbiased Chris Matthews it is. Earlier this week, MSNBC's Chris Matthews made an appearance on the Tonight Show. During the segment, Matthews told Leno:

"The fact is, I wouldn't be an honest reporter if I didn't tell you what the spiritual experience is like of being in a Barack Obama rally. It’s an honest statement."

Chris Matthews appearance on the Tonight Show gives all of us a good insight into how this suppossedly unbiased, open-minded, fair and balanced "journalist" views the current Presidential campaigns. So, what did he have to say?

Watch and see...

"It used to be the Democrats were the disorganized political party. Now, the Republicans are like the -- like the Iraqis. Have you noticed? They got their Shia wing, the fanatics. They've got Huckabee. This where I get into trouble. This is just where I get into trouble.

Huckabee and Thompson are the Shiites, and the Sunni, the more moderate guys, are McCain, and -- who else they got over there? And uh, Rudy Giuliani. And then they got Romney, the Kurd. I mean, they're all over the place. Who's gonna unite them?"

Yes, he actually compared the Republican Presedential candidates to warring Iraqi factions. I pressume his implication is that the Republicans are not unified in their political philosophies and have resorted to attacking each other.

Uhh...Chris, this is Washington D.C. we're talking about here. What else is new? But, that didn't stop Matthews from labeling Thompson and Huckabee as "fanatics."

In stark contrast, what did Matthews have to say about Barack Obama?

LENO: On the night of the Iowa caucus, I'm sitting there with the remote in my hand, you know. And I come to MSNBC and I was holding the remote and I hear Barack Obama starting to give his acceptance speech and go -- and, you know, I put the remote down, and I actually felt something. When he talked about his mother's from Kansas, and the father in Kenya. It's an American story.

MATTHEWS: I love it. I love it.

LENO: And you know...

MATTHEWS: And you’re talking to me.

LENO: It moved me. I don't know whether I'm being naive, but...

MATTHEWS: Well, we're white American guys. We want this fight over with. We're tired of this hatred and this back and forth thing that's been going on for 300 years, this back and forth racial thing. I said something nice about Hillary Clinton, personally. Let me tell you something about Barack Obama. If you're actually in the room when he gives one of his speeches, and you don’t cry, you’re not an American. It's unbelievable.

There are so many things to point out, that I'm not sure where to begin. For the sake of time, I'll move past the fact that Matthews just admitted that his support for Obama is based upon the fact that Obama is black, and the assumption that support for a black candidate from "white American guys" will help end racial discrimination and race-based politics.

Watch Matthews as Leno says that he was moved as he listened to Obama speak. Matthews puts his hand over his chest. He is visibly emotional. He emotes and swoons over the very mention of Obama's name.

Then, comes one of the most telling parts of the interview. Matthews actually makes the claim:

"If you're actually in the room when he gives one of his speeches, and you don’t cry, you’re not an American."

It constantly amazes me when leftists claim that Conservatives are calling them "unpatriotic" because of their stance on the war. As Hillary Clinton once shreiked:

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say, 'We are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!'"

Leftists love to make this claim, despite the fact that no elected Republican has ever made such a statement. But, I digress.

Leftists hate to have their patriotism questioned. Yet, Matthews has no problem flat-out denying the patriotism of anyone who doesn't cry whenever Obama talks. Simply amazing.

Finally, we come to the interview's climax.

"The fact is, I wouldn't be an honest reporter if I didn't tell you what the spiritual experience is like of being in a Barack Obama rally. It’s an honest statement."

Honest reporter? Uhh...Chris, I think that ship sailed long ago.

Besides the humorous claim that he is an honest reporter, Matthews also claims that an Obama rally is a "spiritual experience." Spiritual? Really?

Chris Matthews isn't satisfied with selling Obama as though he worked for Obama's campaign. He isn't even satisfied with drooling all over himself at the metion of Obama's name. He goes so far as to say that hearing Barack Obama in person is on par with a spiritual awakening.

Matthews has been a mouth-piece for Obama's campaign for quite sometime now. So, his Obama lovefest on the Tonight Show comes as now surprise. But, it is quite a dichotomy to see the way he views Republican candidtes juxtaposed to the way he views Obama.

It is no mystery where his loyalities lie.

It should be noted, that this particular clip can not be used as "smokin gun evidence" for Matthews journalistic bias. Though there is no question that his MSNBC show Hardball leans decidedly to the left, and that Matthews own political views are often expressed through his supposedly "unbiased" reporting, in this particular instance he was not serving in the capacity of a jounalist. He was being interviewed about his particular viewpoints.

You will never hear me claim that jounalists are not allowed to have their own viewpoints on political issues. They are individuals. They are entitled to their opinions. The real problem is when they inject their opinions into what they claim to be an unbiased and objective news program. The Tonight Show is not a news program, nor does it claim to be. Chris Matthews was not serving in this capacity.

Therefore, his appearance on the Tonight Show does not serve as evidence of his biased reporting. It does, however, speak to his idiocy.

Of course, as I said, there is no lack of evidence of Chris Matthews' biased reporting. But, don't tell that to Andrea Mitchell.

The m500 UPDATED

2008-01-16T11:17:00.000-06:00

I swore to myself that I wouldn’t turn this blog into a technology blog. But, every now and then, a product comes along which merits my commentary.

In case you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m kind of a nerd. This is especially apparent when it comes to my love of gadgets. Geek-chic, techy gadgets have always fascinated me. I’m a sucker for them. Most of the time, you can see me sporting one of these gadgets on my wrist, because I also happen to be a huge sucker for gadget watches.

My primary watch is a Casio PRG70T.

This watch has it all. It’s a compass, an altimeter, a barometer, a thermometer, a stopwatch…oh yeah, it tells time too. It’s not as though I use all of these functions on a daily basis. But, it’s certainly comforting to know that they are there…just in case.

Of course, a lot of people are sporting watches similar to this one. I like to also find watches that very few people are going to be wearing. They are unique not only in their style, but in their function as well. Here are a couple of my more eccentric watches.

This one is called Alien, and it’s made by a company called Android. If you have ever seen the film, Equilibrium, you’ll probably recognize this watch. It made a couple of brief cameos on Christian Bale’s wrist.

But, the most unusual watch I have, by far has got to be…

…the Scope. It’s manufactured by TokyoFlash. Most people can’t even figure out how to read the time on it, but you get used to it after a while.

But, why am I saying all of this? Well, I have just become aware of a new watch. This is the one I have been waiting for most of my life. I have to have it:

That’s right. It is a cell phone watch. The m500 by SMS Technology. Over the past few years, there have been attempts at manufacturing such a watch. But, all of the predecessors suffered from a similar fatal flaw. They were all too big!

A watch like this must have full functionality, ease-of-use, flexible usage for different cell phone providers, all packaged in a very small form factor. You can see why this has been a difficult achievement.

But, I think the m500 answers all of these issues. Obviously, I don’t own it yet, so I can’t properly review it. But, from what I have seen and read, this is the cell phone watch I have been waiting for.

It has a speaker-phone with optional Bluetooth headset capability, full phone functionality for sending and receiving calls or texts, a full color touch-screen, it’s SIM card ready and unlocked to work with virtually every carrier, and a decent battery life. And, to top it all off, it’s small!

Someone on YouTube purchased one, and created a few videos which show off the watch’s capabilities. Check these out:

Video 1
Video 2
Video 3

The major downside at this point is the price tag. The lowest prices I have been able to find are on eBay for around $800. That’s more than an iPhone! Perhaps the price will come down in the future. But, for now, I guess I’ll just have to stick with my RAZR.

Side Note: My birthday is on April 3.

***UPDATE***
I have been informed that Tronicvasion.com is selling the m500 for a mere $500!

Keith Olbermann vs. The Truth

2008-01-10T12:15:00.000-06:00

It's not as though lying is new to Keith Olbermann. But, when he is caught on video making a blatantly false statement, it simply must be brought to the public's attention.

Video

Olbermann's particular brand of "journalism" severely suffers from a lack of fact-checking. Yet, there are some who still consider him to be a credible, objective journalist. Amazing.

It should be noted that a "lie" is defined as a false statement made with a deliberate intent to deceive. In other words, the person making the statement must KNOW that the statement is false at the time that they make it, in order for it to be defined as a "lie."

Whether or not Olbermann KNEW that he was making a false statement is anyone's guess. But, even if he didn't, he could have avoided making this mistake by practicing some simple research. He could have actually watched the broadcast that he was so eager to criticize. Had he practiced some common sense and actually checked his facts, he could have avoided looking like an ass.

Instead, Olbermann chose to be negligent in his duty. He intentionally ignored a basic tenant of debate, and made allegations which had no factual basis. That, in and of itself, is enough to label Olbermann's actions as deceitful.

But, as I said, this is nothing new.

Gun Control By The Numbers

2008-01-09T10:36:00.000-06:00

In the wake of recent school shootings, there have been more than a few people who had knee-jerk reactions. Sadly, their first inclination was to say that stricter gun laws are needed. Gun ownership must be further limited, and we must make it extremely difficult to own and/or carry a firearm.

It amazes me that these individuals never consider the possibility that strict gun laws, and the vilifying of those who carry firearms, are the reason that these events were allowed to take place.

Criminals are much more likely to carry out an attack on a group of people that they know will not be armed. Accordingly, they are less likely to carry out an attack if they believe that their potential victim is also carrying a firearm.

Evil preys upon the weak and defenseless. It fears those who fight back.

Case in point…Michigan.

Six years after new rules made it much easier to get a license to carry concealed weapons, the number of Michiganders legally packing heat has increased more than six-fold.

According to anti-gun zealots this change would undoubtedly result in an exponential increase in gun violence. Workplaces would be turn into war zones due to disgruntled employees packing heat. The streets would be transformed into rivers of blood by enraged drivers with itchy trigger fingers. More people carrying guns inevitably means that more people are going to die.

Yet, it didn’t happen.

Dire predictions about increased violence and bloodshed have largely gone unfulfilled, according to law enforcement officials and, to the extent they can be measured, crime statistics.

The incidence of violent crime in Michigan in the six years since the law went into effect has been, on average, below the rate of the previous six years. The overall incidence of death from firearms, including suicide and accidents, also has declined.

"I think the general consensus out there from law enforcement is that things were not as bad as we expected," said Woodhaven Police Chief Michael Martin, cochair of the legislative committee for the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. "There are problems with gun violence. But ... I think we can breathe a sigh of relief that what we anticipated didn't happen."

John Lott, a visiting professor at the University of Maryland who has done extensive research on the role of firearms in American society, said the results in Michigan since the law changed don't surprise him.

Academic studies of concealed weapons laws that generally allow citizens to obtain permits have shown different results, Lott said. About two-thirds of the studies suggest the laws reduce crime; the rest show no net effect, he said.

But no peer-reviewed study has ever shown that crime increases when jurisdictions enact changes like those put in place by the Legislature and then-Gov. John Engler in 2000, Lott said.

Anti-gun zealots would have us believe that such changes to gun laws will return us to the days of “Wild West.”

We should be so lucky:

• In 1880, wide-open towns like Virginia City, Nev., Leadville, Colo., and Dallas had no homicides.

• By comparison, Cincinnati had 17 homicides that year.

• From 1870 to 1885, the five Kansas railheads of Abilene, Caldwell, Dodge City, Ellsworth and Wichita had a total of 45 homicides, or an average of three per year - a lower homicide rate than New York City, Baltimore and Boston.

• Sixteen of the 45 homicides were committed by duly authorized peace officers, and only two towns, Ellsworth in 1873 and Dodge City in 1876, ever had as many as five killings in any one year.

With a few legendary exceptions, law enforcement officers in the Old West were rather ineffective. Still, there were few robberies, thefts or burglaries in western towns, primarily because almost everybody carried or possessed firearms and was willing to resist. "The citizens themselves, armed with various types of firearms and willing to kill to protect their persons or property, were evidently the most important deterrent to larcenous crime," said one author. Unlike "Gunsmoke's" Matt Dillon, the much-heralded western peace officer actually faced fewer problems than his counterpart elsewhere. The westerner, said one student of the era, "probably enjoyed greater security in both person and property than did his contemporary in the urban centers of the East." "It's a fairly recent idea that guns aren't a good thing," says Jon Weiner, a professor of history at the University of California. "The image of the lone man defending his homestead . . . is deeply embedded in the American psyche."

The Epitome of Bias

2008-01-08T12:48:00.000-06:00

In the midst of the Presidential election, it becomes more important than ever to expose the mainstream media’s left-wing bias. Sadly, many in this country watch broadcasts on CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC and actually believe that they are getting a balanced presentation of the candidates and their platforms.

But, this simply isn’t the case.

Take, for instance, ABC’s Good Morning America. On Monday, Good Morning America dedicated several segments to Presidential candidates. During the two-hour program, a total of 15 minutes was given to Democrat candidates. So, how much time was given to Republican candidates? Being an objective, fair, and balanced news network, I’m sure that ABC dedicated an equal amount of time to the other side.

Not even close.

While they gave 15 minutes to Democrat candidates, they gave a mere 31 seconds to Republican candidates. That’s right. 31 seconds.

The 15 minutes dedicated to Democrats (which took place over the course of 4 segments) included Diane Sawyer interviewing Barack Obama TWICE, George Stephanopoulos (who used to work as an advisor to President Clinton) interviewing Hillary Clinton, and Kate Snow discussing the current state of Hillary’s Presidential campaign.

After these four segments, Sawyer decided to maintain the illusion of balance by asking “And what about the Republicans?” What followed was a conversation lasting 31 seconds. That’s it. 31 seconds.

Balance? I don’t think so.

