My definition of liberalism, Part 1

This is the first part of future discussions regarding my definition of liberalism. Today: tuition vouchers.

A discussion over the Thanksgiving weekend got me thinking about what it means to me to be a liberal. But first, here's my comments on this in my Weekend Wrap-up of 11-12-2006. I also want to note the response by JB. His whole reply is worth noting (and I encourage you to read it), but I am posting this passage in particular, because it's related to my response afterwards:

"Now that we are in such an affluent nation, the vast majority of people are content with the status quo, leaving the democratic party with only the most extreme forms of social change to glom onto.Think of it. The last major social issue for the democratic party was the environment. The republicans saw the environmentalists as radicals. Now that we have so much social change in that area, it has become the status quo, stripping the democratic party of that issue. What are they left with? What social change can they pursue?"

Thing is, I think that there's plenty for the Democrats to pursue in our current day and age that would still be in line with their tradition of "helping the little guy".

There's the injustices in the educational systems - specifically the public ones. Families that can't afford private schools or religiously based schools are pretty much stuck with what the public schools offer, and since all things religious have been driven away from public schools, the students are left with a questionable secular curriculum that more encourages "feelings" rather than education. In other words, the "little guys" in this scenario are the students, and the "oppressive establishment" are the school systems and the teachers unions that won't allow changes or challenges that threaten their hold on their power.

One way to help these "little guys" is to allow for tuition vouchers so that students can have "the right to choose" what schools they might attend. However, teachers' unions are vehemently opposed to them, this despite that it could actually help public schools in the long run. So basically, the "right to choose" applies only to legalized abortion.

I grew up in a poor, single-parent family. My mother scrimped, saved, and sacrificed so that my brother and I can go to a Catholic school. And as far as Catholic schools go, this was a pretty poor (as in: low funding) school, but it was all that my mother could afford. However, my brother and I benefited enormously. He went on to get a scholarship to a Catholic high school, and then another scholarship to go to college. I also went on to college, and even went on to get a Master's degree. So our experiences demonstrates that even if you start out poor, you can rise above it. I also know that my mother would have gladly taken a tuition voucher had they been available back then.

But none of us could have done it without a lot of help. All three of us had a support group that we relied on time and time again, and for which came through time and time again. My mother and her two sons were one family, but we also had the support of an extended family of grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins. This same group still meets three times a year for family gatherings. Beyond the extended family were other, more distant relatives as well as neighbors and the surrounding local community.

We each knew each other, and we helped each other out in times of need. It was because of that support group that, during our whole youth, my brother and I never felt "poor", even though technically that's what we were. It was also during this time that I grew up around the "village" concept of everyone helping each other - which, back then, was basically the Democratic ideal in a nutshell.

Somewhere along the way, however, the Democrats' "village" ideal got lost and was replaced with the current "village idiots" concept of the extremism that JB mentioned in his reply. Instead of helping "the little guy", Democrats now serve the more extreme left wing special interest groups. Instead of supporting the tuition voucher concept to help students in poor families to get a decent education, they instead back teachers' unions because these unions donate to their party. In other words, it ain't just in the GOP that money buys politicians.

Instead of seeing that the voucher system can help public schools to keep to their church/state separatism, the Dems instead are insistent in making it much harder for the poor families to go to other schools if the local public schools are failing to educate their children. It appears that keeping on the good side of teachers' unions takes a much greater precedence than seeing that our nation's children get the best education possible. This is an injustice that the old Democratic party wouldn't have tolerated, much less facilitated. It would have sickened the old Democratic party to be an enabler to an oppressive power structure.

To me, being truly liberal would mean finding the best means possible to educate all children, regardless of the income of the families that they come from. Instead, being liberal today means that you support an intolerant and closed-minded establishment such as teachers' unions because they donate to party coffers. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but that's not what being liberal was supposed to mean.

