Life is stranger then fiction. Maybe that's because of our poor imagination. But what we have here is an agreement on something between me/this blog and Pat Robertson. Don't let me lead you astray, he is an awful bigot, a frothy fecal pile, a religious huckster, and loathsome vacuous sick evangelist and yet we can agree on marijuana, please watch.
They say if you live long enough........I fear that he may have ulterior motives but I'll take any progress I can get.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Pet owners
I found this video on youtube and it is very powerful. Watch first.
I had this experience once and I don't care to repeat it. We had a doberman, who when he was 15, started to have seizures. I was also 15 then as well so I knew this dog my whole life. He could no longer walk all the time and had to have his back legs carried when it came time to go to the 'bathroom'. He wasn't always disabled for he could walk again in a few days after a seizure. The adults in my life came to the determination that this was his time and that he should be euthanized.
I can remember that day quite well. Saying goodbye, knowing that was our last few hours together, made for a strange day indeed. When our appointment came and he was put on the exam table, I felt rather emotionless. When the Dr. put the needle in and pushed in the fluid, it was a rather peaceful, almost eventless event. But the part that is ingrained most firmly in my memory was his eyes. He was looking at me as he fell asleep and I can remember how they almost turned black, as if it was truly a light bulb going out. His eyes were closing as he grew weaker, until his head was resting on the table. So there he lay motionless, dead, pain free, while one last goodbye was said and we left for home.
As a male I feel it is a requirement, almost a duty to not show emotion of the sad sort even at events like this. But I can tell you I feel nearly overwhelmed reciting this story, not only in words but in clear memory. The job that these people do is an unenviable one that I could not do. At one point in this film the Dr. says you begin to feel like putting a gun in your mouth. I can see how easy it would be to feel that way and I hope the reader does as well. According to the Human Society there are about 3-4 million homeless animals euthanized every year. It should seem immediately apparent there is a moral wrong being committed by our nation. The best solution it seems is to spay or neuter your pets. Not only for the quality of life for the animals but for the well being of the people who have to do this ghastly deed that ALL of us are indebted to.
I wanted to promote this video to get the word out, for I do not know what else to do to help. Education about this topic seems key to any success. As anyone who has lost a longtime pet can appreciate the work involved for anyone who has to euthanize so many animals. It is a grave misdeed to breed indiscriminately, to care not for the consequences of breeding too many animals, and for the rest of us to not put social pressure on fellow citizens, friends, and family members who partake in the actions which lead to the wholesale slaughter of otherwise good pets.
I had this experience once and I don't care to repeat it. We had a doberman, who when he was 15, started to have seizures. I was also 15 then as well so I knew this dog my whole life. He could no longer walk all the time and had to have his back legs carried when it came time to go to the 'bathroom'. He wasn't always disabled for he could walk again in a few days after a seizure. The adults in my life came to the determination that this was his time and that he should be euthanized.
I can remember that day quite well. Saying goodbye, knowing that was our last few hours together, made for a strange day indeed. When our appointment came and he was put on the exam table, I felt rather emotionless. When the Dr. put the needle in and pushed in the fluid, it was a rather peaceful, almost eventless event. But the part that is ingrained most firmly in my memory was his eyes. He was looking at me as he fell asleep and I can remember how they almost turned black, as if it was truly a light bulb going out. His eyes were closing as he grew weaker, until his head was resting on the table. So there he lay motionless, dead, pain free, while one last goodbye was said and we left for home.
As a male I feel it is a requirement, almost a duty to not show emotion of the sad sort even at events like this. But I can tell you I feel nearly overwhelmed reciting this story, not only in words but in clear memory. The job that these people do is an unenviable one that I could not do. At one point in this film the Dr. says you begin to feel like putting a gun in your mouth. I can see how easy it would be to feel that way and I hope the reader does as well. According to the Human Society there are about 3-4 million homeless animals euthanized every year. It should seem immediately apparent there is a moral wrong being committed by our nation. The best solution it seems is to spay or neuter your pets. Not only for the quality of life for the animals but for the well being of the people who have to do this ghastly deed that ALL of us are indebted to.
