In any conflict there are at least two sides but the most important element is the truth. Getting to the truth can only be achieved when one knows the facts. In the present state of unrest between Israel and Hamas, the facts do not seem to be important.
Last month three Israeli teenagers were abducted and executed. Without any evidence to support their claim, Israel accused Hamas. Hamas has denied involvement but that fell on deaf ears. When the bodies of the victims were found, Israeli citizens retaliated by kidnapping a Palestinian teenager and setting him on fire. They burned him to death. The perpetrators of this crime were apprehended but it is extremely doubtful that they will receive proper punishment for their crime, given that their victim was a Palestinian.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) though now known only as the Islamic State has apparently claimed responsibility for the initial abduction of the Israeli's. ISIL is a jihadist militant group that grew out of Al-Qaeda. They are not Hamas, they are not connected to Hamas and Hamas does not exert any control over them. Yet, Benjamin Netanyahu continues to blame Hamas, even though he apparently knows that Hamas was not involved.
When Israel killed an innocent Palestinian youth, the Palestinians had a right to defend themselves. They did so with rocket strikes against Israel. Israel has retaliated with airstrikes against Palestine. This must be put in perspective. Palestine has launched over 800 rockets and killed no one. Israel has struck over 1,300 times and killed nearly 200. The vast majority of the casualties are civilians. Israel knows this. Israel does not care.
All Americans should be aware of what is going on in Israel. United States Foreign Aid to Israel makes up more than half of the foreign aid to the entire world. We give more money to Israel than to any other country but we get nothing in return. Israel is not an oil-producing nation, so they do not supply us with oil. In two wars that the United States started (Iran and Afghanistan), Israel has not supplied any military assistance. We get nothing for the money we spend.
The Arms Export Control Act states that the United States may stop aid to countries which use U.S. military assistance for purposes other than “legitimate self-defense.” Palestine has a right to retaliate when Israel burns one of their children alive. Israel cannot correctly call their current actions against Palestine "self-defense." As such, the United States should immediately withdraw all military assistance from Israel until such time as Israel agrees to enter into peaceful negotiations with Palestine. Such negotiations must include an immediate cease-fire, releasing Palestinians held as prisoners without the benefit of due process and returning land illegally seized from Palestine since the agreement of the borders in 1967.
Israel is killing innocent Palestinians and the United States is supporting that effort. When will the people of this great nation stand up for those who are being oppressed by our allies?
Monday, July 14, 2014
Friday, July 4, 2014
It's Up to Men to End Abortion
For decades now we have heard that abortion must be legal because it is a woman's right to choose. I agree. We have also heard that abortion is murder. I understand that sentiment but I cannot say that I fully agree. Murder is too strong, as that entails a crime against a person and abortion is an exercise of the woman's right to her body.
The loudest voices in this argument have been the voices of men, particularly among the elected officials and women have often felt that this was unfair. Women claim that if men got pregnant abortion would have been legal centuries ago. Perhaps this is true but we will never know for certain.
One thing I do know, however, is that men can end this once and for all. I am suggesting that we do just that, beginning on January 1, 2015. That gives us nearly six months to prepare. Once we implement the program, we should expect to carry it through to its full term of five years for completion.
Many states have passed legislation to curtail abortions and many of those laws have been overturned by the courts. Even if the states win, they still lose because they must pay to defend the lawsuits brought against them. This is not a step forward.
Several states have recently passed legislation that would close the majority of the abortion clinics within their borders, which does nothing to stop the abortions; it merely moves them across the state line. That does not solve the problem, but enacting this program will cause these clinics to close simply because they won't have the necessary patients to keep them open.
This program is simple because it does not require legislation, it does not cost any money to implement and it does not involve women. It is the men taking the initiative and handling this problem once and for all.
Beginning on January 1, 2015, all across America, men must abstain from sex with women. Now, I know this might be difficult but there are alternatives. For example, you can take matters into your own hands, so to speak. This is not the ideal situation but it has its benefits. Not needing a partner means not caring if you're showered and shaved. Small talk is avoided and no promises need to be made; or broken.
