Write about it!

Class Distinction on the Titanic

2010-01-14T06:23:00.002-05:00

The photo to the right shows the British and English speaking Goodwin family (minus the youngest Goodwin baby) before the Titanic disaster. The reason there is no family photos after the sinking is because the entire Goodwin family perished on the Titanic. The fact that they all died gives lie to the idea that so many Third Class passengers perished because they couldn't understand English. Fredrick Goodwin was a 42 year old electrical engineer from Fulham in Britain, who was taking his entire family to Niagara Falls, NY where he would work with his brother. Goodwin was not an immigrant who didn't understand what happened around him, so blaming the Goodwin's death on being ignorant immigrants won't cut it.

On April 15, 1912, at about 2:20am, the RMS Titanic sank beneath the icy waters of the North Atlantic. At the British Inquiry, Mr. W. D. Harbinson, the official representative of the Third Class people, or steerage passengers, had this to say:

"I wish to say distinctly that no evidence has been given in the course of this case that would substantiate a charge that any attempt was made to keep back the third class passengers. There is not an atom or a tittle of evidence upon which any such allegation could be based (Lord, Walter; The Night Lives on, PG 93)

Before both the American and British boards of inquiry, The White Star Line's company standard was essentially the same; that the only rule was "Women and children first;" there was no distinction between classes. The problem with this assertion is that the numbers of saved do not agree with Harbinson, as I believe I will show in this article.

I will evaluate the argument that class distinction did indeed affect the number of Third Class passengers saved from the sinking Titanic. To get us started, consider this; 53% of first and Second Class passengers were saved, but only 25% of Third Class. Of the First and Second Class women and children, 94% saved, but only 42% of those in Third Class. Only one child in First Class was lost-while in Third Class, 52 out of 79 children were lost. (Lord, Walter, "The Night Lives On," PG 94)

I know the argument many will put forth; that the numbers themselves are what count, not the percentages, but that is erroneous. Because there were more Third Class passengers, more should have been saved. And spare me the weak assertion that steerage passengers weren't kept below decks.

Third Class passengers were use to doing what they were told by their "betters" it was almost second nature, even if it did grate on their collective nerves. It is almost certainly what took place aboard Titanic. They were told to wait, and they did, until the slant of the deck and the cacophony of noise told them that their time was fast running out. Then the men began to get antsy and demanded to be released to the boat deck.

Almost immediately after brushing against the iceberg, unmarried Third Class men, housed in the bow of the ship, began to get wet and knew something was wrong with the ship. Because Third Class passengers were prevented from entering either First or Second Class sections of the ship by locked barriers, these men had to re-route, thus taking them farther away from where they needed to go. The barriers proved to be the death of almost four hundred men as they eventually drowned as the ship sank beneath them. For more in depth analysis of this, check out this link: David Gleicher

Third Class survivors Carl Jansson and Bernt Johannesen's stories are typical of several Third Class men from the bow who survived to tell them. Jansson later related his story: "Then I run down to my cabin to bring my other clothes; watch and bag but had only time to take the watch and the coat when water with enormous force came into the cabin. I had to rush up to the deck again where I found my friends standing with life belts on and with terror painted on their faces. What should I do now, with no life belt, no shoes, and no cap?
Bernt Johannesen also had a story to tell: "We were in the cabin where we undressed. Then we heard something like a vibration in the ship. I dressed, and went upstairs. On the other deck, I met a mate who told me that we had struck an iceberg, and boats were being put out as a matter of precaution. It was nice, quiet weather that evening, so I thought I would walk to the cabin to get a coat. However, at the fourth deck I was stopped by an officer who told me that I could not get any further. The seawater had got into the cabin. (Gleicher, David: The fatal journey of Third Class Men on Titanic) David Gleicher

Third Class passengers "congregated at the Third Class stairway" (Lord, Walter, "The Night Lives On," PG 96) located on E Deck. Why didn't they go all the way to the boat deck to get into the boats? While lifeboats were being lowered to the Frigid North Atlantic, Third Class passengers were below decks and had no idea that their only safe way off the ship was rowing away. The truth is, there were stewards posted down in E Deck with the Third Class passengers, a few minutes before 1:00am, instructions finally came to "pass women and children up to the boat deck." Assuming Third Class passengers were not being withheld from the boat deck, would it be necessary to pass (another word for allow) the women and children?
Steward John E. Hart testified that he escorted two groups (thirty & twenty-eight respectively) of Third Class women and children to the boat deck.

By the time he came back for the second group things down below had taken an ugly turn. Third Class men were now demanding to be allowed up on deck. Steward Hart's testimony was heavily relied on by the White Star Line, but Hart's testimony clearly showed that the men in Third Class (steerage) were held back and the women had what amounted to an hour's handicap in the race for the lifeboats. (Lord, Walter, "The Night Lives On," PG 115)
The White Star Line explanation that the language barrier kept Third Class passengers from understanding instructions from the crew impressed the court; in fact, the court accepted all of White Star's "lines"; Third Class passengers were reluctant to leave the ship, they were reluctant to leave their luggage, and it was difficult to get them up from their quarters. The problem with the first two of these excuses is that they were true of all passengers. As for getting them up from their quarters, they were all told to get their life belts on by at least midnight, and the fact that there were so many at the Third Class stairway proves this theory, at best false and at worst, misleading on their part.
At the British Inquiry, one member of the crew after another assured the court that there was no discrimination whatsoever- but not a single Third Class passenger was called as a witness. Further more, to debunk the theory of the language barrier, the Goodwin's, an entire family of eight, never made it off Titanic, and they were British. Taken all together, or piece-by-piece, the evidence clearly shows that, though no one, both then or now, want class distinction to actually be a cause of death to any passengers, the opposite is true.

According to Douglas W. Phillips, the idea of class distinction was a fallacy, based on numbers of First Class passengers saved as opposed to Second and Third. Third Class passengers vastly outnumbered both First and Second Classes, so based on this and the number of men saved from Third (75) as opposed to Second Class, (14) the idea of class distinction is wrong.

All this proves is that more Third Class men were saved than Second Class men... period. Consider the opposite by this standard, since 387 Third Class passengers perished, as opposed to 154 for Second, that means twice the amount died from Third Class than Second. Phillips also tries to use the vast amount of crew that died as a comparison to Third Class. This will not wash, as crew are supposed to die as opposed to passengers, though it is preferable that no one is lost.

This evaluation demonstrates that class distinction was almost definitely an issue on board RMS Titanic. The lack of lifeboats for all passengers created the necessity for class selection, and the location of steerage made it obvious as to who would be held in check where possible. Most steerage passengers were uneducated, heading to the New World for a better life, and the fact that they could not speak English only made them that much easier to exploit.

To assume that those in authority would not use these circumstances against those in steerage is naive and unrealistic considering human nature or the alternative, which would be survival of the fittest; riots, and death to even greater numbers due to the chaos that would have reigned on the sloping deck.

With 2201 souls on board, and lifeboats for only 1178 Captain Edward J. Smith did not even bother with boat drills and/or boat assignments for either crew or passengers. The resulting confusion caused by complacency and disaster left room for what passed as natural selection during the Edwardian Era.

Although David Gleicher has an interesting, brilliant, and convincing argument that explains much of what steward Hart said, and didn't say. One can not explain away everything that adds up to one thing; there is a reason, or are reasons, why too many Third Class passengers didn't make it to the life boats. Numbers and percentages will only tell us so much as well. When it comes right down to it, Social status was the ticket off Titanic.

My how Christmas has changed

2009-12-25T07:54:00.005-05:00

You know it wasn't that many years ago that my kids were waking me up on Christmas day to open presents. I could feel the excitement, and tension in the air on those mornings. The kids were excited to see what Santa brought them. The tension was provided by me and my wife. Would the kids like what they got? Did we manage to pull out another successful Christmas for our kids... by the skin of our teeth?

