News and Opinions - Blog Chow

Pluto is no longer a planet. Not sure what it takes to get on that voting board, but the planet that was discovered in 1930 is gone. Astrologers say this does not affect astrology, but it does seem to throw a monkey wrench into that whole field…

The new guidelines for planets say that a planet needs to meet three rules:

*It must orbit the Sun
*It must be big enough for gravity to squash it into being roughly round
*It must have cleared other things out of the way in its orbital neighborhood

Pluto apparently didn’t do a good enough job of cleaning house.

I know a few people who meet the criteria to be a planet. To be a dwarf planet, you only have to be round. I know quite a few people who could be dwarf planets. I think we should vote on the use of the word dwarf. I find the language to be very insensitive. What else can we vote on? Let’s have a few drinks and vote on whether gravity actually exists or whether the the temperature of the sun is high enough to be considered “roughly” hot…

Much of what I learned as a child about astronomy has turned out to be wrong. I think the real problem here is distinguishing between fact and theory. Science seems to embrace a lot of theory as facts these days. I should say some so called scientists, teachers and politicians… Man-made global warming is something that is being passed off as scientifically proven, but with so much conflicting information and debate surrounding it it’s definately only a theory. A theory that can never be proven.

A lighthearted look at the New York Times, which is thought by many to be guilty of treason. They seem to have done as much to aid the terrorists as anyone has, but on to the humor:

10. Extensive coverage of recent fighting between the Israelis and the lesbians

1. Reporting that Oprah isn’t gay, but Letterman is

Kicked to the curb by the hypocritical liberals, I believe Joe Lieberman is far from finished. Lieberman made the classic mistake of a fallen modern day democrat - having an open mind. The party which always claims to have an open mind not only doesn’t, it doesn’t even have a conscience. Lieberman has supported his party on 90% of the issues. There simply isn’t any room anymore for anyone who analyzes the issues and tries to get things done in a non-partisan manner.

When John McCain flip-flops on the issues he is labeled a maverick. Surely Lieberman deserves that label for not only having some of his own opinions, but for fighting on as a 3rd party candidate. It takes guts nowadays to resist the marching orders that say you must disagree with everything the other party does, regardless of whether you actually agree with them or not. That is obviously what you are supposed to do if you are a democrat these days. Ann Coulter was certainly on to something when she wrote ‘Godless: The Church of Liberalism.’ This is more proof of that.

The media isn’t calling Lieberman a maverick. They are questioning how he can run against his own party. The dirty trick of turning a democrat into a traitor for going against their party on something, but when a conservative like John McCain does it, they are a “maverick”. The real truth is that John McCain is a shameless politician and Joe Lieberman has some integrity.

Not only did the liberals elect Lieberman’s opponent on the basis of one issue, they continue to show their hypocrisy by voting in yet another rich man. Ned Lamont is a one-trick pony and I think a lot of people on both sides of the political spectrum will back Lieberman in the election in November. I don’t agree with Lieberman on a lot of issues, but certainly like the fact that he has more character than most prominent democrats and he also has some guts. You can count on one hand all the democrats who fit that profile. It takes both hands and maybe part of your second foot to count the republicans who fit that profile. I would vote for him under the circumstances if I was from Connecticut. Who knows, maybe this will spur a real independent party. A party where candidates actually vote on issues and not just tow the party line. I can dream, can’t I?

Even more hypocrisy is shown by the liberals for booting out a minority. They want the minority vote, but they don’t seem to want minorities in high positions so much. Joe Lieberman was good enough for these guys when they thought Al Gore needed a token Jew to push him and the party over the top in the 2000 Presidential Election. Thanks Joe. Here’s your hat, what’s your hurry? Can we still be friends? 2006 doesn’t seem like a good time to be Jewish. I doubt racism was a major factor in this, but you can’t help but wonder when race baiters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are in the corner of Ned Lamont.

The reason the fringe liberal groups worked so hard to get Lieberman’s opponent elected was to prove that everyone is against the War on Terror. That is the conclusion they expect everyone to make from this. Just like the bogus polls that get so much news coverage are meant more to sway opinion than reveal it. There is no room for a variety of opinions. One size fits all in the liberal party and in the liberal media. No room for opinions at all. You simply disagree with the other party no matter what. You don’t need to offer a better plan, just be like like John Kerry and tell everyone your opponent is wrong and you would have done it better. That is their real stance on the issues.