New blog for my edtoons

I have now put up a separate blog for my editorial cartoons (edtoons for short). It is called Edtoon Alley. Right now, only old edtoons are on it, and for some reason, when you click on the thumbnail, you get an error message instead of a larger image. I'll try to find out why that is.

Now that I have it up, I'll try to post to it at least once a week. I hope to get back to my usual posting rate of two a week that I had back when I worked for my college newspaper.

I'll also post a link to the new blog from this blog. Coming soon is yet another blog that I'm making for my comic strip. You good folks will certainly be notified once that's up. :-)

Creative packaging

Attached below are some rather creative packaging. I think the one for the drunk driver is especially powerful in its message.

OJ's "If I did it" won't be done

Of all the awful books that I can think of, OJ Simpson's "If I did it" has to be among the top. If you haven't already heard of this book, in it OJ discusses how he would have killed his wife some years ago - that is, "if he did it". I don't know which is worse - OJ for writing that book, or ReganBooks for publishing it. There's only one reason that I can think of for providing enough of a motivation to publish that book, and it's not a good one: pure and unadulterated greed. Fortunately, the book is being cancelled – not because the publisher had a change of heart, but largely because most people found the book and its topic ghoulish and revolting. As for me, it restores a little faith in mankind again, that we still have a sense of being revolted by something like this. Power to the people!

Weekend Wrap-up 11-19-2006

"TomKat" wedding
I wish I could find the poll regarding how long the viewers or readers thought that "TomKat's" (Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, in case you didn't already know) marriage would last but I found it very insteresting. I forgot what the other two options were (I think it was "Less than a year" and "More than a year"), but the one option that caught my eye was "Who cares?", which got 73%. I wholly agree with the majority: Who cares? I've lost all respect for the man, and I wouldn't have even brought up Tom here, but the poll's results were just too good to not have at least a brief mention, and now that mention has passed.

Democrats again
I've had at least a couple of people ask me just what it is that I expect the Democratic Party to do, seeing as how I complain so much about them on my blog. I gave that some thought, and perhaps the mistake here is having expectations at all. The Dems are a political party, and "the nature of the beast" for political parties is to get elected - and usually by whatever means works at the time. So is it wrong to expect the Dems to do only what political parties generally do? I don't know - maybe so.

The GOP certainly operates by the same principle as well. For instance, the GOP claims to the the "prolife party", and yet, more often than not, their efforts in the prolife cause fall short of expectations (there's that word again). What this means is that the GOP is the "prolife party" largely because the Dems are the "prochoice party", and not much else. Basically, each party strives to be what the other party is not - one is "pro-" this and the other is "anti-" that. This makes the Dems and the GOP essentially two sides of the same coin. This is not the stuff that inspires people to believe in their leaders.

However, this topic deserves a more thorough discuss of what I expect from the Dems and why I feel that they have fallen short. I'll give this more thought and post here probably later this week. If you have other thoughts on this, let me know.

Sports
I haven't discussed sports on my blog in a long time, so let's take care of that today, shall we? :-)

College football is starting to get down to its final weeks, and once again, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) does everything to rob the postseason of its potential drama, especially when compared to the postseason structure of the college basketball postseason. In college basketball, a selection of 65 teams is picked into brackets, and they all play each other until there is a final two to compete for the championship. This format allows a team to see how far they can go riding soley on their heart and their guts.

In other words, the little team from Slackjaw, Mississippi has just as much of a chance of being the national champion as the big team from Georgetown (usually a basketball powerhouse) provided that they make it to the "Big Dance". Keeping up with little Slackjaw U. to see how high up the bracket it goes is part of the familiar American underdog story. We love the underdog story. When Slackjaw U. beats Georgetown, we just love it to death. We'll put the Slackjaw team on the Today Show, the Tonight Show, and perhaps even make a movie of the week of their story. They might even make a visit to the White House, and we'll follow their victory tour the whole way.