We as a family have always known the true meaning of Christmas, and I remember reminding the kids when they were young to give thanks to God for his son, but some where along the years, as the kids got older, and we moved around, and away from the Church, the most important part of Christmas ended up in the back seat, and I do not refer to the presents we bought.

Now that the kids are older... 13, 19, and 23, I find myself sitting here Christmas morning writing this blog about my kids and Christmas, while they are either still sleeping or, in my oldest daughters case, opening presents with her daughter in Massachusetts. The other two that are still sleeping won't even stir until ten or eleven.

One of the most memorable times of Christmas for me was after I met my wife. Her family all got together at Christmas, as mine had, but without the chaos. When her family got together, it meant brothers and sisters, cousins and nieces, aunts and uncles, grandmas and grandpas, new babies and old. There was lots of noise of course, but one thing was lacking that my family had in abundance... the chaos. With my new family it was like... organized chaos. And yes, there is such a thing.

My wife's grandmother always got the guys (my father in law not included) the same thing, which I am not complaining about. There was probably twenty different males to buy for, at various ages along the spectrum. For me, I still have the gloves she gave me the last Christmas that I saw her before going back into the military, what's more, I still use them.

It has been nearly ten years since we have all been together again, and yes I miss it. I will always miss it. Both my in laws' parents have passed, as well as one of my wife's aunts, where we once went on New Years. We still go to my in laws house on Thanksgiving and Christmas, but as family's often do, ours has evolved as well, and Christmas will never be quite the same.

I look forward to future Christmas's with my kids and grandkids, and my in laws. Hopefully our family will evolve again to bring us all back together once more at Christmas time. That would be a Christmas present from God I think, a miracle of sorts.

A little less talk, a lot more action

2009-09-16T06:37:00.005-04:00

After watching both games closely... and I tried not to watch the Jets game as only a Patriots fan would (but as a football fan). I was impressed with the Jets defense against... the Texans. Lets be honest, Matt Schaub was quite pathetic; he looked like the rookie out there. As for Sanchez, he looked good against a defense that was very mediocre. And to be honest, he might be doing it again on Sunday!

There was a comment that I read some where that read like this:

"The Jets could win this game just so long as they make sure there aren't any hidden cameras around watching their coaches..."

Could we find any more out of date, more tired comment than that?

Okay, lets try to stay focused-

I think the Jets are the better team right now. They are not more talented, by any means, but more cohesive and feeling good about themselves, and hey, more power to them.

However, rather than do all manner of talking about Super Bowls, (regardless of when they are being played) why don't they just go out and let their play do the talking for them? The Jets could make a much louder statement by going out there on Sunday, smacking the Pats in the mouth (like I think they might be able to do based on what I saw this past weekend and Monday night) and then move on to the next game, and the next.

Their coach should be preaching that mantra in fact, but he is too busy strutting around prattling on about not kissing rings. Well, I don't recall anyone asking you to Rex. The thing is this, when you are young and so full of piss and vinegar as the Jets are, your ego is so fragile. You have so much further to fall due to all the chest pounding you are always doing. Why do you think coach's like Parcells and Belichik and Cowher always keep their players so grounded? If the Jets go out and get creamed on Sunday ( No, I don't think it will happen) what could that do to their collective psyche after all their trash talking since freakin March?

I know, I'm just a Pats fan, what do I know? I think the Jets will win the battle this week end, but in the end, the Patriots will win the war, and quite possibly the REAL Super Bowl.

A Father's Day post

2009-06-19T11:59:00.002-04:00

I have been blessed in my life with having two dads who have taught me about the meaning of "True American values;" honesty, integrity, work hard at what you do in order to be successful. Success is not "A lot of money," but a life lived to provide for one's family in an honest manner. It is no accident, or surprise, that neither man has anything to do with the Internet or computers. My biological father is an upstanding member of the greatest generation, though he missed WWII by a few years. He fought in Korea in 1951 while in the Army, and spent a life time working ridiculous hours and supporting a family that at times, grew to 13 in a household... all immediate family members.

My father-in-law fought in Vietnam and then quietly came home to work for one company for almost 30 years, providing for his family before finally moving to upstate NY to a quieter, but no less busy, life. In some ways these two men are so much alike though they have met only once or twice; they are both amazingly stubborn and rigid in their beliefs. One is an old time JFK democrat with no like minded people that he knows, in Massachusetts. The other a staunch conservative with a bone to pick with both parties. They both believe that we all must answer to God for the decisions we make in this life. One lives that belief, the other is quiet about it, but believes it non-the-less. I owe so much to both men, and my debt encompasses more than the monetary. Their support in my life's decisions has been at times, dubious, when I should have paid attention to their hesitance and guidance. I often came to rue those decisions, as my son, unfortunately, will too at times.

I don't always agree with their assessments, but their support has been there. I know there is no such thing as a perfect parent, least of all a perfect father. I know that first hand, but I'm glad I had these two fathers in my life.

The flip-flopping president.

2009-05-23T05:52:00.010-04:00

The flip-flopping president

Read the two statements below, and then think about what is common between them:

1.) In a speech to a pro-Israel lobby group last June 4th, Obama spoke to the American Israel Public Affairs Council (AIPAC). President Obama said this. Jerusalem "will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."

Wow, that says it all right? No need to second guess what he is telling them there... but wait.

In an interview July 12, 2008 Interview with Fareed Zakaria:

2.) "We don't want barbed wire running through Jerusalem, similar to the way it was prior to the '67 war," Obama explained.

Obama said the latter statement in response to Fareed Zakaria's insertion that Obama was outside the International consensus that, evidently everyone else in the international community wants to take Jerusalem, split it in half, giving the Palestinians one side and leaving the other side to Israel.

Alright, so the commonality is that President Obama said both statments. But he is smooth, and his questioners allowed him to wiggle out of his flip-flopping because they are biased toward him. There is no other conclusion here. It is the modus operandi of most of America's media, and what will continually bail this president out of hot water again and again through out his reign.

The only problem I see with the grand consensus Zakaria spoke of is this, Israel is a sovereign nation people. It is not up to outsiders whether or not Israel split their capital in half for anyone, regardless how contentious the issue may be. Or how strong (tongue in cheek) someone might think their argument might be in favor of this ridiculous idea.

What about this little tidbit? I don't remember reading anything in my history books about France recommending we split Virginia in half in 1863 during our Civil War because some wanted to keep slavery and some didn't.

Look, I know the U.S. sticks it's big, nosy nose in too many world-wide issues. The thing is, if we didn't, nations like France, Germany, Russia, China, and yes, Britain would run rough shod over the world, dictating what will and will not be within other sovereign nations. And yes, this goes for the United States as well. But answer this question honestly to yourself; who in the world is going to face down, or halt Iran if and when they decide to launch on Israel, besides Israel herself I mean? Russia, China? Please! They are both in bed with Iran and their nuclear program, along with North Korea, and we all know Pyongyang isn't going to come out in any kind of rational way.

I certainly don't have all the answers to the world's ills, but sticking our collective noses into Israel's sovereignty will get us no where, unless more war is a place we want to be. Believe it or not, as an American, I do not want war.

If siding with, or standing against Israel is the option, I am on Israel's side in this situation. After all, God Himself said in Genesis 12:3, “I will bless those who bless you,(here comes the kicker) and whoever curses you (emphasis mine) I will curse; and all peoples on earth shall be blessed through you.”(NIV) And no I am not a bible scholar or a self-righteous religious person. But I do know some of the bible, and I remember something Jesus said to the Pharisees after he drove out a demon from some guy. In case you are not aware of who the Pharisees were, they were the big-wigs in the Jewish world back in the day. They were the Dividers of the people when it came to Jesus too. They saw the danger he represented to the status-quo. He answered them in Mathew 12:25 in this way: A kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided gainst itself will not stand.

