I disagree more often than not with Robert Novak. But who cares, I like the guy. Maybe I just have a thing for curmudgeons, or possibly I just appreciate and respect not only his talent, but his depth of experience. One thing I know for a fact, the man is deserving of respect. After all, he has been a Washington insider since the 1950's, and the man knows his way around the place. He knows the major players and shakers, inside and out, on both sides of the political spectrum. He had this reputation from the early days when he was a part of the team of Evans and Novak, up until the time his old partner, Roland Evans, who joined him, up until his recent death, on CNN's Evans, Novak, Hunt, and Shields.
Since joining CNN, practically from the inception of the network, Novak has quickly earned the title and appelation, "The Prince Of Darkness". It seems to fit. But a lot of his fellow analysts at CNN know better than to take such appellations with more than a few grains of salt. Still, Novak is a man who should be taken seriously, and I think therein lies the problem. A good lot of the time it seemed that few did, from his liberal antagonists on the old Capital Gang, (another CNN staple which was recently defunct), Mark Shields, Margaret Carlson, and Ed Hunt (who of all people should have an appreciation for Novaks position at CNN, himself being the token liberal at the Wall Street Journal) to his co-hosts on the old Crossfire program, including James Carville, seemed at first glance to go out of their way to belittle Novak, chiding him for everything from his selfish interests in tax cuts, to his suppossed extravagant wealth, to his greatly exagerrated number of years in Washington.
Novak always took these chidings, for the most part, in more or less good humor, but here and there one could see flashes of impatience, and agitation. Sometimes, he would lash out at his tormenters, but more with the attitude of a wise old man scolding the impertinence of the young whippersnappers he was being forced to endure. Not with any actual ill will, it seemed.
But things finally came to a head when, on a recent airing of Inside Politics, Novak took exception to Carvilles seemingly playful jaunt that Novak just "had to look tough for the right wing". "That's bullshit", Novak snapped. "I don't like that".
Novak seemed to become even more irritated when the moderator seemed to ignore the outburst and continue on with his questioning of Carville as though nothing had occurred untoward. Looking at the moderator in an attitude of disgust, he rose, and walked off, throwing his microphone to the ground as he did so. CNN, for it's part, later issued a statement to the effect that Novak was suspended, indefinitely. I doubt seriously the Prince of Darkness is overly concerned.
Novak seemed compelled to issue a statement to the effect that he was agitated at Carville for questioning his motives. I take him at his word, unlike the myriad of others who seem determined to ascribe motives where none exist. Some for example postulate that Novak feared the potential of a coming query on the program as to his role in the Valerie Plame affair, and took this opportunity to avoid this questioning.
Ridiculous, in my opinion. For one thing, Novak has all ready addressed that issue, long ago, and if questioned again, he would doubtless give the same vapid answers he gave before. More than likely, he would utter that old canard about not being allowed to speak directly in the middle of an on-going investigation. Which would certainly be his right. And frankly, there probably is nothing to tell. He probably merely used Karl Rove as a verifying source on the Plame story, the same as did Matthew Cooper, without being aware really as to the covert status of Plame. The whole point to the stories as published, remember, wasn't to reveal Plames covert status. It was to point out her connection to her husband Joseph Wilson's trip to Niger and her importance in recommending and helping to set up that trip as a means of counteracting and contradicting Bush foreign policy. In other words, it was a way of saying that Wilson was lying when he said the trip had been arranged by Vice-President Cheney, and conducted with his knowledge, and that the Vice-President then dissavowed the trip when it didn't turn up the hoped for results.
Complicated? Yes,and that's the whole problem, the whole story has turned into such a labrythine maze of lies and deceit that there are times you need Ariadnes golden cord to trace back to the original sources. But Bob Novak isn't the Minotaur of this story. He's just an old man, who reacted to yet another perceived affront to his honor and dignity. In other words, he just lost his cool. And conservatives like Michelle Malkin should take a deep breathe and get a grip. But then most conservatives are fucking morality hypocrits anyway, so no surprise that yet another should be so aghast at such a display of profanity. When Ms. Malkin reaches Robert Novaks age and depth of experience, in the unlikley event she ever does, then she will have possibly earned the right to criticize another persons manners or lack thereof. More than likely, she will have earned the right to utter a few well-chosen profanities herself, only more than likely she will still be too much of a hypocrit to say them openly and honestly. After all, she might give all the other fucking hypocrits the wrong idea.
As for CNN, they really need to rethink their position on this really trivial matter. They have all ready earned a reputation, undeserved or not, as a stellar member of the "liberal elite press", and of being suppossedly so unfair to the conservative side. In reality, not only do they give the conservative side a fair amount of air time in the couse of interviews, at least, but they have a number of conservative analysts as well. Robert Novak is not the only one they have, this is true. On the other hand, none of them come close to matching Robert Novaks status and standing in the field of journalism as a conservative columnist and commentator. They should not only reinstate him, but in my view they should issue an apology for any misunderstandings over this really unimportant bit of nonsense, and show the man the respect he deserves.
Friday, August 05, 2005
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Current TV
It's a done deal. Al Gore will soon proudly oversee the launching of his newest brainchild, the first since the legitimacy challenged birth of the Internet. The new child will promise to produce much ooh-ing and aah-ing, and a few kitchie-kitchie-koos. But a lot of people are going to whisper under their breaths, "what an ugly fucking baby". And a few more are going to do so in stage whispers.
Current TV. I'm not sure exactly what it is. You assume there will be a healthy dose of politics, probably slanted to the left, though hopefully presenting a balanced perspective, or at least not being overly strident.
But it sems it will be about more than just politics. There seems to be an opportunity here for newcomers and beginning filmmakers to show off their talents and their expertise. To express their creative talents. Their vision.
Hey, Al, give me a call. I got talent. I got vision. The expertise, well, we might have to work on that one. But at least I got a lot of heart.
And I got a lot of ideas, Al. Creative, original ideas. So what do you say? Al?
Al?
Current TV. I'm not sure exactly what it is. You assume there will be a healthy dose of politics, probably slanted to the left, though hopefully presenting a balanced perspective, or at least not being overly strident.
But it sems it will be about more than just politics. There seems to be an opportunity here for newcomers and beginning filmmakers to show off their talents and their expertise. To express their creative talents. Their vision.
Hey, Al, give me a call. I got talent. I got vision. The expertise, well, we might have to work on that one. But at least I got a lot of heart.
And I got a lot of ideas, Al. Creative, original ideas. So what do you say? Al?
Al?
Too Much Of A Good Thing-Covington and Carmel
Carmel, California must have taken a page from the playbook of Covington Kentucky when deciding what to do about the glut of art galleries that have flooded the town. In the case of Covington, it got to the point where there were so many strip clubs it was indeed a blight. In fact, it was downright ugly. I walked by a place one time while on my way to treat myself to a serving of LaRosas pizza for my birthday, when I walked by the open door of this one strip club and wondered, "huumm-maybe?"
But then, as the drunk made his exit, this whale of a broad spread her legs and straddled a barstool, which promptly seemed to disappear up inside her cavernous cunt. I continued on to LaRosas.
But then, there was Dreama. A nasty drunk when provoked, but physically beautiful. And ambitous. Dreama was a dreamer. And when I ran into her once at the local laundromat, and she asked me to remove some quarters from the pockets of her skin tight jeans (on the grounds that her just polished nails were not yet dry) I thought my dreama might come true. But alas it was not to be.
The girls, though, ran the mix, from beautiful, to pretty, to cute, to interesting, to plain, to ugly, to nasty-to downright, motherfucking disgusting.
All becaue there were just too many places that had to have a cetain number of dancers in order to function, and there just weren't that many good ones to go arund. So they took what they could get. Of course, many of them were drunks, or drug addicts, and hookers. If they weren't so going in, a great lot of the time they would end up that way. But a good many of them resisted this downward spiral-though they seldom worked at these places for long. But for the most part it was relatively easy, in most places, to get a handjob under the table. Or a blowjob. But whether you got any of this, or nothing, you could always say you got fucked. The drinks you were obliged to pay the girls for their "company" ran the gamut from twenty dollars, and more.
Naturally, you were made to understand that any activity that smacked of prostitution was "not encouraged" and could only happen "after hours".
Regardless of all this, it got to the point where even the prettiest of girls had a hard time bringing in the customers for long stretches at a time. These stretches would come to be known as the "off-season" and any girl, even the prettiest and most talented dancers, were discouraged from engaging in work solely for the artistic merits. Even so, it all grew old- as did all too many of the dancers-and the novelty quickly wore off, and the glut of strip clubs ensured a corresponding abundance of mediocrity. And desperation.
And so the city of Covington, Kentucky passed an odinance which aimed to prevent new strip clubs from opening. For moral reasons, of course, and to improve the city's image. I haven't been there for awhile, so I wonder if the city's image has improved all that much. Probably not. But I bet the girls on the average are prettier. And I bet business is stable, and I bet it is good, maybe even in those "off-seasons". It is probably booming, more so than usual.
Carmel, California may indeed experience a Renaissance, for the same resons. Too much of anything is a bad thing, even art, and even the best of galleries might be in danger of being swallowed up by the glut of mediocrity that might otherwise ensue.
Of course, you have to guard as well against the other extreme. The dangers of elitism, and worse, the threat of monopoly. Even a glut is preferable to that. Even when out of desperation galleries resort to underhanded promotions and tactics to attract customers.
Such as the one gallery recently that offerred free admission to any man who showed up naked to a recent exhibition. And of course some did. I for one don't see the wisdom of such an obvious display. It is at best somewhat degrading to the gallery. For the man? Well, I guess that depends. Petty much like some of the girls in the strip clubs of Covington.
Some people would almost pay them to keep their clothes on.
But then, as the drunk made his exit, this whale of a broad spread her legs and straddled a barstool, which promptly seemed to disappear up inside her cavernous cunt. I continued on to LaRosas.
But then, there was Dreama. A nasty drunk when provoked, but physically beautiful. And ambitous. Dreama was a dreamer. And when I ran into her once at the local laundromat, and she asked me to remove some quarters from the pockets of her skin tight jeans (on the grounds that her just polished nails were not yet dry) I thought my dreama might come true. But alas it was not to be.
The girls, though, ran the mix, from beautiful, to pretty, to cute, to interesting, to plain, to ugly, to nasty-to downright, motherfucking disgusting.
All becaue there were just too many places that had to have a cetain number of dancers in order to function, and there just weren't that many good ones to go arund. So they took what they could get. Of course, many of them were drunks, or drug addicts, and hookers. If they weren't so going in, a great lot of the time they would end up that way. But a good many of them resisted this downward spiral-though they seldom worked at these places for long. But for the most part it was relatively easy, in most places, to get a handjob under the table. Or a blowjob. But whether you got any of this, or nothing, you could always say you got fucked. The drinks you were obliged to pay the girls for their "company" ran the gamut from twenty dollars, and more.
Naturally, you were made to understand that any activity that smacked of prostitution was "not encouraged" and could only happen "after hours".
Regardless of all this, it got to the point where even the prettiest of girls had a hard time bringing in the customers for long stretches at a time. These stretches would come to be known as the "off-season" and any girl, even the prettiest and most talented dancers, were discouraged from engaging in work solely for the artistic merits. Even so, it all grew old- as did all too many of the dancers-and the novelty quickly wore off, and the glut of strip clubs ensured a corresponding abundance of mediocrity. And desperation.
And so the city of Covington, Kentucky passed an odinance which aimed to prevent new strip clubs from opening. For moral reasons, of course, and to improve the city's image. I haven't been there for awhile, so I wonder if the city's image has improved all that much. Probably not. But I bet the girls on the average are prettier. And I bet business is stable, and I bet it is good, maybe even in those "off-seasons". It is probably booming, more so than usual.
Carmel, California may indeed experience a Renaissance, for the same resons. Too much of anything is a bad thing, even art, and even the best of galleries might be in danger of being swallowed up by the glut of mediocrity that might otherwise ensue.
Of course, you have to guard as well against the other extreme. The dangers of elitism, and worse, the threat of monopoly. Even a glut is preferable to that. Even when out of desperation galleries resort to underhanded promotions and tactics to attract customers.
Such as the one gallery recently that offerred free admission to any man who showed up naked to a recent exhibition. And of course some did. I for one don't see the wisdom of such an obvious display. It is at best somewhat degrading to the gallery. For the man? Well, I guess that depends. Petty much like some of the girls in the strip clubs of Covington.
Some people would almost pay them to keep their clothes on.
George Smith
Another missing pesons mystery, this one involving a newlywed couple on a Meditterrannean cruise, during which the groom disappears, amidst allegations of drunken revelries, arguments between the couple (to the point the bride alegedly gave the groom a knee to the groin), gambling, rowdy teens, mysterious Russians, a late night to early morning party in the couple's cabin. An argument, loud voices, the movement of furniture across the floor. The dropping of a heavy object that resounded with a sickening thud.
And blood. The next day. Blood in the cabin. A bloody handprint at the railing outside. A pool of blood on an awning under the couple's cabin.
Pictures. Of the blood. Before the blood was quickly cleaned up. From the cabin. From the railing. From the awning. No evidence. Nothing but a missing husband, a presumed widow, and rumors. Innuendo. Hearsay.
The bride was in the cabin during the party. No, she was at another party, on an upper deck. But where? When?
No matter who killed George Smith-and George Smith is obviousy dead, and more than likely murdered-it is almost of no consequence in comparison to the actual tragedy, that of a cruise ship so concerned with it's reputation, with it's image, with going so-well, overboard, in protecting it's botton line.
So much to the point that vital forensic evidence may have been purposefully destroyed. Not as a matter of inexperience, or incompetence, or stupidity-but as a matter of corporate policy.
And naturally, the Cruise line would deny this charge, as indeed they all ready have. Of course, they would just about have to. As always, you should read the fine print.
And blood. The next day. Blood in the cabin. A bloody handprint at the railing outside. A pool of blood on an awning under the couple's cabin.
Pictures. Of the blood. Before the blood was quickly cleaned up. From the cabin. From the railing. From the awning. No evidence. Nothing but a missing husband, a presumed widow, and rumors. Innuendo. Hearsay.
The bride was in the cabin during the party. No, she was at another party, on an upper deck. But where? When?
No matter who killed George Smith-and George Smith is obviousy dead, and more than likely murdered-it is almost of no consequence in comparison to the actual tragedy, that of a cruise ship so concerned with it's reputation, with it's image, with going so-well, overboard, in protecting it's botton line.
So much to the point that vital forensic evidence may have been purposefully destroyed. Not as a matter of inexperience, or incompetence, or stupidity-but as a matter of corporate policy.
And naturally, the Cruise line would deny this charge, as indeed they all ready have. Of course, they would just about have to. As always, you should read the fine print.
Homeland Security-Storming The Gulags
The new Homeland Security Department has finally done something that might prove it is worhty of it's status as the countries newest cabinet level department. And of course, it is certainly to eventualy become the subject of controversy and legal challenges. I am talking here about the recently announced "Operation Neighborhood Shield".
Unless, of course, they stat out by going after some of the rabidly far-right conservative miitias, or the Ku Klux Klan, or maybe some white biker gangs. But of course, the real targets wil be what we know it was meant to be.
Gangs. Stret gangs. Thugs. The kind that infest the African American and Latino communities and result in an increase in crimes of violence, drugs, rape, and murder. To say nothing of the myriad of out of wedlock pregnancies that invariably occur in these areas.
The kind of areas where the majority of the people who are ordinarily hard-working, decent, law-abiding, and respectful citizens, are kept mired in poverty, fear, and misery. Where honest business investment and commerce are kept at a minimum, while price gouging runs rampant and slumlords rule the day.
Where the elderly on fixed incomes are afraid to leave their homes even in the daytime, and the young and the vulnerable are easy targets for exploitation.
The gangs that rule these provinces by fear and intimidation, and prowl it's alleys and corridors like packs of wolves or wild, rabid dogs, are, true enough, sometimes white. They are Slavic, Italian, sometimes Irish. Also Jewish. But they are also, certainly, African Americans. Or black immigrants. Haitians. Nigerians. Jamaicans. Also Oriental. Vietnamese. Koreans. Chinese. And, yes, they are Hispanic. Mexican. Columbian. Cuban. Puerto Rican.
