Non-profit=Same Rules

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/30/atheist-group-sues-irs-for-discriminating-against-secular-non-profits/

     Now it is a fact of human nature that people tend to trust religious organizations more than secular ones.  Even with all the debacles that have occurred under the heading of religion (Catholic Church suppressing information and even protecting child molesters, anything dealing with the Westboro Baptist Church etc.), we still seem to put an inordinate amount of trust in religious institutions.
     So with this as a given, the idea that our government may give preferential treatment to Religious Non-Profits over Secular Non-Profits is believable.  Also given some of the Secular Non-Profit disasters that have occurred fairly recently, it easy to understand how we might be a little leery of any Charity that isn't "endorsed" by God.
     However, if the US government is giving preferential treatment when it comes to rules and regulations to Religious NP over Secular NP there is a problem IMNSHO (For those who aren't up to speed on Me Speak, that stands for In My Not So Humble Opinion.)  The above article alleges that RNPs are allowed to slide on Record Keeping/Rule Keeping while SNP are held to a much higher standard.  It claims that SNP are forces to follow the rules for Non-Profit groups while RNP essentially get a free pass.
     If this is true, then the problem needs to be fixed.  RNP should be held to the same rules and standards of SNP.  They both do the exact same things pretty much the exact same way.  The only difference between them is one is church based and one is not.  The rules and laws have to apply to everyone equally under the terms they operate under (In this case, the terms for Non-Profit Groups.)
     So if group X from Our Holy Mother of the Great Spaghetti Monster Second Dunking Donuts Church operates a Non-profit then it has to follow the same rules and regulations as the Fraternal Order of Left Handed Ginger Peasnappers Local Order #185.  It is really that simple.
     Now I am not saying that Religious Non-Profits should be penalized or that Secular Non-profits should be given more leeway.  I am just saying, with all other forces remaining equal, if you do the same things and do them correctly then you should all follow the same rules.

May The Great Spaghetti Monster spread his noodley goodness over all of you.

End of rant

Jump! Jump! Jump!

Pollytics always gives me a headache!

      So here we are, end of the year watching the same old song and dance.  Without immediate action on the part of our government, a whole gaggle of tax increases and spending cuts will snap into place.  Hundreds of thousands of jobs will be put at risk and the nation will probably fall back into a recession that we have just started crawling out of.  Imminent doom on a level even the Mayans never imagined.

     Our government, in its usual timely fashion, has refused to come to any sort of agreement.  Reboobicans blame the Damnocrats!  Liarberals blame the Teabeggars!  Everyone blames everyone else for not getting the job done.  Me, I cannot say which side is more responsible for this disaster.  I will leave that to more learned and more opinionated people to decide.  In my not so humble opinion, I will say it is both parties fault and leave it at that.

There are none so blind...

     (As a slight aside here, I do blame the Reboobicans slightly more than the Damnocrats for one simple reason.  

 http://news.yahoo.com/sinking-plan-b-u-fiscal-cliff-disaster-john-060405476--business.html

     Boehner came up with a compromise proposal that even old Grover N. agreed was an decent compromise.  You know Grover right, he's the "No tax increases forever" pledge guy.  He put it up and his own people (Teabeggars cough cough) shot him down before it could even be put to a vote.  Now admittedly Obama has already said he would veto the proposal if it got past, but if Boehner had managed to get it through, he would have been negotiating from a much stronger perch.  As is, his people shooting down his idea gave Obama and the Damnocrats even more ammunition.  Hence the reason I blame the Reboobicans slightly more than the Damnocrats.)

     Okay that was more than a slight aside but what the hey it is my blog.  So anyho, onward and downward.

     Both sides Know that this has to be done.  Both sides know damned well that the other side isn't going to agree to everything the other side wants.  Both sides know that disaster will occur if action isn't taken.  Neither side is willing to make any sort of real compromise.  They are more than willing to allow this train wreck to happen then blame the other side while they attempt to clean up the mess.  

     Watching our government "work" is like watching a bunch of cranky, constipated 5 year old children all trying to play on the same swing.  Everyone could play, everyone could be happy if they would just wait and take turns.  You know, compromise?  But instead, they stand around arguing, blaming the other kids for not letting them play and staying full  of poop.  

     So here we sit, dangling over a "fiscal cliff" watching the ground behind us crumble away.  Instead of doing something to save ourselves, we are contemplating just how much it is going to hurt when we hit the ground way below.  Will our so called leaders act in the eleventh hour to save us all or will we fall onto the metaphorical jagged rocks below?

Okay they said go this way.

     (Annd don't forget folks, we will reach our debt ceiling in just a few days too.  Gotta love those double whammies!) 

It comes in book form too.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AEH3A2Y

Like the Blog?  Buy the book!

Respect not greed.

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/2012/12/28/claim-seeks-100m-for-newtown-massacre-survivor

     Short but sweet rant here, folks.  As I expected, some industrious soul is attempting to file a lawsuit for 1 Million Bucks in the wake of the Newtown massacre.  In the name of their child, they are suing because they feel that the school did not take action to stop the shooting from happening.  They claim (and I truly believe) that their child has been horribly scarred by all of the violence that happened and because of this, she (They cough cough) deserves to be rewarded 1 million dollars.
     Now I wish I could truly believe that these people are doing it because they have their child's best interest at heart, but sorry I can't.  If this litigation is allowed to go through, then little Jill Doe will be forced to live through the events of that day again and again as it is battled out in the courts and in the news.  Instead of hopefully dealing with her rightful trauma and moving on, she will be trapped in it for months, maybe even years.
     To many Americans see litigation as their path to prosperity.  They sue over the drop of a hat in the hopes of being one of those people who receive a huge payoff.  They really don't care who their actions hurt as long as they get their payoff.
     IF I felt the school (or in the Batman shooting case the theater) had done anything wrong or negligent, then I could see some sort of legal action.  However, the school had all of the standard security of any school in most cities/towns.  Short of having armed trained security people on hand at every entrance (Which I am okay with) and metal detectors backed by friskings on top of that, there isn't much more the school could have done.
     Now moving forward, do we need to seriously rethink how we protect those who cannot protect themselves?  Absolutely.  Maybe there will be changes to School security in the future.  If the time comes when we do start taking into account that some madman might walk into a school and open fire, then and only then can I see lawsuits being launched.

End of rant

A Common Discourse for the greater good.

