Friday, May 30, 2008

Mother Natured Charged With Discrimination

Mother Nature has been summoned to court to answer charges of discrimination. In a stunning move brought by the UN under pressure from the US and it's well paid allies, charges have been formally leveled against her.  Just some of the things Nature has been accused of are that poor people often suffer greater mortality rates to curable diseases. She will have to answer tough questions about why she refuses to compensate people who can’t afford to buy life saving drugs and are often the ones to die because of it. Some say Ms. Nature considers poor and hungry people to be weak and inferior to their wealthier counterparts. She stands accused of conducting genetic experiments on the poor using mass breeding and intolerable environments to see who will survive.  Some of these people have even had genetic mutations (such as opposable thumbs) as a result.

    Obese people are often targeted for heart and circulation failures. This is in spite of the fact, that it is well known, that some of these people are born with "gland problems" and some have emotional issues that hinder their ability to do strenuous activities required to maintain a "healthy" weight. Nature refuses to recognize their plight and their right to be who they are. Others have had irresponsible parents who did not teach them proper eating habits. But again, Ms. Nature is unyielding in her pursuit to aware only the most physically fit people.

    This pressure from the USA to have Nature charged came from internal pressure from nearly every specialized group. The Homosexual community is in an uncommon uproar, are dramatically angry with the antics of Nature also. They blame an unbalanced number of AIDS cases effects the homosexual community. The "Friends Against Gross Injustice and Treatments" as they call themselves, contend that there is an 80% increased chance of getting the deadly disease if you are a promiscuous gay male over a traditionally married straight male. The gay community is also upset about the lack of fertility that is evident in their community. "It is astronomical how few pregnancies have resulted from gay sex", shreeks a group spokesman/ woman.

    Other accusation include the very young and very old being targeted by Nature during disease and Flu outbreaks. She has also been accused of animal cruelty. Encouraging everything from dog fights to the ripping apart of baby seals by polar bears.

    "Nature has just gone on long enough and it is time she answers for her tyranny. She has acted erratically and irresponsibly according to her own laws long enough. It is time she answers to 'Gods Laws'." Says and unnamed source from the former president Bush's justice department, speaking on condition of anonymity. "The Obama admiration should not talk to her, and should not rest, and we will call good American children to serve until nature is no longer a threat to our national security. We do not care what it takes, even if we have to violate every American and human right to see this 'war on nature' to its end." The current justice department is still poling to see what they should do.  They are leaning towards condemning the Bush's administration’s policies and following up by doing exactly the very thing they condemned.  But more discussion will have to transpire. 

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Father jailed for truant child not passing GED

So there is this story last week that came out of Cincinnati. The title of the story was a little misleading. It leads the reader to believe that the crime committed was a failure of a man’s daughter to pass the GED. The real story is quite different. In Ohio as in many states, they have truancy laws that hold the legal guardian accountable. First this laws makes parents get involved with parenting. It also makes it more difficult for people to use their teen kids to baby sit their younger sibling. The real reason that the father was jailed was for his daughter’s record of not showing up at school.

Reading the story you find out that the daughter was a teen mother. Her parents were divorced. Her father received the money as the legal guardian. However, the daughter (along with the "fiancé". Think high school kid with a job at Subway.) actually lived with her mother. 6 months prior the father had been called before the court where he agreed to get his daughter to finish school or get her GED. It seems that she failed it once at least. Here is the story: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXYQiNLQsgp51Q3pX6p2aPdnyYuQD90KNG4G0

I actually love this law. As a father of a very young child I may one day regret that statement, but I doubt it. The judge did a great job putting this man in that predicament. In that past he had two option. He could have at age 16 let his daughter drop out of school as long as she had a job. One of three things hindered that. 1) His daughter refused to get a job. 2) He really wanted his daughter to finish high school and have a good starting point for adulthood. Or 3) Her father didn’t want to stop receiving the money that he got for her child support. More then likely it was a combination of all three.

