Today is exactly one year after Hurricane Katrina made landfall. Last year, a couple of days before this, we had weird wind blowing through Austin in circular gusts. People downtown were even more boistrous than usual, screaming and jumping up and down. A tourist asked me if it was always like that. I told her it wasn't, everyone was just excited about the hurricane because they could feel it coming. Little did I know at the time.
I got home around 2:30 am and turned on CNN to see what was happening, where the landfall would take place and it was still on track for a direct hit in New Orleans. I got on-line and looked at the web-cam in the French Quarter just as the rain was starting. People were still driving around and walking in the street.
I've been through a lot of hurricanes when I lived in Houston, but something about this one mesmerized me. I kept refreshing the French Quarter cam even though the transmission was getting pretty bad. I was glued to CNN, even more than usual if that's possible. Everything looked like it was just another hurricane if there is such a thing. Then the levees breached and all hell broke loose.
As I watched the desperate pleas of the people of New Orleans for help, food, water, security, I cried along with everyone else around the United States because I could not believe what I was seeing. I knew at that moment whatever else Bush was guilty of and whatever his spin doctor Karl Rove put out to try to make him look good, he has put this country in a much greater danger than I had even imagined. There is so much bureaucracy between the problem and the solution, it will take a complete government restructuring to untangle the stranglehold that exists since he created this debacle of an agency and called it Homeland Security.
I realized then that no matter what I do, if a similar disaster were to happen in Austin, I would be in the same hungry, thirsty, tired, dirty, helpless, and desparate situation as those who stayed in New Orleans during Katrina. What little confidence I had in the ability of the government - federal, local, and state - was gone. When I think of Homeland Security I don't feel secure. When I think of the people who still support this guy, I wonder why they are so easily influenced and I realize it's because if they thought about it they way I do, they may very well take their own life.
On the NBC Nightly News Brian Williams asked George Bush while he was touring New Orleans what he thought his legacy would be. He answered that he believes in 30 or 40 years when people can look at it historically, only then will they be able to decide if his decisions made America and the world safer. He said short term history is not important to his legacy. Really? I beg to differ.
The reality is George Bush has not made us safer and has, in fact, made us more vulnerable. By creating a larger bureaucracy, FEMA, the one government department that was created specifically to help the American people in times of disaster, has been marginalized to the point of uselessness. If there were another disaster tomorrow, natural or man-made, the very same problems and inability to respond effectively still exist. As more money is borrowed to pay for the war in Iraq, essentially mortgaging the country, less resources are available for the people of the United States. In 30 or 40 years those debts will still not be paid off, so the legacy he leaves can be objectively evaluated today.
I am also offended by his comment that short term history is not important. His favorite "strong black woman" Condi Rice seems to believe otherwise. Condi thinks if you archive a memo, it is historical, even if she archived it yesterday. When she was in charge of advising the President on national security, she received a memo titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack inside the U.S." and presented it in a PDB (presidential daily breifing) on August 6, 2001. Yet when she testified before the 911 Commission, she claimed it was historic and not important. I'd say in that instance, short term history was all that mattered.
I only bring Condi into the posting because I'm flabergasted that a growing number of the Bush faithful are trying to convince her to make a run at the Presidency. If her judgement is as bad as Bush's, and it very well could be worse, I am very afraid for the future of this country. How can we feel safe when we've got incompetent leaders making poor decisions? We only need to remember how we each felt watching fellow Americans begging for help while Condi was trying on $1500 Ferragamos, Cheney was fly fishing, and Bush was playing a guitar.
I saw Spike Lee's "When the Levees Broke" last week and it's on again tonight. It's really different from what I expected, and I must say much better. All I had heard about it was that some people were claiming the government had breached the levees deliberately to save the white neighborhoods. Although there were a few scenes with that claim, it was incredibly well done, objective, and should be required viewing for everyone in the Bush administration.
Technorati Tags: politics Hurricane Katrina Bush Condi Rice New Orleans
Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Monday, August 21, 2006
Is George Bush a Fascist?
fascism: fas·cism fa-"shi-z&m noun a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
According to sociologist Dr. Laurence W. Britt in the Spring 2003 edition of Free Inquiry magazine, analysis of seven fascist regimes (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia) reveal fourteen recognizable commonalities:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
Technorati Tags: politics fascism Bush Dr. Laurence Britt Sphere: Related Content
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
According to sociologist Dr. Laurence W. Britt in the Spring 2003 edition of Free Inquiry magazine, analysis of seven fascist regimes (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia) reveal fourteen recognizable commonalities:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not."
Dr. Laurence W. Britt
Technorati Tags: politics fascism Bush Dr. Laurence Britt Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Anchor Baby: the gift that keeps on taking
Anchor baby: an·chor ba·by 'a[ng]-k&r 'bA-bE noun Also known as a jackpot baby: a child born in the US to illegal aliens. Refers to the child's role in facilitating "chain migration" under the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965. The baby becomes the "anchor" of the chain by which its family may receive benefits from social programs, and may themselves become citizens of the United States. The term also refers to children born to women legally in the US on temporary visas when the child's birth is specifically intended to attain citizenship. This is also known as birth tourism. Anchor babies are an unanticipated and unintended exploitation of the fourteenth amendment.
The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the Thirty-ninth Congress, on the 13th of June, 1866. It was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State dated July 28, 1868 to have been ratified by the legislatures of 28 of the 37 States.
The section illegal aliens use in their attempt to remain in the country by crossing the border late in their pregnancy to give birth at the expense of American taxpayers is:
The amendment was originally intended to provide for the guarantee of freedom to the children of freed slaves.
The blatant disregard for the spirit of the fourteenth amendment and the ongoing cost in welfare benefits to these illegal aliens and their offspring is indeed the gift that keeps on giving. To the illegal aliens, that is.
Technorati Tags: politics illegal immigration illegal aliens anchor baby fourteenth amendment constitution Sphere: Related Content
The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the Thirty-ninth Congress, on the 13th of June, 1866. It was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State dated July 28, 1868 to have been ratified by the legislatures of 28 of the 37 States.
The section illegal aliens use in their attempt to remain in the country by crossing the border late in their pregnancy to give birth at the expense of American taxpayers is:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The amendment was originally intended to provide for the guarantee of freedom to the children of freed slaves.
The blatant disregard for the spirit of the fourteenth amendment and the ongoing cost in welfare benefits to these illegal aliens and their offspring is indeed the gift that keeps on giving. To the illegal aliens, that is.
Technorati Tags: politics illegal immigration illegal aliens anchor baby fourteenth amendment constitution Sphere: Related Content
Update to Texas invades Mexico - A Hypothetical
In an ironic turn of events, several members of the Arellano Felix Organization, aka AFO and the Tijuana Cartel, were arrested yesterday.
I found this article from February 21, 2005 which shows a relationship between Los Zetas and the AFO. Los Zetas were hired as enforcers for the rival Gulf Cartel leader Osiel Cardenas Guillen to gain control of the terroritory and distribution channels of the AFO.
According to the Stratfor report, it "is likely that more drug-related violence will spill across the border into California as Los Zetas carry out their orders to destroy the Arellano Felix family's grip on the Tijuana cartel. Many senior members of the Arellano Felix organization reportedly have hideouts in San Diego and other California cities. Since Los Zetas already have been implicated in three recent murders in Texas, it is unlikely they would have qualms about hunting Arellano Felix associates in California.
This means both Mexican and U.S. law enforcement and other public officials such as prosecutors and judges could be at increased risk of being assassinated over the next several years while both governments seek to neutralize Cardenas and the Gulf cartel".
So it seems the administration of George Bush is in favor of allowing other soveriegn nations such as Israel to protect and defend their borders, but when our own borders are routinely violated, the violators should be granted amnesty and offered American citizenship.
Bush has flip-flopped on the immigration issue, once "talkin' tough" advocating catch and return and strong workplace enforcement. His position now is "not amnesty", but a legal path to citizenship for those who arrived here illegally and commit identity fraud which, of course, would be a felony offense if they were legal citizens. Since they're not, it doesn't matter. They're doing what they "have" to do and are entitled to the American dream. With only 127 workplace enforcement criminal convictions in 2005 nationwide, up from an appalling 46 the previous year, he has once again caved when pressured by corporate lobbyists and special interest groups. There are no doubt millions of law-abiding illegal aliens living and working in this country. Except for that pesky little illegal entry infraction and presenting false documents, those don't matter, remember?
The arrests today prove that some of those illegal immigrants are also criminals, among whom are not only violent repeat offenders, but on the FBI's most wanted list. Those are exactly the kinds of facts that cannot in any way be disputed by special interest groups advocating amnesty for illegal aliens.
In my hypothetical example, the U.S. military would retaliate against Los Zetas and the other armed non-state Mexican militias. In reality, they are being pursued by the DEA, FBI, CIA, federal and state prosecutors, and local law enforcement. So why is it appropriate for Israel to send in their military? There have been many more crimes, including kidnapping and murder, committed by Mexican narco-terrorists against both Mexican and American citizens than Hizbollah committed against Israel.
Obviously it is not appropriate here in the United States or Mexico, and it wasn't appropriate in Lebanon. As I said yesterday, it is a social phenomenon that could only have occured with Israel as the aggressor, I mean defender.
Technorati Tags: politics illegal aliens Bush Israel Mexico Arellano Felix Organization Los Zetas Sphere: Related Content
I found this article from February 21, 2005 which shows a relationship between Los Zetas and the AFO. Los Zetas were hired as enforcers for the rival Gulf Cartel leader Osiel Cardenas Guillen to gain control of the terroritory and distribution channels of the AFO.
According to the Stratfor report, it "is likely that more drug-related violence will spill across the border into California as Los Zetas carry out their orders to destroy the Arellano Felix family's grip on the Tijuana cartel. Many senior members of the Arellano Felix organization reportedly have hideouts in San Diego and other California cities. Since Los Zetas already have been implicated in three recent murders in Texas, it is unlikely they would have qualms about hunting Arellano Felix associates in California.
This means both Mexican and U.S. law enforcement and other public officials such as prosecutors and judges could be at increased risk of being assassinated over the next several years while both governments seek to neutralize Cardenas and the Gulf cartel".
So it seems the administration of George Bush is in favor of allowing other soveriegn nations such as Israel to protect and defend their borders, but when our own borders are routinely violated, the violators should be granted amnesty and offered American citizenship.
Bush has flip-flopped on the immigration issue, once "talkin' tough" advocating catch and return and strong workplace enforcement. His position now is "not amnesty", but a legal path to citizenship for those who arrived here illegally and commit identity fraud which, of course, would be a felony offense if they were legal citizens. Since they're not, it doesn't matter. They're doing what they "have" to do and are entitled to the American dream. With only 127 workplace enforcement criminal convictions in 2005 nationwide, up from an appalling 46 the previous year, he has once again caved when pressured by corporate lobbyists and special interest groups. There are no doubt millions of law-abiding illegal aliens living and working in this country. Except for that pesky little illegal entry infraction and presenting false documents, those don't matter, remember?