     Now pretty much everyone who has even glanced at my blogs knows that I tend towards humor even when discussing subjects of a serious nature.  I tend to try and defuse tension and combativeness with light asides and comedy.  In short, "I laugh so that I do not cry."
     No amount of humor or comedy can ease the shock and pain of the gruesome murder of so many people in Newtown, Con.  and I won't even try.  It has gotten me pondering the very volatile issue of gun control and gun safety.  After a very lively and sometimes heated discussion on FB last night, I am left thinking about a very simple issue.  Why is it so difficult for the Nation as a whole to discuss the subject of firearm control with any real sense of civility or logic?
     With the exception of Politicians who have become more and more silent on the issue, every time there is a horror such as the Theater Shootings or what happened in Newtown, both sides of the argument are (forgive the pun) up in arms.  Anti-gun advocates are screaming harsher and more restrictive gun laws with some even advocating making private ownership of firearms illegal.  Pro-gun advocates scream 2nd Amendment and that they have the right to own everything from  Guns up to Anti-tank weapons  (Okay maybe a minor exaggeration there).  The moderates who advocate intelligent gun control laws while allowing private citizens to own firearms are drowned out under the righteous indignation of the extremes.
     So why are we, as a society, unable to hold a rational discussion on the subject of gun control?  Extremes, as a general rule, are never correct.  Answers are most often found somewhere in the middle between the two extremes.  Unfortunately, the very nature of the beast promotes extreme views.
     As a nation, the only time you have a majority discussing firearm control vs personal rights is during tragedies such as the Newtown shootings.  As a whole, most people don't even think about gun control till they hear that some nutball walked into an area and killed people.  Once they hear of these horrors, they are rightfully horrified and shocked  over what happened.  They become afraid for their loved ones and angry that someone let this event happen. 
     Anger, fear, shock and confusion are powerful emotions.  However, they don't lend themselves well to any sort of rational thought.  They tend to drive us towards a Mob Mentality.  Groups are polarized into Absolutes with very little chance at finding a common ground. 
     We need to start a common discourse that isn't overshadowed by fear and anger.  I don't pretend to have all the answers.  Hell, like I always say, I don't even pretend to have all of the questions.  I believe that the private ownership of firearms is one  of the most basic rights promised to all law abiding citizens of the US.  I also believe that more should be done to protect our children and our people from the crazies that would do them harm.  There has to be an answer.  We just need to find out what it is.
     (Ordinarily this is where I would type "End of Rant,' but this piece wasn't intended as a rant.  I wasn't calling anyone out or criticizing anyone.  May whatever powers that be watch over the souls of those lost and be with the families who will never see their loved ones again on this Earth.  May God grant us the wisdom to find the answers we need to combat this growing issue.)

Crazy people will always do crazy things.

http://news.yahoo.com/connecticut-towns-schools-locked-down-following-shooting-report-153953370.html
     So once again some completely insane person has decided to end his life and in the process take as many other innocent lives as he can.  Children have been slaughtered in a place where they should feel and be safe.  The world looks on in horror as the death toll is tallied and wonders exactly what the fuck is wrong with America.
     And as usual, many people are blaming the tool not the person.  Commentators are crying for more gun control.  They ignore the thousands of responsible gun owners in the country who have never gone on a killing spree or committed any violent gun crime.  They ignore the fact that any person who would commit such a horrible crime would find a way to do it no matter what.  They preach, "Take away the guns and the killing will stop."
     Let me hit you with some factoids:

" According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 32,885 people died in traffic crashes in 2010 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 10,228 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths last year."

" In 2008 testimony before a Senate subcommittee, Medical Epidemiologist Dr. Leonard J. Paulozzi of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that in 2005 (the most recent year for which data was available) more than 22,000 American lives were lost due to overdoses, and the number is growing rapidly. Dr. Paulozzi also testified that all available evidence suggests that unintentional overdose deaths are related to the increasing use of prescription drugs, especially opioid painkillers."

 "Per the Center for Disease Control, latest figures (2005) show 30,694 firearm deaths (all races, all ages, both sexes) in the United States. Since a firearm is an inanimate object, it can not be the sole creator/ root cause of a death as it must be handled by a person in order to be fired.  A more accurate description is approximately 16,000 suicides using a firearm.  Approximately 12,252 murders by firearms 80% of which are caused by felons/career criminals/gang member activities. USDOJ. National Gang Threat Assessment annual report 2009.   Approximately 600 justifiable defensive shootings by both police and citizens.  The remainder in accidental firearms discharges."

     So of these three examples, the number of fatalities is pretty close to equal.  Tens of thousands of people killed every year, but we only hear people crying out for the banning of one of the three examples.  Now I suppose you could argue that the Drug deaths shouldn't be included since it only effects the user.  Still I have to wonder how many of the drug related deaths are kids ODing because parents don't keep tighter control of their meds?
     Crazy and stupid people will always do crazy and stupid things.  A man will get behind the wheel of a 2000lb vehicle after drinking with his buddies even though he KNOWs that driving while drunk is stupid and dangerous.  All of the drunk driving laws introduced have never changed that.  People still pump themselves full of drugs even though they KNOW it is harmful to them and possibly the people around them.
     Nutjobs like the guy in the article above and the "Batman" shooter will always find some way to hurt themselves and the people around them.  If we ban guns, they will use knives.  If we ban knives, they will use bombs (Don't even get me started on the handy explosive uses of many common household items.) 
     Even with the stricter gun control laws we have, it is still ridiculously easy for someone to obtain a gun illegally.  If someone wants to commit gun violence especially on the scale described above, they will find someone to sell them what they need just like a drug addict will always find someone to give them their next fix.
     In the end, the only people that laws effect are the people that actually follow the laws.  This is why you never hear reports about the multitude of people in the US and around the world who DON"T walk into a school and kill children.  You don't see stories on responsible gun owners who don't dress up in armor and kill dozens of people in a theater.  Hell, someone getting tanked up on booze and plowing through a cafe window probably won't even make it past the headlines of a local paper.
     When I was growing up, my family was easily one of the best armed groups in Pike County.  We had rifles, shotguns, handguns and more ammo than the National Guard.  Not once in the 20 years I lived at home did anyone in my family go on a killing spree.  We don't need to control the guns.  We need to control the crazy people that might own them.  People preach about gun control, BUT if someone at that School had possessed a gun then maybe the death toll wouldn't have been so high.

"The best deterrent against someone with a gun is someone else with a gun."

End of Rant

Founding Principles Or Just what did they mean anyway?

Okay first some basic history about our Founders and their religious beliefs from Wikipedia:

“Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (or Episcopalian, after the American Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists.

A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible") and Benjamin Franklin. Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists, or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.

Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism.”

For those who don't know what it is, here is the explanation of the Jefferson Bible, also from Wikipedia: “The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was a book constructed by Thomas Jefferson in the latter years of his life by cutting and pasting numerous sections from the New Testament as extractions of the doctrine of Jesus. Jefferson's condensed composition is especially notable for its exclusion of all miracles by Jesus and most mentions of the supernatural, including sections of the four gospels which contain the Resurrection and most other miracles, and passages indicating Jesus was divine. “ (BTW, this info is from Wikipedia, but there are literally dozens of historical studies on the subject.)