I have received a lot of flack from friends and debate acquaintances for advocating this kind of government interference. A child that doesn’t graduate has a 90% chance of being on government assistance, being a single parent, or end up in prison. All three of these require tax payers to support their existence. Well I am a tax payer. So, as many layers of thought as it takes, little miss I can’t pass a GED exam will ultimately reflect negatively on my pursuit of happiness with 90% certainty. I get speeding tickets on statistics that are certain of only a fraction of a percent. As I see it, for every cent pissed away educating a child that doesn’t have the curtsey to see it through is a cent that I could have put into my children’s futures. As a side to this concept. Poor people are most often the patrons of places like Wal-Mart. They have to. This directly adversely effects the economy by expanding the trade deficit between the US and it’s foreign partners.

One of the reasons we have punishments is to make examples of behavior our society finds deviant. There needs to be a way to show other parents that keeping tabs on your children is your responsibility. These parents lack of responsibility has lead to another child being conceived and born. Who is going to teach this girl that as a parent she is responsible for the upbringing of her child. She would surely tell you that she understands, but she obviously doesn’t. How could she. Who would have taught her?

Then in a related story on talk of the nation a school has started putting GPS locator bracelets on chronic truancy offenders.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90477623
they claim a great success as long as they can keep kids from leaving school. As long as they are there and failing and in school you can find out why. A program might need to be developed for certain students. It would recognize the "disadvantaged ones." "Sorry Brittany, you are never going to amount to much more then a job that serves fries with burgers. Now lets talk about how to survive on less the $17,000 a year."


"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." - Many speakers.

Sunday, May 4, 2008

18 cent gas tax holiday?

Any candidate who thinks this is a good idea should be removed from the ballot. They have sufficiently demonstrated no intellectual skills required to be leader of the free world. They really shouldn't be leading a guided tour of the zoo from the short bus at this point. But hey they got to make a living somehow. Any voter who agrees with them should be barred from voting. This is a case where your freedoms are infringing on my rights.

Anybody withy a vague understanding of economics understands that this proposal would not help the American people one bit. Do you know what happens the day that the gas tax holiday begins? That’s right!! Nothing. The next say you pull up to the long line at the pump. Because everybody and their brother waited until the holiday began to fill up their tanks. All of the sudden there is a surge in demand. What does basic economics tell us about a demand surge? Right, it is followed quickly by a price increase. Guess what the gas stations are going to do. They are going to raise the price 19 cents. Demand will decrease to only those people who need it. And life will continue on. That is until the “Gas Tax Holiday” is over. Then a sharp spike in price of 20 cents will occur. 18.4 cents for the tax being re-instated and the extra 1.5 cent for good measure. Thanks Hillary and John. You guys are truly brilliant. Give them some bubbles.

These are the people who could potentially run the country. This is a demonstration of their depth of understanding of the economics. And what is based on economics? You guess it right again, the economy!! So what was hoped to be a grand total savings of $40 will probably cost us about $150 before it is all done.

But then again Obama’s pastor said some bad things about our politicians and our weapons dealers. His pastor had the gull to say that, because we sold weapons to support coups and installed puppet governments in the Middle East, the people who lost those battles were mad at us. Some of them eventually became terrorists? What a mad man.

Partisan Politics And Presidential Powers

It makes me laugh to hear presidential candidates say what they are going to do as president. This is especially true of things that need fixed immediately and not in 10 months when the candidate will finally get the keys to the White House. It also ribs me to hear people talk about the reasons not to elect a particular candidate for president. "he is going to come to our house and take our guns away." Has to be one of my all time favorites. However the fact that a preacher for his church said some stupid things is up there. (Never mind that the other candidate has had 6 of their closest business associates charged tried and convicted for various versions of fraud. Some of those people were even pardoned buy the candidates husband prior to leaving office.) Most voters seem to not understand exactly what a president "can" and "can not" do. General ignorance of the "checks and balances" system is a social norm throughout the voting public. A while back I told a story about my wife and voting. I think it is worth telling again.