The arrests today prove that some of those illegal immigrants are also criminals, among whom are not only violent repeat offenders, but on the FBI's most wanted list. Those are exactly the kinds of facts that cannot in any way be disputed by special interest groups advocating amnesty for illegal aliens.
In my hypothetical example, the U.S. military would retaliate against Los Zetas and the other armed non-state Mexican militias. In reality, they are being pursued by the DEA, FBI, CIA, federal and state prosecutors, and local law enforcement. So why is it appropriate for Israel to send in their military? There have been many more crimes, including kidnapping and murder, committed by Mexican narco-terrorists against both Mexican and American citizens than Hizbollah committed against Israel.
Obviously it is not appropriate here in the United States or Mexico, and it wasn't appropriate in Lebanon. As I said yesterday, it is a social phenomenon that could only have occured with Israel as the aggressor, I mean defender.
Technorati Tags: politics illegal aliens Bush Israel Mexico Arellano Felix Organization Los Zetas Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
64% of Americans give Bush regime negative marks for diplomacy
With two wars raging in the Middle East and the status of a third conflict - the on again, off again fight between Israel and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon so unstable as to defy a predictable course, and with other global hotspots from North Korea to Venezuela stealing headlines, Americans are pessimistic about how their leaders are conducting
read more | digg story Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story Sphere: Related Content
Texas invades Mexico - A Hypothetical
Some who read my previous posting A history lesson for anyone who believes Isreal was right to attack Lebanon may get the erroneous idea that I am anti-Israel. Not at all, however I'm not pro-Israel either. I actually think the month long conflict between Israel and Hizbollah in Lebanon highlighted a very important social phenomenon that could only have existed with Israel as a participant.
No doubt George Bush was relieved to have some of the attention diverted from his debacle in Iraq. The media immediately dispatched journalists to the scene, gave on the spot updates, counted bombs and bodies, and made it into something which it wasn't. It wasn't new, it wasn't justified, and no matter who beats their chest and declares victory, there was no winner. They have sucessfully doomed another generation to hatred and bigotry and quite possibly created the next terrorist "mastermind".
So let's bring it home:
Imagine an American citizen crosses the border from Laredo, Texas into Nuevo Laredo, Mexico and gets kidnapped. That's not so hard to imagine, it's already happened. According to the FBI "Between May 2004 and May 2005, there have been 35 reported abductions of U.S. citizens in this region" and between "January to mid-August 2005, 202 kidnappings" of Mexican citizens "occurred in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas, the Gulf Cartel's operational center, which includes the cities of Matamoros, Nuevo Laredo, and Reynosa." It's a dangerous place where violence crosses the international border into the United States.
We could then imagine George Bush getting serious about border security. That's pretty far-fetched I know, but just play along. In his quest to prove he's serious about stopping the drugs, violence, kidnappings, and murder before they spread into the U.S., let's imagine he retaliates by sending in troops. Not the 6,000 national guard troops he said he would send to protect the border without, of course, giving them any enforcement power or weapons. This time he means business: Marines, special forces, fighter jets, boots on the ground. He's gonna show those Mexicans his commander in chief powers.
Our group of Mexican terrorists is not called Hizbollah, we'll call them Los Zetas. They are narco-terrorists rather than ideological terrorists, known to be violent and are recruiting gang members inside the U.S.. Los Zetas is believed to be responsible for the latest kidnapping, so Bush decides their actions represent a danger to the United States and retaliates first by sending in fighter jets to drop bombs on suspected Los Zetas strongholds in Mexico. Los Zetas has a history of living among innocent civilians, so it's not surprising that there's a large amount of collateral damage.
Go ahead and insert all of the media coverage of the Israeli-Hizbollah conflict here, substituting the U.S. for Israel and Los Zetas for Hizbollah.
When it's all said and done, we're left with a lot of resentment on the part of Mexican citizens who now expect the U.S. to destroy their homes and property, so they turn to Los Zetas for protection and pledge their loyalty. Sound familiar? We've just created a new generation of terrorists.
Technorati Tags: politics Israel Hizbollah Bush Los Zetas Sphere: Related Content
No doubt George Bush was relieved to have some of the attention diverted from his debacle in Iraq. The media immediately dispatched journalists to the scene, gave on the spot updates, counted bombs and bodies, and made it into something which it wasn't. It wasn't new, it wasn't justified, and no matter who beats their chest and declares victory, there was no winner. They have sucessfully doomed another generation to hatred and bigotry and quite possibly created the next terrorist "mastermind".
So let's bring it home:
Imagine an American citizen crosses the border from Laredo, Texas into Nuevo Laredo, Mexico and gets kidnapped. That's not so hard to imagine, it's already happened. According to the FBI "Between May 2004 and May 2005, there have been 35 reported abductions of U.S. citizens in this region" and between "January to mid-August 2005, 202 kidnappings" of Mexican citizens "occurred in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas, the Gulf Cartel's operational center, which includes the cities of Matamoros, Nuevo Laredo, and Reynosa." It's a dangerous place where violence crosses the international border into the United States.
We could then imagine George Bush getting serious about border security. That's pretty far-fetched I know, but just play along. In his quest to prove he's serious about stopping the drugs, violence, kidnappings, and murder before they spread into the U.S., let's imagine he retaliates by sending in troops. Not the 6,000 national guard troops he said he would send to protect the border without, of course, giving them any enforcement power or weapons. This time he means business: Marines, special forces, fighter jets, boots on the ground. He's gonna show those Mexicans his commander in chief powers.
Our group of Mexican terrorists is not called Hizbollah, we'll call them Los Zetas. They are narco-terrorists rather than ideological terrorists, known to be violent and are recruiting gang members inside the U.S.. Los Zetas is believed to be responsible for the latest kidnapping, so Bush decides their actions represent a danger to the United States and retaliates first by sending in fighter jets to drop bombs on suspected Los Zetas strongholds in Mexico. Los Zetas has a history of living among innocent civilians, so it's not surprising that there's a large amount of collateral damage.
Go ahead and insert all of the media coverage of the Israeli-Hizbollah conflict here, substituting the U.S. for Israel and Los Zetas for Hizbollah.
When it's all said and done, we're left with a lot of resentment on the part of Mexican citizens who now expect the U.S. to destroy their homes and property, so they turn to Los Zetas for protection and pledge their loyalty. Sound familiar? We've just created a new generation of terrorists.
Technorati Tags: politics Israel Hizbollah Bush Los Zetas Sphere: Related Content
Monday, August 14, 2006
A history lesson for anyone who believes Isreal was right to attack Lebanon
You can also read and comment on this article at OpEdNews
You may be wondering why everything is italicized. The above text is taken straight from the United Nations website, an unbiased account without justifications or declarations of Israel's right to defend itself during the most recent invasion of Lebanon.
Less than two years ago Lebanon democratically elected a government which George Bush claims to believe is the inherent right of all humanity to insure basic freedoms. Yet when Israel, a country which has refused to honor U.N. Security Council resolution 242 passed in 1967, nearly 40 years ago, launches a massive attack on Lebanese territory, with the justification that the fledgling Lebanese government has failed to disarm factions deemed terrorists as called for in U.N. Security Council resolution 1559 passed in 2004 two years ago, Bush claims they have every right to demolish anything and everything in the name of self-defense.
Under Ariel Sharon, Israel finally agreed to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 2005, thirty eight years after they were called on by the U.N. to do so.
Israel can't have it both ways. They can't expect rational, unbiased people to ignore facts and support the destruction of a sovereign nation when they themselves have disrespected the very institution they are claiming must be obeyed by the Lebanese government.
If they were truly concerned about disarming Hizbollah they should have worked through diplomatic channels to assist the new government in Lebanon. Establishing business relationships and trade partnerships with the Lebanese people would have gone a long way towards eliminating the need for the humanitarian endeavors that have established such a strong loyalty to Hizbollah in Lebanon.
It's all a matter of perspective. If you have a choice between a neighboring country with a history of encroaching and occupying territory and an armed militia providing for your basic needs, who are you going to support?
Comment thread from OpEdNews:
Technorati Tags: politics Israel Hizbollah Bush United Nations Sphere: Related Content
The Palestine problem became an international issue towards the end of the First World War with the disintegration of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. Palestine was among the several former Ottoman Arab territories which were placed under the administration of Great Britain under the Mandates System adopted by the League of Nations pursuant to the League's Covenant. (Article 22)
All but one of these Mandated Territories became fully independent States, as anticipated. The exception was Palestine where, instead of being limited to "the rendering of administrative assistance and advice" the Mandate had as a primary objective the implementation of the "Balfour Declaration" issued by the British Government in 1917, expressing support for "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people".
During the years of the Palestine Mandate, from 1922 to 1947, large-scale Jewish immigration from abroad, mainly from Eastern Europe took place, the numbers swelling in the 1930s with the notorious Nazi persecution of Jewish populations. Palestinian demands for independence and resistance to Jewish immigration led to a rebellion in 1937, followed by continuing terrorism and violence from both sides during and immediately after World War II. Great Britain tried to implement various formulas to bring independence to a land ravaged by violence. In 1947, Great Britain in frustration turned the problem over to the United Nations.
After looking at various alternatives, the UN proposed the partitioning of Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized (Resolution 181 (II) of 1947). One of the two States envisaged in the partition plan proclaimed its independence as Israel and in the 1948 war expanded to occupy 77 per cent of the territory of Palestine. Israel also occupied the larger part of Jerusalem. Over half the indigenous Palestinian population fled or were expelled. Jordan and Egypt occupied the other parts of the territory assigned by the partition resolution to the Palestinian Arab State which did not come into being.
In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). This included the remaining part of Jerusalem, which was subsequently annexed by Israel. The war brought about a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at half a million. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 called on Israel to withdraw from territories it had occupied in the 1967 conflict.
In 1974, the General Assembly reaffirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty, and to return. The following year, the General Assembly established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. The General Assembly conferred on the PLO the status of status of observer in the Assembly and in other international conferences held under United Nations auspices.
Events on the ground, however, remained on a negative course. In June 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon with the declared intention to eliminate the PLO. A cease-fire was arranged. PLO troops withdrew from Beirut and were transferred to neighboring countries after guarantees of safety were provided for thousands of Palestinian refugees left behind. Subsequently, a large-scale massacre of refugees took place in the camps of Sabra and Shatila.
In September 1983, the International Conference on the Question of Palestine, which was widely attended, adopted inter alia the Geneva Declaration containing the following principles: the need to oppose and reject the establishment of settlements in the occupied territory and actions taken by Israel to change the status of Jerusalem, the right of all States in the region to existence within secure and internationally recognized boundaries, with justice and security for all the people, and the attainment of the legitimate, inalienable rights of the Palestinian people.
In December 1987, a mass uprising against the Israeli occupation began in the occupied Palestinian territory (the intifadah). Methods used by the Israeli forces during the uprising resulted in mass injuries and heavy loss of life among the civilian Palestinian population.
