Television is indeed a wonderful medium, it teaches so much and then it sometimes shows you others in the learning process. But you are never quite sure who is learning -- the viewer, the writer, or those talking heads who the viewer is assured are really intelligent. I have learned so much from television that I feel I wasted years in reading and listening to all of those lectures. For instance I have learned the Bermuda Triangle should be avoided, I know that diet and exercise in association with virtually anything – like Chocolate Pudding for example – will cause you to lose weight. I have learned that smoking causes hang nails, weight gain, sexual dysfunction, and dental decay, plus reducing your mental competence to the point to where you vote Republican. I now know that Americans – all Americans are obese primarily from eating super-sized hamburgers and drinking Cokes. Television is truly an amazing medium and I learn constantly from it.
Television has assured me that in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary Evolution is a fact and not a theory and that we have actually descended from apes. Nevertheless I believe in freedom of religion so I continue to support Evolution as a belief system. I am totally aware that at any minute a huge meteor will strike the Earth and wipe out all of mankind. Television has taught me that Al Gore and Global Warming are real and we are in imminent danger of being roasted alive – or is it freeze to death due to the coming ice age that is the result of global warming? It is all so confusing. . I have learned that if your career has tanked the solution is to immediately announce that you have a drug or alcohol problem and you are bound for rehab. Of course what is to be rehabilitated is the career not the habit, but then who notices. But these are the global issues that everyone has learned from Television, but there are many other lessons lurking in the background – if you only watch. For example in television land – men are essentially stupid, women make the best rocket scientists, that weepy men are attractive to real babe’s, and women are truly the master race.
Alas, while I don’t totally agree with all of the wonderful feminists who assure me that as a male I am doomed to the life of serfdom and ignorance I see on television, I do find some (slim) facts that indicate they might be right. I think this understanding of the male role begins with marriage and that you need only to examine recently married men, you know the men who think that marriage really didn’t change anything other than the laundry service. Of course all of those men who have been married for longer than the average age of a fruit fly know that once you have uttered those fateful words “I DO” nothing is ever the same. Life as you know it has ended and your lifetime of adjusting to the weird world of women has begun. This adjustment requires a lifetime and the reality is most men never reach any true level of understanding the female mind, they simply adapt to the conditions. Women are simply different and this difference is much greater than the simple physical differences. The very foundation of these differences begins with what is important and what is not. For example for women there are approximately ten to the 27th power of things that are important but for the average male there are simply ten and after food and sex (in that order) he must be reminded of the other eight.
Almost immediately after that fateful day that is enshrined in the female mind as “the Anniversary”, the male comes to understand that all of those things that he enjoyed are “tacky” and that his wardrobe falls somewhere between pathetic and embarrassing. But this isn’t really where the learning and adjustment begins. Believe it or not it begins with women’s sizes and underwear --- errrr – ah yes – lingerie (pronounced “lawn – jer –ray’ – NOT “ling-grrr -eee). Most men don’t put a great deal of thought into their own clothes and even less into women’s other than ease of removal. Clothes for men come in small, medium, or large and extra-large and men generally fall into one of these categories unless of course we are talking about jock straps and in that case everyone wears a large (extra-large is pure ego and generally would not be believed). Now I have been married for many years and I still have not grasped women’s sizes. They come in petite, juniors (but no seniors) plus sizes (which no one seems to actually wear so why stores stock them I have no idea), and a whole bunch of other sizes, which all seem purely arbitrary. The numerical sizes do not follow any logical system because a size 6 and a size 7 are only sold to anorexics and seem to bear no relationship to each other.
But the real difference between the sexes lies in their underwear. For guys underwear is really pretty simple. You have briefs for guys who like comfort, or boxers for guys who like the wedgie feel, or for those guys who can’t decide whether to be cool or comfortable you have the boxer brief, and that’s it!!. For women there are entire stores devoted exclusively to their underwear and none seem oriented toward comfort – the merchandise not the store. The sizes are as mysterious as the Periodic Table of Elements. Bra’s seem to range in size from skimpy little band-aid type things to cupful, handful, and up to “Big Bertha”. The panties range in size from little pieces of lace that require a bikini wax to the “Thigh Master” and there the name says it all.
But it isn’t just the clothes that distinguish the sexes, we also have differences that the typical male can never seem to comprehend. For instance take the toilet paper, which as any man knows can be found on the toilet paper holder. How it gets there is largely unknown and it is generally believed by most men that there is some sort of a toilet paper fairy – who based on television is apparently known as “Charmin”. Charmin is both squeezable and efficient and replaces the toilet paper as required – I think. But this is actually an example of how truly simple men are because the female of the species has distinct preferences regarding the placement of the toilet paper on the holder. Once married the male quickly discovers that toilet paper must feed either over the top or from under the role. There really isn’t any correct way but every woman has a preference and if the husband intends to continue his conjugal relationship he should master this art of toilet paper replacement.
