Of course we expect a mother to be upset in this Ferguson case. Certainly we have all been in situations where we are too close for comfort, it prevents us from understanding the full picture or taking in the reality.
The decision was made not to indict Officer Wilson because this is what the Grand Jury concluded based on the facts, the witnesses, the physical evidence, and other statements. They had the option of inditing him on a wide variety of charges including involuntary manslaughter. There simply was NO case to be made. No probable cause was found.
Showing posts with label evil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label evil. Show all posts
2013-10-03
Psychological Projection
Just a random thought...
To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil. — Charles Krauthammer
In psychology, the term projection is used to describe a person's thoughts and behavior as being a reflection of their true self. People who make accusations towards others are really only revealing who they truly are on the inside.
I've always agreed with the quote above from Krauthammer. I have heard those sentiments exactly from liberals about conservatives and vice versa. Could it be that both sides are projecting themselves with these descriptions?
Well, I don't know about you but I would rather be stupid than evil.
I've always agreed with the quote above from Krauthammer. I have heard those sentiments exactly from liberals about conservatives and vice versa. Could it be that both sides are projecting themselves with these descriptions?
Well, I don't know about you but I would rather be stupid than evil.
2013-06-04
The Verdict Is In -- Jodi Arias Is Guilty
Wednesday, the verdict day finally arrived. Those of us that have been following the trial have anxiously awaited the verdict. Many of us had either prayed and chatted on Facebook expressing our hope for a guilty verdict. For me, and I think many others, this was more than Jodi being found guilty. This was about our ultimate faith the American Justice System. After the acquittal Casey Anthony many Americans had lost all faith in juries. My goodness. What kind of a jury could be so idiotic to think that a woman who knows her daughter is dead, then goes out and parties for 30 days, gets a tattoo, doesn't report anything to the authorities, and carries on with her life like nothing happened while continuing to lie, lie, and lie some more did not kill her daughter? Unbelievable, inexcusable stupidity was expressed by that jury when they let her walk. That particular case sucked the life out of me. I remember being pregnant when I had heard that poor Caylee went missing and her mother didn't even care. No emotions of sadness. Casey merely became mad because she was in jail and HER life had been taken away, no concern over her daughter's life whatsoever.
2012-11-13
Distortions About Republicans
I have been trying to examine why it is so many on the left have been working so hard to demonize the Republican party. According to those on the left, we are a group of evil people who hate minorities, gays, poor people, and anyone who isn't white. Since I don't fall into most of the categories that democrats say Republicans support - white, male, rich -- I wanted to write an article about why it is I feel the Republicans are the best party to represent all Americans, rather than the democratic party that seems to want to do nothing other than separate people for political gain.
In order to do this, I must FIRST address the lies and distortions that come from the democrats who are always trying to project their own illness unto everyone else. They attempt to whitewash their history, ignoring what their party has done and then actually make efforts to blame Republicans.
First of all, the Republican party was started under Lincoln. He was the first Republican candidate to win the presidency. Blacks were first elected to Congress as Republicans and some were ex-slaves. We also know that every single piece of legislation that was passed in an effort to make blacks equal and give them equal rights were not only passed with Republicans but were strongly opposed by the democratic party. In fact the organization called the KKK (founded by democrats), was created to get rid of Republicans -- and since blacks were 100% Republican, they were a natural target for the group rooted in hate and racism. After the democrats took control in 1892, with the Presidency, the House, and Senate, they repealed all of the Republican civil rights acts and enacted Jim Crow laws.
According to democrats, the racists became Dixiecrats and then became Republican, basically prompting everyone to switch parties. The argument is totally absurd and completely false.
Women also benefited from Republicans. The right for women to vote was brought about by the Republicans, not the Democrats -- Here's a nice reality check for those of you that would like some details.
If we listen to the current democrat party, we can see these dems trying to scare people with their fake "war on women" and actually telling people Republicans want to take away a women's right to vote.
I myself have said I would gladly give up my vote if it meant women like the one featured above would not be allowed to vote but, I cannot name one Republican in office that has advocated taking the women's right to vote away.
Affordable, quality education? It has been the democrats who have repeatedly blocked any effort to allow poor children access to private schools through a voucher program. The Republicans have tried relentlessly to get competition among schools in order to raise the overall level of education provided to children. Blacks, poor, and other minorities are constantly the victims horribly run, government schools, especially in the inner-cities (run by democrats), yet the democrats see nothing wrong and their only solution is to deny the problem and maintain the status quo. Of course we know why - unions. The dems are fully backed by corrupt unions that protect teachers that do not do their jobs. We are only instructed to pay them more regardless if students are learning less, and regardless if teachers are preforming better.
Both parties (click to read details), have made changes concerning their stance on public education. Let's also not forget that the same democrats who are all strongly against a voucher program do not send their own children to the public schools they demand for the poor and minorities to attend; their children attend private schools.
The equal pay issue is ridiculous and quite frankly insults my intelligence. I already discussed this issue in another article I wrote, "Women and Their Equal Pay."
You can read more about how ridiculous this issue is and the sheer hypocrisy of the democrat party for bringing up this issue in the first place, click here, here, and here.
Republicans are routinely accused of not supporting things like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid but of course this is false as well. Both the Republicans and Democrats had opponents for these bills and both parties had supporters, which ultimately led to their passage. Some have argued whether these bills have been successful. The system is designed in such a way that asks current workers to pay for those that need Social Security now. Initially, there were plenty of workers for one retiree but that number has massively decreased and is expected to tilt the other way in the next 20 years. Meaning there will be one worker for 2 or 3 retirees.