A Peace Conference on the Middle East was convened in Madrid on 30 October 1991, with the aim of achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement through direct negotiations along 2 tracks: between Israel and the Arab States, and between Israel and the Palestinians, based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) (the "land for peace" formula). A series of subsequent negotiations culminated in the mutual recognition between the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian People, and the signing by the two parties of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993, as well as the subsequent implementation agreements, which led to several other positive developments, such as the partial withdrawal of Israeli forces, the elections to the Palestinian Council and the presidency of the Palestinian Authority, the partial release of prisoners and the establishment of a functioning administration in the areas under Palestinian self-rule. The involvement of the United Nations has been essential to the peace process, both as the guardian of international legitimacy and in the mobilization and provision of international assistance.
You may be wondering why everything is italicized. The above text is taken straight from the United Nations website, an unbiased account without justifications or declarations of Israel's right to defend itself during the most recent invasion of Lebanon.
Less than two years ago Lebanon democratically elected a government which George Bush claims to believe is the inherent right of all humanity to insure basic freedoms. Yet when Israel, a country which has refused to honor U.N. Security Council resolution 242 passed in 1967, nearly 40 years ago, launches a massive attack on Lebanese territory, with the justification that the fledgling Lebanese government has failed to disarm factions deemed terrorists as called for in U.N. Security Council resolution 1559 passed in 2004 two years ago, Bush claims they have every right to demolish anything and everything in the name of self-defense.
Under Ariel Sharon, Israel finally agreed to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 2005, thirty eight years after they were called on by the U.N. to do so.
Israel can't have it both ways. They can't expect rational, unbiased people to ignore facts and support the destruction of a sovereign nation when they themselves have disrespected the very institution they are claiming must be obeyed by the Lebanese government.
If they were truly concerned about disarming Hizbollah they should have worked through diplomatic channels to assist the new government in Lebanon. Establishing business relationships and trade partnerships with the Lebanese people would have gone a long way towards eliminating the need for the humanitarian endeavors that have established such a strong loyalty to Hizbollah in Lebanon.
It's all a matter of perspective. If you have a choice between a neighboring country with a history of encroaching and occupying territory and an armed militia providing for your basic needs, who are you going to support?
Comment thread from OpEdNews:
a very good article
Some details should be added:
1. The final casting vote on the 1947 UN resolution was made by the Ukrainian rep. in the UN. Stalin at that time was pro-Israeli. When Israelis did not fulfill the promises the Russian prominent Jews paid the price. A bloody one.
2.Palestinian Arabs did suffer from both sides. Take the ' Black September'. The Arab states around Israel are using Palestinians for their own purposes in many cases.
3. In the Y1948 during the war of Independence Israel did proclaim itself unilaterally but the first attack was from the Arab side. The Yom Kippur war in 1972 was a similar thing.
I would like to state that the overwhelming majority of the East European Jews did not want to go to Israel. I also would like to state as myself being a subject of that that people emigrating from the Communism or after the WWII were in most cases pushed to go to Israel and were not given any other options ( or those options were very limited) In fact, they were and are designated as a cannon fodder( especially their children).
I also would like to add that through all that period the so - called Arab rulers never even tried to solve the problem by sticking together in embracing their Palestinian brothers and used the situation for their own shallow benefit.
But that all does not matter much. Israel was created as a pawn and is a pawn. A dangerous pawn.
by panurg
there are lessons in history, will we learn them?
Point taken; I think that time in history was unsettling and the territorial compromise was initiated with the best intentions, with the expectation neighbors would respect, if not embrace it. Obviously it didn't work out exactly as they intended, sort of like the U.S. in Iraq.
The lesson I hope those with the power to act will learn from this is that as weapons technology improves and continues to dominate the underlying diplomatic theatre, there will come a time when diplomacy must take the lead. If the goal really is peaceful co-existence, our leaders need to stop reaching for the aresenal at the first sign of trouble and work to achieve a lasting diplomatic solution.
Since the unfortunate introduction of nuclear weapons, those countries in possession currently have proven they are able to exercise restraint, at least with regard to those weapons. They can do it and I would hate to think the only way to acheive lasting diplomatic solutions is for everyone to have that destructive power at their fingertips and threaten its use, as seems to be the direction we're heading now.
It is a cliche, but "can't we all just get along?" We don't solve our problems as individuals by fighting (well, I don't) and it shouldn't be acceptable to to so as soveriegn nations.
by ethicsfetish
History Lesson
If we are going to go back to 1918, why not back to 515, and if back to 515, why not go back to 70 A.D. when Rome destroyed the Temple. Point is there is no going back no matter how much the Muslims wish to go back. They lost the '48 war and Israel won. They lost again in '56, '67, '72 and Israel was foolish enough to give the territory back to them.
As far as Islam goes please read your Koran and some Hadith. It would help greatly to stop to think: the goal of every committed Muslim is to live under Sharia Law. Do a quick study of Nigeria for the past thirty years. See what is happening to the non-Muslilms who live in the counties which have gone under Sharia Law. Muslims have been able to push back the animists into the far corners of Nigeria. The Muslims have done this through terrible persecution. The animists and Christians either leave their homes, covnert to Islam or die. To make sure the conversions are permanent, Sharia Law makes it a capital offense (death penalty) for a Muslim to convert to any religion, and makes it a death penalty for anyone to try to convert a Muslim to another religion. Sharia Law which is the application of Koran and Hadith make it a death penalty for anyone who converts to any religion after becoming Muslim. Under Sharia Law only Muslims can be citizens. There have never been Jewish or Christian citizens in any Muslim nation that practiced Sharia Law. The Roman Catholics tried this same tactic back in what we call the Dark Ages which culminated in the terrible Crusades and the Inquisition. The Crusades were not just against Muslims, they were against Jews, too. When Crusaders put to death Muslims by the thousands to "free the Holy Land" during the Crusades, they put to death thousands of Jews, also. At that time, it was better for a Jew to live under the hard yoke of Islam than the impossible terror of the Roman Catholic Church. This has not been true since the sixteenth century and is basic history 101. Why would Jews would flee countres like Pakistan, Sudan, and Yemen if they were so happy under Islam?
Any honest Muslim cleric will tell you that democracy is evil and contradictory to Islam. Unlike Bush, at least they are honest about it. Hezbollah and Hamas are just being faithful Muslims. The opposition is not so much against Israel or Zionism as it is against democracy; however, the devout Muslim must never forget that when men like Patrick Henry and Nathan Hale said such things as , "Give me liberty or give me death," untold billions in the world and many within Islam cry out with all their heart the same thing. Muslims are not the only ones willing to die for what they believe. Most free men and women had rather be dead than live under the tyranny of Islam or any other despotism.
The real problem Islam has with Israel as most Muslim clerics believe is that the Land of Israel belongs to Islam. As you well know, Islam teaches that once a territory belongs to Islam, it is Islamic territory forever. Look out eastern France, Europe and Spain. Most Muslims look at the State of Israel as illegitimate as both Hamas, Hezbollah and their backers teach. They are very willing to die trying to destroy the State of Israel which they prefer to call Zionism.
Israel could care less about Islam, Judaism, Christianity, the United States or anything else. They will never be brought back to the conditions the Jews found themselves in from 70 AD to 1948, when every Jew was at the mercy of every religious nut in every community. When they say, "Never again." They mean, "Never Again." There is no doubt in my mind and should not be in yours that if Iran develops a nuclear weapon, the BOMB will be smuggled into Isreal and detonated. Mark my words when that happens you can write off Damascus, Teheran, Khartoum, Mecca and Medina because that will open the gates to the worst holocaust the world has ever seen. The reason I say Iran will do that is because as long as Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas teach little boys and girls to walk around with suicide vests and teach that murdering yourself and murdering others guarantees you eternal sexual bliss with seventy plus "cow eyed" twelve year old children, they would not hestitate for a moment to try to blow Israel into the sea. I think we are well down the road to that happening in my life time and I am sixty-six years old.
by pratliff94
Technorati Tags: politics Israel Hizbollah Bush United Nations Sphere: Related Content
Why don't Conservatives respect human life?
I was blog surfing today and I kept landing on conservative sites. I don't know if I've gotten completely cynical, but I really don't understand how people still believe anything this administration says or does. Bush has been stuck on the "hate us for our freedom" schtick for so long I doubt he beleves it anymore. In fact, I know he doesn't because he said so during his speech today. He really believes "there's still individuals that would like to kill innocent Americans to achieve political objectives" and that's not the same thing.
As we've seen in Iraq, it doesn't matter how many American lives are lost or how much money he borrows and donates to the rebuilding of the country he ordered destroyed, the type of Democracy and those elected lead in the middle east will not be advocates of freedom for all. Furthermore, they may not be eternally grateful for his "gift". "Democracy" in the middle east could be better described as theocracy and anytime you throw religion into anything, there's going to be trouble.
The "moral majority" has morals and values confused with beliefs. Faith and religion are not morals. They value their faith, but that doesn't make it a value. They value George Bush because they believe he is religious. I think his recent overzealous support for Israel is a misguided attempt at redemption for the Bush family's allegience with the Nazis and their contribution to the financial support of Hitler.
Oh! There goes that left wing propaganda machine trying to stir something up by stating facts again. Dubya's doing everything he can to leave a lasting legacy, but I doubt future Bush's will be proud of his blatent disregard for human life. He has so much blood on his hands, it just proves the legacy of the Bush family is respect for money regardless of who is killed.
Technorati Tags: politics Iraq war Bush Sphere: Related Content
As we've seen in Iraq, it doesn't matter how many American lives are lost or how much money he borrows and donates to the rebuilding of the country he ordered destroyed, the type of Democracy and those elected lead in the middle east will not be advocates of freedom for all. Furthermore, they may not be eternally grateful for his "gift". "Democracy" in the middle east could be better described as theocracy and anytime you throw religion into anything, there's going to be trouble.
The "moral majority" has morals and values confused with beliefs. Faith and religion are not morals. They value their faith, but that doesn't make it a value. They value George Bush because they believe he is religious. I think his recent overzealous support for Israel is a misguided attempt at redemption for the Bush family's allegience with the Nazis and their contribution to the financial support of Hitler.
Oh! There goes that left wing propaganda machine trying to stir something up by stating facts again. Dubya's doing everything he can to leave a lasting legacy, but I doubt future Bush's will be proud of his blatent disregard for human life. He has so much blood on his hands, it just proves the legacy of the Bush family is respect for money regardless of who is killed.
Technorati Tags: politics Iraq war Bush Sphere: Related Content
Friday, August 11, 2006
Rice is in way over her head
Helen Thomas commentary on Condi's handling of her diplomatic duties. First she was snubbed by Lebanese PM Siniora, appeared shaken and stressed out after learning of the Qana massacre from a staffer during meeting with Isreali PM Olmert, and lectures leaders of sovereign countries in the Middle East as though they were school boys.
