Today is a two for one; first I will tell who are the five female celebrities whom I keep hearing are hot and I don't get it, I think if you saw a chick that looked like them in a bar they wouldn't even get a second look, unless you were super drunk, but somehow because they're famous guys think they are hot. Then I'll give my five female celebrities whom I think are super hot, my Meccas.
Ones I Don't Get:
Cameron Diaz Julia Roberts Paris Hilton Uma Therman Drew Barrymore
I Got a Thing For These Chicks:
Rachel Stevens Shannon Sossamon Julia Stiles Kira Knightley Kate Beckinsale
Raised in a Republican household which worshiped these fellows, I was amazed to find out their political views were more like mine than my father's;
Clint Eastwood (F'n Dirty Harry!) Tom Selleck (Magnum PI biotch) Kurt Russell (Snake Plisskin himself!) Dennis Leary (He did some cool shit, but nothin quotable) John Larroquette (not only did we watch Night Court, but he was in Star Trek III)
Try taking this civil literacy test, apparently many people haven't been scoring well on it. My score was 93.94% or 31 out of 33.
from the website:
"Of the 2,508 People surveyed, 164 say they have held an elected government office at least once in their life. Their average score on the civic literacy test is 44%, compared to 49% for those who have not held an elected office. Officeholders are less likely than other respondents to correctly answer 29 of the 33 test questions."
Just thought I'd let you guys in on this; Jerry Bader is a local conservative talk show host here in the Green Bay area. I love to listen to him because he isn't a tow-the-line kind of guy like most of them; I usually agree with what he has to say. Well, now if you're interested you to can view the show live on the radio station website, so even if you're way out in Nevada like my boy Mikey you can listen to what I consider to be a great show. Now, very often he does take up local issues, but there is usally a point to it that can translate to anywhere. The show airs 8:30am-11am Central Time, check it out here if you're interested.
As of right now they are looping the show until they get their other shows streaming
People need to stop throwing science around so casually without actually understanding it, so here are a few tidbits to make you more informed.
A scientific hypothesis is an educated observation of a causal relationship; meaning you see something happen, and you guess what made it happen.
A scientific theory is a more worked out version of a hypothesis; it's a model of how things should work, but as of yet has not been completely proven through repeatable controlled experimentation.
A scientific fact is an observation which can be proven using a physical repeatable controlled experiment; repeatable, meaning you or anyone attempting it have to be able to the experiment over and over with the same results; physical, meaning it can be carried out in the real world where causality is most assured; controlled, meaning you must control every factor involved to show direct cause and effect of what your theory states.
Here are some examples:
Scientific Fact: Evolution-Over time by mixing certain animals in a species the species will evolve this, can be seen through physical repeatable controlled experimentation; this can been seen in breeding, by taking the cows that give the most milk and mating them with the bulls which produce the most meat you will get a line of cows which give a lot of milk and meat.
Scientific Theory: The Theory of Evolution- That all animals have evolved from a common ancestor; this will always be a theory for the simple fact that it has already happened and there is no repeatable controlled experiment which can be done. The same goes for the Theory of Human Evolution; although both are sound theory, there is no conceivable way for them to become fact.
Scientific Theory: CO2 Caused Global Warming-That a rise in CO2 alone can cause the greenhouse effect to increase. Since the world is so big with so many variables, it is impossible to do a controlled experiment to see the exact cause and effect relationships occurring. Computer models are not a physical test, they do not happen in the real world, so they can not prove anything, they can only help support theories.
Scientific Theory: Cigarette Smoking Causes Cancer-Since the human body so complex there is no way to do a controlled experiment to see the exact causality. The best which can be achieved is a correlation; but correlations do not prove anything, if every time I ride my bike I fall down and skin my knee the correlation between riding my bike and skinning my knee is very strong, but the causality is not.
I though I would share my favorite musical artist with you for two reasons; so you can get to know me better and because you most like have never heard of him even though he is responsible for writing and producing a number of popular songs. His name is Butch Walker, he started out in a hair metal band called SouthGang; then the pop rock band the Marvelous 3 with whom he had a moderate hit called "Freak of the Week". After the Marvelous 3 broke up he started producing and writing for bands such as SR-71, Bowling for Soup, Pink, Fall Out Boy, Sevendust, the All American Rejects, American Hi-Fi, Lindsey Lohan, The Academy Is..., Avril Lavigne and Lit among others. He has released several solo albums, the most recent being "Sycamore Meadows"in the fall of 2008, and last summer released an album called "Maya" from his side project 1969.
I'm getting fed up with so called libertarians trashing religious people and assuming all libertarians are atheists. I myself am not an atheist, I deeply believe in God, but I don't think that should affect my political views, and there are most likely more like me, who if so called libertarians would stop harassing may join our cause. To be a libertarian is not to view the world the same, it is to view the world differently and debate (not scold) each other without government involvement in our personal beliefs. Libertarianism is not a personal view, but a political view.