Sex with a woman is allowed so long as it is either oral or anal. The difficulty with this is that, while the man is often more than willing to make this sacrifice the woman is usually not on board with the idea. Suggesting that her sister might be willing to help out just might get her to re-think her position.
Lastly, having sex with another man is fine. Actually, it is encouraged. Since most states are either allowing gay marriage or at least considering it, the taboo on man-to-man sex is no longer what it once was and in reality, a lot of men have been looking for an excuse to try anyway, so why not just give in?
Implementing this program is simple, and once done, pregnancies in this country will drop to zero. When no women get pregnant no women have abortions. As time goes on, the abortion clinics will close, due to the fact that they will be under-used to the point that they cannot afford to stay open. Legislators can get back to working on actual problems that need their attention, not on regulating women's bodies, and this whole argument of whether or not abortion should be legal can finally be put to rest.
The program will conclude on December 31, 2019. Men, the ball is in your court. Can you rise to the occasion? Are you willing to stand firm and show exactly what you're made of? Join me and together we will end abortion in this country.
The loudest voices in this argument have been the voices of men, particularly among the elected officials and women have often felt that this was unfair. Women claim that if men got pregnant abortion would have been legal centuries ago. Perhaps this is true but we will never know for certain.
One thing I do know, however, is that men can end this once and for all. I am suggesting that we do just that, beginning on January 1, 2015. That gives us nearly six months to prepare. Once we implement the program, we should expect to carry it through to its full term of five years for completion.
Many states have passed legislation to curtail abortions and many of those laws have been overturned by the courts. Even if the states win, they still lose because they must pay to defend the lawsuits brought against them. This is not a step forward.
Several states have recently passed legislation that would close the majority of the abortion clinics within their borders, which does nothing to stop the abortions; it merely moves them across the state line. That does not solve the problem, but enacting this program will cause these clinics to close simply because they won't have the necessary patients to keep them open.
This program is simple because it does not require legislation, it does not cost any money to implement and it does not involve women. It is the men taking the initiative and handling this problem once and for all.
Beginning on January 1, 2015, all across America, men must abstain from sex with women. Now, I know this might be difficult but there are alternatives. For example, you can take matters into your own hands, so to speak. This is not the ideal situation but it has its benefits. Not needing a partner means not caring if you're showered and shaved. Small talk is avoided and no promises need to be made; or broken.
Sex with a woman is allowed so long as it is either oral or anal. The difficulty with this is that, while the man is often more than willing to make this sacrifice the woman is usually not on board with the idea. Suggesting that her sister might be willing to help out just might get her to re-think her position.
Lastly, having sex with another man is fine. Actually, it is encouraged. Since most states are either allowing gay marriage or at least considering it, the taboo on man-to-man sex is no longer what it once was and in reality, a lot of men have been looking for an excuse to try anyway, so why not just give in?
Implementing this program is simple, and once done, pregnancies in this country will drop to zero. When no women get pregnant no women have abortions. As time goes on, the abortion clinics will close, due to the fact that they will be under-used to the point that they cannot afford to stay open. Legislators can get back to working on actual problems that need their attention, not on regulating women's bodies, and this whole argument of whether or not abortion should be legal can finally be put to rest.
The program will conclude on December 31, 2019. Men, the ball is in your court. Can you rise to the occasion? Are you willing to stand firm and show exactly what you're made of? Join me and together we will end abortion in this country.
Monday, March 24, 2014
How To Be A Great President
Since the days of Harry Truman, presidential administrations have been ranked by their approval, expressed as a percentage. Looking at the approval rating of all presidents from that time forward as they left office, only two were higher than 60%. As far as greatness goes, these two men can truly be said to have been great presidents.