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: politics Condoleezza Rice Helen Thomas Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: politics Condoleezza Rice Helen Thomas Sphere: Related Content
Objector Bails Believing Iraq War has "no legal basis to be fought"
An Army interrogator with the 82nd Airborne Division deployed to Baghdad in December 2004 and was in Mosul when he said he witnessed the killing of a young Iraqi man. Shortly after returning from Iraq last year, he packed his bags and sneaked out of Fort Bragg, leaving only a note quoting Martin Luther King.
read more | digg story
from todays Houston Chronicle
Technorati Tags: politics Iraq war Houston Chronicle Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story
from todays Houston Chronicle
Technorati Tags: politics Iraq war Houston Chronicle Sphere: Related Content
Kinky Friedman wants Strayhorn investigated
Friedman's campaign asked Travis Co. D.A. Ronnie Earle to determine whether Strayhorn violated state law that bars misuse of government personnel and resources. Strayhorn aides have said it was appropriate to have staffers help her prepare for speeches by frequently compiling briefing materials because she is on duty as comptroller full time.
read more | digg story
From todays Austin American Statesman
Kinky website
Technorati Tags: politics Kinky Friedman Carole Strayhorn Texas Austin Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story
From todays Austin American Statesman
Kinky website
Technorati Tags: politics Kinky Friedman Carole Strayhorn Texas Austin Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Connecticut Dems Won't Stay the Course
I've been watching the Leiberman-Lamont primary race in Connecticut which culminated last night in a victory for Lamont. Until now I was a casual observer simply interested in a race between a long time incumbent and a first time politician. However, since everyone's been asking both candidates what they think the outcome may foretell about the November mid-terms, I heard Leiberman say something I think sums it up.
Prior to the result yesterday Chris Matthews was interviewing Leiberman for Hardball on MSNBC. Chris asked how Leiberman thought his constituents felt about his continued support for the Iraq war. He responded that although he knows the majority of residents in Connecticut do not support his decision, he thinks it's his job to do what he thinks is best regardless of they want. He knows best and they elected him to make his own decisions.
I happen to believe they elected him to make decisions based on what they want. This attitude of politicians to flagrantly disregard the very people who elected them is the reason they need to update their resumes now so they'll be ready in January.
The ridiculous decisions made by this Congress, including suspending all current business to keep Terry Schiavo alive, are getting pretty hard to ignore. The Republicans probably wish they hadn't wasted that flag burning vote a couple of months ago. They need another diversionary issue. Maybe they'll pull the immigration debate out of committee just in time to show the Democrats are weak on national security.
That's another issue that if the politicians listened to their constituents instead of pandering to La Raza they would have a better chance at gaining a majority. As it stands, the only reason to put a bill which has already been voted on into committee is to resurrect it when you need it. They need it the second or third week of October. That's what I said back on June 12th in "Dems are Falling Into Trap" and I stand by it now.
Technorati Tags: politics Lamont Congress Democrat Leiberman Hardball Sphere: Related Content
Prior to the result yesterday Chris Matthews was interviewing Leiberman for Hardball on MSNBC. Chris asked how Leiberman thought his constituents felt about his continued support for the Iraq war. He responded that although he knows the majority of residents in Connecticut do not support his decision, he thinks it's his job to do what he thinks is best regardless of they want. He knows best and they elected him to make his own decisions.
I happen to believe they elected him to make decisions based on what they want. This attitude of politicians to flagrantly disregard the very people who elected them is the reason they need to update their resumes now so they'll be ready in January.
The ridiculous decisions made by this Congress, including suspending all current business to keep Terry Schiavo alive, are getting pretty hard to ignore. The Republicans probably wish they hadn't wasted that flag burning vote a couple of months ago. They need another diversionary issue. Maybe they'll pull the immigration debate out of committee just in time to show the Democrats are weak on national security.
That's another issue that if the politicians listened to their constituents instead of pandering to La Raza they would have a better chance at gaining a majority. As it stands, the only reason to put a bill which has already been voted on into committee is to resurrect it when you need it. They need it the second or third week of October. That's what I said back on June 12th in "Dems are Falling Into Trap" and I stand by it now.
Technorati Tags: politics Lamont Congress Democrat Leiberman Hardball Sphere: Related Content
Monday, August 07, 2006
Bubble Heads
There's no business in the world that could possible function with the level of ineptitude present not only in the White House, but in both branches of Congress. The Bush administration has been allowed to make one mistake after another, many of which were in violation of the Constitution, none of which have been prosecuted, investigated, or censured. History will not be kind to this administration, and indeed will show that Congress enabled these errors by not doing the job they were elected to do.
With the increasing violence in the middle east with seemingly no end in sight, I wonder what George Bush thinks of his war now. In Connecticut, Lamont will probably take Leiberman's seat on a single issue: opposition to the fiasco W created in Iraq. CNN reported this morning that he is ahead in the polls at this point, so there's a good chance Leiberman's constituents are going to use their vote to insure their views are represented rather than Leiberman's. Precisely, most Americans have come to see what some of us have known all along; violence and war are not the solution, they only create a new set of problems while rarely solving anything.
If this is any indication of the way the mid-terms will be decided, we should finally have congressional oversight for the first time since W took (translation - stole) office. I don't know what it's like to be a politician, but I see an increasing number of Americans refusing to back one party or the other, basing their vote on issues rather than political party, and declaring independence. C-SPAN recently added a third phone line for Independents, which should be a wake up call for every representitive on the Hill, that is if they're paying attention which I doubt.
We're tired of hearing about Democrat and Republican voting blocks banding together simply for the sake of towing the party line. We're not being represented, nothing of substance is getting accomplished, and if you are elected, your vote should be representive of those who chose you for the office. Voting with your party is not noble, it's just lazy. If you don't have the time or staffing resources to find out how your constituents want you to vote, you should resign and let someone else do the job.
Many Americans turn a blind eye to the daily business of the government, probably because when they do pay attention the blatent incompetence is so disturbing, they prefer to be blissfully unaware. That is until they pull up to the pump and pay sixty bucks for the same tank of gas that a relatively short time ago was half of that. It's time to start paying attention and taking responsibilty as global citizens.
There are many areas we as Americans could make an impact through conservation, recycling, and innovation. Drilling for fossil fuels is not the answer to the energy question, we need to focus on sustainable and renewable sources. By filling the Gulf of Mexico with drilling platforms, we are not only wasting time and money, we are creating a future energy disaster when a hurricane blows them down. Instead of repeating the same mistakes over and over, we need to demand our elected officials emphasize research and development of alternative fuel sources and stop incentivising oil companies.
The United States has become dependent, rather than strong. If our ports are compromised, Hurricane Katrina will look like a picnic. Without oil and gas imports alone our economy would grind to a halt. Remove all the Wal-Mart crap from cheap foreign labor markets and we've got a huge problem. Take away both and there's a recipe for disaster. The United States simply cannot sustain itself independently. The question is how long are we going to wait to become a global super power instead of a global super consumer? When are we going to pop the bubble around our collective heads and act like we care about more than the latest celebrity gossip? More importantly, when are we going to dispel the caricature of the Ugly American and start taking responsibility for ourselves, our posterity, and our future?
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Congress Democrat Republican mid-terms Sphere: Related Content
With the increasing violence in the middle east with seemingly no end in sight, I wonder what George Bush thinks of his war now. In Connecticut, Lamont will probably take Leiberman's seat on a single issue: opposition to the fiasco W created in Iraq. CNN reported this morning that he is ahead in the polls at this point, so there's a good chance Leiberman's constituents are going to use their vote to insure their views are represented rather than Leiberman's. Precisely, most Americans have come to see what some of us have known all along; violence and war are not the solution, they only create a new set of problems while rarely solving anything.
If this is any indication of the way the mid-terms will be decided, we should finally have congressional oversight for the first time since W took (translation - stole) office. I don't know what it's like to be a politician, but I see an increasing number of Americans refusing to back one party or the other, basing their vote on issues rather than political party, and declaring independence. C-SPAN recently added a third phone line for Independents, which should be a wake up call for every representitive on the Hill, that is if they're paying attention which I doubt.
We're tired of hearing about Democrat and Republican voting blocks banding together simply for the sake of towing the party line. We're not being represented, nothing of substance is getting accomplished, and if you are elected, your vote should be representive of those who chose you for the office. Voting with your party is not noble, it's just lazy. If you don't have the time or staffing resources to find out how your constituents want you to vote, you should resign and let someone else do the job.
Many Americans turn a blind eye to the daily business of the government, probably because when they do pay attention the blatent incompetence is so disturbing, they prefer to be blissfully unaware. That is until they pull up to the pump and pay sixty bucks for the same tank of gas that a relatively short time ago was half of that. It's time to start paying attention and taking responsibilty as global citizens.
There are many areas we as Americans could make an impact through conservation, recycling, and innovation. Drilling for fossil fuels is not the answer to the energy question, we need to focus on sustainable and renewable sources. By filling the Gulf of Mexico with drilling platforms, we are not only wasting time and money, we are creating a future energy disaster when a hurricane blows them down. Instead of repeating the same mistakes over and over, we need to demand our elected officials emphasize research and development of alternative fuel sources and stop incentivising oil companies.
The United States has become dependent, rather than strong. If our ports are compromised, Hurricane Katrina will look like a picnic. Without oil and gas imports alone our economy would grind to a halt. Remove all the Wal-Mart crap from cheap foreign labor markets and we've got a huge problem. Take away both and there's a recipe for disaster. The United States simply cannot sustain itself independently. The question is how long are we going to wait to become a global super power instead of a global super consumer? When are we going to pop the bubble around our collective heads and act like we care about more than the latest celebrity gossip? More importantly, when are we going to dispel the caricature of the Ugly American and start taking responsibility for ourselves, our posterity, and our future?
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Congress Democrat Republican mid-terms Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
15 School Districts Try Out New Hybrid Buses
Districts in New York, California, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Arkansas, Iowa and Washington will be the first states in the nation to receive hybrid school buses as part of the Plug-In Hybrid ElectricSchool Bus Project.
AISD (Austin Independent School District) and Killeen Independent School District will each receive 1 bus as part of an on-going program to improve fuel effeciency and protect the environment.
From the Enova Systems press release:
After issuing nationwide Request for Proposals (RFPs) for hybrid school buses in June 2006, Advanced Energy announced today at the 13th Annual School Transportation News Expo that IC Corporation, the nation's largest school bus manufacturer, won the bid and will provide up to 19 hybrid school buses to those 11 states.
"This project provides operational benefits to school districts,while also providing the reduced emissions desired by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a valuable return on investment to school boards," said Ewan Pritchard, P.E., Advanced Energy's hybrid program manager. "This bid award is the result of several years of collaborative effort among manufacturers, school districts and government agencies to change the school bus market."
Advanced Energy is a Raleigh-based non-profit corporation that enables utility customers to improve returns on their energy investments. The corporation also strives to create environmental, economic and societal benefits through innovative and market-based approaches to energy. The Hybrid Electric School Bus Project represents a collaborative effort among many parties to improve the nation's air quality. The project has demonstrated that industry, government and non-profits can successfully work together to improvethe environment and encourage the economy.
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: alternative energy hybrid school bus AISD Austin Independent School District Enova Systems Advanced Energy Sphere: Related Content
AISD (Austin Independent School District) and Killeen Independent School District will each receive 1 bus as part of an on-going program to improve fuel effeciency and protect the environment.