There are still many different issues to discuss but I wanted to bring up a few that have always disturbed me. I feel that the Republicans' message has remained fairly consistent. We have made changes here and there to reflect the people inside of the party but overall our desire has always been equality and economic growth.
All one has to do is turn on the news and see how conservative Republicans are not only attacked on ideas but that they are actually called "evil." Click here to see an interesting site dedicated to this type of rhetoric. Not only will these people lie and distort information, but instead of attacking ideas, they actually attack people. Their message does not end with people being "stupid" or "ignorant" in their minds but rather EVIL. As conservatives, we must read what they have to say in order to seek out the truth and counter these arguments with facts. Again, I say to you, it is not the people we dislike it is the reflection of who they are. They are merely projecting their own beliefs about themselves. It is their egos that have taken them over. Their egos are not who they truly are. If we can get them to question themselves in some small way, there we can begin to break down the walls they have built up around themselves.
The recent election has helped me realize a number of things but most importantly it has helped me become interested in getting out the true, loving message of what it means to be a conservative Republican. I will continue to look for issues that are distorted by the left and do my best to expose them here or lead you to others who have already done so. Together, we can turn things around.
In order to do this, I must FIRST address the lies and distortions that come from the democrats who are always trying to project their own illness unto everyone else. They attempt to whitewash their history, ignoring what their party has done and then actually make efforts to blame Republicans.
First of all, the Republican party was started under Lincoln. He was the first Republican candidate to win the presidency. Blacks were first elected to Congress as Republicans and some were ex-slaves. We also know that every single piece of legislation that was passed in an effort to make blacks equal and give them equal rights were not only passed with Republicans but were strongly opposed by the democratic party. In fact the organization called the KKK (founded by democrats), was created to get rid of Republicans -- and since blacks were 100% Republican, they were a natural target for the group rooted in hate and racism. After the democrats took control in 1892, with the Presidency, the House, and Senate, they repealed all of the Republican civil rights acts and enacted Jim Crow laws.
According to democrats, the racists became Dixiecrats and then became Republican, basically prompting everyone to switch parties. The argument is totally absurd and completely false.
The idea that “the Dixiecrats joined the Republicans” is not quite true, as you note. But because of Strom Thurmond it is accepted as a fact. What happened is that the **next** generation (post 1965) of white southern politicians — Newt, Trent Lott, Ashcroft, Cochran, Alexander, etc — joined the GOP.
So it was really a passing of the torch as the old segregationists retired and were replaced by new young GOP guys. One particularly galling aspect to generalizations about “segregationists became GOP” is that the new GOP South was INTEGRATED for crying out loud, they accepted the Civil Rights revolution. Meanwhile, Jimmy Carter led a group of what would become “New” Democrats like Clinton and Al Gore.Professor Larry Schweikart of the University of Dayton continues:
Why did a new generation white Southerners join the GOP? Not because they thought Republicans were racists who would return the South to segregation, but because the GOP was a “local government, small government” party in the old Jeffersonian tradition. Southerners wanted less government and the GOP was their natural home.
Jimmy Carter, a Civil Rights Democrat, briefly returned some states to the Democrat fold, but in 1980, Goldwater’s heir, Ronald Reagan, sealed this deal for the GOP. The new ”Solid South” was solid GOP.
BUT, and we must stress this: the new southern Republicans were *integrationist* Republicans who accepted the Civil Rights revolution and full integration while retaining their love of Jeffersonian limited government principles.
Women also benefited from Republicans. The right for women to vote was brought about by the Republicans, not the Democrats -- Here's a nice reality check for those of you that would like some details.
If we listen to the current democrat party, we can see these dems trying to scare people with their fake "war on women" and actually telling people Republicans want to take away a women's right to vote.
I myself have said I would gladly give up my vote if it meant women like the one featured above would not be allowed to vote but, I cannot name one Republican in office that has advocated taking the women's right to vote away.
Affordable, quality education? It has been the democrats who have repeatedly blocked any effort to allow poor children access to private schools through a voucher program. The Republicans have tried relentlessly to get competition among schools in order to raise the overall level of education provided to children. Blacks, poor, and other minorities are constantly the victims horribly run, government schools, especially in the inner-cities (run by democrats), yet the democrats see nothing wrong and their only solution is to deny the problem and maintain the status quo. Of course we know why - unions. The dems are fully backed by corrupt unions that protect teachers that do not do their jobs. We are only instructed to pay them more regardless if students are learning less, and regardless if teachers are preforming better.
Both parties (click to read details), have made changes concerning their stance on public education. Let's also not forget that the same democrats who are all strongly against a voucher program do not send their own children to the public schools they demand for the poor and minorities to attend; their children attend private schools.
The equal pay issue is ridiculous and quite frankly insults my intelligence. I already discussed this issue in another article I wrote, "Women and Their Equal Pay."
You can read more about how ridiculous this issue is and the sheer hypocrisy of the democrat party for bringing up this issue in the first place, click here, here, and here.
Republicans are routinely accused of not supporting things like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid but of course this is false as well. Both the Republicans and Democrats had opponents for these bills and both parties had supporters, which ultimately led to their passage. Some have argued whether these bills have been successful. The system is designed in such a way that asks current workers to pay for those that need Social Security now. Initially, there were plenty of workers for one retiree but that number has massively decreased and is expected to tilt the other way in the next 20 years. Meaning there will be one worker for 2 or 3 retirees.