But the toilet paper adjustment is only the tip of the iceberg in marital adjustment. Most men never really realized how primitively they were living prior to marriage or learned how to deal with the problems that they never realized were problems. One of these is the “noise”. At some time shortly after marriage there will be a noise in the night. This noise was initially heard by Eve in the garden while poor Adam slept. She went to investigate and as we say the rest is history. However, since that time, women do not go to investigate mysterious noises – that is the man’s job. This noise always occurs shortly after the husband has dropped off to sleep. Of course the husband after a long day of toil could sleep through the San Francisco Earthquake, but women’s hearing is genetically different. A woman can hear cotton rubbing on silk from a distance of approximately a quarter mile and immediately conclude that this noise is due to a drug crazed burglar intent on stealing the --- well it really doesn’t matter what they were planning on stealing because it is the husband’s duty to frighten him away before that event occurs.
Now any man who has been through this knows that pretending to be asleep is fruitless because the dear wife will continue punching him in the back until he gets up and searches high and low for the source of the “noise”. The newly married man will commonly pretend to be asleep but this simply demonstrates his naiveté because it won’t work. The woman will continue beating on his back until blunt force trauma becomes a real possibility. The next male strategy employed by the newly married is to explain the noise as “nothing”, but this won’t work either. Women KNOW that something dangerous has occurred and the noise must be identified or there will be no sleep. Sleep can only be achieved by the husband getting out of bed, prowling throughout the house in his underwear, and then returning to bed and announcing – it’s nothing – go to sleep. Now the man who has been married long enough to have been through this drill a few times, simply gets up goes the refrigerator, gets something to munch on, opens the door, closes it, turns on a couple of lights, and then returns to the dear wife and announces it was nothing. The wife is now free to go to sleep knowing that the home has been protected, the noise identified (it was nothing), and she is secure in knowing that her man has once again saved the day. But I digress – let’s return to the topic of Television as a medium.
Television is certainly a source of entertainment as well as education. Not only do we learn about men and women, we also learn about medicine, nutrition, and exercise. From television I have learned that if you join the Bow Flex generation you will look like a superhero in just a few short weeks. Clearly Bow Flex sweat has regenerative powers because they all look so young and healthy. But that’s when I discovered that if you only eat Oatmeal your cholesterol will drop to astonishing levels. This has been demonstrated clinically using horses and not one had high cholesterol, although some people who have eaten oatmeal for extended periods did come to resemble a Quaker. I think it was the hat.
Showing posts with label sex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Sunday, June 05, 2005
The Land of the Living Dead
Once again I have returned to the land of the living after visiting California, where it is perpetually sunny and each day brings another influx of illegal aliens and sun worshipers. Why these people are drawn to this land of the dead – not only brain dead but morally dead as well – I have no idea. When you ask the answer is always the same – the weather. Every day is a beautiful day and you have the beach, the mountains, skiing, the desert, -- in short you have everything except a parking place. What no one is willing to admit is that while the beach is only minutes away there is no parking and if you are lucky enough to find a parking place the beach itself is filled with some pretty strange people and generally not a place to take your family – unless of course they have completed their sex education course with honors.
Then you have the mountains which are beautiful – but what goes unsaid is the end of the phrase which is – when you can see them. In the period of one week I did not see the mountains except once and even then they were only a shadow seen dimly through the brown muck which they call air. Of course the good news is that if you can actually get to the mountains then that same brown muck shields you from seeing the sprawl of houses, strip malls, and freeways. One of the challenges in getting to the mountains is the traffic. It is hard to imagine twelve lanes of cars going 10 miles an hour for miles and miles. The logical question is where are all of these people going? Naturally the answer is that they are 1) going home, which is only 100 or so miles from where they work, 2) they are going to the mountains or desert; 3) they are headed to the beach – but the fourth option is never mentioned and that is that most of them are looking for a parking place.
The traffic is terrible and it is that way virtually 24 hours a day. However, California is a state filled with enlightened people who generally feel they are smarter than the rest of kids so they have solutions for everything. Most of all they are the Nannies of the world so they feel that most of us are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves so they must take care of us. Consequently there are signs everywhere telling you about the dangerous chemicals in the buildings (janitorial supplies), alcohol is dangerous (no warnings about drugs though), and that coffee cups contain hot liquids. The signage is everywhere – but in English even though almost no one actually speaks English there anymore. My favorite traffic solution offered by the enlightened elite are the diamond lanes. As stated earlier the traffic is horrendous and moving at a walking pace. The brilliant solution offered by the state was to create special lanes for those people who have more than one person in the car thus reducing the capacity of the freeway by 25% . The intent was to encourage people to develop car pools but alas the law of unintended consequences took effect so the result was to create even greater traffic jams.