From the Enova Systems press release:
After issuing nationwide Request for Proposals (RFPs) for hybrid school buses in June 2006, Advanced Energy announced today at the 13th Annual School Transportation News Expo that IC Corporation, the nation's largest school bus manufacturer, won the bid and will provide up to 19 hybrid school buses to those 11 states.
"This project provides operational benefits to school districts,while also providing the reduced emissions desired by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a valuable return on investment to school boards," said Ewan Pritchard, P.E., Advanced Energy's hybrid program manager. "This bid award is the result of several years of collaborative effort among manufacturers, school districts and government agencies to change the school bus market."
Advanced Energy is a Raleigh-based non-profit corporation that enables utility customers to improve returns on their energy investments. The corporation also strives to create environmental, economic and societal benefits through innovative and market-based approaches to energy. The Hybrid Electric School Bus Project represents a collaborative effort among many parties to improve the nation's air quality. The project has demonstrated that industry, government and non-profits can successfully work together to improvethe environment and encourage the economy.
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: alternative energy hybrid school bus AISD Austin Independent School District Enova Systems Advanced Energy Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
How welfare reform changed America
A decade since welfare reform, the worst fears of those who opposed it haven't materialized. Thousands of poor children did not wind up "sleeping on grates," as senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan predicted. Nearly 70% of all single women are working and incomes have risen. Child poverty rates have dropped and teen pregnancies are down.
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: Politics USAToday welfare reform Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: Politics USAToday welfare reform Sphere: Related Content
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Hate Thy Neighbor
Understanding the new and lethal logic of violence in the Middle East--and what the world can do to find peace
By Lisa Meyer for TIME Magazine - Jerusalem
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: Politics TIME Magazine Middle East Sphere: Related Content
By Lisa Meyer for TIME Magazine - Jerusalem
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: Politics TIME Magazine Middle East Sphere: Related Content
Stop Fighting and Start Talking
I'm really upset by the violence in the world today. It is bad enough to be constantly bombarded by stories of American soldiers dying in Iraq every day in an unjustified and poorly planned invasion. The current conflict in Lebanon and Israel is pushing me over the edge. What I will never be able to understand is how anyone thinks violence is the solution to any problem, including the three stooges (Bush, Rummy, and Condi).
Imagine if Dubya smacked Laura around when she disagreed with him. Would he be hailed as a strong leader demonstrating the power of his convictions or a cowardly spouse abuser resorting to violence? What's the difference in smacking your wife around and bombing and sending in military troops instead of negotiating diplomatically?
I know it's a popular position to side with Israel, but I can't get past the fact that more innocent civilians on both sides are adversely affected than the supposed terrorists who are targeted. I have friends who are Jewish and Arab and the inherent hatred on the basis of heritage and/or religion is not only ignorant, it's repulsive. It reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend from Lebanon who met a beautiful girl. They talked for a long time and he really liked her, then instantly lost interest when he found out she was from Israel. It makes no sense.
I equate this current conflict with the problem we have here in the United States with gang violence. Some gang members and former gang members acheive mainstream success and status, give back to the community and are applauded for their efforts in the same way as Hizbollah and Hamas. Imagine if the city of Los Angeles decided to eliminate the gangs and the city, county, and/or state response was to begin a bombing campaign to isolate and bring down the gang leaders. Would we stand idly by and allow our president to say they are free to defend themselves by whatever means necessary?
If the citizens of this world continue to allow hatred, prejudice, and discrimination on the basis of color, heritage, religion, or country of origin to prevail as an accepted premise we are destined to destroy ourselves. While I recognize there will always be ignorant elements in every society, those of us who strive for understanding and acceptance of cultural differences need to become more vocal. We need to drown out the voices among us whose goal is division and come together to celebrate our differences and recognize the common bonds of humanity. Without acceptance, there will never be peace.
Technorati Tags: Politics Bush Lebanon Israel prejudice Hizbollah Hamas Sphere: Related Content
Imagine if Dubya smacked Laura around when she disagreed with him. Would he be hailed as a strong leader demonstrating the power of his convictions or a cowardly spouse abuser resorting to violence? What's the difference in smacking your wife around and bombing and sending in military troops instead of negotiating diplomatically?
I know it's a popular position to side with Israel, but I can't get past the fact that more innocent civilians on both sides are adversely affected than the supposed terrorists who are targeted. I have friends who are Jewish and Arab and the inherent hatred on the basis of heritage and/or religion is not only ignorant, it's repulsive. It reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend from Lebanon who met a beautiful girl. They talked for a long time and he really liked her, then instantly lost interest when he found out she was from Israel. It makes no sense.
I equate this current conflict with the problem we have here in the United States with gang violence. Some gang members and former gang members acheive mainstream success and status, give back to the community and are applauded for their efforts in the same way as Hizbollah and Hamas. Imagine if the city of Los Angeles decided to eliminate the gangs and the city, county, and/or state response was to begin a bombing campaign to isolate and bring down the gang leaders. Would we stand idly by and allow our president to say they are free to defend themselves by whatever means necessary?
If the citizens of this world continue to allow hatred, prejudice, and discrimination on the basis of color, heritage, religion, or country of origin to prevail as an accepted premise we are destined to destroy ourselves. While I recognize there will always be ignorant elements in every society, those of us who strive for understanding and acceptance of cultural differences need to become more vocal. We need to drown out the voices among us whose goal is division and come together to celebrate our differences and recognize the common bonds of humanity. Without acceptance, there will never be peace.
Technorati Tags: Politics Bush Lebanon Israel prejudice Hizbollah Hamas Sphere: Related Content
Playing for water
PlayPump is a children's merry-go-round/roundabout attached to a water pump and water storage tank, that provides clean drinking water to children and families in rural Africa.
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: Africa PlayPump nonprofit springwise Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: Africa PlayPump nonprofit springwise Sphere: Related Content
Convert or Buy New E85
U.S. based Farm Industry News comparison of the benefits of buying a new flex-fuel vehicle or converting your existing one.
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: flex-fuel e85 ethanol Farm Industry News alternative energy Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story
Technorati Tags: flex-fuel e85 ethanol Farm Industry News alternative energy Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Small Pennsylvania city bans illegal immigrants
The City Council of Hazelton approved a law Thursday night designed to make this small city in northeastern Pennsylvania among the most hostile places in the U.S. for illegal immigrants to live or work.
read more | digg story Sphere: Related Content
read more | digg story Sphere: Related Content
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Loyalty Trumps Incompetence, Incompetence Trumps ... Anyone?
The war. 9-11. The only things they have in common are the incompetent responses by Bush and his neo-con advisors. Condoleezza Rice said no one could have anticipated planes flying into buildings and Donald Rumsfeld said no one could have anticipated the insurgency in Iraq.
Really? Maybe Condi didn't read the Presidential Daily Briefing she gave on August 6, 2001 ...1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
I'm sure they missed this, too, from The Indian Express October 19, 1999 Osama bin Laden's reported announcement of jihad against the US and India and his concomitant call to all the Kashmir militant groups to fight together against these countries has provoked fears concerning his ability to execute terrorist acts in Kashmir. The pertinent issue would be to assess the links that Bin Laden has with the militant groups operating in Kashmir.
And maybe they missed this also from August 23, 2001 on CNN Pakistan has been wracked by years of bitter fighting between militant Sunni and Shiite Muslims belonging to several organizations.
I could keep researching until I fill the entire page with documentation, but it's pretty clear they were following their own agenda instead of identifying potential threats. I also realize I have the benefit of hind-sight to search for stories, but didn't anyone in the White House see a pattern emerging? Isn't that someone's job?
Even worse, what is being overlooked right now? This administration can keep spinning the reason for starting this war, but how could they be so blatantly arrogant to believe there is any way to defeat someone who thinks dying for jihad is the ultimate reward? I have a hard time understanding how anyone with any knowledge of middle eastern customs and religions could advocate our involvement in this fiasco. It's also hard to understand how anyone can claim to feel more secure with the three stooges - Bush, Rumsfeld, and Rice - in charge.
I'm truly baffled when I see people urging Condoleezza Rice to run for president. Don't they recognize her incompetence as national security advisor is what caused 9-11? Bush, in his infinite wisdom, chose not to fire her, but promoted her instead. We know now how rewarding loyalty at the expense of competency turned out. Now that she's out of the country most of the time I do feel more secure. I just hope Americans will take off their blinders and objectively look at what's going on. We can't keep following this course.
I've heard the analogy "you don't switch horses mid-race", but if your horse is going in the wrong direction, you probably want to do something to turn it around. If that means getting off, then so be it, but you don't keep going when you know you're about to crash. It's common sense.
Sources:
The Indian Express October 19, 1999
Presidential Daily Briefing August 6, 2001
CNN August 23, 2001
digg story
Technorati Tags: Politics Bush Iraq war Donald Rumsfeld Condi Rice CNN Sphere: Related Content
Really? Maybe Condi didn't read the Presidential Daily Briefing she gave on August 6, 2001 ...1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
I'm sure they missed this, too, from The Indian Express October 19, 1999 Osama bin Laden's reported announcement of jihad against the US and India and his concomitant call to all the Kashmir militant groups to fight together against these countries has provoked fears concerning his ability to execute terrorist acts in Kashmir. The pertinent issue would be to assess the links that Bin Laden has with the militant groups operating in Kashmir.
And maybe they missed this also from August 23, 2001 on CNN Pakistan has been wracked by years of bitter fighting between militant Sunni and Shiite Muslims belonging to several organizations.
I could keep researching until I fill the entire page with documentation, but it's pretty clear they were following their own agenda instead of identifying potential threats. I also realize I have the benefit of hind-sight to search for stories, but didn't anyone in the White House see a pattern emerging? Isn't that someone's job?
Even worse, what is being overlooked right now? This administration can keep spinning the reason for starting this war, but how could they be so blatantly arrogant to believe there is any way to defeat someone who thinks dying for jihad is the ultimate reward? I have a hard time understanding how anyone with any knowledge of middle eastern customs and religions could advocate our involvement in this fiasco. It's also hard to understand how anyone can claim to feel more secure with the three stooges - Bush, Rumsfeld, and Rice - in charge.
I'm truly baffled when I see people urging Condoleezza Rice to run for president. Don't they recognize her incompetence as national security advisor is what caused 9-11? Bush, in his infinite wisdom, chose not to fire her, but promoted her instead. We know now how rewarding loyalty at the expense of competency turned out. Now that she's out of the country most of the time I do feel more secure. I just hope Americans will take off their blinders and objectively look at what's going on. We can't keep following this course.
I've heard the analogy "you don't switch horses mid-race", but if your horse is going in the wrong direction, you probably want to do something to turn it around. If that means getting off, then so be it, but you don't keep going when you know you're about to crash. It's common sense.
Sources:
The Indian Express October 19, 1999
Presidential Daily Briefing August 6, 2001
CNN August 23, 2001
digg story
Technorati Tags: Politics Bush Iraq war Donald Rumsfeld Condi Rice CNN Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Karl Rove Heckled During Speech
Karl Rove drew scattered boos when he highlighted Bush ’s recent approval of $1.9 billion in funding for more border security, including deployment of National Guard troops, and was disrupted twice by hecklers who unfurled antiwar and anti-Bush banners.
