Global Warming - Local Indoctrination

By now, many of you have probably heard the story from Holloway Elementary School in Holland about the presentation made on global warming Greenpeace stirs up controversy at local school : News : NBC24 . My own opinions on the subject are well documented, having been covered in a previous posting "Global Warming", dated 9/15/07, so I won't repeat them. I have to say though that if I were a resident of Holland, and especially if I had a child in Holloway, that I would be outraged. How I would react if that child were in the class lectured simply scares me. Now I know that we are not supposed to question Global Warming, or the motives of those trying to educate us. I am however, outraged here about a couple of things:

1. That tax dollars would used to provide a forum for liberal indoctrination on any subject. I am especially concerned that this would be done to those at such an impressionable age.
2. That facts currently in debate on the potential impact of Global Warming on polar bears should be used to scare children into accepting the opinion of the presenter.
3. That fourth grade students would be asked to copy a letter to Rep. Marcy Kaptur word for word on the subject of the "Safe Climate Act", just another meaningless law to make us feel better about ourselves.
4. That the principal agreed that the students in question were not doing these letters voluntarily, but were instead doing what they had been told to do and that this was "part of the learning experience". (By the way, what kind of learning experience are we talking about here?)
5. That the school brought in not a professor or teacher; but a student and a representative of Greenpeace, an organization that has often been categorized as an "eco-terrorist group".
6. That no opposing point of view was brought in for discussion and the principal laughed at the idea of doing so.
7. That the superintendant of the district said that an opposing point of view might be brought in, if one could be found that was "credible". Are we talking truly credible, or simply as credible as Greenpeace?

I can only hope that the report on this presentation stirs some additional debate. I would also be interested in hearing what the local Board of Education has to say on the subject and that Channel 24 takes the opportunity to follow up with a response from them.

Reality Shows

I would like to say something on the subject of Reality Shows, but am a little uncomfortable about doing so. You see, I've never actually watched one all the way through. (Sorry, but at my age, you don't have a lot of time to waste on crap, and these shows set off my BS detectors at maximum range.) Now you might think that having admitted at a limited first hand information on the subject, I would be be reticent to pass judgement. You would however be wrong. It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a dedicated viewer to glean the message that these shows are putting forward. So let me get right out in front of the subject by saying the following:

1. There are too many reality shows on television! It shows that television has become a lot like the movies, and can't seem to come up with an original idea. It is actually a shame that either there is so little creativity left in Hollywood, or that corporate ownership has taken over so much that all we are left with is the spectacle and the gore as they incestuously feed on each other.
2. It is scary to think that so many people have so little of a life themselves that they would find the lives of a former rock star, a former wrestler, a couple of washed up child actors, a tattoo artist or two, a bunch of arctic fishermen, or a few complete strangers living together in a pretty neat house or on an island (the list could go on and on) a substitute for that lack in their own life.
3. The behavior exhibited on these shows might be used by religious fundamentalists as evidence that Evolution does not exist; or if it does, that God has nothing to do with it by choice. It's a shame that casting directors feel the need to seek out the "culls" of society for these shows. There can be no art in a form of media which exhibits the dregs, freaks, and mental and moral midgets of a society. These people should only get credit for performing the same task that the recruiter in a circus freak show does.

OK, I have that out of my system. The bottom line here is that these shows showcase the very worst about human beings as a species. Self-indulgence, self-absorption, and self-abuse vie with bad manners, bad behaviour, and bad genes in a cage match to the death of a polite society. What's makes it all worse is that the content of these shows not only exhibit and celebrate the worst depravities of the human soul (OK, sub-human), they in fact reward the worst of these characters and laud them.

Adding to the ludicrous nature of the whole thing is the feeding frenzy of the rest of the media. Instead of decrying the behavior depicted as examples of anti-social lunacy, like dung beetles many of them crawl over these bits of natural fertilizer in a feeding frenzy. Touting these performances as if they were bits of Shakespearean theatre, they gasp in breathless anticipation of the next episode's shenanigans.

You know, the Roman Empire truly began to die when the morals of its society decayed beyond healing. What followed was the growing spectacle of the arena and the slippery slide down the slope of societal degradation where brutality and victory were all that mattered. Well as the old Emerson, Lake, and Palmer song says: "Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you can attend, come inside, come inside."
Enjoy the show my friends, because the hordes of barbarians not actually participating in these shows are standing right outside the gate, waiting to move in.