But remember this is California, the land of the liberal elite. This is the state that guarantees anyone who can sneak into the country Constitutional protections, welfare, free education, and free medical. This is a state where the homeless are subsidized with stipends – a state filled with people who feel and care for their fellow man and who are willing to protest at the drop of a liberal cause. However, the traffic is terrible which makes it difficult for these liberals to get to the place where they can protest the plight of the poor and downtrodden – so they have come up with the solution – TOLL LANES. Therefore, for the limousine elite they can use their personal money by buying their way around the traffic jams they caused for the poor and downtrodden so they can rush to the places where they can protest for the poor and downtrodden. The hypocrisy of this seems to escape them.
In spite of what most civilized people would consider drawbacks to living like this the reality is that people are flooding into California – many legally. The result is housing is hard to come by but you can still buy a 1940’s two bedroom one bath bungalow for – depending on location -- $500,000 to $900,000. Selling a house there is quite an experience because you simply place your house on the market and wait for the bidding to begin. No one ever reduces their price because they always expect someone to pay more than the asking price. So who would pay this kind of money for what most people would consider a shack or at best a starter home? The brain dead – that’s who – these are the people who feel that living in perpetual sunshine is more important than having quality. There is no doubt but that California is the home of the living dead – their brains have been cooked by all of that sun.
Then you have the mountains which are beautiful – but what goes unsaid is the end of the phrase which is – when you can see them. In the period of one week I did not see the mountains except once and even then they were only a shadow seen dimly through the brown muck which they call air. Of course the good news is that if you can actually get to the mountains then that same brown muck shields you from seeing the sprawl of houses, strip malls, and freeways. One of the challenges in getting to the mountains is the traffic. It is hard to imagine twelve lanes of cars going 10 miles an hour for miles and miles. The logical question is where are all of these people going? Naturally the answer is that they are 1) going home, which is only 100 or so miles from where they work, 2) they are going to the mountains or desert; 3) they are headed to the beach – but the fourth option is never mentioned and that is that most of them are looking for a parking place.
The traffic is terrible and it is that way virtually 24 hours a day. However, California is a state filled with enlightened people who generally feel they are smarter than the rest of kids so they have solutions for everything. Most of all they are the Nannies of the world so they feel that most of us are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves so they must take care of us. Consequently there are signs everywhere telling you about the dangerous chemicals in the buildings (janitorial supplies), alcohol is dangerous (no warnings about drugs though), and that coffee cups contain hot liquids. The signage is everywhere – but in English even though almost no one actually speaks English there anymore. My favorite traffic solution offered by the enlightened elite are the diamond lanes. As stated earlier the traffic is horrendous and moving at a walking pace. The brilliant solution offered by the state was to create special lanes for those people who have more than one person in the car thus reducing the capacity of the freeway by 25% . The intent was to encourage people to develop car pools but alas the law of unintended consequences took effect so the result was to create even greater traffic jams.
But remember this is California, the land of the liberal elite. This is the state that guarantees anyone who can sneak into the country Constitutional protections, welfare, free education, and free medical. This is a state where the homeless are subsidized with stipends – a state filled with people who feel and care for their fellow man and who are willing to protest at the drop of a liberal cause. However, the traffic is terrible which makes it difficult for these liberals to get to the place where they can protest the plight of the poor and downtrodden – so they have come up with the solution – TOLL LANES. Therefore, for the limousine elite they can use their personal money by buying their way around the traffic jams they caused for the poor and downtrodden so they can rush to the places where they can protest for the poor and downtrodden. The hypocrisy of this seems to escape them.
In spite of what most civilized people would consider drawbacks to living like this the reality is that people are flooding into California – many legally. The result is housing is hard to come by but you can still buy a 1940’s two bedroom one bath bungalow for – depending on location -- $500,000 to $900,000. Selling a house there is quite an experience because you simply place your house on the market and wait for the bidding to begin. No one ever reduces their price because they always expect someone to pay more than the asking price. So who would pay this kind of money for what most people would consider a shack or at best a starter home? The brain dead – that’s who – these are the people who feel that living in perpetual sunshine is more important than having quality. There is no doubt but that California is the home of the living dead – their brains have been cooked by all of that sun.
Friday, April 01, 2005
Gray Becomes The World
How I envy the young, not for their lithe bodies and tight skin but for their clarity. For the young the world is black and white where everything is good or bad, right or wrong, moral or immoral with very little in between. Decisions come swiftly and with certainty but with the onset of maturity tinges of gray begin to creep in. Decisions begin to take longer and when made they lack that air of absoluteness that once was present. Gradually – oh so gradually – gray spreads and the black and white view of the world fades until nothing seems to be absolutely right or wrong, totally moral or completely immoral, and decisions come slowly, if at all, and when they do come, they are filled with uncertainty and ambiguity.