I wanted to promote this video to get the word out, for I do not know what else to do to help. Education about this topic seems key to any success. As anyone who has lost a longtime pet can appreciate the work involved for anyone who has to euthanize so many animals. It is a grave misdeed to breed indiscriminately, to care not for the consequences of breeding too many animals, and for the rest of us to not put social pressure on fellow citizens, friends, and family members who partake in the actions which lead to the wholesale slaughter of otherwise good pets.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Due Process
You know about all those crazy people in the past who said conspiracy theory this murder laws that. You know, those hucksters that tried to make you fear your government and said the government does not have your interests at heart. Well all fiction aside, Orwell's 1984 is becoming real. In this video, by The Young Turks, highlighting a talk by Eric Holder, Attorney General of the U.S., who was the overseer of "operation fast and furious", where the U.S. government allowed weapons to be funneled into Mexico, who then later blamed the U.S. for our 'poor' policy of gun control, who gave a talk about assassinating U.S. citizens. It is now law in the U.S. that the executive branch can now order the killing of U.S. citizens anywhere in the world without regard for what a court may say. In fact we have already killed some but how many, nobody knows.
http://www.theyoungturks.com/
When will this paranoid insanity end. We have become a nation of scared denizens. We can blame both parties here, for this is worse than what Bush II has done. He may have set the stage but Obama has taken the reigns and is sending freedom down the road to oblivion. They no longer need to present evidence or show it to a court. They have no need to make charges. No lawyer will look into your defense for you no longer have one. They are now judge, jury, and executioner which is in direct conflict with the constitution. I don't know why there is no outrage and I am positive many among us would defend these psychotic laws and logic with an appeal for our safety. We need to get the terrorists. Terrorists, Terrorists, Terrorists. Its such a joke in any other context except for this is real life.
If we want to end this nightmare, the only politician which opposes this on all fronts is Ron Paul. Sadly I have strong doubts he will win and in the past he has said "it is not about winning. It's about the message." Although he's correct that it's about the message we would be in a superior position if we could get him elected. I suppose having a constitutionalist in power really is a radical agenda. Who knew?
http://www.theyoungturks.com/
When will this paranoid insanity end. We have become a nation of scared denizens. We can blame both parties here, for this is worse than what Bush II has done. He may have set the stage but Obama has taken the reigns and is sending freedom down the road to oblivion. They no longer need to present evidence or show it to a court. They have no need to make charges. No lawyer will look into your defense for you no longer have one. They are now judge, jury, and executioner which is in direct conflict with the constitution. I don't know why there is no outrage and I am positive many among us would defend these psychotic laws and logic with an appeal for our safety. We need to get the terrorists. Terrorists, Terrorists, Terrorists. Its such a joke in any other context except for this is real life.
If we want to end this nightmare, the only politician which opposes this on all fronts is Ron Paul. Sadly I have strong doubts he will win and in the past he has said "it is not about winning. It's about the message." Although he's correct that it's about the message we would be in a superior position if we could get him elected. I suppose having a constitutionalist in power really is a radical agenda. Who knew?
Monday, March 5, 2012
True Conservative?
As evidenced by this blog, I both enjoy and am vexed by politics. I have always thought of myself as a conservative, not necessarily a far right winger but probably a conservative moderate. I have become particularly confused by the rhetoric espoused by the Republican presidential candidates, so I began to investigate what are the issues that separate the two ideals. A search of "am I left or right", or "am I a republican or democrat" reveals many multiple choice quizzes in which to provide an answer. I find many of these tests to have a unfair bias in the questions and which some questions are outright egregious. To my slight confusion and surprise, these tests reveal I'm a hard liberal?!
One of my chief concerns in the past has been of gun control or better stated, ones free ability to have arms. I am guilty of sometimes being a single issue voter for I reason that if a politician doesn't trust the populace to have arms, I cannot trust him to put MY freedom in his charge. Without knowing who to quote on this statement but I see truth in it, "The second amendment protects all the others." A quick study of history reveals that every populace who has had sweeping gun control policies, a brutal government quickly follows who often uses violence to further its own aims. In reading the second amendment, it seems very plain, that the founding fathers intended for private firearm ownership to be a normal part of life but many liberals and democrats have viewed the "militia clause" to mean that only the military or national guard should have access to weapons. Another short motto as follows, "an unarmed man is a subject, an armed man is a citizen."