Social Security was intended to be one source of your income after retirement, but not the sole source.Yet, it seems as if democrats have been preaching to people for years, at least in my lifetime, that social security is intended to be a person's full retirement plan and when people finally wake up to the reality of social security they can use Republican's as their scapegoat. At this point the program requires major overhaul. As usual we can expect the democrats to pull their "half-truth" propaganda in order to push forward whatever their plan might be to help keep this program on life-support. As we have already witnessed during the Bush 41 years, any attempt at trying to change the program and take action has been routinely shot down and ridiculed by democrats. Only history will show that it would have been best for us to take action years ago when Bush first proposed a solution.
There are still many different issues to discuss but I wanted to bring up a few that have always disturbed me. I feel that the Republicans' message has remained fairly consistent. We have made changes here and there to reflect the people inside of the party but overall our desire has always been equality and economic growth.
All one has to do is turn on the news and see how conservative Republicans are not only attacked on ideas but that they are actually called "evil." Click here to see an interesting site dedicated to this type of rhetoric. Not only will these people lie and distort information, but instead of attacking ideas, they actually attack people. Their message does not end with people being "stupid" or "ignorant" in their minds but rather EVIL. As conservatives, we must read what they have to say in order to seek out the truth and counter these arguments with facts. Again, I say to you, it is not the people we dislike it is the reflection of who they are. They are merely projecting their own beliefs about themselves. It is their egos that have taken them over. Their egos are not who they truly are. If we can get them to question themselves in some small way, there we can begin to break down the walls they have built up around themselves.
The recent election has helped me realize a number of things but most importantly it has helped me become interested in getting out the true, loving message of what it means to be a conservative Republican. I will continue to look for issues that are distorted by the left and do my best to expose them here or lead you to others who have already done so. Together, we can turn things around.
2011-10-12
Wow...Talk About Stooooopid...More Insanity From the Protesters
Special thanks to my friend Glenn for finding this video! This is the best video I have seen that absolutely exposes the insane mentality of these protesters.
These people are nuts and evil. This first guy believes that it's totally okay for the government to use force on those who do not agree with him? Wow. Okay, Hilter-lover.
I love the girl that walks away. She can't even handle any of the facts because she clearly doesn't even know any of the facts. It is absolutely insane how ignorant these people are.
These people are nuts and evil. This first guy believes that it's totally okay for the government to use force on those who do not agree with him? Wow. Okay, Hilter-lover.
I love the girl that walks away. She can't even handle any of the facts because she clearly doesn't even know any of the facts. It is absolutely insane how ignorant these people are.
2011-03-01
Those Enemies From Within
Union Rep Calls for World Socialism, Taking Private Property
It's a little old but, here is an enemy of freedom, an enemy of truth, and an enemy of everything that has made this country great in the first place.
Now, is she just an ignorant fool, a useful idiot? Or, is she extremely evil, knowing full well what socialism has brought the world? You'll have to decide.
It's a little old but, here is an enemy of freedom, an enemy of truth, and an enemy of everything that has made this country great in the first place.
Now, is she just an ignorant fool, a useful idiot? Or, is she extremely evil, knowing full well what socialism has brought the world? You'll have to decide.
2011-02-23
Joy Behar Calls Pro-Lifers Evil
BEHAR: But it’s illogical, what they’re doing, because if you are not going to help people with birth control, you’re going to have more abortions. Don’t they think of that?
RICHARDS: Well, that, and I thought that point-
BEHAR: So, besides being evil and immoral and unethical, they’re also stupid.
2011-02-03
Hannity to Anjem Choudary: "You're One Sick Miserable Evil SOB"
Oh, wow! If you haven't seen this, you must!
If you want to watch the full interview:
If you want to watch the full interview:
2011-01-18
Us Evil Rightwingers
I got this idea from a message board I lurk and participate in from time to time.
Speaking of message boards, have you signed up for The Alternative Conservative forum yet??? Oh, well if you haven't, you really should.
Anyway, it is clear to anyone with a few neurons and dendrites that are healthy and not clogged with bong smoke, that the left absolutely loves hate speech. It's only when speech that differs from their mentally twisted perception of the world that they call it hate speech.
So, lets just give some examples of what the left does, shall we?
Speaking of message boards, have you signed up for The Alternative Conservative forum yet??? Oh, well if you haven't, you really should.
Anyway, it is clear to anyone with a few neurons and dendrites that are healthy and not clogged with bong smoke, that the left absolutely loves hate speech. It's only when speech that differs from their mentally twisted perception of the world that they call it hate speech.
So, lets just give some examples of what the left does, shall we?
2010-11-12
George Soros
George Soros at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2010
Since Glenn Beck has brought up George Soros as being a puppet master, and has encouraged his audience to dig for themselves into who this man is so, I decided to actually read something written by George Soros.
Now, admittedly, I do not know much about this man. I've seen him on various news sources and, I am none too impressed with his ideas. The very mention of the man leaves me feeling quite chilly and almost uncomfortable. He is a representation of the far left, a person who is filled with anti-American sentiment.
After watching Glenn's special, I had decided to do a little internet search and read something this man has written concerning his particular views. I found an article almost immediately:
"The Capitalist Threat" by George Soros Atlantic Monthly, Volume 279, No. 2, February 1997
" People must be free to think and act, subject only to limits imposed by the common interests."