It is a sad but true fact that non-whites do make up the majority of these gangs, the gangs that prey mercilessly on their own people, and serve to keep them as destitute as the neighborhoods in which they are trapped. Liberal poitics have, in fact, turned them into prisoners of their own special gulags, with the gangs in the role of the gulag guards.
It is only right that Homeland Security should free them from this imposition. From this American Gulag System. But will they suceed in doing so?
I certainly hope so, not just for their sake, but for the well being of all American society. For all of us. But the guards, and the wardens, of this American Gulag System-well, they have powerful benefactors.
Unless, of course, they stat out by going after some of the rabidly far-right conservative miitias, or the Ku Klux Klan, or maybe some white biker gangs. But of course, the real targets wil be what we know it was meant to be.
Gangs. Stret gangs. Thugs. The kind that infest the African American and Latino communities and result in an increase in crimes of violence, drugs, rape, and murder. To say nothing of the myriad of out of wedlock pregnancies that invariably occur in these areas.
The kind of areas where the majority of the people who are ordinarily hard-working, decent, law-abiding, and respectful citizens, are kept mired in poverty, fear, and misery. Where honest business investment and commerce are kept at a minimum, while price gouging runs rampant and slumlords rule the day.
Where the elderly on fixed incomes are afraid to leave their homes even in the daytime, and the young and the vulnerable are easy targets for exploitation.
The gangs that rule these provinces by fear and intimidation, and prowl it's alleys and corridors like packs of wolves or wild, rabid dogs, are, true enough, sometimes white. They are Slavic, Italian, sometimes Irish. Also Jewish. But they are also, certainly, African Americans. Or black immigrants. Haitians. Nigerians. Jamaicans. Also Oriental. Vietnamese. Koreans. Chinese. And, yes, they are Hispanic. Mexican. Columbian. Cuban. Puerto Rican.
It is a sad but true fact that non-whites do make up the majority of these gangs, the gangs that prey mercilessly on their own people, and serve to keep them as destitute as the neighborhoods in which they are trapped. Liberal poitics have, in fact, turned them into prisoners of their own special gulags, with the gangs in the role of the gulag guards.
It is only right that Homeland Security should free them from this imposition. From this American Gulag System. But will they suceed in doing so?
I certainly hope so, not just for their sake, but for the well being of all American society. For all of us. But the guards, and the wardens, of this American Gulag System-well, they have powerful benefactors.
John Bolton
Okay, good, it's settled. John Bolton got the recess nomination we all knew was coming. The way I look at it, it's a win win situaton. There are two possible scenarios.
*John Bolton does the bang up job Bush and most Republicans believe he will do. He cleans up the U.N. And boy, could that place use a good house cleaning, in fact, it's several springs overdue. Bolton may well be the man for the job. He may be the only man, in fact, with the stomach for it. If so, good for the country. And in the long run, good for the democrats, who are also overdue in learning a hard but vital lesson. Which is, you have to be firm, tough, and even severe, when dealing with the crooks, scoundrels, and Third World Thugs that make up the majority of the people at the U.N.
*John Bolton does an awful job, in which case the democrats will win points, and maybe the next election cycle. But only if they react in the proper manner, by promising to do the job Bush tried to do, only promising to do it correctly this time. And then doing it.
There is no in-between. Bolton won't, of course, do any real damage. That has all ready been done, and more political correctness and efussive posturing and kow-towing to the interests of this Cadre of Clowns can only exacerbate the situation.
*John Bolton does the bang up job Bush and most Republicans believe he will do. He cleans up the U.N. And boy, could that place use a good house cleaning, in fact, it's several springs overdue. Bolton may well be the man for the job. He may be the only man, in fact, with the stomach for it. If so, good for the country. And in the long run, good for the democrats, who are also overdue in learning a hard but vital lesson. Which is, you have to be firm, tough, and even severe, when dealing with the crooks, scoundrels, and Third World Thugs that make up the majority of the people at the U.N.
*John Bolton does an awful job, in which case the democrats will win points, and maybe the next election cycle. But only if they react in the proper manner, by promising to do the job Bush tried to do, only promising to do it correctly this time. And then doing it.
There is no in-between. Bolton won't, of course, do any real damage. That has all ready been done, and more political correctness and efussive posturing and kow-towing to the interests of this Cadre of Clowns can only exacerbate the situation.
Judith Miller-Practice That Puckering
Robert Novak, you would think, would be in danger of serving hard time for leaking-to the general public-the name of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame, the wife of former Ambasador Joseph Wison. But he is not. Neither is Matt Cooper of Time magazine. So why is Judith Miller in jail, when she leaked the information to no one?
Except apparently, that is, to Robert Novak and Matt Coper, both of whom seem to have used Karl Rove as no more than a verifying source, if undoubtedly an eager one. Why doesn't Ms. Miler come clean and save herself the fate of countless hours of Oprah Winfrey and Spanish lanquage soap operas in a jail filled to double capacity?
Obviously she is not doing it for the companionship. And if the fate of Novak and Cooper are to be our guides, it is not for fear of the penalty for having loose lips. After all, she herself would be under no obligation to keep Ms. Plames identity secret, if she were, then Novak and Cooper, it stands to reason, would face similar serious consequences.
Could it be that she is possibly fearful of being revealed herself as a covert agent, working undercover at the New York Times, as a wholly owned subsidiarie of the Republican National Committee?
Only time will tell. And in the meantime, those lips may end up getting a good workout, and become considerably tighter. Or looser.
Except apparently, that is, to Robert Novak and Matt Coper, both of whom seem to have used Karl Rove as no more than a verifying source, if undoubtedly an eager one. Why doesn't Ms. Miler come clean and save herself the fate of countless hours of Oprah Winfrey and Spanish lanquage soap operas in a jail filled to double capacity?
Obviously she is not doing it for the companionship. And if the fate of Novak and Cooper are to be our guides, it is not for fear of the penalty for having loose lips. After all, she herself would be under no obligation to keep Ms. Plames identity secret, if she were, then Novak and Cooper, it stands to reason, would face similar serious consequences.
Could it be that she is possibly fearful of being revealed herself as a covert agent, working undercover at the New York Times, as a wholly owned subsidiarie of the Republican National Committee?
Only time will tell. And in the meantime, those lips may end up getting a good workout, and become considerably tighter. Or looser.
The Newly Discovered Planet-Minerva
So now NASA has finally discovered the mysterious and elusive "Planet X", the long awaited tenth planet of our solar system, wich has long been postulated as the true explanation for the perturbances in the orbit of the planet Neptune that lead to the discovery of the planet Pluto. It was insisted that Pluto was much too small to have this effect. There had to be another explanation.
Well, the new planet is one and a half time the size of Puto-and twice the distance from the sun. For some perspective, it takes Pluto 248 years to revolve around the sun. Planet X takes a whopping 546 years to accompish the same feat. To bring this even further into perspective, when Pluto was discovered in 1930, the last time it had been at that point in the Zodiac where it was in that year, was in 1692. The last time Panet X was at the point in the Zodiac that it now is? 1441. Yeah, well before Coumbus discovered America. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, before Columbus himself was actually born.
But the really odd thing abut the cold, barren, apparently methane composed world, is it revolves around the sun at a higher level than all the other planets. Why? Who knows? A result, possibly, of the suns weakened gravitational pull at that distance. Or possibly due to some as yet unknown aspect of the new planets composition.
Soon, the new planet will need a name, a real name, and in keeping with tradition, I would to propose the name Minerva, the Roman version of Athene. After al, Minerva, as the virgin Goddess of Wisdom and War, had a reputation, unfairly or not, for being cold and distant. Plus, that aspect of divine wisdom which she embodied would, in the opinion of some, tend to place her on a higher level in comparson with your tyical Graeco-Roman deity. Like our mysterious planet itself. Cold and distant, it hovers on a higher level than the other planets. So there you have it.
Makes sense to me.
Well, the new planet is one and a half time the size of Puto-and twice the distance from the sun. For some perspective, it takes Pluto 248 years to revolve around the sun. Planet X takes a whopping 546 years to accompish the same feat. To bring this even further into perspective, when Pluto was discovered in 1930, the last time it had been at that point in the Zodiac where it was in that year, was in 1692. The last time Panet X was at the point in the Zodiac that it now is? 1441. Yeah, well before Coumbus discovered America. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, before Columbus himself was actually born.
But the really odd thing abut the cold, barren, apparently methane composed world, is it revolves around the sun at a higher level than all the other planets. Why? Who knows? A result, possibly, of the suns weakened gravitational pull at that distance. Or possibly due to some as yet unknown aspect of the new planets composition.
Soon, the new planet will need a name, a real name, and in keeping with tradition, I would to propose the name Minerva, the Roman version of Athene. After al, Minerva, as the virgin Goddess of Wisdom and War, had a reputation, unfairly or not, for being cold and distant. Plus, that aspect of divine wisdom which she embodied would, in the opinion of some, tend to place her on a higher level in comparson with your tyical Graeco-Roman deity. Like our mysterious planet itself. Cold and distant, it hovers on a higher level than the other planets. So there you have it.
Makes sense to me.
Martha Stewart
If anybody could hope to be the living incarnation of the goddess Athene, it would be Martha Stewart. Forget the unfortunate fact that she is no longer beautiful-though she is indeed what might be termed a "handsome" woman-and that she very unwisely lied to the Feds during an investigation and got caught doing so, and received a prison sentence for her efforts. All this is incidental.
She is cold. She is hard. She is bitter. She is strong. Yes, she's a bit of a bitch, almost a prototype of the stereotypical business woman. She is shrill, but she is shrewd. And, like I like to say about my patron Goddess Athene, she is severe. Yet, serenely so.
I even bet the woman is a virgin. Okay, maybe not physically. And for damned sure not mentally. But emotionally? Without a doubt and, sadly, nobody wants to bust that cherry, not even to prove that they could.
But she wil overcome all odds otherwise and, like the Goddess springing forth from the head of Zeus, she too will spring forth in full force from societies legal restrictions on her character and dignity.
Martha Stewart, on house arrest? Okay, but she's going to cause a lot of headaches. She can go shopping. She can go to doctors' appointments. She can go to church. But not yoga?
Wait a minute now, I can hear the calculating diva explain to her parole officer, isn't yoga a type of therapy? Isn't it considered by some a type of spiritual discipline? And so it is, Martha. So it is. You hang in there, girlfriend. You have all the gifts of the Goddess, all her atributes and talents, and you certainly have put them to use in the most wondrous of ways. Don't fail us now.
Who knows, maybe one day they might name a planet after you.
She is cold. She is hard. She is bitter. She is strong. Yes, she's a bit of a bitch, almost a prototype of the stereotypical business woman. She is shrill, but she is shrewd. And, like I like to say about my patron Goddess Athene, she is severe. Yet, serenely so.
I even bet the woman is a virgin. Okay, maybe not physically. And for damned sure not mentally. But emotionally? Without a doubt and, sadly, nobody wants to bust that cherry, not even to prove that they could.
But she wil overcome all odds otherwise and, like the Goddess springing forth from the head of Zeus, she too will spring forth in full force from societies legal restrictions on her character and dignity.
Martha Stewart, on house arrest? Okay, but she's going to cause a lot of headaches. She can go shopping. She can go to doctors' appointments. She can go to church. But not yoga?
Wait a minute now, I can hear the calculating diva explain to her parole officer, isn't yoga a type of therapy? Isn't it considered by some a type of spiritual discipline? And so it is, Martha. So it is. You hang in there, girlfriend. You have all the gifts of the Goddess, all her atributes and talents, and you certainly have put them to use in the most wondrous of ways. Don't fail us now.
Who knows, maybe one day they might name a planet after you.
The Atkins Diet
One thing I learned a long time ago, you can make a lot of money merely by validating peoples beliefs and lifestyles, and the more blatantly harmful they are, the more you will make. You see the similar process at work in politics, religion, business, and even relationships. People want reassurrance. And, though you would think food and health would be a different matter, it isn't. People want to feed their faces, and they want to feel good about it.
Therefore, when Dr. Joseph Atkins formulated his wildly popular diet in the late 70's, in which he asserted you should eat as much protein as you wanted, and you could lose weight by doing so, it should have been obvious he was going to be an unqualified sucess.
Of course, there were conditions. It required the drastic reduction in the intake of carbohydrates. But to people who love meat and dairy products, this would likely be seen as no great loss.
But now, finally, the Atkins Diet Company has gone broke. Good riddance. Like all fad diets, it lot just a little too much weight, after a period of constipating wealth, it suddenly sufferred an unexpectedly violent case of the shit runs.
Now, maybe somebody will come along and formulate a sensible diet. Fortunatley, it has all ready been done, and it is in the public domain. In fact, you can credit the federal Government for developing the idea of the four basic food groups and the need for a balanced diet that utilizs all four groups.
It has stood the test of time and, for the average person, it is the best diet plan ever devised. It is also good for most cases where there is an obvious need for weight reduction that doesn't involve diabetes or glandular disorder. But it as well comes with conditions. You must get adequate amounts of sleep and exercise (besides work). You should not neglect one food group while making up the difference by overdoing another. For example, you shouldn't gorge on proteins and fats while eliminating or drastically reducing crbohydrates-which, incidentally, are necessary to ensure the adequate presence of electrolytes, which just happen to be necessary for healthy brain function.
Finally, there is another condition, no more or less important than the others. Which is, eat enough to satisfy your appetite. Then stop. Reduce between meal snacks if not eliminate them, or change them to healthy portions of fruits and nuts.
In other words, if you don't want to be a disgustingly obese fat ass slob, and you don't want to come down with diabetes, heat disease, high choloesterol, high blood pressure, etc., and you don't want your kids to follow your example by being fatso fucking tub-of-lards and stay miserable laughing stocks throughout their formative years-
QUIT STUFFING YOUR FUCKING FACE!!!!!!!
Therefore, when Dr. Joseph Atkins formulated his wildly popular diet in the late 70's, in which he asserted you should eat as much protein as you wanted, and you could lose weight by doing so, it should have been obvious he was going to be an unqualified sucess.
Of course, there were conditions. It required the drastic reduction in the intake of carbohydrates. But to people who love meat and dairy products, this would likely be seen as no great loss.
But now, finally, the Atkins Diet Company has gone broke. Good riddance. Like all fad diets, it lot just a little too much weight, after a period of constipating wealth, it suddenly sufferred an unexpectedly violent case of the shit runs.
Now, maybe somebody will come along and formulate a sensible diet. Fortunatley, it has all ready been done, and it is in the public domain. In fact, you can credit the federal Government for developing the idea of the four basic food groups and the need for a balanced diet that utilizs all four groups.
It has stood the test of time and, for the average person, it is the best diet plan ever devised. It is also good for most cases where there is an obvious need for weight reduction that doesn't involve diabetes or glandular disorder. But it as well comes with conditions. You must get adequate amounts of sleep and exercise (besides work). You should not neglect one food group while making up the difference by overdoing another. For example, you shouldn't gorge on proteins and fats while eliminating or drastically reducing crbohydrates-which, incidentally, are necessary to ensure the adequate presence of electrolytes, which just happen to be necessary for healthy brain function.
Finally, there is another condition, no more or less important than the others. Which is, eat enough to satisfy your appetite. Then stop. Reduce between meal snacks if not eliminate them, or change them to healthy portions of fruits and nuts.
In other words, if you don't want to be a disgustingly obese fat ass slob, and you don't want to come down with diabetes, heat disease, high choloesterol, high blood pressure, etc., and you don't want your kids to follow your example by being fatso fucking tub-of-lards and stay miserable laughing stocks throughout their formative years-
QUIT STUFFING YOUR FUCKING FACE!!!!!!!
Rafael Palmiero
At now more than 3000 hits, and better than 500 home runs, and at 1834 RBI's, Rafael Palmiero should without a doubt, under ordinary circumstances, be considered a shoe-in for induction into the Baseball Hall Of Fame on the first ballot, upon his first year of eligibility. But such is the world that we live in, that some consider him a serious possibility for induction-maybe-on the second or third ballot. Not necessarilly in his first year of eligibility, mind you.
