Putting Too Many in Prison...Or Not Enough

On the night of the Oscars, John Legend said the words that have people finally taking an interest in the fact that blacks are being judged and jailed more than whites who commit the same crimes.

So my question really becomes what is the true issue that is getting lost in all of the back and forth.  Are we upset that people have committed crimes are being put in jail for it or are we upset that white people are not being jailed for the same crime?  I see alot of discussion but the real point always seems to get lost in the conversation.

Criminals are still criminals whether they are black, white or other.  If they have committed a crime they deserve the punishment that they get.  Who are we to say that we know what goes into a decision on when someone is sent to jail and when someone is not.  Are we in the minds of the judge, the jury, the prosecutor?  Whose issue is it when the person gets a bad lawyer because they can't afford a good one, is it the circle of lawyers who won't give up their high rate to help those that need it or is the poor overworked court appointed lawyer who doesn't take his job seriously?  We just assume that we know because it is easier for us to judge then to find out all of the information before we say anything.  How many times have people of color been given a break to only go out and commit another crime?  I do not see people discussing that.

They say that many people are jailed for victimless crimes such as marijuana possession but because of their color they are being persecuted more than whites.  Is it again because people think of marijuana as a victimless crime or is it because people of color get different treatment than whites?  Laws are created to protect us and if the law is unjust then it should be fought but until it is changed people should be arrested for it.  People think that carrying a concealed weapon should not be against the law but tell that to the person who is shot because a person doesn't like their religion.  The speed limit is a law but people always want to go faster than what it given, they don't seem to complain when the cops ignore them for doing this until of course people are killed because people drive like idiots.  Again is it because people really think these laws are unjust or because it intereferes with their circle of comfort.

One of the things I find to be funny is when a sport or hollywood star are given a pass because of their celebrity, whether they are black or white, no one seems to care about them compared to the ordinary citizen.  As long as they can still perform for us that is what we really want.  Does anyone remember Kobe Bryant sexually assaulting someone?  People bullied the victim, was this because they thought she was making up the story or was it because it was Kobe Bryant?  Would they have done the same if it was not a celebrity?

In the end, we need to get to the point of what we are fighting, is it that we want more criminals out on the street or is it that we want a fair and color blind justice system to put more criminals in jail?

No Logic...Ending the Debate of Banning Gay Marriage

I was really interested in seeing for myself if the gay marriage topic was worth fighting for on either side.  So I read some articles on what people thought were the top reasons for being against gay marriage.  I read some articles on why the reasons were not valid.  In the end, what I realized is that there was no logical reason for banning gay marriage.

Here are the arguments that I say make no logical sense:

Religious

            It is against God’s law.  SO WHAT!!

Actually, homosexuality is ‘against’ God’s law so marriage is just an extension of that.  If gay people want to go against God’s law then let them be judged when it is their time.  Everyone else who commits sins has to be judged so there is no difference.

            It is not natural. WHY!!

What is the definition of natural?  Being in nature?  Well, animals are part of the natural world and they cannot marry so doesn’t that must mean that marriage doesn’t follow natural law.  Are we saying that gay people deserve less than animals?  Humans are not the only species on this planet, even though we like to think we are.

            It will have reverse discrimination for religious groups.  HOW!!

Homosexuals are probably not allowed in church today so would that change if they were allowed to be married?  Churches already have the right to turn away anyone from getting married so in this case they will still be allowed to be the religious bigots they always were.

It will cause people to have to have to deal with gay couples in their jobs such as issuing marriage license, even though their religion is against it.  GET OVER IT!!

So now we are going to say that people have the right in their job to not service anyone they do not care for.  Does Jim Crow laws sound familiar?

            To make sure we cover the basics, let’s see how using the Bible as an argument against gay marriage is illogical:

            The Bible says that divorced people having sex after the divorce are committing adultery (Matthew 5:32).  In that case we need a law that bans divorce because God tells us to. 

The Bible also says that if someone sleeps with a virgin and is not betrothed to her, then he must pay a price for that virgin and marry her (Exodus 22:16).  We should have police make sure that people sleeping with virgins marry those said virgins.  If they are paying for the price of the virgin, is that prostitution or slavery?

The Bible states that a woman should submit to their husbands as the husband is the head of the wife( Ephesians 5:22:33).  Why is there not a law to make sure women obey their man?

 

Marriage

            It will ruin the institution of marriage.  NOT LIKELY!!

Let’s see, 50% of marriages end in divorce so I am sure that doesn’t ruin the institution.

Marriage is not a religious institution as someone can get married at the courthouse or by Elvis in Vegas.

            At one time it was not legal for people of different races to marry, now that this is legal does that ruin the institution of marriage?

            Going back to the bible again, it says polygamy is okay as long as it is in the laws of marriage.  So humans outlawed polygamy, not God. (Deut: 17:14-19 is about kings not polygamy).  Why then is this not fought to overturn?

There are many states that with parental consent, people under 18 can be married and in some with a court order can marry under the age of 16.

