Archive for November, 2008

LeBron James Tells Charles Barkley What He Thinks

Saturday, November 29th, 2008

LeBron James pretty much summed up Charles Barkley and the often inept sports media by calling Barkley stupid. Barkley, who seems unprepared at best when giving his opinions had complained about LeBron James mentioning 2010 free agency. Of course, in these situations it’s usually the media who tries to drag out these things in the first place.

It seems the problem with Barkley when he runs his mouth is that he is usually uninformed. The sports media in general falls into this category. Their opinions change faster than the weather. For Barkley to criticize James seems so ridiculous. There doesn’t seem to be a classier NBA player out there than LeBron James. Trying hard to pick and find something negative is so, well, stupid.

It’s good to see LeBron James didn’t play the sports media’s little game and just called it for what it is. This would be good advice for other players or politicians who are on the wrong side of media bias. If you are always on the defensive you become an easy target. When it comes to LeBron James vs Charles Barkley – this one was a “slam dunk.”

“He’s stupid. That’s all I’ve got to say about that.” –Lebron James reacting to criticism from Charles Barkley

India’s 9/11

Wednesday, November 26th, 2008

India almost seemed to stand alone as they sunk a Somali pirate mother ship last week. Now they face a brutal coordinated attack that may have left over a 100 innocent people dead. Is this attack connected? It’s almost unthinkable to believe otherwise. Either way, while Americans are celebrating Thanksgiving, this looks like India’s 9/11.

The media almost glamorized the Somali pirates like they were likable characters from the Pirates of the Caribbean. You don’t hear a lot of mention of them being Muslim Somali pirates. Just because all terrorists don’t always play well with each other doesn’t mean they still aren’t terrorists. Seems these things are only serious to some people if they happen to them.

Are the coordinated attacks of both the terrorist attacks in India and the Somali Pirates state sponsored? How can they not be? These aren’t just a few ragtag suicide bombers here. These are highly coordinated attacks that take a lot of money and a lot of planning. This was done with the help of a technological state, in my opinion.

People often suspect Iran and Syria when it comes to state sponsored terrorism, but isn’t it time to start thinking bigger than that? Isn’t it time for the leaders of freedom loving nations to stop being afraid to make a mistake and go on the offensive? What happened to the war on terror?

Terrorists are like cockroaches. One raid will not stop them. Giving them lawyers and releasing them will not turn them into freedom lovers. Fighting with one hand tied behind the back will not end the threat. When the realization that they are getting help from those with a high military capability occurs, maybe at least some leaders will recognize that the war on terror is a real war. Hopefully it will not take too many 9/11 type attacks to realize the unthinkable horrific potential of such murderers.

Urine into Drinking Water – You Go First

Monday, November 24th, 2008

NASA is working on this thing that is supposed to turn urine into drinking water. They have actually tried it out. I know there are practical applications for such a thing in the area of space travel, but if this is being considered the potential answer to the worlds water shortage(and it is), I think the money could be much better spent.

Seems to me if you are going to invest tons of money working on such a contraption that alternative ideas would be preferable. How about working on taking salt out of ocean water? There isn’t a microscope close to big enough to convince me that urine water is the equivalent to fresh water. They are trying to say it is cleaner. I don’t care if it wins taste tests and the Betty Crocker seal of approval. There has got to be a better way.

Even if it works and there are no harmful long term effects, it would not make life livable where clean water does not exist. You would need to recycle liquid from sweat and respiration, and that still would not provide clean water for baths, cooking and washing clothes. So it’s not really doable here on earth, yet even 3 years ago this was reported, not only as something NASA was pumping money into, but as a way to give clean water to people living in poor countries. If they can pull that off, no doubt they could have done something far more civilised, such as purifying other sources of water.

It’s getting scary some of the ideas the environmentalists and politicians are coming up with. Trying to do away with flushing toilets and recycling “waste” as well as other creepy ideas. If these things actually take off you can bet that someday they won’t be optional. All the money spent on ideas that seem almost barbaric could be better spent, that’s for sure.

The amount of money put into these kinds of research is mind boggling. How about inventing a machine that will store rainwater for the purposes of toilet flushing? Make a really efficient model and you could have drinking water with a little more yum potential than pee. It’s not a crazy idea in comparison to what is actually happening.