What has dimmed his chances might not so much be the testing at which steroids showed up in his system, for which he has been suspended for ten games, as much as his recent testamony before a Senate Sub-Committee during which he claimed to have never used steroids. He may not have committed perjury in a way that is provable. But he certainly lied.
And his insistance that he was unaware of ever having used steroids, which he seems to have taken from the Barry Bonds playbook of plausible deniability, may indeed have only made the lie more blatant-and obvious.
But Palmiero has two unlikely defenders. For one, George W. Bush, who strangely made a call for a crackdown on steroid use by athletes in professional sports a centerpiece of his 2004 State Of The Union address, but yet now insists that Palmiero (who used to play for the Texas Rangers when Bush was the owner of the team) is "a friend" and believes he is truthful in his assertions of innocence.
The other defender is even stranger, on the surface, when you consider that Jose' Conseco, author of the tell-all book Juiced, which deals precisely with the subject, in that book listed Palmiero, among others, as a player of whose steroid use Conseco had personal knowledge.
Now, however, Conseco claims that Palmiero's recent positive test results may be due to the preence of chemical elements in his bloodstream that are an outgrowth of past steroid use. In other words, Palmiero's test results might indeed be a false positive. His assertion-more testing needs to be done in order to determine the difference, and just how long these elements remain in the bloodstream past the last time of steroid use.
This may not be so much of a strange defense on Conseco's part, as he points to potential proof of Palmiero's perjury, while pretending to take the high road by defending Pamiero after being slammed by him.
The real story to all this, however, is how incideous this whole process has become in it's effect on all level of sports, amateur and professional, including school sports. Our performance driven and record breaking obsessive society has produced a glut of child would be star athletes, their aggresive and self promoting parents who push them to suceed whatever the cost, and coaches whose careers are so dependant on establishing and maintaining winning records. There was even a recent case where a coach encouraged the injury and incapacitation of a below par child athlete who was dragging down the team-in T-Ball.
You constantly see assaults involving parents, students, coaches, umpires, referees. At times this can result in an all-out brawl. Serious injuries are more commonplace than might be expected. And at times, death has ensued. Sometimes due to violence. Other times, due to overextended, gruelling training and practices. And, yes, due to the effects of steroids. On at least one occassion, suicide has resulted.
And all for what? To win that big contract. Secure in the knowledge that, for a time at least, and focusing here specifically again on baseball, both the Major Leaque Owners Association, and The Union Players Association, shook hands and, with a nod and a wink, issued meaningless declarations, instituted a number of insipid, ineffective rules and "reforms"-and looked the other way. After all, home run contests were drawing fans back into the park, and more records were being set, and broken, however dubiously.
And, though beaseball seems on the surface to be the worse offender in this matter, it is far from being alone. And, like the cancer that it really is, it has trickled down-or up-from the highest levels of sports into all levels of it. Just one more tumor in the national body that is sick witht he cancer of sucess at all costs. Not only in sports, but in all else.
Healthy competition is good. It is natural, and to be encouraged. But, like all else, when it becomes cancerous, it soon metastisizes, and spreads outward, and inward, until a drastic cure-if by now possible-becomes the only recourse.
But has it really gotten that far out of hand? Well, to recap, Rafael Palmiero has been suspended for ten games. The pay that he will forfeit for that brief period of time-200,000 dollars.
What has dimmed his chances might not so much be the testing at which steroids showed up in his system, for which he has been suspended for ten games, as much as his recent testamony before a Senate Sub-Committee during which he claimed to have never used steroids. He may not have committed perjury in a way that is provable. But he certainly lied.
And his insistance that he was unaware of ever having used steroids, which he seems to have taken from the Barry Bonds playbook of plausible deniability, may indeed have only made the lie more blatant-and obvious.
But Palmiero has two unlikely defenders. For one, George W. Bush, who strangely made a call for a crackdown on steroid use by athletes in professional sports a centerpiece of his 2004 State Of The Union address, but yet now insists that Palmiero (who used to play for the Texas Rangers when Bush was the owner of the team) is "a friend" and believes he is truthful in his assertions of innocence.
The other defender is even stranger, on the surface, when you consider that Jose' Conseco, author of the tell-all book Juiced, which deals precisely with the subject, in that book listed Palmiero, among others, as a player of whose steroid use Conseco had personal knowledge.
Now, however, Conseco claims that Palmiero's recent positive test results may be due to the preence of chemical elements in his bloodstream that are an outgrowth of past steroid use. In other words, Palmiero's test results might indeed be a false positive. His assertion-more testing needs to be done in order to determine the difference, and just how long these elements remain in the bloodstream past the last time of steroid use.
This may not be so much of a strange defense on Conseco's part, as he points to potential proof of Palmiero's perjury, while pretending to take the high road by defending Pamiero after being slammed by him.
The real story to all this, however, is how incideous this whole process has become in it's effect on all level of sports, amateur and professional, including school sports. Our performance driven and record breaking obsessive society has produced a glut of child would be star athletes, their aggresive and self promoting parents who push them to suceed whatever the cost, and coaches whose careers are so dependant on establishing and maintaining winning records. There was even a recent case where a coach encouraged the injury and incapacitation of a below par child athlete who was dragging down the team-in T-Ball.
You constantly see assaults involving parents, students, coaches, umpires, referees. At times this can result in an all-out brawl. Serious injuries are more commonplace than might be expected. And at times, death has ensued. Sometimes due to violence. Other times, due to overextended, gruelling training and practices. And, yes, due to the effects of steroids. On at least one occassion, suicide has resulted.
And all for what? To win that big contract. Secure in the knowledge that, for a time at least, and focusing here specifically again on baseball, both the Major Leaque Owners Association, and The Union Players Association, shook hands and, with a nod and a wink, issued meaningless declarations, instituted a number of insipid, ineffective rules and "reforms"-and looked the other way. After all, home run contests were drawing fans back into the park, and more records were being set, and broken, however dubiously.
And, though beaseball seems on the surface to be the worse offender in this matter, it is far from being alone. And, like the cancer that it really is, it has trickled down-or up-from the highest levels of sports into all levels of it. Just one more tumor in the national body that is sick witht he cancer of sucess at all costs. Not only in sports, but in all else.
Healthy competition is good. It is natural, and to be encouraged. But, like all else, when it becomes cancerous, it soon metastisizes, and spreads outward, and inward, until a drastic cure-if by now possible-becomes the only recourse.
But has it really gotten that far out of hand? Well, to recap, Rafael Palmiero has been suspended for ten games. The pay that he will forfeit for that brief period of time-200,000 dollars.
Saturday, July 30, 2005
From Athens To Nashville With Severe Serenity
One of the places I want to visit, and soon, is Nashville, Tennesee. Not for country music at the Grand Ole Oprey. Nor for the Southern hospitality, or the cuisine, or any of the other myriad reasons most folks might normally flock to the capital of Tennessee.
No, I want to see the Acropolis. The Temple, that is, of the Goddess Athene. My Goddess, whose temple has been reproduced down to the most minute detail possible. Not the ruins that are left now in Athens, but the Temple as it actually was, right in the beginning. Before a great lot of the statuary was either lost, destroyed, or carted of to Great Britain (thankfully) sometime in the 1800's. Even the giant sized idol of the Goddess has been faithfully reproduced, and sits now as before, as though surveying her realm with her own unique aspect of severe serenity.
Severe serenity? I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but after all, Athene was the Goddess of War and Wisdom, among other things. This description is an apt one. Especially when you consider what she has been through over the last couple of millenia.
The descendants of her original devotees, after all, are either preventing her worship, or being prevented from it. An adherent to the religion of Hellenismos, during the recent Athens Olympics, was lowered to having to diplomatically describe his beliefs not as a religion, but as a "philosophy", while the leaders of the Greek Orthodox Church bemoaned the general attention being shown to their own ancestral deities during the event.
Another current day follower of the ancient faith, has recently filed suit in court to demand the right to practice his faith, despite the fact that Greece, as a signatory to the EU charter, has in effect agreed to guarantee freedom of religous expression.
I am reminded that our own American ancestors came here to a large extent for precisely this purpose, freedom of religion, and that this was eventually put into our own Constitution. And so we have it. At least, on paper.
Freedom of religous expression. In all states, for all peoples. Not just Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, as a great many, though not all, of the proponents of the theory that our country was founded on Judaeo-Christian principles, would seem to imply. When you get right down to it, Jews and Catholics were not exactly welcomed here with open arms, at first. Though they were gradually accepted. Welcome, even. Now, they are as big a pain in the ass as the Protestants. As is the case with the Muslims. As no doubt will be the case with all who follow.
Well, I demand my right to be a pain in the ass. And I will do so. When I make my trip to Nashville, I will gaze in adoration up at the image of the Goddess, as I contemplate the true principles this country were founded on, and for. For democracy, for example, which was originally formulated in Athens, while our concept of the Seperation of Powers was formulated in the neighboring Greek city of Sparta. For the continuation of Graeco-Roman law and culture, ethics, and philosophy, by way of English comon law, the Rennaissance, and the Enlightenment.
Finally, among the other reasons too numerous to mention, it was founded on the principles of freedom of religion, including the minority ones such as mine. And I will thank for that not some insane Middle Eastern God whose adherents seem never at a loss to promote war, and tyranny, and oppression, including the suppression, not protections, of religions other than their own.
No, I will thank the Lady Athene, my Goddess of Severe Serenity, as I stand in reverence before her in her new Temple. Once my time there is over, I will doubtless vow to return, yet for now I will leave in a newfound sense of spiritual renewal, as I start on the return home, after stopping long enough perhaps to catch a glimpse of Shania Twain.
No, I want to see the Acropolis. The Temple, that is, of the Goddess Athene. My Goddess, whose temple has been reproduced down to the most minute detail possible. Not the ruins that are left now in Athens, but the Temple as it actually was, right in the beginning. Before a great lot of the statuary was either lost, destroyed, or carted of to Great Britain (thankfully) sometime in the 1800's. Even the giant sized idol of the Goddess has been faithfully reproduced, and sits now as before, as though surveying her realm with her own unique aspect of severe serenity.
Severe serenity? I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but after all, Athene was the Goddess of War and Wisdom, among other things. This description is an apt one. Especially when you consider what she has been through over the last couple of millenia.
The descendants of her original devotees, after all, are either preventing her worship, or being prevented from it. An adherent to the religion of Hellenismos, during the recent Athens Olympics, was lowered to having to diplomatically describe his beliefs not as a religion, but as a "philosophy", while the leaders of the Greek Orthodox Church bemoaned the general attention being shown to their own ancestral deities during the event.
Another current day follower of the ancient faith, has recently filed suit in court to demand the right to practice his faith, despite the fact that Greece, as a signatory to the EU charter, has in effect agreed to guarantee freedom of religous expression.
I am reminded that our own American ancestors came here to a large extent for precisely this purpose, freedom of religion, and that this was eventually put into our own Constitution. And so we have it. At least, on paper.
Freedom of religous expression. In all states, for all peoples. Not just Protestants, Catholics, and Jews, as a great many, though not all, of the proponents of the theory that our country was founded on Judaeo-Christian principles, would seem to imply. When you get right down to it, Jews and Catholics were not exactly welcomed here with open arms, at first. Though they were gradually accepted. Welcome, even. Now, they are as big a pain in the ass as the Protestants. As is the case with the Muslims. As no doubt will be the case with all who follow.
Well, I demand my right to be a pain in the ass. And I will do so. When I make my trip to Nashville, I will gaze in adoration up at the image of the Goddess, as I contemplate the true principles this country were founded on, and for. For democracy, for example, which was originally formulated in Athens, while our concept of the Seperation of Powers was formulated in the neighboring Greek city of Sparta. For the continuation of Graeco-Roman law and culture, ethics, and philosophy, by way of English comon law, the Rennaissance, and the Enlightenment.
Finally, among the other reasons too numerous to mention, it was founded on the principles of freedom of religion, including the minority ones such as mine. And I will thank for that not some insane Middle Eastern God whose adherents seem never at a loss to promote war, and tyranny, and oppression, including the suppression, not protections, of religions other than their own.
No, I will thank the Lady Athene, my Goddess of Severe Serenity, as I stand in reverence before her in her new Temple. Once my time there is over, I will doubtless vow to return, yet for now I will leave in a newfound sense of spiritual renewal, as I start on the return home, after stopping long enough perhaps to catch a glimpse of Shania Twain.
Vacation Aruba-A Real Crap Shoot
As soon as the Holloway/Twitty family offerred a one million dollar reward for information leading to the safe return of Natalie Holloway, and another substantial reward for information leading to any information that would finally solve the case, they should have known. After all, Aruba is an island dotted with casinos, and a good many of the foreign tourists, as well as the islands inhabitants, are gamblers. So it was no time at all before witnesses came crawling out of the woodwork, with sudden recollections of mysterious activities on such and such a date, at such and such a time, some times involving the suspects in the case. Perhaps they are sincere, but perhaps this is wishful thinking. Would Joran Van Der Sloot and the Kalpoe Brothers try to bury Natalie Holloway in a two inch deep stream, secure in the knowledge that a hurricane would soon turn this area into a deep enough pond that it would require draining over a three day period? Would somebody haphazardly take her to a landfill, and take the time to bury her in as deep a pile of garbage as they could find?
Probably not. But if it pans out, the reward is substantial. A crap shoot.
My opinion is the surest way to find out the truth of what occurred to eighteen year old Alabama High School student Natalie Holloway, who disappearred on the last night of her school trip to the island, would be by way of a confession by Joran Van Der Sloot. One way this might occur would be if the truth were beat out of him. Of course the police won't do this, but if he were ever eventually released, and caught out by enough of the right people at the right time, I have no doubt there are a substantial number of the islands residents who would eagerly do this. The Kalpoe Brothers might eventualy suffer the same fate, as far as that goes. Of course, another obvious avenue for closure in this bizzarre case would be if one of them, quite simply, were offerred the reward money, in addition to guarantees of freedom from all future threats of further prosecution.
But failing this, and assumming none of the myriad crap shoots that seem to be on-going as of now ever really pay off, it seems conceivable to me that the best answer, the most logical one, is as follows:
Natalie Holloway was pressured into having sex with Joran Van Der Sloot, and possibly the Kalpoe Brothers as well, once they got her out in a drunken state to a remote area, probably the area of the California Lighthouse. She wasn't actually physically raped, just more or less intimidated into acquiescing. Which is of course a kind of rape, but maybe not in the minds of three young teenage boys who are drunk, and high, and under the equally coercice influence of their own raging hormones, secure in the knowledge that the girl would be leaving the island the next day, and would probably be too humiliated to admit to what happenned, let alone complain or press charges. After all, she was drunk. She went there willingly. So, they got their rocks off, then took her back to the hotel area. Only now, an enraged Natalie Holloway threatened them, threatened to tell everyone what they had done to her, that she would accuse them of rape, that all would know what they were, what they had done. They would pay, and pay dearly.
At one point, she might have gotten into Van Der Sloots face, possibly punched or kicked him, or both. Angry, humiliated now, and afraid of the potential consequences, he strikes out at her, striking her with his fist, as hard as he can, in addition causing her to fall and hit her head. Or possibly one of the Kalpoes did this. Whoever did it, Natalie Holloway now lay motionless on the beach, the deserted beach, to all intents and purposes, no one around but the four of them. Only Natalie is no longer moving. She doesn't seem to be breathing. One of them shakes her, yells at her, to no avail. Try though they may, they can not revive her. She is obviously dead.
Joran calls his father, Paulus Van Der Sloot, who comes as quickly as he can. They drive to his house, where he tries to calm the boys. The dead girl out in the trunk of their car, he explains, can cause no problems if she is never found. She will just be assummed to have run away. Perhaps she might turn up in a crack house. She could conceivably have even been sold into sex slavery in Venezuala, so far as anyone knows. But you have to come up with an alibi, in the event questions are asked. You let her out in front of the hotel. She was drunk, and fell and hit her head, but got up, and was helped inside by a security guard, a black security guard. If her body is found, the fall would explain the injuries to the face. And to be on the safe side, you had all better admit that you had sex with her. As long as there are no obvious vaginal injuries, no one can prove the sex was accomplished through intimidation, and so not really consensual. In the meantime, we will do the best we can to try to make sure the body is never found.