The Future of Music

2007-12-28T08:59:00.000-06:00

Since I was old enough to appreciate music, I remember being very concerned about the state of the music industry (and music, in general). When I first started listening to good music, I was listening to bands like Van Halen, Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers, Aerosmith, and classics like Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra and The Beatles. My musical tastes even began to branch out into genres like Classical, Jazz, and Blues.

However, you have to keep in mind that, while I was listening to this kind of music, another genre was gaining popularity, and it seemed unstoppable. The early 80’s gave rise to Rap and Hip-hop. Music, it seemed, would never be the same. And, that isn’t a compliment.

Let me state this right up front. Rap and Hip-hop, for the most part, suck. It is awful, awful stuff. I can scarcely bring myself to attach the word “music” to it.

As if Rap and Hip-hop music weren’t bad enough, the larger problem with these genres is the world in which they exist. It is commonly referred to as the “Hip-hop culture.” It is a culture which idolizes criminals and thugs and boosts them to god-like stature. I would dare to say that it even glorifies the lifestyles and behaviors of pimps. But, in fact, Rap and Hip-hop songs use the word “Pimp” so often, and in so many contexts, that they have virtually redefined the word.

That is another common trend found in Rap and Hip-hop music…the butchering of the English language. These "artists" mispronounce words so badly, and use them in improper contexts, that they have essentially created a new language. In a lot of cases, they will even intentionally change the spelling and pronunciation of a word and create a completely new word (i.e. the word “Soldier” is now “Soulja” and its meaning is completely different.)

Despite the faults of Rap and Hip-hop, and their incomprehensible natures, they have become a powerhouse in the music world. Today, Rappers and Hip-hop "artists" are at the top of the charts. It’s sad. But, it’s true. And, it makes me that much more concerned for the future of music.

But, even now, they are a few glimmers of hope out there. There are still artists who take a lot of pride in their craft, and work very hard to create good music.

There is hope for the future of music. And, it is stories like this that prove it:

Overall music sales during the Christmas shopping season were down an astounding 21% from last year. From the week of Thanksgiving up through the day before Christmas Eve, 83.9 million albums were sold, a decrease of 21.38 million from 2006's 105.28 million.

With the kind of crap that the music industry is producing, this is welcomed news. Perhaps people are starting to catch on that the music industry, which is dominated by Rap and Hip-hop "artists," is not doing its job. They are not producing music.

So, sales were down this Christmas. But, who was the top-selling artist of the Holiday season? That should give us a glimpse into the type of music people are interested in:

Josh Groban is the rare person in the music industry singing a happy jolly tune this holiday season…

Groban's "Noel" has crossed 3.5 million in sales to become the top-selling disc of the year.

Groban's holiday album claimed its fifth straight week at No. 1, selling 757,000 copies to trump the debut session of Mary J. Blige's "Growing Pains" (Geffen), which sold 629,000 copies, according to Nielsen Soundscan. "Noel" is the first Christmas album ever to hold the top spot for five consecutive weeks.

When I spoke of glimmers of hope in the music industry, Groban is definitely one of those. If you haven’t heard of him, look him up. He is one of the most talented male vocalists…and I don’t just mean of the ones recording today. He may be one of the most talented singers of all time. In no way am I exaggerating. He is a true musician.

It's very good to hear that Groban is outselling the overrated hacks of Rap and Hip-hop. It seems, for the time being, that people are appreciating good music.

I truly look forward to the day when people remember their love for talented musicians. That will be the day when people stop funding the thugs who are destroying music, and start supporting artists who take pride in their craft and the art of song.

Consensus? What Consensus?

2007-12-21T08:18:00.000-06:00

For the past 2 years, the Left has been telling us that the Global Warming debate is over. The science is settled. The numbers are in.

"The scientific debate is over. We're done."
- CNN's Miles O'Brien on July 23, 2007
(O'Brien also declared on CNN on February 9, 2006 that scientific skeptics of man-made catastrophic global warming "are bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry.")

"While some people claim there are lots of skeptical climate scientists out there, if you actually try to find one, you keep turning up the same two dozen or so. These skeptics are endlessly recycled by the denial machine, so someone not paying close attention might think there are lots of them out there -- but that's not the case."
- Andrew Dessler in the eco-publication Grist Magazine on November 21, 2007

"This discussion is behind us. It's over. The diagnosis is clear, the science is unequivocal -- it's completely immoral, even, to question now, on the basis of what we know, the reports that are out, to question the issue and to question whether we need to move forward at a much stronger pace as humankind to address the issues."
- UN special climate envoy Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland on May 10, 2007

"More than half of the mainstream media have rejected the scientific consensus implicitly — and I say 'rejected,' perhaps it's the wrong word. They have failed to report that it is the consensus and instead have chosen … balance as bias."
- Al Gore at the Media Ethics Summit II in 2007

"The misconception that there's disagreement about the science has been deliberately created by a relatively small group of people."
- Al Gore from "An Inconvenient Truth"

"The debate is no longer over society's role in global warming, it is a matter of degrees."
- NBC reporter Ann Thompson on August 14, 2007

"After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such debate [on global warming]."
- ABC reporter Bill Blakemore on August 30, 2006

Do you see what I mean? These people seem to be absolutley convinced that there are no credible voices speaking out against the Religion of Global Warming.

Or, at least, that's what they want YOU to believe. But, it just ain't the truth.

I've already told you about the Petition Project, which has been signed by over 19,000 scientists who wish to speak out against the so-called "consensus." Also, the Senate recently issued a report documenting over 400 scientists from more than two dozen countries who object to the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming:

These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.

Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.

"Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media."

The distinguished scientists featured in this new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; oceanography; geology; biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics; chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; engineering; physics and paleoclimatology. Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Gore.

Read the full list of scienitists, then tell me that there is a "consensus." Al Gore and these other left-wing media hacks are liars. I don't know how to state it any other way.

*SIDE NOTE: As eager as the mainstream media is to bombard us with stories about any report critical of the War in Iraq or those which seem to put a black-eye on the Bush Administration, I wonder how long it will take them to report this. I'm not holding my breath.

How To Stop Global Warming

2007-12-20T09:26:00.000-06:00

For years, environmentalists have come up with new ideas for slowing or even stopping Global Warming. Most of these ideas are...(how can I put this?)...INSANE. Noted Global Warming expert Sheryl Crow (sense the sarcasm) even came up her own idea for using just one square of toilet paper each time you drop a deuce. Naturally, after she was ridiculed for her stupidity, she claimed it was all a "joke." Sure it was.

These environmentalists, however, are not joking. They have developed what they consider to be completely rational and logical methods for combating Global Warming. And, they say all of this with a straight face.

Via the Herald Sun:

1. Get rid of humans.
Greenpeace co-founder Paul Watson insists we "reduce human populations to fewer than one billion".

2. Put a carbon tax on babies.
Prof Barry Walters, of the University of Western Australia, says families with more than, say, two children should be charged a carbon tax on their little gas emitters.

3. Cull babies.
Toni Vernelli, of green group PETA, says she killed her unborn child because of its potential emissions: "It would have been immoral to give birth to a child that I felt strongly would only be a burden to the world."

4. Sterilise us all.
Dr John Reid, a former Swinburne University academic, gave a lecture on ABC radio recommending we "put something in the water, a virus that would be specific to the human reproductive system, and would make a substantial proportion of the population infertile."

5. Ban second children.
Says Melbourne University population guru Prof Short: "We need to develop a one-child family policy because we are the global warmers."

6. Feed babies rats' milk.
PETA campaigner Heather Mills, ex-wife of Paul McCartney, says cows' burps are heating up the world and we should use milk from other animals: "Why don't we try drinking rats' milk and dogs' milk?"

7. Eat kangaroo, not beef.
Greenpeace says kangaroos don't belch like cows, so are greener and should be eaten first.

8. Shut industries.
Greens leader Bob Brown says we must scrap all coal-fired power stations and our $23 billion export trade in coal.

9. Wash less.
Says actor Cate Blanchett: "I have little races with myself, thinking: 'Oh no, I'm not washing my hair, I only need a two-minute shower'."

10. Sweat more.
The green-crusading editor of the (airconditioned) Age says we should turn off airconditioners in summer: "Our consumer society has long abandoned the fan or the cold bath as the way to keep summer at bay."

11. Use human corpses as fertiliser.
Robert Larkins, founder of the Victorian Environment Defenders' Office, wants gassy cremations banned and humans buried where trees can use their bodies for food.

12. Use coolies, not machines.
Climate Care is offering to offset emissions from jet travel by hiring poor Indians to use manual treadle pumps -- once used in British prisons -- rather than diesel pumps to pump irrigation water: "Sometimes the best source of renewable energy is the human body itself."

13.Ban cars on alternate days.
Local pollster Hugh Mackay says "cars' emissions are stealthily killing us" and we could "halve the fleet, at one stroke, by adopting the odds-and-evens number plate system."

14. Use horses instead.
The French National Stud Organisation says horses are already replacing petrol-powered vehicles in 70 French towns, and should be used to pull school buses.

15. Stop flying.
Green author George Monbiot says flying is too gassy: "It is becoming morally unacceptable now to fly to go on holiday."

16. Ban street lights.
Ivan Brooks, a mayor in Adelaide, says street lights should go off after midnight to save emissions.

17. Ban Christmas lights, too.
Spain's Ecologistas and Accion environment groups says Christmas lights should be banned before Christmas day, to save energy.

18. Ban Hanukkah candles.
The Arkada green consulting firm is running a "Green Hanukkah" campaign asking Jews to use one less candle to "save the planet."

19. End democracy.
Says green academic Mayer Hillman, author of How We Can Save the Planet: "When the chips are down I think democracy is a less important goal than is the protection of the planet from the death of life, the end of life on it. (Carbon rationing) has got to be imposed on people whether they like it or not."

I would laugh, but these nutcases are considered to be quite rational by our media and the mindless followers of the Religion of Global Warming. They are thought to be the brightest minds in the world, here to offer there genius in pursuit of our salvation.

And, their movement is gaining momentum.

The Wealthiest 1%

2007-12-19T11:42:00.000-06:00

“The truth of the matter is that the tax policy in America has been established by big corporations and the wealthiest Americans. That's why we have tax breaks for the top 1 percent and 2 percent…What we ought to be doing instead is getting rid of these tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans”

“Lots of people come on [CNBC] who, you know, are gung-ho, protect the tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans, that will not work if the economy slows down. You need to get money in the pockets of tens of hundreds of millions of Americans, and that's what I intend to do.”

“We will also turn the page on an approach that gives repeated tax cuts to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans even though they don't need them and did not ask for them.”

“From 2003 to 2005 -- the increase in income for the top one percent exceeded the total income of the bottom 20 percent. Given that, what would be wrong with letting the tax cuts for the top one percent expire?”

These statements were made by leading Democrats. The first three are attributed to John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, respectively. The last is attributed to George Stephanopoulos, the supposedly unbiased, objective reporter from ABC News. (By the way, before becoming an elite member of the left-wing mainstream media, Stephanopoulos was a senior political advisor for the Clinton White House. So, it should come as no surprise that his bias tilts far to the left.)

But, these statements are nothing new. It is the same mantra we have heard since Bush’s tax cut plan was passed in 2001. For the past 6 years, Democrats have constantly whined and complained about the “wealthiest 1% of Americans” and the “super rich” being pampered by the Federal Government at the expense of the middle and lower classes.

It’s odd how none of them ever mention exactly what percentage of the entire national tax burden falls on the wealthiest 1%. You might be interested to know that the top 1% of wage earners in this country pay 39% of the tax burden. But, I digress.

The media and Democrat politicians alike love to characterize Bush as pandering to the “super rich.” But, as is usually the case, their facts are little...skewed. Under the Bush Administration, the wealthiest Americans have seen their tax burden INCREASE. Not, only that, their tax burden increased at a rate greater than any other previous administration.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Based on the latest available tax data, no Administration in modern history has done more to pry tax revenue from the wealthy.

Last week the Congressional Budget Office joined the IRS in releasing tax numbers for 2005, and part of the news is that the richest 1% paid about 39% of all income taxes that year. The richest 5% paid a tad less than 60%, and the richest 10% paid 70%. These tax shares are all up substantially since 1990, and even somewhat since 2000. Meanwhile, Americans with an income below the median -- half of all households -- paid a mere 3% of all income taxes in 2005. The richest 1.3 million tax-filers -- those Americans with adjusted gross incomes of more than $365,000 in 2005 -- paid more income tax than all of the 66 million American tax filers below the median in income. Ten times more.
Notably, however, the share of taxes paid by the top 1% has kept climbing this decade -- to 39.4% in 2005, from 37.4% in 2000. The share paid by the top 5% has increased even more rapidly. In other words, despite the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003, the rich saw their share of taxes paid rise at a faster rate than their share of income.

It goes to show you that politicians such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards have perfected the art of class warfare. They pander to people who have an unfettered, unapologetic hatred for anyone who dares to be financially successful. It has nothing to do with the facts at hand.

It should be noted that all of the Democrat Presidential candidates speak of letting the Bush tax cuts expire and soaking the rich with new taxes. Based on this new information, I have to ask…How much is enough? The top 1% already pays 39% of the tax burden, which is a huge increase from what they were paying just a few years ago!

When will enough be enough? What percentage should they be paying?

Government Schools...Gotta Love 'Em

2007-12-18T08:33:00.000-06:00

Government schools just love their zero-tolerance policies. Zero-tolerance policies allow the mindless Government employees (i.e. the faculty) to act without actually having to use the mass of gray and white matter located about 3 feet above their ass. For any Government employee, this is the ideal situation, since they aren't in the practice of actually thinking for themselves.