Halloween Costumes 2007

As I have previously pointed out in an earlier post "Run and Hide, The Candidates Are Coming", Halloween is just around the corner. That means that many of you may be having trouble deciding on costumes for this last of the pagan holidays. While I claim no expertise in this area; common sense, some degree of insight, and a twisted and perverse sense of humor means that I may have a few suggestions for some of you undecided out there:  

Here In Toledo:

• Any member of City Council (or that of a Lucas County Commissioner for that matter). Such a costume will allow you to take as much as you wish from any household that you visit, since 93% of them don't seem to give a damn who you are or how much you take anyway.
• Mayor Finkbeiner's dog Scout. Walking around with your tongue hanging out and panting, you should engender a great deal of sympathy and might even get something interesting to drink. (Do not wear this costume near city hall however, or you may end up locked in the back of the mayor's car.)
• Bill Dillard, the majority owner of Southwyck Mall. Be careful with this costume, as someone may try and take away your "Trick or Treat" bag through Eminent Domain.
• A downtown storefront. Hey, it's not a great costume, but it is a simple one. All you need is a sheet of plywood in front.
• Larry Dillin, developer. This one is easy. Just do your Trick or Treating at city hall and they will give you millions.

For Those of You Outside the Friendly Confines of My Hometown:

• A Cubs uniform. There ought to be a great deal of sympathy out there for any team that hasn't reached their championship in almost 100 years.
• Rex Grossman, former starting quarterback of the Bears. People will give you all kinds of candy, but you will probably throw it away before you get home.
• Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House. (see Toledo City Council) This costume will also allow you take as much as you want. If anyone questions you, just tell them it's for poor children.
• A "poor child" (Sorry, I know this one is wrong, but I couldn't resist). This costume goes with the Pelosi costume. You may not get any candy, but you will get free health care.
• Bill Gates of Microsoft. You don't have to go out and Trick or Treat in this costume. You already own all of the candy.
• Any second tier presidential candidate. You won't get much out there, but the advantage is that you can look like anything that you want and no one will recognize you anyway.
• Bill Clinton. Everyone will like you and give you something, but you probably won't be allowed to do your rounds near anyone's wife or daughter.
• A smoker. This is actually a version of a martyr's costume. You probably will not get anything in this costume, and won't even be allowed to stand near the doors of the houses you go to. (I didn't say it was a good costume, did I?)
• Hilary Clinton, presidential front-running candidate. This may be the scariest costume of the season, but should allow you to get candy from houses that you haven't even been to through bundling. The only trick to this one is that you have to say "Trick or Treat" and then cackle in a demented fashion.

Just in case you were wondering, I will be the guy out there in the Monk's robes. The life of poverty and chastity that I live these days demands it, and it does allow me to sip a bit of Irish Whiskey during my rounds to keep out the cold.

Politically Incorrect

For those few of you who haven't figured it out already (probably because you have IQ's equal with your shoe size), I am someone who could and should be considered Politically Incorrect. Now many people wear this scarlet letter in shame (OK, letters ... glad to see you were counting). I however wear it as a badge of honor. Why you might ask, when being incorrect in anything is normally the last thing that anyone would want to be, or admit to (and anyone who knows me that I normally don't admit to being incorrect without a fight) . Well, I will tell you why: I can and do have opinions that I espouse without taking an opinion poll. There is nothing more frustrating these days than people who won't voice an opinion on a subject without finding out if it's popular first. Our politicians are the most guilty where this offense is concerned and actually hire professionals to test the waters for them on what their beliefs should be. The process and the people using it sicken me, and what it ultimately says is that these people believe in nothing. This blog does not get edited for popularity by anyone but me before a posting. (Hey, no cracks about the obviousness of that, please.)  

I can and do say things or make decisions without wondering whether anyone's feelings will be hurt.  
I often seem to have a great deal of difficulty engaging my brain before I speak or act. As a consequence I sometimes say and do things that hurt others feelings. It's a character flaw I admit, but my intention is never really to offend (well sometimes, but I usually make that pretty clear to those involved right up front). As sorry as I am that I may hurt someone accidentally, I prefer being occasionally insensitive to mostly dishonest. 