And so, the body was taken, either by the parties involved or through hired confederates who could be depended upon (Aruban police officers friendly to Van Der Sloot, and very ambitous?)
to the most remote part of the island they could find, a place that was desolate of all human habitation, a place that would be seldomly visited, a place of wild and rugged terrain and dense vegetation, a place where a variety of wild animals would eagerly feed upon the dead and decomposing body of the unfortunate girl as she lay in the midst of dense bushes and foliage, completely hidden from human view, even were there happenned by that rare person who visited the area.
Within a few short days, the body would be completly torn and scatterred about, all but demolished by the combined ravages of the native island scavengers and the hot heat of the tropical Carribbean island. The perfect way to dispose of an inconvenient body in this type of environment. All they really needed was a few days time, a week, maybe two at the most, for the ravages of mother nature to complete the job.
This is my theory of what occurred to Natalie Holloway. Of course, there are other possibilities. She could have been put into an incinerator, for example, or cremated for a price by a bribed crematory operator, or for that matter buried in what might appear to be a legitimate grave belonging to another person. She could have been run through a scrap mnetal compactor, or dumped far out to sea, perhaps in shark infested waters to the east of the island.
There is also yet the ever fading glimer of hope she might yet be alive, sold into sex slavery in Venezuala or Columbia, or even being held in a private residence. She may have been kept in a drugged state for so long, she might be little more than a zombie who no longer even knows who she is, let alone where she is.
I know that the mother of Natalie, Beth Twitty, is holding out hopes that this is the case, which is ironic in the extreme. Why else offer a million dollar reward for her daughters safe return, were she not holding out this hope? As unlikely, to say the least, that it obviousy is.
I have a great deal of respect for Beth Holloway Twitty. In her own way, she is as beautiful a woman as I have ever seen. Her efforts on behalf of her daughter are indeed of heroic proportions. Unfortunately, this case has become a ratings bonanza for the cable news media in particular, and it has become very unseemly the way the case has been overcovered, in my opinion, though conversely, the coverage has indeed propeled the case up to this point.
I wish I could advise the woman to take a break from the case, for a mere couple of days. The first day to just wind down, perhaps seek spiritual counseling. The following day, to just stay to herself, for no other reason that to allow her spirit a chance to actually attune with the spirit of her daughter, with no interference from anyone, including her husband and other family members. After all, there is obviously a strong spiritual connection between this mother and daughter. The more I think about it, the more I think maybe a week of this would be even more appropriate than a mere day. A period of silent meditation and reflection could allow that spiritual connection to come to the fore. It may not give her the answers that she is searching for now. But it may at least give her some peace.
Probably not. But if it pans out, the reward is substantial. A crap shoot.
My opinion is the surest way to find out the truth of what occurred to eighteen year old Alabama High School student Natalie Holloway, who disappearred on the last night of her school trip to the island, would be by way of a confession by Joran Van Der Sloot. One way this might occur would be if the truth were beat out of him. Of course the police won't do this, but if he were ever eventually released, and caught out by enough of the right people at the right time, I have no doubt there are a substantial number of the islands residents who would eagerly do this. The Kalpoe Brothers might eventualy suffer the same fate, as far as that goes. Of course, another obvious avenue for closure in this bizzarre case would be if one of them, quite simply, were offerred the reward money, in addition to guarantees of freedom from all future threats of further prosecution.
But failing this, and assumming none of the myriad crap shoots that seem to be on-going as of now ever really pay off, it seems conceivable to me that the best answer, the most logical one, is as follows:
Natalie Holloway was pressured into having sex with Joran Van Der Sloot, and possibly the Kalpoe Brothers as well, once they got her out in a drunken state to a remote area, probably the area of the California Lighthouse. She wasn't actually physically raped, just more or less intimidated into acquiescing. Which is of course a kind of rape, but maybe not in the minds of three young teenage boys who are drunk, and high, and under the equally coercice influence of their own raging hormones, secure in the knowledge that the girl would be leaving the island the next day, and would probably be too humiliated to admit to what happenned, let alone complain or press charges. After all, she was drunk. She went there willingly. So, they got their rocks off, then took her back to the hotel area. Only now, an enraged Natalie Holloway threatened them, threatened to tell everyone what they had done to her, that she would accuse them of rape, that all would know what they were, what they had done. They would pay, and pay dearly.
At one point, she might have gotten into Van Der Sloots face, possibly punched or kicked him, or both. Angry, humiliated now, and afraid of the potential consequences, he strikes out at her, striking her with his fist, as hard as he can, in addition causing her to fall and hit her head. Or possibly one of the Kalpoes did this. Whoever did it, Natalie Holloway now lay motionless on the beach, the deserted beach, to all intents and purposes, no one around but the four of them. Only Natalie is no longer moving. She doesn't seem to be breathing. One of them shakes her, yells at her, to no avail. Try though they may, they can not revive her. She is obviously dead.
Joran calls his father, Paulus Van Der Sloot, who comes as quickly as he can. They drive to his house, where he tries to calm the boys. The dead girl out in the trunk of their car, he explains, can cause no problems if she is never found. She will just be assummed to have run away. Perhaps she might turn up in a crack house. She could conceivably have even been sold into sex slavery in Venezuala, so far as anyone knows. But you have to come up with an alibi, in the event questions are asked. You let her out in front of the hotel. She was drunk, and fell and hit her head, but got up, and was helped inside by a security guard, a black security guard. If her body is found, the fall would explain the injuries to the face. And to be on the safe side, you had all better admit that you had sex with her. As long as there are no obvious vaginal injuries, no one can prove the sex was accomplished through intimidation, and so not really consensual. In the meantime, we will do the best we can to try to make sure the body is never found.
And so, the body was taken, either by the parties involved or through hired confederates who could be depended upon (Aruban police officers friendly to Van Der Sloot, and very ambitous?)
to the most remote part of the island they could find, a place that was desolate of all human habitation, a place that would be seldomly visited, a place of wild and rugged terrain and dense vegetation, a place where a variety of wild animals would eagerly feed upon the dead and decomposing body of the unfortunate girl as she lay in the midst of dense bushes and foliage, completely hidden from human view, even were there happenned by that rare person who visited the area.
Within a few short days, the body would be completly torn and scatterred about, all but demolished by the combined ravages of the native island scavengers and the hot heat of the tropical Carribbean island. The perfect way to dispose of an inconvenient body in this type of environment. All they really needed was a few days time, a week, maybe two at the most, for the ravages of mother nature to complete the job.
This is my theory of what occurred to Natalie Holloway. Of course, there are other possibilities. She could have been put into an incinerator, for example, or cremated for a price by a bribed crematory operator, or for that matter buried in what might appear to be a legitimate grave belonging to another person. She could have been run through a scrap mnetal compactor, or dumped far out to sea, perhaps in shark infested waters to the east of the island.
There is also yet the ever fading glimer of hope she might yet be alive, sold into sex slavery in Venezuala or Columbia, or even being held in a private residence. She may have been kept in a drugged state for so long, she might be little more than a zombie who no longer even knows who she is, let alone where she is.
I know that the mother of Natalie, Beth Twitty, is holding out hopes that this is the case, which is ironic in the extreme. Why else offer a million dollar reward for her daughters safe return, were she not holding out this hope? As unlikely, to say the least, that it obviousy is.
I have a great deal of respect for Beth Holloway Twitty. In her own way, she is as beautiful a woman as I have ever seen. Her efforts on behalf of her daughter are indeed of heroic proportions. Unfortunately, this case has become a ratings bonanza for the cable news media in particular, and it has become very unseemly the way the case has been overcovered, in my opinion, though conversely, the coverage has indeed propeled the case up to this point.
I wish I could advise the woman to take a break from the case, for a mere couple of days. The first day to just wind down, perhaps seek spiritual counseling. The following day, to just stay to herself, for no other reason that to allow her spirit a chance to actually attune with the spirit of her daughter, with no interference from anyone, including her husband and other family members. After all, there is obviously a strong spiritual connection between this mother and daughter. The more I think about it, the more I think maybe a week of this would be even more appropriate than a mere day. A period of silent meditation and reflection could allow that spiritual connection to come to the fore. It may not give her the answers that she is searching for now. But it may at least give her some peace.
Friday, July 29, 2005
The Nra
The National Rifle Association recently announced it would not be holding it's annual convention in Columbus Ohio, as previously had been planned, and this is said to be due to the restricitve gun laws in Columbus. I don't blame the NRA at all for this, in fact, I would suggest a number of good areas for their convention, places that have reasonable gun laws, and could use the economic infusion that a national major convention might bring them. I'm a supporter of the NRA, that is one of my few pet conservative issues, as I am an ardent supporter of the Second Amendment. Of course, it is not often that I engage in any kind of dialoque with any NRA members, in fact, I never do, because, frankly, I most generally otherwise don't fit in with these folks. They are usually conservative Christians, for example, and also mainly Republicans.
I remember a while back I was in Cincinnati, I attended an event at Fountain Square, run by some real far-right group. It was attended by a Congressman from the area, a Republican, whom the main speaker actually informed that he would be watched, in what was nearly a menacing manner. And no, he wasnt joking. This was a Pro-gun rights rally, among other things, mainly it was an anti-Clinton and anti-liberal rally, right before the 1994 mid-term elections, the one in which the democrats lost power in the House and Senate for the first time together in like sixty years. And they have yet to regain it. So you might say this period was a turning point.
Anyway, this guy, a militia type with military fatiques and a long pony tail, was speaking about the right to bear arms, and all the other stuff, when I was approached by this smiling man with dark hair, wearing glasses, asking me if he could give me his pamphlets. They were Christian pamphlets, tracts, about the usual shit probably, hell and damnation if you'r unsaved, no matter how good you are otherwise. I say probably, because I didn't see them, I told him I wasn't interested. I told him firmly, too. I had just recently converted to Paganism, and I was a real fire brand about it. I didn't talk to anybody about it in a preaching manner of speaking, now mind you, but I was really into it. Taken with it, all the way, and I wasn't going to hear any of this guys shit, or anybody elses like him. And I made damned sure they understood at least that much, if they ever approached me. So it was with this guy. I wasnt really hateful, I thought, though maybe I was, I just said plainly, I'm not interested. Then I turned back to hear the speech of the militia leader. I noticed this guy was nodding to an acquaintance, and indicated me, with a sneer. Suddenly, he started loking at me, up and down, walking around me a couple of times. I felt like he might start sniffing my ass any mintue, and in fact, I almost think he did. It was weird. Real weird, but I ignored him, and after a couple of minutes, he went on his way.
I wondered, what is he doing, throwing off on the way I was dressed, looking for cloven hooves and a tail, what the shit was this guys story? And it hit me. I didn't reject his God. I rejected him. That was the problem. And he hated me for it. I had humiliated him, and he couldn't deal with that. I then ignored him. I can only imagine how he took that. But he is I fear typical, all too so, of this crowd. Zealots. Fanatics. Better than Muslim fanatics only by a few degrees, and I'm not all that sure about that.
But I am a supporter of the Second Amendment, and as such I support the NRA, as they are the only organization of any note, in fact they are the only ones I know, who advocate for the Second Amendment. It's just too damned bad that their only supporters are nuts like the ones I had to contend with in Cincinnati that cold day in 1994.
I remember a while back I was in Cincinnati, I attended an event at Fountain Square, run by some real far-right group. It was attended by a Congressman from the area, a Republican, whom the main speaker actually informed that he would be watched, in what was nearly a menacing manner. And no, he wasnt joking. This was a Pro-gun rights rally, among other things, mainly it was an anti-Clinton and anti-liberal rally, right before the 1994 mid-term elections, the one in which the democrats lost power in the House and Senate for the first time together in like sixty years. And they have yet to regain it. So you might say this period was a turning point.
Anyway, this guy, a militia type with military fatiques and a long pony tail, was speaking about the right to bear arms, and all the other stuff, when I was approached by this smiling man with dark hair, wearing glasses, asking me if he could give me his pamphlets. They were Christian pamphlets, tracts, about the usual shit probably, hell and damnation if you'r unsaved, no matter how good you are otherwise. I say probably, because I didn't see them, I told him I wasn't interested. I told him firmly, too. I had just recently converted to Paganism, and I was a real fire brand about it. I didn't talk to anybody about it in a preaching manner of speaking, now mind you, but I was really into it. Taken with it, all the way, and I wasn't going to hear any of this guys shit, or anybody elses like him. And I made damned sure they understood at least that much, if they ever approached me. So it was with this guy. I wasnt really hateful, I thought, though maybe I was, I just said plainly, I'm not interested. Then I turned back to hear the speech of the militia leader. I noticed this guy was nodding to an acquaintance, and indicated me, with a sneer. Suddenly, he started loking at me, up and down, walking around me a couple of times. I felt like he might start sniffing my ass any mintue, and in fact, I almost think he did. It was weird. Real weird, but I ignored him, and after a couple of minutes, he went on his way.
I wondered, what is he doing, throwing off on the way I was dressed, looking for cloven hooves and a tail, what the shit was this guys story? And it hit me. I didn't reject his God. I rejected him. That was the problem. And he hated me for it. I had humiliated him, and he couldn't deal with that. I then ignored him. I can only imagine how he took that. But he is I fear typical, all too so, of this crowd. Zealots. Fanatics. Better than Muslim fanatics only by a few degrees, and I'm not all that sure about that.
But I am a supporter of the Second Amendment, and as such I support the NRA, as they are the only organization of any note, in fact they are the only ones I know, who advocate for the Second Amendment. It's just too damned bad that their only supporters are nuts like the ones I had to contend with in Cincinnati that cold day in 1994.
Sinn Fein
Sinn Fein's Gerry Adams issued his declaration that the IRA will now lay down their arms, and work for reconciliation of all sides, as he expressed sympathy for the victims of both sides. George Bush described this as a positive development, but said it must be followed up with a declaration to refrain from all criminal activities. Of course, this has been in the works for some time now, since Bill Clintons famour visit to Ireland, following his controversial decision to invite Adams to the White House. Still, Clinton proved wildly popular in Ireland, and he was able to initiate real dialoque, for the first time in 36 years of sectarian violence that has causd the loss of thousands of lives. The dialoque of course did not always go smoothly, as promises to disarm were met by skepticism, and apparrent breakthroughs in discussions ended at times in those talks being arbitrarilly cut off by one side or the other.
But, in the case of the Muslim declaration which came later, in roughly the same hour, in fact, there must be a real good faith effort to work toward these conciliatory goals. Words are well and good, but there must be honest effort on both sides.
Unfortunately, the insanity of religous bigotry has fueled this situation in much the same manner as it has propelled the Middle East toward the cauldron of hatred that it is today. However, my ancestors were from Ireland, so it tends to hit a little closer to home. And it makes me wonder, yet again, why is it religion that causes all this grief, all this turmoil, all this hatred? Would it be any different if the Irish were to suddenly, by and large, decide they would return to their ancient Celtic pagan roots? I know that would never happen, yet if a large enough percentage of them did so, who knows, they might set an example of sanity in the middle of madness. I could never understand why people would want to willingly embrace a religion that was foreign to them. One that can not, in fact, be anything but foreign. It's my honest belief that when a person returns to the pagan roots of their ancestors, and their old pagan deities, they will never turn away from them, unless they are forced to on the surface for economic or other such reasons. Even then, they will not turn away from them inwardly. But if all peoples could return to their ancient roots, they can not help but be in tune with their ancestry,their heritage, and thus their own spirits.
To do otherwise is to live an illussion. And it is unfortunatley in the case of Christianity, of most major denominations, an illussion of violence in the pursuit of so-called righteousness. The ends justifies the means. Look at what's going on in the Middle East. Then look at the situation in Ireland over the past 36 years, which is fueled to a great extent by the rivalry between Catholic and Protestant. There is scarcely any real difference between the two of them.
