I was late in making this entry, so I have written a thousand words to make up for being a day late, and I will not count a single word of this for this week.
Have you ever seen the Little Mermaid? Or perhaps an Animal Planet program on sea life? You see before you thousands upon thousands of fish and other creatures of the deep. It is no wonder that little see a problem in the amount of fishing we do. Such films working over our entire lives will definitely make us a little biased against the scientists who try to spread the word about the destruction we do.
Such movies and influences have made us think that the ocean is a huge, bountiful place. They think that since the ocean is so vast, it will never run out of life and food. Not so. Most scientists will tell you that the ocean is like a desert. There are so little places to hide, so little food, and so little nourishment, that although there is a lot of life, it is concentrated in a few areas.
We call these areas reefs. They are comparable to an oasis in a desert, for they hold a huge abundance of life. The structure of a reef is made up of bony coral. These corals provide several key things for the survival of many species of sea life. They provide shelter, food, and a place to do things such as farm algae and perform symbiosis (two species interacting with each other).
So with all of those traits, we get several algae and coral and other life forms near the bottom of the food chain. That, of course, brings in predators, producing a thriving ecosystem which can be as large as a few square feet, to the huge Great Barrier Reef, which can be seen from space.
Reefs were few and far apart already before man ever came to be, and they were fairly safe from harm even when we just started throwing in a pole. It has only been in the last few decades, when technology has began to catch up with them, and start to deplete them. Not only this, but destructive devices and practices (such as bottom trawling) destroy reefs and waste unwanted animals that will not be used and will just become debris in the bottom when they dump them overboard.
There is a certain point when nature cannot replenish itself from what we take. We have more than passed that point with our motor boats and detection technology. The ocean is starting to look more barren than it even used to look. If we don't do something, we may end up with an extreme crisis.
Government officials have made regulations, restrictions, and rules, but although they exist, there is no one to enforce them. The coast guard is not responsible, and there is no man-power to make sure that all fishermen and women use the ocean in a good, renewable way. So, if they took out the regulations now, it really wouldn't make much difference. Our government still does not care about the environment and making sure it stays replenish-able and healthy.
If you want much more detailed account of our problems with the over-fishing, I would recommend either renting or finding on Youtube a movie called Empty Oceans, Empty Nets. It really explains well what some people are doing right, and what a lot more are doing wrong. It shows technologies that we could use to replenish Ocean and Sea life, and prevent them from ever happening again.
If we were to lose the ocean life, it would be disastrous for the entire human race. No more sea food. To you and me, we might not care, because in the land-locked U.S.A, we don't need fish very much, for we have other main sources of food. Some countries around the world, however, depend almost one hundred percent on seafood to feed the people. Millions would die, and millions more would go hungry. All because we are wasteful and destructive.
This is a much more serious problem than Global Warming or even Oil shortages, for very few people know how much is gone and how much is truly at stake. We are risking what will be the biggest food crisis in the history of humanity. Imagine the Irish potato famine across the whole world. A large percent of the population will die, and here we are indulging and not listening to the facts.
We as a people must act. We must spread the word, and help to make sure that we can save the creatures of the ocean for the good of our fellow men. We must act, or have the deaths of millions occur because of the short-sightedness of others.
My biggest fear is that we will be the most villanized generation in all of the history of mankind if we don't act on this and other things. We could also be known as the greatest, if we solved these problems and fixed our government and environment. Unfortunately, we are all human, so the chance of that are small. Please help to make that dream a reality.
Monday, December 27, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Are We Running Out?
Many a time you have heard a scientist or even common peer use the term "non-renewable" resource. What does that mean, exactly? It means that whatever you take out of the environment will not return for millions of years. So, if we mill it all out at once, we won't be able to use it for one hundred thousand generations later. That is a very, very serious thing.
Some examples are: Oil, Natural Gas, and Uranium. If these and other natural gasses were not very important to the majority of the world today, depleting them would not be a problem. In fact, it would be smart. We would be throwing away resources if we didn't use them. Unfortunately for us, our entire world revolves around these things. Oil in particular controls the global economy, and makes it possible for many many people to live.
Now, depending on the scientist you ask, you will receive a slightly varied timetable. Some say we are almost out now. Some say a few thousand years. Something all of them agree on, however, is that it is soon. Too soon for comfort.
If we ran short, contention and even war might follow. Then, when it all disappeared entirely, the world economy will collapse, and the conditions of living all over the world would drop like a bowling pin in a strike. Millions upon millions would grow hungry, and a large percent would die. I know this sounds like a horror story too crazy to be true, but this is no lie.
What can we do about it? Well, the best solution would be to ease out of the focus of the economy on non-renewable resources. We can't just change it instantly, because that would cause collapse of the entire economy. We would have to move one step at a time to focusing on renewable and clean sources of revenue, and using them responsibly. I hope that someday people would realize that we need to do these things, but I suppose that topic will have to be discussed in my next post.
Some examples are: Oil, Natural Gas, and Uranium. If these and other natural gasses were not very important to the majority of the world today, depleting them would not be a problem. In fact, it would be smart. We would be throwing away resources if we didn't use them. Unfortunately for us, our entire world revolves around these things. Oil in particular controls the global economy, and makes it possible for many many people to live.
Now, depending on the scientist you ask, you will receive a slightly varied timetable. Some say we are almost out now. Some say a few thousand years. Something all of them agree on, however, is that it is soon. Too soon for comfort.
If we ran short, contention and even war might follow. Then, when it all disappeared entirely, the world economy will collapse, and the conditions of living all over the world would drop like a bowling pin in a strike. Millions upon millions would grow hungry, and a large percent would die. I know this sounds like a horror story too crazy to be true, but this is no lie.
What can we do about it? Well, the best solution would be to ease out of the focus of the economy on non-renewable resources. We can't just change it instantly, because that would cause collapse of the entire economy. We would have to move one step at a time to focusing on renewable and clean sources of revenue, and using them responsibly. I hope that someday people would realize that we need to do these things, but I suppose that topic will have to be discussed in my next post.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Those Who Would Fool You
It is truly sad how many people in the world don't seem to care about what they do to their environments, but perhaps you could say that it is far sadder when people take these problems, and pretend to care about the world just to make a boatload of money, gain fame, and in a few cases, get revenge. They manipulate the people who want to make a difference and do what they think is right just to achieve their own ends. In this post, I will describe a few kinds of people that do that.
First, Politicians. These guys are unique because of the position they hold. They have a lot of public influence and a lot of connections. They are persuasive of large amounts of people, making them very dangerous to the common people who just happen to listen.
Perhaps the best example I could give is of Al Gore. After his close, and perhaps unfair, defeat by George Bush for the office of President of the United States, Al Gore lost his credibility as a politician. So, he changed his tactics to gather the public interest in him. Some say for money, others say revenge.
Al Gore took the center stage as the man who would start the issue of man-made global warming. He was rich, so he dropped down millions and millions in creating efficient energy, traveled the U.S. to speak in front of crowds, and even created a movie "An Inconvenient Truth". Al Gore certainly pulled out all the stops, and even created a system called Carbon Credits, where you pay for the emissions you caused by driving, buying manufactured items, and even breathing.
Sounds like a good guy, right? No, actually. At all of his presentation, and in his movie, Gore has shown computer-generated graphs. At first when you hear that last sentence, you think "Well, that sounds accurate." The only problem is that kind of graphs computers use. The accurate graph of climate change is logarithmic, or linear. The kind that computers use are called exponential. Exponential causes very drawn-out although technically correct graphs that would make the thing being graphed seem much more than it is.
Another problem with Gore is his Carbon Credit Program. He runs the company, so he receives all of the money. Thousands of, well, suckers pour their money into him, which allows him to afford a large house, a beach home, and a few gas-guzzling private jets. He often openly takes pride for paying for his Carbon Credits, but since he owns the company, he is basically paying himself, which proves how hypocritical he really is.
Second, Businessmen. This is a more obvious topic. Every day when you watch TV or surf the web or read the paper, you are assaulted with advertisements. Page after page of people trying to sell you things. It is an effective marketing tool. So is environmental danger.
Companies are always making the claim that they are "Going Green." That they are helping the environment by releasing products that reduce trash and come from efficient renewable sources. That sort of talk is very attractive to many people, and makes big business.
Unfortunately, it is not one hundred percent true what the companies and such tell you about their products. They like to manipulate facts, bend rules, and to do jobs only half-way. They are very good at what they do, and usually go undetected.
This post is getting long, so I will stop here. There are hundreds of different people that would like to use the environment to get you to give them something. They use a strange sense of guilt associated with the planet that they plant there to make you feel terrible, and be sympathetic to their cause. It is a new psychological game, and we need to see through it.
Take heart. For every man who would take advantage of you, there are three that are passionate about the environment and change for the better. We need to spread the word, and stop the hypocrites in their tracks.
First, Politicians. These guys are unique because of the position they hold. They have a lot of public influence and a lot of connections. They are persuasive of large amounts of people, making them very dangerous to the common people who just happen to listen.
Perhaps the best example I could give is of Al Gore. After his close, and perhaps unfair, defeat by George Bush for the office of President of the United States, Al Gore lost his credibility as a politician. So, he changed his tactics to gather the public interest in him. Some say for money, others say revenge.
Al Gore took the center stage as the man who would start the issue of man-made global warming. He was rich, so he dropped down millions and millions in creating efficient energy, traveled the U.S. to speak in front of crowds, and even created a movie "An Inconvenient Truth". Al Gore certainly pulled out all the stops, and even created a system called Carbon Credits, where you pay for the emissions you caused by driving, buying manufactured items, and even breathing.