Karl may be starting to realize that some Americans are getting wise to his tricks. Energizing the base ain't as easy as it used to be. He can't just toss up gay marraige and flag burning and expect them to turn out.
Today he must have realized that "Latinos" aren't stupid either and they're on to him. It's one thing to talk about things you believe in and are passionate about, but apparantly no one was interested in or related to his Norwegian roots. His flagrant grasp to find anything in common with his audience was blatantly obvious.
I also heard Dennis Hastert on MSNBC saying he believes the Republicans will actually pick up a few seats on November because the war is going so well. What is this guy smoking? I need some, because although I'm occasionally a little ditzy, I'm never THAT delusional.
You guys "under the Republican tent" need to realize the rest of us are looking for change. We want something to get accomplished with our tax dollars. We want the partisan bickering to stop and have you start voting the way your constituents want you to, not just blindly tow the party line. We're tired of it and if you are an incubent with an expiring term in November (Democrat or Republican), you may want to start packing.
We don't want Democrats and Republicans, we want representation.
read the whole story in the LA Times | digg story
Technorati Tags: politics Karl Rove LA Times Democrats Republicans Sphere: Related Content
Karl may be starting to realize that some Americans are getting wise to his tricks. Energizing the base ain't as easy as it used to be. He can't just toss up gay marraige and flag burning and expect them to turn out.
Today he must have realized that "Latinos" aren't stupid either and they're on to him. It's one thing to talk about things you believe in and are passionate about, but apparantly no one was interested in or related to his Norwegian roots. His flagrant grasp to find anything in common with his audience was blatantly obvious.
I also heard Dennis Hastert on MSNBC saying he believes the Republicans will actually pick up a few seats on November because the war is going so well. What is this guy smoking? I need some, because although I'm occasionally a little ditzy, I'm never THAT delusional.
You guys "under the Republican tent" need to realize the rest of us are looking for change. We want something to get accomplished with our tax dollars. We want the partisan bickering to stop and have you start voting the way your constituents want you to, not just blindly tow the party line. We're tired of it and if you are an incubent with an expiring term in November (Democrat or Republican), you may want to start packing.
We don't want Democrats and Republicans, we want representation.
read the whole story in the LA Times | digg story
Technorati Tags: politics Karl Rove LA Times Democrats Republicans Sphere: Related Content
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Web 2.0 and What it Means to You
I've been working on a website and it made me start thinking about internet "buzzwords". Everyone in the design and coding community is talking about "web 2.0", but the end users of websites don't know what that means and probably don't care. I subscribe to several design related newsletters, each one with slightly different interpretations of what works in terms of design, marketing, page rank and search engine optimization (seo), etc.
I have a background in design, not computer related design, I learned that on my own because it wasn't available when I was in college. I actually studied art and believe design principles (balance, proportion, rhythm, emphasis, unity) apply to any media including the computer screen.
I've read several articles lately about poorly designed websites such as craiglist and myspace that are popular, the implication being that design doesn't matter. I disagree. The underlying application framework on those sites works, therefore the functionality and usability is what makes them popular. I would also disagree that the myspace core pages are ugly, they're basic, but not ugly. Myspace becomes ugly and loses functionality because the users' pages look bad and they don't know how to integrate the applications (video and music players).
Some of the technologies of "web 2.0" sites have been used for years and are suddenly being recognized as an intrensic component of a well built site. (I also say building databases and constructing legislation, so for anyone getting bogged down by semantics, just deal with it.) The explosion of blogs is a good example of 2.0 and has created a new method of marketing for business websites allowing fresh content to be syndicated and embeded into other websites complete with branding from the originating site. This is especially important for business website seo because the link gets counted from each of the syndicating sites, while the summary gets broadcast on all the blogosphere sites (like Technorati and del.icio.us) you have set up to ping.
If this all sounds a little technical and your eyes are starting to cross, have no fear. I'll move on to one of my personal pet peeves about websites, and unfortunately it's one of the things a lot of potential clients say they absolutely "need" on their website: proprietary applications like Flash, Java, or Windows media player. I cringe every time someone says they want a Flash site or at least a Flash intro. Why? It's not that I don't like Flash sites or have anything against Macromedia. It's because when I go to one of those Flash intro sites I immediately look for the "skip intro" button. I know I'm not the only one because that button wasn't put there just in case I visited the site. Most people skip the intro, so why do you want to pay someone to make it for you?
Even more annoying is when I go to a site and get a message that I need to update my Flash player to be able to even see what's there. Sometimes I decide I want to see your site after I've updated the player, sometimes I decide I've already wasted enough time and should get back to work and never go back. As far as Windows media player, well, you may have noticed in the sidebar it says there is no Microsoft software on my computer and that's a decision Microsoft made, not me. You see, I don't use Windows operating system, I use Linux. Microsoft will not make any of it's products compatible with Linux, so when you put any of their proprietary embeds on your website, you are excluding people like me.
Once again, I don't dislike Microsoft per se, what I didn't like when I did use Windows was viruses, crashes, rebooting all the time, security patches, external firewall software, etc. You know, all the things you probably do all the time because you think you have to. The fact is, Microsoft will not make applications available for Linux because a lot of programmers use Linux and they might rewrite the code, improve it (gasp!), and release it as open source. And, my computer hasn't crashed since I started using Linux except when I f'ed with the kernel and had to re-install the original kernel.
I'm sure some people at Microsoft think Linux users are freeloaders because we all use free open source software and that's why they won't make their apps usable for us. The fact is I've bought plenty of software and most of it hasn't done exactly what I needed and I ended up finding something similar in open source and making it do what I needed. The beauty of open source is that there are a lot of smart people willing to tinker around with code and contribute it back to the community. That's why there IS web 2.0.
So basically when you hear the buzzword "web 2.0" you should know it doesn't have anything to do with style, design, or proprietary software. The new internet is based on open source technologies and server-side scripting like php, perl, AJAX, ruby, and python. They are written for use on Linux servers using open source databases like mySQL. And most importantly, they are community driven with some level of user interaction. This could be as simple as a comment box on a blog or the ability to create a page like a wiki or myspace. The "new" internet is something you're already using and you didn't even know it.
Related Articles: What is Web 2.0? Tim O'Reilly 9/30/2005
Technorati Tags: design web design web 2.0 Linux open source internet buzzwords Sphere: Related Content
I have a background in design, not computer related design, I learned that on my own because it wasn't available when I was in college. I actually studied art and believe design principles (balance, proportion, rhythm, emphasis, unity) apply to any media including the computer screen.
I've read several articles lately about poorly designed websites such as craiglist and myspace that are popular, the implication being that design doesn't matter. I disagree. The underlying application framework on those sites works, therefore the functionality and usability is what makes them popular. I would also disagree that the myspace core pages are ugly, they're basic, but not ugly. Myspace becomes ugly and loses functionality because the users' pages look bad and they don't know how to integrate the applications (video and music players).
Some of the technologies of "web 2.0" sites have been used for years and are suddenly being recognized as an intrensic component of a well built site. (I also say building databases and constructing legislation, so for anyone getting bogged down by semantics, just deal with it.) The explosion of blogs is a good example of 2.0 and has created a new method of marketing for business websites allowing fresh content to be syndicated and embeded into other websites complete with branding from the originating site. This is especially important for business website seo because the link gets counted from each of the syndicating sites, while the summary gets broadcast on all the blogosphere sites (like Technorati and del.icio.us) you have set up to ping.
If this all sounds a little technical and your eyes are starting to cross, have no fear. I'll move on to one of my personal pet peeves about websites, and unfortunately it's one of the things a lot of potential clients say they absolutely "need" on their website: proprietary applications like Flash, Java, or Windows media player. I cringe every time someone says they want a Flash site or at least a Flash intro. Why? It's not that I don't like Flash sites or have anything against Macromedia. It's because when I go to one of those Flash intro sites I immediately look for the "skip intro" button. I know I'm not the only one because that button wasn't put there just in case I visited the site. Most people skip the intro, so why do you want to pay someone to make it for you?
Even more annoying is when I go to a site and get a message that I need to update my Flash player to be able to even see what's there. Sometimes I decide I want to see your site after I've updated the player, sometimes I decide I've already wasted enough time and should get back to work and never go back. As far as Windows media player, well, you may have noticed in the sidebar it says there is no Microsoft software on my computer and that's a decision Microsoft made, not me. You see, I don't use Windows operating system, I use Linux. Microsoft will not make any of it's products compatible with Linux, so when you put any of their proprietary embeds on your website, you are excluding people like me.
Once again, I don't dislike Microsoft per se, what I didn't like when I did use Windows was viruses, crashes, rebooting all the time, security patches, external firewall software, etc. You know, all the things you probably do all the time because you think you have to. The fact is, Microsoft will not make applications available for Linux because a lot of programmers use Linux and they might rewrite the code, improve it (gasp!), and release it as open source. And, my computer hasn't crashed since I started using Linux except when I f'ed with the kernel and had to re-install the original kernel.
I'm sure some people at Microsoft think Linux users are freeloaders because we all use free open source software and that's why they won't make their apps usable for us. The fact is I've bought plenty of software and most of it hasn't done exactly what I needed and I ended up finding something similar in open source and making it do what I needed. The beauty of open source is that there are a lot of smart people willing to tinker around with code and contribute it back to the community. That's why there IS web 2.0.
So basically when you hear the buzzword "web 2.0" you should know it doesn't have anything to do with style, design, or proprietary software. The new internet is based on open source technologies and server-side scripting like php, perl, AJAX, ruby, and python. They are written for use on Linux servers using open source databases like mySQL. And most importantly, they are community driven with some level of user interaction. This could be as simple as a comment box on a blog or the ability to create a page like a wiki or myspace. The "new" internet is something you're already using and you didn't even know it.
Related Articles: What is Web 2.0? Tim O'Reilly 9/30/2005
Technorati Tags: design web design web 2.0 Linux open source internet buzzwords Sphere: Related Content
What has Dubya Done?
I'm still on my quest to find something Bush accomplished while he was Texas Governor, and I came across another gem written in 1999 by Louis Dubose from the Texas Observer for the Austin Chronicle called "Where Was George?". Apparantly, unbeknownst to those of you who don't live in Texas and don't remember how little we heard or saw of him until he decided to run for president, his lack of planning and/or ability to get something done was a surprise. He started a war, though. No matter how that turns out, his inablilty to properly plan could never have been showcased in a more dangerous way.
I did find a reference to the credit he took for reforming the education system. That reform actually started with Governor Ann Richards and included the introduction of the Texas Lottery to help with funding. After reading several dozen articles written during his first presidential campaign, it seems reporters also had a hard time finding any accomplishments directly attributable to Gov. Bush.
Then press secretary Karen Hughes touted the education angle as well as claiming his record of "setting a positive tone, a constructive tone, that has helped people respect their government. It's in stark contrast to the bitter, partisan divide in Washington, D.C. I think the people of Texas feel their government is responsive, and productive, and I think Governor Bush deserves credit for working with legislators in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation and setting a positive tone."
