I think Keith Olberman needs to stick to football. In another interview with Scott Mclellan, Keith Olberman came to this startling conclusion, “Fox News is biased”. I won't necessarily disagree here, it is hard for Fox News or any News channel to be unbiased but this seems like a case of the pot calling the kettle black, only the pot is "blacker" than the kettle. Numerous liberal pundits are complaining that shows like The O'Reilly Factor and Sean Hannity are parroting the White house talking points. To be more specific the problem apparently is that these shows mention the White house talking points at all. Somehow by acknowledging the existence of these talking points and, God forbid, agreeing with some of them Fox News is guilty of being biased. The definition of biased here seems to be "agreeing or disagreeing with any point not previously 'agreed upon' by the liberal media." If this is the definition then yah, Fox is biased.
It got more interesting when another pundit began to explain that it was unconstitutional for Fox to parrot these talking points. Let me first ask that, if this is true, then do we get to ban MSNBC, CNN, New York Times and Air America if and when Obama wins? No? Then your problem isn't that Fox is repeating, or more accurately reporting, white house talking points but that those points are not your talking points. Hypocrisy like this is rampant throughout the media. To address the constitutionality of this we must consider the argument itself. I cannot find a link to this so I am going to have to do this from memory. (Let me ask my very small audience at this time to please send any sources you have. I would like any of them.)
From Bennett in the morning sometime at 4 AM (I know, quite an ungodly hour, so forgive me if I screw this up.) a female pundit stated that it is unconstitutional for Fox to, and I quote, "Be a mouthpiece for the government" Even ignoring the obvious problem involving their complacency toward being a mouth piece for the Clintons during their stay, this argument does not fly. The only thing in the constitution that could possibly be misconstrued as making it unconstitutional to "be the mouthpiece of the government" is the freedom of speech and press part of amendment I. This fails to address anything regarding this as the government is not directly or even indirectly prohibiting them from speaking. However, it would be unconstitutional for liberals to prohibit Fox from speaking by forbidding them to tell their side of the story.
If you are at all surprised by this then you are not aware of the Fairness Doctrine. It is an attempt to bring back rules and regulations that more or less shutdown talk radio which is completely dominated by conservatives. All this is done in the name of being equitable to both sides. Unfortunately not everyone wants to have another viewpoint shoved down their throats. Although I do think people should look at both sides, I do not believe in mandating it. If you want to see me switch sides on an issue, add the word mandate. Most everything could be accomplished without mandates.
If you still are not convinced that we shouldn't allow this then all you need to do is ask yourself what if when the republicans got back into office they decide to use these rules against you. Censorship is censorship, it doesn't matter who does the censoring.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Iraq, A war gone right.
Imagine if after WWII we had only lost three thousand soldiers (not including the attack on Pearl Harbor) or if it used only one fifth of our national budget instead of the 3/4 it did use. Iraq, a war whose statistics are exactly these has been waged for over five years now. Let me first correct myself and a common misconception. This isn't a war as in the Iraq war, but a front in the War on Terror. This includes our front in Afganistan. Regardless of this trivial point many people have become disillusioned about this particular battle. Many beleive that this distracts from our true goal of finding and hopefully executeing Osama Bin Laden. This is the first thing that is wrong. We are not there to kill Osama, we are there to stop terrorism wherever it exists. This means fighting the terror orginaizations and the countries who harbor them. Sorry to disappoint the war for oil crowd but well... your wrong, and I am certain that some if not most of you know on some level that you are wrong, either in logic or in actuality.
In the beguinning George Bush Jr., with intel from MI6 (the british version of our CIA) stated that Iraq was looking for nuclear weapon materials. Where are these WMDs? Well first he said "looking" and also stated that they "might" already have them. Well how do we know this isn't a lie? Well as the times online reports the Butler committee agreed with this assesment based on data known at the time (source http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article457472.ece). Not only were they looking for WMDs but already possesed some in the form of Nerve gas. (Source http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000915.html) Along with this they also possessed: 500 tons of yellow cake uranium (left over since after Desert Storm, why it wasn't confiscated by the UN inspectors is beyond me and just another reason we shouldn't even trust them to sell girl scout cookies.) and approxamately 500 chemical weapons including Sarin and Mustard gas (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html note: weapons were partially degraded due to their storage). Ya right, we lied, I admit it.