The football postseason set-up, however, favors the big schools with the power and money, and politics totally slants in favor of those schools. In other words, the football team from Slackjaw U. will never get the chance to be the national champion, because it doesn't belong to a "BCS conference", which is an arrangement guaranteed to favor the big schools against the little schools.

In fact, since some of you asked me about what I consider the difference between the Democrats and the GOP, then these two types of postseason formats does it pretty well: The March Madness format is a Democrat style, in which anyone can go the distance provided that they keep winning, and the BCS format is a GOP style, in which only those that are in the "in" (that is, the BCS) conferences have the chance to go the distance - everyone else has virtually no chance unless an extraordinary and highly unlikely set of circumstances somehow puts them there. And to date, no team other than a BCS conference team has been in the national championship in the entire time that the BCS format has been in place.

That's it for now, folks. Have a great week!

Thanksgiving's coming early this year

I work at a university library, and this gives me a front row seat of the habits of today's college student. It used to be that the university had classes right up to the Wednesday before Thanksgiving (I had even been told that some universitys will count Wednesday absences as double). However, this year, the university is bowing to the reality regarding usual college student behavior, and there won't be any classes on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving.

Of course, as I've said, knowing the usual behavior of the typical college student, this only means that most students will be skipping Tuesday instead of Wednesday. ;-)

In other words, next week is going to be basically a one-day week!

(and no doubt, a few students will probably be skipping Monday as well...)

Immigration column

Below is my column on immigration as it appeared on this website:

Column on immigration

Below is the text of my column. I just remembered that one of my New Year's resolutions was to get published again somewhere, somehow. It looks like I actually kept a New Year's resolution! Also, the editor of that website happened to see my blog entry on immigration, and he asked me to make a column out of it. It goes to show that you never know who might be reading your blog.

---------------------------------------------
The Right Way To Control The Border

Illegal immigration has been a hot topic for most of this year, however, most debate and discussion on this issue are going about it in the wrong way. They are dealing largely with the illegal immigrants themselves – which is important, but it's not the best way to take care of the problem (and yes, illegal immigration is a problem – specifically, the "illegal" part). The way to look at this issue is to see why they are coming here in the first place.

Illegal immigrants know that there are companies here that will hire them, despite the fact that they know that they are here illegally. So why would a company hire illegal immigrants? It's because illegal immigrants work for much less than American workers. And illegal immigrants have no other expenses attached to them, like health insurance, overtime pay, and other benefits that the rest of us take for granted in this country. Illegal immigrants work much cheaper, and with no union to back them up, they can't complain about the working conditions, because their illegal status hangs over their head like the proverbial sword of Damocles.

So essentially, dealing with the illegal immigration problem by dealing only with the illegal immigrants themselves is seeing this issue from too small a perspective. All that these critics accomplish is to plug the holes in a leaky dam while ignoring the one making the holes in the dam in the first place. And that hole-maker is the companies that hire illegals. During most of this year, the Democratic Party and even unions have tried to court illegal immigrants, but this is a mistake in so many ways.

Democrats get political mileage by portraying illegal immigrants as “immigrants just trying to seek a better life”. Most Americans know of our country’s tradition of growth through immigration, and they don’t object to people moving here from other parts of the world – so long as they do it through the proper channels. However, trying to blur the line between legal and illegal immigrants ultimately does not serve either group, and the Democrats will succeed only in making Americans resent all immigrants – whether they are here legally or not.

In addition, when the Democrats resort to this kind of tactic, it gives regular working Americans the impression that the Democrats are more concerned about people who are here illegally than for the constituency that they allege to be serving: the American people – especially the American blue-collar worker. So any short term benefit that the Democrats may gain by trying to blur the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants will come back to haunt them in the long run.

For the unions, there's no better way for them to shoot themselves in the foot than to support illegal immigrant workers, because they are taking jobs that union workers could have. Also, if an illegal immigrant works in the place of a union worker, then this deprives the union of the dues that could be paid by a union worker as well as the clout that being in a union brings to the negotiating table.

