In Response to Nurse Claudia's post on Affirmative Action

Which can be found here.
She argues that it's time to stop Affirmative Action, I disagree.

As a pre-marker to the following post, I'm a tall, blonde haired blue-eyed male in his early twenties.

"However, in today's world, I believe it is no longer necessary to consider race when academic qualifications are reviewed. Reverse discrimination was the flip side for many quality students." Your entire point is reverse discrimination, don't allow me to misconstrue you on where I'm going with this, I fully acknowledge your position that a modern demographic recognition of race in itself is racism, if we are all equal, then to single out differences which are in no way indicative of equality is separatism. Hand's down though, it's extraordinarily self defeating of your point to argue this angle under the context "Have we not settled whatever score was owed for past injustices?"; I've got to say I'm a fairly cold lad and even I was taken aback by that inquiry. Seriously? It's not a score, it's not about settling bygones or providing reparations. I have to say it, how dare you assume that Affirmative Action is the big benevolent shame filled white man who is oh-so-generously agreeing to take pity upon those he once oppressed and is now humbly outfitting an entire race of people to be a charity case, oh and since that IS what we're calling it tap your watch and pack your briefcase because 'hey guys, we're friends now that one of you is in Office'. Affirmative Action isn't a loan repayment, it's not a kindness bashfully meant to be afforded for injustice, it's a necessary program for the underprivileged, would you deny people food stamps, TANF, would you shut down battered womens shelters because "Hey what about battered men?", would you stop funding to orphanages and foster homes because there are adults who need supervision, food and shelter?

Reverse Discrimination though it may be that skin color is a factor in some if not many institutions of higher education, it's a handicap, not a free-throw, you know why? They have it worse than us, and neither you nor I can ever fully understand just how bad that may be. I could go into the conspiracy of traffic laws, the social structuralizations that dictate a need for adhesive racial concentration which lead to poor living conditions, the economic, ergonomic, and civil negative perpetuations set into place by people who think and get behind thoughts which begin behaviors that surmount to actions which are made into laws by people like you, but I'll just leave it at 'this isn't about you'. Get off your @#$#ing high horse; for us, majority folks like you and I, I mean, as a general rule college is a choice, for minorities it's USUALLY A LUXURY. Let them have their God Damned race specific college scholorships, sponsorships, and the right to one hundred percent assure an education, why? Because it's already assured for us. If an outstanding young white man makes his way to the top with a 4.0 and applies for a University, and his place is usurped by a young black man with a 3.9, I'm here to tell you that, not always, but often enough to be considered in every case, the black man faced far more challenges and hurdles to get his 3.9 than his competitor did to get a 4.0. That is why race is a factor.

Time is money, borrowed time.

Courtesy of The National Debt Clock, This is a pie chart which depicts the present debt the U.S.A. is subject to one day be called upon to repay. At this very moment, it exceeds 11 trillion dollars and has just short of doubled since the beginning of the new millennium; I'm sure none of us are left to wonder why. As can be derived from yon happy pie-chart, about 23 percent of our debt, or around twenty five THOUSAND-BILLIONS of US minted George Washington faced Dollars are owed to other countries who have graciously accepted the burden of letting us live on their couches and eat their ramen noodles until we can get a steady job again, man. Take heart, however, that that is only about half of what the U.S. Government owes itself (see big red absence marker). Upon careful review of such a thought, that means that the mint has about 5 trillion dollars in print which cannot be supported by precious stone reserves.

Initially, in the days of the old west and the steam engine, paper notation was merely a means of not having to lug around heavy awkward ores of recently San Francisco mined gold, you took your gold, silver, iron, whatever, to your local (or federal) bank, who then weighed it and locked it into a vault, and gave you back cash, which then were essentially insured certificates of ownership, to be able to return and withdraw your share from the vault, or trade with others who could then CASH in on those material backed and recorded shares of the bank. It was about the time that credit became more than trust between two personally known individuals and evolved into a "buy now, pay later" mentality that the U.S. Mint started borrowing from itself, choosing to print paper notation that it didn't have any reason to believe it would ever be able to back with gold, that the red spot on that pie chart began it's steady climb to the bullyingly large sore that it is now. Before I get into the evils of modern credit and the scourge that it presents our economy, allow me to first point out that before we can repay China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and India the money that we have so hedonistically borrowed from them we must first be able to repay ourselves, only from that point can we begin regaining the money that we owe others in order to return it to them. There is a small but significant portion of inflation by the hand of fraudulent infiltration motivated printing, but as a whole, it is the self destructive nature of the people within our materialist economy and the greater pawns who assess and commandeer it who plunge(d) it into decay.

