I had this discussion with The Boyfriend while we were watching Farscape …again… (love that show). We started discussing how we were tired of seeing human looking aliens, then it hit me—duh, if the missing link in our evolution came from the sky then this would totally make sense. Let’s take this from different points of view, shall we?

If we look at it from the stand point that an all powerful being created the universe and all that is in it; that we come from said all powerful being, then we are alone as the bible makes no mention of extra-terrestrial life and we know that everything in the bible is true  :-/   Also, the idea that others are out there defeats the idea that we are unique. “God” created us in his image…US, not them. If we believe this, then we are alone.

If we believe that we crawled out of the primordial fluids and evolved then this also makes us pretty unique. The right circumstances created us. After watching one too many Discovery Channel programmes on “our universe”, I have learned that our planet is in the the right zone, the right placement in the orbit around our sun to create “life”. One little placement either left or right means no life. One little tilt on our axis either way, no life. The odds of this happening again? Well, have you heard about other planets being found in “the right zone” and life being found on them? yeah….

However, if we believe that the missing link to us evolving from ape to man was alien (which is a theory), then this could have ramifications beyond this planet. This could mean that we are, in fact, not alone. This could also explain all the  sci-fi creators’ lack of imagination . Granted not all aliens would look exactly like us.  Differences in  skin colour, eye colour, fingers, height, even tentacles could have developed over the years for them to adjust to their environment just as we have developed to adjust to ours. However, most of them, according to the creators of sci-fi characters, are, mostly, bipedal and for me this makes sense. To think that we came directly from apes leaves much to wonder about, even if they think they found the “missing link“. Even with that, there are still tons of questions.

Now, I am not saying that I think we came from space (so put down the phone and the straight-jacket), although, how cool would that be? Somewhere, out there in the big universe are “people”, somewhat like us, but much more technologically advanced. But what happened to them? Why haven’t they contacted us? Honestly, if I had to 100% believe this theory, I would venture to say that they have been observing us and due to our constant fighting, our lack of understanding, our lack of imagination, our lack of sympathy to our fellow humans, our lack of technological advancement, the fact that we can’t seem to go one day without killing each other, they don’t want to risk revealing who they are or they have given up on us because of these things. Maybe they have died out…boy, that would sad. Or maybe, and I like this one, we were a prison colony that was forgotten about, the prisoners mated with early “humans” and now we have grown beyond our captors wildest nightmares. When they came back and saw what had happened, they fled, leaving us on our own. *sad*

Maybe we are just a molecule in a sea of experimental goo in some alien laboratory? I dunno, but I can say that I don’t believe an all powerful, all knowing being created us. If we are in experimental goo, this experiment has gone too far and I want to be in the control group. If you are reading, please transfer me to the petri dish that hasn’t  been poked and prodded or been hopped up on experimental drugs. K? Thx!

What a sad, sad state the US has come to when they have to hire people who are fluent in Ebonics to help nab criminals. I mean, fo’ real tho, sheeit. How fucked up is The States that they now have to have people who speak this “language” (notice the quotes) in government business? That is some whacked out shit, but I have complete and total faith in the US. I mean, if any country can fuck up a language, the US can, you got to give them that.

(fade into a memory)I remember walking through Atlanta airport, asking someone for directions and not only did this lady have the most unreal hair I have ever seen (it was shaped like a weaved hat) but she spoke some fucked up version of English (must have been Ebonics) and I told her, “Sorry, but could you repeat that, in English” (and yes I emphasized it like a smart ass, would you expect any less out of me?) and she got mad (fade out of a memory).

Sorry, but if you are working with the public, then the public needs to understand you. Gawd, I sound racist, but you know what, I don’t give a crap because this is how I feel. Why do people feel the need to butcher a language to the point that they are completely incomprehensible. People need to understand you and when you speak like you don’t have any common sense or any grasp of the English language, not only do you look dumb, but you make your race (what ever it may be), your nationality (whatever it maybe be) and your employer look  ignorant.

Personally, I think it is a poor excuse for not paying attention in school and not grasping even the simplest part of the language—proper pronunciation. As far as I know, there isn’t a form of Ebonics in any other language. It is called “Black English”, “Black vernacular”, “Black dialect” or, my personal preference and therefore my favourite name for it, “Substandard English”.
Yes, substandard.

(dramatic pause)

All I have to say is this: it says something about the “language” Ebonics when the job opening is for the DEA.

Awesome!

Remind me not to move to Atlanta.