I have shared stories before in which zero-tolerance policies have been used to arrest and punish students for the most ridiculous offenses. And, the stories keep pouring in. Today's story comes from Ocala, Florida.

A 10-year old girl at Sunrise Elementary School has been arrested and charged with possession of a weapon on school property. The school's principal has also suspended the student for 10 days.

So, what kind of weapon did she have on campus? Did she have a gun hidden in her locker? Was she brandishing a machete in front of her friends?

Not even close:

School officials say the 5th grader was brown-bagging it. She brought a piece of steak for her lunch, but she also brought a steak knife. That's when deputies were called.

It happened in the cafeteria at Sunrise Elementary School. The 10-year-old used the knife to cut the meat.

She brought a kitchen knife in her lunch bag to use on a steak! It get's better.

"She did not use it inappropriately. She did not threaten anyone with it. She didn't pull it out and brandish it. Nothing of that nature," explained Marion County School Spokesman Kevin Christian.

But a couple of teachers took the utensil and called the sheriff. When deputies arrived, they were unable to get the child's parents on the phone, so they arrested her and took her to the county's juvenile assessment center.

The hyper-sensitive Government teachers freaked out. No surprise there. But, here is the real kicker. This next statement sums up the absurd nature of zero-tolerance policies and why Government employees can't be trusted.

They are not ALLOWED to practice rational thought.

School officials said it doesn't matter what the knife was being used for. They said they had no choice.

"Anytime there's a weapon on campus, yes, we have to report it and we aggressively report it because we don't want to take any chances, regardless," Christian said.

"It doesn't matter how innocent the situation was. It doesn't matter that there was absolutely NO danger or threat presented. We have no choice. We have to report it."

That is why zero-tolerance policies suck. That is why the majority of Government schools and the employees located therein suck. They are not allowed to think for themselves. They are not allowed to act as rational human beings. They can not be trusted to assess the situation based on the facts.

They are required to act as mindless drones, following arbitrary policies set by bureaucrats who have little to no grasp on reality.

Folks, these people are in charge of educating your children. Be afraid.

Moral Relativism

2007-12-17T08:27:00.000-06:00

Many on the political left view the War against Islamic Terrorism through the prism of moral relativism. They even question our use of the word "terrorism" when we describe Islamic radicals. According to them, George Washington, Ben Frankiln, and the rest of the founding fathers were also "terrorists." It all depends on which side of the fight you are on.

They rationalize the heinous acts of the Islamic radicals by claiming that the United States is imperalistic and corrupt. We are the invaders. We are bad guys. Cindy Sheehan has even gone so far as to label the Islamic terrorists (the same terrorists who killed her son Casey) as "freedom fighters."

This is how many on the left view them...as victims. Who is to decide who is good and who is bad? It's all relative.

Would you like to know what separates us from them? Would you like to know why we are the good guys and they are the bad guys? It's because of stuff like this:

MARDAN, Pakistan — The bomb that ravaged Benazir Bhutto's homecoming processional in October appears to have been rigged to the clothes of a baby who was held up for the former prime minister to embrace, Mrs. Bhutto said.

A man approached her armored truck, Mrs. Bhutto recounted, and was trying to hand across a small child as her motorcade inched through the thronged streets of Karachi. She remembers gesturing for the man to come closer.

"It was about 1 or 2 years old, and I think it was a girl," Mrs. Bhutto told The Washington Times in her first public remarks about the baby.

"We feel it was a baby, kidnapped, and its clothes were rigged with explosives. He kept trying to hand it to people to hand to me.

These sick monsters will strap bombs onto children and use them as weapons. They are pure evil.

The True Goals Of The Global Warming Movement

2007-12-14T12:39:00.000-06:00

The recent Global Warming conferences in Bali have provided us with many interesting stories. Al Gore used this conference as an opportunity to join sides with anti-American Europeans and bad-mouth his own country:

"My own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here in Bali."

During the Bali Conferences, the Church of Global Warming has even taken the time to reveal its true motivations and goals:

A global tax on carbon dioxide emissions was urged to help save the Earth from catastrophic man-made global warming at the United Nations climate conference. A panel of UN participants on Thursday urged the adoption of a tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

Schwank said at least “$10-$40 billion dollars per year” could be generated by the tax, and wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.”

The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained.

The tens of billions of dollars per year generated by a global tax would “flow into a global Multilateral Adaptation Fund” to help nations cope with global warming.

"A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources," said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.

It is Global Socialism, plain and simple.

Climate Skeptic

2007-12-13T10:12:00.000-06:00

A topic I return to time and time again on this blog is the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming. I like to refer to it as the Religion of Global Warming because it has become just that.

There are a lot of blogs out there that deal with this topic. But, there is one, in particular, that I have become very fond of. It is called Climate Skeptic. The author is Warren Meyer, a small business owner in Phoenix, Arizona.

Warren is one smart guy. Read his blogs Climate Skeptic and Coyote Blog, and you will see exactly what I mean.

Warren has (to quote The Princess Bride) a “dizzying intellect.” He has such a deep understanding of different areas of science and economics that I have a hard time keeping up with him. But, his posts always make for a good read.

The best part about his blogs is that he approaches his subjects from a completely intellectual perspective. He doesn’t rely on emotionally-charged arguments or unfounded claims. Logical persuasion is the primary weapon in his arsenal.

If you want to read more material concerning the topic of Anthropogenic Global Warming than you can wrap your mind around, check out his blog Climate Skeptic. He has written several amazing pieces (which can also be found on Coyote Blog) such as The 60-Second Climate Skeptic as well as an 80+ page dissertation titled A Laymen’s Guide to Man-Made Global Warming.

Recently, Warren even branched out into the world of film by creating his own documentary which rebuts many popular Global Warming myths and asks the all-important question "What is Normal?"

Read his blogs. Watch his film. You won’t understand it all (at least, I don’t). But, you’ll definitely be better educated for it.

It's funny because it's true

2007-12-10T07:55:00.000-06:00

As most of you know, I'm not a huge fan of kids. They're loud, they're annoying, they're messy...this list could go on for a while.

I understand that all parents think THEIR child is the exception to this. THEIR child wouldn't ever do anything to annoy someone else. THEIR child is a perfect angel. Parents, trust me when I say that no one else around you agress with that. Your child can be quite irritating.

I am also aware of the fact that kids will be kids. They scream, they run around restaurants, they whine, they cry, and they don't know any better. It's all a part of their nature.

But, if "kids will be kids," PARENTS MUST BE PARENTS. Stop acting like everything your child does is adorable. Stop acting like your child is a perfect angel. Hang up the cell phone and control your damn kid.

I think this cartoon perfectly sums up the sentiment I'm trying to express:

Ron Paul

2007-12-04T09:55:00.000-06:00

The Presidential campaigns are in full swing. On the Democrat side, the only names you hear are Clinton and Obama. The race for the Democrat nomination is between these two. The Republican nomination is a slightly more complicated. Four front-runners have emerged: Giuliani, McCann, Romney, and Huckabee.

But, there is one more candidate on the Republican side who has gained a lot of attention. This guy has an Internet following like nothing I’ve ever seen before. At every turn in cyberspace, or the real world, his supporters are shouting at the top of their lungs. His base is energized and ready for a fight.

That candidate is Ron Paul. Before I go any further, it is important to note one thing. Officially, Ron Paul is a Republican. He currently serves in the House of Representatives as a Republican and he is running for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. However, Ron Paul is a Libertarian at heart. In 1988, he ran as the Libertarian nominee for the Presidency. Many of his positions (such as National Defense, the Patriot Act, the War on Drugs, and the Federal Reserve) conform to the platforms of the Libertarian Party and stand in direct opposition to the official platforms of the Republican Party. Mind you, I’m not being critical of his positions on those issues. I’m simply stating that he agrees with Libertarian views much more than he does with Republican views.

I’ve expressed on a number of occasions that the recent Republican leadership in Washington has forced me to abandon the Republican Party on principle. I still agree with them on a number of issues, and I would continue to vote for Republican candidates who represent my views. However, they are no longer the Party of small Government or limited spending. They have lost touch with their Conservative roots. Therefore, I can no longer call myself a Republican. I commonly refer to myself as a Libertarian (although I have a few disagreements with their official positions).

As I have grown older, my world view has shifted on a number of issues. I have found myself more committed to the ideas of true freedom and individuality. To his credit, Ron Paul represents this view as well.

Paul is committed to the idea of smaller Government and an emphasis on individuality. On many of his positions, I am in complete agreement. There are things that I really like about Ron Paul.

Alas, I cannot support him. There are two primary reasons.

First, his views on the War against Islamic Terrorism. Admittedly, he favored fighting the Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan. He voted for military intervention on that front. But he opposed, and continues to oppose the War against terrorists in Iraq. He, like many opponents to the Iraq War, claims that terrorists were not in Iraq before we invaded. We haven’t accomplished anything there. We have made the situation worse.

I disagree. I still believe that Saddam Hussein was a threat to us and served as an ally to the Islamic radicals. Removing him from power was the right decision.

Ron Paul believes that it was a mistake to intervene there. In fact, he has adopted a rigid non-interventionist foreign policy. Basically, he believes that if we don’t mess with them, they won’t mess with us.

In my opinion, this as a HUGE mistake in judgment. The Islamic terrorists have stated on many occasions that they will not stop until the United States is completely destroyed. It is not their desire to simply drive us from the Middle East. They hate our very existence. They seek our eradication.

Before World War II, there were many in the United States who believed that we should not get involved. Hitler’s campaign was Europe’s problem. Should we have remained inside our own borders? Should we have accepted the belief that if we don’t mess with Germany, they won’t mess with us?

Of course, there is something to be said about reducing our military presence throughout the world. There is an argument to be made that we involve ourselves in too many conflicts that don’t affect us. But, the War against Islamic Terrorism is not one of those. I believe that defeating the Islamic radicals is vital to our survival. Because of that, I cannot support Ron Paul.

But, there is a second reason. And, this speaks directly to his rationality. In order to gain support for his campaign for the Presidency, Ron Paul has pandered to a group of people which I find not only detestable but completely lacking in credibility. That group is the 9/11 Truthers.

“Truthers” believe that the United States Government was behind the attacks on the World Trade Center. Different elements of the group believe that the Government either knew about the attacks ahead of time and allowed them to occur, or that the Government was directly responsible for the planning and coordination of the attacks as well as the subsequent “cover-up.” Truthers should be denounced by every elected official as the nutcases that they are. They should be lent no credibility whatsoever.

Yet, Ron Paul has found a niche with these people. Not only has he indulged their desire to reopen investigations on the 9/11 attacks, but he has also appeared on the Alex Jones Show (If you don’t know who Alex Jones is, look him up. But, beware. You are entering the land of the insane.).

I understand that Presidential candidates must reach-out to different segments of the population to gain support and momentum for their campaign. But, the line has to be drawn somewhere. I’d say that line should be drawn at the “Tin-Foil Hat Brigade.” No candidate should give credence to a group like this unless they want their rationality seriously questioned.

I don’t want this to sound like “guilt by association.” I am not suggesting that Ron Paul is a 9/11 Truther simply because he appeared on the Alex Jones Show. Ron Paul has done a fine job of implying that all by himself.

Several months ago, Paul was questioned by a representative with the “Student Scholars for 9/11 Truth.” Here is the exchange that took place:

Student: We’ve heard that you have questioned the government’s official account.
Paul: Well, I never automatically trust anything the government does when they do an investigation because too often I think there’s an area that the government covered up, whether it’s the Kennedy assassination or whatever.

Student: So I just wanted to say, you know, we’ve talked to Dennis Kucinich and he says that he’s willing to, you know, investigate it. He would advocate for a new investigation.

Paul: Into 9/11?

Student: Yeah, into 9/11. I mean, if it was Dennis Kucinich and you, there’d be congressional support. You know what I mean? So you wouldn’t be the only one.

Paul: It’d be bipartisan, too. And I’ve worked with Dennis a lot on a lot of these issues.

Student: So I mean, would you advocate for a new investigation into 9/11?

Paul: Yes, I think we have to look at the details of it.

Maybe he’s just clamoring for any support that he can find. Maybe he actually “questioned the government’s official account.” Either way, Paul has a problem. He's pandering to conspiracy theorists.

That is why I cannot support Ron Paul.

Things Caused By Global Warming

2007-11-30T07:45:00.000-06:00

We see it in the news everyday. "It has been determined the Global Warming was the cause of ___________." (You can fill in the blank with just about anything.)

According to the media, Global Warming has been the cause of everything from bridge collapses to a reduction in African circumcisions.

Dr. John Brignell, a British engineering professor, runs a website called Numberwatch. On his website, he has compiled a list of things that, according to the media, were caused by Global Warming. This list of over 600 items contains links to all of the source material. It is the most complete list I have ever seen in one place, and it is growing.

Take a look at the list and recognize the ridiculousness.