Wasn't it Abraham Lincoln, Obama's "favorite" president who had the famous House Divided Speech? Lincoln spoke of a different situation than what I am speaking of here I know, but not by much when it is all put into context.

And when it all comes down to it, isn't the "Ruin of Israel" the ultimate goal here of those who seek the division? Think about it, and be honest with yourself, if not with those you speak to on this issue.

Not so funny

2009-05-03T07:19:00.006-04:00

Not So Funny

Yesterday, while my wife and I were in a BJ's Wholesale Club shopping, we both went our separate ways for a while and I made a "B-Line" for the books, as I always do. I noticed a book with Denis Leary holding a sparkler on the cover. I've always liked Denis Leary, now Dr. Leary, and the title farely jumped off the cover at me (which I'm sure was part of Denis's plan)... "Why We Suck." Pretty simple and straight forward.

Now I've always enjoyed Denis Leary's humor; his style and wit was engaging and forced us all to pay attention lest we miss something. The fact that he is a Red Sox fan also helped.

So there I am in BJ's reading the prologue and that is when it hit me... Denis Leary is a Pinko Liberal. Yeah, I said it. I still think he is hilarious, and he himself said in his foreword that the book would piss people off. It surprised me more than pissed me off because I would expect honesty in one's belief at least, if he is going to attack one president and praise another for his alleged great deeds, then he ought to state what the facts were as they actually were, not as he wishes they were.

Leary castigates George Bush Jr., as he calls him, yet man-crushes all over Bill Clinton despite his obvious presidential failures (and no, I am not talking about Lewinsky). Does the name Osama bin Laden ring any bells? As in, Clinton should have nailed him after the first WTC bombing. So Denis, don't tout Clinton as this big peace guy, when he is one of the earlier failures which now require the "War on Terror." Not to mention that he has something in common with our current president.

In 2000 Clinton dipped the U.S flag aboard a naval vessel to that of the Vietnamese flag during a visit he made to Vietnam. Something America just did not do as a rule. Commenting at the time of the report was America's most decorated living war veteran, Colonel David Hackworth, "What's new? Clinton has done everything else to dishonor the flag, why not make it number two?"

Now, in 2009, Obama all but prostrates himself in front of Saudi King Abdullah at the G20 Summit.

You know, it's one thing to have a sense of humor about all things. It's quite another to pretend to be making jokes about something, when what you are conducting, is a dishonest left-wing attack. Regardless of what the rest of the book says, Leary set the tone in the prologue!

GE and Hypocrycy

2009-04-24T10:05:00.004-04:00

In March 2003 when I began the trek from Kuwait up through the heart of Iraq with my unit in the 4th Infantry Division, I had no idea about the scandal that was about to unfold in regard to Haliburton. Now, common sense and hindsight tells me that if the Vice President of the United States has something to do with a company that is making money from government contracts, then it makes for a conflict of interest and more bad press for America. But what else is new right, it seems bad press is all America can put out these days?

So lets fast forward to today; Friday, April 24, 2009. President Barrack Obama has appointed Jeff Immelt to his economic recovery advisory board, of all things. Immelt can not even advise or recover the company he runs, never mind the entire country. But this gets better; after GE stock has plunged more than 70% under Immelt's so called leadership and now GE stands to rake in "billions" under the cap and trade policy currently under consideration by the current administration.

What was it I said about common sense and conflict of interest with regard to government contracts? When the president appoints someone with a questionable (to say the least) performance record, to a position in his administration in the very area in which that individual has performed so abysmally, you have to wonder if the fix is in. Then again, all one has to do is watch the news, and there isn't much of a question as to whether the fix is in or what side most of the media is on is there? I guess the surgical removal of honesty and moral integrity must be a requirement before joining these journalistic media giants eh?

They're screaming about torture and justice these days... just wait until they are torturing Americans. Who will scream for our justice then?

Great Call Mr. President

2009-04-16T09:08:00.004-04:00

As any one would know who has read my blog, I have been critical of our president of late, and with good reason I think. But not so today!

President Obama ordered the Navy Seals in to handle the Somali Pirates, and handle them they did; three shots, three dead pirates (the fourth had come to the Navy ship earlier due to illness). Do I celebrate the death of three human beings? Absolutely not, what I celebrate is the American Action inherent in situations like this. And this is exactly the situation I've been nervous about in regard to President Obama. Having seen the president's domestic agenda as an absolute disaster for our way of life, and in his own words, he wants to "change the foundation of how our country has worked since about 1879."

That kind of rhetoric makes many people nervous, and for good reason. But today is a proud day for America and the U.S. Navy, and yes, President Obama. Again, not for the death of these pirates, but for the correct action taken in this instance by President Obama. I know that may sound duplicitous, but it is not. What other action would have served... to pay the pirates? When the American military and government got involved, paying the pirates was no longer an option, and rightly so. As terrible an out come for the pirates as this was, maybe they have learned a little lesson here.

I have no illusions that they will strike again, and maybe they will change their tactics. So will the Navy, and the result will be the same if our resolve remains firm. So far the score is U.S. Navy 3 Pirates 0.

The UN-American President

2009-04-09T18:29:00.012-04:00

The Un-American President

Recently President Barrack Obama went on a European "popularity tour" to tell the world how much he was sorry, and that he can't stand America either. Of course, he was only doing what the liberal media, Acorn, and his presidential campaign backers paid him to do; that is, bring America down where she belongs.

During his inauguration I held out hope that Obama wouldn't completely tear apart the United States, but alas the new president began his dismantling of America within his first week.

I know what the Obama's supporters (or should I say his apologists) will say, "President Obama has been doing all he can to bring America out of the dole drums that the Bush administration brought us down to." All I can say to that is, "pull this one, it plays jingle bells."

Is this the "change I can believe in?" That the president has shown over and over that he hates America, and true, hard-working Americans... oh, and everything we have stood for, for more than two hundred years? Because if that is it, the message has sunk in, very deep. Only a president with roots steeped in anti-Americanism would go to Europe and kowtow to the likes of the french & germans (no, I will not capitalize it).

And to actually be able to stand there and say, "without equivocation or exception that the United States of America does not and will not torture." (The Humbling of a Superpower, by Nile Gardiner, Human Events.com) Are you kidding me? How does Obama expect us to get information from dangerous terrorists, ask nicely? Besides all that, and like Gardiner says, "As if Obama's own country had been some sort of brutal tyranny that had suddenly seen the light with his election." And he had the gall to accuse America of arrogance?

How much "play" is the left trying to get out of this so called issue? The Abu Ghraib incident is almost five (5) years old people, and when the left harps on it constantly as a means to their false agenda's, more rational, true Americans suffer for it. President Obama is smack-dab in the middle of this... Three trillion plus sized budget? He signs a stimulus with almost 9000 pay offs... er, I mean ear marks, sorry. I was thinking of his contributors there for a minute, so I was kind of confused.

How about this international gem that our illustrious leader spewed forth; "instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times when America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive."

Oh really Mr. President, when was this? Might it be that this all happened when practically the whole of Europe, (aside from our one true allies, Britain and Australia) "derisively" told us we had to allow "more than the fifteen international sanctions (that had all been dismissed and laughed at by Hussein... to the detriment of his people) to work against Iraq and Saddam Hussein." Or could it have been that they were all so deep in bed with Hussein during the "Food for Oil Program" that they didn't want any of that to see the light of day? The only thing they could think to do was attack our decisions. Doesn't that type of behavior sound familiar? Doesn't it resemble what the left does every time someone disagrees with what they believe?

