The media and dick Cheney

On first thought those two shouldn’t be lumped together in one sentence, the media reports news, and Cheney is a politician, but there is a common denominator, both seemingly follow the same motto “the end justifies the means”.

How else could we explain the following?

Following the Charlie Gibson interview with Sara Pailin, the media mocked her as inexperienced for asking “in what respect Charlie”, to the question what do you think of the bush doctrine, but the truth is there is no bush doctrine at least an official one proclaimed by bush as his doctrine, Bush has announced different policies throughout his presidency, which include; encouraging democracy around the world, to secure ourselves from countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups, among others. Non as his official doctrine, see this article regarding the supposed Bush Doctrine.

Throughout the first couple of weeks when Pailin was announced as McCains running mate the media came up with different lies for instance the New Yorker cover showing Pailin looking for Rusia through her window, when in fact she had said something totally different [see full interview here] to squash her growing popularity.

The difference between democracy and dictatorship is in part having a free press, a media that could report the truth to the people, and let the public decide the direction they want their government to take.

We don’t need, the media to decide for us, and assist us in making the right choice by lying to us, using the same moral underline as dick Cheney, who lied when he wanted to go to war, because he thought that the war is important, they are not better than us the people, the American people have the capacity to make the correct choice when presented with the truth.

What we do need, is a media that will report the truth, in this case tell us what are the policies of those who want to be elected as our leaders, the American people have the right to choose the candidate whose policies they approve of most, we need politicians that tell us the truth about the dangers lurking on our country, and let the American people decide if its worth going to war.

Intelligent design, chance, and tail wagging, what do they have in common?

How our universe and ourselves came to be, is a question asked since the dawn of human history, but is it really something that we could figure out?

Mankind has tried to come up with different answers, some of them are more logical then others, and each of them serve different needs in our day to day life.

For instance the intelligent design theory: it tries to apply reason and compare our existence to our own creation ability, typically when we encounter a somewhat complex object or mechanism, we will assume based on prior experience and knowledge that it was designed through intricate thought out processes.

The chance theory: appeals to those that need an explanation how this intelligence that was theoretically able to create our universe came about, since absent an explanation, we are at square one not understanding how we came to be.

Fable creation: serves those who choose to close their minds completely and believe in the ancient ways of thinking and explaining complex things.

A pretext to a theory is either a need to explain a phenomena, that will be able to predict a future occurrence, behavior, or an explanation on how it happens and how it could be reproduced.

In order for us to have the ability to know and understand any given subject, we might start out with theory, but it remains theory until it could be proven by being reproduced or experienced.

To date there is no method for reproducing or experiencing the creation of the universe and life, there is nothing within the boundaries of this universe that has that ability.

Therefore coming up with theories on how our universe and ourselves came to be, at this point is no more than fable, conjecture, and speculation, that has been tweaked to serve the need of the creator of theory.

This is awesome

A US judge has thrown out a case against God, ruling that because the defendant has no address, legal papers cannot be served.

The suit was launched by Nebraska state senator Ernie Chambers, who said he might appeal against the ruling.

He sought a permanent injunction to prevent the "death, destruction and terrorisation" caused by God.

Judge Marlon Polk said in his ruling that a plaintiff must have access to the defendant for a case to proceed.

"Given that this court finds that there can never be service effectuated on the named defendant this action will be dismissed with prejudice," Judge Polk wrote in his ruling.

Mr Chambers cannot refile the suit but may appeal.

'God knows everything'

Mr Chambers sued God last year. He said God had threatened him and the people of Nebraska and had inflicted "widespread death, destruction and terrorisation of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants".

He said he would carefully consider Judge Polk's ruling before deciding whether to appeal.

The court, Mr Chambers said, had acknowledged the existence of God and "a consequence of that acknowledgement is a recognition of God's omniscience".

"Since God knows everything," he reasoned, "God has notice of this lawsuit."

Mr Chambers, a state senator for 38 years, said he filed the suit to make the point that "anyone can sue anyone else, even God".

Latino and African American comparison

Yesterday I was listening to NPR while driving, on the air was a show about arts, politics, and race, and how they are interrelated with one another, it was a joint program of Latino and African American artists.

It occurred to me that some Latinos are trying to compare themselves to African Americans in regards to race and minority status claiming to be a disadvantaged minority in the United States.

I was amazed at that comparison being that the African American people were not allowed to vote until recently, had to sit in the back of the bus, could not attend the same schools as the white, did not have access to higher education, all of this was inherent in the laws of this country, were deemed to be a negro race for thousands of years a philosophy that is integrated into the Judeo-Christian religion as is stated in the old testament.

The Latinos who are descendants of Spain who were big culprits in the slave trade, they were never banned voting rights, education, were not perceived to be of lesser race, nor denied anything by the laws of this country, somehow are trying to compare themselves to the African American people.

Yet what some Latinos are suffering is an integration period, and cultural difference, the same hardships as the Jews, the Irish, and every large group that have migrated to this country endured.

In the case of Latinos it seems to be a prolonged hardship brought on by unwillingness to assimilate and adept to their new country being very proud of their origins, you walk into some predominant Latino neighborhoods and the spoken language is Spanish even amongst the second generation.

Having said all that, nothing is wrong with clinging to your traditions and culture, it might even be cherished by some, yet you can’t expect the average American to accept you as an American when all you try to do is not be an American.

Using a vague similarity of hardships which are, poverty, high crime rates, and higher unemployment then the rest of the population, to liken themselves to the African Americans, seems to be a cynical ploy to gain what every other group acquired through hard work, trying to acquire it via free handouts, quotas, and free social benefits, which the African Americans earned by all their suffering in this country.