So, with this history lesson in mind, let's study the concept that the US was meant to be a Christian Nation by the Founding Father's. Even among the actual Christians, there was a vast variety of tenets and beliefs No Sect of Christianity is identical to another and some of them are radically different. So if the US was meant to be a Christian Nation, which Sect? Then take into account the fact that several weren't Christian at all. Deists recognize no religion or its tenets, merely holding faith that a benign Creator does exist.

Now the Declaration of Independence does mention God. Five times to be precise, but at no time does it state which God. Now given that the majority of the Founders were some form of Christian, it can be inferred that they meant the Christian God, but this never actually stated. Historians believe that this generalized wording for a Diety was because the Founders realized that America was destined to become a nation of many faiths.

Despite what most people seem to think, there is absolutely no mention of a God/Creator anywhere in the Constitution. The closest thing is the line at the end “in the year of our Lord...” which was a pretty standard wording at the time. Now combine this fact with the 1^st Amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” and you've pretty much don't have an argument for the US being intended as a Christian Nation.

Now having said all of that, (Believe me it was a mouthful) let me say this. I do believe that our Founding Fathers intended for the US to be built on the idea that there is a God watching over us, guiding us and hopefully showing us right from wrong. As a Christian myself, I believe that many of the teachings of Christ and his Father are well suited for the job. However, I also believe that trying to pass and enforce laws based solely on Christian teachings (DOMA, Anti-Abortion Laws etc.) is wrong. We are a Nation of many religions, cultures and races.

This one's bound to piss some people off

BACON!

So last night, my Brother posted an article that prompted a rousing discussion on Socialized Healthcare Pros and Cons. This conversation prompted one of my friends to ask, “What is wrong with Greed?” That question got my headparts to thinking. Is there anything inherently wrong with the concept of Greed? Is the desire for money, wealth and power, by the very nature of the beast, evil?

Now the direct concept of Government Sponsored Healthcare and various other services that “help those less fortunate” are based off Utopian concepts where everyone feels some sort of obligation to help everyone else. The idea is that Services will be offered at the lowest rates possible so that everyone can enjoy the same privileges as everyone else regardless of their social standing or income ratios. So Doctors, drug producers and insurance companies should be willing to charge bare minimums for profits and forgo major profits.

Smile darn you, this shift is funny!

The problem is that businesses are in the business of making money. They want to make as much money as they can from as little expense as possible. Business is not in any way Utopian in its drive. And unlike a lot of people who rail against capitalism, I am very much okay with that. That is how the Free Market System works. A business charges X amount for an object or service. If the public wants to pay that amount, then it sells. If the public isn't willing to pay that amount, then the business is either forced to reduce their profit margins or stop making the item.

As a system, this has worked pretty well for a very very long time. It prolly started when Ogg the caveman traded rocks for sticks to Oog the caveman. Oog wanted 5 rocks for two of his prime sticks. Ogg felt like 3 rocks for 2 sticks was more fair. When Oog insisted, Ogg prolly hit him on the head with one rock and took the sticks. See Capitalism at its best.

This country was founded on Greed. A bunch of middle aged White men felt that the government was charging them unfairly on their taxes. (The funny part is, Historical Scholars still debate if the taxes charged by Fat George were actually unfair when measured against taxes levied elsewhere.) This country was built on greed. (Sorry but the old Manifest Destiny is the living embodiment of greed to me. “We deserve to have the whole damned continent!”) The Industrial Revolution ran on the fuel of greed. Pretty much every aspect of modern life came about through some form of greed.

"I want money, lots and lots of money...

So is Greed inherently EVIL? Hell no! Just like any other philosophy/idea, it is neither good nor evil. Is it wrong for any Service provider to expect the most money possible for their services? No, because the very core of a Free Market System keeps the extremes in check. Gas prices are an excellent example of that. Not too long ago, Gas Producers tried boosting gas prices up past an amount that people were willing to pay. Consumers said, “Fudge that shift” and basically stopped driving. The Producers were forced to drop prices back to a level that consumers would pay (Still to high, but that is just my opinion) or not sell their products. In a FMS, greed is most often countered with reality.

Greed not Altruism is what drives the world. Companies produce a product/service as inexpensively as possible, then turn around and sell said product/service for as much as possible. Anyone not okay with that needs to step back into what I jokingly call reality. Now is it wrong for Acme Hogskinners Inc., LLC to make an inferior, dangerous Handy Dandy Auto-Hogskinner & Bottle Opener and then sell it to the public for Eleventy Billion Dollars knowing damned well that it will malfunction and skin the dogs too? Yes, absolutely. However, as long as Acme makes the HDAHBO as safe a product as possible, I have no problem with them charging as much as the market will bear. (Oh and the Bear Skinning Attachment for the HDAHBO is due out in the Spring) If Hog and Bear hunters don't like their prices, they will go to HOGCO instead and pay their lower prices.

Lessee I left my watch around here somewhere.

People always rag on Capitalism and Greed. They blame these two concepts for all the ills of the world. These ostriches (Yes I know Ostriches don't actually stick their heads in the sand) ignore the fact that they wouldn't have all of the amazing things in their lives without the ideas they preach against. Can we use a little more humanity in our lives? Yes. Could we all benefit from people caring more about their fellow man? Prolly. Is it fair to expect those who can produce to give up part of their goodies to benefit those who don't produce? Prolly not.

“So many people today cry, 'I deserve better! I deserve what others have!' but are not willing to make the efforts to earn what they wish. I posit that this idea of 'entitlement' is an anathema to the concept of growth. When people become unwilling to actually work towards the things that they wish and expect others to provide for them, Stagnation is the only possible outcome.”

End of Rant

HapMerrJoy ChrisNakkwanziYule Everyone!

What?  I like Puppies!

Okay let's take a look at a list for a moment before we start the actual rant.

1. Bodhi Day: 8 December - Day of Enlightenment, celebrating the day that the historical Buddha (Shakyamuni or Siddhartha Guatama) experienced enlightenment (also known as Bodhi).
2. Winter Solstice: 21 December-22 December - midwinter
3. Mōdraniht: or Mothers' Night, the Saxon winter solstice festival.
4. Saturnalia: the Roman winter solstice festival
5. Christmas Eve: 24 December
6. Yule: Pagan winter festival that was celebrated by the historical Germanic people from late December to early January.
7. Kwanzaa: 26 December - 1 January - Pan-African festival celebrated in North America
8. Hanukkah is an eight-day Jewish holiday commemorating the rededication of the Holy Temple (the Second Temple) in Jerusalem at the time of the Maccabean Revolt of the 2nd century BCE. 

   

   Huh, maybe should have left the puppies outside.

There are many many more Holidays and Times of Observance, but this gives you some idea of just how insanely hectic the month of December is when it comes to religious/spiritual celebrations. Now that we have this background set, ON WITH THE RANT!