Sounds like a good guy, right? No, actually. At all of his presentation, and in his movie, Gore has shown computer-generated graphs. At first when you hear that last sentence, you think "Well, that sounds accurate." The only problem is that kind of graphs computers use. The accurate graph of climate change is logarithmic, or linear. The kind that computers use are called exponential. Exponential causes very drawn-out although technically correct graphs that would make the thing being graphed seem much more than it is.
Another problem with Gore is his Carbon Credit Program. He runs the company, so he receives all of the money. Thousands of, well, suckers pour their money into him, which allows him to afford a large house, a beach home, and a few gas-guzzling private jets. He often openly takes pride for paying for his Carbon Credits, but since he owns the company, he is basically paying himself, which proves how hypocritical he really is.
Second, Businessmen. This is a more obvious topic. Every day when you watch TV or surf the web or read the paper, you are assaulted with advertisements. Page after page of people trying to sell you things. It is an effective marketing tool. So is environmental danger.
Companies are always making the claim that they are "Going Green." That they are helping the environment by releasing products that reduce trash and come from efficient renewable sources. That sort of talk is very attractive to many people, and makes big business.
Unfortunately, it is not one hundred percent true what the companies and such tell you about their products. They like to manipulate facts, bend rules, and to do jobs only half-way. They are very good at what they do, and usually go undetected.
This post is getting long, so I will stop here. There are hundreds of different people that would like to use the environment to get you to give them something. They use a strange sense of guilt associated with the planet that they plant there to make you feel terrible, and be sympathetic to their cause. It is a new psychological game, and we need to see through it.
Take heart. For every man who would take advantage of you, there are three that are passionate about the environment and change for the better. We need to spread the word, and stop the hypocrites in their tracks.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Global Warming
Okay, with this section of my blog, I will just immediately hit it with a hammer right away with this hotly-debated subject for my first post. I guess I will start out with the science of the whole matter (it is the boring part, but it is required to understand some other aspects of the post).
There is a common misconception about the definition of the term "Global Warming." Many people believes that it is the process of the Earth heating because of human actions and emissions. Not so. Global Warming is simply a term to describe the whole Earth heating, whether it be caused naturally, astronomically, or by human actions. Global Cooling is the same idea, only relating to the Earth getting colder. Many people have drilled the wrong definitions into the heads of others so as to try to achieve their own ends.
The theory of Human-Caused Global Warming is simple. Carbon Dioxide and other emissions block the warmth of the sun from escaping the Earth after it bounces off of the surface. Sounds plausible, right? Unfortunately it is not. Venus is often used to symbolize this type of Global Warming. The truth is that Carbon Dioxide DOES block sunlight. But here's the catch. Venus has had a couple billion years to get the gas into its atmosphere. It has so much of it, we would have to burn all of the oil the world has ever had several thousand times in order to create that kind of Global Warming. Good news for us. The bad news is that Global Warmings can be very, very dangerous.
Back a hundred million years ago there was a time called the Permian. It was a time of great deserts and immense heat. It was a time of Global Warming. Scientists debate today over the cause. Some say meteor, others say volcano interference, and many other things. Some even consider that we have another sun that comes every 40 million years to cause mass extinction. Anyways, the Earth heated 10 Degrees. Only ten. That was enough to kill 90% of life on Earth. Why? Because there are rich deposits of heat-sensitive minerals in the ocean. When the Earth heated up 10 degrees, those minerals melted, creating a reaction that skyrocketed the temperature immensely.
Global Warming is very much real, and has happened before. However, our Earth's temperature is always raising and lowering by two or three degrees as result of several natural processes. It is much easier to trigger an Ice Age than Global Warming.
On the topic of Global Cooling, I think that it is another dangerous thing. Effect-wise, it would be most disastrous to us early on. We would lose crops, forest, and many other things that are almost necessary for our survival. Then, after all of that is gone, the effects would not be as bad. Much of life on Earth would be annihilated, but not all would be lost. We could endure that. In the long run, Global Cooling would not be as disastrous.
There are some people that would like you to feel guilty about "poisoning" the planet, and profit from that. Some are benign enough, but there are a couple who do what they do for gain and to get revenge on others, including the government. I will address some of them in my next post.
There is a common misconception about the definition of the term "Global Warming." Many people believes that it is the process of the Earth heating because of human actions and emissions. Not so. Global Warming is simply a term to describe the whole Earth heating, whether it be caused naturally, astronomically, or by human actions. Global Cooling is the same idea, only relating to the Earth getting colder. Many people have drilled the wrong definitions into the heads of others so as to try to achieve their own ends.
The theory of Human-Caused Global Warming is simple. Carbon Dioxide and other emissions block the warmth of the sun from escaping the Earth after it bounces off of the surface. Sounds plausible, right? Unfortunately it is not. Venus is often used to symbolize this type of Global Warming. The truth is that Carbon Dioxide DOES block sunlight. But here's the catch. Venus has had a couple billion years to get the gas into its atmosphere. It has so much of it, we would have to burn all of the oil the world has ever had several thousand times in order to create that kind of Global Warming. Good news for us. The bad news is that Global Warmings can be very, very dangerous.
Back a hundred million years ago there was a time called the Permian. It was a time of great deserts and immense heat. It was a time of Global Warming. Scientists debate today over the cause. Some say meteor, others say volcano interference, and many other things. Some even consider that we have another sun that comes every 40 million years to cause mass extinction. Anyways, the Earth heated 10 Degrees. Only ten. That was enough to kill 90% of life on Earth. Why? Because there are rich deposits of heat-sensitive minerals in the ocean. When the Earth heated up 10 degrees, those minerals melted, creating a reaction that skyrocketed the temperature immensely.
Global Warming is very much real, and has happened before. However, our Earth's temperature is always raising and lowering by two or three degrees as result of several natural processes. It is much easier to trigger an Ice Age than Global Warming.
On the topic of Global Cooling, I think that it is another dangerous thing. Effect-wise, it would be most disastrous to us early on. We would lose crops, forest, and many other things that are almost necessary for our survival. Then, after all of that is gone, the effects would not be as bad. Much of life on Earth would be annihilated, but not all would be lost. We could endure that. In the long run, Global Cooling would not be as disastrous.
There are some people that would like you to feel guilty about "poisoning" the planet, and profit from that. Some are benign enough, but there are a couple who do what they do for gain and to get revenge on others, including the government. I will address some of them in my next post.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Environment: An Overview
This is the first post in the Environment section of my blog. Thank you again to all those political people who have followed and read my previous posts.
When considering the environment is, one must ask a question. What is the environment? I know this may seem juvenile and obvious, it is a good statement, because no single person understands all known aspects of it. To put it simply, the environment is the world we live in. Whether it be a wild jungle, a flowing plain, a frozen summit, or even a row of apartment buildings, it is environment. Even those around you are environment. Everything we do, whether it be eat, sleep, drink, walk, or talk, it is connected with the environment. Like the topic or not, it is very important to you and your well being.
Why then, would we start to alter our environment, and make it harder for us to live? I believe that the answer can be found in ancient pre-history, when man first came to be. With our advanced brains and our grasping hands and swiveling thumbs, we are environment-altering machines. Our brains allow us to force an adaption using other parts of the environment without waiting for genetics to do the job. That is why humans are weak, slow land-walkers, because we don't need much strength to stab with a spear or shoot an arrow. This was a great thing back then. However, there is a bad side.
You see, nothing has ever been created like us before, so we are a whole new deal to nature, whose best response to us has really only been disease. Once we got out of small tribes, and started over-running the earth, nature couldn't keep up, because we alter the nature too quickly. That is not a problem in one or two small patches on the earth, but when the whole earth is consumed by us, there is no hope. We basically control nature now, although she does lose her temper now and again and smacks us with a hurricane or earthquake. We are just too far-spread and smart for our own or natures goods.
What does this mean then? MAJOR RESPONSIBILITY. We have to make sure to alter in the right ways for long-term survival, and replenish as much as we can.
Happily, many have realized this and gone on to campaign for great changes and actions. Unfortunately, there are those who realize this, and use it for their own gain. They create phony evidence, tell convincing lies, and pretend to be on the good side to further themselves. This blog will try to weed out some of the things they do. Also, many people who want good change are oppressed. Corporations have had a major influence in the environmental branch of government affairs. They bribe to have more rights to gain money, yet destroy or pollute many things. They lobby to gain support of major politicians. Yet again, I mention that we the people can change these things for the good
I hope that I will be able to accomplish what I want to in the next little while. Please enjoy and comment so that I can hear your opinions and better mine.
When considering the environment is, one must ask a question. What is the environment? I know this may seem juvenile and obvious, it is a good statement, because no single person understands all known aspects of it. To put it simply, the environment is the world we live in. Whether it be a wild jungle, a flowing plain, a frozen summit, or even a row of apartment buildings, it is environment. Even those around you are environment. Everything we do, whether it be eat, sleep, drink, walk, or talk, it is connected with the environment. Like the topic or not, it is very important to you and your well being.
Why then, would we start to alter our environment, and make it harder for us to live? I believe that the answer can be found in ancient pre-history, when man first came to be. With our advanced brains and our grasping hands and swiveling thumbs, we are environment-altering machines. Our brains allow us to force an adaption using other parts of the environment without waiting for genetics to do the job. That is why humans are weak, slow land-walkers, because we don't need much strength to stab with a spear or shoot an arrow. This was a great thing back then. However, there is a bad side.
You see, nothing has ever been created like us before, so we are a whole new deal to nature, whose best response to us has really only been disease. Once we got out of small tribes, and started over-running the earth, nature couldn't keep up, because we alter the nature too quickly. That is not a problem in one or two small patches on the earth, but when the whole earth is consumed by us, there is no hope. We basically control nature now, although she does lose her temper now and again and smacks us with a hurricane or earthquake. We are just too far-spread and smart for our own or natures goods.
What does this mean then? MAJOR RESPONSIBILITY. We have to make sure to alter in the right ways for long-term survival, and replenish as much as we can.