There have been a number of times, where I will find myself reading something that seems very fascinating. I can tell a lot of thought and effort went into writing the piece. Then, it happens. The writer shifts and says something that is either a flat-out lie, or something that the writer actually believes but is amazingly ignorant. Let me explain.
In this article, Soros defines "open-societies" which he correctly identifies as those societies that support Laissez-faire ideologies concerning economic policies. He also correctly explains "closed societies" as those that promote communism and fascism. Almost immediately, and again correctly, he dismisses these extremities as being logical or plausible ideologies.
Here's where he takes his turn, where he is either lying or, he's just plain ignorant--
Soros then begins to explain that Laissez-faire economics have now become the real threat. He writes with the premise that those who support Laissex faire, believe it to be perfect knowledge, or having ultimate truth. He states that those of us who support Laissex-faire do so because, it will ultimately bring about this equilibrium and provide equality for everyone.
SCREEEEEETCH! What?!?!?!
That was my reaction. Who or what source has told him that people who support free markets do so because, it will bring about balance and equality? The very reason for supporting an "open-society" as Soros refers to it, is because we recognize that inequalities will ALWAYS exist, no matter what. Nothing is ever going to bring about equality on an economic scale. It is why it's better having the individual make their own choices as opposed to being able to blame the government for inequities, that makes the ideology superior.
I want to emphasize, however, that I am not putting laissez-faire capitalism in the same category as Nazism or communism. Totalitarian ideologies deliberately seek to destroy the open society; laissez-faire policies may endanger it, but only inadvertently. Friedrich Hayek, one of the apostles of laissez-faire, was also a passionate proponent of the open society. Nevertheless, because communism and even socialism have been thoroughly discredited, I consider the threat from the laissez-faire side more potent today than the threat from totalitarian ideologies. We are enjoying a truly global market economy in which goods, services, capital, and even people move around quite freely, but we fail to recognize the need to sustain the values and institutions of an open society.
Okay, well, there is a point I'm sure to be made that laissez-faire does have it's problems. I would not dispute that. In the sense that, yes, there are people that will suffer. There are people that will be poor. As the Bible says, the poor will always be amongst us but, those of us who believe in open societies, do not propose that everything will be perfect. Quite the contrary and, that is why I am terribly surprised at Soros' inferences here. Certainly he knows this...or, does he?
Finally, he continues with the article saying that open societies are based upon the principles of Darwinism. To some extent, he is correct in his assertions and comparisons here. The belief that people should have a great self interest and promote oneself is part of a successful blueprint to obtaining financial freedom in an open society.
Yes, indeed, Darwinism has been proven to be wrong in some regards, as Soros again correctly points out but, not all of Darwinism can be dismissed and we know this. Adaptations on various scales most definitely occur.
He then makes complaints about those who benefit by means of inheritances or, those that benefit by not doing right but, evil. So, let's talk about this for a moment:
Inheriting money is not an evil concept. There is nothing wrong from benefiting from the generation before you and, there is certainly nothing wrong with working hard so that the next generation can live comfortably. Let's face it, it's not just money that people are passing on; it's also a mind-set that comes with wealth. Just as a poverty mind-set is passed on to the next generation by less affluent families.
The simple psychology one learns given their environment while growing up and, later who they surround themselves with, helps determine the level of success one can achieve but, only in open societies can one have the option of changing their environment, making it more affluent, thereby improving themselves and their affluence, creating more wealth. In a closed society, this shift almost becomes impossible, keeping people "stuck" in a specific class of society.
Money and wealth do not know evil or good. Money is a neutral object and concept. Attracting money is not a matter of being good or evil but, a matter of whether you have limited yourself or not. However, if you are someone that has inherited money and make no attempt to understand money or, have a certain mind-set, you will loose all your money.
The same example can be found if you give a poor-mindset person a million dollars and visit them in a year, only to find they have completely blown all their money and, are in more debt then their previous state. Or, if you take all the money away from someone who has a wealth mindset, they will usually have all their money back in a year. These stories are tried and true and only prove that wealth is a mindset.
Society cannot fix an individual's mind-set. That has to come from within. As I have already argued, it is more plausible for person to switch their mindset when their economic environment pushes people to succeed, rather than just accepting their course and living comfortably off the government dole.
Those that benefit by doing evil or illicit things, usually will find some ironic justice in the end. Of course, a person's values dictate what they will or will not do. People who are void of morality and obtain wealth through these means will ultimately destroy themselves. Does this always happen? Honestly, I cannot say for sure. Probably not. I do NOT know every wealthy person who has brought about wealth by illicit means. It IS my faith that leads me to believe this.
It is my personal observation of the wealthy people that I do know, that wealth was obtained by honesty, hard work, and providing a good or service that was needed by others. The only evil rich folks I know about are from the news, people I do not know personally, and Nancy Pelosi...(and look what's happening to her!)
Soros proposes a society that wipes out the values as we know and, proposes an economic policy that is open but, recognizes it's fallibility and, that there is no way of obtaining perfect knowledge. Then, he states:
" People must be free to think and act, subject only to limits imposed by the common interests."
He further says that it's not enough to be a democrat but, that we must be liberal democrats. It's all about this common good he hopes to achieve but, didn't he say before that he recognizes those ideas do not work?
Soros just talks in circles. He's afraid to make a stand. It is certainly noble to have concern for everyone but, if you recognize the limitations that we have and, that governments have, why would you propose more control from a government? Wouldn't you be more concerned with helping people by providing them an environment that they could thrive in? One that could provide them with the motivation to rise above and promote morality?