But, in the case of the Muslim declaration which came later, in roughly the same hour, in fact, there must be a real good faith effort to work toward these conciliatory goals. Words are well and good, but there must be honest effort on both sides.
Unfortunately, the insanity of religous bigotry has fueled this situation in much the same manner as it has propelled the Middle East toward the cauldron of hatred that it is today. However, my ancestors were from Ireland, so it tends to hit a little closer to home. And it makes me wonder, yet again, why is it religion that causes all this grief, all this turmoil, all this hatred? Would it be any different if the Irish were to suddenly, by and large, decide they would return to their ancient Celtic pagan roots? I know that would never happen, yet if a large enough percentage of them did so, who knows, they might set an example of sanity in the middle of madness. I could never understand why people would want to willingly embrace a religion that was foreign to them. One that can not, in fact, be anything but foreign. It's my honest belief that when a person returns to the pagan roots of their ancestors, and their old pagan deities, they will never turn away from them, unless they are forced to on the surface for economic or other such reasons. Even then, they will not turn away from them inwardly. But if all peoples could return to their ancient roots, they can not help but be in tune with their ancestry,their heritage, and thus their own spirits.
To do otherwise is to live an illussion. And it is unfortunatley in the case of Christianity, of most major denominations, an illussion of violence in the pursuit of so-called righteousness. The ends justifies the means. Look at what's going on in the Middle East. Then look at the situation in Ireland over the past 36 years, which is fueled to a great extent by the rivalry between Catholic and Protestant. There is scarcely any real difference between the two of them.
The Recent London Terror Bonanza
I guess they finally got the guy by promising they wouldn't kill him as long as he behaved himself. Actually, I think he came to realize that they damned well were going to kill him if he didn't give up. The important thing, is they got him, and now comes the real truth about why it took so long. He was ashamed to come outside in his underwear. That's just the Muslim mind-set. That's why the Abu Ghraid prison photos were so scandalous to the Arab world. The very idea of a wicked American woman pointing and laughing at the penis of a godly Arab man. I am not being sarcastic either, I am being very serious. The Britsh, as well as American, authorities had better stop worrying about treating these fanatics with kid gloves and about the opinions of the far left with their absurd accussations of torture, and devise methods of dealing with these people. I propose you do the exact thing that seems to humiliate them so much. When guys like this are holed up and won't surrender, you can't take the chance that they might blow up an entire block just to satisfy the civil liberties crowd.Shoot gallons of urine and feces through the windows at them, and tell them there is more to come if they refuse to surrender. These guys aren't wrapped too damned tight, after all, it shouldn't take that damned much to crack them, but we have these idiots in our midst insisting we should play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules, on the grounds that we are "better than that". Speak for yourself, I'm not better than that, I want to win and I want this shit over with, and I want the fucks that want to kill us dead. Period.
We can start by not allowing anymore of these idiots in our repsective countries, just close the door to any further imigration, and whenever possible kick out the ones who are here that aren't American citizens. And keep a close eye on them. Of course,it's racist, some will say, but consider the following. The man that was arrested today, was a teacher of underprivileged children. He had even been interviewed on the BBC, not too long prior to this. No one would ever had imagined that he was a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer, as his mother was of such a good reputation, she had been invited to dinner at Buckingham Palace. A typical example of how a good citizen should live.
Of course, it is true that a good many Muslims have at last started to get the message, as just yesterday a delegation of Muslim clerics issued a proclamation declaring their renunciation of violence. All well and good, but it certainly was a long time coming, wasn't it now? Another good cop bad cop routine was how I saw the past Muslim actions. The bad Muslims bomb us, blows us up, chops off our heads with a dull blade on the Internet for all the world to see, and declares they will destroy us beause we are infidels. The good Muslims come along then and assure us that Islam is not really like this, we are a religion of peace. You should join us. Well, that didn't work, so now they have to step up to the plate and issue a Fatwa. Words. Empty, meaningless words. Until, that is, they are followed with actions. If they are sincere, fine, but let them demonstrate their sincerity by turning in anybody they may have reason to suspect is engaging in criminal activity. Instead of delivering proclamations for the benefit of the television cameras, how about a few sermons, a whole bunch of them, denouncing this violence you allegedly deplore so greatly.
And no, I dont hate all Muslims. I greatly respect and even appreciate the efforts of Mushariff in Pakistan, for example, who also just today, announced that all foreign students in the madrassas in his country will have to leave, with no exceptions. Mushariff has gotten the message. He wants to build a good life for the honest people of his country, and wants to encourage an actual civilized lifestyle. He finally figured out the Madrassas were a big drain on his nations reputation.
The same goes for Mubarrek in Egypt, after the recent terror attacks his country suffered, which affected a god many Muslims as well as tourists, he realizes that this will prove to be nothing but a massive drain on Egypts tourist industry, and will accomplish nothing else. As long as these kinds of people are being radicalized by their imams, and their madrassas, they will not be able to be controlled by anybody other than people like Mushariff and Mubarrek, men who know if they don't rule with an iron hand, they will end up getting their own throats slit.
And of course I would hope that most Muslims in this country are good, law-abiding people. But all too many of them are of the calibre of former University of Miami Professor Sami Al Aryan, who is now on trial for raising money for Hamas. He even went so far as to send a letter to a Kuwaiti legislator soliciting money for the families of suicide bombers in Palestine, in order for "this good work" to be enabled to continue.
That's the kind of mind-set we deal with here. The kind of mind that refers to the bombing of innocent children and elderly as an example of "good works".
We can start by not allowing anymore of these idiots in our repsective countries, just close the door to any further imigration, and whenever possible kick out the ones who are here that aren't American citizens. And keep a close eye on them. Of course,it's racist, some will say, but consider the following. The man that was arrested today, was a teacher of underprivileged children. He had even been interviewed on the BBC, not too long prior to this. No one would ever had imagined that he was a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer, as his mother was of such a good reputation, she had been invited to dinner at Buckingham Palace. A typical example of how a good citizen should live.
Of course, it is true that a good many Muslims have at last started to get the message, as just yesterday a delegation of Muslim clerics issued a proclamation declaring their renunciation of violence. All well and good, but it certainly was a long time coming, wasn't it now? Another good cop bad cop routine was how I saw the past Muslim actions. The bad Muslims bomb us, blows us up, chops off our heads with a dull blade on the Internet for all the world to see, and declares they will destroy us beause we are infidels. The good Muslims come along then and assure us that Islam is not really like this, we are a religion of peace. You should join us. Well, that didn't work, so now they have to step up to the plate and issue a Fatwa. Words. Empty, meaningless words. Until, that is, they are followed with actions. If they are sincere, fine, but let them demonstrate their sincerity by turning in anybody they may have reason to suspect is engaging in criminal activity. Instead of delivering proclamations for the benefit of the television cameras, how about a few sermons, a whole bunch of them, denouncing this violence you allegedly deplore so greatly.
And no, I dont hate all Muslims. I greatly respect and even appreciate the efforts of Mushariff in Pakistan, for example, who also just today, announced that all foreign students in the madrassas in his country will have to leave, with no exceptions. Mushariff has gotten the message. He wants to build a good life for the honest people of his country, and wants to encourage an actual civilized lifestyle. He finally figured out the Madrassas were a big drain on his nations reputation.
The same goes for Mubarrek in Egypt, after the recent terror attacks his country suffered, which affected a god many Muslims as well as tourists, he realizes that this will prove to be nothing but a massive drain on Egypts tourist industry, and will accomplish nothing else. As long as these kinds of people are being radicalized by their imams, and their madrassas, they will not be able to be controlled by anybody other than people like Mushariff and Mubarrek, men who know if they don't rule with an iron hand, they will end up getting their own throats slit.
And of course I would hope that most Muslims in this country are good, law-abiding people. But all too many of them are of the calibre of former University of Miami Professor Sami Al Aryan, who is now on trial for raising money for Hamas. He even went so far as to send a letter to a Kuwaiti legislator soliciting money for the families of suicide bombers in Palestine, in order for "this good work" to be enabled to continue.
That's the kind of mind-set we deal with here. The kind of mind that refers to the bombing of innocent children and elderly as an example of "good works".
Frist Crosses Bush
Bill Frist has fired yet another volley in what is now apparently a serious move to plan for the Republican Presidentail nomination, as he has just announced plans to support a bill that would ease current restrictions on stem cell research. True, this is obviously self-serving on his part, and an even more blatant attempt at political calculation than his recent foopah regarding the Terri Schiavo fiasco, for which he among others took a well deserved hit in the public opinion polls. But this is a welcome change, and may bode well for the future of stem cell research, and medical research in general. From what little I understand of the bill, it is designed to support with federal funds research to match adults with stem cells made just from them, and for them. That smacks of cloning. Cool. Maybe Frist can agree to an experiment using his own stem cells, then we can say Bush has been, eh, double-crossed. (Okay, yeah I know it's corny)
The thing I don't understand-(because I haven't yet really gone into detail in studying it) is what this has to do with embryonic stem cells. I'm just guessing here that if an adult has need of a stem cell, for medical reasons, then a frozen egg would be injected with the stem cell, and in much the same procedure as in vitrio fertilization, the adult recipient now has a matching stem cell that a doctor can utilize for the treatment of various illnesses. Hell yeah, that is therapeutic cloning, if that's what it is, the very thing Bush about went apopleptic over when the South Koreans announced they would soon do the exact same thing.
Good for Frist. He's finally done something in the political arena that I like and can actually applaud. I still say his motives are political. But then again, aren't the motives of all politicians, well, political?
The thing I don't understand-(because I haven't yet really gone into detail in studying it) is what this has to do with embryonic stem cells. I'm just guessing here that if an adult has need of a stem cell, for medical reasons, then a frozen egg would be injected with the stem cell, and in much the same procedure as in vitrio fertilization, the adult recipient now has a matching stem cell that a doctor can utilize for the treatment of various illnesses. Hell yeah, that is therapeutic cloning, if that's what it is, the very thing Bush about went apopleptic over when the South Koreans announced they would soon do the exact same thing.
Good for Frist. He's finally done something in the political arena that I like and can actually applaud. I still say his motives are political. But then again, aren't the motives of all politicians, well, political?
Pediatrician Kills Mother
This is an example of how some people never really escape their past. About ten o'clock in the morning of the 27th, pediatrician Balar Balasubramanian of the Blue Ash section of Cincinnati, Ohio, was discovered by a passing motorist on McKinley Road. She was half naked, and seemed to be pretty much out of it when approached by police. She informed them there was somebody in the trunk of a car on Glendale Milford Road that needed help. They found the car, a 1998 Oldsmobile Intrique, and in the trunk they found the body of Balar's mother Saraja. She explained that she had initially tried to suffocate her mother, then fed her a milkshake laced with a lethal dose of medication. When this too failed to accomplish the task, she got her mother down on the floor and strangled her. Once she was dead, Balar dragged her mother to the trunk of the car with a makeshift raft made of bags of mulch she kept in her garage. She did this, she explained, not only for herself, but for her siblings, in order that her mother could no longer "hurt us". She went on to say she was sorry for what she did to her mother, but she had come to realize that she would never be a success because of of her.
Balar was a pediatrician who had in June 2004 finished a residency at the Childrens Hospital in Pittsburgh. She had spent the past year as a doctor in India. She woas soon to have moved to St. Louis to begin a cardiology fellowship.
Police had no explanation as to what may have occurred between the time Balar murdered her mother and the time she was found, half-naked and disoriented, at ten in the morning. It was obviously an emotional collapse of the most serious order, and there seemed to have been evidence she may have attempted suicide, due to the presence of a cut on her wrist.
Whatever the case, it's interesting to note that this woman had obviously sufferred some kind of serious traumatic disorder for quite some time, and may have felt, rightly or wrongly, that she was the victim of childhood abuse at the hands of her mother. Interesting also as to how this might have affected her career choices. To become a pediatrician would seem a logical route for one who has sufferred from abuse at the hands of a parent, even if that abuse was simple neglect. However it may have evolved, or how it began, it obviously culminated in the horrific series of events that to all intents and purposes, ended not just one life, but two.
Balar was a pediatrician who had in June 2004 finished a residency at the Childrens Hospital in Pittsburgh. She had spent the past year as a doctor in India. She woas soon to have moved to St. Louis to begin a cardiology fellowship.
Police had no explanation as to what may have occurred between the time Balar murdered her mother and the time she was found, half-naked and disoriented, at ten in the morning. It was obviously an emotional collapse of the most serious order, and there seemed to have been evidence she may have attempted suicide, due to the presence of a cut on her wrist.
Whatever the case, it's interesting to note that this woman had obviously sufferred some kind of serious traumatic disorder for quite some time, and may have felt, rightly or wrongly, that she was the victim of childhood abuse at the hands of her mother. Interesting also as to how this might have affected her career choices. To become a pediatrician would seem a logical route for one who has sufferred from abuse at the hands of a parent, even if that abuse was simple neglect. However it may have evolved, or how it began, it obviously culminated in the horrific series of events that to all intents and purposes, ended not just one life, but two.
Mexican Workers And Organized Labor
The AFL-CIO has just split up, as of a few days ago, over differences in the direction Organized Labor should take (besides straight down that is). One side, if I understand correctly, seems to feel that there should be more of an emphasis on attracting more members. They even look longingly toward the hordes of Mexican immigrants that stream across the border every day almost with lust in their hearts, it would seem, at the power these workers would provide. Well, they had better start jacking off, because I seriously doubt they will ever get in those pants. Mexican imigrants are here precisely because they are ready, willing, and able to work at menial jobs for far cheaper rates than most Americans are. And they are for the most part even cheerful about it. I remember once a while back, some years ago in fact, I and another white associate got us a temporary job picking oranges. We were driven out to the middle of nowhere, it seems, to a large farm, and were handed each a large burlap sack , and told to start picking. It was piece rate, now mind you, something like ten cents per dozen, or some kind of shit like that. I didn't like the sound of it, but I started picking. Hell, I needed the money, what can I say?
The Mexican workers were up in those trees, laughing and singing in unison as they picked, quickly filling their bags, by the time I was a third of the way through one. It was hot, sticky, stuffy, I was hungry and thirsty. And after a couple of hours of this bullshit, I had more than enough. I left, without pay. My friend stayed on, and I never saw him again. Not that this was unusual or suspicous, we were both transients, living in Phoenix Arizona at the time. We came and went with the winter. Snowbirds, they called us all. The worst thing about it, is those guys never so much as broke a sweat. They kept smiling, they kept singing, they kept talking and joking-all in Mexican-and they kept filling those goddamned bags full of oranges. Unlike me, or my friend, they didn't feel the least bit put out. The only thing that would have bothered them was if they were to be told they couldn't do it. And that's the point of all this. These schmucks actually feel they have a good thing going on down here, and I guess all things considered they do. As long as they keep that attitude, the Republican Party and their business supporters are going to ensure that they are able to come here in substantial numbers. To some, the more the merrier.
But Organized Labor? Believe me, I knew quite a few Mexicans during my time in Arizona, and since, and as a general rule, they are good, simple, humble, honest folks. But they are not stupid, by any means, and they damned sure aren't going to rock the boat that is responsible for their being here, whether by way of the border crossings, or through the dessert, or across the Rio Grande. And that boat is quite frankly the Business Community, in additon to the politicians, mostly Republicans, who look after their interests. True, most people on the Far Left welcome them as well, for different reasons, mainly idiotic ones. But the Far Left isn't paying their salaries. Maybe years down the line, it would eventually be differnet, but we are talking in terms of decades, not in just a few short years.
In the meantime, the quickest way for the Mexican workers to lose the support of the business community that hires them, and the Republican Party that supports and has up to now enabled their continued presence, is to start moving into the ranks of Organized Labor.
The Mexican workers were up in those trees, laughing and singing in unison as they picked, quickly filling their bags, by the time I was a third of the way through one. It was hot, sticky, stuffy, I was hungry and thirsty. And after a couple of hours of this bullshit, I had more than enough. I left, without pay. My friend stayed on, and I never saw him again. Not that this was unusual or suspicous, we were both transients, living in Phoenix Arizona at the time. We came and went with the winter. Snowbirds, they called us all. The worst thing about it, is those guys never so much as broke a sweat. They kept smiling, they kept singing, they kept talking and joking-all in Mexican-and they kept filling those goddamned bags full of oranges. Unlike me, or my friend, they didn't feel the least bit put out. The only thing that would have bothered them was if they were to be told they couldn't do it. And that's the point of all this. These schmucks actually feel they have a good thing going on down here, and I guess all things considered they do. As long as they keep that attitude, the Republican Party and their business supporters are going to ensure that they are able to come here in substantial numbers. To some, the more the merrier.