Agricultural land increase, Africa devastated, African aid threatened, Africa hit hardest, air pressure changes, Alaska reshaped, allergies increase, Alps melting, Amazon a desert, American dream end, amphibians breeding earlier (or not), ancient forests dramatically changed, animals head for the hills, Antarctic grass flourishes, anxiety, algal blooms, archaeological sites threatened, Arctic bogs melt, Arctic in bloom, Arctic lakes disappear, asthma, Atlantic less salty, Atlantic more salty, atmospheric defiance, atmospheric circulation modified, attack of the killer jellyfish, avalanches reduced, avalanches increased, bananas destroyed, bananas grow, beetle infestation, bet for $10,000, better beer, big melt faster, billion dollar research projects, billions of deaths, bird distributions change, bird visitors drop, birds return early, blackbirds stop singing, blizzards, blue mussels return, bluetongue, boredom, bridge collapse (Minneapolis), Britain Siberian, British gardens change, brothels struggle, bubonic plague, budget increases, Buddhist temple threatened, building collapse, building season extension, bushfires, business opportunities, business risks, butterflies move north, cancer deaths in England, cardiac arrest, caterpillar biomass shift, challenges and opportunities, childhood insomnia, Cholera, circumcision in decline, cirrus disappearance, civil unrest, cloud increase, cloud stripping, cockroach migration, cod go south, cold climate creatures survive, cold spells (Australia), computer models, conferences, coral bleaching, coral reefs dying, coral reefs grow, coral reefs shrink , cold spells, cost of trillions, cougar attacks, cremation to end, crime increase, crocodile sex, crumbling roads, buildings and sewage systems, cyclones (Australia), damages equivalent to $200 billion, Darfur, Dartford Warbler plague, death rate increase (US), Dengue hemorrhagic fever, dermatitis, desert advance, desert life threatened, desert retreat, destruction of the environment, diarrhoea, disappearance of coastal cities, diseases move north, Dolomites collapse, drought, drowning people, ducks and geese decline, dust bowl in the corn belt, early marriages, early spring, earlier pollen season, Earth biodiversity crisis, Earth dying, Earth even hotter, Earth light dimming, Earth lopsided, Earth melting, Earth morbid fever, Earth on fast track, Earth past point of no return, Earth slowing down, Earth spinning out of control, Earth spins faster, Earth to explode, earth upside down, Earth wobbling, earthquakes, El Niño intensification, erosion, emerging infections, encephalitis, equality threatened, Europe simultaneously baking and freezing, evolution accelerating, expansion of university climate groups, extinctions (human, civilisation, logic, Inuit, smallest butterfly, cod, ladybirds, bats, pandas, pikas, polar bears, pigmy possums, gorillas, koalas, walrus, whales, frogs, toads, turtles, orang-utan, elephants, tigers, plants, salmon, trout, wild flowers, woodlice, penguins, a million species, half of all animal and plant species, not polar bears, barrier reef, leaches), experts muzzled, extreme changes to California, fading fall foliage, famine, farmers go under, fashion disaster, fever,figurehead sacked, fir cone bonanza, fish catches drop, fish catches rise, fish stocks at risk, fish stocks decline, five million illnesses, flesh eating disease, flood patterns change, floods, floods of beaches and cities, Florida economic decline, food poisoning, food prices rise, food security threat (SA), footpath erosion, forest decline, forest expansion, frostbite, frosts, fungi fruitful, fungi invasion, games change, Garden of Eden wilts, genetic diversity decline, gene pools slashed, gingerbread houses collapse, glacial earthquakes, glacial retreat, glacial growth, glacier wrapped, global cooling, global dimming, glowing clouds, god melts, golf Masters wrecked, Gore omnipresence, grandstanding, grasslands wetter, Great Barrier Reef 95% dead, Great Lakes drop, greening of the North, Grey whales lose weight, Gulf Stream failure, habitat loss, Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, harvest increase, harvest shrinkage, hay fever epidemic, hazardous waste sites breached, health of children harmed, heart disease, heart attacks and strokes (Australia), heat waves, hibernation ends too soon, hibernation ends too late, homeless 50 million, hornets, high court debates, human development faces unprecedented reversal, human fertility reduced, human health improvement, human health risk, hurricanes, hurricane reduction, hydropower problems, hyperthermia deaths, ice sheet growth, ice sheet shrinkage, illness and death, inclement weather, infrastructure failure (Canada), Inuit displacement, Inuit poisoned, Inuit suing, industry threatened, infectious diseases, inflation in China, insurance premium rises, invasion of cats, invasion of herons, invasion of midges, island disappears, islands sinking, itchier poison ivy, jellyfish explosion, Kew Gardens taxed, kitten boom, krill decline, lake and stream productivity decline, lake shrinking and growing, landslides, landslides of ice at 140 mph, lawsuits increase, lawsuit successful, lawyers' income increased (surprise surprise!), lightning related insurance claims, little response in the atmosphere, lush growth in rain forests, Lyme disease, Malaria, malnutrition, mammoth dung melt, Maple syrup shortage, marine diseases, marine food chain decimated, marine dead zone, Meaching (end of the world), megacryometeors, Melanoma, methane emissions from plants, methane burps, melting permafrost, Middle Kingdom convulses, migration, migration difficult (birds), microbes to decompose soil carbon more rapidly, monkeys on the move, Mont Blanc grows, monuments imperiled, more bad air days, more research needed, mountain (Everest) shrinking, mountains break up, mountains taller, mortality lower, mudslides, National security implications, new islands, next ice age, Nile delta damaged, no effect in India, Northwest Passage opened, nuclear plants bloom, oaks move north, ocean acidification, ocean waves speed up, opera house to be destroyed, outdoor hockey threatened, oyster diseases, ozone loss, ozone repair slowed, ozone rise, Pacific dead zone, personal carbon rationing, pest outbreaks, pests increase, phenology shifts, plankton blooms, plankton destabilised, plankton loss, plant viruses, plants march north, polar bears aggressive, polar bears cannibalistic, polar bears drowning, polar bears starve, polar tours scrapped, porpoise astray, profits collapse, psychosocial disturbances, puffin decline, railroad tracks deformed, rainfall increase, rainfall reduction, rape wave, refugees, reindeer larger, release of ancient frozen viruses, resorts disappear, rice threatened, rice yields crash, riches, rift on Capitol Hill, rioting and nuclear war, rivers dry up, river flow impacted, rivers raised, roads wear out, rockfalls, rocky peaks crack apart, roof of the world a desert, Ross river disease, ruins ruined, salinity reduction, salinity increase, Salmonella, salmon stronger, satellites accelerate, school closures, sea level rise, sea level rise faster, seals mating more, sewer bills rise, sex change, sharks booming, sharks moving north, sheep shrink, shop closures, shrinking ponds, shrinking shrine, ski resorts threatened, slow death, smaller brains, smog, snowfall increase, snowfall heavy, snowfall reduction, societal collapse, songbirds change eating habits, sour grapes, space problem, spiders invade Scotland, squid population explosion, squirrels reproduce earlier, spectacular orchids, stormwater drains stressed, street crime to increase, suicide, taxes, tectonic plate movement, teenage drinking, terrorism, threat to peace, ticks move northward (Sweden), tides rise, tourism increase, trade barriers, trade winds weakened, tree beetle attacks, tree foliage increase (UK), tree growth slowed, trees could return to Antarctic, trees in trouble, trees less colourful, trees more colourful, trees lush, tropics expansion, tropopause raised, tsunamis, turtles crash, turtles lay earlier, UK Katrina, Vampire moths, Venice flooded, volcanic eruptions, walrus displaced, walrus pups orphaned, war, wars over water, wars threaten billions, water bills double, water supply unreliability, water scarcity (20% of increase), water stress, weather out of its mind, weather patterns awry, weeds, Western aid cancelled out, West Nile fever, whales move north, wheat yields crushed in Australia, white Christmas dream ends, wildfires, wind shift, wind reduced, wine - harm to Australian industry, wine industry damage (California), wine industry disaster (US), wine - more English, wine -German boon, wine - no more French , winters in Britain colder, wolves eat more moose, wolves eat less, workers laid off, World bankruptcy, World in crisis, World in flames, Yellow fever.

Shameless Self-Promotion

2007-11-17T11:17:00.000-06:00

As most of you know, I recently wrote a few scripts for a video series that our drama team was producing for Church. The video series was entitled "Common Sense." I wrote this as an homage to one of the best TV shows of all-time, "Arrested Development." The videos were a hit at Church.

Because of the great reception the recieved in the services, I decided to post them on YouTube and its Christian counter-part GodTube. I was curious what other people's reactions to them might be.

So far, the comments have been good. In fact, about a month ago, I received a call from a church in California who wanted to use the videos for a similar sermon series that they were doing. They saw the videos on GodTube and were really impressed. Naturally, I was flattered. So, I sent them a copy to use at their church.

Now, the "Common Sense" videos have even landed our drama team in the local newspaper! After finding our videos on GodTube, the Gainesville Times wrote an article about the Christian video website and featured the "Common Sense" videos. They even included an interview with me!

You can read the full story here.

All You Need Is Love

2007-11-15T08:28:00.000-06:00

I’m a romantic at heart. I’m sure that you can’t tell based on my other blog posts. But, it’s true. In the words of Lennon and McCartney, “All you need is love.” I believe that.

When I hear an amazing story of love such as Westley and Buttercup, Christian and Satine, Kevin and Winnie, or Cory and Topanga, I can’t help but shed a little tear on the inside (Again, the only tears I shed are immaterial in nature. I never actually cry.). But, as you know, all of these couples are fictitious. They exist only in fairy-tales of man’s creation. Most people believe that kind of love can’t exist in our own reality. But, it does.

Read this story, and you will believe.

When he was 12, Herman Rosenblat and his family were taken from their home in Poland and sent to a concentration camp in Nazi Germany. Young Herman was forced to work shoveling bodies into a crematorium. All the while he did not know if he, too, would soon be killed.

One day two years later, Herman walked up to the barbed wire fence and saw a girl on the other side. "She says, 'What are you doing in there?'" Herman says. "I said to her, 'Can you give me something to eat?' And she took an apple out of her jacket."

The girl fed Herman an apple every day for seven months. Then one day he told her not to come back—he was being moved to another camp. "A tear came down her eyes," Herman says. "And as I turned around and went back I started to cry, too. I started to cry knowing that I might not see her again."

Herman was shipped to Czechoslovakia. Just two hours before he was scheduled to die in the gas chambers there, Russian troops liberated the camp and Herman was set free.

Almost 15 years later, Herman was living and working in New York City. A friend set him up on a blind date with a woman named Roma Radzika. Herman says he was immediately drawn to her. When they began talking about their lives, Roma asked Herman where he was during World War II. "I said, 'In a concentration camp,'" he says. "And then she says, 'I came to a camp and I met a boy there and I gave him some apples and I sent them over the fence.'

"And suddenly it hit me like a ton of bricks. And I said to her, 'There was a boy? Was he tall?' And she said, 'Yes.' I said, 'And one day he told you not to come around anymore because he's leaving?' And she says, 'Yes.' I said, 'That boy was me.'

Roma and her family had moved from Poland to Germany, using forged papers to hide that they were Jewish. They lived on a farm next to Herman's camp, posing as Christians to avoid being captured. Roma says when she brought apples and bread for Herman, he used to say, "I'll see you tomorrow."

"Well, what can I tell you? I proposed right then and there," Herman says. "I said, 'Look, I'll never let you go anymore. … Now that we're free we're going to be together forever.'"

In 1996, on The Oprah Show stage, Herman and Roma gave Oprah a moment she'll never forget. Herman stood and addressed his wife: "Darling, you've fed me when I was hungry. You fed me when we were married. You fed me…until now. But now I'm not hungry anymore, and I'm hungry for your love!"

Since that day their love has continued to grow. Herman and Roma have now been married for nearly 50 years. He says he's learned a valuable lesson from love. "Every morning when I get up I say, 'I love you. I love you. I love you,'" Herman says. "And not only [do you say], 'I love you,' but you mean it."

Eleven years after their first Oprah Show appearance, Herman decides to honor his wife again—this time by getting down on bended knee. "Sweetheart, it was 64 years ago when I first saw you," he says to Roma. "My mother came to me and said to me, 'I'm sending you an angel.' And a couple of days later you appeared at the other side of the fence while I was in a concentration camp. Then in 1957, 14 years later, I had a blind date, and it was you. Now our 50th anniversary is coming up. With this ring, my dear, I pronounce my love for you forever. And as this ring has got no end, my love for you doesn't have any end."

A story like this should make even the most devout atheist know that God exists.

Glenn Beck goes head-to-head with NBC

2007-11-08T08:29:00.000-06:00

Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

The Dishonesty of Olbermann

2007-11-01T08:53:00.000-05:00

Witness the blatant dishonesty of Keith Olbermann and Arianna Huffington. Olbermann teases a segment several times on his MSNBC show by claiming:

“Rudy Giuliani insists the Democratic candidates will eventually come around to the Bush War in Iraq, or is it the Giuliani-Bush War? And, in the interim, he accuses the Dems of codling bin Laden and Ahmadinejad.”

“Rudy Giuliani is already contending the Democrats are going to invite Osama bin Laden to the White House to negotiate.”

Arianna stated during the interview segment:

“Here is Giuliani daring to insult his Democratic opponents by saying that
they would invite Osama bin Laden to the White House. That is really
something that should not be accepted.”

They both claim that Giuliani has stated publicly that the Democrats will invite Osama bin Laden to the White House for negotiations. Olbermann even dedicates an entire segment of his MSNBC program to this idea.

The problem with this? It never happened. Here is what Giuliani actually said:

“This is the world we live in. It’s not this happy, romantic-like world where we’ll negotiate with this one, or we’ll negotiate with that one and there will be no preconditions, and we’ll invite Ahmadinejad to the White House, we’ll invite Assad to the White House.”

“Ahmadinejad” is in reference to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran. “Assad” is in reference to Bashar al-Assad, the President of Syria. Giuliani is stating that the Democrats would be willing to negotiate with both of these countries. Gee, where would he get an idea like that?