The institution of marriage has already been changed by man so how can anyone say that gay marriage will ruin the institution.

Lifestyle

            The gay lifestyle will be more highlighted with gay marriage.  HOW!!

Since when does a marriage of any kind highlight a lifestyle?  I have a Hispanic friend who married an Oriental woman, did their marriage highlight their different cultures to the outside world?

It's a good thing our laws have made the lifestyle of racial discrimination or bigotry go away.  Oh wait...they didn't.

Children go to school with all different people, including racists, poor people, etc.  So what does it matter if your children go to school with children of gay people?

The Bible says tattoos are against God's law (Leviticus 19:28).  So when are we going to create laws that ban tattoos and then make sure tattoo artists are put in jail for flaunting their lifestyle.

            Gay people are already in the world, so their lifestyle is already out there, how does that change with marriage?  People should be more highlighted by what makes them different maybe then it would bring out more tolerance.

 

Children

            I saved the best for last.

            The main reason for marriage is to procreate.  GREAT!!

If the act of sex is only to procreate, then we should:

Outlaw sex in any position that is not missionary (especially that doggy style) and oral sex.  We should have a monitor for all times that sex is being done when there is no chance to create a child.

            All couples that do not want a child need to have their marriage dissolved.

            All couples who cannot create a child need to have their marriage dissolved

            Children should have a mother and a father.  Then:

                        Single parents should be arrested for not being married.

                        No matter how abusive the significant other is, they should not divorce.

            Children who grow up with gay parents will become gay

                        So that means a child of a child abuser will always become a child abuser.

                        So that means an atheist will always become an atheist.

                        So that means a child of a porn star will always become a porn star.

In the end this is about people thinking everything they believe is what everyone else should believe.  So I say to those people:  The next time you are doing your sexual obligation, think if you want someone in your room judging you about it.  The next time you quote a Bible verse as your defense think about other parts of the Bible that you do not live by.  The next time you want to instill your belief on someone, ask yourself how would you react if they wanted to instill their belief on you. 

My final comment is for everyone to ask themselves how their life changes if gay people get married.  Then leave gay people alone and let them have the same expression of their love as anyone else.

           

 

 

Bottom Line Society: Doing Good Comes with a Price

In today's society I think we fight alot to try to make things better, healthier and move environmentally safe. I think our forefathers would be very proud of us. However, I think what has always happened over the history of this country and what continues to happen today is that when we make changes, whether for the good or the bad, we never think that it effects us financially.

Now I am not saying that things should not be taken away from our society that may cause heath issues or is bad for the society as a whole. I just want us to understand as we go through financial crisis and such that it isn't always about Wall Street and political greed.

For my example, I am going to bring up something that really over the last twenty years has impacted a great part of this country: smoking. Almost every state has some kind of law about smoking in public places and work places. Now I know the main reason for this was for the health of the non smokers more than the smokers but it has effected us all.

So to begin with let's look at some numbers. The cigarette business was worth 614 BILLION dollars in 2009 worldwide, the biggest of which was China. The nine cigarette companies also combined to generate 160 billion dollars in tax revenue. For the purpose of my writing, I am going to concentrate on Philip Morris since they are a US based company. In 2008, Philip Morris had revenues of 64 Billion dollars, which represented about 16% of the market share globally. If you take 16% of the tax revenue that comes out to roughly 25 billion dollars that Philip Morris would generate.

There is not alot of data on how much right now the smoking laws have decreased smoking and cigarette purchases. So let's say for ease that it has caused an overall decrease of 10%, which is not hard to say really since prices as well as the laws I am sure would cause 1 out of every 10 smokers to quit or decrease.

So here are some of the what can happen when you decrease smoking or cigarette purchases by 10%:
A. Phillip Morris loses 6.4 billion dollars in revenue.
1) They do not make their estimates for Wall Street, thus making them less attractive to stock investors which then makes people sell their stock and reduces the stock price.
a) This of course then reduces stock options that some employees may have and also people that might invest in them as part of their 401K investment.
b) It can cause the Dow as a whole to reduce because Phillip Morris doesn't make their estimates which then has an effect on the entire US economy.

2) They decide they can make up the revenue overseas where smoking has not become as conservative as it has in the US.
a) This of course is another case of where a US company now starts to invest more in overseas operations, thus causing less revenue streams to be coming into the US.

3) They decide that they have to reduce their costs at the same rate that their revenue has decreased.
a) This means more people are now unemployed.
1. Now there are more people on unemployment
2. Less consumer purchases are now being made
3. People could lose their house.

B. The company's that supply Phillip Morris with supplies such as the cigarette packages, the tobacco, etc will also have to reduce their revenue to PM or find other places to sell to.

C. What about businesses that have to put the smoking bans into place, bars are the ones that they feel are hit the hardest.
1) Now the bars not only have to ban smoking but to keep their regulars they have to build a place where their customers can go and still follow the ban rules.
a) Of course, each moment that the patrons are out smoking is less time they are purchasing alcohol which reduces their revenue even more.
2) If the bar decides that they do not want to build a smoking area, they will most likely lose at least 50% of their patrons which they will have to make up for.
a) Now maybe the bar will get new customers but bars are built to bring in regular patrons with new ones being a luxury. Bringing back 50% of new customers is a tall order.


