Ahhhh (Conspiracy) Nuts!

All nice and cozy!

     So over the past couple of days, I have read several posts on my FB page that have truly made me go "WTF?  Really?"  Now folks I have seen doozies of conspiracy theories before and even commented on a few here in this forum, but the ones I have seen within the past 48 hours really and truly take the nut cake.  (No I won't tell you which ones, but if you are truly curious then hit up my FB page and scroll to see if you can guess which posts I am talking about.  I can pretty much promise you that it won't be the ones that you think it is (are...was...err moving on).  I was actually tempted to interject a little something I like to call facts into these fantasy worlds but in the end, I decided that the ever wise Ron White is right when he says, "You can't fix stupid."  So I let crazy dogs lie (in both meanings of the word.)

Don't ask, it just seemed appropriate.

     Now folks I get that people love conspiracies.  I get that we need to believe that some hidden, invisible force is plotting to do horrible things to us the moment our backsides are turned.  Conspiracies have probably existed as long as we have.  Ogg the cave person probably believed that Oog in the cave next door was plotting to steal all of the best rocks for himself and corner the Rock Market.  I mean lets face it, there are still people that believe the moon landings were faked and Professional Wrestling is real.  (WHICH IT IS!!!)  These oh so dedicated nutters will continue to believe these things up till the day that they die and short of heave medication and padded rooms, there really isn't much we can do about them.

Well, okay that would work too.

      And despite what so many people like to think, I don't believe that there are more nutters running around now (proportionately of course) than there were 30, 40 or 50 years ago.  Like I mentioned in a previous blog, it is just that they have so much chance to get their message out and find others of like mind.  Before the Interwebz, if some nut believed that the US Government was beaming invisible beams of mind control energy from space into his brain, he might run off some pamphlets on his copier (Mimeograph machine?) stand on a street corner and shout his message to the masses...and generally be ignored.  Now with the information super highway, he can post his rant on We-Tube and find thousands of kindred spirits.
     I am a firm believer in Free Speech and I truly believe that some conspiracies might be true.  However, I am also intelligent enough to do my own research and make my own conclusions based of FACTS not improper quotes, misstagged photos and such.  So when I see people just nodding their heads and going "Yup that's right," it makes my headparts hurt.  I have friends that I often disagree with (Waves at TC, TD), but no matter how many times I disagree with them, I can always count on them to have adequate data and facts to back up their arguments.  Either of us might still be wrong, but we will have made as much effort as possible.
     Learn to think for yourselves.  Learn to find out the truth even if it is not a truth you like.  Quit being Sheeple (Sorry I just love that word) and be an individual.  Trust me, life will be a whole lot more interesting.

End of Rant

COEXIST?

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_22300164/coyote-bites-boulder-jogger-skunk-creek-trail-further

Why can't we all just get along?

     So as the article above states, people in Boulder are concerned because a coyote has taken a bite out of a jogger and several other people have been menaced or attacked.  This has sparked the usual discussions on the old Animules Vs Peeples argument.  The Pro-Animules say that the critters are just defending their territory and acting the way God programmed them to.  The Pro-Peeples group says that Peeples have a right to live in safety without worrying about some critter deciding they might look good on the dinner table.  Like pretty much every subject, there is very little middle ground being bandied about.

     So, the question sitting on the table shedding is this.  Which side is right?  Do the fuzzies have the right to roam free and hunt to their hearts content?  Do the not so fuzzies have the right to not be turned into critter chow?  The answer is Yes.

     Wait, you might ask?  Yes to which question?  To which I would reply with a tad bit of snarkiness, "Both."  You might come back with a shocked, "But the answer to both questions can't be yes!  One side has to be wrong!"  At which time I might get offended by your objections and that is when the fight would start.

Owchie!

         Okay now that the fight is over with (I WON!), we can get back to the questions that started it.  Despite what most people seem to think, the answer to both questions above is indeed yes.  Animals have the right to live like nature intended and People have the right not to be attacked by animals.  The question most people aren't asking is what can be done to fix the problem.  The main reason they aren't asking it is because the answer to that question is, "Not to damned much."

     The ideal answer is of course to give the animals plenty of wide open, people free spaces so that they can live their lives without risking people's well being.  Unfortunately, with more and more people moving into more and more wilderness areas, that answer isn't very feasible.  Animals are being forced to either move from habitats they have roamed for thousands of years or to exist side by side with humans.  I don't like it personally, but that is just what is happening.