Platform of the American People

My question is, how long is the Obama administration going to milk the Bush administration as a cop out for its failures, bad ideas and apologizing to the rest of the world. I have a feeling the likes of Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and Dodd will not be happy until this country is nothing more than an after thought to the rest of the global community. They won't be happy until they have given what money we have left, away. They wouldn't know or choose a real solution if it bit them in their collective... well, you know.

And what "leading role in the world" has Europe played in the last sixty years? (The Humbling of a Superpower, by Nile Gardiner, Human Events.com) Other than the race to socialism I mean? Please don't try their "universal health care" on me, because that is so not what we want here.

Platform of the American People

President Obama apologized for American arrogance and dismissiveness, and he said again something about us not being a Christian country, but one of moral, hard working people." Of course all those things may be true, but he refuses to accept the fact that 85% of Americans consider themselves Christian. That is what he apologizes for, and the fact that we, as Americans, are proud of our heritage of working for what we have.

Another thing that I am NOT SORRY for is our history as a nation. I'm sure our president would fall all over himself apologizing for how we came to be one of the greatest nations in the history of the world. But at least he wouldn't be the first for that travesty. Has any other world leader ever apologized to seek approval? The irony is this; Barrack Obama heard cheers, but what most Americans heard was laughter and jeers.

I'm sure if anyone even reads this, I will hear it from those who don't want to see what is right in front of them. The truth that is.

If you would like to read Nile Gardiner's article you can find it here.

Platform of the American People

Twelve American Solutions for Jobs and Prosperity.

Ryan Moats: What has happened to compassion?

2009-03-27T07:41:00.003-04:00

As far as everyday occurrences go, I don't go out of my way to give my opinion about them because... well, no one cares what I think, and rightfully so. I am not E.F. Hutton, I know that. When I speak, I am about the only one who listens. If you don't get the whole E.F. Hutton thing at all... don't worry about it.

This morning while watching ESPN, I read a news snippet scrolling along the bottom of the screen about Ryan Moats. I have no idea who Moats is, but it doesn't matter, it wasn't the name that captured my attention; it was a piece of what happened during the incident that caused me to take notice.

So like most everyone these days, I went to my search engine and typed "Moats" in the dialog box, and a whole host of entries came up. What I saw made me sick, and actually made me lower my head in shame for the Dallas police department, and America as a whole. Have we slunk so low that we have no compassion for even our own citizens? This isn't about politics here people. This is either about pure unadulterated stupidity, male pride or plain old rottenness and profiling. For either one of the latter reasons that officer should be fired.

I am not a proponent of the old "pull the profiling card," because I believe you must have irrefutable proof. Well, how about the camera and mike from the cruiser? Even after a nurse came out to plead the Moats' case, the officer (Officer Robert Powell) refused to budge. All Powell cared about was Moats' proof of insurance. Alright, how about a fellow officer, trying to explain that Moats' mother-in-law was dying "right now" as they were all standing outside arguing about a ticket and the fact that Moats could not find his proof of insurance, and faced having his car towed.

At one point Officer Powell lost what little sense he did posses and told Moats to shut up... thats right, shut up and settle down or he was going to be taken to jail for running a red light. Talk about communication skills in our professionals... shut up!

I know there will be many out there who will say, "an officer never knows what he is going to find when he pulls someone over and Powell had to make sure..." Bull _ _ _ _! After the nurse, then a fellow officer tries to tell you whats up, and you still do not have the common sense and compassion God gave most human beings to see that this is not an ordinary situation? You need to re do the police academy if that is the case, or see a psychiatrist for your lack of compassion for a fellow human being.

I've been a correction officer in a prison and spent a year in Iraq while in the army, I don't want to hear, you don't know what you would have done in this situation. This incident was all about testosterone, plain and simple. Powell's only other defense is stupidity or racism, which is it Officer Bob?

A Game of Thrones and Historical Events: A Parallel

2009-02-22T10:41:00.007-05:00

"Caution: Spoiler Alert!"

I first read A Game of Thrones in March of 2003, while in Kuwait awaiting word to proceed into Iraq with the vanguard of the 4th Infantry Division. While it was obvious right away that George R. R. Martin was a student of history and possibly one of history of warfare as well. But I admit I was naive enough for it to never occur to me that he may have been basing some of the events in "Thrones" on an actual historical events until this very morning when I was able to watch a show on the history channel called: "Caligula: Reign of Madness."

Now before you judge me mad, hear me out, or in this case, read me out. I am not proposing that Martin went ahead and based the entire thing on Caligula's reign. But while watching this show I began to make comparisons; beginning when King Robert ordered Eddard Stark (Ned) South to Kings Landing, and ending only when King Joffrey choked to death.

Everything that happened in between, including various travels down memory lane by Ned which pertained to the "Sacking of Kings Landing," and Prince Rhaegar's "Death on the Trident," which also included the murder of Princess Alia of Dorne, her infant child, and Ned's sister Lyanna respectively. Incidentally, the princesses daughter was murdered the same way in which Caligula's infant daughter was; grabbed by the ankles, and swung head-first into a wall, scattering her brains all about. Dastardly and cruel to the extreme in both instances.

I am in no way trying to presume that Martin absolutely based any of his events on the actual historical events that took place during the time of Caligula, or any historical events for that matter. What I am saying is that the events named above draw a parallel to actual events that have taken place throughout human history.

Having said that the events that took place between the years 19AD and 41AD ring familiar when reading A Game of Thrones. Of course the historical events do not mirror the novel, and one would not expect, or even want them to. All I am suggesting is that while watching this historical show on the events surrounding Caligula's life, but not his death, I was reminded of portions of Martin's outstanding work of art.

They don't make them like they use to!

2009-02-17T15:50:00.007-05:00

I am referring to movies and the way they are done now compared to the way they were done back in the day. I am not a total throw-back, but in my opinion there is just no comparison between the actors and actresses of the time of say, the 40's, 50's, and 60's and today, and the way they go about their craft.

If you need examples or you want me to be more specific and give exact comparisons that would be my pleasure. All my references can and are found at Internet Movie Database (IMDB). My comparisons will be child stars, and I will start with Elizabeth Taylor, and the movie would be National Velvet. She was phenomenal in that movie, from the smiles to the tears to the feeling in which she put into that part at 12 years of age. The year before that she stared in Lassie come home. By 1958 she had been nominated for her first Oscar; the first of five, with two wins in 1961 and 67.

No, I am not going to talk next about Shirley Temple, though I should. I am going to talk about Jodie Foster and her incredible body of work in The Taxi Driver. And did you know Foster did the original Freaky Friday? Well, neither did I; so we do learn something new every day don't we.But that isn't all she did is it? She was brilliant in The Accused also. Did I fail to mention Jodie won Mr. Oscar for The Accused (89) and for one more movie that happens to be one of the most popular movies of all time. Yeah, you know which one it is, and it stars another one of my favorites, but he is not what this blog is about; The Silence of the Lambs (92) was with out a doubt one of her best performances along with Nell, and Stealing Home. She was great in Contact. Her nominations include Taxi Driver in 76, and Nell in 94.

Here is one that I believe will blow you away as it did me; Kurt Russell, who most people know got his big start with Disney. Russel began acting at the age of nine, and did both TV and Disney. But get this, he did TV in the late 50's in a show called Sugarfoot. But that wasn't all; he was all over the tube in some very popular shows of the day and even had his own series on ABC called "The Travels of Jaimie McPheeters" from 1963-1964.