I can’t believe some of these things are even considered. Toilets that use little or no water and urine drinking water… The same people who try to save us from pollution would have us with unsanitary bathrooms and drinking our own urine. You may think I’m wandering in thought here, but I’m trying to make a broader point. These nuts try to outlaw bug sprays and the result is infestation and disease. Look at what they did with DDT. When they banned DDT malaria came roaring back and over a million people a year die of malaria worldwide. Ethanol was pushed on us, and food prices went up as a result. When they screw up, it is a tough road getting them to go back to square one.

All these nutty things seem to have the same kind of origins. Some do-gooder politician/environmentalist who are only trying to advance themselves at the expense of everyone else. They’ll tell you how you are saving the world, but the reality is that they spent the money and did the research on bizarre ideas, instead of in more thought out areas.

I really wonder sometimes if they just want to see how far they can push some of their demented ideas on the public. A lot of people don’t even question this stuff. If you’ll drink your own piss, and you’re not hallucinating in the desert, they have done a good job at taking away some of your sense of decency as a human being. After they have you drinking your own urine, I can only wonder if, in the future they will have some tasty treat in mind for dinner.

Congress Hypocrites Have Nerve to Lecture Automakers Over Corporate Jets

Thursday, November 20th, 2008

These hypocrites in Congress have no shame. Lecturing the executives of the “big 3″ automakers over traveling in corporate jets on their way to ask for a bailout? Sure, it wasn’t a smart thing to do traveling there like that. Then again, did anyone really think they would do otherwise? Did anybody think they were gonna show up on mopeds?

Members of Congress have no problem being wasteful in their travels all the while lecturing Americans on how to not burn fuel because we are supposedly heating up the planet. Remember when Barack Obama pointed out in the debates that the wasteful earmarks were just a small part of the money spent by the government? I would say the automaker executives spent a fraction of their company budget traveling to visit the Congressional hypocrites. Yet somehow the two-faced politicians have succeeded yet again of taking the light off of themselves and shining into someone else.

I don’t know if it is a good idea or not to bailout the automakers. I just see amazing hypocrisy in it all. If we will bail out the biggest thieves around such as the banks and insurance companies, how do you justify turning your backs on companies that made America great? I think I would prefer helping someone who held on to a failing business model too long over someone who gambles with the money they obtained from Americans, much of it in dishonorable ways.

Our politicians have been fleecing us for so long. Instead of finding out the facts of where the money is going to go, they prefer to ambush in order to score cheap political points. As usual, they score their biggest points in the hypocrisy department.

Boston Herald Thought Police Writer Attacks Denis Leary

Thursday, November 20th, 2008

So the latest to be lynched in the media is Denis Leary and the latest media clown to do it is a BostonHerald.com writer by the name of Peter Gelzinis. I’m so sick of people who are so ignorant they can’t figure out what someone is trying to say or they can’t at least give someone the benefit of the doubt as far as their intentions. It seems that people like this don’t really care anyway. They just see someone who has left themselves vulnerable and they move in for the kill.

I’m not a pop culture person, so I am usually pointing out the stupidity or hypocrisy with a lot of these people. Since I came to the side of Michael Savage for the same nonsense, I’ll come to the side Denis Leary. Why can’t some people try to see the point someone is making when they say something a little over the top, instead of tryng to make them out to be haters of handicapped children? Geesh.

Lost in the comments of Denis Leary and Michael Savage was the grain of truth they were trying to point out. There is also an attempt at humor as well, whether you get it or like it. Neither Savage nor Leary were picking on any actual autistic children. Denis Leary said: ”There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-ass kids can’t compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks… to help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons.”

OK, so you don’t think it’s funny. Do you really think Denis Leary thinks there are no autistic children? Please… I would not defend any of these guys if I thought they actually believed there were no autistic or handicapped kids. Some people can’t wrap their brains around a joke, especially one with a point. Seems many of these people are quicker to defend a terrorist than they are a comedian.

We all know that not all doctors are on the up and up. We know some doctors hand out prescriptions like candy to the delight of drug companies. Are there really that many people with erectile dysfunction to account for a viagra commercial every 5 minutes? That’s a lot of viagra. I am an observer of humanity, and I suspect the vast majority of people got along just fine before viagra made it onto the scene. There are doctors who give diet pills to skinny people and there are no doubt doctors who’s favorite abuse is diagnosing autism. There are enough quacks to go around. There are also plenty of parents who can’t handle if their kids aren’t number one. Again, an observer of humanity here.