Okay, so what exactly has he done? Call me crazy, but taking credit for signing a bill constructed, debated and amended by the Legislature isn't really doing anything.
Most of what I've found is a pattern of pandering to corporate interests. Bush's record on the environment is no secret in Texas and it's no surprise to anyone paying attention that the "Clean Skies Initiative" hasn't made the air any cleaner. It does allow corporate interests to continue with business as usual.
That's a pretty good summarization of my current research into Dubya's gubernatorial record: business as usual. Corporations can continue to pollute the environment, hire illegal aliens with no fear of reprisal or penalty, fire Americans in favor of outsourcing to cheap foriegn labor markets AND get a tax credit for doing it.
And, if you're one of the millions of Americans for whom the cost of living has increased while your paycheck hasn't, you must be part of the middle class.
Sources:
Bush's Education Record: Strong Leadership or Just Good Timing? Extra Credit by Kevin Fullerton Austin Chronicle 5-28-99
We Interrupt This Presidential Campaign for the 76th Legislative Session ... Where Was George? by Louis Dubose Austin Chronicle 5-28-99
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Texas Dubya 1999 Sphere: Related Content
I did find a reference to the credit he took for reforming the education system. That reform actually started with Governor Ann Richards and included the introduction of the Texas Lottery to help with funding. After reading several dozen articles written during his first presidential campaign, it seems reporters also had a hard time finding any accomplishments directly attributable to Gov. Bush.
Then press secretary Karen Hughes touted the education angle as well as claiming his record of "setting a positive tone, a constructive tone, that has helped people respect their government. It's in stark contrast to the bitter, partisan divide in Washington, D.C. I think the people of Texas feel their government is responsive, and productive, and I think Governor Bush deserves credit for working with legislators in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation and setting a positive tone."
Okay, so what exactly has he done? Call me crazy, but taking credit for signing a bill constructed, debated and amended by the Legislature isn't really doing anything.
Most of what I've found is a pattern of pandering to corporate interests. Bush's record on the environment is no secret in Texas and it's no surprise to anyone paying attention that the "Clean Skies Initiative" hasn't made the air any cleaner. It does allow corporate interests to continue with business as usual.
That's a pretty good summarization of my current research into Dubya's gubernatorial record: business as usual. Corporations can continue to pollute the environment, hire illegal aliens with no fear of reprisal or penalty, fire Americans in favor of outsourcing to cheap foriegn labor markets AND get a tax credit for doing it.
And, if you're one of the millions of Americans for whom the cost of living has increased while your paycheck hasn't, you must be part of the middle class.
Sources:
Bush's Education Record: Strong Leadership or Just Good Timing? Extra Credit by Kevin Fullerton Austin Chronicle 5-28-99
We Interrupt This Presidential Campaign for the 76th Legislative Session ... Where Was George? by Louis Dubose Austin Chronicle 5-28-99
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Texas Dubya 1999 Sphere: Related Content
Monday, July 10, 2006
Bush's Style Over Substance: A Warning from 1999
Living in Texas and paying a little more attention than the average American to politics, I've been trying to remember anything (just one thing even!) that George Bush accompliched while he was Governor. I found this, published in 1999, from the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics at Saint John's University and the College of Saint Benedict in Collegeville and St. Joseph, Minnesota while searching. The country would have been wise to understand the potential ramifications of a President who is egomaniacal, impulsive, shallow, passes the buck, takes credit for others' accomplishments, and is unable to grasp complex concepts.
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Sphere: Related Content
Executive Summary: Personality Profile of Texas Governor George W. Bush
INTRODUCTION
The object of the study was to assess the personality of Texas governor George W. Bush and to predict his political performance and leadership effectiveness on the basis of personality traits.
KEY FINDINGS
METHODOLOGY
The Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC) was used to construct the personality profile, based on empirical analysis of biographic materials. The 170 MIDC criteria permit classification of political figures along 12 personality dimensions, or 34 categories. Personality patterns are used to predict presidential performance and leadership style.
Source: Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics Saint John's University and the College of Saint Benedict in Collegeville and St. Joseph, Minnesota
INTRODUCTION
The object of the study was to assess the personality of Texas governor George W. Bush and to predict his political performance and leadership effectiveness on the basis of personality traits.
KEY FINDINGS
- Gov. George W. Bush’s personality-based leadership strengths include:
- the important political skills of charisma and interpersonality, which will enable him to connect with people and retain a following;
- self-confidence in the face of adversity;
- an outgoing, gregarious personality that appeals to voters who favor style over substance in an era of prosperity and peace; and
- an adventurous streak conducive to the cut and thrust of political life.
- the propensity for a superficial grasp of complex issues;
- a potential for acting impulsively, without fully appreciating the implications of his decisions or the long-term consequences of his policy initiatives;
- a risk of failing to keep himself adequately informed; and
- placing personal connections, friendship, and loyalty over competence in his staffing decisions and appointments.
Gov. George W. Bush’s personality-based leadership limitations include:
METHODOLOGY
The Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria (MIDC) was used to construct the personality profile, based on empirical analysis of biographic materials. The 170 MIDC criteria permit classification of political figures along 12 personality dimensions, or 34 categories. Personality patterns are used to predict presidential performance and leadership style.
Source: Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics Saint John's University and the College of Saint Benedict in Collegeville and St. Joseph, Minnesota
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, July 01, 2006
My Mad Introspective
I'm still relatively new to blogging and after going back and reading some of my initial posts I realized I sound really mad in most of them. I didn't realize it at the time, but I was really mad when I wrote them. I'm usually pretty laid back, but I have a tendency to analyze (translation: over-analyze) everything, so of course I started trying to figure out why I get so mad at politicians and basically people in general.
I saw something yesterday that helped me sort it out a little, two things actually. The first was a report on CNN about the Supreme Court decision ruling regarding President Bush's attempt to expand his powers to hold detainees in Cuba without regard to the provisions of the Geneva Convention without first going to Congress. The second was a re-broadcast of an April 14, 2003 interview on C-CPAN with former hostage Terry Waite. What do these two seemingly unrelated items have in common? Not much, except that one of the questions after the interview with Mr. Waite specificly addressed the detainees at Guantanamo, to which he expressed his concern about the legality of detainment: "What is the essential difference between the methods deployed by my captors, who were labelled terrorists, and those of the authorities that detain suspects in Guantánamo Bay and elsewhere? They have been detained on suspicion and treated in a way that no civilised nation ought to condone."
More telling was the tone in which he, a British citizen, expressed himself and some comments he made about the international role of religion, the American perspective, and the American perception of religion. I think a lot of Americans seem to have the misplaced belief they are not in charge of themselves or their life, GOD is. The scary thing is that George Bush seems to share that belief. Even scarier is that he seems to think he has some calling to indoctrinate that message not only in this country, but into an area of the world that has been fighting about religion since the beginning of civilization.
After hearing Mr. Waite speak I realized this is strictly an American perspective, not the perspective of religious zealots in general. What struck me most was that even after his confinement, Terry Waite harbors no resentment toward his former captors, rather a grudging respect because he took the time to understand what his status as a hostage meant to them. He didn't take it personally and he didn't give credit to anyone or anything, spiritual or otherwise, except himself and his ability to observe and learn what he could from the situation.
The islamic jihadists will never stop fighting because an "infidel" wants them to. The biggest mistake Bush and his war-profiteering cabinet (Cheney, Rumsfeldt, and Condi) made by starting this war was failing to understand why we were targetted and attacked in the first place. I'm talking about the original war with Afghanistan, the one where some justification may exist for the use of force since without question the Taliban was allowing al Qaeda access and refuge after the Sept. 11 attack, not the other more expensive, more deadly war Bush started because he obviously has a small... Oh! There I go again, judging the man by his actions not his words and obviously with no personal glimpse into his pants. (It's just something a girl can tell, just take a look at Laura: very unsatisfied.)
Back to the point, I have come to the conclusion that my anger is directed at the right wing nut cases who are hijacking the country, the Democrats who can't decide on a cohesive platform, and other Independents (like myself) because everyone is too busy stomping their feet and screaming so no one is being heard. I don't like the "us versus them" attitude of politicians who are fighting with each other on the basis of their political party to the detriment of the American people they are supposed to represent, and I don't like the "us versus them" attitude of Americans who don't take the time to understand other cultures.
I am the first to admit I think most people in America are stupid. I also admit it is mostly due to ignorance because they are uneducated or willing to concede their common sense to the will of god. However, I don't think the lack of a formal education (school, in case you're one of the stupid ones) is a good reason to be uneducated. Public libraries are funded by taxpayers and are freely available for anyone to use. Most universities also allow access to non-students, so the methods for educating yourself are available, limited only by individual desire to learn.
People who don't take the time to educate themselves on the very things on which they are ignorant are the same ones who are complaining about gas prices. President Carter called for conservation of fossil fuels nearly 30 years ago. U.S. automaker and American consumer response? The Hummer - 11 mpg. While every other major consumer economy around the world has focused on conservation, recycling (plastic is made from petroleum), and alternative energy, the U.S. has proceeded as if our economy is somehow immune. Now we are at war, and we dare to complain that our lives have been inconvenienced by high gas prices?
We need to act as if we are at war. We need to conserve natural resources, expand non-fossil fuel sustainable and renewable energy sources, hold elected officials accountable when they react and over react to the news item of the day instead of getting something of substance done, and we need to hold ourselves accountable for our own actions instead of looking for someone else to blame.
That's why I get so mad.
Something to think about:
"I do not believe the world's wrongs will be resolved by warfare or economic dominance by one nation over another. We must grow into a world community where difference can be celebrated rather than seen as divisive. To progress we need people of stature who will be able to demonstrate compassionate wisdom and political acumen that brings hope to those in despair." from Terry Waite's essay in You're History Michelle P. Brown and Richard J. Kelly pub. 2006 Continuum Books
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Terry Waite common sense Sphere: Related Content
I saw something yesterday that helped me sort it out a little, two things actually. The first was a report on CNN about the Supreme Court decision ruling regarding President Bush's attempt to expand his powers to hold detainees in Cuba without regard to the provisions of the Geneva Convention without first going to Congress. The second was a re-broadcast of an April 14, 2003 interview on C-CPAN with former hostage Terry Waite. What do these two seemingly unrelated items have in common? Not much, except that one of the questions after the interview with Mr. Waite specificly addressed the detainees at Guantanamo, to which he expressed his concern about the legality of detainment: "What is the essential difference between the methods deployed by my captors, who were labelled terrorists, and those of the authorities that detain suspects in Guantánamo Bay and elsewhere? They have been detained on suspicion and treated in a way that no civilised nation ought to condone."
More telling was the tone in which he, a British citizen, expressed himself and some comments he made about the international role of religion, the American perspective, and the American perception of religion. I think a lot of Americans seem to have the misplaced belief they are not in charge of themselves or their life, GOD is. The scary thing is that George Bush seems to share that belief. Even scarier is that he seems to think he has some calling to indoctrinate that message not only in this country, but into an area of the world that has been fighting about religion since the beginning of civilization.