Increasingly I observe via the television this clarity of vision that I seem to have lost. Yet I see people rendering decisions that I think would have confounded Solomon and certainly have confounded me. Perhaps the most visible today is the situation with Teri Schaivo. There are people who are vehemently supporting both sides, apparently comfortable in making decisions for others without actually having any facts on which to base their decision. Personally I don’t know what to think and can only thank God that I do not have to make the decision whether she should live or die. Who is right? The husband maintains he is carrying out her wishes while the parents plead for the right to care for her. The husband refuses to divorce her while living outside of his marriage vows – why? The parents are determined to keep her alive but perhaps only as a living vegetable regardless of what her wishes might have been. How do I know who is right? The courts have stayed within the framework of the law and have refused to get involved in the moral aspect of the case. Perhaps that is wise but then perhaps it is the coward’s way. Of course I have an opinion – like everyone else – but it is an OPINION and not based on anything other than my own individual moral compass.
Then we have the situation with that Man-boy Michael Jackson. Everyone seems to have made up their mind regarding whether or not he is a child molester. How can anyone be absolutely sure of his guilt or innocence? Clearly he is someone in desperate need of psychiatric help because he appears to my untrained eye, to be a case of arrested development. I think he reacts like a ten year old boy, who likes to hang out with his friends and do the things that ten year old boys do, and that includes all of the titillating aspects of sex and sexual exploration. This is certainly does not condone any behavior that would fall into the category of molestation because he is in fact a 40 year old man. But I’m not trained and I wasn’t there and the accusers all seem to have an agenda. So how can anyone be so certain that he is guilty or innocent? There is no doubt that he acted inappropriately for an adult but then being a physical adult doesn’t make him a mental adult. So his actions have to be examined in terms of his mental development, which is far from normal -- and any decision regarding him and his conduct falls into the realm of gray and uncertainty – at least for me.
But there are many more issues where people seem to have a clarity that I lack and among these is abortion. This is a matter that moves people to violence – sort of – kill a commie for Christ – while purporting to protect the unborn from violence. The nub of this argument really lies with some philosophical issues that have plagued mankind for years. To some the moment the sperm enters the egg life begins so any deliberate violence to the egg is tantamount to murder, except for those who believe life begins with the first breath. To the atheist, the soul doesn’t exist so when life begins is open to interpretation—presumably with the first breath otherwise abortion would be murder. For others, life begins with the entry of the soul into the body but the problem seems to be – when does this happen? Some think it happens at the time of conception so abortion is murder – pure and simple, but others think the soul enters the body with the first breath so abortion is purely a clinical matter. Others take the view that the decision to abort is purely the woman’s decision and is independent of these philosophical issues, which sidesteps the issue of what constitutes murder. Personally, I don’t know and I am puzzled by how so many people are convinced they know the answer, when these are questions that have been debated for centuries. From my perspective these people are entitled to their opinion but that is all it is – their opinion. To foist their opinion onto the rest of us is wrong. This does not mean I am pro-abortion or pro-life, it simply means I don’t know. I do think the decision to abort is a very personal one and not one that any woman makes lightly. So to me this is another one of those areas where everything is gray and unlike so many others, I don’t this issue with any clarity.
Then we have the issue of war – not just the current Iraqi affair, but war in general. I see people of various ages – some old enough to know better – marching around with anti-war slogans. Many of these people are simply anti-Bush agitators, but some are sincere in their feelings that war is wrong. This issue was addressed by Aristophanes in his play Lysistrada hundreds of years before Christ. I think everyone would be willing to concede that war is a bad thing but at no time in history of man has there been a period of total peace. Peace – such as it has been – has been maintained by the force of arms and those countries that were weak or undefended were exploited at best and destroyed at worst. There is no doubt that war is bad but is it immoral? Is it morally wrong to use force to defend those who cannot defend themselves from those who would destroy them? In effect these anti-war activists are saying that war is morally wrong and that it is better to allow the weak to be destroyed by the strong because this is the Darwinian way and to intervene in this natural process is immoral. To make it more relevant essentially Hussein had every right to murder and pillage his people because to intervene as President Bush did, is morally wrong because it interfered with the natural process. This same argument could be mounted to defend Hitler, because to go to war to stop murder is wrong.
This argument then escalates to weapons – because weapons kill people and the atomic bomb is the most potent weapon for mass killing and therefore, it should be outlawed. Of course, I don’t think in the history of mankind has their ever been an example of a weapon murdering someone unless the weapon was employed by a human hand. Weapons are bad, guns are bad, but so are people. In fact, every society has outlawed bad behavior and has punished those who violate the rules – these are called criminals. Criminals act immorally but to disarm the populace is to place them at risk to those individuals who are willing to use force to take what they want. So who is the most immoral – the person who disarms the people so they can’t defend themselves or the person who is willing to take advantage of those unable to defend themselves?
So as I stated at the outset – how I envy the young their clarity and certainty because as you age, things get very gray and certainty about anything comes in very small doses.