For the GOP, they get political mileage by portraying illegal immigrants as invaders. But the majority of the illegal immigrants do not come here as an advance invading force, they are only coming to find jobs. This is not to imply that seeking jobs is a justification for coming here illegally, but it is wrong to portray illegal immigrants under a false light only for the sake of political gain.

Plus, it would be to the GOP’s benefit to be more outspoken about the companies that hire illegal immigrants and to seek punishment policies with “teeth” against such companies. In the long run, the GOP will succeed in reducing the number of illegal immigrants through such policies rather than through their favorite practice of portraying illegal immigrants as an evil invading force.

And last, for the illegal immigrants themselves, the hiring of illegals does very little to motivate them to eventually becoming U.S. citizens. Actually, the U.S. companies that hire illegal immigrants wouldn't want them to become legal citizens, because then they'd have to pay them more, for then they'd qualify for the rights that U.S. workers get -- which defeats their whole purpose of hiring illegals in the first place!

The best way to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants is to truly punish companies that hire illegal immigrants to the point that it will make it much less palatable for these companies to hire them. As a result, it will make the risk that an illegal immigrant goes through to get here not worth the trip.

The thing is, everything stated above is just plain common sense. Anyone with a lick of sense could have figured this out – including most of our politicians. However, it is also the nature of politics and politicians to go after issues that are “sexy” so that they will get voted into office. Right now, it is “sexy” for political campaigns to concentrate on the illegal immigrants themselves rather than the companies that hire them.

As voters, we must insist that the candidates stop using “sex appeal” to get into office, and to instead pursue solutions that will have real results instead of actions that have only short-term gains. Not an easy task, mind you, but living in a democratic society places such a responsibility on its citizens, and the power of the ballot box is our best means of keeping our public servants on their toes.

Memories of pecans

On my desk right now is a small package of pecan pieces. I saw them yesterday at my local supermarket, and I bought them not necessarily because I like pecans (which I do), but because they also remind me of someone I knew a long time ago: my grandfather.

Many years ago, my grandfather used to take me and my brother hunting for pecans. We'd go to some nearby woods where pecan trees grew, and we'd gather them and open them so that we can eat the pecan inside the shell. He died very young, when he was 58. I was 10 years old at the time of his death, so I don't have a whole lot of memories of him. But gathering pecans was one of those memories, so each time I see pecans, I think of him.

To this day, I don't like pecans any other way than by themselves; I don't like them in pies or brownies. For me, it's just not the same to have them any other way than by themselves. There's an important lesson in all this for those of you who are parents, and those of you who are grandparents.

The lesson is this: Make memories with your kids and grandkids. Do little things that they'll remember - like gathering pecans. While it may seem like nothing to you, for the kids, it may be something else entirely. Pecans may be just something to eat for you, but for me, pecans are a connection to my grandfather; and by eating them, I recall the few times that we had together.

So go out there and have fun with your kids and grandkids, folks. Years from now, those memories just may be how they remember you. Make those memories happy ones.

Weekend Wrap-up 11-12-2006

For this weekend wrap-up, I'm going to wrap up a couple of topics that I brought up earlier in the week - or at least attempt to. Onward!

Women's magazines
I had asked the ladies earlier in the week about the effectiveness of the advice in women's magazines in regards to love, dating, and romance. Their responses were pretty much as I expected: The advice was helpful only for women who had little to no self-esteem, and who lived largely a hedonistic lifestlye. In other words, to your average woman, their advice was worthy only as a measuring stick of where our society is nowadays - seeing as how such mags are still being published because enough women out there are still buying them. And judging by the nature of much of that advice, we're a pretty sick society.