People who make these jokes/comments are usually trying to help the children and their parents who actually do suffer from these kinds of problems. Abuses of the system, any system, only hurt the ones who really need it. It’s not that hard to figure out.

Michael Savage and Denis Leary, in their own ways, made some observations about people that had plenty of truth attached to them. There is an epidemic of spoiled children and lazy parents out there. You already kinda know that, don’t you? There is no reason to believe it is always autism. There is no reason to believe there aren’t people in the medical profession who care more about money than they do people. There is no shortage of greed out there these days. Did the medical profession somehow evolve faster than everything else?

Barack Obama’s Big Blunder Considering/Picking Hillary Clinton for Secreatary of State

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

I was going to ask the question of who was dumber for the supposed Secretary of State offer - Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. I decided it wasn’t that dumb for Hillary, although I don’t know why she would want to be a part of the Obama administration after all that has happened.

Barack Obama on the other hand seems to have made a big mistake. He not only welcomes someone into his circle who has the potential to overshadow him, but the potential undermine him as well. Make that two people – of course you can’t forget Bill Clinton. Bill brings all kinds of possible conflicts with his own international projects he has going as well as his speeches.

It makes no sense to me really. Maybe he is adhering to the saying of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer. Perhaps he thinks this will stop the likelihood of Hillary or Bill speaking out against him. In that sense it would seem smart, but is that really the way he wants to govern?

Does this mean Hillary is out for 2012, even if an Obama presidency does not turn out to be all heavenly music? These are the Clintons, so who knows what they are thinking. In the case of Barack Obama, he seems to not be thinking about anything but politics, unless he has seen enough already to realize he is in over his head.

I know the job of Secretary of State is a very prestigious gig, but being a New York Senator is no longer worth anything? Remember when she wanted to be Senator so bad? She wanted so bad to be Senator so she could help New York State. Remember that? She has been trying to get out ever since. Believe me, the new Governor could sure use some help.

I was hoping that Obama would turn out to be his own man, despite all the sundry associations. It is looking more and more like a longshot with Obama surrounding himself with so much potential friction. If the Hillary Clinton Secretary of State selection goes through it will likely be a rough ride for Barack Obama, if not America.

The Italian Terri Schiavo

Monday, November 17th, 2008

I haven’t done a Terri Schiavo murder update in a while. The Supreme Court of Italy has ruled food and hydration can be removed from 37 year old Eluana Englaro, who has been in a coma for a long time following an automobile accident.

I don’t care what condition a person is in, why do you have to kill someone by withholding food and water? Shouldn’t the innocent be given a more dignified way out than that? This is more than just the controversy over where the line is drawn on someone with a brain injury.

We don’t execute mass murderers in such a horrible way. I’m definitely not advocating that people continue to be put to death because they are not able to take care of themselves, but these people who justify and legalize it cannot come up with a more humane way than this? Most people wouldn’t let an animal starve and die of dehydration, even if it were unconscious.

When cases like Terri Schiavo are allowed to occur, the threshold for what is allowed and tolerated by society slowly grows. There is always some justification to push the envelope a little further. Euthanasia? It is such hypocrisy. If someone is so far gone that they don’t feel any pain, then just let them die in dignity. You are not allieving their suffering by putting them to death. If they indeed do feel pain, then what monster would cut off food and drink to such a person?

Bobby Schindler, brother of Terri Schiavo comments on the ruling:

“It seems to indicate that American ‘medical ethics’ are spreading like a virus among the international community, threatening countless numbers of elderly, ailing and disabled persons in an increasing and alarming way.”

“Our heart goes out to this family as we know very well the profound affect that these types of injuries can have on loved ones. However, we must remember that we have a grave obligation to do all we can to protect those with disabilities, recognizing that a person with a brain injury is a human being with an inherent dignity and a right to life. This young girl needs only food and water and her family’s love to survive. At the very least this should be provided to her.”

When abortion was legalized I doubt many people thought we would be debating the hideous practice of partial birth abortion. There would probably have been a lot less support for it back then had they only known. Lawmakers and groups with ulterior motives do find justification for just about anything. Then the bar slowly lowers. The problem is that enough is just never enough.

Who will we be taking out of their misery 20 years from now? Will being elderly or retarded be enough of a justification? Will we “abort” 6 month old babies because they are not showing the proper development and may have previously undetected brain issues? Unless people start paying attention to these things, I suspect we will be a lot closer to that than people can imagine. Partial birth abortion? For many it is not even the slightest concern now.