Ronald Reagan left office with the highest approval rating to that date, at 63%. During the eight years he was in office, the cold war ended, tax cuts for individuals increased, nuclear arms were reduced worldwide, the war in Afghanistan ended (that didn't last very long), the first female Supreme Court Justice was appointed, the Air Traffic Controllers who went on strike were fired (they would have cost the tax payers $700 million had they received their outrageous demands), a successful rescue mission was launched in Grenada and the Strategic Defense Initiative was implemented.
When Reagan left office, the country was prosperous and at peace. The Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 950.68 on the day Reagan took office. When he left, it was at 2,235.36.
While Reagan's 63% approval rating certainly sounds impressive, and it especially is when compared with the 34% that both Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush had when they left office, or the pitiful 24% that disgraced Richard Nixon's administration. But impressive as 63% is, it was not to remain the highest. That title is currently held by William J. Clinton who left office with a 66% approval rating. Highlights of the Clinton years included an impressive 115 months of economic expansion, 22 months of job creation, the highest home ownership in American history, the lowest unemployment rate to date, the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the smallest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rate in 20 years, the first female Attorney General and the first female Secretary of State and the conversion of the deficit to a surplus.
When Clinton left office, the country was again prosperous and at peace. He took office with the Dow Jones Industrial Average at 3,241.95 and left when it was a staggering 10,578.24.
These two men have one very important fact in common, and it is this commonality that made them great. Reagan was a Republican, but the House was controlled by the Democrats. The Republicans held a slim control of the Senate, which they lost in 1987.
Clinton is a Democrat and his first two years saw him with a Democratically lead House and Senate. That reversed in year three when the Republicans took control of both houses and that control remained until the end of Clinton's presidency.
What each of these men had to do was work with the opposition. No president runs this country on his own. They all have to have the backing of the other elected officials in order to be successful and the truly great know that in order for this country to excel, no one political party can ever have its way to the detriment of the other party. There has to be a negotiation where each party gets some of what it wants but neither party gets it all. When we have this balance, when we work together, we are truly the United States of America and our history shows that when this happens, we can achieve greatness.
Ronald Reagan left office with the highest approval rating to that date, at 63%. During the eight years he was in office, the cold war ended, tax cuts for individuals increased, nuclear arms were reduced worldwide, the war in Afghanistan ended (that didn't last very long), the first female Supreme Court Justice was appointed, the Air Traffic Controllers who went on strike were fired (they would have cost the tax payers $700 million had they received their outrageous demands), a successful rescue mission was launched in Grenada and the Strategic Defense Initiative was implemented.
When Reagan left office, the country was prosperous and at peace. The Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 950.68 on the day Reagan took office. When he left, it was at 2,235.36.
While Reagan's 63% approval rating certainly sounds impressive, and it especially is when compared with the 34% that both Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush had when they left office, or the pitiful 24% that disgraced Richard Nixon's administration. But impressive as 63% is, it was not to remain the highest. That title is currently held by William J. Clinton who left office with a 66% approval rating. Highlights of the Clinton years included an impressive 115 months of economic expansion, 22 months of job creation, the highest home ownership in American history, the lowest unemployment rate to date, the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the smallest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rate in 20 years, the first female Attorney General and the first female Secretary of State and the conversion of the deficit to a surplus.
When Clinton left office, the country was again prosperous and at peace. He took office with the Dow Jones Industrial Average at 3,241.95 and left when it was a staggering 10,578.24.
These two men have one very important fact in common, and it is this commonality that made them great. Reagan was a Republican, but the House was controlled by the Democrats. The Republicans held a slim control of the Senate, which they lost in 1987.
Clinton is a Democrat and his first two years saw him with a Democratically lead House and Senate. That reversed in year three when the Republicans took control of both houses and that control remained until the end of Clinton's presidency.
What each of these men had to do was work with the opposition. No president runs this country on his own. They all have to have the backing of the other elected officials in order to be successful and the truly great know that in order for this country to excel, no one political party can ever have its way to the detriment of the other party. There has to be a negotiation where each party gets some of what it wants but neither party gets it all. When we have this balance, when we work together, we are truly the United States of America and our history shows that when this happens, we can achieve greatness.