I do not apologize to any minority group for anything that might have happened to them in the past, nor do I feel that I should make it up to them.  
I don't believe that I am prejudiced against anyone, with the exception of those who appear to have adopted laziness or aggressive stupidity as a way of life. Bad things have happened in the past. Black people put up with slavery, Indians dealt with the lies that the US Government told them, the Irish and Indian peoples put up with abuses by the British government, much of Eastern Europe put up with Russian's cold war policies, the French and the Germans put up with each other, and women put up with men. Sorry people, all of these things were really bad, and all of them are in the past. Beating your breast and declaring yourself a victim does nothing except give you an excuse for self-pity. Get over it and move on, the world doesn't owe you anything! 

I don't believe in "popular" causes and the badges of them.  
I believe that there are wrongs to be righted in the world, and in my small ways I do what I can to seek meaningful change. I do not however, wear ribbons on my clothes or bracelets on my wrists. It is not that I am insensitive to the causes espoused (OK, I am sometimes, but only the really silly ones), but more that I think that many of the people wearing these items are doing so only because they want to be seen as doing so. This is not to say that there are not people that genuinely care about legitimate causes, only that society today is mostly more superficial than substantive. The wearing of these symbols is often the full extent of their efforts at solutions, supplying them with a modicum of self-esteem for showing their compassion. The few genuine causes and the truly dedicated people who work toward real answers easily get lost, buried under a pile of tripe too odoriferous to contemplate. I don't want to save the the farting cockroach, the only known stand of 'piano leg' trees, or the survivors of erectile dysfunction.  

I do not engage in discussions of feeling, only fact; and have little respect for those who do.  
A local talk show host here in Toledo, Brian Wilson on 1370 - WSPD, (yeah, I know, a pretty shameless plug) often talks about the difference between what people "feel" and what they "think" and dismisses the former. He is absolutely right. Discussions of feelings can be amusing, but are usually not worth the spit that carries them. They are semantic exercises that hold a null value as logical argument. Discussions of what someone thinks are always of value, even when those involved do not come to agreement on the subject. Discussions of thought concern facts which can be agreed upon or disputed in a rational fashion (except on TV talks shows). They offer at least the chance that the subject in question can be advanced towards resolution.  

The bottom line here is that Political Correctness has turned mankind into a bunch of spineless jellyfish. It has become a disease that leaves many people unable to do, think, or say anything. Be afraid of it people, for it allows those who would do evil upon us to shame and berate us into immobility while they perpetrate their nefarious acts upon us. This bit of distraction likewise diverts and dilutes our attention from legitimate concerns. Any complaint against this shallow form of misdirection is met with scorn and ridicule for those not willing to accept what the politically correct deem to be right, and the fear of offense prevents us from calling out these villains and carnival con-artists.

As for me, the definition of a Curmudgeon is a cranky, old man. By self-definition therefore, I am only doing what I am supposed to.

 

Run and Hide, The Candidates Are Coming!

Fall is in the air and the leaves are turning. Harvests and hayrides are the order of the day. Halloween is right around the corner (unless you live in Oak Lawn, IL where it has been banned), and then ... another election. 

Prepare yourself therefore for the onslaught of politics and political commercials. Keep the duct tape handy and the aspirin within reach people, we are about to be bombarded with an endless stream of political commercials. Designed to in 60 seconds give us a warm and fuzzy feeling about the candidate, these tedious and boring bits of television do nothing but the opposite. 

Full of cute children, smiling senior citizens, and applauding supporters, they attempt to show each candidate as being "of the people", and mostly fail miserably. Ripe with pointless platitudes, feel good sound bites, and staged video clips; these ads prove that there are a lot of really bad advertising agencies out there. 

Ending with the candidate earnestly looking into the camera and telling us who they are and that they in fact said this, only reinforces the knowledge that someone wrote everything out for that candidate and that in most cases they are not even capable of reading their lines properly. 

Is it just me, or do they all run together in very short order to the point that you don't know what any candidate stands for, which party they are part of, or which office they are running for? ...AND YOU DON'T CARE! 

If you are a candidate out there preparing these messages for the coming election, I can only say one thing to you ... PLEASE DON'T!  

OK, you can't do that and win an election, so try these:  

- Humor sells, try and keep it light and entertaining and we might remember you. 

- Leave your family at home. We assume that you have one, and that they might even like you from time to time; but we're not voting for them.  

- Don't tell us who endorses you. We know that a quid pro quo comes with that and it will only turn us against you.  

- Whatever you do, don't tell us you are or used to be a lawyer. We've got enough of those in politics already and they haven't done us any favors. (OK, maybe we'll make an exception here it you're running for judge; but that's it.) 