This is also a message to other democrats who don’t tow the party line. If you don’t do things 100% our way, you will be next. Fortunately they have to pick and choose their spots, especially in regards to the liberal media’s influence on public opinion. They can’t prop up every extreme left liberal or cut down every conservative, hard as they try. Oftentimes they spend their time promoting a loser. Look at the Dixie Chicks. They tried to make heroes out of them and what happened? Despite a billion dollars in free publicity the last couple years, the Dixie Chicks had to cancel 14 concert dates because of poor ticket sales. That just goes to show you that jumping to conclusions over Lieberman’s loss may be the wrong thing to do. Things are not always as they appear.

Doctored Reuters Photo

The major media uses a lot of tricks to distort the news, but sometimes they just plain fake it. The latest major news organization to publish a fake photo is Reuters. They were caught by fellow bloggers in an attempt to make Israel look bad. There’s a surprise. This was one of two that photographer has been caught doctoring. These were obvious cases which were caught by the naked eye. Not caught by Reuters however. This guy had some 920 photos used over course of about 12 by this news organization. Makes you wonder how many he got away with and what kind of influence they may have had. Reuters has now pulled them all, obviously trying to cover their butts after the fact.

Reuters has published a “picture kill” box which doesn’t tell you that they have been publishing photos that have been doctored using photoshop. Why is it that 90% of the time the errors and manipulations are anti-Christian, anti-Conservative, and anti-Israel? Or should I say work in the favor of the liberal and terrorist point of view? Again, once you start paying close attention you will start noticing how the major media outlets try to influence opinions and use a variety of techniques to achieve it. There is a good column on the canada.com website called ‘The media war against Israel’. It does a good job of showing the worldwide effort to distort what is going on. It is a relentless attack on the truth.

There have been many examples of news which has been distorted or reported in misleading ways such as reports of 40 people being massacred only to find out a few hours later that one person died. They report in a way that makes it look like Israel targets civilians. They quickly report the number of people killed in attacks, but they seldom differentiate whether they are civilians or terrorists. When Israel is accused of killing civilians they report that quickly and repeatedly. When it turns out to be false, that information is reported much less and they basically use the media version of read the “fine print.” It’s page one for the continual misleading news and accusations and page 10 for the retractions. You get the point. You have to really be paying attention to realize the stories they hammered you with turned out to be much different than reported.

They under report the fact that terrorists are hiding behind civilians and are in populated areas. They don’t know whether or not their own photos are altered. They don’t question how shiny new bicycles show up undamaged in a pile of rubble. They are quick to show those photos even though common sense often tells you the scene was tampered with well after the bombs hit, frequently giving the appearance something happened that really didn’t. Do you think the terrorists aren’t aware of the way the media slants what is going on? Do you think murderers wouldn’t add bodies of people they murdered themselves to a bombed building to make it look like the Isreali bombs killed them?

There are going to be civilian deaths in any war. It is amazing there haven’t been far more. It actually shows the restraint by Israel. Israel has been hit by over 2,000 rockets since this war with the Hezbos started. This is a fact that should be reported in every legitimate newscast covering this war. That will paint a better picture of why Israel is using the force it is. Isn’t it strange that’s not reported far more often? The majority of deaths caused by terrorists are civilians. The vast majority caused by countries like Israel or the United States are terrorists. Don’t expect the images and news stories to consistently make it look that way. A big effort is being made to make it appear that if only Israel stopped fighting back everything would be wonderful. Forget the fact that there have been more cease-fires in the Middle East than anywhere. It’s worked well, hasn’t it? It just doesn’t work with murderers. The same way not having police doesn’t lead to fewer crimes.

The news is aimed at people who either don’t pay close attention or simply aren’t very bright. You need to understand that there are a lot of people in the media trying to impress upon you their own twisted views. The facts often get in the way of their effort to influence opinion. There are enemies in the media. If you know someone who habitually tries to con you, aren’t you suspicious of anything they say that you can’t verify? You should be. Better yet, you should turn to people who are honest. The point is: be aware of the propoganda going on in the media or you will likely turn into the sucker they hope you are.