Category Archives: Politics

R.I.P. NASA– You Will Be Missed

I can’t believe this crap!  Okay, yes I can, but it still makes me sick.  Not only is this moron in the Oval Office (who shall remain nameless) trying to make us pay for everything from his ridiculous Cap-and Trade nonsense to healthcare for people in other states but now he is destroying what I consider to be one of the few worthwhile government institutions, one of the only ones (other than the military) which I might willingly pay for with my own money, NASA.

He is nixing the entire Constellation program; the only real hope we have of manned space-flight in the future since we have now decided to retire the existing space shuttle.  No more lunar-landers, no more moon bases for blasting terrorists from space and essentially no more NASA as we currently know it.  Space technology is not something you step away from for a few years to save some quick cash and then come back to when your student loans have been paid off.  If we do this now, we will never lead the way in this field again.

I did take a moment to think about this and say, “Well, with all the recent giant leaps forward in space flight from private companies, wouldn’t it actually make sense to turn our nation’s future extra-terrestrial ambitions over to the private sector,” and that might not be a bad idea but we are not there yet and I think we all know quite well that this means our future in space is going to be in the hands of the Russians and possibly the Chinese.  There’s a bright prospect!  The lives of our astronauts will now be entirely in the hands of a bunch of vodka-swigging commies who cannot even build an airplane that doesn’t burst into flames as the wings fall off upon leaving the runway.

Yes ma'am, it is technically strong enough to fuel our rockets... but what would we drink then?

That’s not the kicker though.  I was already incensed enough when I got to our socialist savior’s next plan for my beloved space agency.  “…the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on Earth-science projects — principally, researching and monitoring climate change.”  AHHHH!  No! No! NO!!!  He is turning NASA into some inane bullshit think-tank so that the government can just create their own ‘data’ to support global warming without needing the UN to do it for them.  I give it two years before Al Gore is running things in Houston and we decide that we cannot even permit ourselves to hitch a ride to the ISS with the Ruskies because their shuttles are powered by highly-combustible fuel rather than rainbows and puppy-dog smiles.  Their going to start making the Tang from ground up algae powder and turn the freeze-dried meals into some gluten-free crap grown by a 3rd-world slave-driver who never passes one iota of his massive boosts in sale price along to the poor saps working the fields.

I thought we were all doomed down here on Earth already.  I thought our decades of free-wheeling, gas-guzzling, fancy-free living had already done so much irreparable damage to our planet that the Himalayan glaciers would be gone in 20 years and we would all be sinking into our respective watery graves like so many polar bears searching for their long-lost ice-floats.  If things are so bad down here, shouldn’t we be focusing our efforts ‘out there’?  Putting solar blockers in place, creating an artificial ozone, finding a new planet to colonize?  We all saw Moonraker, we can do this people!

I can’t take it anymore!  Somebody needs to derail this ‘good-intentions’ train that the world is on and get back to reality.  Wake up, you morons, the concept of ‘best intentions’ has no more place in the world of government than non-data-driven hypotheses has in the scientific community.

Advertisements

‘Lost’ Trumps Obama

It appears that our fearless leader, Barack Hussein Obama Jr., has finally come up against one foe he cannot vanquish.  That’s right, the Leader of the (once and future) Free World, who has enjoyed strong approval ratings and found victory on nearly 97% of all Congressional votes in which he had clearly staked a position since taking office, conceded yesterday that he would not attempt to bump the season premier of the popular ABC series ‘Lost’ from its prime-time slot on Feb 2nd in order to make room his first State of the Union address.

It came as a bit of a surprise to me that the man who has accomplished the unthinkable so many times (e.g. being elected President without any sort of experience/intelligence to support it, strong-arming the passage of numerous bail-outs and stimuli, etc.) could be bested by a whiny doctor and his ragged band of miscreants stranded on an island somewhere in the South Pacific.  Afterall, this is a man who, in a display of post-inaugural muscle-flexing, bumped what had previously been the unstoppable juggernaut of ‘American Idol’ from its time-slot twice in as many months.  Given all of this, I cannot think of a single reason why a show like ‘Lost’ (which seems to make less and less sense as it approaches it’s final curtain) could ever win-out out over a thrilling State of the Union address….

The Great Obama-Buster

Thank God they got that whole 'smoke monster' problem under control

Okay, maybe I can think of one reason.