It's not that those of us that believe in free societies do not recognize the inequalities; of course we do. It's simply a matter of fostering the most positive environment for growth of companies, as well as individuals. Competition in markets provide for this. It is simple fact and, having knowledge is power. It's nothing to be afraid of.
If Soros wants to help people, he should worry about himself, and remain an example of success, rather than trying to be an architect of fantasy.
My final conclusion-- I think Soros has a big head. It's clear this man has some serious delusions of grandeur. He has it in his mind that he is going to somehow change the world with his "vision of fallibility." The whole article is silly and almost embarrassing. The man doesn't appear to be stupid but, when you have an idea that is based on a premise that isn't even true, how can you follow that with a logical conclusion?
2010-11-01
Getting Rid of Pelosi
Nanci Pelosi Seattle Times
Many analysts believe Pelosi's political career could end Tuesday. Her national popularity is in the basement. She has become a symbol of Democratic excesses, much like Gingrich once was for Republicans, a radioactive "San Francisco liberal" from whom moderate Democrats in marginal districts are fleeing.I couldn't of said it better myself, and that's why I copied and pasted it.
Click title of post for full story.
I will be extremely pleased to see Pelosi leave. I think I would like to personally be there, just to kick her right in the rear as she walks out the door.
Please, oh please, Pelosi leave!
2010-08-23
Big Oil Vs. Big Green
One thing that has been in the spotlight for the last few years with liberals is their constant complaining of big oil. We are told by them that big oil is the reason for all the problems surrounding so many issues: the economy, corruption, the environment, global warming, foreign policy, ect. Oh, if only we didn't rely on oil and we all went "green" our lives would be so much better.
The fact is, we do rely heavily on oil. Oil is used for practically everything from the plastics we buy to the shoes we put on our feet, and it's needed for our vehicles. It is extremely versatile. Yes, we do get a lot of oil from foreign countries and, I often hear about how we need to not be so dependent on those foreign sources yet, these same people never want to hear of drilling on our own soil.
What I still do not understand is how someone finds big oil to be so horrible but, somehow big green will be benevolent? All the supposed "evils" of one big conglomerate will simply be replaced by another.
I'm not worried about energy sources at all. I know for a fact that there are many ways to obtain energy besides oil. Oil just so happens to be one of the best forms. There is nothing wrong with exploring other options but, to say that big oil is somehow evil because they make a profit is ridiculous. Any energy that is made will be sold and that company will want to profit from it. It doesn't matter if it comes from solar energy, wind, or some other alternative source like hemp, someone will seek to make a profit.
Also, let's consider the difference between profit and profit margin. Profit is the amount obtained through sales but, the margin of profit is sales minus the cost of the product. When we make comparisons of the profit margin, we begin to see an entirely different picture.
The fact is, we do rely heavily on oil. Oil is used for practically everything from the plastics we buy to the shoes we put on our feet, and it's needed for our vehicles. It is extremely versatile. Yes, we do get a lot of oil from foreign countries and, I often hear about how we need to not be so dependent on those foreign sources yet, these same people never want to hear of drilling on our own soil.
What I still do not understand is how someone finds big oil to be so horrible but, somehow big green will be benevolent? All the supposed "evils" of one big conglomerate will simply be replaced by another.
I'm not worried about energy sources at all. I know for a fact that there are many ways to obtain energy besides oil. Oil just so happens to be one of the best forms. There is nothing wrong with exploring other options but, to say that big oil is somehow evil because they make a profit is ridiculous. Any energy that is made will be sold and that company will want to profit from it. It doesn't matter if it comes from solar energy, wind, or some other alternative source like hemp, someone will seek to make a profit.
Also, let's consider the difference between profit and profit margin. Profit is the amount obtained through sales but, the margin of profit is sales minus the cost of the product. When we make comparisons of the profit margin, we begin to see an entirely different picture.
I decided to look up the profit margin for Siemens, which is a company that deals with wind energy. Their gross profit margin is 32.5%, where as Exxon Mobil is reporting their gross profit margin as 28.2%.
Now, I ask again, how is big green going to be so much less evil then big oil when, they appear to keep even more money in their pockets then big oil?
No one, no matter what, is in business for the motivation of giving and never receiving. Profits are necessary to any company. Profits are what motivate people, all people. It's not evil. It's how the world operates.
There is no harm in us looking to other sources of energy but, let's make sure we keep our facts straight. There is no reason to fool people into thinking that these other companies that supply alternative sources of energy will somehow not make profits themselves. Vilifying big oil companies for making profit is absurd.
2009-07-16
Ahmadinejad: Iran Will Bring Down Global Arrogance
Global Arrogance is what Ahmadinejad refers to the United States and it's allies.
"As soon as the new government is established, with power and authority, ten times more than before, it will enter the global scene and will bring down the global arrogance," he told a big crowd in the northeastern city of Mashhad.
It's so sad to see a country filled with such wonderful people taken over by evil powers.
I'm sure Obama will make everything okay. He just needs to sit down with Ahmadinejad and make nice.
"As soon as the new government is established, with power and authority, ten times more than before, it will enter the global scene and will bring down the global arrogance," he told a big crowd in the northeastern city of Mashhad.
It's so sad to see a country filled with such wonderful people taken over by evil powers.
I'm sure Obama will make everything okay. He just needs to sit down with Ahmadinejad and make nice.