Clinton Says She Would Negotiate with Iran
Obama Says He Would Negotiate with Iran
Obama Says He Would Negotiate with Iran and Syria

Amazingly, Olbermann EVEN PLAYED GIULIANI’S ACTUAL STATEMENT before the segment began. In doing so, Olbermann proved (to any one who was actually listening) that Giuliani never said that the Dems would invite bin Laden to the White House. But, that didn’t stop Olbermann or Arianna from lying about his actual statement. They continued to push the fiction.

For Olbermann, this is par for the course.

My Personal Crusade

2007-10-26T21:50:00.000-05:00

There’s no sense in hiding it. I got a speeding ticket tonight. I was literally 10 seconds away from pulling into my apartment complex when I saw those damned blue lights. Did I have a chance of getting out of that ticket? I’m a guy. What do you think?

Naturally, the officer gave me a ticket. In his esteemed knowledge of traffic and safety, he determined that 63 miles an hour was far too unsafe a speed for a four-lane highway. Anyone traveling such inconceivable velocities must be a daredevil who is endangering every innocent life around him. Such individuals must be stopped!

Do I blame him? A little. It is true that it was a moronic Georgia Government bureaucrat that set the speed limit. And, that officer is simply enforcing the law. However, if he actually used the lump of gray and white matter located about 3 feet above his ass, instead of mindlessly following whatever protocol he was taught to except without question, he would realize that my speed was completely within reason and not a danger to anyone. He could have saved that little ticket for someone who was really “speeding” (When drivers get into the 100mph range on that road, I’d say it’s probably time to pull out that citation pad). It’s called judging the facts of the situation.

Besides, cops give breaks all the time to speeders. Why is it that I have never gotten one? Once again, I’m a guy. You figure it out.

But, I am not here to simply complain. I am on a crusade. Speed laws have always been an issue with me. I am of the opinion that they are, at their very core, oppressive and unnecessary. As always, I have evidence to back up my position. This is from a much earlier blog entry of mine. Actually, it is one of the first that I wrote. Read on:

Recently, a town in Texas unveiled the highest speed limit in the country at 80mph. Town officials decided that this long, straight, four-lane stretch of highway was not the place to post an intentionally, ridiculously low "speed limit" whose only purpose is to generate revenue for the county.

Opponents of high speed limits say that these increased speeds can only lead to more fatal crashes. But, alas, the wussy crowd has been proven wrong time and time again. Before raising this speed in Texas, Representative Pete Gallego looked at the statistics from the Texas Department of Transportation. Studies show that in the 3 years that speed limits were raised from 70mph to 75mph, fatalities went...which direction? Anyone, anyone...Bueller, Bueller. That's right. Fatalities went down.

Modern cars are made to handle safely at higher speeds. Most modern drivers, who still have all of their motor and mental capabilities, are able to exceed 55mph without putting anyone in danger. Sorry, Grandma. You gotta move. If you insist on driving 45mph, stay in the right lane.

Now, in residential areas, school zones, and small, winding roads, should drivers be more aware of their speed and drive more safely? Absolutely. But, it is unreasonable and unwarranted to establish a 45mph (or even 55mph) on a four-lane, straight road. Are you hearing me Arcade, Georgia?

The only purpose for these low speed limits is to generate revenue for the State or Local governments. It is not to keep people safe! If the government really wanted to protect drivers on the road, they would look at the facts. I just mentioned the study done by the Texas DOT. But, maybe this is an isolated study. After all, It's Texas. Texans are a different breed than the rest of the country (but that's another subject).

So, let's see. How can we get the statistics for speed limits and accidents in the rest of the country? Hmmm. I've got it. Let's have the Federal Highway Administration (part of the United States Department of Transportation) do a study of all the States! Too late. It's been done. The numbers are out. Read the report here.

The findings are obvious. But for the sake of argument here they are:
- Accidents at the 58 experimental sites where speed limits were lowered, increased by 5.4 percent.

- Accidents at the 41 experimental sites where speed limits were raised, decreased by 6.7 percent.

So, lower speed limits increase accidents, and higher speed limits reduce accidents. Strange, huh? Based on this, why would the Government not act to raise limits and decrease accidents? The reason is this. Another finding of the report:

- Raising speed limits in the region of the 85th percentile speed has an extremely beneficial effect on drivers complying with the posted speed limits.

- Lowering speed limits in the 33rd percentile speed (the average percentile that speeds were posted in this study) provides a noncompliance rate of approximately 67 percent.

With higher speed limits, drivers are more likely to abide by the law and not exceed that speed limit. But, lower speed limits mean higher rates on non-compliance. That means more people are going to speed. Which means...ding, ding, ding...more money for the Government.

I don't how to make it any clearer.

This is my crusade - the abolition of unecessary articially-low speed limits. They are useless when it comes to saving lives. They exist for one purpose and one purpose only. They are enacted by Government bureaucrats to generate more money for those same Government bureaucrats. It is a scam.

Much of the blame lies with these bureaucrats. But, the enforcement officers deserve some of the blame too. Part of their job is assessing individual situations based on the facts at hand. If a situation is deemed dangerous, the officers will take certain precautions. They make a judgement call, and take necessary action. Speeding scenarios are no different. These officers could quite easily judge each situation and determine if that speeder is really going fast enough to endanger anyone's life. If they are well within a safe speed, the driver should get a pass.

Simple as that.

More defeats for Global Warming

2007-10-23T13:17:00.000-05:00

The religion of Global Warming has suffered a lot of defeats lately. Earlier this month, a British judge ruled that the bible of the Church of Global Warming, “An Inconvenient Truth,” is a political work, and cited nine specific errors in the film. The judge concluded that the film should not be shown to school children without being accompanied by a significant warning of the political biases and inaccuracies contained therein. (Yes, many schools, even in this country, are showing the film to students in an attempt to indoctrinate them into the religion of Global Warming.)

Now, the Science & Public Policy Institute has released a report which details 35 errors in Gore’s “documentary.”

35 ERRORS. And, this thing won an Oscar for “Best Documentary?” Considering that the “documentary” is filled with political biases, factual inaccuracies, and deliberate misrepresentations, I’d say that the Oscar wasn’t exactly well-deserved. But, it is apparently good enough to be used as “educational material” in many classrooms around the world.

Just take a look at this piece from 20/20. John Stossel takes on Global Warming alarmists, and questions several school children about their feelings on Global Warming. Listen as all of the children repeat in mindless unison the propaganda of the Church of Global warming.

And, where did they learn all of this religious dogma? “An Inconvenient Truth.”

Nice, huh?

And, just in case you were STILL under the illusion that there is a scientific "consensus" in support of anthropomorphic Global Warming, guess again:

Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory

The Petition Project: 19,000 American scientists speak out

Know Thine Enemy

2007-10-18T08:54:00.000-05:00

There are times when I think that left-wing media outlets couldn’t possibly do anything to make me think less of them. Then, the New York Times does something like this. They have headlined an Op-Ed video which amounts to nothing less than a propaganda-laden commercial for the Islamic Terrorists who are killing American soldiers in Iraq.

The New York Times has, effectively, given our enemies a premium outlet to espouse their hatred for our country and attempted to portray them as the “good guys.” Yes, these are the same “insurgents” who regularly conduct vile war crimes by disguising themselves as civilians while attacking innocent civilians and American troops. These are the individuals that the New York Times treats as the “good guys.”

This really shouldn’t surprise me. After all, CNN gave a primetime spot to a terrorist recruitment and propaganda video. But, it still amazes me that left-wing media outlets continue to promote the idea that America is the real problem, and that the terrorists are mere victims of American imperialism and greed.

It is interesting to note that the title of the New York Times video is “Know Thine Enemy.” Notice, they don’t specifically define who the “enemy” is. But, based on the blatant terrorist propaganda and distorted worldview contained in the video, I’m guessing that the “enemy” is not Islamic Terrorism.

So, who does that leave? Who does the New York Times really view as the “enemy?”

Click here to view the full video.

Sick. Sick. Sick.

2007-10-17T12:55:00.000-05:00

This is one of those rare cases where I am so stunned at the grotesque stupidity being presented that I am at a loss for words. If you dare, and if you have a strong stomach, reads this article from the Norwegian news source Aftenposten.

Debate flies over 'sex play' in kindergartens.

Norwegians woke up Tuesday morning to news that a respected Oslo pre-school teacher, backed by child psychologists, thinks children should be allowed to openly express their own sexuality, not least through sex play and games in the local day care centers known as barnehager, or kindergartens.

Pia Friis, leader of the popular Bjerkealleen Barnehage in Oslo and a well-known pre-school educator, told newspaper Dagbladet on Tuesday that children should be allowed to express their own sexuality at day care centers. She doesn't want to stifle what comes naturally.

Children, she said, should be able "to look at each other and examine each other's bodies. They can play doctor, play mother and father, dance naked and masturbate.

Friis said there's a lot of uncertainty around how day care center employees should handle children's sexuality.

"The only thing that is absolutely certain is that children, sooner or later, will play sexual games and examine each other at the kindergarten," she told Dagbladet. "When the personnel are uncertain, that passes on to the children, and it can be negative."

Not enough time in the world

2007-10-16T15:07:00.000-05:00

There are so many news stories being discussed this week, that I just don’t have time to cover them all. There are, however, three main stories that I want to comment on, but I just don’t have enough time to dedicate an individual blog entry to each one. So, I’m gonna hit ‘em hard and hit ‘em fast in one single blog. Here we go:

1. General Sanchez. General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top commander in Iraq, made a speech last Friday to a group of journalists. Among the topics he discussed, he blasted the Bush Administration’s handling of the war and called it “a nightmare with no end in sight.” The General was also quoted as saying, “There has been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders.”

Not surprisingly, all of this harsh criticism of the Bush Administration was quickly picked up by the mainstream media. The major networks lead with this story on their nightly newscasts, and the New York Times made it a front page story.

Oddly though, the media completely ignored the main point that General Sanchez was trying to make. His speech was to a group of journalists. He directly addressed the media saying:

“Over the course of this war, tactically insignificant events have become strategic defeats for America because of the tremendous power and impact of the media and by extension you the journalist. In many cases the media has unjustly destroyed the individual reputations and careers of those involved…

You are perpetuating the corrosive partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war…

For some of you, just like some of our politicians, the truth is of little to no value if it does not fit your own pre-conceived notions, biases and agendas.”

He blasted the media for their unbalanced presentation of the facts of the war. He said that their biased reporting put our soldiers at greater risk. Yet, not one of the major media outlets (other then Fox News) covered this portion of the General’s speech.

The media completely ignored it. Kinda proved the General’s point, didn’t they?

2. The Armenian Resolution. Recently, our Congress decided that they could no longer avoid one of the most pressing issues of our time. They could no longer put off a massively important resolution that had been on the books for almost 25 years. The Democrat-controlled Congress has finally decided that this measure is too imperative.

They will finally pass the Armenian-genocide resolution which will officially label the atrocities committed by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians 90 years ago as “genocide.” That’s right. They are finally going to label these actions as “genocide.”

It certainly sounds like a pressing issue that must get top priority from our Congress, doesn’t it? Regardless of whether or not this resolution is even necessary, the main problem with the passage of this resolution is the timing.

You see, the former Ottoman Empire, the entity we would be denouncing, is modern-day Turkey, our ally in the War against Islamic Terrorism. We are using their airstrips and airspace. Now that our Congress is denouncing them, Turkey is reconsidering their status as our ally. Not good.

But, why are Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat Congress pushing this so hard right now…in the middle of a war? Their actions could put our soldiers at greater risk and greatly reduce our effectiveness in the war. Could this be their motivation? Could this be a covert sabotage of the war effort? It has become increasingly clear that the left is invested in defeat in this war. Our success in the war is very bad news for them. I’m not saying this…they are. So, are they using this resolution to intentionally weaken our military? This is not an indictment. But, the situation is very suspect.

3. Randi Rhodes. Randi Rhodes is a left-wing talk radio host on the bankrupt Air America. If you’ve never heard her show, don’t worry. I have, and you aren’t missing much. But, it has been reported that she was attacked on Sunday night. According to Jon Elliott, another Air America personality, Rhodes was mugged Sunday night while walking her dog in New York City. Apparently, she suffered some sever injuries, including having a couple of teeth knocked out.

When I first heard about this, I was saddened. Even though I disagree adamantly with her views, I don’t want to see harm come to her. I pray that she has a speedy recovery.

Of course, when the left-wing blogs heard about this, their first thoughts were…to blame Conservatives. Message boards and comment boards started popping up claiming that this was a hit by the “right wing hate machine.” Do they have any evidence to support these claims? Of course not.

It is interesting to note, however, that Randi Rhodes, herself, never claimed that she was mugged. The New York Daily News is reporting that no mugging actually took place. Apparently, Rhodes suffered a very bad fall. Jon Elliott simply announced that she was attacked, and the rumors snowballed from there. This was NOT an attack by the “right wing hate machine.” This wasn’t an attack at all. It was an unfortunate accident, nothing more.

I still pray that Randi has a speedy recovery.

America is great because...

2007-10-12T09:37:00.000-05:00

I have heard it said that the main difference between the political right and left in this country can be defined as the following:

“The political right believe that America is great because of its people. The political left believe that America is great because of its Government.”

Traditionally, this definition has fit. In the past, Conservatives believed that America functions best when the size and scope of Government are limited. They believed that Government is not the solution to all of our problems. In most cases, Government IS the problem. (Of course, this philosophy doesn’t define the current Republican Party. They have separated themselves from their Conservative beliefs in favor of increased Government spending and size.)

Leftists, on the other hand, tend to view Government as the one and only answer to any problem that comes our way. What happens when we recognize problems in our Health Care system? Government? Our school system? Government. Our retirement? Government. Our infrastructure? Government. To them, almost nothing can be solved by the private sector. According to Hillary Clinton:

“When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.”