The yellow cake is under dispute as it "could not be used in a nuclear weapon" And sulfur makes a very bad propellent by itself but with salt peter it goes boom. "They did not have the ability to refine it themselves". Strange assertion since I could refine it myself. It is very easy actully. The only problem is that someone as unskilled as me would have a very large loss ratio. This isn't to say that it is exceedingly difficult to build a centerfuge though. "They didn't have enough to make a bomb." It takes 8 kilograms of uranium 235 to make a gun or implosion type of atomic bomb. 500 metric tons is literally thousands of times that. If their refining was poor and produced only one gram of U 235 for every kilogram of yellow cake then they would have enough for atleast one bomb. Assuming, as is could be true, that U 238 made up most of the material a breeder reactor could still be constructed to change it from U 238 to Plutonium. Safe, right.
Bush didn't lie and wasn't even wrong about Iraq but that dosn't mean we shouldn't have been there. Accepting this poor line of reasoning we could of course point to the depravity of his regieme but we went in there under the War on Terror. Although some may disagree with that statement I made it and will now have to defend it. What if I told you Saddam himself was rather friendly to terror orginizations?
"Many terrorist movements and Saddam found a common enemy in the United States," This is from a report regarding the link between the dictator and and multiple terror groups including Al-qaeda (he was not involved in 9/11 however). (source http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/21/saddam-friendly-to-terror-groups/) Multiple contacts andconections? Sounds bad if you ask me.
So there were 'other' reasons for the war? Oil had to be the real reason though. No, it wasn't. I doubt it was more then an after thought. Remember, conservatives and moderates want local oil, not foreign. The Democrats may be open to this but in general the american people are not. How could I know? Well, it wouldn't even be a logical place to go for oil. Think about the fuel spent to get there. If we did infact go to war for oil then a more logical step would be to invade Mexico or even better Venezuela. Both have oil reserves and both would be vastly cheaper to wage a war against.
The war is costing too much. This is intresting to hear since the dems are not known for fiscal responsibility but lets play along. Often when refering to this arguement people talk about our nine trillion dollar national debt and how the Iraq war is the cause. Then in a quizzical yet intresting display of self defeat they also spout off that the war has cost 500 billion dollars right now. 9 trillion minus 500 billion is 8.5 trillion dollars so if the Iraq war never existed then we would be 8.5 trillion dollars in debt still. Ahh, what would they bitch about then? How bout the social programs that cost our government hundreds of billions of dollars a year? It is like a little cute Iraq war in every one of them. Only alot of the money invested in Iraq goes to American contractors to buy American steel and American made parts. Those social programs go to paying people not to work. Ya, this one doesn't float either. Glad to see them talk the talk though; it is half the job after all.
No fiscal responsibility is the reason. "But we are loseing the war!!!!" We are doing so well that their own prime minister now thinks it is time for a time table. I must say he is doing a good job as since Al-Maliki has taken office we have fullfilled 15 out of 17 benchmarks we have set upon placing there. Iraq will be stable given just a few more years (I would wager no more than 5). Unfortunately credit for victory may be given to the protesters this time. If the dems win then it is no doubt they will pull out. Id I was asked three months ago I would tell you it would be a massacre, today I would say it wouls be a gamble. If Iraq manages to stand on its own then it will be to Iraq and Al-Maliki's own credit and not the democratic party, not Nancy Pelosi and definately not Harry Reid.
Iraq was not for oil, Bush didn't lie, WMDs were found and the war is not being lost. But hey, don't listen to me. I am just one of the brainwashed sheeple. I will just sit back and wait for this to end for the better or for the worse.
In the beguinning George Bush Jr., with intel from MI6 (the british version of our CIA) stated that Iraq was looking for nuclear weapon materials. Where are these WMDs? Well first he said "looking" and also stated that they "might" already have them. Well how do we know this isn't a lie? Well as the times online reports the Butler committee agreed with this assesment based on data known at the time (source http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article457472.ece). Not only were they looking for WMDs but already possesed some in the form of Nerve gas. (Source http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000915.html) Along with this they also possessed: 500 tons of yellow cake uranium (left over since after Desert Storm, why it wasn't confiscated by the UN inspectors is beyond me and just another reason we shouldn't even trust them to sell girl scout cookies.) and approxamately 500 chemical weapons including Sarin and Mustard gas (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html note: weapons were partially degraded due to their storage). Ya right, we lied, I admit it.