Monday, January 13, 2014
Fullerton Police Officers Found Not-Guilty in Beating Death of Kelly Thomas
Two former Fullerton police officers were found not-guilty of murder charges stemming from the death of a suspect, Kelly Thomas after a violent altercation with the officers. Thomas died from asphyxia, according to a coroner's report. The two officers were charged with murder when surveillance video showed their violent altercation with the suspect. Today, a jury found both officers not-guilty on all counts.
I agree with the verdicts.
This case is very complicated and not simply a matter of police officers using excessive force (which they definitely did). This case, like most cases, needs to be examined from the very beginning and a determination must be made as to the proximate cause of the incident. A proximate cause is that item which, were it not present, the outcome could not have happened in the same way. More on that later.
Kelly Thomas was a 37-year-old homeless man who roamed the streets of Fullerton, California. Apparently, he was schizophrenic and had been involved in numerous run-ins with the police. According to a story in the Orange County Register, from 1990 until 2011, he had been arrested 92 times. While the majority of these arrests were for minor incidents, not all were. His most serious charge was for assault with a deadly weapon. This is not the type of man who should be left to wander the streets.
And therein lies the problem. Kelly Thomas was born to Ron and Cathy Thomas in 1974. Ron is a former Orange County sheriff's deputy. Ron and Cathy continue to live in the area, so why was their son homeless? Why was a schizophrenic with a history of violence and criminal activity allowed to roam the streets unchaperoned?
I have not been able to find any good reason why Kelly was homeless. He had a family living in the area and from their actions since his death, they appear to have loved the man. Why, then was he homeless? Apparently, the family was not able to deal with his mental illness so they released him to the streets so he could be someone else's problem. I cannot reach any other conclusion. If this is so, then the proximate cause of this action was the action of the parents. Had their child not been homeless, the police would not have been called to stop him from breaking into cars. The parents, then, are the cause of this entire incident.
If that is the case, then the city, with their limited training in dealing with mental illness, stopped a violent criminal. Undoubtedly they went too far and firing the officers involved is certainly just but charging them with murder, in my opinion, goes too far. These officers were sworn to protect the citizens and since Kelly Thomas had a history of violence, they did what they had to do to ensure he didn't bring harm to anyone.
What about the parents? Why aren't they being charged? Because their child was an adult it is within their rights to release him but I would suggest that this is a problem with our society. When a couple brings a child into this world, that couple should be responsible for that child. In the case of a child with a mental disability, the parents are responsible for that child for the child's entire life. Ron and Cathy Thomas apparently absolved themselves of that responsibility.
Nearly a year after the death of Kelly Thomas the Fullerton City Council agreed to a settlement of one million dollars with Cathy Thomas. A civil lawsuit by Ron Thomas is still pending. The amount of that suit has not been disclosed. It seems that the parents made out very well in this case. They are rid of their burden and have made a good deal of money to boot. They really should quit while they're ahead.
One more thing, I keep seeing this photograph of Kelly Thomas in the news stories:
One more thing, I keep seeing this photograph of Kelly Thomas in the news stories:
This picture is from 2002, nearly ten years before his death. There is another picture that was taken by police in 2009, two years before his death. That picture is this one:
That paints a much different picture of the man.
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Governor Christie and the George Washington Bridge
By now everyone has probably heard about the problems New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is facing with a certain incident on the George Washington Bridge. For anyone unfamiliar with the story, it happened when Christie was in the middle of his re-election campaign. The George Washington Bridge connects New Jersey with New York City and enters Jersey in the city of Fort Lee. Fort Lee's Mayor, Mark Sokolich is a Democrat (Christie is Republican) and did not support Christie in the election.
A top aide to Christie (Bridget Anne Kelly) sent an email to Port Authority of New York and New Jersey representative David Wildstein, who was appointed to this post by Christie. The email said, "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee." Wildstein replied with, "Got it." He then ordered the closure of two of the three traffic lanes going into New York and kept them closed for four days.