Case in point, check out this website.

WARNING: YOU ARE ENTERING THE MIND OF A LEFTIST

The website is called “Government is Good.” The title alone is quite telling. Wouldn’t you agree? This website is essentially one big argument in favor of Statism. The main author Douglas J. Amy is, not surprisingly, a College Professor of politics.

The first thing that strikes me as odd, besides the fact that anyone could put this much faith in Government, is the fact that this supposedly educated man, this Professor who is responsible for educating the young minds at Mount Holyoke College in the ways of political theory, constantly refers to our system of Government as a “democracy.”

Sadly, many of you reading this don’t recognize the problem with that statement. I have stated it before, but it doesn’t seem to have registered. Thus, it bears repeating in large capital letters.

WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY. WE ARE A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.

There is a huge difference. Look it up. But, this professor seems stumped by this single, simple point. That doesn’t instill the greatest confidence in his credentials. But, that is not the only problem with his writings. We’re just getting warmed up.

Take this post for instance. He attempts to argue that our daily lives are greatly improved by the amazingly proficient institution of Government. Without these wonderful Government programs, our daily lives would be in disarray. We would be miserable.

I won’t even post excerpts from this entry. You simply have to read the entire thing for yourself. It is frightening.

But, after you read the full post, read this rebuttal from TJIC. He goes through point-by-point, explaining the factual and logical inaccuracies of Professor Amy’s post. Here are a couple of good examples:

PROFESSOR AMY: Government also helps you own your house in more than the legal sense. On a more practical level, the federal government actually gives you money every year to help pay for your house. It’s called a mortgage interest tax deduction

TJIC: So I earn $100, and the government would normally steal $30 of that, but because I fill out certain forms, the government only steals $20 of it…and the $10 that the government would have stolen, but chose not to, is a “gift” ?

PROFESSOR AMY: As you are getting dressed, a glance outside the window shows some ominous clouds. You check the weather on your TV. All theseweather forecasts are made possible by information gathered and analyzed by the National Weather Service, a government agency.

TJIC: Information gathering and collection… that couldn’t possibly be done by the free market.

Also: just because the government does something and provides it for free, that’s no argument that there were not private suppliers before the government stepped in, nor is it an argument that there would not immediately be private suppliers if the government stepped out.

If the government ran supermarkets, should I believe that in the absence of government supermarkets, the only alternative is that everyone would starve?

PROFESSOR AMY: And state drivers license examinations ensure that all drivers are at least minimally competent and can actually see the road.

TJIC: False. Most states require that drivers achieve this standard once in their lives…and it may have been 50 years earlier.

Professor Amy’s arguments consist largely of factual inaccuracies and logical fallacies. But, the most overwhelming argument that he seems to use time and time again is that if the Government is performing some service or activity, that service or activity could not be handled by the private sector. The private sector is not capable, willing, able, etc. to handle it. If the Government didn’t do it, it wouldn’t get done.

History has shown us that this is not the case.

Top 101 Media Frauds

2007-10-09T08:11:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I wrote that the media makes a habit of headlining stories that turn out to be completely false. Sometimes this is due to simple irresponsibility or careless researching. Sometimes it is absolutely deliberate mischaracterization, misleading, or fabrication (i.e. the “phony soldiers” controversy). Regardless of the reason, it happens more frequently than it should.

The American Thinker has published a list of the top 101 Media Frauds. These are stories that the media promoted as being true, but were later discovered to be otherwise.

As you read this list, keep in mind something very, VERY important. According to the media, reports of a decrease in Iraq War causalities are absolutely unreliable. Such stories are to be met with firm skepticism and doubt. They can not be considered news.

However, every story on this list, all 101 of them, were considered undeniable truths by the media. They viewed each of these stories as trust-worthy. These reports were the very definition of “news.”

Click here to see the full list.

What qualifies as "news?"

2007-10-08T10:26:00.001-05:00

It’s interesting to watch mainstream media types respond when questioned about their liberal bias. There really is nothing comparable to a reporter trying to squirm and weasel their way around targeted questions regarding their alleged “objectivity.”

Such was the case this weekend on “Reliable Sources” with Howard Kurtz. Kurtz introduced the segment by reporting that September brought a sharp decline in causalities in Iraq. Kurtz correctly pointed out that ABC was the only major network to make this a lead story. Other media outlets buried it deep inside the pages of their newspaper and confined it to a few brief sentences. Other outlets ignored the news altogether.

Progress is being made in Iraq, and many media outlets have chosen to neglect the great news!

Kurtz wanted to find out why. His guests were Robin Wright of the Washington Post and Barbara Starr of CNN. The YouTube video of the exchange can be found here. But, here is the transcript:

KURTZ: Joining us now to put this into perspective, Robin Wright, who covers national security for The Washington Post. And CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr.

Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?

ROBIN WRIGHT: Not necessarily. The fact is we're at the beginning of a trend -- and it's not even sure that it is a trend yet. There is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers. There are different kinds of deaths in Iraq.

There are combat deaths. There are sectarian deaths. And there are the deaths of criminal -- from criminal acts. There are also a lot of numbers that the U.S. frankly is not counting. For example, in southern Iraq, there is Shiite upon Shiite violence, which is not sectarian in the Shiite versus Sunni. And the U.S. also doesn't have much of a capability in the south.

So the numbers themselves are tricky. Long-term, General Odierno, who was in town this week, said he is looking for irreversible momentum, and that, after two months, has not yet been reached.

Let’s pause right here. Wright claims that the numbers are “tricky.” That’s funny. The numbers don’t seem too “tricky” when they are reporting INCREASES in casualties. The numbers didn’t seem too “tricky” when the media (including Wright’s own Washington Post) touted the discredited Lancet Study of Iraq casualties.

But, if they are indeed “tricky” I guess that more research needs to be done to clarify them, which means that reporters need to do their damn job and actually research them.

Instead, Wright uses a word like “tricky” to basically discredit the report of decreased casualties. For her, “tricky” is synonymous with “unreliable.”

She also mentions that an alleged reduction in casualties doesn’t point to a trend. I fail to see why this is even relevant. Trend or not, a vast reduction in war casualties IS MAJOR NEWS! And, it deserves much more attention than a few brief sentences.

The interview continued:

KURTZ: Barbara Starr, CNN did mostly quick reads by anchors of these numbers. There was a taped report on "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT." Do you think this story deserved more attention? We don't know whether it is a trend or not but those are intriguing numbers.

BARBARA STARR: But that's the problem, we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq. This is not enduring progress. This is a very positive step on that potential road to progress.

Stop. She just said that “this is not enduring progress.” Who the hell is Barbara Starr to make this judgment? How does she know that this reduction in casualties will not continue? How does she know that this progress will not endure? She doesn’t.

Kurtz appropriately called the reporters on their double-standard.

KURTZ: But let's say that the figures had shown that casualties were going up for U.S. soldiers and going up for Iraqi civilians. I think that would have made some front pages.

STARR: Oh, I think inevitably it would have. I mean, that's certainly -- that, by any definition, is news. Look, nobody more than a Pentagon correspondent would like to stop reporting the number of deaths, interviewing grieving families, talking to soldiers who have lost their arms and their legs in the war. But, is this really enduring progress?

We've had five years of the Pentagon telling us there is progress, there is progress. Forgive me for being skeptical, I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.

So, let’s recap. A reduction in casualties in Iraq is not news. We don’t even know if it is a “trend,” so obviously the media can’t treat it as a credible report. However, an increase in casualties is the definition of news! They don’t need to do more research or hold a skeptical view of reports of increased casualties. Those numbers aren’t “tricky” at all. No. Those deserve to be headline stories.

FYI – Wright and Starr are essentially saying that these reports of decreased causalities are unreliable. They question their validity with statements like “the numbers themselves are tricky,” “we don't know whether it is a trend,” and “I need to see a little bit more than one month before I get too excited about all of this.”

They suggest that they need more information or more evidence before they start treating these reports as real news.

That’s certainly an interesting sentiment when you consider the following:
- Dan Rather and the forged documents
- The increase in “Global Warming” hurricanes that never was
- The rapes, homicides, and cannibalism during Hurricane Katrina that never actually happened
- The Duke Rape case
- The aforementioned Lancet Study
- $5.00/gallon gas prices

This list could go on for a while. But, the point is that the media makes a habit of headlining stories which turn out to be completely unreliable. The difference is that these particular stories fit their agenda. More research wasn’t necessary. Skepticism wasn't necessary. The validity of these stories was unquestionably trust-worthy.

But, when war casualties drop, and success is on the horizon in a war that they adamantly oppose, any reports of progress are met with harsh skepticism and doubt. These stories don’t fit the narrative they are trying to create.

Bias? What bias?

Socialist Quote Quiz

2007-10-08T08:44:00.000-05:00

I can’t take credit for this. Neal Boortz posted it on his website this morning. But, I just had to share it. It’s a little “Who said it?” quiz. You might be surprised by the answers.

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above

3) "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Jose f Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Answers:

(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005

Interesting, wouldn’t you agree?

A Phony Controversy - Part 2

2007-10-02T14:32:00.000-05:00

In my last post I mentioned that this “phony soldiers” controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh has even made it to the floor of the Senate. Yesterday, Senator Tom Harkin leveled a very personal attack against Rush:

HARKIN: I’ll just close, Mr. President, by noting that in August, seven soldiers published an op-ed in the New York Times criticizing the current strategy in Iraq. Tragically, two of those soldiers were subsequently killed in action, making the ultimate sacrifice for their country.

I can only assume by Mr. Limbaugh’s definition that they too were “phony soldiers.” Now what’s most despicable is that Mr. Limbaugh says these provocative things to make more money. So he castigates our soldiers, this makes more news, more people tune in, he makes more money.

Well, I don’t know. Maybe he was just high on his drugs again. I don’t know whether he was or not. If so, he ought to let us know. But that shouldn’t be an excuse.

Despite the ridiculously childish nature of the OxyContin jab, the irony of the situation is unbelievable.

You see, Tom Harkin is, himself, a “phony soldier” of sorts. During a 1992 campaign for the Presidency, Tom Harkin claimed that he served as a pilot in Vietnam on combat air patrols. It was later revealed that Harkin never flew on combat missions, and, in fact, had NEVER served in the Vietnam War. He lied about his military credentials, only to be exposed as a fraud.

This is the guy condemning Rush Limbaugh for his “phony soldiers” comment?

Oh, irony. Sweet irony.

A Phony Controversy

2007-10-02T13:39:00.000-05:00

Normally, I don’t rush to the defense of talk radio hosts when they are attacked by media personalities. And, in this case, I’m not really “rushing” to the defense, because this controversy has been brewing for a few days. But, this particular attack by left-wing media personalities and politicians is so bluntly dishonest and unfounded that something has to be said.

While I’m a big fan of talk radio (Neal Boortz especially), I’m not a die hard fan of Rush Limbaugh. I don’t know what it is. I’ll catch his show when I have time. But, I’m not a regular listener.

However, the latest attack campaign against him is an absolute sham. If you haven’t heard about it, allow me to give you a little background.

Media Matters, the left-wing doppelganger of NewsBusters, posted on their website last week a harsh critique of something Limbaugh said. Here is what Media Matters had to say:

During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "phony soldiers."…

LIMBAUGH: There's a lot more than that that they don't understand. They can't even -- if -- the next guy that calls here, I'm gonna ask him: Why should we pull -- what is the imperative for pulling out? What's in it for the United States to pull out? They can't -- I don't think they have an answer for that other than, "Well, we just gotta bring the troops home."

CALLER 2: Yeah, and, you know what --

LIMBAUGH: "Save the -- keep the troops safe" or whatever. I -- it's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people.

CALLER 2: No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.

LIMBAUGH: The phony soldiers.

CALLER 2: The phony soldiers. If you talk to a real soldier, they are proud to serve. They want to be over in Iraq. They understand their sacrifice, and they're willing to sacrifice for their country.

LIMBAUGH: They joined to be in Iraq. They joined --

CALLER 2: A lot of them -- the new kids, yeah.

LIMBAUGH: Well, you know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you signed up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan or somewhere.

CALLER 2: Exactly, sir.

There you have it. Media Matters even went so far to post an actual transcript of Rush’s show. So, the accusation MUST be true! You see it right there. Rush believes that any soldier who supports immediate US withdrawal is nothing more than a “phony soldier.”

The mainstream media saw this emerging controversy as fresh meat. MSNBC promoted this story on several of its programs, as did CNN. This controversy has even made its way to the floors of the Senate and the House of Representatives. I guess there must really be something to this story.

Well…not exactly. The media and Congressional Democrats have presented the story exactly the way Media Matters did. Unfortunately for them, their fictional narrative has no basis in reality.

Media Matters did indeed provide a transcript of the exchange…a partial transcript. They conveniently ceased cutting and pasting immediately before the CONTEXT of the conversation was revealed. Here is how the actual transcript went:

CALLER 2: No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.

LIMBAUGH: The phony soldiers.

CALLER 2: The phony soldiers. If you talk to a real soldier, they are proud to serve. They want to be over in Iraq. They understand their sacrifice, and they're willing to sacrifice for their country.

LIMBAUGH: They joined to be in Iraq. They joined --

CALLER 2: A lot of them -- the new kids, yeah.

LIMBAUGH: Well, you know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you signed up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan or somewhere.