The yellow cake is under dispute as it "could not be used in a nuclear weapon" And sulfur makes a very bad propellent by itself but with salt peter it goes boom. "They did not have the ability to refine it themselves". Strange assertion since I could refine it myself. It is very easy actully. The only problem is that someone as unskilled as me would have a very large loss ratio. This isn't to say that it is exceedingly difficult to build a centerfuge though. "They didn't have enough to make a bomb." It takes 8 kilograms of uranium 235 to make a gun or implosion type of atomic bomb. 500 metric tons is literally thousands of times that. If their refining was poor and produced only one gram of U 235 for every kilogram of yellow cake then they would have enough for atleast one bomb. Assuming, as is could be true, that U 238 made up most of the material a breeder reactor could still be constructed to change it from U 238 to Plutonium. Safe, right.
Bush didn't lie and wasn't even wrong about Iraq but that dosn't mean we shouldn't have been there. Accepting this poor line of reasoning we could of course point to the depravity of his regieme but we went in there under the War on Terror. Although some may disagree with that statement I made it and will now have to defend it. What if I told you Saddam himself was rather friendly to terror orginizations?
"Many terrorist movements and Saddam found a common enemy in the United States," This is from a report regarding the link between the dictator and and multiple terror groups including Al-qaeda (he was not involved in 9/11 however). (source http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/21/saddam-friendly-to-terror-groups/) Multiple contacts andconections? Sounds bad if you ask me.
So there were 'other' reasons for the war? Oil had to be the real reason though. No, it wasn't. I doubt it was more then an after thought. Remember, conservatives and moderates want local oil, not foreign. The Democrats may be open to this but in general the american people are not. How could I know? Well, it wouldn't even be a logical place to go for oil. Think about the fuel spent to get there. If we did infact go to war for oil then a more logical step would be to invade Mexico or even better Venezuela. Both have oil reserves and both would be vastly cheaper to wage a war against.
The war is costing too much. This is intresting to hear since the dems are not known for fiscal responsibility but lets play along. Often when refering to this arguement people talk about our nine trillion dollar national debt and how the Iraq war is the cause. Then in a quizzical yet intresting display of self defeat they also spout off that the war has cost 500 billion dollars right now. 9 trillion minus 500 billion is 8.5 trillion dollars so if the Iraq war never existed then we would be 8.5 trillion dollars in debt still. Ahh, what would they bitch about then? How bout the social programs that cost our government hundreds of billions of dollars a year? It is like a little cute Iraq war in every one of them. Only alot of the money invested in Iraq goes to American contractors to buy American steel and American made parts. Those social programs go to paying people not to work. Ya, this one doesn't float either. Glad to see them talk the talk though; it is half the job after all.
No fiscal responsibility is the reason. "But we are loseing the war!!!!" We are doing so well that their own prime minister now thinks it is time for a time table. I must say he is doing a good job as since Al-Maliki has taken office we have fullfilled 15 out of 17 benchmarks we have set upon placing there. Iraq will be stable given just a few more years (I would wager no more than 5). Unfortunately credit for victory may be given to the protesters this time. If the dems win then it is no doubt they will pull out. Id I was asked three months ago I would tell you it would be a massacre, today I would say it wouls be a gamble. If Iraq manages to stand on its own then it will be to Iraq and Al-Maliki's own credit and not the democratic party, not Nancy Pelosi and definately not Harry Reid.
Iraq was not for oil, Bush didn't lie, WMDs were found and the war is not being lost. But hey, don't listen to me. I am just one of the brainwashed sheeple. I will just sit back and wait for this to end for the better or for the worse.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Independance Day '08
As the day of our independance draws near many people begin to think about the fireworks, the hot dogs and burgers, the festivals and parties. So as the Fourth of July approches stop and think about how we got here.
In the year 1770 no government on the face of the earth existed that was like the US. Just a few short years before we declared independance from Britan. Think about that. That means that our founders had very little to go on when it came to founding our government. If you were to found your own government what would you make it? If you think long enough you would undoubtedly come up with not just a government but even an economy and a culture. You may even go so far, as I have done when I was little, as to try to enforce laws to make the people of your country follow your own version of utopia. It is a beutiful idea huh? See, we all have this idea of a perfect society that if everyone just adhered to the the world would be perfect. If you stop to think though, what if your idea of utopia is someone elses idea of hell? Some may say I don't care; I know better. Now what if you were in someone elses idea of utopia? Talk to enough people and you will note that everyone elses idea of utopia is at least a little different. Suddenly you may be transported to paradise or a newer, more gruesome version of Nazi germany.