Happily, many have realized this and gone on to campaign for great changes and actions. Unfortunately, there are those who realize this, and use it for their own gain. They create phony evidence, tell convincing lies, and pretend to be on the good side to further themselves. This blog will try to weed out some of the things they do. Also, many people who want good change are oppressed. Corporations have had a major influence in the environmental branch of government affairs. They bribe to have more rights to gain money, yet destroy or pollute many things. They lobby to gain support of major politicians. Yet again, I mention that we the people can change these things for the good
I hope that I will be able to accomplish what I want to in the next little while. Please enjoy and comment so that I can hear your opinions and better mine.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
So What Can We Do?
For a few months have I posted my political opinions and facts. At times it felt like I was beating a dead horse, but thank you to all of you who have read and responded to many of my posts. As such, I am going to bring the politic-specific section of my blog to a close, for this blog is to help me get all of my ideas out there, not just about politics. I hope that you were enlightened by my work.
Now, you have heard my rants. My anger against corporations, my two cents on political parties, my disgust against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I have also mentioned how all of my posts make up such a small portion of the mistakes and evils of the political world, that it is maybe only 1%. You may be feeling a little down on your country, for all of us have grown up with our own biased opinions of the U.S., and now that some of the truth has been revealed, you start to question your very being. This last post is to raise your hearts, and turn you towards a greater destiny and future.
America is truly a good country, full of opportunity and justice. We are the people, for which the government was originally created. Our constitution was created by the people, and for the people. United we stand, separate we fall. That is why we are the United States. There is great hope for the future if only we look towards it together. If all of the citizens realized the truth, and they act, we cannot fail. We have to build our future with our hands, and no matter how battered, bruised, or bloody they get, we have to press on.
You now have the knowledge. Increase it. Share it. Fight as hard as you can so that one day, we can have the bright future I have promised. There is a chair in Independence Hall. It has the engraving of half of a sun in the top of it. When the Declaration of Independence was signed, Benjamin Franklin saw the chair. He said that it could either be rising or setting. He decided that it was a rising sun. Now, is it a rising, or a setting sun? And if it is setting, can we endure the night until the break of dawn, and the beams of a better world. A single man can create rights for millions. So, how much good could millions of people do?
Thank you for all of your support. I am pleased to announce the subject of my next few weeks of posts. Environment.
Now, you have heard my rants. My anger against corporations, my two cents on political parties, my disgust against the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I have also mentioned how all of my posts make up such a small portion of the mistakes and evils of the political world, that it is maybe only 1%. You may be feeling a little down on your country, for all of us have grown up with our own biased opinions of the U.S., and now that some of the truth has been revealed, you start to question your very being. This last post is to raise your hearts, and turn you towards a greater destiny and future.
America is truly a good country, full of opportunity and justice. We are the people, for which the government was originally created. Our constitution was created by the people, and for the people. United we stand, separate we fall. That is why we are the United States. There is great hope for the future if only we look towards it together. If all of the citizens realized the truth, and they act, we cannot fail. We have to build our future with our hands, and no matter how battered, bruised, or bloody they get, we have to press on.
You now have the knowledge. Increase it. Share it. Fight as hard as you can so that one day, we can have the bright future I have promised. There is a chair in Independence Hall. It has the engraving of half of a sun in the top of it. When the Declaration of Independence was signed, Benjamin Franklin saw the chair. He said that it could either be rising or setting. He decided that it was a rising sun. Now, is it a rising, or a setting sun? And if it is setting, can we endure the night until the break of dawn, and the beams of a better world. A single man can create rights for millions. So, how much good could millions of people do?
Thank you for all of your support. I am pleased to announce the subject of my next few weeks of posts. Environment.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Is America Truly The Best?
For all of those sick of politics, or simply sick of me critisizing what you believe in, this is my second to last post on politics before I move on to another subject entirely. Now, I know that I have been putting down America and a lot of its practices and such, but I am not a hater. In fact, I am very grateful to have been born in this country, because it is a great country, and it has great opportunity possible for the generations. The question in the title might make my last few sentences seem hipocrytical, but although America is a good country, I don't believe that it is the best.
You and almost every other American child have heard your parents and other adults tell you about how great and marvelous America is, and how this and that are better that any other country's this and that. That we have such a great country that we rule the world, that we are the best. That they are proud to be an American. This is not new to you, I bet, and you probably would never guess that in any random country, be it France, Mongolia, Sudan, Congo, Paraguay, Canada, or any other country, that they do the exact same thing. Popular music tells the story of generations of pride in ones own country. Every country thinks that they are the best, and that they are better than the rest in every single way.
Why does everyone say such a thing? Why does everyone deny the existence of a country better than their own? Well, I guess the main reason is that, in your country, there are differences than in others. Different ways of talking, eating, and even using the restroom. You only want to mingle with things that you feel comfortable with, and those are the things you grew up with. You feel comfortable and ready for life in that country. Other country's traditions weird you out, make you feel uncomfortable, so that is why you think that your country is the best.
Now, in this endless mess of human drama and opinion, what is the best country? How do you determine which country is better than all the rest? The simple answer: you can't. There is no way to compare such opiniotated topics and come to a completely right conclusion. So, in a way, there is no best country. Every country is just another country, not a better or a worse one. A country can be good, but not better than another.
So now you have heard my scoop about comparing countries, its time to give the good news. We can do something about it. I don't know how much better I can describe it than in a RUSH song called Territories, as it affirms and explains my points probably better than I do, and the lyrics to it are found at this site. Read them and comment on them. http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/r/rush/territories.html
If you read the lyrics, you probably saw the last paragraph that reads:
Better the Pride that resides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colorful rag is unfurled
That is what you can do. Love the world, and have pride in it. Even better, love all of the humans on the planet, and feel prideful to be human. If there are aliens, feel prideful to be alive. On and on and on. You see, we need to realize that we can't divide ourselves into territories, and look through the spyglass in reverse. We need to realize that we are not alone and that we need to look ahead WITH other countries, and not racing to get into the lead.
You and almost every other American child have heard your parents and other adults tell you about how great and marvelous America is, and how this and that are better that any other country's this and that. That we have such a great country that we rule the world, that we are the best. That they are proud to be an American. This is not new to you, I bet, and you probably would never guess that in any random country, be it France, Mongolia, Sudan, Congo, Paraguay, Canada, or any other country, that they do the exact same thing. Popular music tells the story of generations of pride in ones own country. Every country thinks that they are the best, and that they are better than the rest in every single way.
Why does everyone say such a thing? Why does everyone deny the existence of a country better than their own? Well, I guess the main reason is that, in your country, there are differences than in others. Different ways of talking, eating, and even using the restroom. You only want to mingle with things that you feel comfortable with, and those are the things you grew up with. You feel comfortable and ready for life in that country. Other country's traditions weird you out, make you feel uncomfortable, so that is why you think that your country is the best.
Now, in this endless mess of human drama and opinion, what is the best country? How do you determine which country is better than all the rest? The simple answer: you can't. There is no way to compare such opiniotated topics and come to a completely right conclusion. So, in a way, there is no best country. Every country is just another country, not a better or a worse one. A country can be good, but not better than another.
So now you have heard my scoop about comparing countries, its time to give the good news. We can do something about it. I don't know how much better I can describe it than in a RUSH song called Territories, as it affirms and explains my points probably better than I do, and the lyrics to it are found at this site. Read them and comment on them. http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/r/rush/territories.html
If you read the lyrics, you probably saw the last paragraph that reads:
Better the Pride that resides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colorful rag is unfurled
That is what you can do. Love the world, and have pride in it. Even better, love all of the humans on the planet, and feel prideful to be human. If there are aliens, feel prideful to be alive. On and on and on. You see, we need to realize that we can't divide ourselves into territories, and look through the spyglass in reverse. We need to realize that we are not alone and that we need to look ahead WITH other countries, and not racing to get into the lead.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
A Truly "Savage" Political Media
I have been waiting to post this post on here for a very, very long time. For those of you who listen or have a relation that listenes to political talk radio, you will get my title. It refers to a talk radio program that features every day on KLO at 4:00 (if you live in Utah near Ogden). Its name is The Savage Nation, and it is hosted by one Michael Savage. My grandfather used to listen to him (before he passed away), so I got to hear his utterly lovely voice everyday. Enough sarcasm, for I will explain why him and other political talk shows are definately something you don't want to listen to.
In many of Savage's "discussions," he give opinions, and one or two fair points, but he is also a degrading, insulting, and insolent attention hog (although not matched by Bill O'Reily, which I will get into later). In every disscussion he has, he mocks and insults every Democrat known to man. For some reason, he has picked Nancy Pelosi to be the one who takes on the most mocking. Everything from a wrinkle on her face to the way he laughs, he insults and mocks. It sickens me that a man (dare I call him that?) who has an honest right-leaning Republican opinion feels he needs to show it by being insulting and mocking of the way people are instead of even their opinions!
Next up on the frying pan is one Laura Ingraham. She is also on KLO, but she is on at 7:00. She is a Repulican like Savage, but unlike him, she does not insult often. She is much more civilized and content with just giving opinions, but here is the catch with all people who give their opinions to the public: They can't deal with other people's opinions, and disregard evidence to do so. Laura is notorious for this, even though she is tame in the demoralizing of political officials department.
Now, the last one I am going to discuss is FOX NEWS. If you have ever watched it, it claims to be unbiased and fair, but is it? No, absolutely not. It is a Republican leaning newstation that provides what I like to call "Infotainment" instead of sheer facts. Each caster displays bias and thinks they have the dominant opinion. One of the worst is a man by the name of Bill O'Reily. He irritates me greatly. He won't let other people give opinions or evidence. Every time they try, he cuts them off and criticizes them, failing to give them a chance. I love it when someone puts Bill off guard, and is able to resist his cut-offs, and gives him back some of his own medicine.