For me, this method brings about images of the old west. The condemned standing in the middle of town. The unwashed towns people watching as 5 men raise their rifles and fire.
No mercy.
No sympathy.
How it works is normally there are 5 shooters, one armed with a blank round so everyone can take comfort in the fact that they may not be the one firing that lethal blow. However, sometimes (rarely) a 6th shooter is required to administer the final shot to put the accused out of their misery.  While this method is not the most technologically advanced, let’s look at two positives of it. It preserves the organs for donations—well, other than the heart and it is the cheapest form of capital punishment.

Other than the slight risk that one of the 5 bullets will not hit the heart (meaning someone is not as accurate as they are supposed to be), there is little risk that the shots will not be deadly. The same can not be said for other forms of execution. According to the Associated Press, “University of Colorado law professor Michael Radlet has been tracking botched executions in the U.S. and found some 42 cases that went wrong between 1982 and September 2009. Of those executions, 30 were lethal injection, 10 were electrocution and two were from asphyxiation after exposure to lethal gas.“ Who says technology is always good? 4 bullets, aimed at the heart. Fire. Death. What could be simpler? We try to hard to make everything humane but we forget to look at why these people are on death row to begin with. Murder. The taking of a life. An innocent life, usually. And in our attempts to make the execution more humane we actually make it more difficult (which is usually how any government works anyway).
Let’s take lethal injection.  It has the guise of being humane because it is a “medical procedure”. However, if the needle is not placed correctly in a vein, which has happened, or if there is difficulty in finding a vein, the pain can be extreme. Humane ? Cost of lethal drugs? $86.08. However, the overall cost including salary of the people involved, the phone in the room, the supplies for the drugs, etc…$30,000 +/- (from a few different sites dealing with the cost of executions).
Okay, electrocution. Sometimes a jolt of between 500 and 2000 volts doesn’t work the first time and only after the victim is checked to see if there is a heart beat do they do it again. I have been shocked. We all have. Can you imagine having that voltage running through your body more than once? And to top it all off “...the prisoner’s eyeballs sometimes pop out and rest on [his] cheeks. The prisoner often defecates, urinates, and vomits blood and drool. The body turns bright red as its temperature rises, and the prisoner’s flesh swells and his skin stretches to the point of breaking. Sometimes the prisoner catches fire….Witnesses hear a loud and sustained sound like bacon frying, and the sickly sweet smell of burning flesh permeates the chamber. (Ecenbarger, 1994)“. Humane ? Cost of this? $14,000-$16,000. (again, approximate from many sites).
Now the cost firing squad is harder to find mainly because only three people have been executed by firing squad since 1977, but presumably the cost are negligible. I mean, really, how much do bullets cost? Also the blood is funnelled into bags placed near the entry site so there is no messy clean up.
The idea of capital punishment is like, to put it rudely, fucking for virginity. We are killing someone because they killed someone to prove a point. Seems a little off to me. It is like teaching your child not to bite by biting them. Also, the idea of a humane form of execution is absurd. Were their actions humane to their victims?
I can’t say that I am for or against capital punishment. I don’t believe that if we are punishing people that it should be torturous. That is just lowering ourselves to their standards. It really shouldn’t cost a lot since it will be the taxpayers footing the bill. Cheapest is the best. Should it be humane? Well, yes, to a point, but should it be painless? Naaah. After all, what does capital punishment actually serve but our sadistic impulses.

OURSELVES

That’s right. You heard me. We are the ones to blame. Our big SUVs, trucks, cars, the constant need to drive everywhere even it is just down the street.  We have become dependent on oil. We consume it like candy.    It is our drug of choice. We spend money for it. We buy accessories for it and spin around in parking lots for it. We drive on sunny days for hours to show off.  We defend the use of it. We are even killing for it—each other, animals, the environment. It’s the worlds drug of choice.  We are addicted. It’s like heroin. We need more and more. We can’t get enough. Eventually, it will kill us. We reject the rehabilitation plans. We don’t think there is a problem. We think Ed Begley, Jr. is a nut case because he drives around in an electric car while we freely give our money to the the drug lords. We worship at their feet and beg for more.  We accept their excuses for price increases because we need their products

As much as I want to blame BP and other companies like them, it isn’t just their fault.  So go ahead and place the blame if it will make you sleep better at night. If it will help you forget about the lives that have been lost, the animals that are dead,  the environment that is ruined. If it will help you forget about the oil guzzling machine you drive 3 blocks to work. Just remember,  when you get in your big ass SUV and drive home from work or to the grocery store; that mess in the gulf? It’s your fault too.

“It was to be expected that this new radiance of the priesthood would not be pleasing to the ‘enemy,’” Benedict XVI said. “He would have rather preferred to see it disappear, so that God would ultimately be driven out of the world.”