Now, for years now I have heard people saying really not bright things like “We should say Happy Holidays” instead of (Insert your chosen Holiday here) so as not to offend people. This year especially I have seen article after article of opinion pieces (No way they could ever be called news pieces) saying that we all need to conform and “quit pushing our religious beliefs on other people.” Well I say bullcrap! (Actually I say something much worse, but I try to tone it down for the faint of heart.

Go towards the light, Carol Ann!

With very few exceptions, most of the events celebrated this time of year have deep, spiritual meanings. The followers see a strong connection with the faith/beliefs that drive them and the celebrations they participate in. When a Christian wishes you a Merry Christmas, he is celebrating the birth of his Savior. When a person of Jewish Faith wishes you a Happy Hanukkah, she is celebrating the power of her God in times of troubles. There is a much deeper meaning there than wrapping presents or lighting candles. Deeper meaning that just isn't covered by a generic Happy Holidays.

Our government grants us the Freedom of Religion. It gives us the right to practice our faith in all of its myriad forms. Despite what so many people seem to think, it does not grant us Freedom from Religion. Beyond controlling what can or cannot be displayed on Government properties, no laws protect people from a Hearty MERRY CHRISTMAS or even a God bless you!

When I was growing up in LA (Lower Alabama), we didn't have a whole lot of religious diversity in my home county. I don't think I knew a single Jewish or even Catholic person until I hit college. Diversity consisted of whether or not you were Baptist, Methodist or even occasionally Episcopalian. So needless to say, saying Merry Christmas wasn't even an issue. It would have never even occurred to my family to worry about offending someone by saying it.

(Huh, I have absolutely no idea what the previous paragraph's aside was supposed to do. But hey it was a neat little anecdote right? )

Ahh toasty!

Basically I cannot possible Grok how people can be offended by Merry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah. The people wishing this upon you aren't proselytizing and trying to convert you. 9 times out of 10, they are simply wishing you all the best out of the simple joy of the season. How can you possibly be offended when someone is (Gasp Shudder) being nice? Here is a concept. Instead of being offended, smile and nod then wish them the same in whatever belief system you follow. I know it is a radical idea, but maybe being nice to each other can catch on.

In closing, let me say the following to all of my readers:

Merry Christmas! Happy Hanukkah! Joyous Kwanzaa! Cool Yule! Happy Holidays! May whatever Faith or Belief that sustains you keep you safe during this festive time of year and see you healthy and happy in the year to come.

End of Rant!

and that's a fat...err fact!

Look Ma, they gave me a new hat at work!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/09/diners-called-fat-girls-on-restaurant-bill-check-cameo-club-cardroom-lounge_n_2267805.html

Okay so file this one away under the “Wow Stupid that thick should be culled from the Gene Pool.” Picture this, ladies enter into a restaurant and enjoy a good meal with presumably good service. They go to leave and discover that their server/s have typed in an extremely offensive description of them on their ticket. They do what Ass's are supposed to do and complain and don't stop complaining until some sort of satisfaction is found. They even received an official apology from the Company Heads.

Now, believe it or not, my rant isn't about these ladies. They were rightfully offended, complained and got satisfaction. End of story. No, my dear friends. My rant is about just how STUPID the person that wrote the comment was.

Not that long ago I wrote a rant about another mentally lacking person who wrote “Lady Chinky Eyes” on a similar receipt. Now, I see this grand stupidity repeating itself. Now folks, I am actually okay if you don't like someone. I am okay if you think that someone looks like a cross between Yoda and Golum from LOTR. That is your right. You have the right to (Peacefully) dislike someone and even mock them in your head. But for Crom's sake, keep it in your head!

That's right! Keep the information in your head. Put it behind a firewall, snicker quietly to yourself and move on. Share it with a friend if they are of a similar mindset. Do not, I repeat DO NOT type it into a computer system where it will be then printed out for the customer to see. I promise you that seeing yourself described as “fat” does not encourage smiles and happy feelings in most people. It actually tends to piss most people off.

It is okay if you don't like the way someone looks. It is both hunky and dorey that you feel that a person might make a good stand in for Shamu the Killer Whale at SeaWorld. I personally have seen many people of the years that made me think, “HOLY CRAP!” However, especially when I was at work, I never voiced those thoughts to either the customer or friends.

Should this moron be fired? Hell yeah! Should the manager who seemed to find this all amusing be reprimanded? Also Yeah! Should the owners be commended for acting quickly to fix the issue, also a resounding Yes. The truly sad part is that this should have never happened and when it did happen it should have never made it further than say the Shift Leader. It was an easy fix with a simple solution. Erase the charge for the meals and apologize profusely to the rightfully offended party. This isn't rocket science, people.

In end, it is simple. If you want to keep working and eating, keep your big mouth shut and the insults out of the billing system.

End of Rant

Where's the (Organic) Beef?

Hey Steroids just means there is more to love, right?

 

 

    http://news.yahoo.com/russia-may-halt-u-beef-pork-imports-trade-182345229--finance.html

     So once again I find a very interesting and insightful article about an issue (Chemicals and hormones in our meats) and once again what got me to thinking was the comments that occurred afterwards.  Many different people commented on how we needed to just the moo cows and little piggies run free and eat wholesome, free range forage instead of locking them into tiny stalls and force feeding them a slurry of corn, wheat and hormones/chemicals.  They essentially said that we needed to back to the old timey way of raising our cattle.

     Now whereas I do support the spirit of these ideas, I think that anyone who actually believes that we could return to those old ways and still even have a chance of feeding the Billions of people (Millions here in the US) in the world are woefully unaware of reality.  The times when we could feed the masses with free range animules has long since past.

     Now don't get me wrong, if you want to feed your family organically then it is a fairly easy thing to do.  These days, even people living in apartments in the big cites are learning (relearning) how to grow their own veggies and fruits.  Home owners with even the smallest yards are discovering that they can have enough chickens to supply them with eggs and the occasional leg.  This is all very small scale though.  Even the Professional Organic Farmers simply cannot produce enough food to feed all of the none farmers in the country.

     Every year there are more and more people to feed using less and less land.  This trend is not going to change until the Zombie Rapture comes.  The only chance Suppliers have is to keep up the Industrial Farm approach.  This means producing as much beef, pork and poultry as possible as quickly as possible and the only way to do that is to do it factory style.  Cram as many animals into a small a space as possible and feed them a cocktail that will make them grow as fast and as fat as possible.

     Is this healthy?  Hell no!  Is it harmful?  I'd say 89% chance of Hell Yeah!  Is it the only way to even come close to feeding the world as long as we keep pumping out babies.  Oh Hell Yeah!  