- Stop promising us things that you have no intention of doing or couldn't do even if you wanted to. We're getting really tired of that and you might be the candidate that we decide to draw the line on.

- Don't run your ads quite so often. Repeating the BS over and over until we all want to die a slow death by paper cuts doesn't make make it true or make us believe it. It does however, make us really annoyed with you.  

I'll tell you what, let's all vote for the candidates who come on the air with nothing but really short commercials. They can smile and tell us which office they are running for, that they don't want to bore us with crap that we won't believe anyway, and fade to black. Fifteen seconds and out, cheaper for them and better for us. As Glenn Beck says, "Wouldn't that be great?"  

By the way, the aspirin and duct tape work particularly well as a preventative measure if you stuff the aspirin in your ears and duct tape them in place.

 

Flying the Flag

This one wil make your head explode... It appears that an Air Force veteran on a Campus of the University of New Mexico, Peter Lynch, was arrested in Albuquerque for cutting down a Mexican flag flying above that University. For the whole story, check out the following link: Las Cruces Sun-News - LULAC wants inquiry into Mexican flag incident (6:28 a.m.)

The number of amazing things here is almost mind boggling, but let me try to put it in a nutshell (something which I am eminently qualified to do).  

- Why were we putting up a flag to celebrate Mexican Independence Day? I know that this was done in "New Mexico" and that there is a large Hispanic community in this area, but is this really appropriate?

- How could any veteran be expected to see the Mexican flag, and only the Mexican flag, fly over the campus?

- Why was the university and the local ROTC so disorganized in staging this event and failing to do anything when the student complained?  

- Why should I care what el Centro de la Raza says about this veteran using racial slurs? Branches of this group use hate speak about this country constantly. (By the way, Mr. Lynch's attorney denies his client's use of racial slurs)  

This guy is now charged with a misdemeanor count of criminal property damage, and could face up to six months in jail and a $5,000.00 fine. This will be a jury trial. What do you think the odds are that he will be convicted? There was also an incident in Reno, NV where a Mexican flag was flown over the US flag at a convenience store. This one is pretty straight forward, since it is a violation of Section 7, Title 4 of the US Code. Check out this link for the whole story http://www.krnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=7162515  

I believe in being sensitive to the needs and desires of other people, and of other cultures. In a time of war however, I have to wonder about our priorities. Our first should be to the people serving our country, our second to the veterans who have served this country, and our third to the sensitivities of their families. Everyone else barely makes the list.

Sorry, My Bad

I apologize for the mess in the postings of 10/1 and 10/3. I was attempting to make some minor error corrections, and some improvements to the site and ended up making a mess of things. Having patched things up as best I can, I think that I have learned my lesson (not really, but I scared myself bad enough to at least try and leave it alone for a couple of weeks).

Sorry for the confusion ...

Special: A New Ohio Whine

I know, I know, two posts in one day is a bit excessive; but this stuff is just piling up on me. If I don't get it out there in a timely fashion, I will explode. Since this is a sight too monstrous to even contemplate, I am therefore handing you this bit of personal aggravation.

Well the government is attacking me again! I know that this sounds paranoid, but with the Federal government attacking my cigar habit, the State of Ohio has now taken up the gauntlet and is attacking my love for wine.

Change in Ohio Law which went into effect on October 1st prohibits out-of-state wineries of certain sizes from shipping their product directly to customers in the state. The supposed rationale behind this is to protect Ohio's wineries, though I am reluctant to believe that someone who was interested in a Grand Reserve Cabernet will now settle for a bottle of Lonz or Heineman. No, the dirty little secret here is that this law is designed to protect distributors and retailers in the State of Ohio. Already burdened with state laws as to minimum pricing on wine and beer, they sought and received protection from producers who could supply product at more than competitive prices.

I myself have had wine shipped to my home in for many years. V. Sattui Winery in St. Helena, CA is a personal favorite of mine. These guys make some good white wines and some fantastic red wines, along with a unique California Madeira. It has an exceptionally small distribution in the San Francisco area and relies on direct sales from the winery for everything else. It must be working, because the place has grown tremendously in the 25+ years since I first visited it. I have also had other wines shipped to me from wineries in both valleys of California, Washington State, and Oregon; usually because I was traveling through the area and preferred shipping it to carrying it home.