But Organized Labor? Believe me, I knew quite a few Mexicans during my time in Arizona, and since, and as a general rule, they are good, simple, humble, honest folks. But they are not stupid, by any means, and they damned sure aren't going to rock the boat that is responsible for their being here, whether by way of the border crossings, or through the dessert, or across the Rio Grande. And that boat is quite frankly the Business Community, in additon to the politicians, mostly Republicans, who look after their interests. True, most people on the Far Left welcome them as well, for different reasons, mainly idiotic ones. But the Far Left isn't paying their salaries. Maybe years down the line, it would eventually be differnet, but we are talking in terms of decades, not in just a few short years.
In the meantime, the quickest way for the Mexican workers to lose the support of the business community that hires them, and the Republican Party that supports and has up to now enabled their continued presence, is to start moving into the ranks of Organized Labor.
CAFTA
The CAFTA Bill recently passed the House Of Representatives by a slim two vote margin. Bush must be really proud of himself, he lobbied extensively for passage of this piece of legislative insanity. So now thanks to the crossover democrats, who should have known better, who overcame the renegade Republicansd who voted agaisnt the Bill, to their credit, we now have more of what should be obvious by now is never going to work. More free trade. Meaning, of course, cheaper goods made from near slave labor overseas, while American companies move their production facilities offshore in order to take advantage of the cheap labor, the less strident if at all existent regulations, and a far friendlier tax structure.
In fact, these crumb bums would have all ready wrecked the country by now were it not for the influx of foreign companies that have taken up the slack in providing American jobs and quality goods. But they can only do so much. And is the situation really that benign after all? In addition to buying up American businesses and properties, they are also in the business now of buying up our debt. Not to worry, most experts say, but who can help it?
And of course, there will soon be more of an influx of cheap foreign labor, which is all ready out of control, to further drive down the labor market in this country, which is all ready on life support. The long term effect of all this is that we may, eventually, become a Third World country. In fact, we are all ready on our way there.
I predict that eventually, the world economy will be dominated by two main competitors. The first of these will doubtless be the EU, the second will be an alliance of India, China, Russia, Brazil, Iran, and probably Japan and possibly a reunified Korea. Our country will by then be dominated by the EU, and we will be a third rate power at best. However, if the trade rivalry ever escalates into a full scale war-and you almost have to assume it eventually would-then it will still be the United States that will be on the front lines, doing the vast majority of the heavy fighting, suffering the heaviest casualties, and bearing the greatest expense. Once it's all over with, the EU, provided it wins the war, will be left over to pick up the pieces. What they hell, by this time they will have longed owned us, remember. Of course, it's possible that we might not win.
But whether we win or we lose-we lose.
In fact, these crumb bums would have all ready wrecked the country by now were it not for the influx of foreign companies that have taken up the slack in providing American jobs and quality goods. But they can only do so much. And is the situation really that benign after all? In addition to buying up American businesses and properties, they are also in the business now of buying up our debt. Not to worry, most experts say, but who can help it?
And of course, there will soon be more of an influx of cheap foreign labor, which is all ready out of control, to further drive down the labor market in this country, which is all ready on life support. The long term effect of all this is that we may, eventually, become a Third World country. In fact, we are all ready on our way there.
I predict that eventually, the world economy will be dominated by two main competitors. The first of these will doubtless be the EU, the second will be an alliance of India, China, Russia, Brazil, Iran, and probably Japan and possibly a reunified Korea. Our country will by then be dominated by the EU, and we will be a third rate power at best. However, if the trade rivalry ever escalates into a full scale war-and you almost have to assume it eventually would-then it will still be the United States that will be on the front lines, doing the vast majority of the heavy fighting, suffering the heaviest casualties, and bearing the greatest expense. Once it's all over with, the EU, provided it wins the war, will be left over to pick up the pieces. What they hell, by this time they will have longed owned us, remember. Of course, it's possible that we might not win.
But whether we win or we lose-we lose.
The Boy Scouts-A Divine Comedy?
The on-going Boy Scout Jamboree recently gave way to tragedy when four Scout leaders, having pitched their tent under a power line, were electrocuted when the metal pole of their tent inadverdantly made contact with the overhead wire. Prior to this, the President had to cancel a scheduled appearance before the group due to increment weather. He had to cancel yet another appearance just two days ago, following a memorial service for the fallen leaders, at about the same time that two hundred of the Boy Scouts in attendance became seriously ill. It seems that nothing is going right for the organization.
Except that is for the recent vote in the Senate-98 to 0-in favor of allowing the Boy Scouts to make use of certain military bases during training and camping programs, over the steadfast objections of the ACLU. The Conservative Christian crowd that traditionally support the Boy Scouts were overjoyed at this turn of events, as even such stalwart liberals as Edward M. Kennedy and Barbara Boxer voted in their favor. Even the two abstentions, or absentees as the case may have been, could not find it in their hearts to actually vote agaisnt the organization. The ACLU is obviously aghast, as the Boy Scouts promote personal repsonsibility, belief and faith in a "higher power", good citizenship, patriotism. And of course they discourage the homosexual lifestyle, while refusing to allow homosexuals as Scout Leaders, as is their right as a private organization, a right that has been affirmed by the Supreme Court. And here is the problem, that certain groups claim this disqualifies them from using public lands. They have been turned away from certain cities properties for this reason. So this came as a real surprise.
But I think the Christian Conservatives might tend to gloat just a little too much. Maybe their God doesn't like mean-spirited gloating, maybe he decided to have a little fun with them. Here's a poke in the eye, so to speak, ha ha, have a pie in the face, here smell this flower, hahahahahahahha-here, have a seat here, relax a bit-buuuuzzzzzzzzz. What might that mischievous trickster God of the Christians do next?Poisonous snakes amongst the revelers? A featured speaker dies of a massive coronary in the middle of his address? A severed penis is found in the ice cream?
Actually, probably none of the above. And what has happenned up to this point can probably best be summed up by that old tried and true maxim-shit happens. I personally like and admire the Boy Scouts and wish them well, and congratulate them on their well deserved victory. They are a private organization that does much needed good work that benefits children and the community. The radical left should get over it.
On the other hand, it is interesting to speculate on how the Far Right would have reacted had the same set of tragic or similar circumstances afflicted a group with whose values and philosophies they were at odds. And their relative silence now.
Except that is for the recent vote in the Senate-98 to 0-in favor of allowing the Boy Scouts to make use of certain military bases during training and camping programs, over the steadfast objections of the ACLU. The Conservative Christian crowd that traditionally support the Boy Scouts were overjoyed at this turn of events, as even such stalwart liberals as Edward M. Kennedy and Barbara Boxer voted in their favor. Even the two abstentions, or absentees as the case may have been, could not find it in their hearts to actually vote agaisnt the organization. The ACLU is obviously aghast, as the Boy Scouts promote personal repsonsibility, belief and faith in a "higher power", good citizenship, patriotism. And of course they discourage the homosexual lifestyle, while refusing to allow homosexuals as Scout Leaders, as is their right as a private organization, a right that has been affirmed by the Supreme Court. And here is the problem, that certain groups claim this disqualifies them from using public lands. They have been turned away from certain cities properties for this reason. So this came as a real surprise.
But I think the Christian Conservatives might tend to gloat just a little too much. Maybe their God doesn't like mean-spirited gloating, maybe he decided to have a little fun with them. Here's a poke in the eye, so to speak, ha ha, have a pie in the face, here smell this flower, hahahahahahahha-here, have a seat here, relax a bit-buuuuzzzzzzzzz. What might that mischievous trickster God of the Christians do next?Poisonous snakes amongst the revelers? A featured speaker dies of a massive coronary in the middle of his address? A severed penis is found in the ice cream?
Actually, probably none of the above. And what has happenned up to this point can probably best be summed up by that old tried and true maxim-shit happens. I personally like and admire the Boy Scouts and wish them well, and congratulate them on their well deserved victory. They are a private organization that does much needed good work that benefits children and the community. The radical left should get over it.
On the other hand, it is interesting to speculate on how the Far Right would have reacted had the same set of tragic or similar circumstances afflicted a group with whose values and philosophies they were at odds. And their relative silence now.
Dennis And The Department Of Peace
If Dennis Kucinich had his way about it, I have no doubt the Tigris River would soon all but erupt in flames, much as did the Cuyahoga River when he was the boy mayor of Cleveland in the early seventies. Sure, Dennis means well. In fact, I would say that in a lot of different ways, he was the best candidate running for president during the democratic '04 primaries. He was right on most of the major issues. Civil rights and minority protections, Pro-Choice, Pro-Labor, Pro-environment, Pro comprehensive health care reform, almost everything you want to mention. He was a true democratic liberal, unabashed and unapologetic, which was very refreshing. Unfortunately, like most democrats, he doesnt' seem to have a clue that his party, and most in it, are indeed clueless when it comes to the need for a strong military and a strong national defense and homeland security. Which meant that he had about as good a chance of winning the election as a minnow had of surviving in the Cuyahoga, circa 1972. Then, he seems to have decided, well, "let me go ahead now and cut my damned throat and get it over with" by coming up with the most preposterous proposal I have yet to hear advocated-the Department of Peace.
Yeah, that's what I thought. The Department Of What? To do what? Another bureaucracy, another cabinet level department full of pencil pushers to advocate for world peace, it would seem. Hey, Dennis, a heads up. We seem to have one of those already, I think it's called THE STATE DEPARTMENT, numbnut. I mean, the last time I checked, they seem to function out of the need to try to work out solutions to problems through diplomacy before there is a need to go to war. In fact, they are frequently at odds with the Defense Department due to this very fact. The two serve to balance each other out, which they are supposed to do. Okay, so a great many of the times they don't do that good a job. But would creating yet another carbon copy under a different name really accomplish anything but confusion? I don't think so.
But Dennis failed to learn from his dismal performance at the polls, and now is at it again, this time co-sponsoring legislation in the House of Representatives, bi-partisan at that, to push for an agreed timetable of troop withdrawal from Iraq, which is of course impractical as hell. It won't work, which isn't the problem, the problem is, nobody's going to go along with it. But to be fair, I might have a solution that Dennis and his allies might want to consider.
How about all you guys lobby NATO to join us in earnest in supporting the up-and-coming (hopefully) democratic
government of Iraq, as it goes about the business of drafting a new constitution and setting up a government in which all parties have a voice, and in which certain civil and legal rights are guaranteed, and the rule of law prevails? A government in which there will be free and fair elections? You don't really have to encourage our NATO allies to send troops to Iraq, though that would certainly be nice. Just encourage them to help us in training the Iraqi Army, which can then that much sooner go about the business of defending their own country, with hopefully no need for any help from us or from anyone else.
That way, the Iraqi government can stand on it's own two feet, may be a resounding success, and the American troops can actually come home sooner-much, much sooner-than would otherwise be practical. That is what you realy want, isn't it now? For the troops to come home? And our presence there as occuppiers be ended? Isn't that what the Europeans want, and for that matter, the Iraqi's themselves? Isn't that what everybody wants, in reality? Well, the quicker the government is firmly established, and their military is up to par, the sooner we can do this. Otherwise, were we to leave too quickly, without these conditions being met, the country would doubtless quickly descend into chaos and civil war, eventually followed by a return to dictatorial rule, either by a Saddam style Ba'athist resurgence, or by an Iranian style Islamic fundamentalist theocracy.
Now you wouldn't want that to happen, Dennis, would you now? What kind of Department Of Peace would encourage a scenario like that?
Yeah, that's what I thought. The Department Of What? To do what? Another bureaucracy, another cabinet level department full of pencil pushers to advocate for world peace, it would seem. Hey, Dennis, a heads up. We seem to have one of those already, I think it's called THE STATE DEPARTMENT, numbnut. I mean, the last time I checked, they seem to function out of the need to try to work out solutions to problems through diplomacy before there is a need to go to war. In fact, they are frequently at odds with the Defense Department due to this very fact. The two serve to balance each other out, which they are supposed to do. Okay, so a great many of the times they don't do that good a job. But would creating yet another carbon copy under a different name really accomplish anything but confusion? I don't think so.
But Dennis failed to learn from his dismal performance at the polls, and now is at it again, this time co-sponsoring legislation in the House of Representatives, bi-partisan at that, to push for an agreed timetable of troop withdrawal from Iraq, which is of course impractical as hell. It won't work, which isn't the problem, the problem is, nobody's going to go along with it. But to be fair, I might have a solution that Dennis and his allies might want to consider.
How about all you guys lobby NATO to join us in earnest in supporting the up-and-coming (hopefully) democratic
government of Iraq, as it goes about the business of drafting a new constitution and setting up a government in which all parties have a voice, and in which certain civil and legal rights are guaranteed, and the rule of law prevails? A government in which there will be free and fair elections? You don't really have to encourage our NATO allies to send troops to Iraq, though that would certainly be nice. Just encourage them to help us in training the Iraqi Army, which can then that much sooner go about the business of defending their own country, with hopefully no need for any help from us or from anyone else.
That way, the Iraqi government can stand on it's own two feet, may be a resounding success, and the American troops can actually come home sooner-much, much sooner-than would otherwise be practical. That is what you realy want, isn't it now? For the troops to come home? And our presence there as occuppiers be ended? Isn't that what the Europeans want, and for that matter, the Iraqi's themselves? Isn't that what everybody wants, in reality? Well, the quicker the government is firmly established, and their military is up to par, the sooner we can do this. Otherwise, were we to leave too quickly, without these conditions being met, the country would doubtless quickly descend into chaos and civil war, eventually followed by a return to dictatorial rule, either by a Saddam style Ba'athist resurgence, or by an Iranian style Islamic fundamentalist theocracy.
Now you wouldn't want that to happen, Dennis, would you now? What kind of Department Of Peace would encourage a scenario like that?
Bigfoot Sighted Again
Contrary to popular belief, Bigfoot is very real. Or is she? Her name is Jane Fonda, and every time she is sighted, she seems to be sticking her Big Foot in her Big Mouth. As with all Bigfoot sightings, her apearrances tend to be very disconcerting. To say nothing of the fact that everything about it seems to stink, to high heaven, and on a bunch of different levels. Take for example her most famous sighting.
This one I saw for myself, and it certainly looked for real. There she was, sitting on a Viet Cong anti-aircraft gun, laughing cheefully, gleefuly, as she clasped her hands together. There it was for all the world to see. Was it for real? Or was it some kind of clever fraud? She was later said to have been sighted at a Vietnamese raio station, and was even heard to have broadcast pleas to American soldiers to refuse to fight, fo rthem to desert, that they were fighting an ilegal, immoral, and unjustified war of aggression. She was further said to have been sighted at a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, where she met with seveal POWs. Or did she? A great many of the more unfortunate POWs admitted they never actually saw her, though they believed the accounts of her presence. Very disconcerting. Something about it just didn't pass the smell test.
She was spotted several other times, in movies, in exercise videos, with several different husbands. Finally, she was spotted at a book tour, where she was spat upon by a disgruntled Viet Nam veteran. She had been recently heard to apologize for past actions. But was it for real? Disconcerting. It, yes, stunk to high heaven. She was last seen in yet another movie-Monster-In-Law. Would that be it for Bigfoot?
Evidently not. Now she is said to be about to embark on a bus tour in order to protest yet another war, the present one in Iraq. But is it for real? New Mexico Governor Elliot Richardson, whom she claims will accompany her on the tour, claims he has never heard about it, knows nothing about it. So, we are left to wonder-will Bigfoot soon be spotted in a city or a town near you? Or is it all a bizarre, monstrous fraud?
Disconcerting. And like all Bigfoot sightings, it stinks, on a bunch of levels.