CALLER 2: Exactly, sir. My other comment, my original comment, was a retort to Jill about the fact we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. Actually, we have found weapons of mass destruction in chemical agents that terrorists have been using against us for a while now. I've done two tours in Iraq, I just got back in June, and there are many instances of insurgents not knowing what they're using in their IEDs. They're using mustard artillery rounds, VX artillery rounds in their IEDs. Because they didn't know what they were using, they didn't do it right, and so it didn't really hurt anybody. But those munitions are over there. It's a huge desert. If they bury it somewhere, we're never going to find it.

RUSH: Well, that's a moot point for me right now.

CALLER 2: Right.

RUSH: The weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We're there. We all know they were there, and Mahmoud even admitted it in one of his speeches here talking about Saddam using the poison mustard gas or whatever it is on his own people. But that's moot. What's more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working, and all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and your colleagues over there is a great threat to them. It's frustrating and maddening, and why they must be kept in the minority. I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much.

Here is a Morning Update that we did recently, talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. They have their celebrities and one of them was Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth. Now, he was a "corporal." I say in quotes. Twenty-three years old. What made Jesse Macbeth a hero to the anti-war crowd wasn't his Purple Heart; it wasn't his being affiliated with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. No. What made Jesse Macbeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage, in their view, off the battlefield, without regard to consequences. He told the world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq, American soldiers killing unarmed civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth describes the horrors this way: "We would burn their bodies. We would hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque." Now, recently, Jesse Macbeth, poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. And you know what? He was sentenced to five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim and his Army discharge record. He was in the Army. Jesse Macbeth was in the Army, folks, briefly. Forty-four days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse Macbeth isn't an Army Ranger, never was. He isn't a corporal, never was. He never won the Purple Heart, and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen. You probably haven't even heard about this. And, if you have, you haven't heard much about it. This doesn't fit the narrative and the template in the Drive-By Media and the Democrat Party as to who is a genuine war hero. Don't look for any retractions, by the way. Not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread Jesse Macbeth's lies about our troops, because the truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities because they can't find any that fit the template of the way they see the US military. In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.

This is the FULL CONTEXT of the “phony soldiers” remark. It was in regards to individuals like Jesse Macbeth, Micah Wright, and Amorita Randall. These individuals claimed to be American military veterans and told gruesome tales of war crimes and atrocities committed by U.S. troops. Their stories and their personal biographies turned out to be complete fabrications. They were, in fact, anti-war zealots looking for the spotlight and their 15 minutes of fame.

That is why Limbaugh referred to them as “phony soldiers.” In the context of his discussion he mentioned Jesse Macbeth by name simply because this was the most recent story.
He mentioned Jesse Macbeth BY NAME in the context of this discussion. But, did you see that portion in the Media Matters “transcript?” Of course not.

Interestingly enough, Media Matters helped to prove Rush’s ultimate point of the whole “phony soldiers” discussion. Look at Rush’s last quote in the transcript:

“In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.”

I’d say that just about sums up this controversy.

The principles of Columbia University

2007-09-24T10:42:00.000-05:00

Which of these two individuals seems more dangerous and deplorable to you?

1. An American citizen who has founded an organization dedicated to lawfully fighting the problem of illegal immigration and helping to secure our National borders in accordance with immigration laws.

OR

2. An extremist leader of an Islamic country (which has documented ties to terrorist organizations) who has made the following statements:

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury."

"Israel must be wiped off the map."

"Israel will be annihilated."

"Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm."

"[There is] no significant need for the United States."

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world...The World without Zionism."

"The wave of the Islamic revolution will soon reach the entire world."

"If you want to have good relations with the Iranian people in the future, you should acknowledge the right and the might of the Iranian people, and you should bow and surrender to the might of the Iranian people. If you do not accept this, the Iranian people will force you to bow and surrender."

"With the support and power of God, we will soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism and will breathe in the brilliant time of Islamic sovereignty over today's world."

"A nation that on the other side of the globe has risen up and proved the shallowness of their power…They are angry with our nation. But we tell them ‘so be it and die from this anger’. Rest assured that if you do not respond to the divine call, you will die soon and vanish from the face of the earth."

"The anger of Muslims may reach an explosion point soon…the waves of the blast will not remain within the boundaries of our region and will engulf the corrupt powers that support this fake regime [Israel]."

Number 1 is an American citizen engaged in protecting our country through completely legal and peaceful channels. Number 2 promotes the genocide of an entire race of people, the annihilation of one of America’s allies, and the total destruction of the United States.

Which one seems more dangerous to you?

Well, if you are a “progressive” student at Columbia University, you would no doubt conclude that Number 1 is clearly the more dangerous of the two. If Number 1 were to speak on your campus, you would immediately assemble a protest group to shout him off stage and prevent him from speaking. No doubt you would call him a racist and a Nazi.

But, if Number 2 were to speak on your campus, you would plead with the rest of the Columbia University student body to refrain from any protests. After all, you wouldn’t want him to be “demonized.”

I really wish that I was making this up. But, sadly, I am not.

Last year, “progressive” students at Columbia University protested a speech by Jim Gilchrist, the co-founder of the Minutemen, by storming the stage and shouting hateful names at him.

This year, it has been highly publicized that Columbia University has invited Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran, to speak at their campus. In reaction to this invitation, the Columbia University “progressives” sent out an open letter asking students to refrain from any form of protest against Ahmadinejad.

“We have serious concerns with the content of some of the hostility that has been expressed to his presence, and specifically with the planned protest. We fear the demonization of Ahmadinejad, because we think this demonization contributes to the likelihood of war… A rally where each speaker denounces Ahmadinejad’s reactionary policies and just a few call explicitly for military action will still be perceived, on campus and around the U.S., as pro-war.”

The dichotomy is absolutely amazing to me. They hate the idea of Ahmadinejad being “demonized,” yet they publicly condemn and shout-down an American citizen who is dedicated to the security of the United States.

You might also be interested to know that while Columbia University has invited Ahmadinejad to speak on their campus, the dean of the University has also expressed his willingness to have Hitler speak at their campus:

“If Hitler were in the United States and wanted a platform from which to speak, he would have plenty of platforms to speak in the United States. If he were willing to engage in debate and a discussion to be challenged by Columbia students and faculty, we would certainly invite him.”

I guess they really do embrace the free and open exchange of ideas! They would invite anyone to speak publicly on their campus, no matter how outrageous, deplorable, controversial, or evil they are.

But, wait…what’s this?

Oh, that’s right. Columbia University, while publicly stating that they would invite Hitler and Ahmadinejad to speak at their campus, continues to ban the ROTC from their campus.

Columbia University welcomes anti-Semites, power-hungry world leaders, and genocidal racists to their campus. But, they refuse to allow their students to participate in an officer training program for our armed forces.

Simply…unbelievable.

***UPDATE***

Many people who support Ahmadinejad’s right to speak at Columbia University do so by arguing that this forum will allow students to directly challenge the Iranian President on many of his controversial statements and beliefs. They believe that this will be an open forum with the free exchange of ideas.

Think again.

“During the program, cards will be distributed to members of the audience, so that they may submit questions for the speaker. If you were unable to register for the event but would still like to submit a question, please email your question to worldleaders@columbia.edu.”

Questions will have to be submitted to the moderator, and no doubt screened. Let’s see if they actually ask him the tough questions. But, regardless, this isn’t the “open forum” that many are hyping it to be.

Typical of the DailyKos

2007-09-20T15:31:00.000-05:00

The DailyKos, the heart and soul of the modern leftist movement, has once again proved itself to be completely and utterly worthless. A new diary post on their site is a classic example of how so many of them truly view the military. They hold them in complete disdain.

Many supporters of the DailyKos, and likeminded websites, will claim that it is only a fringe element of the left who hold extremist views like this. They claim that right-wing bloggers simply cherry-pick anonymous comments on their message boards (which they also claim to be planted by right-wing bloggers) to “prove” that the left doesn’t, in fact, support the troops.

Bear in mind, however, that this diary post (or this one) is not a single anonymous post on an obscure message board. And, it has not been planted by a mysterious right-wing blogger out to smear the DailyKos. It is, in fact, an official diary post, monitored and approved by the website administrators.

It is entitled, “I Don't Support the Troops..oops, there, I said it.”

Here are a few excerpts:

Supporting the troops essentially means supporting the illegal war. It seems that us anti-war types have been doing all sorts of mental and philisophical gymnastics to try and work around this. What has emerged is a sort of low impact, mealy-mouthed common wisdom that is palatable to everyone but is ultimately going to allow us to stay in Iraq for years to come…

Until we have another draft, this is a volunteer armed services. I am not even beginning to count the numerous mercenaries that are involved in the occupation. You signed up, you get to go to the desert and risk being shot at by brown skinned people who don't believe the lies you've been told. A war of aggression is immoral, period. If you believe in God, you can damned well be sure you are going to hell for your participation in it. The only troop I support is the man or woman who refuses to be deployed so that they can make the middle east accessible to profiteers who don't give a flying F about morality or democracy. Or a soldier's life.

When Sunni tribes got paid off enough to stop shooting at GIs and instead shoot at Al-Qaeda (in reality themselves) it is funny how they suddenly became Freedom Fighters. During WWII, French resistance fighters were also called terrorists and insurgents by their German occupiers. Can an anti-war proponent look at these Iraqi resistance fighters with the same admiration, even though they worship differently than us and when they eventually win are likely to install a distasteful (to Americans) theocratic tinged state. Can a person who doesn't believe in violence support that people's right to govern themselves, perhaps violently.

I am sorry but supporting the troops means supporting this illegal war.

Notice that he doesn’t just admit that he completely rejects respect and support for our men and women in uniform. This guy also embraces the “Iraqi resistance fighters” (the Islamic terrorists who are killing our troops), and looks at them with “admiration.” He supports their “right to govern themselves, perhaps violently.”

Ultimately, he also concludes that the “Iraqi resistance fighters” (again, the Islamic terrorists who disguise themselves as civilians and attack OUR troops) will “eventually win.”

Truly, truly disgusting.

HillaryCare - Part 2

2007-09-18T09:36:00.000-05:00

Hillary Clinton's newly unveiled health care plan has so many fundamental problems that I had to split this into two blog postings. So, without further adieu...Part 2.

Clinton claims that her plan will only cost $110 billion. (FYI - This is a separate fallacy which would require a 3rd blog entry. It’s a completely unrealistic dollar figure.)

She states that the $110 billion for her plan would come “through a combination of cost savings and the expiration of some of President George W. Bush's tax cuts for the most wealthy.”

The AP quoted her this way:

“In unveiling her plan, she called for a requirement for businesses to obtain insurance for employees, and said the wealthy should pay higher taxes to help defray the cost for those less able to pay for it.”

In other words, her plan calls for wealth redistribution. She plans to take money from those she considers to be “the most wealthy” and give it to someone else. She’s sticking to her Socialist roots.

On top of empowering the Government to mandate the purchase of insurance and to redistribute wealth, Hillary’s plan also places more regulation on private insurers.

Joking that her proposals "won't make me the insurance industry's woman of the year," Clinton said companies would no longer be able to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions or genetic predisposition to certain illnesses.

If private insurers are required to cover high-risk individuals, insurance premiums for everyone will increase. It’s not rocket science.

She claims that people who are content with their private plan can keep their plan the way it is. However, the premiums will be much higher due to increased regulation, and taxes will go up.

But, then again, she’s just trying to provide us with “more choice.”

One vital question

2007-09-18T09:30:00.000-05:00

When it comes to Government actions, one question should be asked of every decision that they make. One question is absolutely vital when discussing our ever-growing Government. Yet, it is seldom ever asked. That question is:

“Where in the Constitution is this power granted to the Federal Government?”

Sadly, this question is irrelevant to some. It has become an inconvenience to first consider Constitutional merit of certain Government powers before new policies are perused. It happens on both sides of the aisle. Both parties are guilty of ignoring this pertinent question.

But, there is one current issue that must be framed around this question. Failure to do so, will lead us down the road of Totalitarianism. However, it is my belief that this question will never be raised when discussing this issue. Too many Americans have allowed their emotional approach to the issue to overtake their concern for the Constitution.

That issue is health care. Yesterday, Hillary Clinton unveiled her new plan for our health care system. Although she claims that it is not Government-run health care, it will be funded by taxpayer dollars, and will enact many new Government-enforced mandates.

Her new health care plan revolves around one major principle which she trumpeted yesterday:

Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton, whose first attempt at a health care overhaul fell flat 13 years ago, unveiled a broad proposal on Monday to require health insurance for all Americans and make it more affordable.

The proposal would mandate coverage for 47 million uninsured Americans but maintain a role for private insurance companies in what she said would be a simplified system with more choices for consumers.

She claims that her plain provides Americans with “more choices” when it comes to insurance. She even uses the word “choice” in the title of her plan.

It’s a strange dichotomy to think that a plan mandating that every American purchase health insurance somehow provides us with “more choice.” In reality, she is robbing consumers of their most basic choice…their choice to not purchase insurance.

She uses the analogy of requiring the purchase of Auto Insurance. But, there are several fundamental flaws with this analogy. Primarily, there is NO mandate for all Americans to purchase auto insurance. The only mandate on auto insurance is IF you own a car, and IF you use it on public roads. If you own a car, and only use it on your own property, there is NO requirement for insurance. Thus, there is NO universal mandate for coverage.

Which brings me back to the vital question:

“Where in the Constitution is this power granted to the Federal Government?”

Where does the Constitution give the Federal Government the power to force Americans to purchase something? Answer: It doesn’t. The Federal Government does not have the power to mandate something like that. It is absolutely, unequivocally unconstitutional and un-American.

(FYI - The same question should be asked of John Edwards’ plan for mandatory doctor visits.)

What is your child being taught in school?