Raise taxes, raise the hell out of them. I kid you not, all the funding we have thrown at these fruitless wars and at fruitless war mongering countries has been pretend money. That's right, it might as well have been right out of a Monopoly (tm) board game set, because it certainly hasn't been coming out of any physical manifestation of anything worth the ink it's been rolled in. The measures we have taken in order to prevent counterfeiting; ballooning the faces of the presidents on the bills, pastel colors, comically over-sized numbers, are a priceless ironic parallel to their value that I cannot restrain myself from mentioning here. I know we'd all like to hang our heads in shame forever and pout about the suicidal state of affairs our last president left our country in, but it's time to man up and face the fact that we really don't have any choice whatsoever in the matter, it has to be fixed. I feel sorry for the economic advisor's working for the Obama administration right now, because they're stuck with having to find a way to subtract numbers until they add up to a greater sum. The only option is to tell everyone who objects to stuff it, raise sales tax, raise income tax and raise state taxes and let's all take one for the team here so that we won't become a third world country. There are plenty of people who defy this logic, this is the land of the free they say, true! Free and now at the bottom of a dry well with no uncannily sharp scottish sheep dog to call attention to the sheriff. I don't like it anymore than the next lower middle class chump, but the only solution to this problem is to SUCK IT UP and be completely penniless, without luxury and without mutiny for long enough to ensure that the next generation of Americans aren't handed the same bad deal that we were; you think it was unfair to us? Just imagine how unfair it will be to our children.

Re: Mad Chatter's take on Mandatory Organ Donation

Personal rights be damned! It is the meticulous emphasis on personal rights which kink the flow of an otherwise flawless democracy. Organ donations should be mandatory, I have mine down one and all to be donated at the moment of my death or viably permanent loss of consciousness.

"As citizens of a democracy, we simply enjoy our freedoms far too much to surrender them for a cause that, while noble and benevolent, is severely tarnished." Resonantly spoken! But cherish your freedoms by perpetuating them so that they remain polished. Trite.

Don't get me wrong, donor programs send vulturous, eager, stab happy people to follow ambulances, I've known some of these people, they are exactly as you've pictured them. But if in chance I am the recipient of an hepectomy while it's still servicing my still breathing body, but then my liver is given to someone else who can use it, that's democracy! Surely you cannot put so much weight into one single though very large example of a near miss as though it were the norm. People aren't stupid, even if they are motivated to steal your vital this's and that's. If that mans brain were taken out of his head and donated to research over his condition, or his heart lungs and blood given over to other people who weren't the lazarus that he was and weren't clinically pronounced dead but were in fact terminally ill, noone's the wiser. Who are we sparing here? Him? He didn't know he was going to wake up, his family? Doctors told them he was already gone. His organs? Why the @#$# save his organs just in case exactly what happened did? That is so ridiculously beyond probability that even the fact that it occurred doesn't justify pre-empting all future cases of vegetating head trauma with the logic that it will happen again. Lechery.

What about medical costs? We're talking about keeping every permanently comatose patient alive artificially indefinitely just because one man zombified. The anomalies here are the ones that live, not the ones that don't. Greed.

"If a law required all citizens to donate at least one organ after death, what kind of condition would these organs be in?"

I forgive you for this statement because clearly you are not pursuing a medical degree. We're not all quacks, the most simple of all and primary test performed before transplanting any organ whatsoever is a blood typing, they are required to make sure that the organs that are being transplanted will fit into the next person that will use them and not be eaten alive by that transplantee's own body. It should be given that they're going to know which organs not to use, it's not like they just toss them in a basement freezer and mark the expiration date with a sharpie on a ziploc baggie. If this is meant to inspire fear of wasted effort, they don't just take your organs out, they make sure that you don't have any diseases or pre-existing conditions before they even cut into your skin. Common sense.