With that said I begin to wonder what classification my values fall under and what it would take to slide to the right. First off I value separation of church and state, as outlined in the constitution, I value the secular state. I also value environmental standards. I value individual rights, an almost tripe utterance with no meaning of its own. I also value free expression, protesting the government and corporations, helping the poor, and smaller government. Both parties pay lip service to these values but I have to state that the republican party as been the most ardent violator of these principals.
The republican party swaggers up to the podium and invokes god at nearly every turn at the same time they are opposed to the welfare state. If they believe in the tenants of Jesus Christ, they must also give as much support to the poor as possible and yet giving to the poor seems to be a democratic idea. Or better stated, the government giving to the poor as opposed to the church giving to the poor and yet the government gives welfare out in orders of magnitude more than the church does. Very confusing. When I say welfare state I do not merely mean cheese and milk, I mean all welfare programs, living assistance, unemployment insurance, and yes even health care. Jesus said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter heaven."
.jpg)
The environment: Since when did protecting the environment become only a democratic ideal? I suppose since it 'infringes' on the 'rights' of business to pollute indiscriminately that this becomes a leftist anti-business issue. I would agree that many environmental policies go haywire as in the case of connecting wind farms to the power grid by not letting power lines be built though the forest. And yet in many, many instances, we let business pollute on a horrendous scale. When an animal farm dumps it's waste into public rivers and waterways and disrupts all life in that ecosystem, why does bipartisan outrage evaporate? The same republicans who love the outdoors, who love to go boating, hunting and fishing also pay for this environmental cost for the benefit of a tiny minority. Very confusing.
Rich Santorum has seen broad support in the party. I participated in the republican caucus in Spokane, WA and in our precinct Ron Paul narrowly won with Santorum only one vote behind while he took second in the overall county vote. (http://elections.msnbc.msn.com/ns/politics/2012/washington/republican/caucus/#.T1W1_ocgdTI) Even though Paul took a narrow second in Washington total counts, Santorum has done very well in other parts of the country. These polling results show that Santorum's views are indeed indicative of the party as a large percentage. Santorum does not support the separation of church and state but would insert HIS version of the bible into the law of the land. Would your religious views align with his? I would be certain that statistics would prove me correct in saying that Santorum's views DO NOT represent the nation as a whole and yet his supporters care not for this fact. Santorum would fit in very well with middle eastern Imams and Ayatollahs in regards to the structure of government they both pursue. Very confusing.
Expansion of government has been the norm under both parties but it is the republican party that advocates the loudest for smaller government. And yet it was Bush II and his party that created the Patriot Act, no child left behind, and expansion of the TSA to name only a few. By the way the Patriot Act is anything but and in fact it should be called the 'Repeal the fourth amendment act'. If they want smaller government why have they increased it exponentially. Very confusing. I won't bother much with the TSA here (which gives a good idea for a future post) other than to say; how can normal men and women do this as a job everyday. It is disgusting what we have become and how did we survive before this aggressive abuse? Oh, we did just fine.
.jpg)
I really don't understand why conservatism has been reversed to mean abuse of power. I don't know why 'conserving' our resources by keeping our water and air clean now equates to a 'radical liberal agenda'?. I would have to suppose by what conservatives call conservation is; keeping the money changers and abusive business in power. One question which seemed to separate left from right was: Do corporations have a social responsibility or do they simply need to create money for the shareholders? Certainly the main goal of business or a corporation is to make money but to suggest that a business has no social responsibility is a backwards idea. They may not need to feed the starving but at the very minimum a corporation should do no harm. Instead our corporations, as evidenced by the wall street debacle, have become predatory and acutely greedy.
And I haven't covered 'gay rights' which is another anomaly of the republican parties lip service to individual rights. Very confusing.