The term “the enemy” is a traditional Catholic way of referring to the Devil. [From AP newswire.]

Translated from the traditional gobbledygook, the pope is saying the devil made the pedophile priests do it so people would turn their backs on God, who is represented on earth by the one, holy and apostolic Catholic Church.

If anyone knows about pedophiles in the church, it is Joseph Ratzinger (his real name, or  just-plain-Bennie), himself. From 1981 until his coronation in 2005, he was the Prefect of of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The Congregation is a direct descendant of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, formed in 1542. [From Wikipedia]

Yes, that Inquisition, still alive and well today, rooting out evil and heresy wherever it is found. To believe that Bennie didn’t  know about the thousands of pervo peds within his ranks for twenty-one years is a crock of  pope poop. German hardliner that he is, it was his job as the Inquisitor to defrock these sickos—not play 52 card shuffle with them. But that, of course, would have tarnished the church’s impeccable image and cost a lot of silver coin.

Understandably, the thousands of victims of pedophile priests aren’t very happy.  Ruined lives, theft of innocence, and betrayal by a trusted adult cannot be dismissed and forgotten by such an idiotic inference by Commander-in-Chief  Ratzinger.

But still, people flock to his church like sheep.

I’m not one of them.

Posted from Chandler, Arizona June 13, 2010.

The next day, I posted Update: Arizona’s Law of Hatred, an editorial in The Washington Post by Phil Gordon, the Mayor of Phoenix, denouncing the law as “hateful” thanks to “political opportunists such as state Sen. Russell Pearce, the author of the legislation, and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.”  (Maricopa County encompasses the majority of the Phoenix Metropolitan area.)

As it turns out, Pearce was not the author of the law,  but merely its sponsor in the State Legislature. In the May 31, 2010 print edition of The Arizona Republic newspaper (or the Republic of Arizona as I like to call it), the author was Kris Kobach, an immigration attorney from Topeka, Kansas.

Kris Kobach, a member of FAIR

Kobach, however, is not your garden variety attorney who helps immigrants with US work permits or attaining citizenship. On the contrary, he is a member of FAIR — the Federation for American Immigration Reform — an organization recently listed as a nativist hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

A May 10, 2010 article by John Hanna of the Associated Press had this to say:

Before the law was passed … Kobach spent several years consulting with its main sponsor [Pearce]. And he has a $300-an-hour contract to teach deputies in Maricopa County [Arpaio], which includes Phoenix, to enforce immigration policies. [Bold is mine]

Bill Straus, Regional Director of the Anti-Defamation League’s Arizona office, said in February 9, 2010 press release, which I have as a Microsoft Word document:

We find it absolutely outrageous that Sheriff Arpaio has chosen an individual with an obvious bias, who works on behalf of an anti-immigrant group to conduct training on immigration law and ethnic profiling. This shows that he is not serious about dealing with the concerns that have been raised about his tactics and treatment of immigrants.

Well isn’t this a cozy little bunch. I have shown that all three compadres (excuse me, gentlemen) have links to white supremacist or neo-Nazi groups. This is not immigration reform, but unabashed hatred of any human being who is not White.

Pearce isn’t finished, not by a long shot with a willing and compliant legislature and governor — a Republican governor whom we inherited after Democrat Janet Napolitano was tapped by the Obama administration for Director of Homeland Security. Napolitano kept Pearce in check by vetoing and shredding all his bills that sullied her desk. Jan Brewer, however, is a staunch supporter.

The last paragraph of The Arizona Republic’s “report” is totally outrageous:

Next year, Pearce has said, he will propose a measure that would make Arizona the first state to stop the practice of giving citizenship to children who are born to in the United States to illegal immigrant parents.  Ending the practice of granting citizenship to “anchor babies,” as they are sometimes called, is one of FAIR’s legislative goals and is supported by Kobach.

Never mind that immigration law is a federal matter; Pearce, Arpaio, and Kobach openly disregard it. And why shouldn’t they? The reaction so far from President Obama is a shaking of his head and his usual speechifying.

Period.

Posted from Chandler, Arizona, June 3, 2010.

“Sarah Palin says she remains a ‘big supporter of offshore drilling’ despite the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

But Palin also tells “Fox News Sunday” that oil companies need to be held accountable. The former Alaska governor suggests that drilling on land in places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is safer than trying to extract oil from beneath the ocean floor.”

Well, Sarah, which is it? Offshore or onshore??? Fox News, bastion of “Fair and Balanced Reporting”, naturally accepted both answers.