Russel then went on to do a variety of things like "Giligan's Island" in 1965, and "Lost in Space" in 1966. The list goes on and on, but he really caught on with people my age (at the time) doing Disney Movies like The Computer wore Tennis shoes,(1969) Now you see him, Now you don't,(1972) and The strongest man in the world. (1975) All three movies were about the escapades of a man named Dexter Riley.

One of the funniest movies I ever saw was with Kurt Russel, and called "Used Cars." It was a very underrated movie at the time, as was "Big trouble in little China." The latter was directed by John Carpenter, the former by Robert Zemeckis. Later on in the 90's it was Backdraft, Stargate, and you know the one with Sly Stallone that was bad but good. Kurt Russell only gets better with age. In the 21st century he is Steve Stronghold.

Are there other actors and actresses out there that are good at their craft like those that I listed here? Of course there are, and most assuredly there are those I missed that started as children, but as you can see the ones I selected began their careers way back when and for the most part, stayed out of trouble as children and young adults. They may have had their issues as adults, but then again who doesn't. The very nature of their work makes it impossible to keep their personal lives private. So every little thing that happens makes the news, but they still managed to stay out of trouble by and large.

As for Liz Taylor, she was so absolutely gorgeous that I'm sure she had her pick and in those days the media was not the tell all it is today. So what ever happened didn't always make the tabloids until she was much older. I am not a tabloid either.

Why I created a Titanic Lens

2009-02-02T10:37:00.008-05:00

My first attempt on Squidoo was a lens about making money on line. The name of the lens is not important right now, I am not trying plug all my lens in this one blog. The reason I told you that is because, about a year ago I realized that what I should be creating, was a passion. I decided to stick with what I know. I've read so much on the RMS Titanic that before I realized it I found myself becoming the one people sought out to ask questions on the most famous ship wreck in history. Admittedly people don't walk around talking about the Titanic like tomorrow's weather, and that was where Squidoo came in.

I could tell the story the way I always wanted to tell it; I could talk about the people that were on the Doomed Liner. The stories that surrounded the people on Titanic have helped keep the legend that is "The Titanic" alive.

For instance; regardless of what "reliable" account you read they all explain how "Charles Joughin" made it off the ship. Oh there may be a few variables; after nearly 100 years details are bound to get a little crossed. Especially somewhat minute details; such as a night time baker's sojourn on a sinking ship, in the middle of the North Atlantic, while drunk, in 1912. The reason why all these little, but unbelievably important details remain attainable is because other people, who were there, were able to corroborate enough of the details so as to make them worthy of including in either public or official records. These are the details I have been seeking.

For me, The Titanic is bigger than life, and in 1997 the movie itself was bigger than live as well. Of course, it wasn't true to the real story. But that doesn't mean it was not a very good movie. One area I would like to get right that James Cameron seemed to have abandoned either a lot truth, or just chose to leave it out, and that is the story of Margaret Brown. Most know her as The unsinkable Molly Brown." But did you know she was not known as Molly at all? As a child she was called Maggie, and as an adult either Margaret or Mrs. J.J Brown.

Then there is the ship itself, which needs no explanation. There are so many stories that surround that ship; they will give you goose-bumps. For great resources check out Titanic Historical Society, Inc.

An Historic Inauguration

2009-01-20T18:03:00.005-05:00

An Historic Inauguration

I did not vote for President Obama, I went from very depressed to resigned, to hopeful very quickly. I am by nature a hopeful cynic if there is such a thing. I have been trying to watch things carefully as they have transpired over the past two months since the election. But I noticed a curious thing happening almost in tandem with the transition of power within the White House. With respect to Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, nothing those two do really surprises me too much, but I will watch them until they have gone away from public service for ever. Reid should already be gone for his role in this financial fiasco, and any reasonable minded person knows it. The only thing wrong with Pelosi is she wants President Obama's job. Barring that, she'll take the power, she want's that for it's own sake.

If you are wondering what those two have to do with the 44th President of the United States? Well, they are members of his party. Though I think he may be worrying them a little over the past few weeks to a couple of months. I hope he continues to do just that, and I don't mean that because I want him to be George Bush or anyone other than President Barrack H. Obama. I know he is considered a progressive president, and I'm a conservative guy. But does that mean I can't cheer for him. Does that mean I can't pray or hope for him? And again, I am not hoping or praying that he all of a sudden gets an epiphany from "on high" and decides national health care is not a good idea, or taxing over $250, 000.00 sounds a bit low. Or maybe he'll start pushing for drilling for oil this weekend off the coast of Florida.

I don't expect any of those things; though drilling for our own oil would be about the smartest thing we could possibly do while we are getting into the alternative fuel business. It could help to kick-start our ailing economy and keep the wolves from other parts of the world sucking us dry of our money at the pumps. I know the Global Warming alarmists love to sound the clangor when someone says the words drill and oil in the same breath.

But I know President Obama is a smart and patriotic man, just as the president he follows. I know he has America's best interests at heart, and his Presidential Inauguration speech today he was very inspiring even to me, someone who, as I said, didn't vote for him. Yes there were things I shook my head at or maybe even had a slight frown on my brow about, but who agrees with everything someone says anyway? I agreed with probably 95% of what he said. And now I will hope and pray that he will be able to ward off the wolves right here at home on both sides of the political isle.

One thing is for sure however, he won't have the media to worry about like George Bush did. Most of the media in this country are completely in the tank for anyone on the left, but especially for our new president. Heck, I myself am looking for a reason to be in his corner too, but I won't just jump there because everyone else is. I will watch our president carefully, and especially... hopefully.

A case of rape and murder.

2008-12-11T19:59:00.002-05:00

There is much good that happens in Iraq & Afghanistan, but I recognize that not everything that has transpired in those two theaters of operation has been, shall we say, rosy. Some of it has been down right catastrophic. Especially for the Iraqi and Afghani people who have either lost their lives or their livelihoods in the wake of these two wars.

I know war is hell, to borrow the tired old cliche', but sometimes it is worse than it has to be because of choices people make thousands of miles away in an office somewhere far removed from flying bullets and exploding IED's. But the leaders we have in America aren't the only ones who have made some of those crappy decisions. Those crappy decisions have been made all over the world by leaders of many different countries and theirs' aren't always so under the microscope as ours are because others choose to turn their collective eyes away.

But some times things happen that we ourselves should police, and police harshly. I was still in the Army in 2006 when this rape/slaying took place and I was disgusted when I heard about it then. When I was in Okinawa, Japan in 1985 and getting ready to rotate back to the states one of the marines right in my own company was accused, and later convicted of a robbery/murder of a man in the town outside of Camp Hansen. Since the evidence gathering practices where so stringent and the conviction rate of violent criminals in Japan was (at the time) a whopping 96% that marine spent quite a few years in a Japanese prison. Exactly how many I don't know because I came back to the states and never heard any more about it.

But this case of rape and murder in Iraq reminded me of it again. Though admittedly this current case is far worse when you take into consideration the scope of the crime, the age of the rape victims (though I know rape knows no age when speaking of victims). The soldiers in question here chose an Iraqi girl they saw at a check point. The rest of this horrible story is in the article that is attached to the link above and below. You can also find the link at my Squidoo lens, which you can find here: jtedesco

I will never make any excuses for these despicable people and what they did, because there are none. Things like this is what cause people in other countries to pounce and point fingers, screaming at the top of their lungs what hypocrites Americans are when we preach about torture and terrorism and such. And who can argue with them right? WRONG!

Acts such as these are the exception, not the rule, like you will find when dealing with actual terrorists or thugs. When we find people such as these knuckleheads we usually hammer them. I know that some slip through the cracks, and please don't say that George Bush is one of them because that is just plain stupid!