D. Let's talk about tax revenue since most of the price of cigarettes now is taxes.
1) This means that programs that depend on this revenue have to find the the revenue somewhere else or the program will be underfunded or worse can close down.
a) Of course, people again can lose their job.
b) Politicians depend on some of these programs to get elected.
c) It could mean that they tax something else that citizen's do not want taxed
d) It could mean that they will tax the citizen's directly to make up the difference.

E. So since we are talking about health improvement, we cannot disregard the health care part of this conversation. So let's say that now people, smokers and others, are now more healthy.
1) Obviously health care costs are reduced but do we think insurance companies are going to reduce our rates?
2) Of course doctors may have time to attend other patients that are needed but at the same time they may lose more revenue which means they may have to close up shop.
3) What about living longer? They may add slightly more to the social security pot but if they live longer they are most likely going to take more out of the pot and leave less for future generations.


So in the end, the 6.4 billion dollar decrease may actually be a bargain compared to what the real amount would be once you take everything into consideration. Now I am not saying that we should stop trying to stop smoking from happening and people should not live longer. All I am doing is showing a different aspect of the financial troubles in this country.

Maybe this is an extreme example but don't underestimate the effect of changing over from McDonald's to a healthier food source. Some of us may never see this underbelly unless our favorite bar closes down or a friend is laid off from work. We should always try to do what is best when we see something is bad for the country and it's citizens, but we need to understand that it always comes with a price. A price that eventually needs to be repaid.

http://www.tobacco-facts.net/2010/11/global-tobacco-industry-cigarette-cost
http://www.ehow.com/list_6791046_benefits-smoking-being-banned_.html

Bottom Line Society: The Corporates

So what happened with businesses over the last few decades? I for one believe there is nothing wrong with making a profit, as long as those profits are being used to make a better business or country. It seems in today's society that not only are profits and cash not being used to make the business better, it is being used to make investors and CEO's richer. Even making a profit isn't enough anymore, we have to make more and more profits to increase that value for investors and CEO's, which increases the greed.


One of the big things that is happening is the sending of jobs overseas because it is cheaper. So what is the main reason for doing this? To help reduce the costs so the company can use those profits and cash to help the US? To promote better trade between countries? If companies are making billions of dollars in profits and have tons of cash on hand, why do they need to continue to employ jobs overseas?


We know all about Wal-Mart having jobs overseas but what about a company like Exxon. This company made 30 BILLION dollars in profit last year, has 7 BILLION dollars in cash on hand and yet still sends jobs overseas or uses overseas labor instead of US labor. Alot of the companies within the Forbes Top 500 companies have exported jobs or are using overseas labor. How does a company justify this and at the same time look America in the face and say it is doing what is best for this country and its citizen's?
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/popups/exporting.america/content.html


Corporations say they are going overseas more because of the tax code in this country which is unfair to businesses. So do corporations think they should not have to pay their fair share of taxes, just like its citizens? Our governments are driven on tax revenue, where do corporations get off thinking they should be exempt from being part of that. I do not think they should be unfairly taxed but at the same time saying that you are doing business outside of the US because of the taxes...that is crap. It is another excuse for doing more business overseas and justifying it to themselves and the people that do not agree with them. Most companies pay little or no taxes each year, they surely do not pay the 35% that they are suppose to. This in turn leaves less money for the states and federal programs. Once again, doing business in this country should be part of helping this country.
http://patriotupdate.com/12622/coke-chief-criticises-us-tax-rules-says-china-more-business-friendly


The stock market is all on paper there really is no tangible output from this business, yet it drives our economy. Do we wonder then why it is so volatile? Companies are asked to estimate earnings and they usually put them so high to attract investors but are they reasonable? A corporation then will do whatever it has to do to make that earnings number, even if it means laying people off unnecessarily or even worse doing something illegal. Should we really use a system that is so volatile to push a company to make unreasonable decisions, even illegal ones, to make a profit? How can something be good when making a profit can still be a bad thing? Recently, Apple announced they made 100 BILLION dollars in sales but still missed their estimates. At the same time, Yahoo announced their sales decreased by 26% but still reached their estimates.


How do we make it so that when a company makes a profit it is good for all stakeholders, not just for the stock holders and CEO's? Maybe we should push to have agencies such as the SEC and IRS to be better funded and hire more staff so they can go after these companies like they should. If these people are not allowed to go after the people who are approving their funding, how can we expect those people to be held up to a standard.
http://www.politicususa.com/en/republicans-taxpayer-money


Maybe the politicians need to talk with the corporations and find out what they need to make this a better country. I believe corporations have a right to a voice about what is best for this country. Of course, at the same time they should also be held to the same standards as its citizen's. I am sure alot of people would say this is a crazy idea, but at the same time, how can we fix the problems of all, if we do not hear everyone's voice.