Increasingly I observe via the television this clarity of vision that I seem to have lost. Yet I see people rendering decisions that I think would have confounded Solomon and certainly have confounded me. Perhaps the most visible today is the situation with Teri Schaivo. There are people who are vehemently supporting both sides, apparently comfortable in making decisions for others without actually having any facts on which to base their decision. Personally I don’t know what to think and can only thank God that I do not have to make the decision whether she should live or die. Who is right? The husband maintains he is carrying out her wishes while the parents plead for the right to care for her. The husband refuses to divorce her while living outside of his marriage vows – why? The parents are determined to keep her alive but perhaps only as a living vegetable regardless of what her wishes might have been. How do I know who is right? The courts have stayed within the framework of the law and have refused to get involved in the moral aspect of the case. Perhaps that is wise but then perhaps it is the coward’s way. Of course I have an opinion – like everyone else – but it is an OPINION and not based on anything other than my own individual moral compass.
Then we have the situation with that Man-boy Michael Jackson. Everyone seems to have made up their mind regarding whether or not he is a child molester. How can anyone be absolutely sure of his guilt or innocence? Clearly he is someone in desperate need of psychiatric help because he appears to my untrained eye, to be a case of arrested development. I think he reacts like a ten year old boy, who likes to hang out with his friends and do the things that ten year old boys do, and that includes all of the titillating aspects of sex and sexual exploration. This is certainly does not condone any behavior that would fall into the category of molestation because he is in fact a 40 year old man. But I’m not trained and I wasn’t there and the accusers all seem to have an agenda. So how can anyone be so certain that he is guilty or innocent? There is no doubt that he acted inappropriately for an adult but then being a physical adult doesn’t make him a mental adult. So his actions have to be examined in terms of his mental development, which is far from normal -- and any decision regarding him and his conduct falls into the realm of gray and uncertainty – at least for me.
But there are many more issues where people seem to have a clarity that I lack and among these is abortion. This is a matter that moves people to violence – sort of – kill a commie for Christ – while purporting to protect the unborn from violence. The nub of this argument really lies with some philosophical issues that have plagued mankind for years. To some the moment the sperm enters the egg life begins so any deliberate violence to the egg is tantamount to murder, except for those who believe life begins with the first breath. To the atheist, the soul doesn’t exist so when life begins is open to interpretation—presumably with the first breath otherwise abortion would be murder. For others, life begins with the entry of the soul into the body but the problem seems to be – when does this happen? Some think it happens at the time of conception so abortion is murder – pure and simple, but others think the soul enters the body with the first breath so abortion is purely a clinical matter. Others take the view that the decision to abort is purely the woman’s decision and is independent of these philosophical issues, which sidesteps the issue of what constitutes murder. Personally, I don’t know and I am puzzled by how so many people are convinced they know the answer, when these are questions that have been debated for centuries. From my perspective these people are entitled to their opinion but that is all it is – their opinion. To foist their opinion onto the rest of us is wrong. This does not mean I am pro-abortion or pro-life, it simply means I don’t know. I do think the decision to abort is a very personal one and not one that any woman makes lightly. So to me this is another one of those areas where everything is gray and unlike so many others, I don’t this issue with any clarity.
Then we have the issue of war – not just the current Iraqi affair, but war in general. I see people of various ages – some old enough to know better – marching around with anti-war slogans. Many of these people are simply anti-Bush agitators, but some are sincere in their feelings that war is wrong. This issue was addressed by Aristophanes in his play Lysistrada hundreds of years before Christ. I think everyone would be willing to concede that war is a bad thing but at no time in history of man has there been a period of total peace. Peace – such as it has been – has been maintained by the force of arms and those countries that were weak or undefended were exploited at best and destroyed at worst. There is no doubt that war is bad but is it immoral? Is it morally wrong to use force to defend those who cannot defend themselves from those who would destroy them? In effect these anti-war activists are saying that war is morally wrong and that it is better to allow the weak to be destroyed by the strong because this is the Darwinian way and to intervene in this natural process is immoral. To make it more relevant essentially Hussein had every right to murder and pillage his people because to intervene as President Bush did, is morally wrong because it interfered with the natural process. This same argument could be mounted to defend Hitler, because to go to war to stop murder is wrong.
This argument then escalates to weapons – because weapons kill people and the atomic bomb is the most potent weapon for mass killing and therefore, it should be outlawed. Of course, I don’t think in the history of mankind has their ever been an example of a weapon murdering someone unless the weapon was employed by a human hand. Weapons are bad, guns are bad, but so are people. In fact, every society has outlawed bad behavior and has punished those who violate the rules – these are called criminals. Criminals act immorally but to disarm the populace is to place them at risk to those individuals who are willing to use force to take what they want. So who is the most immoral – the person who disarms the people so they can’t defend themselves or the person who is willing to take advantage of those unable to defend themselves?