     Now I eat organic as much as possible given these tough financial times.  During the Spring/Summer/Fall periods I grow my own veggies.  As soon as we get extra cash, I am even installing a chicken coop in our very large back yard.  Individuals who are willing to work at it can at least supplement the things they buy from the stores, but people who expect farmers and ranchers to feed the whole world the way they did in the old days are delusional.

     Billions of people are slowly stretching the world's spaces and resources to the breaking point and dreaming of doing things the way our parents and grandparents did just won't work.  As more and more people are born, science will have to come up with more and more ways to produce food to feed them.  You can be damned sure that these ways will involve chemicals, drugs and hormones.  So unless the world stops eating, this is pretty much your future.  It ain't pretty and it ain't healthy but it is reality.  If you don't like it, buy local, buy organic and grow your own food.  It won't save the world or feed the multitudes, but it can make your life and your little corner of the world a better place.

The End!

Dare I say it?  End of Rant

Its a Conspiracy, I tell you!

http://news.yahoo.com/history-detective-did-churchill-sacrifice-city-protect-secret-180400260.html

http://news.yahoo.com/black-boxes-cars-raise-privacy-concerns-082047728.html

As most of you know by now, one of the first things I do when I get up at the crack of noon is drink about a pot of coffee and go through news feeds from 8 different sources. (Yes including Fox News.) It is my way of waking up and seeing what is going on in the world before tackling my oh so difficult job of sitting at my computer in my pajamas drinking coffee and writing down the information that the little blue gnomes have stored inside my headparts the night before.

So today I went through my news and saw two articles (See above links) that made me go, Hmm. So without hesitation (Okay well actually after another pot of coffee and a homemade Pepperoni & Cheese Biscuit plus potty break), I set fingertips to keyboard to create this sure to be amazing blog. (Well, either amazing or completely ignored. I have trouble telling the two apart sometimes.)

What is the fascination the human race has with Conspiracies? Why do we always feel the need to find patterns of intent in seemingly random events? Why do we still cuddle close to these ideas long after they have been proven to be false? A well known Atheist once said, “Man chooses to see patterns in things because he is afraid of being alone in the Universe. In his mind, patterns mean that some great driving force is at work in the Universe.” (Not going to say the person's name. Anyone who can correctly identify this person will get an honorable mention here in a future blog.) I think Conspiracy Buffs fall into that same category.

People hate the idea that Shift just happens. They need to believe that some greater force beyond blind chance is behind things that they cannot comprehend. So they invent Conspiracies. “The Moon landings were faked!” “There was more than one gunman in the Kennedy Assassination!” “Obama is plotting with the UN to take over the world!” “911 was a secret plot by the US!” There are hundreds if not thousands more. People stare at grainy photos or badly blurred films and believe what the so called experts tell them.

Now this blog isn't an attempt to debunk any conspiracy. That's not my job. Besides, if the tons of information available hasn't dissuaded the Buffs then nothing I say will. This piece is just my current nod to the whole Conspiracy community. (I say current because I did a conspiracy specific blog not that long ago under “Cry Bullcrap!”) The two articles above perfectly illustrate the Conspiracy Mindset both in an established conspiracy and one in its infancy.

Let's take the established one first. Much like the “Roosevelt knew in advance that Pearl Harbor would be bombed and let it happen so he could get us into WWII” (One of my personal favorites), the whole “Churchill knew that Conventry would be bombed and let it happen so that the Nazis wouldn't know that the Brits had broken their code system” is a conspiracy that just won't die. Studies have been done and volumes have been written on the subject that debunk this idea, but people refuse to let it die. Instead of studying the historical data, the “experts” cite one or two random quotes from people who Might have been involved. I truly believe that someone could invent a time machine, send the Buffs back in time to observe the events themselves and the Buffs would still cry foul.

Now onto the Conspiracy in the making. Buffs are claiming that black boxes in newer automobiles will be used by the Government to track and control citizens movements and freedoms. Now keep in mind that black boxes in cars have been around since the early 90s. In the past 12 years or so I haven't seen any signs of ANY sort of control on our highways, let alone some form of government control. The Hoopla has come about because now, Automakers are actually letting people know about the boxes.

Course, the vast majority of objections I am reading to the black boxes is along the lines of “Wait, if I am speeding while driving drunk and texting with my seatbelt unfastened and I have an accident, I won't be able to lie about it.” Basically people are objecting because if they do something illegal, it will be much easier to prove it. One Tater does mention a complete fictitious device which will allow the Government to track and control cars by remote control from orbit which I find is the height of paranoia. If the “Government” could control vehicles from orbit through black boxes, we'd have a lot fewer plane crashes. Also, keep in mind that with modern satellite technology, the Forces that be don't need some special gadget installed in your car. We have spy sats up there that can spot a field mouse farting in tall grass from high orbit. They would have little trouble tracking your SUV on a country road.

So, why this fascination..nay obsession with conspiracies? Why do they persist decades, sometimes centuries after they have been completely debunked? Maybe it is a need to see patterns where there aren't any or maybe we secretly love the idea of mysterious forces (Illuminati, Free Masons, League of Shadows etc.) interfering with our lives. Maybe it makes us feel special to think that our lives are important enough for the Grand Poobahs of the Hidden Order of Mystic Knights of the Hidden Chambers (GPHOMKHC for short) to meddle with. All I can say for sure is that as long as Humans exist, we will always find conspiracies hiding around every corner.

Course, keep in mind as you go about your day that just because something is a conspiracy doesn't automatically make it not true.

End of Rant

I just don't grok Pollyticks

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/06/democrats-watch-in-awe-as-mcconnell-filibusters-himself/#.UMEwtYcQQog.facebook

     So Mitch McConnell introduces a movement (The grist of which scares the crap out of me because it basically would give the President unlimited power to increase the Debt Limit on his own.) with the express purpose of producing a bill that "Not even Democrats will vote for."  THEN when the Damnocrats go "OH BOY!" and call for a vote, the old geezer panics and is forced to filibuster his own bill.  

     Now forget the idiocy of his oh so brilliant idea, let's look at the real stupidity of having a governmental style that allows the person who INTRODUCES a bill to basically cry "Backsies!" and try to block it.  This isn't 2nd grade softball where you get a do over when you miss the ball.  By pulling a truly stupid stunt in the first place, he was forced to make himself look like an idiot when his stunt backfired.  Really smooth Mitch.

     Don't get me wrong, the bill should have never been introduced in the first place.  Giving either the President, House or Senate the ability to increase the debt limit (Huh since it keeps getting raised, maybe the Debt Suggestion instead?) without the express consent of the others is an insanely scary idea.  Mitch should have kept his big mouth shut or at least got someone else besides himself to oppose the bill.  Yes it would have looked bad to have a member of your party opposing you, but at least you wouldn't look like a moron.