It might take something so drastic that one person would have to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. What if someone who was laid off from a company for 'financial' reasons, sued that company for unfair dismissal? What would be unfair about it? If that company made a profit, a large profit or had large cash on hand, what would the reason be for making the layoff? If this layoff put that person's job onto someone else which decreased the efficiency of that job, would that not mean they actually did not add value to the company? This would be a tough one to go through but think of the results if they won the case.


Business is based on supply and demand, so who is it that provides the demand for these businesses? So if we drive the demand, how do we not have the power to change the way the system works? Just by you not accepting a $5 fee for your debit card so you move your account to another bank can make a difference that you might not understand.


In the end, there are alot of questions out there that need answers to help fix the issues. These are not all questions that one person can answer, they are questions that need to be answered by the country themselves. Businesses have always been a part of our bottom line society, hell they have been driving it for hundreds of years. I just think somewhere, the greed and corruption has them thinking they are above the country as a whole and they need to be stopped. We have to make them understand that pushing profits and cash to other places besides America is wrong and they should be held as accountable as a citizen who lies, steals or betray its country.

Bottom Line Society: Prologue

We see right now the protests happening around the world called Occupy Wall Street. The people are angry and this is their way of expressing their anger at what is happening in the world today. It is making an impact because it is already part of the political conversation and it is already being infiltrated by the powers that be to demean it. This is a great example of what happens when people stand together. But is what they are protesting only a small part of the problem?


Our country was created to be a bottom line society, the opportunity to make a better life for ones self and family. The reason why most people came to this country was to be free land owners, again the opportunity for a better life. Over the years, the changes in our country have been to make it a better country but we never strayed from being a bottom line society. Each war, each technological change, each improvement we did made the country better but an end result was it also created a larger economic gap between its citizen's. Its seems only now where the gap has become so large that we see it as a problem. This gap needs to be reduced to bring our country back to the way it should be.


So even though we protest the way Wall Street has been allowed to be destructive on our country, it is only a small part of the problem. As with alot of our problems we only seem to focus on a small part or something that clouds the real problem. When you only focus or fix part of the problem, the issues will still exist, it is like only cutting off the one of the heads of a three headed dragon. Each problem has to be tackled because if they are not dealt with then it will continue to be an anchor on the country. The answer to the problems cannot be fixed by one person, one election or even one president. It is something that has to be done by everyone, the citizen's, the politicians and yes even the greedy Wall Street executives that are being protested. If all levels do not get involved, then all levels do not have a voice and that is what is happening now. We have ignored our problems to where we are not hearing all of the voices that need to be listened to.


So what are the other problems we are seeing as a bottom line society. Obviously, the greed and corruption on Wall Street has been the highlighted one. What about the corporations of America that have also used greed and manipulation as part of business? What about the politicians? Have we ever looked back on the good or bad part of the changes that we make from a financial aspect? What about us as citizen's, do we really think we have no stake or responsibility in what is happening in this country? Is it now time for us to look at the in efficiency of our country that may have caused us to not keep up with the every changing world?


Corporations have been allowed to make changes based on greed that effect people's lives yet no one has held them responsible for it. Enron, World Com, the list goes on and on. The companies make millions, even billions, of dollars of profits and millions of dollars of cash on hand, yet are still laying off workers or sending jobs to cheaper countries. The agencies and representatives that are suppose to be protecting the countries are being deregulated or are understaffed to provide the support.


Have we ever thought about when we fight for something to be changed how the financial impact effects us all? When something is bad and should be removed, do we ever wonder how we are going to replace the financial impact of it? For instance, slavery was a bad thing and should have been changed a long time before it was. However, the financial impact to the country for abolishing slavery was billions of dollars loss to the economy, something that hurt several states. Mississippi went from one of the richest states in the country to one of the poorest because of this one thing. Should there not have been something in place to help replace that loss?


Do we really think that we as citizen's get a free pass on responsibility in this crisis? We are the consumers that drive the business decisions that are made. We are the one's who vote these corrupt people into office yet complain when they are corrupt. We are the ones who complain that our taxes are too high. Just by going to buy your coffee at Starbucks instead of the mom and pop coffee shop down the street, you have effected our economy in a way you may not have realized.


I believe that we have always been an inefficient society, we have always done more work than we needed to get the end product. We always wanted to be paid more for doing that same work, even if that work was not efficient. Now people are asked to do even more work for the same pay, which still makes it inefficient but harder to accept. We lay off someone and expect that work to be taken up by someone else, who then gets stressed out and leaves as well. Have we ever just bothered to go through our processes and see where the inefficiencies are and do the right amount of work for the right pay?


I see these as the problems because they have always been the problems of our society, no matter how far back in our history you go. We just have either chosen to ignore them or maybe they were hidden beneath a pile of other problems that never allowed them the priority they should be given. Well, now is the the time to give these problems that priority. Maybe Occupy Wall Street is the start of that priority but it should not be the end.