I'm talking about the men like Ted Kennedy who allows a woman to drown in his car when he drives it off a bridge one night, and nothing is done other than he is never allowed to ascend to the level of political power that his brothers enjoyed. But then again, if he had, he may never have lived past his 40 something birthday.

That is just one example of people who get away with crimes because of having connections. But as you can tell by the Gov. Blagojevich case. The days of having friends in high places and getting away with crimes are slowly coming to an end. But I confess, I know the end isn't here yet.

As for our country as a whole, we are a noble nation, and we do not torture people just because it seems to be the fun or entertaining thing to do. Does it happen? Absolutely! And good, decent people usually report it and the wanna-be thugs almost always pay the price! But don't tell me that we don't need tough but humane interrogation tactics, because that is just, as the pigeons in the movie Bolt would say, "ridonkulous."

We do more for the African continent & to battle so-called Global Warming than any other country on the planet but you will not hear about that any where because that would give credit where credit is due; the Bush Administration.

All you will hear about is torture, Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, the Patriot Act, blah, blah, blah. But I promise you, history will see this president differently than how people are describing him now! Remember, you saw it here, and I do not say that arrogantly, because I do not believe I am in a position to be arrogant. I just think our president has done better than people give him credit for based on the "whole" picture.

If it were up to me, I would turn them over to the Iraqi people and tell them... do justice!

To read the article click here.

The Left Will Kill America!

2008-12-01T15:03:00.000-05:00

Absolute Fact- The Left Will Kill America!

Does the above title sound a little like I need to lighten up? If I didn't know what I know, and read and see the things that I see every day, I would say yeah, I definitely need to take a pill and go lie down with a cool face cloth on my forehead.

Think about it; to say the left will kill America and mean it, I think is a strong and provoking statement. But I don't say it just to be provocative. If you look at recent history, you will see a definite tendency to veer left ever since FDR and the so-called "New Deal." Actually, if you want to be a stickler for details you can probably find some origins of the "Elite Left" a little earlier; during the enlightenment, in the earlier part of the opening of the new century. But, I'm no historian, just interested and I think, at least a little... informed.

After WWII, for instance we were still manufacturing most of our own products from TV's to toys, and cars with carburetors. Now what do we build? Cheeseburgers? Non-fat lattes? Hell, we can't even build most computers any more, even those are outsourced. The liberals will blame the big corporations because of greed, but what about the unions? Has anyone ever really stopped to think about the size of the slice of pie they get? It doesn't all go to the workers you know.

The same goes for School Unions; they are way top-heavy and where do you suppose all that federal money goes? These school union heads have pensions and health plans the size of small countries budgets (obviously a slight exaggeration) and don't even blink or crack a smile when announcing cutbacks in school programs due to "lack of funds."

Are you kidding me? These same type of people are screaming about the environment and demanding regulations to replace the regulations they demanded the last time. Over-all we have the cleanest air in the world-"the world" and yet here we have people in our own government screaming about "US" being the biggest polluters in the world. They know it is a bald-faced lie, but with the media on their side reporting all the doom and gloom people believe what they read in the paper.

That is why it is imperative for you to get your information from multiple sources, so you can be discerning.

I will be including some of those "independent study site url's" here on MySpace profile if anyone is ever interested. You can check back periodically, but just in case you might want to NOT wait you can click on the link below to check out an article by Michael Crichton who most think knew what he was talking about:

http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html

If you don't agree with any of my premises, thats cool; just like the weather:)
(Sorry, I couldn't resist that corny global warming joke. Can you tell I just made it up?)

Okay I'm gonna stop now before I lose what ever credibility I may have earned up to this point.

Joe Tedesco
http://www.squidoo.com/jtedesco

Resistance 2 Public Beta

2008-10-26T14:02:00.000-04:00

Well, at first I was confused at the way the lobby of Resistance 2 was setup, and not a little intimidated at the prospect of mixing it up with people who are far better than I am at this game, whether they are new to it or not. Though I love to play Resistance I do not delude myself with visions of gaming grandeur.

First, it took me four hours to download 2211 MB of the R2 software onto my console. Perhaps it would have been faster with a hard-wired connection, but I felt it necessary to attempt the download with the connection I use for gaming. Other than the long wait there has been no other glitches to date, though it has only been a few days I have played at least 8 to 10 hours with no problems while on line. That includes checking my stats, as well as that of others, with no lagging and no lost data.

The game play itself was excellent really. The team aspect of this game is awesome, because it shows the absolute need to work together in a combat situation. Having hero's is great and all, but in the Real World heroes do indeed rely on others in order for the events to come to fruition that make them hero's.

By installing medics, soldiers, and special ops personnel Insomniac have given regular folks a taste of how it works when in combat. Other companies have done this before I'm sure; not least among them whoever created the software for the U.S Army game used at all their recruiting events. Sorry, I'm not up on gaming software and the companies that create them. It never seems to be that high on my priority list other than to know who makes the game I am most recently interested in.

I suppose what you are more interested in would be the different classes in which you would participate while in the game. The first class I will discuss is the Medic. You might think the medic would be the least heroic right? You would be wrong if you did. You are given this neat little device that sucks the life right out of your enemies by pressing the R1 button. By pressing the R2 button you can heal friendlies. When a comrade is killed, you can resuscitate him faster than others can, after all, that is your job. As you progress and gain XP points you also unlock more advanced weapons and medic equipment.

The same goes for the other two classes, which are the Soldier, and the Special Operations, or Spec Ops soldier. The Soldier does the obvious things; he kills, he dies. The Spec Ops soldier is responsible for equipping everyone with ammo throughout the missions. And as with the medic, you gain XP points as you progress and achieve great things throughout the game. Unlocking weapons and other gear you become the soldier, or civilian, or whatever as you gain more and more XP points.

It is a bit more complicated than RFOM, but if a 45 year old (decidedly non-gamer) can figure this out, I guarantee those who are use to these types of games will figure it out with ease.

Resistance 2 is going to be a huge success as long as there are not many glitches to contend with. The gun turrets are absolutely murderous, (at least for me and everyone I've played with so far) and they have introduced a rank structure into the Chimeran horde. Above the ranking Chimeran you will see a bar with the number of stars representing the individual's rank, and subsequently the difficulty in taking it down.

Of course there is more, but I haven't reached it yet, and probably won't by the time the Beta ends.

American media not for truth, dark times are coming.

2008-10-23T07:32:00.001-04:00

At what point in history did the American media almost en masse make the fateful decision to revise, and otherwise write what ever they decide they want people to read or watch in the news.

What is so difficult about reporting what you see? Let the viewers, or the readers decide what the truth is. I believe that is a black and white thing (not the racial black & white- stay focused here people). Either something is true or it is not, plain and simple.

In this election season the media has taken dishonesty to a new low. But only because we as a nation continue to allow it. Americans see the so-called "Big Three" on T.V. spewing their propaganda and instead of changing the channel or getting their news from the Internet, they watch that crap, and whats worse, they believe it.

I know there are homes that do not have cable T.V. or even gulp... Internet, so I realize that there isn't anything for them. But for the most part people are just too gullible, or they want to believe in something so bad that they just grab hold and refuse to let go.

But what happens when that something is the wrong thing? Come on, this isn't my opinion here. This is the truth! If you don't think so just watch a couple minutes of each of the so-called major news casts and I think you may revise your thinking if you are a true minded person. These people are so in the tank for Obama and anyone else that is running on the democratic ticket that it is fast beginning to resemble what they have been accusing the Bush administration of being all along. And that is a tyranny. If you doubt me in any way, just wait until after the election and see if the left elect a "Super Majority."