     So what do we do?  Honestly, I have no idea.  (Mark that one in your calendar, boys and girls)  I truly believe that all animals deserve the right to exist in their native habitats without interference from people.  I also recognize that, barring a global catastrophe of biblical proportions, people aren't going to stop pushing further and further into said habitats either to live or to work.  

     Now I don't really think to highly of the human race (Adults anyway) and have no problem with a lot of grownups (Congress "cough" Senate "Cough" President "Cough") being eaten by Yogi and Booboo (Bear not Honey), but I have no wish to see children hurt or house pets eaten. (I apologize for the completely Non-PC joke that just popped into my head which did not make it to print.) 

     Hopefully, someone much smarter and wiser than me will come up with some answer.  The (albeit tiny) part of me that is optimistic hopes it will be an answer that  is somewhat fair to all sides.  I'd hate to see creatures like the coyote and wolf vanish from the face of the Earth like so many species have in the past.  

End of Rant

WMDS>.22 Caliber

Not a Weapon of Mass Destruction.

Is a Weapon of Mass Destruction.

Not a WMD

Is a WMD

     Now this little rant isn't about gun control or the 2nd Amendment or even what types of guns, if any, should be allowed in the hands of the American people.  No, my dear readers (All four of you), this rant is all about one of my favorite subjects, Semantics.  As an author, my very business is the proper (Okay sometimes improper) use of words and how they pertain to the world around us.  We define our world with words and many people often use words to distort our ideas and views.
     Recently I have seen more and more people describing guns as weapons of mass destruction.  This bothers me because it comes across as an effort to put pistols, rifles and shotguns on the same level as an Atomic Bomb, Hydrogen Bomb, Nerve gas etc.  This amounts to an attempt by some forces to make people as terrified of a S&W .22 caliber handgun as they might be of some terrorist detonating a nuke in NYC.
     Guns can be dangerous.  In the wrong hands, they can be tools of terror.  (Course keep in mind that some of the 911 Terrorists used box cutters so in the wrong hands anything can be a tool of terror)  In the wrong hands, a gun can kill a lot of people.  However a gun cannot destroy a building or devastate an entire city.
     Guns are weapons who's express purpose is to make lots of holes in things and kill them.  Of course they are still used in positive ways to this day to put food on the table and defend those who cannot defend themselves.  The same cannot be said of WMDs.
     Like I said in the beginning, this isn't an argument about gun safety or gun control.  It is about semantics and the burgeoning propaganda war that is developing on both sides to try and sway people's opinions.   Yes I said the P word because that is what it is boiling down to.  Fanatics on both sides of the issue are using everything they can to paint the other side as evil incarnate instead of just sticking to truth and facts.
    Proponents are trying to paint their opposition as Anti-American anytime suggestions are made the MIGHT limit access to Fully Automatic Laser Guided Mouse Seeking Missiles.  The other side paints their opposition as Crazed Redneck (well some truth to that part at least) Assault Weapon Carriers who have massive stockpiles of the aforesaid FALGMSMs and are intent on rebelling against the government.  And it is all simply propaganda (Well okay 99% is propaganda.)
     A wise man (forget who) once said, "The day we start accepting lies over truth is when true freedom shall fail."  I am open to any debate on any subject as long as actual facts are being used.  I am proud to say that there are actually a lot of facts being tossed around in the current debate.  i am ashamed to say that most of the facts are being drowned out by the lies.  Come on, people!  Ignore the lies, do your own research and for God's sake learn to think for yourself!

End of Rant

A Prescription for High Blood Pressure (Getting that is)

Hokay so today I went to the Doctor for a follow up appointment to get the results from my yearly lab tests. The numbers were okay, but needed some work. Doc gave me new prescriptions for my old meds and some new meds to try to help with the numbers. Nice quick visit with me going in at 4pm and coming out at 4:25pm. So I skip (No not literally) over to Krogers to pick up the prescriptions that the Doc emailed in. Planned on picking up meds, getting a coffee from Starbucks (Don't yell, wife has a gift card!) then coming home. Half hour to 45 minutes tops.