Estimates are that as many as 500,000 vehicles were impacted by this action, resulting in millions of dollars in lost wages and time spent in unnecessarily heavy traffic. There is also one death that has potentially been attributed to the closure.
Wildstein has resigned his position and when the cause of the closure was determined, Christie fired Kelly as his aide. In press conferences Christie has maintained that he did not know anything about this incident until long after it was done and even went so far as to personally apologize to Mayor Sokolich for the unfortunate event.
All of this is well and good and on the surface makes it seem that Christie should not be implicated in this, however there is more to it. Christie hired Kelly. He should have either done a more extensive check of her background and moral character or at the very least made sure she understood that he had zero tolerance for such political shenanigans. Christie also appointed Wildstein and he should have ensured that Wildstein was instructed appropriately as well. Obviously, this was not done.
Christie is now considering a run for the office of President of the United States. As President he will be appointing the entire Cabinet of his administration, as well as Ambasaddors and Judges, including possibly Supreme Court Judges. Given his record of hiring and appointments, I have to seriously question whether he is the best person to be given this responsibility. We don't need people like Bridget Kelly and David Wildstein running any part of our country.
A top aide to Christie (Bridget Anne Kelly) sent an email to Port Authority of New York and New Jersey representative David Wildstein, who was appointed to this post by Christie. The email said, "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee." Wildstein replied with, "Got it." He then ordered the closure of two of the three traffic lanes going into New York and kept them closed for four days.
Estimates are that as many as 500,000 vehicles were impacted by this action, resulting in millions of dollars in lost wages and time spent in unnecessarily heavy traffic. There is also one death that has potentially been attributed to the closure.
Wildstein has resigned his position and when the cause of the closure was determined, Christie fired Kelly as his aide. In press conferences Christie has maintained that he did not know anything about this incident until long after it was done and even went so far as to personally apologize to Mayor Sokolich for the unfortunate event.
All of this is well and good and on the surface makes it seem that Christie should not be implicated in this, however there is more to it. Christie hired Kelly. He should have either done a more extensive check of her background and moral character or at the very least made sure she understood that he had zero tolerance for such political shenanigans. Christie also appointed Wildstein and he should have ensured that Wildstein was instructed appropriately as well. Obviously, this was not done.
Christie is now considering a run for the office of President of the United States. As President he will be appointing the entire Cabinet of his administration, as well as Ambasaddors and Judges, including possibly Supreme Court Judges. Given his record of hiring and appointments, I have to seriously question whether he is the best person to be given this responsibility. We don't need people like Bridget Kelly and David Wildstein running any part of our country.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
'Tis The Season (to stage a boycott)
Hallmark has apologized if they offended anyone but when I went to their site, the ornament is still available. Apparently, they don't have any intention of removing it, hence for anyone who supports gay rights (and the right of us to be considered as equals), this company should be boycotted.
I tried to write a review of their product, but their site won't allow it. I've copied it here. The red wording is the error message that I keep receiving. I wonder if it would have gone in had I not given them only one star.
Here is my review from the Hallmark website:
We're sorry, but we have encountered the following issue(s):
- Your nickname can only contain letters and numbers.
Tell us what you think
Poor
Example: Best Purchase Ever
Minimum reached.
Tell us about you
To protect your privacy, do not use your full name or email address.
Example: New York, NY
We will ONLY use your email to notify you in regards to your submission.
How are we doing? Would you recommend Hallmark products to a friend?
0 = Never10 = Definitely
This doesn't appear with your review, but will be sent to our customer service department.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
No Winners In A Government Shutdown
There aren't any winners in the recent shutdown of the government but there certainly are losers. Chief among them is John Boehner and the Republicans in the House of Representatives followed closely by the American people.
John Boehner has worked for several years on defunding or derailing the Affordable Care Act (also known as "Obamacare"). He has brought up a vote in the House more than 40 times to halt it in one way or another and on each of these occasions the Senate has refused to vote on it.