Seven Deadly Sins of America

So I was watching an episode of 'Charmed' about the seven deadly sins and an idea popped into my head. I wondered how we react as a country to these sins.

Wrath. (Anger). Why do we respond to our anger with blazing violence? The London riots. The LA Riots. Dropping nuclear bombs because of Peal Harbor. The war in Iraq and killing of Osama Bin Laden due to 9/11. Yelling at a waitress because your order was not exactly what you wanted. I myself have let my anger get the best of me like yelling at a subordinate that didn't deserve it. When we express our anger aren't we only hurting ourselves or those around us?

Greed. In a capitalistic society how can you not have greed? The stock market is all about greed, people trying to get rich determining whether companies do good or bad. People going on reality shows trying to win money by calling other people names and screwing them over. Spending money to play the lottery when they drive a broken down car. Athletes trying to show they have the bigger dick by asking for the most money hurting their team and the fans. People trying to always get 'paid', moving from job to job for more money. I never thought greed would ever get me but I can say that I fell for money scams because I wanted to be shown the money. So then I ask when is enough money enough not to hurt people,the country and yourself?

Lust. Look at most commercials, they show some beautiful person selling some product but do we ever remember the product? Reality shows are about getting hot people to show off trashy television. The Weiner scandal is the most recent of what seems to be yearly sex scandals. Do we not think child molestation and child pornography is because of lust? I use to call these things 'lustful stupidity' and I can say that I have had many incidents of this stupidity.

Envy. How many times do you show a friend something but they have to try to show you up by having something better? How many marriages have ended because someone wants something better than what they have? How many murders have been committed because someone wanted what someone else had? Do we not see how the current financial crisis is based on a combination of greed and envy as people wanted more than what they could afford. A long time ago envy almost made me ruin my friendships as I use to resent the friends that I felt were smarter than me or getting things that I wanted.

Pride. This is an interesting one. I believe that pride actually keeps us from doing many of the things that could potentially better ourselves and those around us. How many times have you done something wrong and not apologized for it because of pride? The current debt ceiling battle was about pride and nothing else. It's why we can never say no to other countries that ask for our help because it may make us look bad to the world or so we preceive. How about someone like me who has an inflated ego that blinds him to logic and almost gets him fired?

Gluttony. Someone once said to me there is nothing wrong with things as long as they are done in moderation. Let's see how that works. Someone getting so drunk from having 'fun' that they puke in the street, your car or in thier bed. Waking up with a hangover, do we think the overindulgance was fun? How much food do we leave in a restaurant or have to throw away each week because we bought too much? How many cars, boats, toys do we own that we rarely use? How much porn do some people indulge in a day, week, month? Having a passion such as collecting autographs can also cause one to be obssessed to the point of spending too much money they do not have.

Sloth How do these people contribute to themselves let alone to society? The 1000 lb woman who could not move and was on disability because he couldn't stop eating the ding dongs?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1257850/Super-sized-mother-determined-worlds-fattest-woman-years.html

What about a man who dies from playing video games for 3 straight days? http://www.themedguru.com/node/43775
Having people in your life that have given up on life and the people around them, thus hurting those that love them the most.

I am sure we all have stories that relate but the real question is how much damage have we done to ourselves and to others because of these sins? Would our country be better off if we did things in moderation? I write this hoping people share their stories and the impacts!!!

Who Do You Blame?

So during the debt ceiling fiasco and even afterwards, do you know what I found as the common theme? Blame. The Republicans blamed the Democrats, the Democrats blamed the Republicans and everyone blamed the Tea Party. So in the end it took months of blaming to get us a debt ceiling that created what...more blame.

Have we ever thought that with everyone blaming everyone in this country for their problems or the problems of the country that we actually are distracted from what the true problems are? Then if we are distracted are we not being stopped from solving the real problems?

When did we stop taking responsibility for the things that happen in our lives or maybe we have never taken responsibility. Maybe it is our nature to always assign blame because to look within ourselves would mean maybe going to a dark place. Then we might actually realize that life does not revolve around ourselves and other people have feelings and opinions.

So here are examples of what I see as assigning blame:

When two kids walk into a school and start shooting each other, we blame the guns, the parents, the music and the movies. We don't think about the people themselves, that they made the choice to kill another person. We assume that it had to be a movie that pushed them to kill, not thinking it might have been being rejected multiple times when trying to find love. We might think that this is crazy but how do we know because we are too busy blaming to find out the real answer. Do we really believe that if you take away the guns, the movies, the music that killing would stop? If so where did we assign blame for killing in the old days before these things existed?

German citizen's were told that the Jews were to blame for all of their problems and while they embraced this delusion, the Nazi party came to power and people were ripped from their homes and killed.

When Pearl Harbor happened we imprisioned Japanese American citizen's and did we as citizen's stop this, no, we looked the other way because we blamed them for hurting us. How else can we explain accepting dropping nuclear weapons on innocent people?

We buy $300K houses while making $50K per year and then when we lose our jobs or the financial crisis hits, our finanical life changes. So do we get upset with ourselves for living beyond our means, no, we blame the banks and the country for creating this crisis. Is it their fault that we live under the delusion of being able to afford more than we can?