Wow, rereading this post seems to mark me as either a Democrat or a hipocrite, but I hope I am neither. I haven't heard Democrat talk shows, but I believe that they would be just as bad as Republican ones. Remember, don't just take my word for it, listen to them a little and form your own opinions about them, and comment back what you believe.
In many of Savage's "discussions," he give opinions, and one or two fair points, but he is also a degrading, insulting, and insolent attention hog (although not matched by Bill O'Reily, which I will get into later). In every disscussion he has, he mocks and insults every Democrat known to man. For some reason, he has picked Nancy Pelosi to be the one who takes on the most mocking. Everything from a wrinkle on her face to the way he laughs, he insults and mocks. It sickens me that a man (dare I call him that?) who has an honest right-leaning Republican opinion feels he needs to show it by being insulting and mocking of the way people are instead of even their opinions!
Next up on the frying pan is one Laura Ingraham. She is also on KLO, but she is on at 7:00. She is a Repulican like Savage, but unlike him, she does not insult often. She is much more civilized and content with just giving opinions, but here is the catch with all people who give their opinions to the public: They can't deal with other people's opinions, and disregard evidence to do so. Laura is notorious for this, even though she is tame in the demoralizing of political officials department.
Now, the last one I am going to discuss is FOX NEWS. If you have ever watched it, it claims to be unbiased and fair, but is it? No, absolutely not. It is a Republican leaning newstation that provides what I like to call "Infotainment" instead of sheer facts. Each caster displays bias and thinks they have the dominant opinion. One of the worst is a man by the name of Bill O'Reily. He irritates me greatly. He won't let other people give opinions or evidence. Every time they try, he cuts them off and criticizes them, failing to give them a chance. I love it when someone puts Bill off guard, and is able to resist his cut-offs, and gives him back some of his own medicine.
Wow, rereading this post seems to mark me as either a Democrat or a hipocrite, but I hope I am neither. I haven't heard Democrat talk shows, but I believe that they would be just as bad as Republican ones. Remember, don't just take my word for it, listen to them a little and form your own opinions about them, and comment back what you believe.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
The Sheep of the United States
You must be thinking right about now that I have truly gone insane, because I am now talking about sheep. I am not talking literally about any mammal that we make clothes out of, but about the citizens of the U.S. Why do I compare them to sheep? If you have ever talked to my science teacher Mrs. Nelson talk about political parties, you know why, but I will explain it now.
Imagine a large flock of sheep in a pasture. They are standing there, oblivious to the fact that most of the herders are on the way to sheer off their warm, fluffy coats. In fact, they are delighted when they arrive, expecting a tasty round of grains, or a few apples. There is more than one herder out there, trying to attract as many sheep as possible to their sheering buildings, because every extra sheep is money. The sheep blindly decide which herder to go to, for most of them carry a large carrot in their hands, and say sweet nothings. A few strange sheep actually look at the face of the herders, and discover who will sheer them, and who will feed them, and decide to go to those who have no treats, but have a good countenance. They are shunned and mocked by the other sheep, and become outcast.
I'll bet there are some of you readers who can already connect this to reality, and the party system, because it is very blatant if you take the time to think. Every party is one of those herders, holding out sweet promises, and we, the people, are sheep, and flock to one without questioning them at all. They do no research, no study, and just go with their party down to making this country even worse off than before.
We need to stop being sheep, and start thinking and acting to try to make this country better, and to be able to vote for those who will lead us to a better future.
Speaking of voting, I will say something about non-voting. When I grow up, I will likely be one of these. Now, you have heard all of your life that non-voters are cowards, and yellow-bellied fools. They say that we do absolutely nothing to change the future of our country, but not so.
There are two kinds: the ones who are lazy or extremist anti-patriot, and those that don't vote because there is NOTHING they think are a good choice to vote for. Why vote for the democrat who has a slightly better way of running the country, but will still bring it down. We show our dismay at ALL of the candidates, and say that we will not take the slightly better, but only the best.
In conclusion, we need to stop being sheep and realizing that not all that the politics say is evil, but just devices to gain votes. If not, our country will continue to suffer and rot from the inside until all of this is evident, but it is much too late.
Imagine a large flock of sheep in a pasture. They are standing there, oblivious to the fact that most of the herders are on the way to sheer off their warm, fluffy coats. In fact, they are delighted when they arrive, expecting a tasty round of grains, or a few apples. There is more than one herder out there, trying to attract as many sheep as possible to their sheering buildings, because every extra sheep is money. The sheep blindly decide which herder to go to, for most of them carry a large carrot in their hands, and say sweet nothings. A few strange sheep actually look at the face of the herders, and discover who will sheer them, and who will feed them, and decide to go to those who have no treats, but have a good countenance. They are shunned and mocked by the other sheep, and become outcast.
I'll bet there are some of you readers who can already connect this to reality, and the party system, because it is very blatant if you take the time to think. Every party is one of those herders, holding out sweet promises, and we, the people, are sheep, and flock to one without questioning them at all. They do no research, no study, and just go with their party down to making this country even worse off than before.
We need to stop being sheep, and start thinking and acting to try to make this country better, and to be able to vote for those who will lead us to a better future.
Speaking of voting, I will say something about non-voting. When I grow up, I will likely be one of these. Now, you have heard all of your life that non-voters are cowards, and yellow-bellied fools. They say that we do absolutely nothing to change the future of our country, but not so.
There are two kinds: the ones who are lazy or extremist anti-patriot, and those that don't vote because there is NOTHING they think are a good choice to vote for. Why vote for the democrat who has a slightly better way of running the country, but will still bring it down. We show our dismay at ALL of the candidates, and say that we will not take the slightly better, but only the best.
In conclusion, we need to stop being sheep and realizing that not all that the politics say is evil, but just devices to gain votes. If not, our country will continue to suffer and rot from the inside until all of this is evident, but it is much too late.
Friday, October 22, 2010
North American Free Trade Agreement
The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, is something that is elusive, and few know its particulars. Of course, it's also a battleground for politicians and parties to fight over and point fingers and make each other look bad. I hope this post will be able to educate you in some of its particulars, and help you to form an opinion.
The basic idea of NAFTA was to create a trade bloc, a triangular trade between the three main North American countries Canada, U.S., and Mexico. Its main function was to remove protective tariffs from exports and imports. For those who don't remember their U.S. history class, or their Civics class, a protective tariff is a fine that you put on imports and exports, that increases its price so that the businesses in the country itself would be protected from foreign competition.
The hope was that removing these tariffs would encourage a stabilizing of the three economies and the classes of the countries. If they could remove the tariffs, the government stated that it would bring Mexico's economy up, and keep America's and Canada's stable and balanced.
Of course, that is what they said.
Originally, the bill was supposed to be signed into law by George Bush Senior. Unfortunately, his final term ended before he could, so he had to turn it over to the Clintons' administration. Of course, instead of signing it into law immediately, the Clintons decided to change the bill around a bit. More on that later.
The funny thing is, many members of the Republican Party today are angry with NAFTA, and claim that it is the cause of the ruining of our economy (ask any Republican in your ward or community about NAFTA, and you will find this true), when it was the Republicans that first supported the bill and attempted, themselves, to sign it into law. Also, in Canada, Progressive Republicans actually were the ones to sign it into law, while the Liberals fought constantly to repeal it, with the support of the men's and women's of the Liberal senate, and the majority of the Canadians' opinions, and some still do. Every party is to blame for the bad, questionable things in this law.
Okay, so now is the time to tell you what is wrong with this law. First, a major part of the law that Republicans created and Democrats supported, companies of the countries they were from could sue (not technically, its more like a usage of law, but it is hard to explain so I will use the word sue instead), the government in other countries for passing laws that although may protect its citizens, they hurt the companies' investments. If you have read my bit on corporations you know why alarm bells are sounding off in my head right now.
This is basically telling the corporations that they can screw other countries over. Because of their influence, they have sucked billions out of the pockets of other countries. Because of company influence, America wins about 90% of their suits, Canada wins only 30%, and Mexico about 10%. I have a few examples of suits I will share with you now.
1999 Sun Belt Water Inc. sued Canada, because of its prohibition on exporting fresh water in marine tankers. Canada was worried about the stability of its ecosystem and the preservation of lakes and streams, but the company won 105 million dollars from the suit. Reports of environmental damage have been made at sites of rivers, lakes, and streams.
1996 American sellers of the fuel additive MMT sued Canada for 201 million dollars, because Canada had banned its importation, and the companies were losing some money. Canadian researches claimed that its exhaust caused neural damage, while American researches claimed it had no effects. America won, and the effects are still not quite known.
Methanex Corporation, a Canadian corporation, sued the government 960 million dollars, because California had banned it due to some reports of it leaking into wells in the area. Of course, Methanex Corp. lost, and was forced to pay our government 3 million for it.
Metalclad, and U.S. corporation sued the Mexican government for 15.6 million after a Mexican municipality leader (who's name translated roughly to Ferris) refused the construction of a hazardous waste dump near a Mexican city. NAFTA delcared that the Ferris's statis as a municipality leader did not have the authority to stop it, because the federal government had agreed to it.
Now, with my second wrong thing with NAFTA, the responsibility for it is mostly Democratic. Bill Clinton had added a section to it that stated that America's partners had to adhere to environmental practices and regulations like their own. That means, that if we pass a law on a certain chemical, Canada and Mexico are automatically forced to have that law. We control what they do, which is very wrong. We have the ability to pull far too many strings, which is what politicians and corporations excel at.
All-in-all, I believe that this agreement is morally wrong, and gives Americans the power to manipulate the economies of others, and hurt the populations of them. There are other wrongs with the law, but I can't include them in this post, so look on some web sites. Here is a good reference website to start: http://www.suite101.com/content/nafta-is-a-bad-agreement-a46386. Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement. Remember, don't just take my word for it, research and develop your own opinions.