You will see unheard of things come to fruition that you would never think possible in this country. The left is salivating right now, because it is so close they can taste it. All over Europe people are celebrating... behind closed doors to be sure. They wouldn't want anyone to know their agenda, which has been to turn the U.S to a more user friendly U.S if you will, ever since Bush's star began to fall. But that is a separate and much deeper issue.

The media in this country, be it print or televised has been slanted left for years. But the gloves are off now. They are no longer pulling their punches or trying to hide their bias. They are fully in the tank for any on the left. And then they scream bloody murder at Fox News for reporting what I believe to be some pretty good "news reporting," not B.S. Which by the way, people think Fox is the most non-biased news station on T.V. I have watched both CNN, and Fox, just to see the difference between the two. Because I only trust myself to do the job right and I couldn't believe my eyes or ears.

You see, even though I back John McCain I realize his short comings. The way I see it, that is where Congress comes in. Be that as it may, though I could never back Obama, I recognize his charisma and see how people become anamored with him. But when I watch these two news stations I put my partisanship aside while I am watching during these times because I am on a different mission. I am watching and listening for specific things. I am not listening to every little thing they say as much as I am to the between the lines stuff, and I am also reading the ticker on the bottom of the screen to see what they are reporting, though I really can't say I've seen anything there.

You can see where the left is coming from a mile away. If you don't agree with what they say or stand for. They immediately go on the attack. Exhibit A is "Joe the plumber." Big freakin deal if he doesn't have the correct or any license for that matter. Do we have bigger fish to fry here or what? And don't come to me with what about Bill Ayers because we both know they are two horse of vastly different color. The future president of the United States has a questionable past with a "home-grown terrorist," and how convenient for you that you think that it is irrelevant. Or that his self proclaimed mentor hates America, or that he lied about his muslim back ground. Which I could care less about, other then the fact that he lied about it.

So what is the difference here? The difference is Joe the plumber isn't running for president. All he is guilty of is asking the presidential candidate a question. Suddenly he is being investigated by all these "hardnosed" reporters. Like Laura Ingram said on The O'Reilly Factor on Friday. She asked this question(I am paraphrasing): "Were any of those news vans parked outside Bill Ayers house asking questions about his actions all those years ago? The is N.O. NO!"

You will not see any of this happen with the news media in this country, unless it happens on Fox news. Yesterday, October 22 O'Reilly was on the "The View," and Barbara Walters had the audacity to pin the bailout squarely on the shoulders of the Bush administration. Amazingly, O'Reilly didn't say anything to that, maybe he just didn't want to argue a meaningless point with all those ladies. Walters was clearly wrong in her accusation. Though Bush floated the idea and pushed it, we all know this whole thing had it's infancy during the Clinton administration with Barney Frank jamming these bad loans down the throats of banks. I don't pretend to know enough about all this to delve into it completely, but I know enough to know the truth. Laws were changed during that time to force the issue, and now here we are. And everyone is blaming the right. What a coincidence.

What does this say about America?

2008-10-13T08:21:00.000-04:00

I liked Tina Fey so much better when she was just a down on her luck teacher going through the throes of life and rolling with the punches. Oh wait a minute, she was just acting. We have no idea who Fey is and guess what, no one cares really, outside of a few dozen SNL fans.

But it doesn't say much for the American voter when an actress can have an impact on an election simply by aping another person's mannerisms and words on camera. Sure it can be funny, though, though I prefer the days of Tom Hanks, Eddy Murphy, and Dan Akroyd. But the Tina Fey as Sarah Palin has taken on a different tone than just entertainment. When Dana Garvey did the first George Bush you couldn't help but laugh because it was completely harmless, it hurt no one, wasn't intended to hurt any one, and everyone laughed. What a difference a couple decades make huh?

The sad reality here, is that if Tina Fey is having an impact on this race, (as was suggested on at least one news program that I watch) then America should reexamine the way it goes about getting it's information on presidential and vice presidential candidates. I mean, if you are making a decision based on a skit you saw Tina Fey do, what does this say about America? More importantly, what does it say about you? A little shallow perhaps. I mean, if Tina Fey is the first exposure you have to the idea of a McCain/Palin ticket ad you say to yourself...what? Then by all means, look hard into both candidates, but not via SNL. At the risk of sounding like a sound bite myself, Tina Fey is not the way.

The left is ready to commence with their coup de' tat

2008-10-10T09:36:00.000-04:00

In my research to write this blog I came across a forum where, on October 9, 2008 there was a discussion on this alleged "Acorn Scandal." One person actually called this a non-issue. A non-issue? Are you kidding me? Was he not alive or even awake during the last two elections? The fact that I stumbled upon a bunch of liberals crying about "another" ethical dilemma they find their favorite candidate in is not surprising. What did take me aback was the fact that they were surprised about this investigation at all which, by now, on October 10th, has turned into practically a nationwide raid on "Acorn."

I say it is about time. In no way should "any" one private group be responsible for, or be allowed to meddle, in any way with voter registration. That means... hands off! It is a federal offense to screw around with voter registration cards or applications right? So why does a private or public company, with a "political ax" to grind, have anything what so ever to do with voter... anything? Talk about over-sight. I guess the financial sector isn't the only thing needing regulatory over-sights.

Folks on the left are screaming that republicans are, and have been guilty of voter repression. Propaganda is so prevalent in our society that without "REAL," almost visual evidence of an allegation such as this, propaganda is all you have... empty words and accusations.

With Acorn, the proof is in the pudding, sort of speak. They basically have the fraudulent registration applications and cards in their hands, and that is why the FBI raided them and will continue to do so all over the country as they turn up these bogus cards.

The problem with Acorn, is that they have more political irons in this fire than they would probably care to discuss in a public forum. They are at least as culpable as Barney Frank in this financial crisis in my opinion. Look, not everyone can afford to buy a home. That is just the way it is, and when someone tries to engineer a way to jam the "false philosophy" of "financial equality" down our collective throats, we find ourselves in the midst of a socialistic society. One that this country was not founded on, and the American people DO NOT want. Only a select, "elite few" want that society, because it offers them complete power over our lives.

All this; Acorn, the origin of the financial crisis, the environmental agenda of the left, their collective love affair with Europe and it's model of politics is nothing less than a massive power play that has been playing out for more than thirty years.

Look, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I am a realist, I see things that are going on around me, and I am forced to acknowledge certain realities. I can already hear the counter arguments to this idea; "What about the Bush administration's attack on personal freedoms with the likes of "The Patriot Act." That one is so easy it is pathetic, and I can't believe the Bush camp doesn't just tell it like it is; the only people that get have to worry about "The Patriot Act" are those that should worry about it. All other arguments are just semantics and political talking points, not to mention ACLU garbage.

Another BS argument is the one regarding the Abu Ghraib torture. No, I am not condoning what happened at Abu Ghraib. It was despicable and completely unprofessional and un-called for. But to actually lay blame on the Bush administration, who took the proper action regarding the incident is plain dumb, and politics as usual in Washington. In my opinion, as long as those responsible were held accountable, that is all that matters. Not who was in office at the time; even if it had been Bill Clinton, who by the way, was in office when this whole "housing for those can't afford it" plan got under way. Was it Clinton's fault? No. But he was president when it came to be thanks to the likes of Barney Frank and others like him. And then this idea was jammed down the collective throats of lending institutions around the country. Strong-arming those who hedged at it with partisan politics as usual.. all part of this coup de' tat I mentioned in the title of this blog.

You don't have to buy what I'm saying, I guess it all depends on where you get your news and resources. If you depend on the regular media for truth, then you have been badly misled. If you think you are reading or hearing the truth when you pick up your major newspaper (the New York Times, LA Times; et al.) or switch on your news, then you are delusional or simply refuse to know what is really going on in this country... right under your nose.

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE FOR MCCAIN?