End of Rant

They took the jobs...that no one else would work!

http://news.yahoo.com/illegal-immigration-drops-decade-long-rise-050220584.html

     Above is a very interesting article about how illegal immigration is at all all time low due to tougher enforcement of immigration laws, better patrols along the borders and the suckish Economic Times that the US is going through.  It is a very good read which raises some interesting points.  BUT as usual, the article itself is not the subject of this blog.

     As usual, my comments are on...well the comments that follow the blog.  They mention two points that prove to me that no one really reads these articles past the headline.  The comments show just how little the so-called readers actually paid attention or comprehended what was written.

     Point the first:  There are loads of comments about how this article isn't true because it is impossible to count the actual number of illegal aliens in the US so how can we know that Illegal Immigration has dropped?  Well, if you read more than a few words of the piece, you will grok that they are talking about people trying to get into the US not the ones already living here.  In other words, it measures the number of people trying to get into the country illegally not the ones who already have.  Still that point is really just picking nits so let's move onto point two.

     Point the second:  GODS I am so tired of people ranting about how (Insert Immigrant Group Name here) is "Stealing American jobs."  I really get annoyed when people say "I can't find work because of the (Racial Minority Group here) down the street took them."  (As a side note, folks really should be more considerate.  Even if we were to somehow stop all forms of immigration, those "minorities" that so many people love to hate on are rapidly becoming Non-Minorities and driving forces in both state and federal government, but that is grist for another blog.)  

     People who decry Illegal Aliens are stealing American Jobs fail to comprehend that the vast majority of jobs being stolen are jobs 90% of Americans don't want.  Americans, in some vast sense of entitlement, want jobs in air conditioned buildings with regular breaks and benefits with salaries of $15.00 an hour.  They feel, no matter what level of education or training they have, that they deserve only the best jobs with the best pay.

     The jobs "stolen" include the hardest, dirtiest lowest paying jobs in the country.  Field laborers, Construction Roustabouts, and dozens of other jobs that have you working under  a blazing hot sun (Or freezing temperatures, depending on where you are) for bare minimum pay for 8-12 hours a day.  

Attempts to fill these jobs with non-Immigrant workers have pretty much proven that, even when given the opportunity, non-Immigrant workers simply refuse to do the job.  The next link is from the Huff Post, but actually occurred.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/22/georgia-immigration-law-f_n_882050.html

     Americans seem to have this attitude that certain jobs are beneath them.  They feel that they shouldn't have to work those jobs because they "deserve" better.  They'd rather starve to death or go on the Dole than work in the fields or other jobs.  So the fact that they can claim Immigrants (Legal or Not) are stealing their jobs is ludicrous.  You can't steal something that has already been thrown away as unwanted.  So until Americans suck it up and start working these jobs, I say fudge it.  Let whomever is willing to do the job...well do the job.

      Do I support Illegal Immigration?  No.  Do I believe that Illegal Immigrants are stealing the jobs of hard working Americans?  No.  Do I feel that every person should receive the same fair pay for doing the same job regardless of Race/Creed/Religion?  Absolutely.  Just make sure that you are willing to do the same job as the other guy for those same wages.

End of Rant

Buy my books, I'm hungry!

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AEH3A2Y

     This is of course a shameless plug of my new book which is a compilation of many of the more popular blogs here interwoven with completely new material.  I post it here just in case any of the readers of this and my other blog do not follow my FB page and are not aware of it.  The book is available from Amazon.Com for .99 for Kindle and hard copy from the same source for $4.00.  (See how much you save when you save a tree?)  I hope you buy it and enjoy it half as much as I did writing it.

Insert Shameless Plug here

The REAL War on Christmas

So there is a lot of fuss over the past month about the “War on Christmas” being waged by Secular forces, most notably Atheists. The uproars range from the White House calling the yearly dead tree with lights a “Holiday Tree” to Atheists buying up display areas so that Mary, Joseph and Baby Jesus have no room at the inn. We hear news report after news report (Usually I'd mention Fox News, but really I've seen them all over the channels) about how every effort is being made to stamp out the day where a baby was born in a stables. It may come as a surprise to all of you, but I completely agree with this fear. There is indeed a WAR being waged against everything that Christmas is supposed to stand for.

How can I say this, you ask? (You did ask, I heard you! Yeah you over there in the corner with the Cheesy Burrito from Taco Bell. Did you bring enough for everyone?) How can I possibly believe all of the dozens of talking heads? Do I really think that the EAAC forces (Evil Atheists Against Christmas) are trying to destroy all that is sacred and holy (holly?) about this event that sent three old men wandering in the desert following a shiny light? Well, not exactly.

There is a way being waged against Christmas. It has billions of dollars in backing and is being pushed by some of the most powerful businesses in America (Nay, the World! Yes I said Nay ,get over it.) Despite what so many people seem to believe, this War isn't even remotely a new action. It has been going on for decades. What is this war you ask? (No not the Burrito Guy, the girl in the third row texting her friend about shoes.) Consumerism.

That's right, Consumerism! Companies like Wal-Mart, Target, Sears and so many more are waging a war on Christmas. Every year their salvos get stronger and faster as evidenced by the fact that Black Friday this year turned into Black (and Blue) Thursday. The massive consumer glut that occurs in the weeks before Christmas and what Christmas traditionally stands for. Just in case you need a reminder here is a link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKk9rv2hUfA

Click it and watch, I'll wait.

Back? Okay let's keep going.

Notice, not a single word about 40% off at Wally World or the best price on Gizmotrons at SuperBuy. Traditional Christmas has nothing to do with busting your credit cards to show off. Traditional Christmas has nothing to do with making sure your kid has the latest Y-Crate Game System. Hell, really it doesn't even have anything to do with decorating dead trees and putting up sparkly lights. The Consumeristas want us to forget that. They want us to think that the only way to show love for yourself and others is to spend yourself into poverty. So every year, they wage a war to separate us from our money and make us think that it is all in the name of Christmas.

Atheists aren't waging a war against the spirit of Christmas. Muslims aren't waging a war against our “most hallowed beliefs.” Big business is and we just sit buy and let them year after year without a single objection. Maybe this year, we call all just sit back and think about exactly why we celebrate Christmas. Can we at least make a little effort to make it Christmas again and not Cashmas?

End of Rant

Iraq/WMDs part II?

http://news.yahoo.com/us-weighing-military-options-syria-uses-wmd-223957678.html

I first read about the rumors of Syria using WMDs on its rebels a couple of day ago and much like many of the commentators after the piece above, I did indeed suffer flashbacks to Iraq's “Massing of WMDs” debacle not that long ago. Still my main focus wasn't really on the article but more on the comments left afterward. People weighed in both for and against (Mostly against) any attempts by the US to step in to stop the use of WMDs against Syria's rebel forces. The comments really got me pondering all the sides and this is what I have come up with.

The argument basically boils down to “Should the US get involved with yet another foreign conflict even as we wind down from the last two” and it is a very good question. As a nation, we are massively in debt and our troops are so very tired. Why should we risk any more of our sons and daughters lives in a war that isn't even our fight?