The basic idea of NAFTA was to create a trade bloc, a triangular trade between the three main North American countries Canada, U.S., and Mexico. Its main function was to remove protective tariffs from exports and imports. For those who don't remember their U.S. history class, or their Civics class, a protective tariff is a fine that you put on imports and exports, that increases its price so that the businesses in the country itself would be protected from foreign competition.
The hope was that removing these tariffs would encourage a stabilizing of the three economies and the classes of the countries. If they could remove the tariffs, the government stated that it would bring Mexico's economy up, and keep America's and Canada's stable and balanced.
Of course, that is what they said.
Originally, the bill was supposed to be signed into law by George Bush Senior. Unfortunately, his final term ended before he could, so he had to turn it over to the Clintons' administration. Of course, instead of signing it into law immediately, the Clintons decided to change the bill around a bit. More on that later.
The funny thing is, many members of the Republican Party today are angry with NAFTA, and claim that it is the cause of the ruining of our economy (ask any Republican in your ward or community about NAFTA, and you will find this true), when it was the Republicans that first supported the bill and attempted, themselves, to sign it into law. Also, in Canada, Progressive Republicans actually were the ones to sign it into law, while the Liberals fought constantly to repeal it, with the support of the men's and women's of the Liberal senate, and the majority of the Canadians' opinions, and some still do. Every party is to blame for the bad, questionable things in this law.
Okay, so now is the time to tell you what is wrong with this law. First, a major part of the law that Republicans created and Democrats supported, companies of the countries they were from could sue (not technically, its more like a usage of law, but it is hard to explain so I will use the word sue instead), the government in other countries for passing laws that although may protect its citizens, they hurt the companies' investments. If you have read my bit on corporations you know why alarm bells are sounding off in my head right now.
This is basically telling the corporations that they can screw other countries over. Because of their influence, they have sucked billions out of the pockets of other countries. Because of company influence, America wins about 90% of their suits, Canada wins only 30%, and Mexico about 10%. I have a few examples of suits I will share with you now.
1999 Sun Belt Water Inc. sued Canada, because of its prohibition on exporting fresh water in marine tankers. Canada was worried about the stability of its ecosystem and the preservation of lakes and streams, but the company won 105 million dollars from the suit. Reports of environmental damage have been made at sites of rivers, lakes, and streams.
1996 American sellers of the fuel additive MMT sued Canada for 201 million dollars, because Canada had banned its importation, and the companies were losing some money. Canadian researches claimed that its exhaust caused neural damage, while American researches claimed it had no effects. America won, and the effects are still not quite known.
Methanex Corporation, a Canadian corporation, sued the government 960 million dollars, because California had banned it due to some reports of it leaking into wells in the area. Of course, Methanex Corp. lost, and was forced to pay our government 3 million for it.
Metalclad, and U.S. corporation sued the Mexican government for 15.6 million after a Mexican municipality leader (who's name translated roughly to Ferris) refused the construction of a hazardous waste dump near a Mexican city. NAFTA delcared that the Ferris's statis as a municipality leader did not have the authority to stop it, because the federal government had agreed to it.
Now, with my second wrong thing with NAFTA, the responsibility for it is mostly Democratic. Bill Clinton had added a section to it that stated that America's partners had to adhere to environmental practices and regulations like their own. That means, that if we pass a law on a certain chemical, Canada and Mexico are automatically forced to have that law. We control what they do, which is very wrong. We have the ability to pull far too many strings, which is what politicians and corporations excel at.
All-in-all, I believe that this agreement is morally wrong, and gives Americans the power to manipulate the economies of others, and hurt the populations of them. There are other wrongs with the law, but I can't include them in this post, so look on some web sites. Here is a good reference website to start: http://www.suite101.com/content/nafta-is-a-bad-agreement-a46386. Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement. Remember, don't just take my word for it, research and develop your own opinions.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
The Health Care Reform Bill
Okay, okay, I know that sparks fly and teeth nash in Utah on this subject, but here I go anyway. Health care reform is a tricky thing. You have to look deeper, and for patterns in the different segments. I found a website: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0322/Health-care-reform-bill-101-what-the-bill-means-to-you.
This website is one of the least biased ones on the web, and explains things well, even if it was made in the last spring.
First of all, I believe that the government paying for our healthcare would be not a bad idea. Now before you all point at me and yell "DEMOCRAT," I do not agree to everything that the bill says.
Good Things About the Bill:
First of all, 32 million people that did not previously have health care coverage will be able to afford coverage. Second, health care insurers cannot refuse to insure because of a preexisting condition. Third, the less money you make, the less of it you have to spend on healthcare.
If you are in what is considered to be the federal poverty rate, the government will only let up to 9.8 percent of your income go to health care. The lower you are in the poverty rate, the less percentage you have to pay (counting down from 9.8). This means that you will still pay partially for you own health care, but the government will help you. This will allow millions of people to be able to have health care.
In the past, insurers have been able to deny you coverage just because of a preexisting condition (something that has happened in the past and may happen again, or perhaps is already happening again). Now, everyone who struggled to get health care because of preexisting conditions will be able to purchase health care.
Bad Things About the Health Care Bill:
There are a few not-so-good things about the bill. First, the healthcare STILL runs thought corporations! Insurance agencys are coperations, and they will do what corperations do, squeeze every last ounce of money out of you. Second, the rich societies will be taxed for this. Third, you will be required to buy health care. Also, do realize that I am only fourteen, and I don't know ALL of the good and bad things, just those I have been able to research.
If you want my rant about corperations, you should read my blog post entitled Corporations. Just keep in mind that insurance agencies are corperations.
To cover costs of the bill, the government is taxing insurance agencies, tanning booths, and the rich societies of the United States. Now, some say that taxing the rich is bad, some good. (I put it in bad because the message about corperations was short). It makes sense to take money out of people who have lots, and give it to people who have little, but many rich people got where they were through a lot of hard work and determination, and to have that given perhaps to people who don't or didn't work is a little unfair. Not to say that all poor people are lazy, because most are not.
Last but not least, you will be required of the government to buy health care. I cannot think of a reason why they would do this, and it doesn't say why in any of the websites that I have been to. So, I put it as a bad thing, because the government will give you a cumulative fine (one that increases in percent annually) that can cost a lot more than the health care.
Common Misconceptions:
There are a few things that people don't understand, or they ignore because they are biased (usually journalists and politicians). First, the government is not forcing us to buy health care directly from them, but from a corporation or small agency. The government only gives us support in the costs. Next, people claim that it is unconsititutional to force people to buy health care, but every major war we have had to draft people into the military. We FORCE them to risk their lives. With the health care bill, we will save many lives. My mother (who is a nurse) had to recently turn out a man dying from serious lukemia on the street basically to die slowly and painfully. With the bill, no person will be rejected from the hospital, because everyone will have health care. Are we all going to stick up our heads and declare selfishly "Unconstitutional!" or are we going to swallow our inflated pride, and save that lives of people that are hoping desperately for this bill to pass so that they can be cured and treated of diseases they can't afford to treat.
This website is one of the least biased ones on the web, and explains things well, even if it was made in the last spring.
First of all, I believe that the government paying for our healthcare would be not a bad idea. Now before you all point at me and yell "DEMOCRAT," I do not agree to everything that the bill says.
Good Things About the Bill:
First of all, 32 million people that did not previously have health care coverage will be able to afford coverage. Second, health care insurers cannot refuse to insure because of a preexisting condition. Third, the less money you make, the less of it you have to spend on healthcare.
If you are in what is considered to be the federal poverty rate, the government will only let up to 9.8 percent of your income go to health care. The lower you are in the poverty rate, the less percentage you have to pay (counting down from 9.8). This means that you will still pay partially for you own health care, but the government will help you. This will allow millions of people to be able to have health care.
In the past, insurers have been able to deny you coverage just because of a preexisting condition (something that has happened in the past and may happen again, or perhaps is already happening again). Now, everyone who struggled to get health care because of preexisting conditions will be able to purchase health care.
Bad Things About the Health Care Bill:
There are a few not-so-good things about the bill. First, the healthcare STILL runs thought corporations! Insurance agencys are coperations, and they will do what corperations do, squeeze every last ounce of money out of you. Second, the rich societies will be taxed for this. Third, you will be required to buy health care. Also, do realize that I am only fourteen, and I don't know ALL of the good and bad things, just those I have been able to research.
If you want my rant about corperations, you should read my blog post entitled Corporations. Just keep in mind that insurance agencies are corperations.
To cover costs of the bill, the government is taxing insurance agencies, tanning booths, and the rich societies of the United States. Now, some say that taxing the rich is bad, some good. (I put it in bad because the message about corperations was short). It makes sense to take money out of people who have lots, and give it to people who have little, but many rich people got where they were through a lot of hard work and determination, and to have that given perhaps to people who don't or didn't work is a little unfair. Not to say that all poor people are lazy, because most are not.
Last but not least, you will be required of the government to buy health care. I cannot think of a reason why they would do this, and it doesn't say why in any of the websites that I have been to. So, I put it as a bad thing, because the government will give you a cumulative fine (one that increases in percent annually) that can cost a lot more than the health care.
Common Misconceptions:
There are a few things that people don't understand, or they ignore because they are biased (usually journalists and politicians). First, the government is not forcing us to buy health care directly from them, but from a corporation or small agency. The government only gives us support in the costs. Next, people claim that it is unconsititutional to force people to buy health care, but every major war we have had to draft people into the military. We FORCE them to risk their lives. With the health care bill, we will save many lives. My mother (who is a nurse) had to recently turn out a man dying from serious lukemia on the street basically to die slowly and painfully. With the bill, no person will be rejected from the hospital, because everyone will have health care. Are we all going to stick up our heads and declare selfishly "Unconstitutional!" or are we going to swallow our inflated pride, and save that lives of people that are hoping desperately for this bill to pass so that they can be cured and treated of diseases they can't afford to treat.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
This is also another very important post that I have published that I hope a lot of people would read and comment on. I will be blunt: the bombing of Hirsoshima and Nagasaki, Japan were completely unneccesary, immoral, and self-served acts. In this post, I will try to explain why I think this way, and how I hope American People would think.