For balance, I also decided to ask the men and whether the mags they read presented any advice on love, dating, and relationships. Pretty much to a man, practically all of them said that they knew of no such men's mags that gave tips and advice on love, dating, and romance - and even if such mags existed, they probably wouldn't read them. Their mags of choice tended to be of sports, news, or their hobbies - and those don't generally have dating advice in them. What the women said in response to this is that women's mags tend to prey on women's insecurities, which is a tactic that works well enough, apparently, to support several such women's mags. However, a men's mag that preyed on men's insecurities would just be ignored, probably because men generally don't admit to having any faults, much less stress themselves out over them.

After all this, it seems to me that there is a readership market here that is largely untapped - specifically, a women's magazine that is tailored to women who are not of the hedonistic lifestyle, but who still seek helpful information about love and relationships. Perhaps they have to seek mags of a religious nature for something like that, because a mag put out for the general public at large probably couldn't survive, because they'd be trying to be all things to all people. I don't know exactly what to suggest, because I'm not a magazine publisher, but after all this, I can see that clearly SOMETHING is needed that isn't being provided right now.

And last, here's a cartoon that pretty much sums up the difference between men and women. I literally laughed out loud when I first saw it. :-)

My advice for Democrats
Someone asked me about my advice for Democrats that I posted on my blog earlier in the week, and why I tended to be so harsh on them. Another asked me why I even care for the Dems OR the GOP, for that matter, for they only deal with politics anyway. I feel that it is only fair that I respond to these questions here.

First, I am harsh on the Dems because I feel that they have fallen far from what they have and should be: a party of the little people. In the past:

If you were a blue collar worker, you were a Democrat.
If you were Catholic, you were a Democrat.
If you were politically liberal, you were a Democrat.
If you were African American, you were a Democrat.
If you were Hispanic, you were a Democrat.
If you were of the lower or middle class, you were a Democrat.

And so on. Today, while the above groups may still be largely Democrat, the only interests being served by today's Democratic Party is the people of a liberal point of view - and even the definition of "liberal" has changed. In the past, being liberal meant being open-minded enough to realize that many people among the poor have the potential to be great people, and that we should aid such people so that they can contribute to society as a whole. That was accomplished by providing the opportunity for such people to show what they can do. That is the kind of liberal that I am, by the way.

Nowadays being liberal means having a secular and hedonistic outlook on life, and that "religion is the opium of the masses" (a quote attributed to Karl Marx). In fact, opposition to religion must be to the point that today's liberal is anti-religious; that is, they actively seek to remove all public displays of religion wherever it appears because they take the term "separation of church and state" to its broadest and most widespread extreme. Today's liberals also support government programs that actually lock the poor in their lower class status rather than giving them hope for the future.

And last, today's liberals support legalized abortion, which is the ultimate act of age discrimination as well as being an even worse throwback to the days of slavery, in which the life of a class of people is made wholly dependent upon the rule of law. Slavery was wrong in the past, and its conceptual descendent of legalized abortion is wrong today.

I am harsh on the Democrats, because many people still believe the Dems to be the party of the little people, when clearly, they are not. So many people pin their hopes and dreams on the Dems because they still think that the class distinctions between the parties still exist; that is, that the GOP is the party of the rich and that the Dems are the party for the rest of us.

But the leaders of the Dems are often just as rich as the leaders of the GOP, so this class distinction today between the parties is largely non-existent. And yet, Democratic leaders often exploit this old and no longer applicable belief about their party to get elected. What I am saying is that they are lying to the voters and to their supporters about who and what they are, and this is wrong in so many ways. That is what angers me about today's Democrats. If the Dems want to continue to be their current hedonistic, secular, and anti-religous selves, then they should have the decency be honest and up-front about it so that some other party can be the party that the Dems used to be.

As for why I even care about the Dems or the GOP, it's because both parties have such a large impact and influence on today's society. As such major influences on society, they have a responbility to live up to the faith and trust of the people that elected them. However, many politicians act as if they are our country's version of an aristocracy rather than the public servants that they really are. They often act as if we owe them the living that they have gotten themselves accustomed to. In short, they have largely forgotten who really is the boss here and why they are in their offices - which is to serve the public trust and interests rather than special interest groups that they largely serve today. I care about what both parties do, because we deserve better from both of them than what we've been getting from them in recent decades. I simply want them to do the job that we elected them to do.