In spite of my differences with the man, I realize that television remains the predominant medium of communication between the American President and his subjects, err… constituents, so I would like to offer a few words of advice to our dear Der Kommissar as his second year of tyranny, I mean leadership, and his first SotU (whenever it does eventually air) approaches:

1. Do not make the mistake of bumping ‘American Idol’ a third time.  Those fans were pissed last year and they know how to vote early and often (something you should be familiar with given your history in Chicago politics.)  I know that our elected officials are not yet chosen via text message but, given the general malaise of apathy into which our nation is currently sinking, I believe those days may not be too far off.  Make that mistake again and you are likely to be succeeded by Carrie Underwood in the Oval Office.

America in shock as President Underwood steps down, telling the nation she intends to let "Jesus Take the Wheel"

2. In times such as these, when the goings-on of fictional characters are more important to most Americans than the reality in which we live, you should consider carefully before potentially putting yourself before any popular TV show, movie, song, coloring book, etc.  However, you should exercise particular caution in running the State of the Union against anything with word “Lost” in the title.  Many Americans, searching their channel guide for your speech, may just see “Lost” and, thinking they are viewing the program description rather than title, tune into the show by mistake.  This opens up a whole new slew of problems when the public starts to believe that you have replaced our police force with a bunch of dudes in DHARMA Initiative jumpsuits and that the polar bears, displaced by Al Gore’s global warming, have begun to run rampant through American suburbia.

Due to lack of funding, President Obama chooses to shorten his first State of the Union to a single (yet ultimately very fitting) word

3. Finally, and probably most importantly, remember that it is important for any public official to tread lightly when taking over his nation’s prime-time airwaves to discuss his own political agenda.  Despots the world over have taken to seizing broadcast time in order to maintain their stranglehold on the people’s minds but such actions are never looked upon favorably on the world stage.  The quintessential example of this today is Venezuelan despot Hugo Chavez and I am certain that you, dear Mr. Obama, would never, ever want to be lumped together with the likes of him…

I wonder if Hugo kisses on the first date... only one way to find out!

Actually, ya know what.  Never mind.  Just do whatever the hell you feel like (I am sure you will anyway.)

Pork Chop Gets the Axe

On recent trip to Allentown, PA to visit my grand-parents I learned that, beginning this season, the city would become home to a minor league baseball franchise. The Lehigh Valley Iron Pigs (formerly the Lynx of Ottawa) would represent the Philadelphia Phillies as their local affiliate at the Triple-A level. However, the arrival of the new team to the area has been marred by accusations of racism by local Hispanics regarding the name of their mascot.

Based on over 7,000 fan submissions of potential names, the cartoony, metallic pig had originally been given the title of ‘Pork Chop.’ The team quickly conceded to the complaints of “several Hispanics” that the name was offensive and dumped the fan-chosen name prior to the start of the season. My first thought was, “What is offensive to Hispanics (or anyone else) about naming a cartoon pig ‘Pork Chop’?”

Apparently the pig’s chosen moniker has been used by some people as a derogatory term for Puerto Ricans. Aside from the fact that this seems like a stupid racial slur (not stupid in the sense that it demeans a group of people based on race but rather because it is, in reality, a type of food and therefore should offend the group at which it is directed no more than someone calling me a ‘Cracker’ would offend me) but it is a term of which I doubt most people have any awareness.

Guillermo Lopez, vice president of the Latino Leadership Alliance and one of the prime complainants about the name, hammered this very point home with his own statements when he noted, “If my parents were alive, they’d be having fits. It meant much more to them than it does to Puerto Ricans now in the Lehigh Valley.”

Exactly! This may have been an offensive to term to a select group of people over 20 years ago but that is clearly not the case anymore. Moreover, this name was being given to a pig! The pig is the mascot and therefore the physical representation of the team’s spirit and camaraderie. The name was being used in the most positive of connotations (unless you are an actual pig) and this moron has not only stripped the public of their chosen name but also breathed life back into what was a dead racial slur so that an entire new generation of bigots can use it to belittle his own people.

So congratulations, Mr. Lopez, to you and all your fellow ‘minority’ groups out there who continue to fan the flames of prejudice by constantly reminding the public at large of not only the myriad of differences between our races, religions, and genders but also of all the ways with which they can offend you.

Oddly enough, nobody was offended by Pork Chop’s replacement, ‘Wetback the Dolphin’

The most ignorant statement from the whole story did not come from those who were offended, however, but from the man who conceded to them. General Manager Kurt Landes said of his decision to change the mascot’s name, “We were really unaware of any negative connotations with the word ‘pork chop.’ If it offended a few, it’s a few too many.”