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.- Einstein
One of my chief concerns in the past has been of gun control or better stated, ones free ability to have arms. I am guilty of sometimes being a single issue voter for I reason that if a politician doesn't trust the populace to have arms, I cannot trust him to put MY freedom in his charge. Without knowing who to quote on this statement but I see truth in it, "The second amendment protects all the others." A quick study of history reveals that every populace who has had sweeping gun control policies, a brutal government quickly follows who often uses violence to further its own aims. In reading the second amendment, it seems very plain, that the founding fathers intended for private firearm ownership to be a normal part of life but many liberals and democrats have viewed the "militia clause" to mean that only the military or national guard should have access to weapons. Another short motto as follows, "an unarmed man is a subject, an armed man is a citizen."
With that said I begin to wonder what classification my values fall under and what it would take to slide to the right. First off I value separation of church and state, as outlined in the constitution, I value the secular state. I also value environmental standards. I value individual rights, an almost tripe utterance with no meaning of its own. I also value free expression, protesting the government and corporations, helping the poor, and smaller government. Both parties pay lip service to these values but I have to state that the republican party as been the most ardent violator of these principals.
The republican party swaggers up to the podium and invokes god at nearly every turn at the same time they are opposed to the welfare state. If they believe in the tenants of Jesus Christ, they must also give as much support to the poor as possible and yet giving to the poor seems to be a democratic idea. Or better stated, the government giving to the poor as opposed to the church giving to the poor and yet the government gives welfare out in orders of magnitude more than the church does. Very confusing. When I say welfare state I do not merely mean cheese and milk, I mean all welfare programs, living assistance, unemployment insurance, and yes even health care. Jesus said, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter heaven."
The environment: Since when did protecting the environment become only a democratic ideal? I suppose since it 'infringes' on the 'rights' of business to pollute indiscriminately that this becomes a leftist anti-business issue. I would agree that many environmental policies go haywire as in the case of connecting wind farms to the power grid by not letting power lines be built though the forest. And yet in many, many instances, we let business pollute on a horrendous scale. When an animal farm dumps it's waste into public rivers and waterways and disrupts all life in that ecosystem, why does bipartisan outrage evaporate? The same republicans who love the outdoors, who love to go boating, hunting and fishing also pay for this environmental cost for the benefit of a tiny minority. Very confusing.
Rich Santorum has seen broad support in the party. I participated in the republican caucus in Spokane, WA and in our precinct Ron Paul narrowly won with Santorum only one vote behind while he took second in the overall county vote. (http://elections.msnbc.msn.com/ns/politics/2012/washington/republican/caucus/#.T1W1_ocgdTI) Even though Paul took a narrow second in Washington total counts, Santorum has done very well in other parts of the country. These polling results show that Santorum's views are indeed indicative of the party as a large percentage. Santorum does not support the separation of church and state but would insert HIS version of the bible into the law of the land. Would your religious views align with his? I would be certain that statistics would prove me correct in saying that Santorum's views DO NOT represent the nation as a whole and yet his supporters care not for this fact. Santorum would fit in very well with middle eastern Imams and Ayatollahs in regards to the structure of government they both pursue. Very confusing.
Expansion of government has been the norm under both parties but it is the republican party that advocates the loudest for smaller government. And yet it was Bush II and his party that created the Patriot Act, no child left behind, and expansion of the TSA to name only a few. By the way the Patriot Act is anything but and in fact it should be called the 'Repeal the fourth amendment act'. If they want smaller government why have they increased it exponentially. Very confusing. I won't bother much with the TSA here (which gives a good idea for a future post) other than to say; how can normal men and women do this as a job everyday. It is disgusting what we have become and how did we survive before this aggressive abuse? Oh, we did just fine.
I really don't understand why conservatism has been reversed to mean abuse of power. I don't know why 'conserving' our resources by keeping our water and air clean now equates to a 'radical liberal agenda'?. I would have to suppose by what conservatives call conservation is; keeping the money changers and abusive business in power. One question which seemed to separate left from right was: Do corporations have a social responsibility or do they simply need to create money for the shareholders? Certainly the main goal of business or a corporation is to make money but to suggest that a business has no social responsibility is a backwards idea. They may not need to feed the starving but at the very minimum a corporation should do no harm. Instead our corporations, as evidenced by the wall street debacle, have become predatory and acutely greedy.
And I haven't covered 'gay rights' which is another anomaly of the republican parties lip service to individual rights. Very confusing.
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.- Einstein
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)