Although the bombings were terrible acts, the terrible truths about their use are evident even before the incidents. When America started their bombing raids, they set apart three separate cities all in the same approximate area for the Air Force to avoid bombing in any way. I bet you can guess two of them, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but there was another city that was never bombed called Kokura because of cloud cover preventing it. The government wanted not only to bomb for military strategy's sake, but to do it as an expirament to see how much damage it would cause. They decided to EXPIRAMENT on the Japanese people, because they could make up and excuse to exuse themselves.
Their excuse turned out convincing. During this time, we had blockaded Japanese seas, cut off supply lines, and had them cornered. The Soviet Union had plans to declare war on Japan (which Japan did not know of until after the bombings). We had given Japan the Postdam Ultimatum, which was a declaration of unconditional surrender. The Japanese government did not like that term, thinking that Americans would destroy their entire system of government and enforce executive democracy on them. In his speeches, prime minister Kataro Suzuki announced that Japan was still making a decision. They knew the outcome of the war, and they knew that they could not take long. I (and many professionals and army personnel) am sure that if we had waited a week for the Soviet Union to declare war, Japan would have surrendered. Our government seized the chance to justify dropping the bombs by purposely misinterpereting his speech into one of contempt.
They convinced us that Japan would not surrender, and if we attempted a land invasion, we would lose millions of Allied soldiers in the process. They told us that the bombs were life-savers, not life-takers. They even went as far as to compare the worth of a Japanese person to an American person. Of course that is not true, everyone is the same.
August 6, 1945, a small detachment of bombing B-29s and a camera ship took off from Iwo Jima, heading for the industrial city of Hiroshima, Japan. No alarms were raised, because the Japanese supposed that it was an intelligence sweep and nothing more because of the small amount of planes.
The bomb missed its target, and landed on a hospital not far from the target zone. Then all hell broke loose. 30% of all the residents of the city of 340000-350000 died instantly. They were the lucky ones. The bomb leveled buildings, and burned others, causing the trapped to die.
The bomb created temperatures of 3900 degrees celcius. Clothes melted and burned the skin. People became deformed. Many tried to jump into the canals to cool of, but died becaus the water was boiling.
The winds moved at a tousand miles per hour, knocking down buildings just by themselves, and killing more and more people.
The majority of Hiroshima was civilians. About 40% disliked Japan's war on America. We killed tens of thousands of innocent people in some sort of sick test, a display of power to the world. Inocent people almost half of whom did not even support the war in the first place were murdered in horrific, terrible ways.
Not only was this replicated in Nagasaki, it was even worse. The bomb was twice as powerful, and it was only due to the lucky placement of hills that prevented twice as much damage and death. It had the same effects, and was just as horrific in many ways.
President Harry Truman supported the bombings fully, and he may have not have fully known the effects, but he did threaten to destroy the entire Japanese Military with it. If he had done so, how many more thousands of people would have died.
The most powerful and horrific weapon on earth, maybe in the whole galaxy, and America is the only country to use it. It is our fault the ashes of thousands of innocent people float through the world today, and mingle with the ashes of thousands of burned Jewish peoples. America will never be able to attone for what it has done without first realizing what they have done. We need to be willing to spread the word, and see past the lies of the government. We must atone for the damage our ancestors have wreaked.
Although the bombings were terrible acts, the terrible truths about their use are evident even before the incidents. When America started their bombing raids, they set apart three separate cities all in the same approximate area for the Air Force to avoid bombing in any way. I bet you can guess two of them, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but there was another city that was never bombed called Kokura because of cloud cover preventing it. The government wanted not only to bomb for military strategy's sake, but to do it as an expirament to see how much damage it would cause. They decided to EXPIRAMENT on the Japanese people, because they could make up and excuse to exuse themselves.
Their excuse turned out convincing. During this time, we had blockaded Japanese seas, cut off supply lines, and had them cornered. The Soviet Union had plans to declare war on Japan (which Japan did not know of until after the bombings). We had given Japan the Postdam Ultimatum, which was a declaration of unconditional surrender. The Japanese government did not like that term, thinking that Americans would destroy their entire system of government and enforce executive democracy on them. In his speeches, prime minister Kataro Suzuki announced that Japan was still making a decision. They knew the outcome of the war, and they knew that they could not take long. I (and many professionals and army personnel) am sure that if we had waited a week for the Soviet Union to declare war, Japan would have surrendered. Our government seized the chance to justify dropping the bombs by purposely misinterpereting his speech into one of contempt.
They convinced us that Japan would not surrender, and if we attempted a land invasion, we would lose millions of Allied soldiers in the process. They told us that the bombs were life-savers, not life-takers. They even went as far as to compare the worth of a Japanese person to an American person. Of course that is not true, everyone is the same.
August 6, 1945, a small detachment of bombing B-29s and a camera ship took off from Iwo Jima, heading for the industrial city of Hiroshima, Japan. No alarms were raised, because the Japanese supposed that it was an intelligence sweep and nothing more because of the small amount of planes.
The bomb missed its target, and landed on a hospital not far from the target zone. Then all hell broke loose. 30% of all the residents of the city of 340000-350000 died instantly. They were the lucky ones. The bomb leveled buildings, and burned others, causing the trapped to die.
The bomb created temperatures of 3900 degrees celcius. Clothes melted and burned the skin. People became deformed. Many tried to jump into the canals to cool of, but died becaus the water was boiling.
The winds moved at a tousand miles per hour, knocking down buildings just by themselves, and killing more and more people.
The majority of Hiroshima was civilians. About 40% disliked Japan's war on America. We killed tens of thousands of innocent people in some sort of sick test, a display of power to the world. Inocent people almost half of whom did not even support the war in the first place were murdered in horrific, terrible ways.
Not only was this replicated in Nagasaki, it was even worse. The bomb was twice as powerful, and it was only due to the lucky placement of hills that prevented twice as much damage and death. It had the same effects, and was just as horrific in many ways.
President Harry Truman supported the bombings fully, and he may have not have fully known the effects, but he did threaten to destroy the entire Japanese Military with it. If he had done so, how many more thousands of people would have died.
The most powerful and horrific weapon on earth, maybe in the whole galaxy, and America is the only country to use it. It is our fault the ashes of thousands of innocent people float through the world today, and mingle with the ashes of thousands of burned Jewish peoples. America will never be able to attone for what it has done without first realizing what they have done. We need to be willing to spread the word, and see past the lies of the government. We must atone for the damage our ancestors have wreaked.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Corporations
This is a very serious subject, and perhaps the most important of all my posts about Politics. In this paragraph I will attempt to explain why allowing capitalism and corporations to do certain things is, I'll say it, an evil idea. I will also try to explain why we are allowing these companies to do these things. Also, I will jump around a bit. I will provide an example (the Iraq War) and explain what you can interperet from it.
March 20, 2003. That is the date of the start of what has been called the Invasion of Iraq. Our troops invaded the northern portion of the country via the southern portion. We quickly staked up positions, and prepared to wage a war that would last nearly seven years and cost over twenty thousand American lives.
Now there are a few things you need to know. First, the middle east is where about 55% of all of the oil extracting occurs on earth. Iraq has the third-largest amount of oil wells of any other middle-eastern country. It was the perfect spot for the terrorists to attack, but it was even more perfect for the United States.
Why? Because it was a split nation. It had operated under comunism for several years now, and the people were getting restless. Finally, the southern half of the country rebelled, and tried to fight for democratic freedom. It gave America a clean, right reason to go and invade.
At the time, Al-Qaeda had organized his group of terrorists, and considering somehow attacking Israel. He viewed the uprising in Iraq to be nothing, and that the better-equiped north would easily quash the strange patriotic feelings. At least, he thought that until America invaded.
When America started to push at northern Iraq, Al-Qaeda viewed this as an obvious victory for them. So he switched his attention, and began his march to Iraq, eventually meeting our soldiers in battle.
That is one proof of America's real intent in the war to seize natural resources. President George Bush declared it in the name of wiping out terrorism, when really America brought the terrorists to the country. He purposely lied to make America look good.
This also brings me to the first proof of the corruptness in corporations. They are called economic hit men. The role of an economic hit man was to go into underdeveloped countries, like Panama and Iraq, and convince them to take out huge developmental loans for corporations like World Bank and USAID. The countries, who were obviously unable to pay back completely, were pressured by American political power until they were forced to pay them back in other ways, like giving up natural resources.
In his book, Confessions of and Economical Hit Man, John Perkins made this statement:
Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly-paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.
This was exactly the purpose of the War in Iraq. The corporations were using the government to the extreme to gain access to a rich amount of oil wells. Did they succeed? You bet they did. We now control three-fourths of Iraqi oil wells, and because of this, the people suffer, the economy is shot, and we, America, caused it.
Am I done showing the evils of corporations? Not in the slightest, for I still have to tell the story of our troops, and how corporations made their lives miserable, and also the private horrors we have commited on the Iraqi people
With the war in Iraq came problems for the military. It could not care for all of the needs of their troops. So, the government decided to use private contractors and corporations to care for the troops and provide a few basic but essential military needs. The corporations worked as hard and as cheaply as possible to squeeze every last bit of money out of the government.
Here is a breakdown of what corporation controlled what.