This video is a mash-up of the full (and lengthy) interviews available on YouTube, a nice little compilation of a woman who has absolutely no idea what she is talking about. I mean it is a sad day when she can’t even tell Katie Couric what magazines she reads.

But wait, Sarah fans, because there’s more to come! That is right my friends, she has “written” another book. Titled America by Heart : Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag, it will be published by Harper Books on November 23, 2010—a full six months from today.

Here’s the claptrap from Amazon.com:

“Framed by her strong belief in the importance of family, faith, and patriotism, the book ranges widely over American history, culture, and current affairs, and reflects on the key values—both national and spiritual-that have been such a profound part of Governor Palin’s life and continue to inform her vision of America’s future. Written in her own refreshingly candid voice, AMERICA BY HEART will include selections from classic and contemporary readings that have moved her-from the nation’s founding documents to great speeches, sermons, letters, literature and poetry, biography, and even some of her favorite songs and movies. Here, too, are portraits of some of the extraordinary men and women she admires and who embody her deep love of country, her strong rootedness in faith, and her profound love and appreciation of family. She will also draw from personal experience to amplify these timely (and timeless) themes—themes that are sure to inspire her numerous fans and readers all across the country.”

Alaskan walrus poo. All this from a woman who does not (or cannot) read a magazine? There is no word yet on who actually wrote the book for her.

Does Palin have a chance of winning the Republican nomination for President to run against Obama? In this day and age, anything Kafkaesque is possible. And the “compassionate conservatives” love her because she is determined to abolish the separation of church and state.

Posted from Chandler, Arizona May 23, 2010

Britain in 2010 is not a happy country – too many divisions, inherent antagonisms, and ideological chasms divide the nation and make it a country that could be described as “being at war with itself”.

So says Margit Appleton in an editorial for MJB Times, titled Britain at War Chapter II.

I can’t speak for the veracity of MJB Times, but it makes little difference when I can replace “Britain” in the quote with “America” and end up with the same word-for-word meaning. Ever since the lies and cover-ups of Bush and Cheney, politics aren’t discussed in either polite or impolite circles at the risk of a black eye. And the chasm grows wider as Democrats (liberal) and Republicans (conservative) spend their time slinging barbs at each other.

Appleton:

Quite apart from the more obvious—and undoubtedly more pressing problems—like the enormous debt crisis,  the trade deficit, the war in Afghanistan, the problem of immigration etc., the Coalition government has its work cut out for itself.

Ditto Democrat Obama, who is closing in on 1½ years of his administration with little or nothing to show for it—and that with a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. He’s managed to spend hundreds of billions of dollars bailing out rich banks and funding “wars”, both within the bailiwick of the Republicans, but his “massive health-care reform” package has yet to see the light of day.

But Mr. Obama has a terrific smile. Appleton writes,

[W]hen Nick Clegg and David Cameron announced their coalition government . . . friendly banter in the garden . . . [a] wave to Obama’s relaxed style was clearly intended.

Never mind that the political systems of th UK and US are quite different; it is the politicians who account for the sameness. They smile to your face, give you a glad-hand, make promises to placate you—and the moment you turn your back, they stab it.

Appleton concludes her editorial with pie-in-the-sky smarm:

Here’s hoping that the new Coalition government has it in them to finally create what a previous Prime Minister called “a nation at ease with itself”.

Don’t make me cry. How can a Coalition possibly solve serious domestic problems? How can Obama solve serious domestic problems when his own Party is in disarray and does not support him?

The answer is obvious. In a tale of two countries, neither one of them can.

Posted from Chandler, Arizona May 20, 2o1o

Former Transport Secretary, Lord Adonis – yes, that is his real name – has been speaking out against the fixed term parliamentary system introduced by the new Tory/LibDem coalition, describing the idea as a “constitutional outrage”. I know, some might say it’s just a case of sour grapes from the losing party, but he does have some support from constitutional experts.

The argument for change is that the country needs a strong and stable government to oversee the rebuilding of the economy following the credit crisis and bailing out of the banking system. Superficially that does make sense, but closer scrutiny suggests it’s an extremely misleading idea.

During World War Two, Britain was run by a coalition government installed after a vote of no confidence led to the resignation of Conservative prime minister, Neville Chamberlain whose policies of appeasement had proved both unsuccessful and hugely unpopular. Winston Churchill became PM, and later found himself facing a similar vote, but survived to lead the country to victory. I do wonder what he’d think about his successors trying to manipulate public anxiety to make changes to the parliamentary system.