For anyone who doesn't know how the process works, in order to make a law the legislation is brought to the floor of both houses and both houses must agree on it. Once an agreement is reached, it is sent to the president for his (hopefully soon her) signature. If the president doesn't agree with it, he has the power to veto it.
In the case of the Affordable Care Act, the Senate has repeatedly stated that it will not vote on any measure that defunds, delays or derails this law. Yet Boehner, with great zeal at wasting tax dollars wherever and whenever he can, continues to bring up useless legislation and force the House to vote. And they have. And it passes and goes to the Senate. And they lose each time because the Senate does what they said they would do.
So, Boehner once again brought up a measure that the Senate told him they would not vote on. He once again saw the measure passed and sent on to the Senate, which threw it in the trash (where it belonged) and Boehner effectively shut down the United States government.
President Obama, in true presidential fashion, refused to cave in to the demands of the Republicans in the House. Good move on his part. He allowed the government to shut down but in reality, much of the government remained up and running. We still got our mail, our military was still funded, our elected officials were still working. For the majority of Americans, we really didn't see much of a difference.
Then came the vote on the debt ceiling. If this were not raised the United States would default on our debt and an international crisis would be on the hands of the Republicans. We knew it, they knew it, the president knew it and the Republicans had to do something. Sadly for them, there wasn't anything they could do but go along with the Democrats and pass the legislation that the Senate sent to them. Which they did.
Now the Republicans have lost face with the American people. They were responsible for the government shutdown, and hopefully, the American people will remember that the next time they go to the polls.
The American people have lost in this latest battle as well. Our tax dollars just paid for two weeks of vacation for the employees of the government who were furloughed because of Boehner's ineptitude and gross incompetence.
I'm thinking that shutting down the government in an effort to change legislation should be seen as treason and Boehner should be dealt with accordingly.
John Boehner has worked for several years on defunding or derailing the Affordable Care Act (also known as "Obamacare"). He has brought up a vote in the House more than 40 times to halt it in one way or another and on each of these occasions the Senate has refused to vote on it.
For anyone who doesn't know how the process works, in order to make a law the legislation is brought to the floor of both houses and both houses must agree on it. Once an agreement is reached, it is sent to the president for his (hopefully soon her) signature. If the president doesn't agree with it, he has the power to veto it.
In the case of the Affordable Care Act, the Senate has repeatedly stated that it will not vote on any measure that defunds, delays or derails this law. Yet Boehner, with great zeal at wasting tax dollars wherever and whenever he can, continues to bring up useless legislation and force the House to vote. And they have. And it passes and goes to the Senate. And they lose each time because the Senate does what they said they would do.
So, Boehner once again brought up a measure that the Senate told him they would not vote on. He once again saw the measure passed and sent on to the Senate, which threw it in the trash (where it belonged) and Boehner effectively shut down the United States government.
President Obama, in true presidential fashion, refused to cave in to the demands of the Republicans in the House. Good move on his part. He allowed the government to shut down but in reality, much of the government remained up and running. We still got our mail, our military was still funded, our elected officials were still working. For the majority of Americans, we really didn't see much of a difference.
Then came the vote on the debt ceiling. If this were not raised the United States would default on our debt and an international crisis would be on the hands of the Republicans. We knew it, they knew it, the president knew it and the Republicans had to do something. Sadly for them, there wasn't anything they could do but go along with the Democrats and pass the legislation that the Senate sent to them. Which they did.
Now the Republicans have lost face with the American people. They were responsible for the government shutdown, and hopefully, the American people will remember that the next time they go to the polls.
The American people have lost in this latest battle as well. Our tax dollars just paid for two weeks of vacation for the employees of the government who were furloughed because of Boehner's ineptitude and gross incompetence.
I'm thinking that shutting down the government in an effort to change legislation should be seen as treason and Boehner should be dealt with accordingly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