So as I stated at the outset – how I envy the young their clarity and certainty because as you age, things get very gray and certainty about anything comes in very small doses.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
POLITICAL EXODUS
My comments are actually offered in rebuttal or at least in response to, the following article written Rick Lyman of the New York Times. With that pedigree we can assume the article is written in a totally objective fashion and with no hidden agenda of the author. So before proceeding you may want to read the article at
http://iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/02/06/news/refuge.html
But leave it he intends to do, and as soon as he can. His house is on the market, and he is busily seeking work across the border in Canada. For him, the re-election of George W. Bush was the last straw.
This is alleged to be an American who understands how America operates and a man who purports to be a solid citizen but the fact that he would leave the country over the election of a President with whom he disagrees indicates not only his shallowness as a person but his almost total lack of understanding about how the country operates. The ONLY President ever elected in this country who was universally popular was George Washington. EVERY other President has been opposed and vilified with Abraham Lincoln being one of the most vilified. Here we have a man old enough to know better who is pouting and stamping his little foot because he didn’t get his way. What we are seeing here is the result of years of pandering by the press and intelligentsia (?) to every minority, politically correct position, and spoiled child who cannot lose.
But America is turning into a country very different from the one I grew up believing in.
Notice that is lacking is any explanation as to what he believes in or what he thinks America was. I can tell you that the America I grew up in was an America where you either passed a class or you flunked it. You either learned enough to go to the next grade or you were held back. I went to movies where there were no curse words, no overt sex, no graphic violence, and there was a moral fabric to the films rather than the amoral one we see today. I grew up in a world where criminals were punished because they broke the law. I remember a world where if you jumped off of your bicycle and broke your leg you got punished at home for being a dumbbell rather than seeing it as an opportunity to sue the bicycle manufacturer. I grew up in an America where people were responsible for their actions and that if you lost you learned to play a better game. What America did he grow up in?
Yet immigration lawyers say that Americans are --- fed up with a country they see drifting persistently to the right and abandoning the principles of tolerance, compassion and peaceful idealism they felt once defined the nation
Let me see – America has always been forced into wars because the “peaceful” Europeans have never been able to take care of themselves. It has been America who has been the bastion of compassion and idealism not Europe or even Canada. Canada is hardly a nation devoted to helping anyone but instead are insular and isolationist. So the real issue is that the country is moving to the right – right of what I ask -- right of the immoral community who have abandoned God in favor of the reign of the individual? America is a country who has abandoned their compassion? Excuse me but did we just send more help in terms of money, equipment, and people to Asia than all of the other countries combined? Isn’t it the Americans who have driven out Hussein and freed a nation of 17 million people. Sorry but this entire statement has no validity at all.
Still, that is more than double the population of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. "For every one who reacts to the Bush victory by moving to a new country, how many others are there still in America, feeling similarly disaffected but not quite willing to take such a drastic step?" Cohen asked.Melanie Redman, 30, assistant director of the Epilepsy Foundation in Seattle, said she had put her Volvo up for sale and hopes to be living in Toronto by the summer. She and her Canadian boyfriend, a Web site designer for Canadian nonprofit companies, had been planning to move to New York, but after Nov.2, they decided on Canada instead."I'm doing it," she said. "I don't want to participate in what this administration is doing here and around the world. Under Bush, the U.S. seems to be leading the pack as the world spirals down."
First, I would guess there are quite a few “disaffected” people in the US but I think I would use the term spoiled instead. These are the people who have grown up expecting to be rewarded by just showing up. This is a group of people who have never learned how to lose. They expect to get their way and win every time and if they don’t it is some one else’s fault. Here we have a group of people who expect the government to take care of them regardless of their poor judgement. Well the country is truly better off without them so Bon Voyage.
The US is leading the pack as the world spirals downward – hmmmm --- have I missed something here. It seems to me that it is the Muslims who have pioneered the murder of innocent children as a political statement. It seems to me that it was the Muslims who have stated that they consider anyone who disagrees with them as legitimate targets. Wasn’t it the Americans who put a stop to the genocide in Bosnia? Isn’t it America who is pouring huge amounts of money into Africa to fight AIDS? So exactly what is America doing that is so wrong – well for starters they elected a President who puts America first. President Bush is a quintessential American who is unashamed of being an American. He is a man who says what he means and means what he says. He is doing what the Europeans can’t do and once again cleaning up the mess they made. So if this person wants to leave America to go to a better place – good – the country is better off. I’ll be willing to bet that after a good dose of socialism they will slink back across the border.
http://iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/02/06/news/refuge.html
But leave it he intends to do, and as soon as he can. His house is on the market, and he is busily seeking work across the border in Canada. For him, the re-election of George W. Bush was the last straw.
This is alleged to be an American who understands how America operates and a man who purports to be a solid citizen but the fact that he would leave the country over the election of a President with whom he disagrees indicates not only his shallowness as a person but his almost total lack of understanding about how the country operates. The ONLY President ever elected in this country who was universally popular was George Washington. EVERY other President has been opposed and vilified with Abraham Lincoln being one of the most vilified. Here we have a man old enough to know better who is pouting and stamping his little foot because he didn’t get his way. What we are seeing here is the result of years of pandering by the press and intelligentsia (?) to every minority, politically correct position, and spoiled child who cannot lose.