After hearing Mr. Waite speak I realized this is strictly an American perspective, not the perspective of religious zealots in general. What struck me most was that even after his confinement, Terry Waite harbors no resentment toward his former captors, rather a grudging respect because he took the time to understand what his status as a hostage meant to them. He didn't take it personally and he didn't give credit to anyone or anything, spiritual or otherwise, except himself and his ability to observe and learn what he could from the situation.
The islamic jihadists will never stop fighting because an "infidel" wants them to. The biggest mistake Bush and his war-profiteering cabinet (Cheney, Rumsfeldt, and Condi) made by starting this war was failing to understand why we were targetted and attacked in the first place. I'm talking about the original war with Afghanistan, the one where some justification may exist for the use of force since without question the Taliban was allowing al Qaeda access and refuge after the Sept. 11 attack, not the other more expensive, more deadly war Bush started because he obviously has a small... Oh! There I go again, judging the man by his actions not his words and obviously with no personal glimpse into his pants. (It's just something a girl can tell, just take a look at Laura: very unsatisfied.)
Back to the point, I have come to the conclusion that my anger is directed at the right wing nut cases who are hijacking the country, the Democrats who can't decide on a cohesive platform, and other Independents (like myself) because everyone is too busy stomping their feet and screaming so no one is being heard. I don't like the "us versus them" attitude of politicians who are fighting with each other on the basis of their political party to the detriment of the American people they are supposed to represent, and I don't like the "us versus them" attitude of Americans who don't take the time to understand other cultures.
I am the first to admit I think most people in America are stupid. I also admit it is mostly due to ignorance because they are uneducated or willing to concede their common sense to the will of god. However, I don't think the lack of a formal education (school, in case you're one of the stupid ones) is a good reason to be uneducated. Public libraries are funded by taxpayers and are freely available for anyone to use. Most universities also allow access to non-students, so the methods for educating yourself are available, limited only by individual desire to learn.
People who don't take the time to educate themselves on the very things on which they are ignorant are the same ones who are complaining about gas prices. President Carter called for conservation of fossil fuels nearly 30 years ago. U.S. automaker and American consumer response? The Hummer - 11 mpg. While every other major consumer economy around the world has focused on conservation, recycling (plastic is made from petroleum), and alternative energy, the U.S. has proceeded as if our economy is somehow immune. Now we are at war, and we dare to complain that our lives have been inconvenienced by high gas prices?
We need to act as if we are at war. We need to conserve natural resources, expand non-fossil fuel sustainable and renewable energy sources, hold elected officials accountable when they react and over react to the news item of the day instead of getting something of substance done, and we need to hold ourselves accountable for our own actions instead of looking for someone else to blame.
That's why I get so mad.
Something to think about:
"I do not believe the world's wrongs will be resolved by warfare or economic dominance by one nation over another. We must grow into a world community where difference can be celebrated rather than seen as divisive. To progress we need people of stature who will be able to demonstrate compassionate wisdom and political acumen that brings hope to those in despair." from Terry Waite's essay in You're History Michelle P. Brown and Richard J. Kelly pub. 2006 Continuum Books
Technorati Tags: politics Bush Terry Waite common sense Sphere: Related Content
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Austin Humane Society Gets into the Matchmaking Business!
Meet Your Match is an innovative new method for matching puppies and adult dogs with potential adopters. It matches the expectations of a new pet owner with the behavior and personality of the dog. Meet Your Match has been proven to increase the likelihood of a human/canine bond, which in turn, reduces returns to the shelter.
The Meet Your MatchTM Canine-ality Adoption Program was created by animal behaviorist Emily Weiss, Ph.D., in conjunction with the ASPCA. AHS was chosen to be the first shelter in Texas to implement the program!
Over 13,000 animals a year (which is 1,100 per month or 37 per day) are killed in Austin because they don't get adopted.
Don't breed or buy when you can save the life of an animal who deserves a second chance. Besides the Austin Humane Society, there are breed specific rescue groups, Town Lake Animal Center, Lago Vista PAWS, Central Texas SPCA, Humane Society of Williamson County, and many others with available animals. There's even a ferret rescue.
The Meet Your Match Canine-ality Adoption Program helps you find the dog that's right for you and your personality. All of our dogs are tested to determine his or her canine-ality characteristics including friendliness, playfulness, energy level, motivation and drive. Each dog is then placed into one of three color-coded categories: easy maintenance (purple), average maintenance (orange) and high maintenance (green). Within each color category are three descriptions to help you better understand the dogs canine-ality.
When you arrive at the Austin Humane Society, you'll be asked to fill out a Dog Adopter Survey. This one-page survey gathers information about your expectations of dog ownership and helps us determine the canine-ality that best suits your lifestyle. Based on the results of the survey, you'll receive a color-coded Guest Pass to help guide you to dogs that best meet your expectations and lifestyle. For example, if your pass is green, look for dogs with a green cage card.
You:
PURPLE: Couch Potato, Constant Companion, or Teacher's Pet.
ORANGE: Busy Bee, WallFlower, or Goofball
GREEN: Free Spirit, Go-Getter, or Life of the Party
Your dog:
COUCH POTATO
Like the easy life? Then I'm the perfect match for you. I'm a relaxed, laid back kind of dog who enjoys long naps, watching movies, curling up on laps, and walking very short distances from the couch to the food bowl and back.
CONSTANT COMPANION
Looking for an emotionally secure, mutually satisfying, low maintenance relationship? I am all you need. Let me sit at your feet, walk by your side, and I'll be your devoted companion forever.
TEACHERS PET
I've got the whole package smart, fuzzy, four legs, love to learn and live to please. Go ahead, teach me anything. Sit, stay, balance your checkbook, I can do it all. Keep me entertained and I will be yours forever.
WALLFLOWER
Shy yet charming canine searching for patient owner with relaxed lifestyle. Looking for gentle guidance to help me come out of my shell. Treat me sweet and kind and I'll blossom.
BUSY BEE
I'm a naturally playful, curious and trusting canine. Take me for a big walk every day; give me something to do. After my job's done, I'll curl up in with you in the evenings. I'm a dog on a mission to please you and myself.
GOOFBALL
I'm a fun-loving, happy-all-the-time, glass-is-half-full kind of dog looking for someone who loves to laugh and play around. Must have a great sense of humor and a bunch of tennis balls.
LIFE OF THE PARTY
I think everything is fun, interesting and meant for play, especially you. Anything you do, I'll want to do too. With my own brand of surprise, life with me will keep you constantly on your toes, and the fun is guaranteed.
GO-GETTER
Want to get more exercise? Action is my middle name. My Lets GO! lifestyle will keep you motivated to get outside and move. I've got tons of energy; and just like the sun, I'm burning and working 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I'll run for miles, chase a ball for hours, and still want to play at the end of the day.
FREE SPIRIT
Intelligent, independent, confident and clever, I prefer making my own decisions but will listen to you if you make a good case. We're partners in this adventure. Treat me like one and we'll both live happily ever after.
Visit Austin Humane Society for more information.
Technorati Tags:
Texas
Austin
dog
animal welfare
Austin Humane Society
Note: I did not write most of this posting, nor do I wish to imply that I did. I do want to promote the practice of adopting shelter animals and simply reformatted an email announcement from the Austin Humane Society with additional statistics for the purpose of promoting this innovative new program. Sphere: Related Content
The Meet Your MatchTM Canine-ality Adoption Program was created by animal behaviorist Emily Weiss, Ph.D., in conjunction with the ASPCA. AHS was chosen to be the first shelter in Texas to implement the program!
Over 13,000 animals a year (which is 1,100 per month or 37 per day) are killed in Austin because they don't get adopted.
Don't breed or buy when you can save the life of an animal who deserves a second chance. Besides the Austin Humane Society, there are breed specific rescue groups, Town Lake Animal Center, Lago Vista PAWS, Central Texas SPCA, Humane Society of Williamson County, and many others with available animals. There's even a ferret rescue.
The Meet Your Match Canine-ality Adoption Program helps you find the dog that's right for you and your personality. All of our dogs are tested to determine his or her canine-ality characteristics including friendliness, playfulness, energy level, motivation and drive. Each dog is then placed into one of three color-coded categories: easy maintenance (purple), average maintenance (orange) and high maintenance (green). Within each color category are three descriptions to help you better understand the dogs canine-ality.
When you arrive at the Austin Humane Society, you'll be asked to fill out a Dog Adopter Survey. This one-page survey gathers information about your expectations of dog ownership and helps us determine the canine-ality that best suits your lifestyle. Based on the results of the survey, you'll receive a color-coded Guest Pass to help guide you to dogs that best meet your expectations and lifestyle. For example, if your pass is green, look for dogs with a green cage card.
You:
PURPLE: Couch Potato, Constant Companion, or Teacher's Pet.
ORANGE: Busy Bee, WallFlower, or Goofball
GREEN: Free Spirit, Go-Getter, or Life of the Party
Your dog:
COUCH POTATO
Like the easy life? Then I'm the perfect match for you. I'm a relaxed, laid back kind of dog who enjoys long naps, watching movies, curling up on laps, and walking very short distances from the couch to the food bowl and back.
CONSTANT COMPANION
Looking for an emotionally secure, mutually satisfying, low maintenance relationship? I am all you need. Let me sit at your feet, walk by your side, and I'll be your devoted companion forever.
TEACHERS PET
I've got the whole package smart, fuzzy, four legs, love to learn and live to please. Go ahead, teach me anything. Sit, stay, balance your checkbook, I can do it all. Keep me entertained and I will be yours forever.
WALLFLOWER
Shy yet charming canine searching for patient owner with relaxed lifestyle. Looking for gentle guidance to help me come out of my shell. Treat me sweet and kind and I'll blossom.
BUSY BEE
I'm a naturally playful, curious and trusting canine. Take me for a big walk every day; give me something to do. After my job's done, I'll curl up in with you in the evenings. I'm a dog on a mission to please you and myself.
GOOFBALL
I'm a fun-loving, happy-all-the-time, glass-is-half-full kind of dog looking for someone who loves to laugh and play around. Must have a great sense of humor and a bunch of tennis balls.
LIFE OF THE PARTY
I think everything is fun, interesting and meant for play, especially you. Anything you do, I'll want to do too. With my own brand of surprise, life with me will keep you constantly on your toes, and the fun is guaranteed.
GO-GETTER
Want to get more exercise? Action is my middle name. My Lets GO! lifestyle will keep you motivated to get outside and move. I've got tons of energy; and just like the sun, I'm burning and working 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I'll run for miles, chase a ball for hours, and still want to play at the end of the day.
FREE SPIRIT
Intelligent, independent, confident and clever, I prefer making my own decisions but will listen to you if you make a good case. We're partners in this adventure. Treat me like one and we'll both live happily ever after.
Visit Austin Humane Society for more information.
Technorati Tags:
Texas
Austin
dog
animal welfare
Austin Humane Society
Note: I did not write most of this posting, nor do I wish to imply that I did. I do want to promote the practice of adopting shelter animals and simply reformatted an email announcement from the Austin Humane Society with additional statistics for the purpose of promoting this innovative new program. Sphere: Related Content
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