What about going to a Mexican restaurant on Cinco De Mayo and people being upset with the service because there were only 1 waiter for every 10 tables. Did we think that no one would call in sick on these days? I guess we think everything should be there for us when we want it and if we do not get it then it has to be someone's fault. Does that not sound like we think we are entitled?


Being in the workplace, I see the blame game going on every day. I have seen people actually making blatent mistakes and still blame it on someone or something else. I have seen meetings go on forever because most of it is people fighting with each other about who is to blame for the problem when the issue could have been discussed and solved in ten minutes.


I give an example recently where I could have blamed someone and I did not. I was wondering why I had an NSF fee on my bank and I was ready to go down and yell at them for it. Then I realized that in doing online payment for one of my credit cards, I clicked on the Pay Full Amount instead of a normal payment that I do. Well, obviosuly that was more than I had in the bank so it was returned. After $100 in fees from both the bank and the credit card company, I could have blamed both for not letting me know or could have cried to try to get the fees reversed. I just called myself an idiot, paid the right amount and lived with it because there was no one to blame for this except for me.

So the next time things happen, ask yourself if you take responsilbity for it or do you blame someone else? If you balme someone else, does it make the situation better or worse? Then ask yourself what things occured that you could have taken care of while you were busy blaming someone else.

Who Really Determines Free Speech

A man walks down the street wearing a tee shirt that has a picture of a priest standing over a kneeling child, with his hand on the child's head. The caption says 'Jesus says Cum onto the Children'. What would your first reaction be in seeing this shirt? Would you cause physical and mental abuse to this person? Would you laugh? Either way, do you believe this person has the right to wear this shirt?

I guess the above would create a point that our country expresses the right to free speech but at the same time we react offensively to it. In doing so does it stop people from expressing their voice because if it is going to cause them pain, why do it?

Now I would never stop anyone from expressing their opinion, whether in person or in some other form. There is nothing anyone can say that will offend me and I would never ask anyone to apologize for their opinion. I have no issues with groups and individuals protesting or being offended, that is what makes the battle fun. Where I have issues is when that offensiveness starts to infringe on other's rights to express themselves or enjoy the output of that expression.

Social Networking is becoming more and more important in the battle of free speech. This outlet has allowed us to have a voice and bring that voice to people around the world. It gives us a chance to freely discuss our lives, no matter how boring it may be. At the same time it also brings the same narrow mindedness and arrogance that we have to deal with everyday.

A football player for the Steelers had to apologize for comments on Twitter about Bin Laden's death. He said that it was sad that we celebrated the killing of another human being. So even though others thought the same thing, this person was asked to apologize. Was this because he was a professional athlete and therefore had no right to express his opinion or was this about the fact that he spoke against the hypocrisy of the country?

One of the great things about free speech is the ability to bring about discussion on several topics. To me there is nothing greater than people with different views getting together and having a heated debate. Then afterwards everyone leaves still having their beliefs or maybe even changed their mind. So why don't we have more of this? Could it be because people do not want the abuse?

In 2004, there was an incident at the University of NC, where a teacher was trying to get a discussion going about 'why heterosexual males were threatened by homosexual males'. So a Christian person gave his religious opinion and because others did not agree with, he was accused of creating 'hate speech' and a 'hostile environment'.

http://www.carolinajournal.com/articles/display_story.html?id=1401

Why does it seem that voices of protest are louder than voices of reason when it comes to being offended? Is it because the voices of reason are afraid to talk? Why can't people just turn their back, walk away or get over what they think is offensive?

South Park has had several episodes of the show that have been kept from re airing because of religious groups, television executives and Tom Cruise. Were the fans of South Park asked if they wanted to see the episodes? What right did these groups have to speak for everyone when it came to whether these episodes got aired?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/22/south-park-mohammed-censo_n_547484.html

GLAAD is a group that fights diligently for others but they also seem to think they have the right to decide what is or is not defamation of the 'gay' community.

GLAAD 'fined' Kevin Smith because they did not like one of his films that had some 'gay' overtones. They protest movies where they think 'gay' people are always portrayed as serial killers. Does GLAAD think we are all so brain dead that just by watching a movie with a bi sexual killer that we think all 'gay' people are killers? What does that tell us as citizen's about what GLAAD thinks of us? By the way, just a point, John Wayne Gacy, Ed Gein and Aileen Wuornos, all serial killers and all gay/bi sexual.

http://www.alternet.org/story/11460/

There are tons of examples where the battle for free speech continues in both directions. This is a subject that we must all fight in our own way because it is driven by our own beliefs. The fact should be that both people who speak and the people who are offended should drive freedom of speech because having both can only make it stronger. The question is can they co exist and be beneficial to us as a country? I guess we should think about that when you see me walking down the street with a tee shirt that says 'Jesus Smokes Pole',

Hypocrisy Leads the Way

When our elected leaders take action while in office, they represent our country but do we truly hold them accountable for those actions? The world views us as its citizens on how our leaders represent us. So if hypocrisy is leading our country why would the world not see us as hypocrites, therefore having little respect for us?