To religions I say get over yourselves, your body can be a temple and a testament to whatever god you worship up to and beyond it's occupation by a soul with or without the crap inside it that makes it walk around, and it's not like in fifty years it's going to be sparkling after burial anyway. Decadence.

What about cremation upon death? That's like eating a case of mars bars in front of a third world inhabitant. Hypocrisy.

The benefits of mandatory organ extraction far, far, FAR outweigh the petty stipulations which are restraining it from becoming a law, I am personally disappointed in the vast quantity of people who feel that there are valid reasons to retain something that is useless to them and potentially life saving to others, I've lost faith in you, Americans, for reasons like this.

The National Reluctance to Pay Civil Serviceman

On an annual basis, many if not all citizens of Travis, Bastrop, Caldwell and Williamson counties
receive a plea in the mail, a letter from their local firefighters written in a way painstakingly reminiscent of a PBS marathon; "Please help, we need donations to continue keeping the collective ingrate that is our proximal neighborhood from becoming a blast furnace.". I paraphrase. Do you give them your spare change? I do, as guiltily as would I hand it over to a poor homeless veteran at a red light, and I should feel guilty, I think we all should, because that is both the technical and eventually the literal position the people our local keepers of freedom are forced into.

The police force, I've never met an officer I didn't get along with, I respect authority, but at the same time I will curse before I swear that I have ever met an officer that I respected personally. Oh no! T'was the badge, the gun, the position of power that I revere and curtsy to, not the people behind them. Why? In my unreserved opinion it takes a certain kind of select human being to want to carry that authority under those circumstances. Little pay, and dedication to upholding the law? I scoff, why should we expect that of people? The minimal wages and requirements which are brandished by those we turn the enforcement of justice over to are laughable restraints upon the innate human tendency to abuse power. Show me an entirely honest cop, I'll show you an overpaid Fireman.

With new budgets in order, I reprimand he who would not support a proposal to raise the bar for the men and women of law enforcement, and lower it for those in red. Pay them more! Encourage them to on one side perform the duties in their handbooks verbatim, and for the latter to continue being able to support their families while still keeping our behinds out of the flame. Why risk your life if the only appreciation you see for it is to carry a license to batter people who don't agree with you, or to slide down a shiny firepole?

Where would we get the money to up the ante for our uniformed warriors? Dare I say it should already be within the budget, but since it clearly isn't, I point my witching rods at vices. The last time Ross Perot ran for office, he highlighted the notion that even during hard times, we still purchase and consume things which are bad for us, there's no shame in it, and there certainly isn't any hope for wishing it away; Tax them! I'm a heavy smoker, I smoke a pack and a half a day, while I have a ready sack full of excuses to continue throwing away my money on something that will inevitably kill me, my latest justification is that the recent up in taxes on tobacco is going purely toward cancer research for children. By killing myself gradually I am atleast steadily giving hope for the innocent. Seem's like a pretty sharp avenue to take on an advanced number of issues if you ask me. Pay the salaries of our already tax-salaried titles by adding tax to tobacco, liquor, gambling- hell, legalize drugs and prostitution and tax those too. Why shouldn't we be paying the men and women who have our lives in their hands upwards of 60, 70, even 100,000 dollars per year? What's more, why not gather the funds for their raises from those things which are standard factors in the institution for which they are employed? Hundreds of thousands of fires are started from un-extinguished cigarettes, an extra 2 dollar per pack tax on them to pay the brave folks who are out there putting them out! Alcohol, I don't even need to begin to describe how much money we'd be throwing at the police if we were paying them by the hour to tackle conflicts which started at the bottom of a black label.

In short, what better time than the realignment of our nations political stances toward a more polished tax budget to take a look at a proper monetary appreciation for they, no, we, who benefit and are rewarded by it.

Up Your Wall Street.