This is how profound our forefathers were. They knew that one man's tresure is another man's curse. So just think on this. What would you do knowing this? Well I can't know but I do know what Thomas Jefferson said "An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens." The simple fact is that, assuming you are a benevolent leader, you will never have want to control your people. Imagine your people angry at you because you did one thing or another. To be more exact to his meaning, only a tyrant can come of a dictator. One other quote from him that strikes me is "The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object." This quote shows what the Declaration is all about. Our founders knew that there was no way to make a just government that listened only to the one and so instead they focused their efforts on making our government a government that listend to the many. This perfect government would only protect your freedoms and that this goal is the best and single most important thing in the world.
I would also like to talk about patriotism. dictionary.com defines patriotism as devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty. Certainly this is an honorable goal for all. Patriotism is sometimes used as some kind of political hockey puck with people questioning each others patriotism all the time. I am not saying that patriotism isn't important and I definately think this is a laudable trait, but sometimes it seems like a futile political game. If someone isn't a patriot then it is always obvious to those who are. It is as if patriotism is a tie-dye shirt. Everyone without one stares at the few who do. One major trait of patriotism is the self sacrifice for your own country, so by this standard all veterans are patriots, but sacrifice need not be just your life but your time or your money and maybe even your family. As John Adams, a hero of mine, said "Our obligations to our country never cease but with our lives." In this sense, patriotism is the most important national resourse in the world.
So enjoy your barbeques and your fireworks shows. Just remember that those who came before us, those who graced us with their wisdom, are precicely why we are here. If not for them and every life given in the liberation and defense of our great country we may still be british and the world may never have known freedom.
In the year 1770 no government on the face of the earth existed that was like the US. Just a few short years before we declared independance from Britan. Think about that. That means that our founders had very little to go on when it came to founding our government. If you were to found your own government what would you make it? If you think long enough you would undoubtedly come up with not just a government but even an economy and a culture. You may even go so far, as I have done when I was little, as to try to enforce laws to make the people of your country follow your own version of utopia. It is a beutiful idea huh? See, we all have this idea of a perfect society that if everyone just adhered to the the world would be perfect. If you stop to think though, what if your idea of utopia is someone elses idea of hell? Some may say I don't care; I know better. Now what if you were in someone elses idea of utopia? Talk to enough people and you will note that everyone elses idea of utopia is at least a little different. Suddenly you may be transported to paradise or a newer, more gruesome version of Nazi germany.
This is how profound our forefathers were. They knew that one man's tresure is another man's curse. So just think on this. What would you do knowing this? Well I can't know but I do know what Thomas Jefferson said "An honest man can feel no pleasure in the exercise of power over his fellow citizens." The simple fact is that, assuming you are a benevolent leader, you will never have want to control your people. Imagine your people angry at you because you did one thing or another. To be more exact to his meaning, only a tyrant can come of a dictator. One other quote from him that strikes me is "The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object." This quote shows what the Declaration is all about. Our founders knew that there was no way to make a just government that listened only to the one and so instead they focused their efforts on making our government a government that listend to the many. This perfect government would only protect your freedoms and that this goal is the best and single most important thing in the world.
I would also like to talk about patriotism. dictionary.com defines patriotism as devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty. Certainly this is an honorable goal for all. Patriotism is sometimes used as some kind of political hockey puck with people questioning each others patriotism all the time. I am not saying that patriotism isn't important and I definately think this is a laudable trait, but sometimes it seems like a futile political game. If someone isn't a patriot then it is always obvious to those who are. It is as if patriotism is a tie-dye shirt. Everyone without one stares at the few who do. One major trait of patriotism is the self sacrifice for your own country, so by this standard all veterans are patriots, but sacrifice need not be just your life but your time or your money and maybe even your family. As John Adams, a hero of mine, said "Our obligations to our country never cease but with our lives." In this sense, patriotism is the most important national resourse in the world.
So enjoy your barbeques and your fireworks shows. Just remember that those who came before us, those who graced us with their wisdom, are precicely why we are here. If not for them and every life given in the liberation and defense of our great country we may still be british and the world may never have known freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)