No, it isn’t! The things we say and do can always be found to be offensive to a few people on some level, but that is no reason to alter our behavior. There will always be those like Lopez and his ilk who have nothing better to do than complain about things which could be offensive to some tiny sub-group of people (even if those people are from a past generation, as in this case) and if everyone continues to concede on the most innocent of or alleged faux pas then we, as a majority of the people, place ourselves ever more at the mercy of the few yahoos pathetic enough to spend their days searching out new ways to be offended.

If anyone involved in this entire situation is guilty of racism it is Mr. Lopez and his Latino Leadership Alliance of Lehigh Valley who, according to their own mission statement, claim the the LLA “seeks to improve the quality of life for the Latino community and the entire Lehigh Valley.” I would be interested, however, to know what specifically this organization does to help anyone in Lehigh Valley who is not Latino.

According to their president, the LLA “promotes education by providing ‘Si Se Puede’ workshops” in local schools. Sounds to me like these workshops are geared specifically to Hispanics (or at least only to those who speak Spanish.) I don’t speak Spanish and I find it offensive that they would discriminate against me simply based on my ethnicity or the educational opportunities I have had.

The group also gives out dozens of scholarships annually, but they are only open to Latino students. That is the very definition of racial discrimination and, once again, flies in the face of their claims of improving the quality of life for everyone in Lehigh. It makes me sick that groups like the LLA are able to promote the advancement of only those individuals who have the same color skin and speak the same language as they do. This organization and all those who support their bigoted, racist agenda should be ashamed of themselves.

I have gone on for long enough though. It is nearly dinner time and I am getting hungry. I think I will go get a pork chop so I can eat… that Puerto Rican chef sure knows how to cook. (Thanks for teaching me a new word, Guillermo!)

Iran Builds Rocket in 9 Months– Still No Gays

Iran has built their own unique space rocket, from scratch, in a scant nine months. At least, that is what President Ahmadinejad has announced. Then again, we should all remember that this is the same man who, during a speech at Columbia University last year, stated that Iran does not have gay people within its borders and wondered where Americans had gotten the idea that his nation routinely executed those among its citizenry known to be homosexuals.

Nukes? Nope. Gays? No way.  Cheap 1980s-era 3-D glasses? You Bet!I suppose he is correct depending upon how you look at it. Afterall, Germany (circa World War II) was entirely devoid of Jews if you don’t count those hundreds of thousands of ‘undelcared’ individuals  tattooed with serial numbers and forced to work themselves to death in prison camps. But, then again, if you ask Ahmadinejad about those Holocaust victims he will tell you that they don’t exist either.

Is anyone else out there getting more than a little sick of listening to these moronic blow-hards, who have weaseled their way into a position of power in some 3rd world sandbox, continually spit lies and accusations into the face of America and the rest of the Western World?  With people like Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il, Hugo Chavez, and Saddam Hussein constantly testing to see just how far America can be pushed before snapping, however, I find it odd that we do not bomb another nation back to the stone-age on a weekly basis. (One thing we can be sure of, Saddam and his idiot sons have played their last game of brinksmanship with the West.)

These dictators lie, villify, and slander our leaders, our people, and our way of life every chance they get and we remain silent lest we be further bedeviled by the world at large. Chavez nationalized foriegn oil companies (like Citgo,) took the money to prop up his own dictatorship, and then came to America and said our elected leader is “Satan.” Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad constantly claim to have no weapons-related nuclear programs and then refuse to allow this fact to be verified. This sounds shockingly similar to the tactics used by Saddam Hussein prior to his fall from power and consequent short-drop into the unknown. As one of Saddam’s top advisor’s recently noted, the practice of denying any weapons programs on the world stage and then refusing to permit verification of this claim was a tactic to make it appear as though Iraq was lying about existing nuclear, biological, and/or chemical weapons operations in order to appear more stalwart in the eyes of Iran and other rival nations in the Middle East.

I know they have got a lot of sand in which to stick their heads over there in the Middle East but these idiots better wise up pretty quickly or start praying for some stronger candidates out of the Democratic party because I am sure that a President McCain is not going to take too much of their saber-rattling before he introduces them to Allah and their precious virgins.

Democrats: The Party of Racism & Ignorance

So I am in a cab this morning on the way to the airport and the driver has on the local NY affiliate for National Public Radio.  I am not a big fan of NPR, if only because I have never understood why the few outlets of broadcast media being propped up by our federal tax dollars (NPR, PBS) have been so historically to the left of center in the political spectrum.  Given that the last two U.S presidential elections have been decided but such a markedly thin margin, does it not make sense that our nation’s media market reflect both ends of the political measure (or at least show some semblance of compromise between the two?)

But, in spite of myself, I admit that NPR does put out some genuinely interesting programming from time to time and the mere fact that it was the radio station selected by my cab driver is not what is irritating me at the moment.  What proved troublesome for me were the comments made during an interview of some Maine voters regarding their state’s recent presidential primary.