Those against (which I am technically one of) argue that this simply isn't our fight. They call out that it is not America's job to be the policemen of the world. (Although I would technically point out that this nation has basically made it our job by insisting under pretty much every national/military accord signed by the nations of the world since around WWII be dominated by US forces. This includes UN Security Forces BTW.) They argue that we didn't get involved when Syrians were killing Syrians with more conventional weapons so why get involved now. They point out that a sizable chunk of our debt (Around 5 Billion Dollars currently) is because we have been fighting two very long wars by borrowing money. Basically we shouldn't get involved because this isn't our fight and we can't afford it. I agree on purely monetary reasons, not moral ones.

Those for argue that it is the moral responsibility of everyone to help those who need help. They argue that if positions were reversed, we would want people to help us. Somehow they feel that the threat of using weapons that could literally kill 1000s of people pushes us to a higher moral imperative than the fact that Syria's leaders have been achieving pretty much the same thing with standard bombs and bullets. If we didn't have a moral obligation a year ago, then we don't have one now.

The sad part is, I doubt this sudden push by the US and other nations to stop Syria is based off any altruistic feelings on our part. Notice that no real efforts were done to help as long as the threat was contained within Syria's borders. But now that Syria MIGHT be planning on using WMDs, governments such as Israel and Turkey are suddenly recalling that Syria has missiles capable of carrying said WMDs into neighboring nations.

So will we once again be forced into a war in a country where neither side really likes us and neither side would really want us there? Will more of our brave armed forces be forced to sacrifice their lives? Will the machine of war grind on for another 10 years making billions for the Arms Manufacturers, but costing us so much more? The next few weeks will tell.

Customer Disservice for the loss!

My readers have heard me gripe many times in the past about how the concept of customer service and customer appreciation. It is one of the sorest points of my general Ass-ish nature. Especially in large chain stores, it seems like the attitude is “We don't need to be nice to you, just go spend your money and leave us alone.” Today did nothing to dissuade me of this feeling.

So my wife got up early this morning so she could go to the major store that she calls “The Den of Inequity” in the vain hope she could find the items that she had been looking for all week. She managed to find three items that she thought would do, picked up a small container of yogurt for her snack and two other items. Keep in mind that all six items were very small and could fit in one bag. So the clerk rings up her items, hands her ONE bag and Paula leaves for work. When she gets to work, she finds that the bag only contains some of the purchased items and none of them are her snack. Apparently the cashier felt the need to split the six small items into two bags and neglected to hand her the other bag.

Now believe it or not, this is not the cause of my current rant. After all accidents happen. Maybe the cashier had just gotten to work or maybe (Since the Den is open 24 hours) were just minutes away from going home. No, my rant comes from what happens next.

We drove back out to the DOI to return the items that she had purchased that morning and complain that the cashier had shorted her the other items. When I tell the kid behind the Customer Service desk that a cashier had accidentally shorted my wife that morning, he gets all defensive and VERY confrontational. He asks, “Are you sure you wife didn't get the items? Are you certain that she just didn't notice them? Maybe she got the items and lost them.” I politely informed him that my wife didn't lose the items and then not so politely asked the punk to give me the danged refund.

Now folks keep in mind that the grand total of my wife's purchases from that morning was $11.96. Also keep in mind that the items this kid was basically accusing my wife of stealing were worth $3.00 of the sad $11.96. I had the receipt and the three items that weren't left behind. I was simply asking for a refund, not all the money in the safe. So why in hell did it take 20 minutes of arguing with this kid to get my money back?

So, finally the kid refunds my money. Already in a grumpy mood, I find my wife and we pick up some items (Since we are there) and go to check out. That is where I see essentially why my wife lost her midday snack and shows the general level of competence in the DOI. The lady rings up our purchases and as she does, she places the items in bags then rotates the little turntable to a new bag. She finished ringing up almost everything, but misses three items hiding behind the cat litter boxes.

She has already rotated the full bags around and left several empty slots on the turntable. After I point the items out to her, she rings them up and places them in an empty bag. She charges my wife's card hands her the receipt and starts checking out the next customer. She starts placing his items in the same bag as ours before I can stop her. When I point this out to her, she gives me a “looks could kill” glance, swings the turntable around and then goes back to checking out the next customer.

Now not only would we have been short some very important items (Hey premium mixed nuts are important!) if I hadn't noticed, the person behind us would have gotten OUR stuff without having to pay for it. Still the thing that honked me off was that look. She made the mistake, but she was angry with us for catching it.

Now folks, having worked those jobs I know that they are thankless jobs with crappy pay. I understand that your feet hurt, your eyes hurt and your back hurts. Mistakes happen, that is a fact of life and I am okay with that. What I am not okay is the bad attitude that so many people have. Customers pay your bills. Customers feed your families! Unless you live in a tiny town with only one store (I have BTW LOL), there are other places the customers can go. Suck it up, grin and bear it and remember that a little friendly customer service can make everything go smoother.

END OF RANT

If at first you don't Secede, try try again

Okay so I was listening to the radio on the Interwebz last night while working on my latest literary masterpiece, The False Fang Detective Agency. Some Anderson Cooper wanna be was holding discourse on the subject of Secession. His opinion was that Secession is legal and that the people who have petitioned the US Government for permission to Secede from the Union were the highest form of Patriots. His guest disagreed very loudly, stating that everyone who signed the various petitions were the lowest form of traitors. She implied that the petitioners should be taken from their homes and shot at dawn.

Now, folks I personally feel that most of the people who signed those petitions are doing so out of a severe case of sour grapes. Sorry, I just do. If you feel otherwise, that is your right, but most of this uproar (In my not so humble opinion) is because Romney lost and Obama won. We saw similar disgruntledness during the whole Al Gore/Chad incident. (Though I can't remember off the top of my head if we have a secessionist movement going on then too.) So people are pissed and not afraid to show it.

With that kind of lengthy aside...well aside, let me say that I am firmly in favor of any group (Gaggle, Herd?) who is so pissed off at the government that they feel the need to secede. Hell, it is how this country got started. A bunch of grumpy white men decided that fat King George was being mean to them so we got together and kicked him out of our sandbox. Happened again about a century later when a bunch of states felt that the Union wasn't playing fair and filed for divorce. Of course, that one didn't work out so good for the Secessionists, but they did let their disgruntled feelings known. So if you and yours are pissed off at the government and want to pull up stakes, that's cool. More power to you!

So “What's you're problem with Secessionists, Macleod?” You might ask. (Well I hope you ght might ask it or else this blog would be kind of pointless) Simple! Despite the wonderful part of the Declaration Of Independence (And sorry to those who think otherwise, it is not part of the Constitution) where it talks about “When in the course of human events...” Secession is still considered an act of treason. The Supreme Court even upheld this belief with the Texas VS White ruling of 1869. Basically, from a purely legal standpoint, The US is an indestructible entity and any attempts to dissolve it are illegal.