While it is true that we owe a stupendous amount of money, and that we will be paying it off for decades to come, this can not possibly compare to the threat the country faced in the 1940s. Back then, we also had a massive national debt – billions owed to the US alone* – and it was growing because not only did the country have to finance the war effort, there was also the cost of rebuilding once hostilities were over. And of course, the danger was not only financial, the world’s biggest super-power was camped just across the Channel and planning to invade. In the meantime they were bombing our towns and cities into rubble and attacking our shipping with the intention of starving us into submission. Yet, despite this, at no point did anyone think the government should be shored up with changes to the system which made it harder to remove them from power.

Fast forward to 2010 and that very thing could happen. The Tory government want to make it harder to remove them if it all goes horribly wrong. And make no mistake, these changes would protect the Tories, not the coalition! If the coalition falls apart, the fixed term and new rules about votes of no confidence will enable the Tories to stay in power until 2015, despite the fact they will have no majority. They tell us this is a good thing because the country is in financial crisis and needs a firm hand on the tiller to see us through the difficult days ahead. They may have a point, but surely a minority government is not a firm hand, it’s a weak hand, and one which could lead to at best stagnation, and at worst, catastrophe.

So what would Churchill do? Would he approve of a minority government playing on peoples’ fears to introduce undemocratic changes to the parliamentary system to keep themselves in power? I think not.

* It took until 2006 to repay the money owed to the USA

“Thousands of soldiers, their bald eagle shoulder patches lined up row upon row across the grassy field, stood at rigid attention to hear a stern message from their commander.

“Brig[adier] Gen[eral] Stephen Townsend addressed the 101st Airborne Division with military brusqueness: Suicides at the post had spiked after soldiers started returning home from war, and this was unacceptable.

” ‘It’s bad for soldiers, it’s bad for families, bad for your units, bad for this division and our Army and our country and it’s [sic] got to stop now,’ he insisted. ‘Suicides on Fort Campbell [Kentucky] have to stop now.’ “

I quote an article written on April 24, 2010 by Kristen M. Hall of the Associated Press. She goes on to tell the story of twenty-one-year-old Adam Kuligowski upon his return from Afghanistan. Adam loved the Army and his job, but he became increasingly depressed and angry. Finally,

“Adam wrote a note telling his dad, [Mike], ‘Sorry to be a disappointment.’ Then he shot himself inside a bathroom stall with his rifle.

“When the Army closed their investigation into the soldier’s suicide, his father said an investigator told him that Adam’s problem was that he was unable to conform to a military lifestyle. Mike Kuligowski did receive a personal note from the general who was commanding the division at the time: ‘We don’t know why this happened,’ he wrote.

“Kuligowski was not appeased. ‘It reminds me that officers know absolutely nothing about the plights of the soldiers who are under their command,’ he said. ‘What kind of leadership is that?’ “

Off the top of my head and in one word, I would say typical.

The plight of these soldiers was called “shell shock” in WWI. In WWII and Korea, it was called “battle fatigue.” Since Vietnam, the psychiatric diagnosis is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD. But disregarding the labels, the symptoms are the same and have been around for a long, long time—perhaps from the beginning of war itself.  For military leaders and investigators to scratch their heads over the increase in suicides is ludicrous, and General Townsend’s proclamation “to stop now” is way beyond asinine.

But according to Hall’s article, Fort Campbell is responding to the crisis.

“The number of patients being treated at the behavioral health clinic has increased by 60 percent,from 25,400 in 2008 to nearly 40,000 in 2009. To handle the expanded need, they’ve also increased the number of counselors in that clinic to 60 last year, compared to 36 in 2008. In all, Fort Campbell has about 100 counselors, some of whom work in areas like social work, family advocacy, substance abuse and children’s behavioral health.”

If all 100 counselors worked directly with the patients, that would equal a caseload of 400 men and women each. Since some of the counselors work in other areas, that makes the caseload even higher. It cannot be done, especially if proper charting (case write-ups) is required and if meetings are frequent (the military bureaucrats live for meetings to justify their existence).

We train our soldiers to defend our country from a hostile invasion. We train them in all types of weaponry, to kill to protect the civilian populace. And then we send them to fourth-world countries like Iraq and Afghanistan that don’t want them there in the first place, and our soldiers kill to protect themselves from an enemy they cannot distinguish from a non-enemy. Amid the chaos they see atrocities no human should ever have to witness, including the bombing of innocent children and infants.

Eventually the soldiers come home and are discharged from service. Most of them adjust to their old lives again, but many don’t—the ones who need help.

As someone whom I can’t remember said, “We make them into killing machines, but unfortunately there is no ‘off’ switch.”

Posted from Chandler, Arizona May 14, 2010