It's easy to be afraid today that our current economic situation will lead to another Great Depression; what when that's what the news and politicians are saying. But I can give you one huge reason why it won't be like that; the Dust Bowl. The Great Depression began in October of 1929 and then in May of 1930 the Dust Bowl hit. The Dust Bowl; which devastated much American farmland, is what made the Great Depression great, raising the price of food: which not only affects the livelihood of those producing the crops, but also those who transport and sell them; not to mention making it hard for anyone to buy food. At this point, even if we have a severe drought, it will not get as bad as the Dust Bowl because of technologies and agricultural techniques we have in place. So, even though it may get tough, this will never approach conditions of the Great Depression.
It took me more than 4 years to decide how I would vote and I was still undecided when I got into the voting booth; would I vote as far left as McCain? That was my dilemma, and I did. I lost out to thinking gradual regression back to what we were could work. But I seriously want to know why anyone voted the way they did.
From Dictionary.com mor·al (môr'əl,) Pronunciation Key adj. 1. Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary. 2. Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior: a moral lesson. 3. Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior; virtuous: a moral life. 4. Arising from conscience or the sense of right and wrong: a moral obligation. 5. Having psychological rather than physical or tangible effects: a moral victory; moral support. 6. Based on strong likelihood or firm conviction, rather than on the actual evidence: a moral certainty.
Ok, so what many of the left say about Republicans is they want to legislate morality; this is how I used to describe it as well, until the other day when I was conversing a person of the left persuasion; then I realized that both Democrats and Republicans want to legislate morality. Because, as you can see above, there is no mention of the word religion in the definition of the word "moral". So, when you tell someone else how to live their life because you see it as wrong you are preaching morals, whether they come from the Bible or Al Gore; they are still morals. So Democrats get mad that the Republicans want to make laws using thier biblical morals, and the Republicans gets mad when Democrats try to make laws using thier environmental morals. So, when Democrats complain about Republicans legislating morals they are being hypocritical, they are mad they aren't legislating their morals. As well as legislating environmental morals, making someone pay for a government program can also be enforcing morals. Let's take an example: welfare v American Family Housing. Welfare serves the same purpous as American Family Housing, they both take care of the poor. So, why should a person be mandated to pay for either? If you think wlfare works, then you should give your money to welfare, if you think American Family Housing works then you should give your money to them; you should not be forced to give your money to either. Just because you think welfare is better doesn't mean that I do. If someone wants to give to a program which they feel better fits their morals they should; but they shouldn't be forced to pay for one that doesn't. So what laws should we make? Ones that protect property; your body is your property, so no one can harm you. Your land is your property, so someone else can't do something on their land that will harm your land, like dumping chemicals into the river; and so forth.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
From dictionary.com:
Marx·ism/ˈmɑrksɪzəm/Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mahrk-siz-uhm]–noun the system of economic and political thought developed by Karl Marx, along with Friedrich Engels, esp. the doctrine that the state throughout history has been a device for the exploitation of the masses by a dominant class, that class struggle has been the main agency of historical change, and that the capitalist system, containing from the first the seeds of its own decay, will inevitably, after the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, be superseded by a socialist order and a classless society.
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2.
(often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3.
(initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2.
procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3.
(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
If the government owns a stake in our businesses what does that mean? That is socialism. Is socialism simply a regulation of our business', no, it is the government having stake in our business'. Deregulation is simply the government allowing business to do business, allowing milk producers to sell milk at the price they demand, allowing a company to offer health care at the price they demand, allowing companies to pay what they demand, but the government must demand that the company does not infringe upon your rights, mainly, once they own a stake in it, it is theirs. They can't enforce upon you anything you did not permit them to enforce. But didn't that cause our current economic problems? No, wrong, regulations did, regulations demanding that banks loan money to people whom the banks did not feel were suitable. Both parties were responsible for this. I said this four years ago when the presidential candidates were saying that everyone should own a home, no, everyone who can afford it should own a home, if they want. Deregulation does not mean that there should not be limits placed on companies, when they violate a persons rights they should be held responsible, But deregulation holds the key of competition, competition is responsible for every advance in human evolution.
Deregulation, does that mean no regulation? No, if someone has impeded one of your rights, of course you have a right to recourse, but does regulation hold the key? Regulation is the government telling the market what it should do, when in fact it should be the other way around, the market should tell the government what to do. Is it any coincidence that we passed the 16th amendment, allowing for the government to take income tax, then 13 years later we had the great depression? I'm not a conspiracy monger mind you, but I do not think those who run for office are usually qualified to run a company, so why should we let them run our companies?
But why is deregulation bad? It's not. The government should be there to protect us for our defense and stopping people from stealing our property. But bad regulations are bad. If they are there to stop them from stealing your property, then they are there to enforce the law. What more does one need? To keep themselves from being stupid? Well, that will never work, because no matter how hard one tries, there will always be stupid people.
Think the Right are the ones who abuse people, look at the left, they abuse eminent domain to increase the revenue base; the government takes (they pay them, but it is not a choice to not accept their offer) the land of a property owner to sell or give it to a business which will pay more in taxes. These laws are there for building roads and other necessities, but as of late they have been used to increase revenue bases for the government and for environmental protection.
[mahrk-siz-uh