2007-09-17T15:43:00.000-05:00

I have railed against Government schools before, so it probably won’t come as any shock that I have yet another story to share with you.

Mike Brooks, a history teacher at Bidwell Junior High School in Chico, California, recently sent his eighth grade students home with letters asking their parents to do something very…odd. Wait…“odd” really isn’t the right word. The word I’m looking for is…DISGRACEFUL!

The letter, written by Mike Brooks, asked the parents to renounce their U.S. citizenship and declare themselves independent members of the “global community.” I…kid…you…not.

The local Newspaper in Chico ran the story here. Check this out:

Reached at home, the teacher said his U.S. History class is studying the Declaration of Independence, and he decided to write a letter putting the document into modern language. His intention, he said, was to send it home for parents to review, and possibly discuss with their children.

He concluded the letter with "After careful consideration of the facts of our current situation, I have decided to announce to everyone that I am no longer a citizen of the United States, but a free and independent member of the global community."

"The point was, I wanted to ask parents if they would sign such a letter if conditions that existed prior to the Revolution were happening now."

So, why would he do such a thing? Naturally, his response was:

"I just wanted to start a discussion."

There it is - the familiar “discussion” rationalization. Where have I heard that before? Oh, yeah. Jay Bennish tried to use that defense on the “Today Show” after he was caught on tape teaching his students that America is the most violent nation on the planet.

Interestingly enough, this rationality is also a favorite tool of the 9/11 “Truthers” who claim that they are just “asking questions.”

Based on that idea, teachers could theoretically “ask questions” and “start discussions” on a litany of issues. Why not have eighth grade classes dedicated to the JFK assassination or the Roswell landings? Why not teach high school students about the commonalities between the United States and Nazi Germany (Wait…they already do that.)? Why not “discuss” with students the theories surrounding the “illuminati?”

There is a reason that this stuff is not acceptable in a classroom. They are gross distortions of the facts. Schools are places to foster rational, critical thinking based on proveable facts. They are not places to foster indoctrination based on biased worldviews.

“The lesson being taught in class was that the U.S. kidnaps innocent people and takes them to Cuba, where they are kept indefinitely and tortured.”

I know that the unhinged left love to claim that Guantanamo Bay is a black-ops prison where inmates are routinely tortured and subjected to inhumane treatment. But, the facts just don’t bear that out. Innocent people are not being kidnapped and taken anywhere. The only prisoners being held at prisons such as Guantanamo are enemy combatants.

Brooks was teaching his students unfounded conspiracy theories, which are on par with the aforementioned 9/11, JFK, Roswell, and Illuminati theories. They have no place in a classroom. Yet, Mike Brooks felt it was perfectly acceptable material to “discuss.”

But, even that wasn’t enough for Mike Brooks. He had to take his anti_American agenda one step further. He actually asked parents to renounce their citizenship and join the “global community.”

It is a truly disgusting display of colossal arrogance and ignorance.

So, what did the school administration have to say about this? What do you think? It’s a Government school, and it’s in California.

Naturally, they defended Brooks’ actions:

Bidwell Junior High School administrators said a letter sent home with students in an eighth-grade class Tuesday was a good idea for a history lesson, with bad execution.

"It was a well-intended lesson that didn't shake out too well," she said, adding that Brooks would not be subject to disciplinary action.

And, the real kicker…

Parsley said she doesn't believe Brooks has any political agenda to advance.

How much stupidity can possibly be contained in one school district?

And now for something completely different...

2007-09-14T07:57:00.000-05:00

Admittedly, this story is very different from anything that I normally post. But, I just had to share it.

Take a look at this picture, then read the accompanying story.

I’m trying desperately to maintain my rugged, masculine exterior. But, on the inside, I shed a little tear. It’s a very small tear. I wouldn’t even call it a tear, really. It’s more like a droplet.

The Hsu Scandal

2007-09-12T11:04:00.000-05:00

If you haven’t heard about the recent Norman Hsu scandal in Washington, you’re not alone. The mainstream media has virtually ignored it. Even the New York Times admitted that this scandal is receiving “only a handful” of attention.

Here we have a prominent New York businessman, who is a long-time fugitive from American authorities, has been charged with several counts of fraud, plead “no contest” to Grand Theft, and has mysterious sources of income most likely connected to illegal Ponzi schemes. He has a history of making very large political campaign donations, many of which are suspected to be in serious violation of campaign finance laws.

Yet, the media is giving very little attention to it. Why?

I guess I forgot to mention that Norman Hsu’s campaign donations, including the illegal ones, were to DEMOCRAT candidates. For the media, this makes all the difference.

Remember, if you will, a little story known as the Jack Abramoff scandal. This story was plastered on the front-page of almost every newspaper in the country and received “top story” coverage from all of the major networks. Even though, Jack Abramoff made contributions to both Republican and Democrat politicians, the media treated it as a purely Republican scandal. For instance, CBS’s Harry Smith labeled the Abramoff scandal a “Republican problem.” Abramoff was referred to as a “Republican lobbyist,” and his ties to Republican politicians became the central focus of the scandal. Of course, very little attention was given to all of the Democrats that he contributed to.

That story was a goldmine for the mainstream media. But, now that we have a campaign finance scandal involving top Democrats like Hillary Clinton, Patrick Kennedy, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, and Harry Reid, nothing is being made out of it. Take a look at this spreadsheet of political donations made by Hsu. You’ll notice that out of the 83 Politicians on the list, only 1 is a Republican - Tom Gallagher, Chief Financial Officer of Florida. The other 82 Politicians are Democrats.

So…once again…if the media is sooooo concerned about political contribution scandals, why not make this a front-page story for months, just like they did with the Abramoff scandal.

I think you know the answer.

You might be inclined to believe that this isn’t a major story because the candidates didn’t know about Hsu's fugitive status or his history of fraud. Those among us with the slightest bit of common sense will understand that Politicians don’t blindly accept large contributions. They know who they receive it from.

Case in point – this story from the New York Daily News:

“Team Clinton can't explain ignoring warnings on Hsu”

WASHINGTON - Hillary Clinton's campaign couldn't explain yesterday why it blew off warnings about felon-turned-fund-raiser Norman Hsu - and the Daily News learned FBI agents are collecting e-mail evidence in the widening scandal.

Yesterday, the campaign insisted it did all it should to vet Hsu after California businessman Jack Cassidy warned in June that Hsu's investment operation was fishy. Cassidy e-mailed his tips to the California Democratic Party, which forwarded them to the Clinton campaign.

His warning "prompted a search of publicly available information, which did not reveal Mr. Hsu's decade-plus-old warrant," said Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson. He would not say why the campaign didn't follow up on specifics Cassidy included to explain his suspicions.

"They knew [about Hsu], and they knew back in June," a source told The News.

To her credit, Clinton has said that she will return the $850,000 donated by Hsu. Of course, she’s doing this 3 months AFTER she was warned about Hsu’s illegal activities (and only AFTER the story was made public).

This is a HUGE story. But, it is a story involving the Democrats “culture of corruption.” So, it will be conveniently ignored by the media. And, the American voters will be none the wiser.

They will continue to believe that only Republicans were involved in the Jack Abramoff scandal, and only Republicans would be so corrupt as to accept illegal campaign donations.

Global Warming: An Unsettled Science

2007-09-11T14:01:00.000-05:00

Here’s a great video entitled, “Global Warming: An Unsettled Science.” It raises several good counter-arguments to the religion of Global Warming.

Watch it, if only for the amazingly dramatic music.

Pay special attention around time marker 3:50. It discusses a huge flaw in climate models:

In theory, greenhouse gases (GHGs) should warm the troposphere faster than the surface. However, observations show just the opposite.

Totalitarian Nanny State

2007-09-10T08:12:00.000-05:00

No Commentary. Just a question:

How is this a part of promoting the FREE MARKET?

As America gets fatter, policymakers are seeking creative approaches to legislating health. They may have entered the school cafeteria -- and now they're eyeing your neighborhood.

Los Angeles officials, among others around the country, are proposing to limit new fast-food restaurants -- a tactic that could be called health zoning.

"While limiting fast-food restaurants isn't a solution in itself, it's an important piece of the puzzle," said Mark Vallianatos, director of the Center for Food and Justice at Occidental College.

This is "bringing health policy and environmental policy together with land-use planning…I think that's smart, and it's the wave of the future."

"The community has suffered for decades by an assumption that attracting business of any type is good, and it's not true."

If you have an answer, I want to hear it.

Indocrination Of A New Generation

2007-09-07T11:57:00.000-05:00

Growing up, I watched a lot of Saturday morning cartoons. But, I never got into the animated movies. For me, they just weren’t that entertaining. A thirty-minute cartoon on Saturday morning was one thing. But, sitting through a two-hour movie about a deer and a skunk was too much to ask of me.

As I got older, I noticed that people my age not only enjoyed animated movies as children, but they still watched the new animated movies! They would talk about movies such as “Toy Story” or “Shrek” as if they were the funniest movies ever made. No offense to those who may enjoy those movies, but I’ve watched them. I hated them.

But, regardless of my personal feelings towards movies like “Toy Story” or “Shrek,” they are admittedly harmless, and all in good, kid-oriented fun.

There are however exceptions to this. Recently, I had the great displeasure of watching the movie “Happy Feet.” Forced against my will, I sat through the two-hour session of leftist indoctrination. If you've seen the movie, you probably know why I refer to it as such.

Not surprisingly, the main villain in “Happy Feet” is us – mankind. Evil, greedy, overfishing, imperialist mankind. The movie covers several hot-button topics, not the least of which is…you had to see this coming…Global Warming.

It is a topic that permeates our daily news. There is no escaping it. The Church of Global warming has to constantly find new ways of injecting their agenda into mainstream audiences. They have decided to use animated films to indoctrinate the next generation of Americans. Their hope is that these children will grow up accepting Global Warming as complete fact, and never question their own belief system.

Call me crazy. But, even research scientists at major universities have noticed this trend in children’s movies. Politico.com has released an article titled, “Hollywood recruits kids to fight climate change.” Did you read the headline? They are RECRUITING children to their cause. Here a few excerpts from the article:

“Children have always been very sensitive to the plight of animals — way back to ‘Bambi,’” explained Dave Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family, a research and advocacy organization based in Minneapolis that studies the impact of media on children’s behavior.

So penguins and polar bears — those marketable animals among the most obviously affected by the negative impacts of global warming — are the chief mascots for the cause…

“It’s not surprising with all of the recent talk about global warming that people who are creating children’s entertainment would translate that current-event discussion into the impact on animals,” Walsh continued. “Kids aren’t going to relate to the impact on the polar ice cap.”

Dan Anderson, a professor of psychology at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, studies toddlers’ understanding of television and consults on several children’s programs…

A significant amount of “moral learning” happens during the formative ages — generally beyond pre-school, Anderson explained. Kids roughly 7 and older begin to understand, remember and reflect on serious topics like death — including the Earth’s death. Elementary school students even start becoming interested in political positions.

Many experts believe that children are the “hidden agenda” in the environmental movement, since the whole premise behind its activism is to convince people to leave the Earth better than they found it for the clean-air enjoyment of the next generation.

These researchers agree, and seem to endorse the notion, that animated movies like “Happy Feet” attempt to appeal to children’s emotional attachment to animals to solidify their message. Just tug at the children’s heart-strings a little bit, and they are putty in the hands of the environmental movement.

Sure…that sounds like an honest way to educate people about your cause.

In a lot of cases such indoctrination is based on incredible factual inaccuracies. For instance, in “Happy Feet,” the assertion is made that Penguin populations are threatened by melting sea ice. Even if the contention is made that sea ice near the penguin populations is melting (even though the antarctic sea ice, overall, is increasing), what proof is there that man is the cause of this, as “Happy Feet” implies? (FYI – it was recently revealed that less than half of published scientists buy into the anthropogenic Global Warming theory).

I think one of the most telling statements in the article comes when discussing the PBS program “It’s a Big Big World.”

“Big Big World” features a 7-foot hairy sloth named Snook, whom Kriegman
[the show’s creator] calls “the Al Gore for kids.” Snook lives in a treehouse
and reads books on science, geography and nature. The show is developing
outreach and promotional opportunities in conjunction with the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy group. In one episode, he tells his viewers: “Hey, did you know that you are an animal, too?”

NO. NO WE ARE NOT! Humans are not merely another animal wandering around this planet devoid of sapience and self-awareness. We are a completely separate entity. To equate us with animals is to degrade the human spirit.

These movies are not innocent presentations of cute and fuzzy animals which only seek to entertain the viewer. They are laced with propaganda, and an agenda that only has legs when it utilizes an appeal to emotion.

In closing, I wanted to post a clip from another animated movie, which is the most obscene and hideous piece of leftist propaganda being passed off as a kid’s cartoon. It is a clip from the movie, “The Ant Bully” (With a little creative text overlay, courtesy of The People's Cube). Sadly, this movie wasn’t even mentioned in the Politico article. But, parents should pay attention. “The Ant Bully” is nothing more than indoctrination into Socialism.

Fred Thompson!

2007-09-06T12:01:00.000-05:00

Fred Thompson has officially announced that he is running for the Presidency of the United States! Here is his announcement video:

For me, the greatest line in the entire video came at time marker 2:34. He sums up his core belief system with this phrase:

“A Government that is big enough to do everything for us is powerful enough to do anything to us.”

I wholeheartedly believe that, and it something that I fear greatly. Thompson seems to hold the same fear. And, at the same time, he speaks of the importance of the individual. He recognizes that individual freedom is inseparable from our very existence. It does not come from Government, but from God. Government is not the solution to our problems. In most cases, it IS the problem.

Watch the video. Decide for yourself.