"WHILE PEOPLE DISS WALL STREETERS AND INDUSTRIALISTS FOR GREED AND HIGH LIVING, note that the most expensive home in America was built by a tv-producer. With its own dedicated “gift-wrapping room.” Funny how Hollywood excess doesn’t get the same kind of censorious scrutiny . . . ." http://www.Instapundit.com

So we're defending the men and women who line their pockets with other peoples money now? I'd like to point out that the stock market, while legitimate in theory, is based upon a structure that is essentially a pyramid scam. It doesn't make any difference that some people have more money than others, in moral spirit certainly but privately what people do with their money is their own business. It's the act of convincing people that their hard earned money is better invested in your own bank account because you know how to profit from it when there's little or no risk to losing your own wealth and plenty of risk that your victim will. That, sirs and madames, is a perfect example of extortion by placation.

During world war 2 the United States encouraged people to buy "War Bonds", which are certificates that say you are a patriot; they GUARANTEED that your money would be returned, guaranteed, under all circumstances, surely if we hadn't have emerged proverbially victorious from the war the money we put into it would have been in vain and more importantly, freaking gone and impossible to get back, to put it clearly, if someone tells you it's a good idea to give them your money, they're lying. The people that make their living encouraging others to give them money on a floppy promise of returning interest are crooks, so it doesn't matter that a tv-producer, who earned his money entertaining people, has four Jacuzzis in his mansion and enough funding wasted on staff doing trivial things to feed an entire third world country, the man isn't making his money by stealing it from others. Honestly I'd love to see people like this not gravitate immediately toward defending whatsoever they can which radiates pure unadulterated evil.

Besides, why do you care, Mr. Generic Instapundit, that people are blaming eachother for their sudden massive losses? It only furthers the stereotype that Republicans charge to reinforce the advancement of the rich and the oppression of the poor with statements like these. Johnny Citizen just lost his 401k, his retirement fund and his childrens college fund that he's been putting into since he was a young working man, never having had any direct contact with the stock market except through the people that he works for who guaranteed that they would handle his savings for him, and he's outraged and depressed and you think he shouldn't have a right to be? I mean who the hell else is he going to point his finger at other than people like you? It wasn't up to him who his money went to, it went to into stock and share investment, people who promised his future was safe destroyed it after stealing it from him and placated him with guarantees and flashy acronyms. So here's a giant middle finger to you, because you would only say something like that if you were one of those people who stole his future, Mr. RightWing Industrialist Wall Streeter.

You never cease to shock, Powerline!

I take a hard, well, not so hard look, at every front runner in the radical right who voices his or her opinion and puts a face to the republican party. I encourage you to do this with me, sure we're all familiar with Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity, they certainly make themselves loud (or in the latter two cases trashy and smug) enough to mark their territory with a bright red and crooked line; we the people have come to expect a certain and distinct tone to escape their muzzles, but the subject in tonights hilarious edition of ThisBlogMayContainTreason is none other than a household name and favorite among the dwellers of farm animal breeding communities, PowerLine: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/02/022939.php

Dictated and served by three editing republicans, these articles continuously offer us slobber to go with the whistle they blow madly in fanfare and unrestrained enthusiasm. I can't help but feel that these fine single toothed folk are leashed onto a habit of repeating themselves, for what point I can only speculate, the article posted above is only one example of the same thing that I've heard from every inbred mouth since President Obama became a candidate for office; Donkeys, Dopeheads, and Socialists, oh my! I'm in no way commanding that they give it a rest, it provides never-ending entertainment and reassurance that some parties will never change (atleast not since the 80's). Here we see John Hinderaker suggesting that the economic solutions proposed by the Left which are intended to resolve the problems we the lower and middle classes are facing under the heavy burden of recession are shifting too much power into the hands of central government, he goes on to imply that we are either headed toward the fate of Fascism or Communism, which, as he declares, are the only two types of socialism. I'm not even going to argue against this hackneyed hogwash that the USA is going to become a socialist capital under Democratic rule, I don't think I need to, the people spitting this dribble contradict themselves enough to make it clear that even if it were true, they wouldn't know much about what they're saying anyway. Let's break it down like I cannot contain myself from down-breaking!