Recent events have had us hunting down and murdering Osama Bin Laden and I watched people dance in the street and give their 'patriotic' chants. We are a country who prides itself on a right to a fair trial, we fight for not using the death penalty on mass murderers and we want a child to live from conception. Yet, we danced for the killing of a person, who was unarmed, simply because he hurt us as a country. Does this not make us hypocrites?

We judged Bin Laden on the WTC attacks, a horrible event that killed thousands and definitely deserves justice. So what should be done about someone who ordered the killing of hundreds of thousands of people? Harry Truman ordered the dropping of an atomic bomb on Hiroshima and then waited three days and dropped another one on Nagasaki. When people talk about this, however, they do not say Truman dropped the bomb, they say America dropped the bomb. So since Truman represented us, in reality we as citizen's authorized the killing of hundreds of thousands of Japanese people, mostly innocents. People say that it was war and so it was justified and probably is why Truman's decision has never been considered a war crime. How is it not hypocritical that no 'justice' was ever brought about for the Japanese that died? How does it make us look as Americans to be the only country to drop nuclear weapons on another country?

Russia was one of our biggest allies in WWII, it was only after they became our enemy. When Berlin fell and Russia was still our ally, the Russian soldiers raped 1 million German women. At no time were the soldiers tried and to make it worse 10% of the women killed themselves. Yet later on when they were our 'enemy' we criticized them and fought against the tyranny they caused their people. How many 'enemies' have we had that started out as our 'ally'?

We currently have trade sanctions against Cuba because they are a Communist country. Years ago they were a threat when Russia was sponsoring them but now they are a poor country who is a blip on the radar. Yet one of our biggest importers is Communist China, a country that calls themselves Communists but try to act as though they are not. A country that fines their people when they have 'unapproved' children, which then leads to a large black market for stolen children. So does our hypocrisy from the past put us at risk for the future?

Israel is one of our allies, in fact Bin Laden has said that one of the reasons to attack us is because we are their allies. Yet, it is quite interesting to note that in this battle of terror, how many more Arabs have been killed by Israeli's than the other way around. Does that make us the good guys simply because we say so?

Andrew Jackson during his military days as well as his presidential days led the charge against the Native Americans. We took them from their homes and made them live where we felt they deserved to live. We killed women, children, unarmed individuals, people that were born and lived here. Then when they had the audacity to fight back against this tyranny, we used it against them, calling them savages and basically turning the country against them. Why did we allow, in this country of freedom, its own citizen's to be dragged from their home?

So do the names of Truman, Jackson and Obama deserve to be mentioned along side Hitler, Hussein and Bin Laden? What gives us the right to determine what is and isn't justified 'evil'? Our leaders deserve to pay for the evil they perform and we need to hold them accountable. Until that happens the leaders will continue to lead by hypocrisy and we will continue to be the hypocrites driving them.

A Delusional America

Abraham Lincoln stood on the war torn battlefield of Gettysburg and gave a speech that ended with 'A country of the people, for the people and by the people shall not perish from this earth.' What did he mean by this? I guess this is open to all of our own interpretation. To me he ends the speech how he starts it, trying to help us understand that we control the past, present and future of this country as its citizen's.


Over the years we have celebrated our country as the land of freedom, opportunity and protector of the world.  How we always seem to rise above in the face of adversity, how we seem to be part of innovation and we invite people of all kinds to come be part of the country.  We are free to elect whoever we want to run this country as well as to walk into any church for our spiritual side.  The American Dream we sell to everyone within these borders and outside these borders.


Recently, I had a conversation with a guy that lived the American Dream. He came here from Mexico, grew up here, has himself a family and a successful career. Then at dinner last week he told me he hates living in this country right now. The more I thought about it, the more I could see that being the general attitude.


So I guess I ask this question, what do you see when you look at our country, the American Dream or what I am now calling the American Delusion?

I can tell you that what I see is a country of the selfish, for the greedy and for people that want to be rich and famous. I see that we feel we are entitled and think we have the right to do anything we want without consequences. We use our military soldiers like pawns in a chess game, except in this game offering up your pieces means people die. Dying not defending our country but so we can show our 'big dick' or to protect our interests. We elect politicians that represent the people but who have no clue on what the people want or probably don't give a damn. Our own citizens fear each other, not because we have reason to but because we are all different or have different beliefs.

We have killed our own citizen's for no reason other than profit and fear. We have allowed our leaders to die without answers to the question of why. We have brutally attacked other countries and have paid for it with destruction of our country and its citizen's. Our freedom's only seem to come up when it offends us, therefore missing what they truly represent. We say people that do not vote should have no voice without realizing that maybe they are speaking the loudest. We call our military people heroes today but baby killers in the past. We let our businesses use us as temporary labor they can discard at whim so they can acquire slave labor in other countries.