Ohio however, in its infinite wisdom on all things including wine, has decided that it should further control what choices I should be able to make in this area. Like my Federal government, they feel only through interference in a free market economy can they see that right is done. My only assumption is that they feel that Ohio's wineries produce such an inferior product that only through government protection can they survive.I disagree. I am not a particular fan of the wines of Ohio, but not because they are inferior. It is simply that they tend to produce a product whose sweetness does not suit my tastes.

I object in principle to any interference or restriction by any level of government in my ability to choose what I will and will not purchase. I further object to the State of Ohio trying to protect distributors and retailers from legitimate competition. Finally I object to being treated as if I were stupid and couldn't see through the thinly disguised excuses that they are making in trying to protect these special interests groups.

As for the wine that I love, I will figure out something. As creative as the government has become in restricting my freedoms, I will be even more creative in regaining them.

Just Words

The idea for this posting came from a Letter to the Editor in the Kansas City Star from 9/21 that was pointed out to me (Thanks Mom). In it, Gene Wolenski said:

"I can understand Ascension Hernandez disliking the Minutemen, but let's face it, calling an illegal alien and undocumented immigrant is like calling a drug smuggler an unlicensed pharmacist."

Once I stopped laughing it occurred to me ... maybe all of our problems are merely an issue of the words we choose to describe them. Maybe simply putting the right spin on a word or phrase is the answer to all of our problems. So let's give it a try:

- Bank Robbers are merely making a withdrawal without proper account documentation.

- Terrorists are merely misunderstood freedom fighters.

- Suicide Bombers are merely self-sacrificing warriors in a cause.

- Bigots are merely those who form an opinion without regard to the facts. 

- Liberals are merely those who let their compassion control their good sense. 

- Conservatives are merely those who let good sense control their compassion. 

- Tyranny is merely the single-minded pursuit by a government of a particular point of view through force. 

- Welfare programs are merely a government's way of perpetrating what would otherwise be considered illegal wealth redistribution. 

- Social Security is merely a savings account in which you deposit money knowing that you will never get it all back. 

- Congress is merely a Constitutionally mandated form of organized chaos. 

- Common Thieves are merely out-of-work Politicians (or is it the other way around?).

OK, I feel better about everything now, don't you? Of course they are all just words, but words do mean things. We need to be careful of the words that we use, the words that we listen to, and especially the words that we are handed as "the truth". They should not be used to misdirect, mislead, or obfuscate (yeah look that one up if you dare).

In the end, I am reminded of something that a friend of mine (one who actually admits it) Wayne Anderson, says in order to put the best face on difficult situations: "I don't have any problems, only opportunities. Unfortunately, all of them suck."

Special: How Long Will I Be Blowing Smoke?

Congress, in another fit of freedom deprivation masquerading as do-gooding, is considering a bill (SCHIP - State Children's Health Initiative) to increase the tax on tobacco products in order to fund more children's health programs. In its current form, it would increase the tax on cigars to almost $10 per cigar (an increase of 20,000 %). 

Now I don't know how well you have been doing lately, but at the rate that I smoke cigars, such an increase would have a serious impact on my ability to eat and pay rent. This is a bad thing and not just for me, as the SCHIP bill has a couple of what might be considered minor flaws: 

 1. Families would be eligible to receive this government sponsored program even if they made a combined income of $85,000 per year  

2. "Children" would be considered to be so up to the age of 25  

3. Most of those smoking cigars would quit, unable to pay the tax.  

4. Importers and sellers of cigars would go bankrupt and close.  

5. People working for those organizations would become unemployed and add to the jobless roles and those needing public assistance.  

6. Cigars, not being sold, would not generate the expected revenue to maintain the SCHIP initiative, which would already have become law. 

 7. You the non-cigar smokers, would then have to pick up the tab for the program, estimated to be from 35 to 50 Billion dollars. 

So even those of you who do not share my disgusting, smelly habit will eventually pay for it. Don't get me wrong, I am not so mean spirited that I want to see children unhealthy (even 25 year-old ones). I merely question the ability of a government that can't seem to keep roads in repair and borders controlled to manage the health of anyone, let alone a bunch of helpless kids. Likewise I am dismayed to find that my government, having decided that cigar smoking is bad for me (the real reason that they feel that it is OK to do this to me), seeks to perform behavior modification through taxation.  

So don't be surprised if one of these days I am forced to change the title of my blog and the picture displayed (and that would be a shame, since you might then be forced to view my countenance unobscured by the smoke), all for the sake of honesty. Then my name too could be added to the list of victims whose rights and freedoms have been trampled on by a runaway government nanny in search of complete political correctness for all of its citizens.