Tuesday, July 17, 2007

A comment of mine from Ted's blog

These are the times when EVERYONE gets mad at me. I believe each of you has taken a valid, yet narrow, point of view and accentuated it. I agree that this is not a war for oil. The oil robber barons didnt need to do that to get richer. Actually, the first Gulf War was for oil, and I didn't hear anyone bitching about that. Uh, yeah, we were saving poor little Kuwait out of the kindness of our big government heart. Look at a map of the Middle East - Kuwait was obviously meant to be a part of Iraq, at least geographically speaking.

This current war was for political gain and power here in the homeland (when did we start talking like 18th century Russians). There was also an element, within the American people, who truly believed that we are fighting for freedom and against terrorism. I agree with Jon that Islam is not a "religion of peace" Christianity, Judaism, and most religions are not any damn thing of peace. Honestly, I can't tell you the difference between a Sunni and a Shi'ite either, just as people from other regions probably can't tell you the difference between a Catholic and a Baptist.

Over the years I have met, interacted with, and befriended, probably 50 Arabic Muslims. Of course they were each individuals, with their own personalities, with positive and negative points. There were many more similarities than differences amonst them, however. Without fail, every Muslim I have ever met was happy to utilize the tremendous resources America has to offer, while at the same time speaking derisively (sp) about our "decadent" culture. Speaking just of the people I personally know, it is not a far leap from the disgust and contempt they held America in, to blowing up a couple of really tall towers full of people. I have the same contempt for Islam as I do for most every other organized religion.

Now I also agree with Ted that we need to get working on some major diplomacy, fast. We need to deal with Middle East countries from a position of power. That means we have to end our dependence on foreign oil immediately. It is also our policies, and our very presence, in fact, that is causing a lot of the unrest in the area. Not only do we need to pull our troops out of Iraq, we need to pull everything out of the entire mideast. Without oil in the mix, the US wouldnt give a rat's ass about how these countries run their affairs. They could all go back to the days of raiding each other's tribes on camel back. I find it astounding that the middle eastern countries have been so sophisticated, for so many centuries, that they gave us things like our modern numeral system; yet they are still so backwards that they treat women as slaves. Quite a paradox, it seems.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Sunday, July 8, 2007

For Lovely Jacqueline


Dear friends, please take a moment to pay your respects to our beloved Jacq. Her mom passed away yesterday, and she could use our support and love.

Saturday, July 7, 2007

O'Really ?!?


I was watching the O'Reilly Factor for a couple of minutes yesterday. Two minutes is usually all I can take without puking. This time around I was mesmerized by what I saw and heard for a full five minutes. That's how weird this episode was. The "big man" himself was not present. They had a three-way split screen "discussion" going on about Muslims in America being lumped together in one group we like to call terrorists. The pro Muslim guest was a British Muslim, the anti Muslim guest was your typical American white guy, and the moderator was an Asian woman. The pro Muslim man talked about his anger at a quote by someone that basically called all Muslims a "cancer in our midst". The moderator glared at him and said "Isn't it true that ALL Muslims look so alike that we therefore cannot tell the good ones from the bad?" The Asian woman said this??????? To the British Muslim??????? While the AmeriKan laughed?????? It could have been an extremely bad Twilight Zone episode.

Monday, July 2, 2007

Attention: New Voting Requirements Instituted


I was reading a post over at Simply Left Behind that was, in part, about how stupid some American voters are. This has inspired Hollander to come up with a new voting system and a set of requirements necessary in order to participate. Every four years each citizen will take a set of mandatory tests that gauge their emotional maturity, experience, knowledge of recent world history, and their IQ. The emotional maturity standard will be set at that of a sixth grader. We know that is twice as high as most voters currently have, but we believe this is an achievable goal. For experience, it will be considered essential that each potential voter has traveled a minimum of 35 miles outside of their hometown, and stayed there at least 24 hours in order to expose themselves to foreigners and their strange ways. Knowledge of current world history will include events of today, last week, and last summer. We know this will tax most Americans short attention spans, but think it is necessary to have well informed voters. Now we come to the most vital part of the testing. Once the potential voter has demonstrated expertise in the prerequisite areas, he will then be allowed to take the IQ portion of the test. All persons who pass the tests will be forced to take part in the voting process. Once the voter's level is determined he will be led to the voting booth and the votes will count on a weighted scale, thusly:

IQ level 99 and below: not allowed to vote
IQ level 100 - 120: 1/2 vote on local matters, 1/4 vote on national matters
IQ level 121 - 130: 3/4 vote on all matters
IQ level 131 - 140: 1 full vote on local matters, 1 1/2 votes on national matters
IQ level 141 - 150: 2 votes on all matters
IQ level 151 - 160: 3 votes on all matters plus negates 1 vote from the US south
IQ level 161 - 170: 3 1/2 votes plus person of voter's choice performs oral sex
IQ level 171 - 180: 4 votes plus voter is appointed to the office of Vice President
IQ level 181 and above: You are obviously not an American and are, therefore, not allowed to vote

The conservatives have come up with a planned "revitalization" of the voting process as well. We give them kudos for their efforts, but think it is unnecessarily complex and just a little harsh. It is based on class, money, geographical location, and job description

Homeless: Taken out and shot

Mentally Ill: Put on a charter bus and dropped off in the middle of the night in Astoria (either Oregon or New York)

Illegal Alien: 1 vote but only on Bush immigration policies

Guy who scoops up horseshit in parades: East coast 0 votes, West coast 1/8 vote

Janitor: 1 vote but has to clean up the polling place afterwards

Accountant: 0 votes in Northeast, 1/2 vote in other blue states, 2 votes in red states, 12,000 votes in Texas

Carpenter: Decides what type of wood to use to build polling place, except in southern US where he decides what type of wood to use to build gallows since slavery was just reintroduced

Truck drivers: Northern tier drivers get one vote but will not be allowed time off to visit polling place. Southern tier drivers will be given 1 vote in each state they drive through

Lawyer: Prosecutors 5 votes (except in south where it will be 1864 votes) Defense attorneys will be taken out and shot with homeless

Judges: Activist liberal judges hanged, activist conservative judges get as many votes as they wish and an airport named after them

Military personnel: Get to vote on what meal is served when Condi Rice visits their mess hall on yet another wartime Christmas

Doctor: 1 vote but must have prior authorization from insurance and pharmaceutical companies

Rich guys: millionaires - one million votes, billionaires - one billion votes...
Rich gals: decide which color scheme to decorate the mansion for the upcoming social season

GW Bush: however many votes Dick and Daddy tell him he gets

Karl Rove: 1 vote, but that cancels out ALL other votes

Now we hope this brings some needed clarification to the process. We here at the Space believe that either plan is workable. It is up to you, the American (or AmeriKan) voters, to decide which system will be best for you.

Sunday, July 1, 2007