Triton, CACI- In charge of torture. They took random people off of the streets with either very vauge reasons or no reason at all. They were put into the major prison Abu Ghraib prison, and always shared a cell with a CACI interrogator. They were treated like animals, and were tortured in horrific ways. The people they hired, most of them had not been confirmed loyal to America in the first place, and were unsupervised completely. Triton provided linguists, who were not trained or test and usually underquality. Many lives were lost because of these undertrained people.
If a soldier hurts a civilian, they are court marshaled. If a contractor's hiree kills a civil, they are sent home, and can come back next week under a new contractor. When a group of these hirees decided to speak out against their contractors, saying that they were acting under orders, they were sentenced to 18 years, and not even an investigation was made against the contractors themselves.
KBR/Halliburton- contracted to build laudry, shower, and mess hall buildings, supply trucks, and hundreds of other small jobs, and an to provide for those things. They took over hundreds of jobs of other mechanics, soldiers, and other professions to try to gain more money. Most of the drivers of their trucks were civilians, and most weren't even from our countries, but the surrounding middle east countries.
Convoys of trucks were attacked, and many civilians lost their lives. Entire trucks exploded. The drivers had no maps, had no protection, had under-date communication devices etc. The roads they had to travel were hostile, and the drivers were not told of this. The contractors knew that they could get money and replace the expendable civilians with more.
All of those lives because of the billions of dollars the contractors made every year from the government and military. They basically murdered civilians for their own gain.
Next, Halliburton was hired to provide clean, safe; drinking, showering, and cooking water. A water purification tester, Ben Carter, was alerted by an officer that he had seen something wiggle in his toilet water. Ben went out and tested the water in the storage tanks. Not a trace of chlorine or other purifiers. Each tank was completely contaminated and riddled with disease upon disease like Typhus and Malaria. The corporation was only interested in cheap profit, and not in how it would affect the troops. The soldiers may come home without a bullet wound, but they will come home with pathogens in their blood, and they won't even know to get tested because they trust the corporation.
Another offense, this time KBR, is concerned with dining halls and food. KBR had three mealtimes a day, mealtimes that any terrorist or Iraqi knew almost to heart. That is why almost all of single-man attacks were at dining halls. All this because KBR refused to do a 24-hour feeding plan where they always have food available because it costs them more money. They sacrifice lives and positions to save money and to earn profit, because they are paid by how many soldiers they feed, not by how many the save.
Also, Halliburton charged soldiers forty dollars for a six-pack of coke or pepsi that the army gave for free. The sodas were produced right there in the desert, so there was no huge transportation cost. Halliburton just wanted to squeeze every last drop out of the soldiers. They also charged 99 dollars for every bag of laundry, and it always came back even worse. The soldiers were forbidden to do it by themselves, they had to use KBR.
Both companies also would buy all the wrong and unneccesary equipment, and then burn it all to claim it as a loss and gain money, and buy even more wrong equipment. And the trucks had no oil filters, so that the engines would break soon, and they could bill the government for new trucks. Even if there was a popped tire, there were no spares, and they blew it up and bought a new truck. Not only that, but they would run empty trucks and bill the government for them. All of this came out, but they were not tried or punished or even forced to pay money back.
We could have gotten Iraqis to do it better, cheaper, and get them off the streets and into jobs so they could have hope.
All of these statements and this evidence came directly from soldiers, workers, and leaders that have realized what they did. And these are only four corporations, at only one time. Think of how much damage and money all of the corporations do, and not only to other countries and the military, but to you and me as taxpayers.
The corporations are the reason why we are in a recession, why the whole world is struggling, and there are no restrictions, no lines drawn, and no announcement of bad deeds to the public. Basically, corporations have free reign.
But why, why has the government not cracked down on this immediately? Because the corporations pay them, bribe them, lobby for them, and support them so that they look the other way, and so they don't get reported. They hold all the money and power cards, and whatever the corporations say goes.
Only two years ago did Joe Biden allow our phone lines to be tapped by the phone companies, and only a couple decades ago did our own head of the Department of Public Welfare paid off to announce that smoking did no damage and was not bad for your health by cigarrette companies, because Congress was considering a tobacco ban. That announcement ended it.
Truly, our country is run by those who have money, and not by the people. It is up to us as citizens to recognize this and to fight back and end the oppression. We can decide our futures, and the futures of our children.
March 20, 2003. That is the date of the start of what has been called the Invasion of Iraq. Our troops invaded the northern portion of the country via the southern portion. We quickly staked up positions, and prepared to wage a war that would last nearly seven years and cost over twenty thousand American lives.
Now there are a few things you need to know. First, the middle east is where about 55% of all of the oil extracting occurs on earth. Iraq has the third-largest amount of oil wells of any other middle-eastern country. It was the perfect spot for the terrorists to attack, but it was even more perfect for the United States.
Why? Because it was a split nation. It had operated under comunism for several years now, and the people were getting restless. Finally, the southern half of the country rebelled, and tried to fight for democratic freedom. It gave America a clean, right reason to go and invade.
At the time, Al-Qaeda had organized his group of terrorists, and considering somehow attacking Israel. He viewed the uprising in Iraq to be nothing, and that the better-equiped north would easily quash the strange patriotic feelings. At least, he thought that until America invaded.
When America started to push at northern Iraq, Al-Qaeda viewed this as an obvious victory for them. So he switched his attention, and began his march to Iraq, eventually meeting our soldiers in battle.
That is one proof of America's real intent in the war to seize natural resources. President George Bush declared it in the name of wiping out terrorism, when really America brought the terrorists to the country. He purposely lied to make America look good.
This also brings me to the first proof of the corruptness in corporations. They are called economic hit men. The role of an economic hit man was to go into underdeveloped countries, like Panama and Iraq, and convince them to take out huge developmental loans for corporations like World Bank and USAID. The countries, who were obviously unable to pay back completely, were pressured by American political power until they were forced to pay them back in other ways, like giving up natural resources.
In his book, Confessions of and Economical Hit Man, John Perkins made this statement:
Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly-paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.
This was exactly the purpose of the War in Iraq. The corporations were using the government to the extreme to gain access to a rich amount of oil wells. Did they succeed? You bet they did. We now control three-fourths of Iraqi oil wells, and because of this, the people suffer, the economy is shot, and we, America, caused it.
Am I done showing the evils of corporations? Not in the slightest, for I still have to tell the story of our troops, and how corporations made their lives miserable, and also the private horrors we have commited on the Iraqi people
With the war in Iraq came problems for the military. It could not care for all of the needs of their troops. So, the government decided to use private contractors and corporations to care for the troops and provide a few basic but essential military needs. The corporations worked as hard and as cheaply as possible to squeeze every last bit of money out of the government.
Here is a breakdown of what corporation controlled what.
Triton, CACI- In charge of torture. They took random people off of the streets with either very vauge reasons or no reason at all. They were put into the major prison Abu Ghraib prison, and always shared a cell with a CACI interrogator. They were treated like animals, and were tortured in horrific ways. The people they hired, most of them had not been confirmed loyal to America in the first place, and were unsupervised completely. Triton provided linguists, who were not trained or test and usually underquality. Many lives were lost because of these undertrained people.
If a soldier hurts a civilian, they are court marshaled. If a contractor's hiree kills a civil, they are sent home, and can come back next week under a new contractor. When a group of these hirees decided to speak out against their contractors, saying that they were acting under orders, they were sentenced to 18 years, and not even an investigation was made against the contractors themselves.
KBR/Halliburton- contracted to build laudry, shower, and mess hall buildings, supply trucks, and hundreds of other small jobs, and an to provide for those things. They took over hundreds of jobs of other mechanics, soldiers, and other professions to try to gain more money. Most of the drivers of their trucks were civilians, and most weren't even from our countries, but the surrounding middle east countries.
Convoys of trucks were attacked, and many civilians lost their lives. Entire trucks exploded. The drivers had no maps, had no protection, had under-date communication devices etc. The roads they had to travel were hostile, and the drivers were not told of this. The contractors knew that they could get money and replace the expendable civilians with more.
All of those lives because of the billions of dollars the contractors made every year from the government and military. They basically murdered civilians for their own gain.
Next, Halliburton was hired to provide clean, safe; drinking, showering, and cooking water. A water purification tester, Ben Carter, was alerted by an officer that he had seen something wiggle in his toilet water. Ben went out and tested the water in the storage tanks. Not a trace of chlorine or other purifiers. Each tank was completely contaminated and riddled with disease upon disease like Typhus and Malaria. The corporation was only interested in cheap profit, and not in how it would affect the troops. The soldiers may come home without a bullet wound, but they will come home with pathogens in their blood, and they won't even know to get tested because they trust the corporation.
Another offense, this time KBR, is concerned with dining halls and food. KBR had three mealtimes a day, mealtimes that any terrorist or Iraqi knew almost to heart. That is why almost all of single-man attacks were at dining halls. All this because KBR refused to do a 24-hour feeding plan where they always have food available because it costs them more money. They sacrifice lives and positions to save money and to earn profit, because they are paid by how many soldiers they feed, not by how many the save.
Also, Halliburton charged soldiers forty dollars for a six-pack of coke or pepsi that the army gave for free. The sodas were produced right there in the desert, so there was no huge transportation cost. Halliburton just wanted to squeeze every last drop out of the soldiers. They also charged 99 dollars for every bag of laundry, and it always came back even worse. The soldiers were forbidden to do it by themselves, they had to use KBR.
Both companies also would buy all the wrong and unneccesary equipment, and then burn it all to claim it as a loss and gain money, and buy even more wrong equipment. And the trucks had no oil filters, so that the engines would break soon, and they could bill the government for new trucks. Even if there was a popped tire, there were no spares, and they blew it up and bought a new truck. Not only that, but they would run empty trucks and bill the government for them. All of this came out, but they were not tried or punished or even forced to pay money back.
We could have gotten Iraqis to do it better, cheaper, and get them off the streets and into jobs so they could have hope.