2009-07-03
The Worshipping of a Child Molester…Michael Jackson
I hate to start this blog with a post about Michael Jackson but, I just can't help it. It seems as though my tv only plays Michael Jackson tributes. Now, I turn on my favorite news channels and all I hear about is his funeral, his will, his not-so-biological children, his nose, his music, his dancing, his health, his use of copious amounts of drugs, yada, yada, yada.
Don't we have a congress passing bills left and right that are putting this country further in debt and stripping away our freedoms while all this nonsense is going on? Isn't anyone concerned that none of our representatives are not even reading the bills they are passing? They are simply passing them through with no debate? I guess not. No, we are much too concerned over a man who is so bizarre; he makes Ted Kennedy look normal.
So fine, if this is what America wants to talk about, I will be more than glad to open my big mouth and express my non-PC opinions! I know how to really piss people off with my opinions; it's just a talent I have.
Since the death of child predator, I mean Michael Jackson, people have really begun to confuse me. First of all, I don't remember him being cared about much before he died. It seemed as if he'd fallen off the map over the past several years. Now, all of a sudden, everyone loves him and shows their undying love by making their avatars on websites images of him, running out and buying his music, tv stations doing tributes and/or covering the death, all sorts of discussions on forums and message boards, ect. It’s quite disturbing if you ask me.
The fact that all these things are occurring over his death is very telling of the state of our current culture. We are all guilty of doing this, myself included; worshiping the false idols of Hollywood. It’s simply amazing the energy we waste turning all of our attention to a man because he made good music. Big deal! He’s not G-d. He’s just a man and one who did evil things as far as I’m concerned.
Like most children who grew up in the 80’s, I was a fan of Michael Jackson. I spent hours with my best friend in front of the tv studying and learning the dance moves to his infamous Thriller video. We used to reenact the whole thing with such energy and excitement, creating quite the entertainment for the parents. However, something happened to Michael after his prime, something quite disturbing.
We all watched Michael slowly change. His face became odd. He was no longer the nice looking black man we all loved and adored. He was pale and his nose began to disappear, he started grabbing his crotch every chance he got and the “he he’s” and the “ow’s” got quite annoying after awhile. He began having lots of children around him, which is somewhat odd for a single grown man. I mean, how many men in their 30’s do you know that are single and hang around children they aren’t related to? If this were anybody else, other than a spiritual leader of some kind, this would be very strange. But, he was Michael Jackson so no one seemed to really care.
Michael then went on to buy monkeys and bones and other strange things. Rumors of his Neverland ranch began to surface and then we were hit with the molesting charges. At first, like most everyone, I completely ignored these charges, dismissing them as a total hoax. Who’d ever want to believe he could do such a thing, even if he was a freak, he was OUR (America’s) freak. Then, for some reason, it seemed out of nowhere, he settled out of court paying an absurd amount of money. Why? Why would Michael do that? Why wouldn’t he fight those charges? I know if I were accused of being a child molester, I was innocent, and I had more money than some of the most powerful people on earth, and I was one of the most powerful people on earth, I would fight tooth and nail before settling for any amount of money!
Now, you say, “but Tuesday, what parent would accept a settlement? If that were my child I would make sure they were behind bars!” Well, I’ll tell you what type of parent…one that lives in the REAL world. Does anyone actually think that Michael Jackson would ever go to jail? Everyone knows that celebrities get a free pass, they always have. Those parents obviously took the money, not only to avoid their child from being scrutinized further in the media but, also because they realized that it was the only way Michael would ever have any consequence for his actions. Oh, and spare me the Paris Hilton argument! She doesn’t come close to the celebrity that Michael Jackson was, even at her prime. This was a man who was simply adored and completely idolized by almost everyone in the United States. Paris was and is hated by many.
Years later, Michael is accused again of diddling with a child. But, instead of focusing on the statements that were made by him and his brother, the media and Michael’s attorney’s chose to center their attention on how awful the mother was. Well, they were right. The mother was horrible and a liar. From what I remember she was involved in another scandal of some sort. But, does that mean children of awful parents deserve to be molested by anyone? Does it mean that somehow the word of the child means nothing because they were unfortunate enough to be brought into the world by a jerk? I think not.
None of us will ever know the actual truth here but, I remember reading those statements and just hearing a “ring of truth” to them. It was so graphic and horrible; I just can’t imagine a child making any of those details up. Plus, we are talking about a known liar here. He tells Geraldo that he only had 2 nose jobs and that was all? I don’t think so. He said he was the biological father of his children and we ALL now know that was a lie, if we somehow didn’t know this before. Also, from other things I’ve read about Michael, the people that knew him questioned his relationship with the truth on many occasions.
I, for one, am not convinced of his innocence and just because a court said he was innocent really don’t mean anything to me. We all have seen on the news or, through personal relationships, people who have gotten away free from their crimes. For me, it’s simply a matter of putting the pieces together. The man was a complete nut job. He was raised in an abusive home. His sister, LaToya Jackson, claimed in her book, “Growing up in the Jackson family” that her father sexually and physically abused her. We all know that Joe Jackson, the father, is a man that has done horrible, evil things. Michael also stated that he was physically abused by him, falling short of stating sexual abuse but, maybe physical to him meant the same thing. So, why would anyone be surprised at a boy being abused like this would grow up to be an abuser himself?