2008-10-04T17:49:00.000-04:00

I’ve been watching the left as they have gone on the attack since Sarah Palin came on the McCain ticket, and at first I was amused at the stridency of their collective voice against this unassuming, successful, tough, conservative mother; and vice presidential nominee.

As time moves on, and reality sets in; I see that yes, Sarah Palin isn’t perfect, she has some work to do, but more importantly I see the left is so scared of this woman that they are brutal in their attacks. Hollywood is pulling out all the stops; from ads to SNL skits to gotcha interviews with the likes of Charles Gibson and Katie Coric. Both of those individuals looked so pathetic, as well as transparent in their efforts to “get” Palin. What is really hurting the John McCain/Sarah Palin ticket is "John McCain."

McCain is standing in his own way. He shot himself in the foot in the middle of all this bailout mess. Deciding to go to Washington and suspend his campaign, and then once there... doing nothing of notice. Or at least, if he did, "we the people" didn't know about it. And if McCain took the time to go to Washington, he should have had more to impart to the process. In fact McCain probably heard the old military maxim of, “Lead, follow, or get out of the way,” McCain didn’t do any of the above and he suffered for it. Like Bill O’ Reilly said, (And I’m paraphrasing) “The folks are looking for the candidate who they think is going to look out for them throughout all this mess, and so far they haven’t seen him in either candidate.”

When McCain has been able to hammer home the truth of Obama’s culpability in this whole debacle he has chosen to stay silent and has paid the price as Americans almost always blame the "right" when it comes to economic woes. Obama knows this, and has had to do absolutely nothing except ride the wave of between 5 and 7 point poll increase over the republican nominee.

If John McCain has any real interest in becoming the next president, he needs to take a page from the left’s “manual of campaign tactics,” and go on the attack of Barrack Obama. Not Obama personally, that is low-rent and wrong. That means his record, or lack there of. Or how about his knee deep involvement with Acorn? That “bastion of the people’s” beginning was due in no small part to Obama, who was one of their lawyers and “trainers,” as part of his duties as a “Community Organizer.”

Still, this whole political process this time around seems like a sham, like we are just going through the motions. It is as though I am watching from the galley of some macabre theater as the actors take their places and I can do nothing but watch as they go through their lines, and though I know what will happen next, I dread the truth of it, and am powerless to stop it. I am watching “Socialism: The Final Act” live, but not enjoying the view I have.

O'Reilly gives it all

2008-08-30T06:54:00.000-04:00

You know, in our heart of hearts we come to a place where we can't hide from truth. I don't mean what we our selves to perceive as truth, because I don't believe in relative truth. I'm talking about looking at some thing, or hearing some one speak and just knowing that what they are saying flies in the face of what every one else is saying, and you know that what you are hearing is either utter nonsense or...something else. But it can't be nonsense can it?

The person saying these things is the host of The O'Reilly Factor's, Bill O' Reilly, and he led his time slot against "all" comers on television during the DNC, which you would think folks who think Fox and O' Reilly are biased against them would steer clear. Not so during when the The Factor is on.

There are those who try to tag him with being in the tank for the Republicans, but he just smiles, as in the next email, some one else accuses him of being a Democrat sympathizer.

It is difficult to disseminate todays news and separate fact from the actual "dissemination." Especially today, in this media environment of dishonesty and misguided agendas. When most of the main stream media is obviously slanted in one particular direction, how does one find news that is not slanted? You know before you watch that what they tell you, they are telling you what they "want you to hear," whether it is about politics, global warming, or the Iraq war, so much has to be taken with a grain of salt that everything becomes suspect. You end up feeling like Mel Gibson's Jerry Fletcher in Conspiracy Theory (1997).

So how can you be sure about what is in the news?

CHECK IT! and DOUBLE CHECK IT!! If you think it is necessary.

You can be sure O'Reilly is checking his sources. And he doesn't only present one side of the proverbial coin. That is the essence of the success of The Factor. Of course, calling it the No Spin Zone makes it a scary and squirmy place for some. There have been epic battles on The Factor and most of those battles have been with far left loons, as O'Reilly would call them. He may have tension filled, or even heated conversations with those on either side, but it is the loons that drive him crazy, or make him laugh, depending on the offense.

But you must take into context the arguments against O'Reilly, and where they come from. I would say most of them come from the left, saying O'Reilly is biased for the GOP. Of course they would say that when "Anyone" questions "Anything" they do.

One of their main tactics; attack. The New York Times, Time Magazine, USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, and probably a dozen others have all gone after him at one time or another, and in his own words, just the other day on the Radio Factor he said, "Bring it on," and just in case any one might have mis understood him he annunciated each word again, "Bring-it-on."!

He isn't afraid to take on the so called big boys, or girls of the news, corporate, and political world. I guess it helps when you have the TRUTH on your side. Again, we are not talking relative truth here. When you are careful about what you are reporting, and telling only "the facts ma'am." Remember the No Spin Zone? People think that only applies to guests on the show. Bill isn't perfect by any stretch, and he will make mistakes like any other human being, but you won't see any spinning on his part either.

People accuse O'Reilly of being heavy handed with many of his guests, or at least, a bully with those who allow it. When he had a big show down with Left wing "Nut-Bag" Phil Donahue folks said O'Reilly didn't win that battle because he was yelling. They obviously don't know Bill. He yells all the time. He might just yell when he prays, I don't know. I'm not trying to disparage Mr. O'Reilly and his religious preferences, but...he yells! Either way, as far as that particular interview goes Donahue comes across with a lot of statistics of dead Americans and accusations against O'Reilly, and Bill went ballistic, just like Phil wanted him too. Except, Bill didn't lose his cool, he didn't lose his mind. He pointed out correctly, that we were taking the war on terror to the terrorists rather than fighting it here. This is a war, after all, he pointed out, and people die in war. Donahue is the one politicking by saying over and over again that Bill wants to keep sending "our boys" over there to get there arms and legs blown off.

At one point Donahue said, loud doesn't mean right. Well, soft and sickly sour, usually means rotten, and Phil Donahue stinks of it. I would say, Donahue won on the numbers, but O'Reilly beat him where it matters, "strength of conviction." And when he left I would have said see you later Philly, for all those times he said Billy during the interview like we were drinking buddies or something. But thats just me. I know there others but this blog is plenty long enough already. Besides Mr. O will be giving me plenty to write about in the days and months to come.

And then I blinked

2008-03-01T12:34:00.000-05:00

By the title you might think I got something in my eye, but that isn't the case. The thing is, I'm 44 years old, and at times like now, I feel decidedly older.
I have a 21 year old daughter that is married and has a little girl of her own. My son is 17 and has made it abundantly clear that he knows more than me in all subjects pertaining to life. Yeah, I know he knows exactly nothing compared to my life's experiences, but that doesn't do much to mollify my sense of, "where the heck did all the time go"?
Well, I was watching "Cheaper b the dozen 2" with my youngest daughter (who still lets me think that I know more than her) and in one scene Tom, Steve martin's character is a mess because one of his younger daughters is going on a movie date and he is just getting use to the fact that his oldest one is married and about to have a baby. He turns to his wife and says something like; "I remember when Nora (the oldest) still sat on my lap (I'm paraphrasing...badly)." To which the wife replied; "Then you blinked."

That is my exact quandary, although my kids all live with me, (even the oldest; her husband is a loser-AWOL from the Army and all that) only the youngest one seeks my advice with any kind of regularity. The other two think I should seek them out. I always say, "I can't wait until they are out there actually doing it for themselves. Then we will see what they really know."
But then thats the curse isn't it, when they find out how much it sucks to try to earn a living and have some left over to have "fun" with they come back and cry "help", and then I wish they actually did know more than me because then they wouldn't have come back.