All of these statements and this evidence came directly from soldiers, workers, and leaders that have realized what they did. And these are only four corporations, at only one time. Think of how much damage and money all of the corporations do, and not only to other countries and the military, but to you and me as taxpayers.
The corporations are the reason why we are in a recession, why the whole world is struggling, and there are no restrictions, no lines drawn, and no announcement of bad deeds to the public. Basically, corporations have free reign.
But why, why has the government not cracked down on this immediately? Because the corporations pay them, bribe them, lobby for them, and support them so that they look the other way, and so they don't get reported. They hold all the money and power cards, and whatever the corporations say goes.
Only two years ago did Joe Biden allow our phone lines to be tapped by the phone companies, and only a couple decades ago did our own head of the Department of Public Welfare paid off to announce that smoking did no damage and was not bad for your health by cigarrette companies, because Congress was considering a tobacco ban. That announcement ended it.
Truly, our country is run by those who have money, and not by the people. It is up to us as citizens to recognize this and to fight back and end the oppression. We can decide our futures, and the futures of our children.
Friday, September 24, 2010
The Party System
They [political parties] serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community-
George Washington, in his farewell speech of 1796.
I think that the way Mr. Washington put this sad statement is not only true and accurate, but is also something we should put into effect today as a general rule of how we should rule our country. I will now break down this speech into something easier to understand.
They [political parties] serve to organize faction
This simply means that the parties' consequently divide the people by their beliefs. They cause dissent through Americans that causes them to turn on their own people and be spiteful, hurtful, and close-minded.
to give it an artificial and extraordinary force
This phrase has a few separate components. The "artificial" part of the system is that they basically make a bigger deal out of a simple political belief, thus causing more "followers" to join, and making previous ones "die-hard."Overexaggeration has always been a tool that the government has used to gain support and affection.
The extraordinary force is that altough a party is supposed to constitute simply a belief, millions of people almost worship their parties. The will of this many is a very strong thing, and it is extraordinary because it only springs from a belief.
to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party
Simply put, the will of those who lead the party will seek their own ends. Almost none of them do the things they do in the name of the nation. Rather, they do it in the name of money, fame, and glory. They actively use tools such as the press to give them a "goody-goody-two-shoes" look that really is a devil in disguise. Does this mean that they are bad people? Not in the slightest. You might think that that phrase is contridictory, but all of these bad things do not spring out of only them, but all of us. It is in our natures to be greedy, nasty people sometimes, but they are only worse because they are in a good position to do it.
often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community
This means that altough the parties are greedy and ruthless, they are also smart. People who have doctorates run these kinds of things. They know how to manipulate, control, and lull the people to achieve their own ends. They are willing to take risks, and usually they end up winning.
In short, what Mr. Washington was trying to warn us about three hundred years ago is evident now! These things are happening around us all of the time! We, as the people of the United States need to see past lies and be able to run our government correctly. My goal here is to educate, and this is exactly the reason why.
And also, George Washington had another great many things to say about parties. You only need to read his speech, the rest is worthless. Go to this link to read the rest: http://www.laughtergenealogy.com/bin/history/politics.html
George Washington, in his farewell speech of 1796.
I think that the way Mr. Washington put this sad statement is not only true and accurate, but is also something we should put into effect today as a general rule of how we should rule our country. I will now break down this speech into something easier to understand.
They [political parties] serve to organize faction
This simply means that the parties' consequently divide the people by their beliefs. They cause dissent through Americans that causes them to turn on their own people and be spiteful, hurtful, and close-minded.
to give it an artificial and extraordinary force
This phrase has a few separate components. The "artificial" part of the system is that they basically make a bigger deal out of a simple political belief, thus causing more "followers" to join, and making previous ones "die-hard."Overexaggeration has always been a tool that the government has used to gain support and affection.
The extraordinary force is that altough a party is supposed to constitute simply a belief, millions of people almost worship their parties. The will of this many is a very strong thing, and it is extraordinary because it only springs from a belief.
to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party
Simply put, the will of those who lead the party will seek their own ends. Almost none of them do the things they do in the name of the nation. Rather, they do it in the name of money, fame, and glory. They actively use tools such as the press to give them a "goody-goody-two-shoes" look that really is a devil in disguise. Does this mean that they are bad people? Not in the slightest. You might think that that phrase is contridictory, but all of these bad things do not spring out of only them, but all of us. It is in our natures to be greedy, nasty people sometimes, but they are only worse because they are in a good position to do it.
often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community
This means that altough the parties are greedy and ruthless, they are also smart. People who have doctorates run these kinds of things. They know how to manipulate, control, and lull the people to achieve their own ends. They are willing to take risks, and usually they end up winning.
In short, what Mr. Washington was trying to warn us about three hundred years ago is evident now! These things are happening around us all of the time! We, as the people of the United States need to see past lies and be able to run our government correctly. My goal here is to educate, and this is exactly the reason why.
And also, George Washington had another great many things to say about parties. You only need to read his speech, the rest is worthless. Go to this link to read the rest: http://www.laughtergenealogy.com/bin/history/politics.html
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
My View On: Politics In General
What is my view on politics? I like to think of it as populitics and screwoveritics rather than the nice, tame word politics. I believe that the government is, and has been doing a horrible, nasty job for a long time, with every president from every party. Even Abraham Lincoln made many mistakes in his section of time as president. Today's "mistakes" are not actually mistakes, but are cleverly planned and enacted.
As what I like to call "America's Pride" grew during the War of 1812 and after, the people have become blinded by their belief that their country is the best in the entire world. This has allowed many of them to think that America can do no wrong, which led to such things as defending the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan. This belief has also led Americans to think that their leaders can do no wrong, owing to many of our problems today.
In conclusion to my overview, I think politics and politicians are wrong on many different levels. I hope that my next few posts will be and eye opener, or maybe only a thought starter, but sometimes that is enough.
As what I like to call "America's Pride" grew during the War of 1812 and after, the people have become blinded by their belief that their country is the best in the entire world. This has allowed many of them to think that America can do no wrong, which led to such things as defending the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan. This belief has also led Americans to think that their leaders can do no wrong, owing to many of our problems today.
In conclusion to my overview, I think politics and politicians are wrong on many different levels. I hope that my next few posts will be and eye opener, or maybe only a thought starter, but sometimes that is enough.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Who am I?
Before I begin to really blog my thoughts, I would like to explain a few things about myself that will help you to understand me a little more clearly in the future. I belong to the LDS church, and so does my mother, but my father is an atheist. This has given me a new perspective on the world in general. My father has taught me to think hard and clearly about topics, and form my own conclusions.
If you are a cold-cut, by-the-book Mormon (or any other religion for that matter) who believes that everything said in the Bible and other works happened exactly and precisely how it was written, I commend you for your belief. I think that everyone should have their own opinions and beliefs, and that they are just as valid as mine, even if I don't understand it. I like comments that agree with me, but I love comments that disagree with me. What that does not mean, however, is that I want rude or degrading comments that insult me or my opinion directly on this blog. Courteously disagreeing with me and presenting your evidence is the proper way to get your opinion across (plus you won't get deleted).
I would like to take a few sentences to explain my methods of blogging. I will post a Master title that will tell what the next group of posts will be about (ex: Politics). Then, each post will include an Inferior title that is part of my Master title (ex: The Party System). Under the Inferior title will be my thoughts on whatever the title is. A master title can take from one week to three to complete (or so I have planned) and will be appropriate.
If you want to be selective and only choose posts that aren't boring looking or just not your thing, I would support you in that endeavor. I know I write like a philosophy major that's still in high school, but I hope my comments will not be too boring.
There is one last thing I would like to address in this post. If you feel threatened or insulted by anything that I write about in my blog, please comment on me and inform me of this. I promise that I will never purposely try to insult anyone, but everyone is entitled to make mistakes and I would love to be able to recognize and correct them for that post and all my future work. I would also ask that you not be childish and get upset over every single little thing I put on this blog that disagrees with what you think. That I why I am doing this, to learn and to share.
I am very excited to be able to learn and grow, and I hope that this blog gets you thinking. I look forward to hearing everyone's thoughts and opinions Now that I have gotten over the very boring stuff, I will introduce you to my new master topic, Politics.
If you are a cold-cut, by-the-book Mormon (or any other religion for that matter) who believes that everything said in the Bible and other works happened exactly and precisely how it was written, I commend you for your belief. I think that everyone should have their own opinions and beliefs, and that they are just as valid as mine, even if I don't understand it. I like comments that agree with me, but I love comments that disagree with me. What that does not mean, however, is that I want rude or degrading comments that insult me or my opinion directly on this blog. Courteously disagreeing with me and presenting your evidence is the proper way to get your opinion across (plus you won't get deleted).
I would like to take a few sentences to explain my methods of blogging. I will post a Master title that will tell what the next group of posts will be about (ex: Politics). Then, each post will include an Inferior title that is part of my Master title (ex: The Party System). Under the Inferior title will be my thoughts on whatever the title is. A master title can take from one week to three to complete (or so I have planned) and will be appropriate.
If you want to be selective and only choose posts that aren't boring looking or just not your thing, I would support you in that endeavor. I know I write like a philosophy major that's still in high school, but I hope my comments will not be too boring.
There is one last thing I would like to address in this post. If you feel threatened or insulted by anything that I write about in my blog, please comment on me and inform me of this. I promise that I will never purposely try to insult anyone, but everyone is entitled to make mistakes and I would love to be able to recognize and correct them for that post and all my future work. I would also ask that you not be childish and get upset over every single little thing I put on this blog that disagrees with what you think. That I why I am doing this, to learn and to share.
I am very excited to be able to learn and grow, and I hope that this blog gets you thinking. I look forward to hearing everyone's thoughts and opinions Now that I have gotten over the very boring stuff, I will introduce you to my new master topic, Politics.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)