I see this country being under a foundation of delusion, one we have lived with and accepted for hundreds of years. The more we accepted this, the weaker we became as a country and its citizens. Now the country is spiraling in turmoil and the $64,000 question is whether we continue to accept this delusion or we start to knock down those delusional walls. It is something each of us needs to take a step back and think about.


It would take some extreme measures on how we can do this. It would entail not using our anger to instill an uprising of violence which seems to be our normal reaction to things. We would stop hurting the people next to us because these are the people that might have the answer on how to help. We need to stop being silent because we are afraid that using our voice might ruin our comfort zone. We need to stop the wrong thing from being done even if it does not effect us at all, because when it hurts one of us, it hurts all of us. We need to realize that working together means knowing the person next to us has different beliefs but that is alright because you can still work on the beliefs you agree with. Is this possible or am I as crazy as everyone thinks I am?


I have always said that we are the real power in this country and yet we hand it over to people that do not have our interest in mind. I am only one voice in a country of millions but what we need to get away from is thinking that our voices do not count. I know I will offend some people, probably piss off some others but in the end if we all find our voice and work together, the delusions that we hide under can soon become a reality we can live in. Only then can WE stand up and say that this country is of the people, by the people and for the people.

Guilty in the Court of Public Opinion

     Is it me or is everyone tired of seeing people judged through the media and the world even before they are given a fair trial or even a chance to defend themselves.

    No matter what Bill Cosby does in his remaining years, he will always be guilty in the court of public opinion.  His great stand up, his humanitarian genorosity and his great television does not matter anymore.  All anyone will ever remember about him is the allegations that are against him when it comes to raping the women. 

     Even his current shows are being protested and he has not even been found guilty of anything, he has not even been charged with anything despite all of the these confessions.  But I can guarantee you that in the new few months we hear about alot of women getting alot of money.

     Now I am not saying that Mr. Cosby is not guilty, if he is found guilty of these crimes then he deserves what he gets.  This is about being judged for something before all of the facts are in or even before someone has been charged with the crime.  Our justice system is suppose to be innocent until proven guilty but that never seems to be the case especially in this time of world wide communication.  It is getting so bad that now we are talking about incidents that happened over the span of a 50 year period of time when times were different and people's way of living was different.

     O J Simpson's life ended the day he was riding in that white Ford Bronco.  No matter what happened he was always going to be judged as being guilty.  He was found innocent in a court of law as per our due process yet he will always be judged as guilty in the court of public opinion.

     The most recent Ferguson incident.  A white police officer killing an unarmed black kid, automatically it is judged as being a racial incident.  Doesn't matter what the office says or how much evidence there is to the contrary, he will always be judged as what he did.  Again, doesn't matter that he was exonerated, he had to resign and you can bet his life will never be the same.

     That is something for us to think about the next time we are glued to our televisions watching endlessly as these things happen.  Just ask yourself one question, what if it was you, would you want to be judged fairly or would you want to be judged in the court of public opinion.

    

Does Technology Make Us Trained Monkeys?

     There are sociological experiments where you can program an animal to do what you want with some behavior modification (treats, shocks, etc.).  When done the animal would do what you expect with the right modification.  The same can be said in the right circumstances with humans, probably even more so.

     Take technology.  Technology has taken over our lives so much that we truly believe that we need it every day and actually, every minute of our lives.  How many people use their cell phone at least 10 times a day?  How many people look at their Facebook updates or get texts every hour on the hour?  If we did not have the technology that we have, would our lives be better or worse?  How many times have you looked at someone as if they were from another planet because they do not have a cell phone or email?

     Why would we need to be in contact with someone more quickly now then we did ten years ago? Is it because their relationship is more important now then before or is it simply because we have to justify the technology?  I have seen people answer the phone when they are talking to someone and ignore the person they were talking to for the person on the phone.  What does that say to the person not on the phone, that they are not as important?

    I have seen people run across a softball field because their cell phone was ringing.  I have seen people go through 'withdrawals' because they sent their tablet to get fixed or it was not charged. What is so important that it can't wait a few minutes or even a few days?

     Now technology does have its benefits. This blog is one of them being able to reach many people around the world. To be able to reach family and friends in emergencies when needed. However, alot of times these are the exceptions instead of the norms.

   So technology, or more so, the people behind technology have modified our behavior to make us believe that we need this technology.  From those commercials where families stay 'in touch' to the ones on the tablets where you can be doing something every minute of every day.  This is why people stand in lines or even worse, trample each other to get the latest upgrade or new product.

    So I end this by saying I am writing this as a hypocrite because I have 2 phones and 2 tablets not to mention 4 computers.  I only use about 40% of them at any given time, so why do I have so many of them?  I do not know when I came up with the notion that my life would be empty without this.  That is why I ask the question because I do wonder if my life would be better or worse without this technology.  My answer was neither because the things I use technology for, I would find another way to do it without technology. 

    Because one day the light might go out because my electronic payment was not made because of a server or computer issue.  Then I might have to use the 15 notebooks, a closet full of books and alot of pens to do the same things I am doing now.