I am not suggesting that just because someone acts “weird” they are automatically child molesters. I’m sure many people think I’m weird. What I’m saying is all the things we know about Michael put together suggest that it is more likely than not that he did do the things he was accused of. It makes sense.
We all know that he admitted to having young children sleep in his bed with him and perhaps this is something, according to what I’ve heard, that black families do. I put my daughter in bed with me as well. I don’t see anything terribly wrong with this behavior. Lot’s of folks, white, black, Mexican, Asian, ect. I’m sure, on occasion, sleep in the same bed with their children but, I’m not sure that it applies to everyone else’s children, especially those you are not related to. That being said, the parents of those children aren’t without fault themselves. I would not be comfortable with a man, a single man, whom I was not related to, sleeping in the same bed with my daughter alone or, with other children. I don’t think I’d be comfortable with even a relative that was single sleeping with her in the same bed. There’s something very wrong there.
I’m not sure what drugs he was on but, currently there seems to be no argument that the man engaged in consuming copious amount of various drugs to numb himself. This is just another part of puzzle that fits and shows what an emotionally disturbed and unbalanced man he was.
I also have a distinct feeling that many more children were abused by him but, were too afraid to say anything. Maybe now, they may have the courage to come forth or maybe not.
The main focus everyone is talking about now is how he died. I feel as though we are never going to hear the end of this. Autopsy after autopsy will be performed, I’m sure. Doctors are being accused of cover up and folks are now claiming that he was healthy when we all know this is just another lie. How could he be healthy when he looked like a walking skeleton, we know he was taking a combination of various drugs and, we have all seen him walking slowly like an old man in pain? Even back when the trial was going on, he couldn’t get out of his pajamas to come to court because, he was so frail and weak.
Yes, they are showing some video of him dancing and preparing for this comeback tour but, give anyone some pain killers and a Red Bull and they can appear pretty peppy themselves. I also heard a clip on the radio from Elizabeth Taylor. I’m not sure of the exact quote but, it was something along the lines of, “When his autopsy comes out, all hell will break lose”? What is THAT supposed to mean? I think he had AIDS. It explains the multiple prescriptions and it also explains his poor health. It’s also poetic justice.
As far as his legendary status, I really could give a crap what he did as an entertainer. None of that matters anymore. He should go down in history, as any other child molester would, as a man who did some damn evil things. Just because he did some good things in life doesn’t mean we should just neglect sexual child abuse and say, “Oh, but, he made such great music.” I don’t see anyone remembering John Wayne Gacy as a nice clown who made children laugh or, the BTK guy as someone who was a nice church man who did so much for his community. No, they are remembered for their horrific crimes, as they should be. I don’t see why Michael gets a pass. His talent consisted of dancing that was not of a formal teaching and singing that was mediocre and “he he’s,” “who who’s,” and “ow ow’s” with the obsessive crotch grabbing. Big deal!
By this woman, and many others, Michael won’t be missed. I only pray that G-d forgives him and makes him perfect one day but, until then, he’ll just be a dead loser who diddled with children.
Don't we have a congress passing bills left and right that are putting this country further in debt and stripping away our freedoms while all this nonsense is going on? Isn't anyone concerned that none of our representatives are not even reading the bills they are passing? They are simply passing them through with no debate? I guess not. No, we are much too concerned over a man who is so bizarre; he makes Ted Kennedy look normal.
So fine, if this is what America wants to talk about, I will be more than glad to open my big mouth and express my non-PC opinions! I know how to really piss people off with my opinions; it's just a talent I have.
Since the death of child predator, I mean Michael Jackson, people have really begun to confuse me. First of all, I don't remember him being cared about much before he died. It seemed as if he'd fallen off the map over the past several years. Now, all of a sudden, everyone loves him and shows their undying love by making their avatars on websites images of him, running out and buying his music, tv stations doing tributes and/or covering the death, all sorts of discussions on forums and message boards, ect. It’s quite disturbing if you ask me.
The fact that all these things are occurring over his death is very telling of the state of our current culture. We are all guilty of doing this, myself included; worshiping the false idols of Hollywood. It’s simply amazing the energy we waste turning all of our attention to a man because he made good music. Big deal! He’s not G-d. He’s just a man and one who did evil things as far as I’m concerned.
Like most children who grew up in the 80’s, I was a fan of Michael Jackson. I spent hours with my best friend in front of the tv studying and learning the dance moves to his infamous Thriller video. We used to reenact the whole thing with such energy and excitement, creating quite the entertainment for the parents. However, something happened to Michael after his prime, something quite disturbing.
We all watched Michael slowly change. His face became odd. He was no longer the nice looking black man we all loved and adored. He was pale and his nose began to disappear, he started grabbing his crotch every chance he got and the “he he’s” and the “ow’s” got quite annoying after awhile. He began having lots of children around him, which is somewhat odd for a single grown man. I mean, how many men in their 30’s do you know that are single and hang around children they aren’t related to? If this were anybody else, other than a spiritual leader of some kind, this would be very strange. But, he was Michael Jackson so no one seemed to really care.
Michael then went on to buy monkeys and bones and other strange things. Rumors of his Neverland ranch began to surface and then we were hit with the molesting charges. At first, like most everyone, I completely ignored these charges, dismissing them as a total hoax. Who’d ever want to believe he could do such a thing, even if he was a freak, he was OUR (America’s) freak. Then, for some reason, it seemed out of nowhere, he settled out of court paying an absurd amount of money. Why? Why would Michael do that? Why wouldn’t he fight those charges? I know if I were accused of being a child molester, I was innocent, and I had more money than some of the most powerful people on earth, and I was one of the most powerful people on earth, I would fight tooth and nail before settling for any amount of money!