Specifically, the NPR representatives were asking African-American voters from the Democratic primary who they had chosen to vote for and, more importantly, the reasons why they had done so.  The selection of interviews was small (it was not a very long report) but nearly every one of the comments irked me to some degree.  It seemed as though, when asked for the reason they supported him, nearly every African-American Barack Obama supporter’s predominant reason for voting for this man was that he is black.

What the hell kind of reason is that to vote for someone?  Casting your vote for one candidate or another based on the color of their skin is not only ignorant but it is also, by definition, racist.  I understand that many people (of all races) are excited to see the first serious African-American contender for the White House in our nation’s history but by making this man’s race into a selling point for his campaign you give legitimacy to the very racial differences against which you claim to fight.  Does this not fly in the face of the concept of all men, regardless of race, creed, age, socio-economic status, etc. being created equal?  Isn’t the point of equality to ensure that each of the candidates has a level playing field from which to woo potential voters?

This is not to say that such prejudiced votes are not cast by many other groups of people for many other reasons.  I know that Mitt Romney recently swept through the Utah Republican primary with nearly 90% of that state’s vote due, to a large degree, to the fact that Romney was the sole Mormon candidate running in a state known to be the Mecca of the Mormon religion; but that does not seem to be quite as knee-jerk of a vote as the African-American issue.  Mormons are a religious group whose family and social ideals are clearly defined by their adherence to the rules and norms of their church.  Moreover, they are a group in which membership is a matter of choice, not genetics.  To say the same about black people would be to imply that their entire race is predisposed to act a certain way.  That is, of course, not true and is also a racist sentiment.

Many African-Americans are obviously going to share some set of social norms and values as they are (for the vast majority) born into African-American families who pass on these traditions from one generation to the next (just as any racial, religious, family group does.)  Americans are not, however, voting to decide who should be the head of African-America or the leader of the Mormon religion; we are voting to decide who should run this nation and as much as I may be inclined to vote for a white Catholic from Massachusetts (as such a person would be wholly representative of my personal background,) I have never voted for anyone with the last name Kennedy because none of these people represented what I wanted for my political leadership or governance.

Perhaps the most disturbing sound-byte from the whole NPR segment came from an African-American woman who expressed her reasoning for choosing Hillary Clinton over Obama.  She stated that she “loves Obama” (without delving into any reason for this admiration) but that she was voting for Hillary because the New York senator has pledged to “double funding to black universities” if elected.

There are two serious issues with the sentiments expressed by this woman.  First, why is there such a thing as a ‘black university’ that receives any public funding?  This is an institution whose very goal is to further the progress of one specific racial group above all others in a nation where ‘all men are created equal.’  How does one justify that?  Such an institution is either attempting to unbalance the already level field of racial play in America or trying to advance a racial group which they themselves have determined to be inferior to the others in some way.  Can you even begin to imagine the outcry if someone attempted to start a ‘white university’ let alone secure its funding from tax dollars?  Those involved would be lambasted as evil racists and probably convicted of some sort of ‘hate-crime.’

The second issue I have with this woman’s reason for choosing Hillary is that she wants to see the funding for these ‘black universities’ doubled.  This begs many questions:  What is the deficiency in these schools that has caused them to need twice the funds currently allotted to them by our government?  Will doubling this funding really solve these problems or just set the stage for further financial increases down the line?  How much of an increase in funding will the public university system as a whole see under President Hillary?  How should I, as a Caucasian-, Hispanic-, Middle Eastern-, or Asian-American, feel knowing that my tax dollars are being set aside for group of people who wish to exclude me based solely on my race?

The bottom line here is that if you feel you have been disenfranchised in some way because serious candidates for the American presidency have always been white males then you should really have some sort of concrete evidence as to what you have missed out on.  With all the whining I have heard from the anti-Bush lobby over the past eight years about how the President duped the nation into launching an unnecessary war or how he is a moron incapable of leading anyone you would think that these people might be able to come up with a slightly better rationale for choosing our next president than race or gender.  If you don’t want to see our nation at war then why not choose Ron Paul, a former Libertarian candidate whose political ideals would certainly not have the U.S jumping into any overseas conflicts.  If you think that George W. Bush is an idiot then why not review the GPAs and IQ scores for each candidate and simply choose the one who is the most intelligent?  It’s odd that in spite of all the years of Bush-bashing and the current trend of voting along racial- or gender-lines I cannot recall a single instance of Bush being called ‘too-white’ or ‘too-male’ of a Commander-in-Chief.