1. Too much power in the hands of the government because of stimulus budgets and tax proposals aimed at lowering the cost of living for working families?
A) This from the people who all but ransom the federal government's children in order to get national law in place that demands unconstitutional jurisdiction over forcing religion into education, defining marriage upon religious foundation and would rather see Uncle Sam force a 14 year old rape victim to raise a child or face having to give it over to the hands of people who will bring it up under circumstances that quite potentially could influence it to, in it's adult life, become criminally motivated or dare I say a rapist? *Don't let the government have the power to make sure the oppressed majority of civilians have enough money to feed, shelter and clothe their families but make sure it still has enough power to obligate the upbringing of more hillbilly goat #$#@$%s like us.

2. There are more than two types of socialism, you freaking moron, and the ones you left out actual do fairly well in most nations, like Statistically The Happiest Place In The World To Live, which is a more or less a socialist democracy (With respect to traditional Monarchy titles).

Actually, I think that's all I need to say, to recap; Before we look at the legitimacy of your claims, make sure you can back them with fact, and that you don't resemble them yourself in the first place.

Why are we fighting?

There comes a point, don't attempt to deny it, when the service of an idea or principle takes precedence over the validity of that principle, when and where is that point? This happens when that idea or principle allows itself to become corrupt and moreover detrimental to it's caretakers. I give you - Israel. Stay your hand at labeling me an anti-Semite! -My wife is by birthright Jewish.

Without having to look too emphatically, logic floats here. Even without any background into the Jewish, Muslim, or Judeo-Christian faiths and their foundations, especially in a geographical sense; uneven numbers rear forth violently and without warning. Statistics, thousands of Muslim soldiers have been killed, just over a dozen Israeli soldiers. So I, and New York Times Columnist Thomas Friedman ask, Where IS that point, What is THE Point?.

After World War 2 we gave the entire Jewish faith a plot of land where they declared a landmark for their following and a monument to their faith. Not in Wisconsin or Florida, as the U.S. had initially offered, but decidedly not a micron west east north or south of where an entirely separate and often conflicting culture of people have set up one of their primary home-bases. I imagine it played out something like this:

"This land is my land, no longer your land, this land you have here, God gave to only me."

And the riff-raff that followed has plunged our very own individual, multi-denominational land of the free into a Political Catch 22 since the beginning of stated manifest. You, the Jewish people, have tirelessly endured persecution, relentless hardship and tribulation for little or no known reason since seemingly the dawn of time, it is only right that you should be free to seek to fulfill the prophecies in your scriptures and web-zines without fear of retribution. It was a seemingly a harmless thought at the time. You are then free to arm yourselves with knowledge, shelter, and so help me all the ammunition and forced military involvement as is predisposed to the necessity of your cause. Free shall you be also to fortify your cause, defend it and take pride in it. All of these notions were written into foreign policy when Israel became Israel not really all that long ago (A retro-generation and a half?). At the time, the principles and ideas the united states were serving were purely of a righteous nature, when that cause evolved into its own world power the nature of it took a sharp turn that, because of the "We'll scratch your back if you scratch ours" policy upheld at gunpoint for the past half a century, has threatened to compromise the United States as a credible world power with any right to integrity and respect.

President Obama was dealt a poorly shuffled deck of cards when he inherited our past national standing with Israel, every administration preceding his own, out of fear of conflict with a great percentage of the American people, has catered to Israels growing thirst for power and invulnerability. With nowhere to turn in order to secure Justice and simultaneously keep peace among dissenters, Obama (wisely?) flashes a smile at Israel and spins a knowing wink to Palestine. The way I observe the matter. territory is one of the most basic primal instincts embedded in every creature and culture, there is no reason in expecting to maintain peace by setting up camp in another lions den, by then launching AWL rockets at those other lions, spitting in their faces every day for a solid series of decades and then demanding quiet time to read. When your victims retaliate out of determination and spite with teeth and not missiles because they do not have the same superior resources you do, then you take that as an opportunity to martyr yourselves and your beliefs AND seize it as another reason to parade their streets with explosions and the unending murder of their children, YOU are the bad guy, your cause is no more in the right hand of your actions.

Where are we to go from here? The world is waiting to see if our new, more articulate and justice concerned president will cave to the pressure of the masses biting his heels, or cut the line that drains our nations resources, founding morals and place among distinguished first world countries who are expected to make decisions that advance the wellbeing and rights of mankind.