Now, you say, “but Tuesday, what parent would accept a settlement? If that were my child I would make sure they were behind bars!” Well, I’ll tell you what type of parent…one that lives in the REAL world. Does anyone actually think that Michael Jackson would ever go to jail? Everyone knows that celebrities get a free pass, they always have. Those parents obviously took the money, not only to avoid their child from being scrutinized further in the media but, also because they realized that it was the only way Michael would ever have any consequence for his actions. Oh, and spare me the Paris Hilton argument! She doesn’t come close to the celebrity that Michael Jackson was, even at her prime. This was a man who was simply adored and completely idolized by almost everyone in the United States. Paris was and is hated by many.
Years later, Michael is accused again of diddling with a child. But, instead of focusing on the statements that were made by him and his brother, the media and Michael’s attorney’s chose to center their attention on how awful the mother was. Well, they were right. The mother was horrible and a liar. From what I remember she was involved in another scandal of some sort. But, does that mean children of awful parents deserve to be molested by anyone? Does it mean that somehow the word of the child means nothing because they were unfortunate enough to be brought into the world by a jerk? I think not.
None of us will ever know the actual truth here but, I remember reading those statements and just hearing a “ring of truth” to them. It was so graphic and horrible; I just can’t imagine a child making any of those details up. Plus, we are talking about a known liar here. He tells Geraldo that he only had 2 nose jobs and that was all? I don’t think so. He said he was the biological father of his children and we ALL now know that was a lie, if we somehow didn’t know this before. Also, from other things I’ve read about Michael, the people that knew him questioned his relationship with the truth on many occasions.
I, for one, am not convinced of his innocence and just because a court said he was innocent really don’t mean anything to me. We all have seen on the news or, through personal relationships, people who have gotten away free from their crimes. For me, it’s simply a matter of putting the pieces together. The man was a complete nut job. He was raised in an abusive home. His sister, LaToya Jackson, claimed in her book, “Growing up in the Jackson family” that her father sexually and physically abused her. We all know that Joe Jackson, the father, is a man that has done horrible, evil things. Michael also stated that he was physically abused by him, falling short of stating sexual abuse but, maybe physical to him meant the same thing. So, why would anyone be surprised at a boy being abused like this would grow up to be an abuser himself?
I am not suggesting that just because someone acts “weird” they are automatically child molesters. I’m sure many people think I’m weird. What I’m saying is all the things we know about Michael put together suggest that it is more likely than not that he did do the things he was accused of. It makes sense.
We all know that he admitted to having young children sleep in his bed with him and perhaps this is something, according to what I’ve heard, that black families do. I put my daughter in bed with me as well. I don’t see anything terribly wrong with this behavior. Lot’s of folks, white, black, Mexican, Asian, ect. I’m sure, on occasion, sleep in the same bed with their children but, I’m not sure that it applies to everyone else’s children, especially those you are not related to. That being said, the parents of those children aren’t without fault themselves. I would not be comfortable with a man, a single man, whom I was not related to, sleeping in the same bed with my daughter alone or, with other children. I don’t think I’d be comfortable with even a relative that was single sleeping with her in the same bed. There’s something very wrong there.
I’m not sure what drugs he was on but, currently there seems to be no argument that the man engaged in consuming copious amount of various drugs to numb himself. This is just another part of puzzle that fits and shows what an emotionally disturbed and unbalanced man he was.
I also have a distinct feeling that many more children were abused by him but, were too afraid to say anything. Maybe now, they may have the courage to come forth or maybe not.
The main focus everyone is talking about now is how he died. I feel as though we are never going to hear the end of this. Autopsy after autopsy will be performed, I’m sure. Doctors are being accused of cover up and folks are now claiming that he was healthy when we all know this is just another lie. How could he be healthy when he looked like a walking skeleton, we know he was taking a combination of various drugs and, we have all seen him walking slowly like an old man in pain? Even back when the trial was going on, he couldn’t get out of his pajamas to come to court because, he was so frail and weak.
Yes, they are showing some video of him dancing and preparing for this comeback tour but, give anyone some pain killers and a Red Bull and they can appear pretty peppy themselves. I also heard a clip on the radio from Elizabeth Taylor. I’m not sure of the exact quote but, it was something along the lines of, “When his autopsy comes out, all hell will break lose”? What is THAT supposed to mean? I think he had AIDS. It explains the multiple prescriptions and it also explains his poor health. It’s also poetic justice.
As far as his legendary status, I really could give a crap what he did as an entertainer. None of that matters anymore. He should go down in history, as any other child molester would, as a man who did some damn evil things. Just because he did some good things in life doesn’t mean we should just neglect sexual child abuse and say, “Oh, but, he made such great music.” I don’t see anyone remembering John Wayne Gacy as a nice clown who made children laugh or, the BTK guy as someone who was a nice church man who did so much for his community. No, they are remembered for their horrific crimes, as they should be. I don’t see why Michael gets a pass. His talent consisted of dancing that was not of a formal teaching and singing that was mediocre and “he he’s,” “who who’s,” and “ow ow’s” with the obsessive crotch grabbing. Big deal!
By this woman, and many others, Michael won’t be missed. I only pray that G-d forgives him and makes him perfect one day but, until then, he’ll just be a dead loser who diddled with children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)