My wife once asked me who she "should vote for." I had to restrain myself from imposing my own political views and try to educate her on what is best for herself. This required an explanation of checks and balances as well as partisan politics. I had to explain fast, as my wife’s attention span on these topics is very limited. What I said to her was this. You have three options. I can’t tell you who to vote for. All I can tell you is that if you want to pick the candidate that most closely resembles your own beliefs and judgments. To figure that out you are going to have to research them, their voting record, and their platform.

If researching the candidates isn’t your bag, then you can research the parties. Generally Republicans believe in smaller government, less taxes, fewer social programs, smaller budgets, and more supply side economics. They are staunch supporters of the right to own guns and oppose laws to restrict that right. They also oppose abortion and would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned. With the same generalization, Democrats believe in more social programs such as welfare, universal healthcare, and Medicare. They believe in higher taxes to pay for their programs. They believe these programs empower the less advantaged of our culture to rise up and do better. Democrats are strong supporters of the freedom of speech and believe in a more open government. They believe that an abortion is a woman’s right to choose. They often are the champions to new gun control laws.

If researching the party platforms is too much effort, I told her she can ask herself one simple question. "Am I happy with life, the economy, and taxes right now?" If the answer is "yes" then she should vote for a president from one party and congressmen and senators from another party. This will ensure that absolutely nothing will get done. (This is the situation we are in now.) Life will stay "as is". Now if the answer to the questing is "No, I’m Not happy with the current status.", then I recommended she pick a party and vote for a presidential candidate that most likely will be of the same party as the majority of the congress and the senate. This will ensure things will get changed, however, it will be a throw of the dice. We the voter have no control over what those changes will be. It could make things worse or it could be better.

That was the advice I gave her. She ended up voting for the person that she knew I was supporting. "Go Dennis".

As for people’s ignorance about what the president "can and "can not" do, here is a little education. A president can not make laws, bills, or create a policy. They can not directly influence the economy, so to speak. I say that reluctantly as the current president has found multiple ways to influence the economy negatively through his only real direct power. The president has only direct control over the military. Even then, he has to get a congressional approval to go to war. But the policy is so vague over what constitutes "war" that there really is not much of an obstacle. Originally the Korean and Vietnam situations were "police actions" that were only called wars de’ facto. So unless there is a clear majority of the presidents party controlling both congress and the senate, these guys can promise the world. However, if they can’t get the legislative branch to introduce a bill and then pass it, their promises might as well be written on your bathroom roll. Yes that is right my sheep. Gas taxes, Universal Healthcare, tax breaks, withdrawing troops, and getting pigs to fly out of my butt is not really in the hands of your president alone. The thing he can do is say "yes" or "no" to whatever bill comes across their desk. Now of course if his party is in control of the legislator, he can make recommendations or even write bills and have them sponsored in congress. However, if the makeup of the congress stays the way it is right now, the only power the new president will really have will be to bring the troops home. This is the only promise they have direct control over. All that other stuff, they would have to sell to a legislative branch members sure to be bitter if their candidate didn’t win.

The other thing a president can do is nominate Supreme Court judges. Again, he will still need an agreeing legislative branch to get the nomination confirmed. But recent past history has shown that the public expects no more then 3 nomination to be rejected or they start getting antsy.

So if there is to be points taken from this post it would be these. Don’t vote for a candidate just because they make promises to impose policies. They may never get a chance to sign them into law. If you vote for a president who is known and experienced in Washington circles, expect the same old backwater. They didn’t get that experience by standing their ground. They owe people favors. A president can make war and get a BJ in the oval office and that is about the extent of direct control. Without help from others, that is it. Caste your vote for the candidate who won’t "rip off the bank." This is why character and ability to be sincere, truthful and convincing is so important. This is true no matter what office you are nominating for. Judge them by their friends. The ones they spend long days working with and not a few hours listening to while half asleep in church.

Counter text

New counter