This one I saw for myself, and it certainly looked for real. There she was, sitting on a Viet Cong anti-aircraft gun, laughing cheefully, gleefuly, as she clasped her hands together. There it was for all the world to see. Was it for real? Or was it some kind of clever fraud? She was later said to have been sighted at a Vietnamese raio station, and was even heard to have broadcast pleas to American soldiers to refuse to fight, fo rthem to desert, that they were fighting an ilegal, immoral, and unjustified war of aggression. She was further said to have been sighted at a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, where she met with seveal POWs. Or did she? A great many of the more unfortunate POWs admitted they never actually saw her, though they believed the accounts of her presence. Very disconcerting. Something about it just didn't pass the smell test.
She was spotted several other times, in movies, in exercise videos, with several different husbands. Finally, she was spotted at a book tour, where she was spat upon by a disgruntled Viet Nam veteran. She had been recently heard to apologize for past actions. But was it for real? Disconcerting. It, yes, stunk to high heaven. She was last seen in yet another movie-Monster-In-Law. Would that be it for Bigfoot?
Evidently not. Now she is said to be about to embark on a bus tour in order to protest yet another war, the present one in Iraq. But is it for real? New Mexico Governor Elliot Richardson, whom she claims will accompany her on the tour, claims he has never heard about it, knows nothing about it. So, we are left to wonder-will Bigfoot soon be spotted in a city or a town near you? Or is it all a bizarre, monstrous fraud?
Disconcerting. And like all Bigfoot sightings, it stinks, on a bunch of levels.
John Roberts Is Catholic-Now We Can Worry
Okay, so now I'm worried, not so much about Roe v Wade, though that is troubling. In fact, my concerns with the Catholic Church began pretty much with the last election, when certain Bishops threatened to withold communion from John Kerry due to his Pro-Choice beliefs. This of course could easily have been interpreted as interference by representatives of a sovereign nation-the Vatican-in the internal affairs of U.S. politics. Thankfully, the various Bishops were divided on this issue, some issuing objections to this policy, and we were never quite sure exactly where the Vatican itself stood. Though there were rumblings.
But even this stance fell fall short of the recent self-serving position recenty advocated by a group of American Bishops as regarding U.S. border policy. They in effect called for an easing of border restrictions, an appeal for amnesty for curent illegals, aid for those illegals who may get in dire straights as a result of flouting our laws, and allowing ever more imigrants to move here legally.
This is self-serving, obviously so, when you consider the statistics. The Catholic Church-and the Vatican-gets the largest share of it's financial contributions from the pockets of American Catholics, more than from any other single group, possibly even more than all others combined. Yet, at the same time, it is a fact that Church conversions are down, as is overall church attendance amongst American Catholics. For the past twenty or thirty years, there has been a troubling shortage of priests and seminarians. If the downward trend continues, it can bode no good for the American Cathoic Church, or the Catholic Church in general, as financial contributions can not for very long fail to also decline, in fact they probably have somewhat all ready done so.
Then, you realize, the majority, if not all, of Mexican immigrants are Catholic, and would add a considerable number of practising members. In time, this would lead to an increase in donations, as well as a much needed boost in seminarians and priests. The Catholic hierarchy aren't just looking at Mexican immigrants and seeing a cash cow, of course. They are seeing a whole damned herd, crossing the desert, swimming the Rio Grande, from California to Texas, and they want them roped and branded. Not only for the reasons I have mentioned, but due to the fact the Mexicans are for the most part socially conservative. Which bring us to the most important, and scariest, reason of all for the Catholic border position. That many faithful, and grateful, practising Catholics, presumably regular church attendees and generous donors, soon to become American citizens, would prove to be one hell of a voting bloc. A socialy conservative, presumably pliant voting bloc that would vote for the candidates who would certainly increase, and perhaps ultimately cement, the Catholic Church in America's power in Washington, possibly to a position of unchallenged control.
This brings us back to the issue of John Roberts. He will doubtless be confirmed in his position on the Supreme Court, though it might turn out to be a nastier struggle than I had envioned. Once this occurs, what would happen if there are tough new immigration laws passed, one for example that might seem fair, yet at the same time seeks to limit immigration to manageable levels, and at the same time adopts a policy aimed at rigidly enforcing current border policies to ensure that the only Mexican immigrants that move here are the ones who do so legally, out in the open? That all others are stopped at the border, and turned away? That those who are caught after sneaking in are immediately sent back, with the admonition they will never be allowed to return? That there will be penalties for employers caught hiring undocumented ilegal aliens, or for anyone else that aids them in such a way as to be intended to assist them in staying here illegally? That cities who allow the presence of illegal aliens as a policy in oppossition to federal laws will be cut off from all future federal funding and other federal aid as a consequence?
Whatever the laws might state, regardless of how well worded and considered, it will no doubt face stiff legal challenges, which would more than likely eventually place it before the Supreme Court. In such an event, how will John Roberts vote? Conservative, Catholic, John Roberts?
No, I don't like the looks of it.
But even this stance fell fall short of the recent self-serving position recenty advocated by a group of American Bishops as regarding U.S. border policy. They in effect called for an easing of border restrictions, an appeal for amnesty for curent illegals, aid for those illegals who may get in dire straights as a result of flouting our laws, and allowing ever more imigrants to move here legally.
This is self-serving, obviously so, when you consider the statistics. The Catholic Church-and the Vatican-gets the largest share of it's financial contributions from the pockets of American Catholics, more than from any other single group, possibly even more than all others combined. Yet, at the same time, it is a fact that Church conversions are down, as is overall church attendance amongst American Catholics. For the past twenty or thirty years, there has been a troubling shortage of priests and seminarians. If the downward trend continues, it can bode no good for the American Cathoic Church, or the Catholic Church in general, as financial contributions can not for very long fail to also decline, in fact they probably have somewhat all ready done so.
Then, you realize, the majority, if not all, of Mexican immigrants are Catholic, and would add a considerable number of practising members. In time, this would lead to an increase in donations, as well as a much needed boost in seminarians and priests. The Catholic hierarchy aren't just looking at Mexican immigrants and seeing a cash cow, of course. They are seeing a whole damned herd, crossing the desert, swimming the Rio Grande, from California to Texas, and they want them roped and branded. Not only for the reasons I have mentioned, but due to the fact the Mexicans are for the most part socially conservative. Which bring us to the most important, and scariest, reason of all for the Catholic border position. That many faithful, and grateful, practising Catholics, presumably regular church attendees and generous donors, soon to become American citizens, would prove to be one hell of a voting bloc. A socialy conservative, presumably pliant voting bloc that would vote for the candidates who would certainly increase, and perhaps ultimately cement, the Catholic Church in America's power in Washington, possibly to a position of unchallenged control.
This brings us back to the issue of John Roberts. He will doubtless be confirmed in his position on the Supreme Court, though it might turn out to be a nastier struggle than I had envioned. Once this occurs, what would happen if there are tough new immigration laws passed, one for example that might seem fair, yet at the same time seeks to limit immigration to manageable levels, and at the same time adopts a policy aimed at rigidly enforcing current border policies to ensure that the only Mexican immigrants that move here are the ones who do so legally, out in the open? That all others are stopped at the border, and turned away? That those who are caught after sneaking in are immediately sent back, with the admonition they will never be allowed to return? That there will be penalties for employers caught hiring undocumented ilegal aliens, or for anyone else that aids them in such a way as to be intended to assist them in staying here illegally? That cities who allow the presence of illegal aliens as a policy in oppossition to federal laws will be cut off from all future federal funding and other federal aid as a consequence?
Whatever the laws might state, regardless of how well worded and considered, it will no doubt face stiff legal challenges, which would more than likely eventually place it before the Supreme Court. In such an event, how will John Roberts vote? Conservative, Catholic, John Roberts?
No, I don't like the looks of it.
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
The Pro-Choice Movement Meltdown-To Make It Clear
Something I should have added in my last post on this subject, was very important, and yet in my haste I neglected to add one very important detail. I asserted that a parent or parents have evry right to be informed when their young daughter attempts to have an abortion. Some people have taken this to mean that I am advocating that the girl should have their parents consent to have the abortion, that she should not be allowed to have one without her parents permission. Nothing could be furhter from the truth. While I wouldn't go so far as to say it is none ofthe parents business, they certainly should have no say in the matter. They simply have the right to be informed. After all, this is certainly a serious procedure being discussed here, much more serious, for example, than having a mole removed, which no respectful medical professional would perform on an underrage person without the knowledge of the parents. In a procedure such as this, indeed, the parents should be required to give their permission.
However, whether or not to have a child is arguably the most life altering decision a person can make. Way too many young girls actually decide to go through with a pregnancy, in fact I have known of young girls who have tried to get pregnant. They just have this desire to have a baby, and for a variety of reasons. Some get it in their heads that there is money they can make through government agencies, some are simply out for the love and nurturing companionship that comes from being a mother, or perhaps they think they can actually become a real adult through this process and possibly even get the "man" of their dreams.
Would any reasonable, sane adult person advocate that this is a matter of privacy, that the girls parents have no right to interfere or even to be informed of such a stupid activity as this on their daughters part? I would most certainly hope not. How, then, does it follow the parents have no right to be informed as to their daughters seeking an abortion? It doesn't make any sense.
I repeat, the parents should be informed, however, they should have no say in the matter, and the girl should be allowed to have the abortion. In fact, I would if I had my way about it take it even farther than that, and say that a young girl, under the legal age of adulthood, should actually not be allowed to go through with a pregnancy-with or without their parents consent and, for that matter, whether or not they themselves want the abortion.
Think about it. When a teenage girl goes through puberty, she is physically capable of becomming pregnant and carrying a baby, and of giving birth. This can happen as early in most cases at the age of twelve, and in some cases even earlier than this. There is just no legitimate reason for allowing this to happen. Seeing as how in most states it would be illegal for a girl that age to even consent to the act of sexual intercourse, then how does it follow that they should be allowed to become mothers, to give birth, to raise a child?
This is a case where religous and social extremism should give way to common sense, and to legitimate concerns for children, as oppossed to the religous claptrap that passes for it. For once, I would like to see both sides of an issue actually work for the benefit of the children they purport to want to protect, as oppossed to merely using them as the typical pawns they all so often become.
However, whether or not to have a child is arguably the most life altering decision a person can make. Way too many young girls actually decide to go through with a pregnancy, in fact I have known of young girls who have tried to get pregnant. They just have this desire to have a baby, and for a variety of reasons. Some get it in their heads that there is money they can make through government agencies, some are simply out for the love and nurturing companionship that comes from being a mother, or perhaps they think they can actually become a real adult through this process and possibly even get the "man" of their dreams.
Would any reasonable, sane adult person advocate that this is a matter of privacy, that the girls parents have no right to interfere or even to be informed of such a stupid activity as this on their daughters part? I would most certainly hope not. How, then, does it follow the parents have no right to be informed as to their daughters seeking an abortion? It doesn't make any sense.
I repeat, the parents should be informed, however, they should have no say in the matter, and the girl should be allowed to have the abortion. In fact, I would if I had my way about it take it even farther than that, and say that a young girl, under the legal age of adulthood, should actually not be allowed to go through with a pregnancy-with or without their parents consent and, for that matter, whether or not they themselves want the abortion.
Think about it. When a teenage girl goes through puberty, she is physically capable of becomming pregnant and carrying a baby, and of giving birth. This can happen as early in most cases at the age of twelve, and in some cases even earlier than this. There is just no legitimate reason for allowing this to happen. Seeing as how in most states it would be illegal for a girl that age to even consent to the act of sexual intercourse, then how does it follow that they should be allowed to become mothers, to give birth, to raise a child?
This is a case where religous and social extremism should give way to common sense, and to legitimate concerns for children, as oppossed to the religous claptrap that passes for it. For once, I would like to see both sides of an issue actually work for the benefit of the children they purport to want to protect, as oppossed to merely using them as the typical pawns they all so often become.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Teacher Of The Year-Deborah LeFave
Why would anyone in their right mind want to prosecute this woman, when they should be promoting her, for goodness sake? Now, I'm not going to go into this hackneyed business witht he obvious jokes about wishing I had a teacher like that. Simply put, in my case, it damend sure wouldn't be a joke. Now, before I go further, I will admit that a math teacher should be teaching math, and nothing but math, same with history, English, etc.
But hey, why invest so much damned money in sex education and not even teach sex? I mean, you learn by doing, right? And women teachers like Debbie LeFave could be a real godsend, beuase any red-blooded heterosexual American male would absolutely love to do it with her. So why not take advantage of the situation. I mean, the guys are willing. She is obviously willing, and I would wager plenty of others would be as well.
This would be providing a real service. Of course, young girls shouldn't be taught sex in this manner, as they shouldn't be penetrated by a grown man. It's just different for girls than it is for boys, politically correct claptrap to the contrary. But even they can benefit overall from young boys being brought to sexual maturity by a teacher adept at the subject. For one thing, the guys would only get to fuck the teacher once they passed the requisite social skills tests involved, as a reward. In effect, they would have to learn to treat females in general with the respect that they deserve. How could that be a bad thing?
And if the parents of any young boy did not want their young sons to be included in the program, they would have the right to refuse to give permission for it. And that would be it. Of course, that isn't going to be easily made up by a camping trip or a few extra dollars allowance. But life is a bitch, after all.
But hey, why invest so much damned money in sex education and not even teach sex? I mean, you learn by doing, right? And women teachers like Debbie LeFave could be a real godsend, beuase any red-blooded heterosexual American male would absolutely love to do it with her. So why not take advantage of the situation. I mean, the guys are willing. She is obviously willing, and I would wager plenty of others would be as well.
This would be providing a real service. Of course, young girls shouldn't be taught sex in this manner, as they shouldn't be penetrated by a grown man. It's just different for girls than it is for boys, politically correct claptrap to the contrary. But even they can benefit overall from young boys being brought to sexual maturity by a teacher adept at the subject. For one thing, the guys would only get to fuck the teacher once they passed the requisite social skills tests involved, as a reward. In effect, they would have to learn to treat females in general with the respect that they deserve. How could that be a bad thing?
And if the parents of any young boy did not want their young sons to be included in the program, they would have the right to refuse to give permission for it. And that would be it. Of course, that isn't going to be easily made up by a camping trip or a few extra dollars allowance. But life is a bitch, after all.
A Wicked Spell Troll This Way Cums
This is a magical spell that I would not advise any witch to perform. Howevr I feel I am providing a service by informing you of the type of spells that are possible. Not that you should do them. Just be aware of them. Because spells such as this one are negative,and can backfire. And besides, it is just wrong to manipulate people's free will by using magic to make them do your bidding. However, IF YOU WANTED TO DO ONE, AND ABSOLUTELY FELT YOU HAD TO, THIS WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TO :
FUCK YOUR TEACHER
You will need a large red candle, in the middle of an altar. At the north, you will need an apple. At the east, a censor, or a stick of incense. At the south, a brazier. And at the west, a cup of wine. Invoke the elements as you cast the circle, calling Power Earth at the North, as you ritually empower the apple; Powerair at the est, as you ritually empower the incense and light it; Power Fire at the south as you ritually empower the brazier, which you will light; At west, invoke power water as you ritually empower the wine. Return to the north, and pick up the apple. Carry it to the east, allowing the smoke of the incense to waft over the apple. Carry it to the south, allowing the heat of the brazier's flames (use small bit of alcohol for this flame, and some toilet tissue to extend the life of the flame, but be cautious) to anfuse the apple with it's power. Proceed back to the west, where you will sip the wine, after which you will proceed to the center of the ritual space, and kneel before the candle. Have beside the candle a bowl, in which you should pour the wine into. Using the power of your visualization, see yourself having an affair with your favorite teacher as you push the apple down into the empowered wine. Hold it there as you project the energy of your sexual passion of your visualizations into the apple.
Once you are finished with the visualization to your satisfaction, release the elements, thanking them for their assistance. Wrap the apple in a specially preparee ritual cheeseloth, and place in a safe spot, preferably in your refrigerator, for purpioses of protecting it.