Thus said, let me reiterate that I have no problem with any group of individuals who get so honked off with the government that they feel their only recourse is to secede from the Union and go their own way. Yup, go for it. Bon voyage, tata, bye bye and even aloha. Stage your revolution! Fight the oppressors! Down with the establishment! Power to the people! (Man I wonder how many old slogans I could come up with?)

But here is a teensy bit of advice for all you potential revolutionaries out there. IF you are contemplating a revolt against the US government, it would be prudent NOT to sign a petition with your full name and address. It would be even more prudent NOT to send said signed petition to the Official Web Site of the White House. Since there is no way in Hades that the US will ever grant a Peaceful Secession from the Union, you guys are only giving the enforcement type people a handy list of names to check off if things ever get busy.

Revolution in all of its myriad forms is the very birthright of the United States of America. Our country was forged in blood and tempered in battle time and time again. At a little over two centuries old, we are an infant when it comes to nations. I have little doubt that times will come in the future where we will disagree to the point of blows. Every man and woman has the right...Hell the obligation to resist oppression in all of its shapes and forms. I just pray that when those times come, we exercise some form of wisdom and intelligence in picking sides and battles. I, for one, will not begin my battles by declaring my intents directly to the people I will be resisting.

End of rant

Our government needs an enema!

(Title used with all due respect to Jack's Joker)

We have severe blockage!  Prepare the dynamite!

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRLDbwQ4cDTTVix2a1zZhl35zrtnC2eoFQkyJa74MMQzLk2MRU0

     This article highlights exactly what is wrong with our government.  With massive tax increases a mere month away that everyone agrees will most certainly send the country spiraling back into another, what are the so called leaders on either side doing?  Are they desperately working together to stave off this disaster before everyone suffers?  Are they even making any real effort to move forward towards some sort of solution?  Are they even sharing a Double Mocha Frappachino in some attempt at getting along?  NOPE!

Keep in mind, folks that its all about posture!

          Both sides are posturing and preening seeking some sort of angle that will allow them to "win" the upcoming argument.  Never mind that the answers are known to pretty much everyone who  has more than three brain cells to rub together.  We need to increase Revenue, decrease Spending and balance the damned budget.  That's it.  That is what needs to be done.  Everything else is in the details.

      Now of course as the old saying goes, the Devil is in the details.  How do we increase Revenue?  Tax increases, tax law overhauls, hiring alchemists to turn lead into pudding?  Where do we decrease spending?  Cut funding for popular public programs, Increase the eligibility age for SS/Medicare etc or put every politician on minimum wage?  These are all viable questions and should be considered.  I personally feel that we shouldn't allow any tax increases until the government proves it can be trusted with the money.  (Which ideally will put off any tax increases for the foreseeable future.)  I feel that popular programs need severe overhauls and better oversight which would allow us to cut some of the funding to them and STILL keep them viable.  However, both the Damnocrats and ReBoobicans are showing absolutely no drive to even confront these issues let alone actually work together to fix them. 

Well it is more like a tragedy but hey...

 

      Right after the election, both sides did these marvelous little dances that gave the impression that they had seen the error of their ways and would be willing to work together.  They preached that we would not have a repeat of the last fiscal emergency where impasse on both sides drove us to the point of disaster.  And like so many false prophets (Profits?), their sermons have turned out to be false.  The Damnocrats claim a mandate from the peeple even though they only won slightly more than half the popular vote.  (BTW does anyone else find it funny that Romney's final total on Popular Vote was 47%.)  The ReBoobicans are back to their "No new taxes no matter what!" speeches and both sides as a whole are refusing to give.

Why can't we all just get along?

     Let me slap a little definition out there for you.Webster's defines Compromise as: settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concession.  In short it means that both sides in an argument give in a little.  It doesn't mean "Hey I am not going to give in, but you have to make concessions!"  By the very nature of the beast, making a compromise means that both sides lose.  Our Political Parties hate that.  "Their side" has to lose and "Our side" has to win.  And when neither side agrees to compromise, then the other side is guilty of blocking any chance at progress.
     The sad part is, even though I knew better, I actually briefly believed that maybe, just maybe our Pollytickans had learned something and would actually make some effort to work together without weeks of posturing.  And in all fairness, some on either side of the carpet are actually showing signs of doing so.   Reboobicans are making noises about agreeing to revenue increases and Damnocrats are showing some signs of being willing to put Reforms on the table.  Unfortunately, none of these guys are the head honchos.  I just hope that both Obama and Boehner can do the same.  The Fiscal Cliff is looming and I have a thing about heights.

and here is a picture of a cute bunny for absolutely no reason.

 

Ooookay someone explain this one to me?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240787/Ronald-Post-Obese-death-row-inmate-claims-hes-innocent-bid-delay-execution-400lb-weight-cause-severe-pain-rejected.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

     Now, this rant isn't about whether or not this guy is guilty or innocent or even whether he deserves to die.  The courts will decide if he warrants a retrial or not.  (course in my humble opinion, if you plead no contest to being involved in a murder you are prolly guilty)  No my question is a move the gentleman made to have his execution delayed because his obesity would cause him extreme pain during the process.

     Hokay, so he shouldn't executed because he might suffer some discomfort while they are KILLING him?  "Sorry you can't execute me today because I might be uncomfortable while you are doing it" seems a little silly.  I don't see any reason why our legal system should be any sort of obligation for making death sentence inmates all comfy cozy while they pump them full of a deadly cocktail of drugs.

     Lethal Injection is supposed to be the kinder, gentler way of executing criminals  (It ain't, btw.  Experts say that the process is very painful though not as painful as previous methods.)  Pre-Lethal Injection, let's look at the various methods used to execute felons.  Beheading...Yup painful.  Crucifixion...oh yeah really painful.   Hangings...moderate to extended painful.  Firing Squad...Oh yeah!  Painful!  Electrocution...yep you guessed it REALLY PAINFUL.

     But wait, you cry!  What about cruel and unusual punishment, you ask?  (Well its either you guys or the voices in my head again.)  To you (Or the little blue gnomes in my head) I reply  "You're executing the guy!  Taking his life!  Shuffling off his mortal coil!  Kicking his bucket!  It don't get much more cruel than that!"

      If someone is accused of a heinous crime, they deserve fair and honest legal defense.  They deserve every chance they can get to get  fair and impartial hearing to prove their innocence.  However, arguments like Mr. Post makes are ridiculous.  When someone kills someone else in a violent crime, I doubt that most of them had any concern about whether or not the bullets fired caused the victim "severe pain" so why should we have any sort of consideration for the one firing the gun?

END OF RANt