But America is turning into a country very different from the one I grew up believing in.
Notice that is lacking is any explanation as to what he believes in or what he thinks America was. I can tell you that the America I grew up in was an America where you either passed a class or you flunked it. You either learned enough to go to the next grade or you were held back. I went to movies where there were no curse words, no overt sex, no graphic violence, and there was a moral fabric to the films rather than the amoral one we see today. I grew up in a world where criminals were punished because they broke the law. I remember a world where if you jumped off of your bicycle and broke your leg you got punished at home for being a dumbbell rather than seeing it as an opportunity to sue the bicycle manufacturer. I grew up in an America where people were responsible for their actions and that if you lost you learned to play a better game. What America did he grow up in?
Yet immigration lawyers say that Americans are --- fed up with a country they see drifting persistently to the right and abandoning the principles of tolerance, compassion and peaceful idealism they felt once defined the nation
Let me see – America has always been forced into wars because the “peaceful” Europeans have never been able to take care of themselves. It has been America who has been the bastion of compassion and idealism not Europe or even Canada. Canada is hardly a nation devoted to helping anyone but instead are insular and isolationist. So the real issue is that the country is moving to the right – right of what I ask -- right of the immoral community who have abandoned God in favor of the reign of the individual? America is a country who has abandoned their compassion? Excuse me but did we just send more help in terms of money, equipment, and people to Asia than all of the other countries combined? Isn’t it the Americans who have driven out Hussein and freed a nation of 17 million people. Sorry but this entire statement has no validity at all.
Still, that is more than double the population of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. "For every one who reacts to the Bush victory by moving to a new country, how many others are there still in America, feeling similarly disaffected but not quite willing to take such a drastic step?" Cohen asked.Melanie Redman, 30, assistant director of the Epilepsy Foundation in Seattle, said she had put her Volvo up for sale and hopes to be living in Toronto by the summer. She and her Canadian boyfriend, a Web site designer for Canadian nonprofit companies, had been planning to move to New York, but after Nov.2, they decided on Canada instead."I'm doing it," she said. "I don't want to participate in what this administration is doing here and around the world. Under Bush, the U.S. seems to be leading the pack as the world spirals down."
First, I would guess there are quite a few “disaffected” people in the US but I think I would use the term spoiled instead. These are the people who have grown up expecting to be rewarded by just showing up. This is a group of people who have never learned how to lose. They expect to get their way and win every time and if they don’t it is some one else’s fault. Here we have a group of people who expect the government to take care of them regardless of their poor judgement. Well the country is truly better off without them so Bon Voyage.
The US is leading the pack as the world spirals downward – hmmmm --- have I missed something here. It seems to me that it is the Muslims who have pioneered the murder of innocent children as a political statement. It seems to me that it was the Muslims who have stated that they consider anyone who disagrees with them as legitimate targets. Wasn’t it the Americans who put a stop to the genocide in Bosnia? Isn’t it America who is pouring huge amounts of money into Africa to fight AIDS? So exactly what is America doing that is so wrong – well for starters they elected a President who puts America first. President Bush is a quintessential American who is unashamed of being an American. He is a man who says what he means and means what he says. He is doing what the Europeans can’t do and once again cleaning up the mess they made. So if this person wants to leave America to go to a better place – good – the country is better off. I’ll be willing to bet that after a good dose of socialism they will slink back across the border.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
ODDS AND ENDS
I continue to be swamped with my consulting activities and these appear to be expanding. This is limiting the amount of time I have to blog, but here are some random thoughts about recent events.
Indonesia, the worlds most populous Islamic country wants the Americans out of the country ASAP. This is another vivid example of how the Muslims punish their own people in the name of Allah. There is more concern about the people seeing America in a positive light than in actually saving the lives of the people. Better they should die of disease or starvation than think Americans are good.
The attacks on Christianity continue unabated in this country under the guise of the "separation of church and state -- ala the Constitution. Of course the Constitution doesn't actually say that, it merely prohibits Congress from making laws that would deny the right to worship. The interpretation came from the Warren Court -- which was the court that has virtually destroyed American values. It is time that we had a Chief Justice that is as extreme right as Warren was left in order to bring some semblance of rationality back to the country and the Constitution.
An article in the paper today where some nut wants Congress to stop paying for circumcisions in infants because they are medically unnecessary. This would save $2M a year (a laughable sum in light of the expendenditures of the government). Of course this procedure is medically unneccessary but speaking as a male who has lived in both conditions I can assure you that circumcision is more hygenic and a great deal more convenient. There is a whole group of men out there who are fixated on uncircumcised penises and want the entire country to succumb to what they think is more "cosmetic". Jeeze aren't there more important things to worry about?