The next time you see your teacher, during class, you will have the apple with you. This is important: do not offer the apple to the teacher, or leave it on his or her desk. Simply carry it on your person through the entirety of the class, ensuring that you participate in class discussions, etc., while maintaining eye contact with your teacher. However, if he or she asks, at the end of class, if the apple is for him or her, simply hand it to the teacher, saying "it's yours if you want it". Then, without another word, simply walk out, pausing just long enough to look back at him or her and smile.
It will only be a matter of time.
FUCK YOUR TEACHER
You will need a large red candle, in the middle of an altar. At the north, you will need an apple. At the east, a censor, or a stick of incense. At the south, a brazier. And at the west, a cup of wine. Invoke the elements as you cast the circle, calling Power Earth at the North, as you ritually empower the apple; Powerair at the est, as you ritually empower the incense and light it; Power Fire at the south as you ritually empower the brazier, which you will light; At west, invoke power water as you ritually empower the wine. Return to the north, and pick up the apple. Carry it to the east, allowing the smoke of the incense to waft over the apple. Carry it to the south, allowing the heat of the brazier's flames (use small bit of alcohol for this flame, and some toilet tissue to extend the life of the flame, but be cautious) to anfuse the apple with it's power. Proceed back to the west, where you will sip the wine, after which you will proceed to the center of the ritual space, and kneel before the candle. Have beside the candle a bowl, in which you should pour the wine into. Using the power of your visualization, see yourself having an affair with your favorite teacher as you push the apple down into the empowered wine. Hold it there as you project the energy of your sexual passion of your visualizations into the apple.
Once you are finished with the visualization to your satisfaction, release the elements, thanking them for their assistance. Wrap the apple in a specially preparee ritual cheeseloth, and place in a safe spot, preferably in your refrigerator, for purpioses of protecting it.
The next time you see your teacher, during class, you will have the apple with you. This is important: do not offer the apple to the teacher, or leave it on his or her desk. Simply carry it on your person through the entirety of the class, ensuring that you participate in class discussions, etc., while maintaining eye contact with your teacher. However, if he or she asks, at the end of class, if the apple is for him or her, simply hand it to the teacher, saying "it's yours if you want it". Then, without another word, simply walk out, pausing just long enough to look back at him or her and smile.
It will only be a matter of time.
Pregos And Their Sex Addict Babies
I've fucked a lot of pregnant chicks in my time. I don't know why, when I was married, I wouldn't fuck my wife when she was pregnant for the life of me. But that was different. Give me a woman who is pregant by another man-especially, most especially, by her husband, and I will fuck her over and over and over again. I get a perverse thrill out of it. What the hell, I can't get her pregnant, right? I used to enjoy telling guys whose wives were pregant that I loved to fuck pregant women that were married to other guys. They would just give me this look. Now, I wouldn't be talking about their wives, of course. Heh, heh, heh.
But recently, I got to wondering, just what am I doing? Am I creating a whole line of sex addicts? I'm serious here. Face it, if a pregnat woman takes drugs, or drinks heavily, or even smokes cigarrettes, while pregant, it is pretty much an establshed fact that their babies are going to be born addicted to whatever substance the mothers were ingesting during their preganancies.
It is also an established fact by now that sex can be an addiction. Sooo, if I fuck a pregant woman, am I possibly going to cause that baby to be a sex addict? And is this possibly the reason there are so many sex addicted people in the world now to begine with? After all, sex during pregnancy was pretty much considered taboo before the nineteen sixties, though I'm sure quite a few pregnant women did engage in the act. But not like nowadays.
Now before anybody ridicules this notion, there is one more pertinent fact to be considered. Not only does a baby ingest whatever substance it's mother ingests while it is being carried by her, but it actually feels the same emotions as the mother. That would include what the mother is feeling when I'm getting her hot as a rocket, the feelings she has while I am fucking her, the emotions she feels when she is having an orgasm.
In conclusion, the question becomes not will these babies be born sex addicts, but rather, how could they not be?
But recently, I got to wondering, just what am I doing? Am I creating a whole line of sex addicts? I'm serious here. Face it, if a pregnat woman takes drugs, or drinks heavily, or even smokes cigarrettes, while pregant, it is pretty much an establshed fact that their babies are going to be born addicted to whatever substance the mothers were ingesting during their preganancies.
It is also an established fact by now that sex can be an addiction. Sooo, if I fuck a pregant woman, am I possibly going to cause that baby to be a sex addict? And is this possibly the reason there are so many sex addicted people in the world now to begine with? After all, sex during pregnancy was pretty much considered taboo before the nineteen sixties, though I'm sure quite a few pregnant women did engage in the act. But not like nowadays.
Now before anybody ridicules this notion, there is one more pertinent fact to be considered. Not only does a baby ingest whatever substance it's mother ingests while it is being carried by her, but it actually feels the same emotions as the mother. That would include what the mother is feeling when I'm getting her hot as a rocket, the feelings she has while I am fucking her, the emotions she feels when she is having an orgasm.
In conclusion, the question becomes not will these babies be born sex addicts, but rather, how could they not be?
Mercury And Autism-Part III
There was recently a protest in Washington, D.C., that got precous little press coverage, as it involves families who have very serious reservations pertaining to the latest pronouncements of the Centers For Disease Control, and other organs of government. In effect, concerning the effects of the use of mercury in childhood vacinnes, and the potential link to the recent escalation in cases of autism in children, which they would have us believe is non-existent. There is no scientific evidence to establish any such link, they say.
So why was the use of mercury discontinued, if that were the case? Just to be on the safe side? Just in case? Seems unlikely, as the properties of mecury would otherwise make it amenable for continued use, otherwise it would not have been utilized to begin with. And, indeed, it is still being used in a number of booster shots, and in some flu vaccines. Why is this the case? Does common sense not dictate the use of caution? Why take such a chance? Or is this the reason for the CDC's denials? Again, is it a matter of money overriding the true public interest, even that of the health of the nations children?
Then, there is the issue of overseas sending of these vaccines to foreign countries that are expriencing epidemics. This could indeed cause a real diplomatic nightmare for the U.S. in the future. And it could also cause a future settlement in the hundreds of billions of dollars to be appropriate, possibly necessitating a government bail out of the entire pharmaceutical industry. The only other option might be seeing our pharmaceutical industry giants being forced to sell out, possibly to foreign companies, whose hands the nations health might then be in the grip of.
But even if the pharmaceutical companies survive, or are replaced with other domestic companies, this will not make up for the lives of thousands, possibly tens of thousands of families, both here and abroad,whose lives may have been ruined forever by this gross neglect and abuse.
If it is the truth, that is. But the concerns of these parents should be heard, and given all due consideration. The claims should be investigated, not by the CDC, or the FDA, or any other such agency which is little more than a wholly owned subsidiarie of the pharmaceuatcal industry. But by the Justice Department itself. Nor would live hearings before Congress be wholly inappropriate.
So why was the use of mercury discontinued, if that were the case? Just to be on the safe side? Just in case? Seems unlikely, as the properties of mecury would otherwise make it amenable for continued use, otherwise it would not have been utilized to begin with. And, indeed, it is still being used in a number of booster shots, and in some flu vaccines. Why is this the case? Does common sense not dictate the use of caution? Why take such a chance? Or is this the reason for the CDC's denials? Again, is it a matter of money overriding the true public interest, even that of the health of the nations children?
Then, there is the issue of overseas sending of these vaccines to foreign countries that are expriencing epidemics. This could indeed cause a real diplomatic nightmare for the U.S. in the future. And it could also cause a future settlement in the hundreds of billions of dollars to be appropriate, possibly necessitating a government bail out of the entire pharmaceutical industry. The only other option might be seeing our pharmaceutical industry giants being forced to sell out, possibly to foreign companies, whose hands the nations health might then be in the grip of.
But even if the pharmaceutical companies survive, or are replaced with other domestic companies, this will not make up for the lives of thousands, possibly tens of thousands of families, both here and abroad,whose lives may have been ruined forever by this gross neglect and abuse.
If it is the truth, that is. But the concerns of these parents should be heard, and given all due consideration. The claims should be investigated, not by the CDC, or the FDA, or any other such agency which is little more than a wholly owned subsidiarie of the pharmaceuatcal industry. But by the Justice Department itself. Nor would live hearings before Congress be wholly inappropriate.
The Pro Choice Movement Meltdown
While the recent protests in Washington, over the denial of links of Mercury in childhood vaccines to autism, were going on and getting precous little coverage, the media chose instead to focus on the on-going protests and dire warnings of doom issued by various Pro-Choice groups concerned over the reent nomination of John Roberts, of the Fifth U.S. District Curt of Washington, D.C., to the U.S. Supreme Court.
They just aren't going to give up, it seems, until Bush relents and nominates somebody that everyone knows for a fact is a rabid anti-abortion judge who will most definitely, without question, vote eventually to overturn Roe v. Wade. Unlike Roberts, whose only pronouncements ont he subject were as an attorney while in the porocess of representing his client. Yet, Roberts has as well, it turns out, had clients that required him to advocate from a liberal position. In one case, he advocated agaisnt a business consortium that wanted to take over an area made up of private home owners, in order to promote some kind of business development. There simply is no way of knowing where he stands onthe abortion issue. If I had to guess I would imagne that he is probably aganst it. But does it follow he is going to agitate for an excuse to overturn an established court precedent. I hardly think that is likely. Courts do not in general like to overturn precedents, as they would not like their own to one day be overturned. The few exceptions to these have certainly been understandable and appropriate. Brown v. Board of Eduacation was one such decison to overturn precedent.
So what are the extremists in the Pro-Choice crowd so worried about? The possible answer to this lies in the recent controversy involving the rights of parental notification. In other words if a teenage girl decides to get an abortion. They are against any such laws, on privacy grounds. The old canard they usualy float is that some parents may have molested their daughters, neices, and therefore they have a right to hide the abortion from these abusers. I am ashamed to admit it, but I at first bought this argment, actually took it at face value. But it's a stupid argument. To begin with, if a man impregnated his own dauhgter, I would imagine he would be more than happy to agree to her getting an abortion. Furthermore, the minute the paper work is made out, and they find out this is the reason the girl has not as yet gotten parental consent to have the abortion, they will certainly take care of that problem, with all it's potential consequences.
So what's the problem here? A young girl, or boy, who is under age, can not get any kind of medical procedure without parental consent. Why should an abortion be any different? It is just unreasonable to promote such a right, or to fight any law that is meant actually to insure the protection of the young and vulnerable from the dangers of abuse. Some of these people have never seen an abortion they didn't like or couldn't approve of, it seems, and they will brook no interference from anyone.
So then that brings up the question, what is the real problem with Roberts, other than his potential support of parental notification, and his probable readiness to support limits on third trimester abortions? Is this nothing, when all is said and done, but a massive fund raising effort on the part of the Pro-Choice groups? Would they make even more in the way of contributions if they could force Bush to nominate another Clarence Thomas? If so, then that is pretty pathetic, and would reveal the truth to something that I have suspected for some time now. That the movers and shakers, the leaders, of the Pro-Choice Movement, have taken it to the point that it really isn't about women's reproductive freedom and privacy rights anymore. It's just another big business with fiscal targets projections.
They just aren't going to give up, it seems, until Bush relents and nominates somebody that everyone knows for a fact is a rabid anti-abortion judge who will most definitely, without question, vote eventually to overturn Roe v. Wade. Unlike Roberts, whose only pronouncements ont he subject were as an attorney while in the porocess of representing his client. Yet, Roberts has as well, it turns out, had clients that required him to advocate from a liberal position. In one case, he advocated agaisnt a business consortium that wanted to take over an area made up of private home owners, in order to promote some kind of business development. There simply is no way of knowing where he stands onthe abortion issue. If I had to guess I would imagne that he is probably aganst it. But does it follow he is going to agitate for an excuse to overturn an established court precedent. I hardly think that is likely. Courts do not in general like to overturn precedents, as they would not like their own to one day be overturned. The few exceptions to these have certainly been understandable and appropriate. Brown v. Board of Eduacation was one such decison to overturn precedent.
So what are the extremists in the Pro-Choice crowd so worried about? The possible answer to this lies in the recent controversy involving the rights of parental notification. In other words if a teenage girl decides to get an abortion. They are against any such laws, on privacy grounds. The old canard they usualy float is that some parents may have molested their daughters, neices, and therefore they have a right to hide the abortion from these abusers. I am ashamed to admit it, but I at first bought this argment, actually took it at face value. But it's a stupid argument. To begin with, if a man impregnated his own dauhgter, I would imagine he would be more than happy to agree to her getting an abortion. Furthermore, the minute the paper work is made out, and they find out this is the reason the girl has not as yet gotten parental consent to have the abortion, they will certainly take care of that problem, with all it's potential consequences.
So what's the problem here? A young girl, or boy, who is under age, can not get any kind of medical procedure without parental consent. Why should an abortion be any different? It is just unreasonable to promote such a right, or to fight any law that is meant actually to insure the protection of the young and vulnerable from the dangers of abuse. Some of these people have never seen an abortion they didn't like or couldn't approve of, it seems, and they will brook no interference from anyone.
So then that brings up the question, what is the real problem with Roberts, other than his potential support of parental notification, and his probable readiness to support limits on third trimester abortions? Is this nothing, when all is said and done, but a massive fund raising effort on the part of the Pro-Choice groups? Would they make even more in the way of contributions if they could force Bush to nominate another Clarence Thomas? If so, then that is pretty pathetic, and would reveal the truth to something that I have suspected for some time now. That the movers and shakers, the leaders, of the Pro-Choice Movement, have taken it to the point that it really isn't about women's reproductive freedom and privacy rights anymore. It's just another big business with fiscal targets projections.
Eric Rudolph
The anti-abortion movement, the so-called Pro-Life movement, have always struck me as being anything but. The most radical ones are against stem cell research, they are against birth control, or sex education in public schools, with the exception of abstinence only education, and finally, they are against public assistance for unwed mothers. Yet, they insist that all abortion is evil, and murder, and should not be allowed under any circumstances. Small wonder that the movement would from time to time produce such monsters as Eric Rudolph, who was recently sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole for his role in several abortion clinic bombings, the results of which included the death of a police officer who worked off duty as a guard at the clinic, as well as the partial blinding and disfigurement of a nursewho worked there.
This same nurse, at Rudolph's sentencing, was given the opportunity to question the monster, and did so with the following question: "who appointed you to rule over the lives of all women?"
I could answer that question for her. He receives his comands from such notables as "Doctor" James Dobson, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and finally, dare I say it, the last two recent Popes. Yes, I include John Paul II as being one of this sick and deluded man's enablers. Listen closely to the words they speak on this issue. It is not what they say, or even how they say it, so much as it is the medium in which it is presented, and to whom. These are people to whom their religous beliefs are everything, and if you do not agree with them, you are of the devil. Satan. Demon Possessed. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort, even if it is honestly not your intention, when you are dealing with this kind of mind-set, to ignite the fuse of hatred and religous intolerance.
With these people, we have our own set of homegrown terrorists, and they are every bit as fanatical, as evil, as determined, as the Muslims of the Middle East who engage in their own perverted version of Islam in much the same fashion. And if you get on their wrong side, they will kill you just as quickly, and just as gleefully. After all, they are doing it for the greater glory of God.
This same nurse, at Rudolph's sentencing, was given the opportunity to question the monster, and did so with the following question: "who appointed you to rule over the lives of all women?"
I could answer that question for her. He receives his comands from such notables as "Doctor" James Dobson, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and finally, dare I say it, the last two recent Popes. Yes, I include John Paul II as being one of this sick and deluded man's enablers. Listen closely to the words they speak on this issue. It is not what they say, or even how they say it, so much as it is the medium in which it is presented, and to whom. These are people to whom their religous beliefs are everything, and if you do not agree with them, you are of the devil. Satan. Demon Possessed. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort, even if it is honestly not your intention, when you are dealing with this kind of mind-set, to ignite the fuse of hatred and religous intolerance.
With these people, we have our own set of homegrown terrorists, and they are every bit as fanatical, as evil, as determined, as the Muslims of the Middle East who engage in their own perverted version of Islam in much the same fashion. And if you get on their wrong side, they will kill you just as quickly, and just as gleefully. After all, they are doing it for the greater glory of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)