In spite of voting for him in both elections, I do not agree with many things that President Bush has done over the past eight years.  I do believe, however, that I would be facing a much longer personal laundry list of issues with actions that Bush’s alternatives would have taken had they been residing in the White House.  That being said, I know that I can feel confident that I have made the correct decision each time I enter the voting booth by selecting the candidate who best represents my desired leadership style and personal values rather than someone whose skin color or chromosome make-up matches mine.

Douchebag Alert! Bono’s back!

So apparently Bono and his band of rich idiots from the (Red) campaign met with the Japanese Prime Minister, Yasuo Fukuda, to present him with an iPod in hopes of convincing him to increase support from his nation in the effort to “reduce poverty in Africa.”

Why does anyone care what some moron like Bono says or does? He is talking on behalf of (Red) about poverty in Africa, but his foundation does not do anything related to reducing poverty in Africa. According to The (Red) Manifesto, the group will “give some of its profits to buy and distribute anti-retroviral medicine to our brothers and sisters dying of AIDS in Africa.” If people want to donate to prop-up impoverished nations in Africa, that is one thing but providing medicine to prop-up the dwindling lives of AIDS carriers in the most AIDS infested corner of the world seems inane.

AIDS remains incurable and these people are not even looking for a cure. Rather, they are extending the lives of countless people suffering the terrible pain of that disease and potentially infecting others with it. If you want to help Africans who actually have some chance of living a full life, why not do something about the lack of potable water or essential irrigation systems? Better yet why not do something about the warlords who terrorize local populations across Africa and steal the essential medicine and food donated by groups like (Red)?

bono.jpg
“So, you say that you BOTH just gave me AIDS?”

It is terrible that these people must suffer through poverty, violence, and AIDS but why not try to solve Africa’s problems which are are at least potentially solvable instead of throwing it away by trying to mitigate the suffering of one group of people?

I do not know what percentage of the money from purchases/donations to (Red) actually winds up being applied to their stated mission but I am often suspect of such groups, particularly those started by celebrities, that pledge to give “some” of their profits to those in need. How much is some? Does anyone out there have the figures of how much of (Red)’s gross is used to help Africa? I would be keen to learn.

Do the Right Thing

Why do these people continue to act as they do?

The Taliban, in their latest attempt at diplomacy by way of terrorism, announced that they would release two of the 21 South Korean hostages in the near future. The two female hostages are ‘sick’ and will allegedly be set free as a result. Putting aside the fact that local leaders have expressed serious doubts as to the validity of the claim, the Taliban is still insisting upon the release of 21 terrorists from Afghani prisons. That isn’t intelligent bargaining even for kidnapping thugs.

Let us not forget that the reason why there are currently 21 South Korean hostages, and not 23, is because their captors shamefully executed two of the members of the kidnapped church group weeks ago. If you abduct 23 people in an overt attempt to gain the release of an equal number of your captive brothers, and then kill two because the negotiations are not going to your liking, you don’t get to just ask for the release of 21 of your original group. If these scumbags are going to resort to thug tactics like kidnapping an innocent church group then they should expect the people with whom they bargain to act in kind. You kill two of your prisoners, we kill two of ours; now we each have 21 left to bargain with– your move, Osama.

The sad answer to my original question is all too clear though. The murdering terrorists continue to kidnap innocent foreigners because the foreign governments continue to give in to their demands (to one degree or another.) In the case in question, the people negotiating for the release of the South Koreans even alluded to paying a monetary ransom en lieu of releasing the Al Qaeda militants. So they abduct, torture, and murder two-dozen people and South Korean pays them off for their trouble.

Hasn’t anyone else noticed that they aren’t kidnapping the American journalists and civilians anymore? There is no reason because they know they best thing they will get out of it is a week of coverage on FoxNews and a lot more Americans pissed off at their thug tactics.

There is a reason why America’s iron-clad ‘no negotiation’ policy works in cases of kidnappings and terrorism. It is not always the easiest route to take but it ultimately deters terrorism for ransom in the only feasible way; it eliminates the goal of taking a hostage in the first place. You cannot get blood from a stone and America’s model is the stalwart rock of which the rest of the world should take serious note.

South Korea is going through a dark time right now but they should not give in to the likes of a deposed terrorist regime trying to regain their political stranglehold with more of the same terrorism. This is not some one-time occurrence where a mugger takes your wallet at knife-point; this is a recurring system of extortion by terror and the only way to prevent the ugly result is to eliminate the motivation for it. South Korea, and all nations whose people fall victim to these cowardly thugs, have the power to stop this trend.

Do the right thing.