Speaking of -- well things sexual -- a young man who dated my daughter has popped up after a number of years. He was gay, then straight, then married, then divorced, and now gay again. He has had a number of jobs but no career jobs because each job has been just that -- a job and unrelated to the previous ones. His dad is the typical Irishman. He has a brother who is big and a clone of his father. He has an IQ somewhere between a radish and a clam but he is very masculine or at least what the world views as masculine. This young man is slight, theatrical, and artistic so hardly the model that the father sees as being desireable traits in a man. Therefore, this kid has spent his life trying to be what he thinks his father wants. He is failing and is now totally screwed up. Ironically, he had a best friend in high school and he and his friend had a special relationship. The friend has now moved on, has a career, met a girl, got married, has two children, is now married 10 years and a VP of a large firm. The friend's dad just accepted his son as he found him and the boy has now become a man while the other kid continues to drift. Very sad.
Then we have the Dan Rather fiasco. This is another example of how when things go wrong -- kill the little guys and let the generals escape to the rear. The worst part of this thing was the conclusion that there is no evidence of political bias. That is so laughable that it borders on the bizarre. This is an example of how the East Coast liberals are so inbred that they can't see the truth. They really think that NPR, PBS, ABC, NBC, and CBS are not left wing propaganda machines. Rather was the architect of the attack on Bush and he was supported in that position all of the way to the top. If he wasn't who authorized a five year study of Bush trying to "get the goods" on him. That isn't bias? The networks are killing themselves just like the Democratic party and neither group has a clue as to what the problem is. They are blaming their failures on the Christian community. They should try values, morality, and their own stupidity.
Abbas is the new leader of the Palestinians -- so will anything change? I think not. I think this will be another period of regrouping by the extremists and then more violence in about 6 months. The objective is to destroy Israel and that has never changed.
Duty calls.
Indonesia, the worlds most populous Islamic country wants the Americans out of the country ASAP. This is another vivid example of how the Muslims punish their own people in the name of Allah. There is more concern about the people seeing America in a positive light than in actually saving the lives of the people. Better they should die of disease or starvation than think Americans are good.
The attacks on Christianity continue unabated in this country under the guise of the "separation of church and state -- ala the Constitution. Of course the Constitution doesn't actually say that, it merely prohibits Congress from making laws that would deny the right to worship. The interpretation came from the Warren Court -- which was the court that has virtually destroyed American values. It is time that we had a Chief Justice that is as extreme right as Warren was left in order to bring some semblance of rationality back to the country and the Constitution.
An article in the paper today where some nut wants Congress to stop paying for circumcisions in infants because they are medically unnecessary. This would save $2M a year (a laughable sum in light of the expendenditures of the government). Of course this procedure is medically unneccessary but speaking as a male who has lived in both conditions I can assure you that circumcision is more hygenic and a great deal more convenient. There is a whole group of men out there who are fixated on uncircumcised penises and want the entire country to succumb to what they think is more "cosmetic". Jeeze aren't there more important things to worry about?
Speaking of -- well things sexual -- a young man who dated my daughter has popped up after a number of years. He was gay, then straight, then married, then divorced, and now gay again. He has had a number of jobs but no career jobs because each job has been just that -- a job and unrelated to the previous ones. His dad is the typical Irishman. He has a brother who is big and a clone of his father. He has an IQ somewhere between a radish and a clam but he is very masculine or at least what the world views as masculine. This young man is slight, theatrical, and artistic so hardly the model that the father sees as being desireable traits in a man. Therefore, this kid has spent his life trying to be what he thinks his father wants. He is failing and is now totally screwed up. Ironically, he had a best friend in high school and he and his friend had a special relationship. The friend has now moved on, has a career, met a girl, got married, has two children, is now married 10 years and a VP of a large firm. The friend's dad just accepted his son as he found him and the boy has now become a man while the other kid continues to drift. Very sad.
Then we have the Dan Rather fiasco. This is another example of how when things go wrong -- kill the little guys and let the generals escape to the rear. The worst part of this thing was the conclusion that there is no evidence of political bias. That is so laughable that it borders on the bizarre. This is an example of how the East Coast liberals are so inbred that they can't see the truth. They really think that NPR, PBS, ABC, NBC, and CBS are not left wing propaganda machines. Rather was the architect of the attack on Bush and he was supported in that position all of the way to the top. If he wasn't who authorized a five year study of Bush trying to "get the goods" on him. That isn't bias? The networks are killing themselves just like the Democratic party and neither group has a clue as to what the problem is. They are blaming their failures on the Christian community. They should try values, morality, and their own stupidity.
Abbas is the new leader of the Palestinians -- so will anything change? I think not. I think this will be another period of regrouping by the extremists and then more violence in about 6 months. The objective is to destroy Israel and that has never changed.
Duty calls.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)