Monday, November 22, 2010

Get Real

All this brouhaha, Dear Gentle Reader(s), about pat downs and scanners at the airports makes one wonder.

Do we really want the perceived enemy to know exactly what to expect at the security points in our airports?  Do we want him or her to know not to expect to have a full body scan or to know there will be a pat down which won’t disturb “junk”?

If someone is so convinced of the rightness of their cause that they will recruit pregnant women to carry out a suicide mission, do we think they won’t somehow ask, or trick, grandma to carry some explosives onto a plane? 

How often do we read of some unfortunate soul who kills a child of their own to save the child from an unhappy life?  Do we think that religious fanatics are less capable of such an atrocity?

If it keeps the potential bomber guessing, then whatever the Department of Homeland Security comes up with is pretty much fine with me.

Don’t give murders a road map.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, November 7, 2010

An omitted step

Thomas Friedman, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is a provocative writer.  One can’t help but think while reading his columns, agreeing and/or disagreeing.  Today’s on-line column edition, “Long Live Lady Luck,” is a prime example.

Friedman writes about how lucky we, in the U.S., were to have escaped 5 efforts to bring, once again, death to our shores via Al Qaeda plotting.  He also writes about what we should do to stop “the savage madness .”  As usual with most of the writing found in similar arguments, Friedman chooses not to address the subject of Koranic interpretation which is used for justification for this “madness.”

Friedman writes,

When Muslim jihadists are ready to just gun down or blow up unarmed men, women and children in the midst of prayer — Muslim or Christian — it means there are no moral, cultural or religious restraints left on the Islamic fringe. It’s anything goes. And it’s becoming routine.

Then he discusses moral and cultural restraints, but not religious.

Christians believe that Jesus came to reform the Abrahamic religion of the day.  Perhaps that underlying belief makes it easier for Christians and some Jews to “modernize” their religions than it is for moderate Muslims to do the same for theirs.

Religious writings were written for a specific people at a specific time, dealing with specific problems.  We choose to believe that those writings are applicable to our own day, but to insist that the intervening years of development of human understanding of the human condition count for nothing could well be as blasphemous and arrogant an insistence as anything ever. 

Change is part of The Plan.

Writing is, in essence, metaphor.

We should remember that, we should teach that—especially if we want to address all the ways to end the “madness.”

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, November 1, 2010

A quick question

It’ll never catch on, Dear, Gentle Reader(s), but what do you think would be the result if, at every Congressional committee hearing which allowed, or requested, non-Federal government testimony, to have the very first question for each testifier be, “How much money, and to whom, have you contributed to a Federal election campaign, either at the general election level or the primary election level, in the past five years?”

That would be one way to keep track of monies expended in political campaigns, as well as to whom it was directed.

Cui bono—who benefits?  Until we know that, we don’t know enough.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, October 30, 2010

DWF (Driving while floating)

Perhaps it’s different for others, but from my personal experience, driving home after  a couple of tokes at a friend’s house some 35 years ago was a slow-motion experience.  I found myself stopping for stop signs in the middle of the block, and deciding to move forward after much deliberation of the pros and coms with myself.

And I know it was slow-motion because it took me 20 minutes to make the 5 minute drive—there’s almost no place in Gainesville, Florida (Go Gators!), that’s more than 5 minutes away from any place else.  (Of course, I haven’t been back in 35 years.)

When I taught speech to police and sheriff officers in Columbia, Tennessee, they would often joke about the local “hippies” who were blocking traffic on local roads with their road scorching speeds of 25 miles per hour.

When people show you a picture of a smashed-up car and speak of the dangers of driving under the influence of weed, look askance.  That car could well have been hit by an alcoholic-influenced driver—which trumps a marijuana-influenced driver.

Cui Bono--Follow the money, Dear, Gentle Reader(s), it will tell you who will benefit with the continued “drug wars.”

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, October 28, 2010

ALEC—and Arizona and Prisons

Technorati Tags: ,,

There’s a new corporation acronym on the block, and it’s not a comic actor, by a long shot.  Meet ALEC, Dear Gentle Reader(s), and be afraid.  Be very afraid.  (Good tie-in for Halloween, eh wot?)

Here’s a rather chilling excerpt from NPR’s website:

NPR spent the past several months analyzing hundreds of pages of campaign finance reports, lobbying documents and corporate records. What they show is a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to help draft and pass Arizona Senate Bill 1070 by an industry that stands to benefit from it: the private prison industry.

According to NPR, the genesis of Arizona’s immigrant law, SB1070 occurred last December at a conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council—ALEC.  An Arizona pol was at the conference, and the rest of the story we all well know.

Admittedly, Capitalism has brought us to a very good life, but every once in a while we surely have to wonder about making profit off of the misery of those who are less fortunate.

Or not?

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Reading Comprehension Test

Wow!  Here’s a headline from The New York Times: Democrats Retain Edge in Spending on Campaigns; and this one is from the website Politico: Dems getting outspent? Not so fast.

So, the Democrats are outspending the Republicans?  Isn’t that counter-intuitive to what we’re hearing about all those millions being spent on negative ads against Democratic candidates?

Well, yes and no.

The stories go on to say that the Democratic Party has more money than the Republican Party. 

Really, though, what would be the point of the Republicans trying to gather money when there are others, secret others, doing the work for them?

And why would anyone who wants to keep their wealth bother to contribute large sums to “regulated” political fund raisers when they can get a possibly bigger bang for their buck by giving without having to admit publicly their largesse?

There can be little comfort for Democratic candidates with the headlines this morning.

Ah, Mr. Justice Kennedy.  What have you wrought?  (And how long will it be before you admit your error in judgment?)

So, what have we learned today, Dear Gentle Reader(s)?  Read beyond headlines; sometimes they don’t accurately reflect the whole story.

Trust, but verify.

p.s. Gold Star to those who can spot the spelling error at the Politico website!

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, October 22, 2010

Words have meaning…Continued

And the Juan Williams confab continues.

In a post today, Andrew Sullivan writes…”He said it was legitimate to feel fear when someone in Muslim garb is on a plane.” 

Not quite.  Williams said, “…when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

Now, DGR(s), is fear, which Sullivan used, equal to worried or to nervous?

If Williams had refused to get on the plane with those dressed “in Muslim garb,” then it could be argued that the two words he used are, indeed, equivalent; but he doesn’t indicate in the interview with O’Reilly that he canceled his trip.  The presumption must be that he rode along with those in the “garb,” albeit a touch fidgety.

So, how about Sullivan’s position?  Was Williams really legitimizing fear of Muslims?

One would be hard pressed to think so.

It’s easy to be nervous around anyone who sports religious symbolism in their garb or accessories.  I’m nervous around guys walking around with crosses in their lapels, but I don’t fear them.  I certainly am more aware of what they do when they’re near.

Their presence is always a good time to

Trust, but verify.

(I stand by my support of NPR; their decision was based on their standards about differentiating between reporters and commenters.)

Sphere: Related Content