Sooo, when I get there I walk over to the Pharmacy to inquire about how long my fills would take. I immediately sensed imminent doom because none of the Pharmacists I actually like working today. I ask the girl behind the counter how long on my meds. She looks at my file and says, “Oh well, we haven't even started yet. They are marked for 7:30.”

Now at that moment I was mildly annoyed since the prescriptions had been sent in 20 minutes before, but still not angry. I politely ask how long it will take them to fill them now. She informs me that they are very busy, but should be able to get them for me in half an hour. I smile and go off to wander around the store. Fast forward 30 minutes. I come back to get my meds. The girl I talked to earlier is gone so I ask the female type person behind the counter if my meds are finished. She checks my file and says, “I'm sorry Sir, but we haven't even started since they were marked for 7:30.

I not so politely tell her that the other girl had told me that they would be ready for me at that time and ask how long it is going to take. She tells me another 20 minutes. I nod and move off just to stand around because I have absolutely nothing else to do waiting for the meds that should have been ready by now.

Now I bet you guys are thinking you know why I am ranting. After all, having them mess up the time twice must have really gotten my goat. Well, you are incorrect. Yes I was mildly annoyed, but no where near rant material. After all, mistakes can be made. No what followed during my next 20 minute wait is what pissed me off.

So there I am standing around, goofing off. I weighed myself (223 in case you're interested) and took my blood pressure (120 over 69 also in case you are interested) and generally just be bored. During that 20 minutes I see at least four people come up to the drop off window and drop off their prescriptions. Those same four people came back within that 20 minutes and picked said prescriptions up. Keep in mind that I, who actually already prescriptions in the system, have been waiting for nearly an hour.

So I ask same girl as before, “Excuse me Miss. How come those people can get their prescriptions done in 10 minutes, but I have had to wait nearly an hour?”

She looks me in the eye and replies, “Well Sir, your prescriptions were set for 7:30 and theirs weren't.”

Now folks, I understand mistakes happen. Misunderstandings abound. My doctor may have sent in the wrong pick up time. The person recording in the system may have entered the wrong time. Mistakes happen, that is just the way of life. However, I communicated to the Pharmacists twice that I was already waiting for my meds despite the 7:30 boondoggle. I was told TWICE that the prescriptions would be ready well before 7:30 and I was forced TWICE to stand and wait while other people who came after me got their orders filled before me.

I wasted over an hour because people could not or would not do their job right. IF they had informed me that there was no way to have my meds ready before 7:30 I would have gone off to do other errands and come back at 7:30. Instead, because two separate people gave me incorrect information, I wasted my time.

I don't ask for much, people. I do expect people to do their job at least passingly well. If you can't get something done in time, say so. If you say you are going to do something, then do it. Don't say one thing and then do another. In other words, DO YOUR FREAKING JOB!

End of Rant

Freedoms VS Laws

http://iam.ij.org/patriotgarden

So a dear FB friend of mine posted the above article today and when I read it, the whole argument about how the city was infringing on these nice people's rights to have a garden got me to thinking. You see these sort of articles all the time. They range from a little old man not being allowed to fly his flag on a pole to his yard to some couple trying to run a winery out of their bathroom. (Yes it did happen, look it up.) No matter what the subject, the hue and cry goes out about “Intrusive government/laws infringing on people's right to feed/clothe/booze themselves.”

Now I am all for pounding down the evils of Big Brother Government. I believe that people have the right (Within certain limitations) to live the kind of life they wish to lead. However, I also recognize that all of our freedoms have certain tradeoffs built directly into them. It is the deal we make with the Devil (Washington/City Government) to ensure certain needs are met.

In the above example, the Ordinances cite are “archaic” which means they have been on the books for a long time. The restrictions aren't new and weren't imposed after the garden in question was planted. Now, if this town's ordinances are like most, for this couple to have planted this “illegal” garden, one of two things would have had to happen. If they followed zoning laws, they would have had to filed with the city to make alterations to their property to ensure that all the alterations met proper zoning code. They could have also chosen not to check zoning and city codes and simply went ahead with their garden anyway.

Either way, the couple in question are in the wrong. If they filed, they knew in advance that their garden did not meet city codes but did it anyway. If they chose not to file or even check the codes, they A. Broke the rules and B. Still violated the zoning laws and codes.

Now you may argue that the laws and codes are unfair and overly restrictive. To which I would reply, “Well yes, but they are still there.” You might then cry out, “The laws should be changed!” I would nod sagely and simply repeat previous statement. (Yes I know I am putting a lot of words in your mouth, but I washed my hands first. I promise.)

Living in a city comes with many benefits and just as many trade-offs for those benefits. You accept that the city has certain “controls” over your freedoms in return for little things like electricity, running water, police protection, sanitation etc. Citizens accept that they have to accept these limitations because they choose to live in the city.

In this case, the city states that a garden cannot be planted in the front yard. Simple and to the point with absolutely no vagueness. Is that law “archaic?” Is it a fair law? Not my call to make. Should the law be changed? With the growing (Pun intended) home garden culture becoming more and more prevalent, I would say yes. However, until these laws are changed they still have to be followed. A resident enters into a contract with the city he chooses to live in to respect its rules and regulations. You don't have the option of picking and choosing which rules you get to follow. Don't like them, change them. Until you change them, follow them.

End of Rant

Cliff Hanging or Politcal Suicide

http://news.yahoo.com/cliff-bill-house-doubts-spending-cuts-200942222--finance.html

     So let me preface this little rant with the this statement.  I am not speaking on the goodness or badness of the Senate passed bill to avert the Fiscal Cliff.  I do not purport to be able to say if it works, does not work or is the road sign for the entrance to the Road To Hell.  From little I able to grasp of it, it seems like a very weak compromise, but at least it is some sort of compromise.  With the Senate voting overwhelmingly in support of it, it at least has some bipartisan support which is rare these days.  I don't have the political chops/savvy to critique it.  I will leave to more learned people.  My rant is aimed solely at the House.

     Before I rant on, let me make a point.  If NOTHING is done very soon, all the experts (Reboobican and Damnocrat alike) agree that it will be a disaster.  Taxes will increase across the board on everyone, massive budget cuts will cause layoffs and furloughs that will leave millions of people without income for an indeterminate amount of time.  Prices on many products will double and God only knows what else will happen.  To make a long story short (too late), it will be a complete and utter disaster.

     Okay back to the rant.  So here we are, with a Senate passed item that will, at least temporarily, avert this horrible disaster.  It is no where near perfect and only scoots the problems a couple of months down the line, but it does avert the immediate dangers.  Hooray for the Senate!  The House comes along and says, "Okay we know that Doomsday is about to happen, but we really don't feel like agreeing on this temporary fix."  The House says that it will either send the item back to the Senate with "amendments" or "vote on a GOP bill" instead.  

     Now like I said, this rant isn't about the rightness of the Senate's bill or whether or not the House is acting correctly.  I personally feel that the House Reboobicans are correct in demanding more spending cuts, but I also feel that these items could be addressed in the two months to come.  BUT what I am really curious about and what this rant is about is "Do the House members realize that any refusal to accept the Senate bill is essentially political suicide?"

     I mean think about it.  If the House refuses to act in this case immediately and the whole Fiscal Cliff disaster occurs (even if it is only for a couple of months), the blame will fall solely on the House.  No one will blame Obama.  No blame will fall on the Senate.  When taxes increase and jobs are suppressed if not outright cut, all anyone will remember is that (right or wrong) the House failed to stop it from happening.

     Remember 2010 when everyone got honked off and voted a whole bunch of incumbents out of office because of the whole "Debt Ceiling" fiasco?  Well, if the fiscal disaster everyone is predicting occurs, I see a whole lot more people leaving for home in the next election period.  People remember the disasters not the right or wrong of it all.  

     So if the House does as it claims it is going to do, all fickle Americans will remember is this, "Obama acted, Senate Acted and the House didn't."  It won't matter to the American people whether Obama and the Senate were in cahoots with Old Scratch himself and the House was working for the Angels.  The House, specifically the House Reboobicans, will absorb all the blame in our eyes.  Right or wrong, fair or unfair it will be all we remember when it comes time to vote again.

End of Rant

     Addendum to Rant:     Let me add this little note.  IF our dysfunctional government had gotten off their collective butts months ago and reached even a tentative agreement, this rant wouldn't have been necessary.  The House could have added the changes it wanted, sent it back to the Senate for more consideration without all of this fuss.  Since neither the President, Reboobicans nor Damnocrats could reach even the tiniest compromise until PAST the last minute, the House is left looking like Scrooge and the Grinch all rolled into one.  

End of End of Rant

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