Other stuff
There's other things that I could post here, but today's entry is long enough, so I'll save that other stuff for later.

Have a great week, folks!

A bad example for the kids?

Check out these toys.

Notice that when you squeeze the frog, the fish, or the smiley face, you make their eyes bug out. Now I ask you, is this a good example to be setting for the kids? Doesn't it seem likely that the kids will get the idea to go sqeezing real frogs and fish to make their eyes bug out?

Maybe it's just me.

Election results: A note to the Democrats

The results are in, and the Democrats have taken control of both the House and the Senate. As a former Dem supporter (but not necessarily a current GOP supporter), I was actually hoping that the Dems would crash and burn again - not because I hate the party or anything, but because I strongly believe that they need to revamp how they do things, and they won't get to that point unless they crash and burn some more.

Until yesterday, the most recent elections had the Dems at least questioning how they are doing things and they were almost to the point of wondering whether there were better ways of doing things. However, the successes of yesterday will now push back that day of reckoning for at least another two years, for the Dems now feel that their party line is what Americans want from them. Now they are going to be reinforced in their erroneous views for two more years and possibly longer.

You know who represents the current Democratic party to me? Barbara Streisand, when she went ballistic over a heckler during one of her concerts. The concert-goers came to see the lady sing, not to hear her political ideology. Her arrogant and elitist behavior to me represents the Dems today - especially her lack of understanding as to why some people took offense at her attempt at political humor (she should have said that it was a "botched joke"!). Despite the fact that other fans have also showed their displeasure over her political hacking during her concerts, she had stated that she's going to continue to have the Bush impersonater at her concerts. This kind of cluelessly arrogant behavior is a microcosm of how the Dems are at large.

But now, the Dems will continue their clueless ways, because they will believe that Americans voted them in because they believe in them. However, Americans weren't so much pro-Dem as they were anti-Bush. The Dems were just the beneficiaries of that anti-Bush resentment because they happen to be the only other major political party. They were also the beneficiaries of the fact that the GOP is now getting cluelessly arrogant as well. Being in power too long must do that to a political party. It might have been for the GOP's own good for them to lose power - especially to the Dems.

No doubt the Dems are going to try to institute their ways and views onto the political arena. However, let me give them two bits of advice:

1.) Don't pull out of Iraq right away. That would be the stupidest thing that you can do right now. If you think you'd be hurting Bush, then you'd be horribly, horribly wrong. Discuss a pullout, even work on a timetable, but do NOT pull out of there right away.

2.) Although the temptation will be overpowering, don't put the country to the unnecessary process of impeaching Bush. That will accomplish nothing positive, and it will only to be disruptive in all the wrong ways. Yes, the nature of politics tends to encourage such petty and vindictive behavior, but if you really, truly want to make changes to how things are done in Washington, then not engaging in impeachment proceedings is one way to do it.

Perhaps I will be wrong, and the Dems will truly become the party of positive and ethically responsible change. But I don't believe that I'll be wrong. I hope I am, but I seriously doubt it. How the Dems behave in the next 3 months will tell us where they will be headed for the next two years.

On blogs and blogging

JB's Opinion Dump blog gives a lot of info and insight about the thoroughly new millennium concept of blogs and blogging (It's the November 6, 2006 entry, if it doesn't show up when you click on the link).

The thing is, I wish I had taken it up much sooner, because I have found it to be a very helpful exercise in writing - especially in that it keeps me in the practice of writing. Before I started blogging, it was difficult to stay motivated to keep writing, because I didn't have an audience to give me feedback on what I wrote. And in truth, when I first put up my website, writing a blog was an afterthought. Actually, someone who is familiar with my written and drawn works gave me the idea, because she felt that I could benefit from the practice of blogging. Boy, was she ever right!

The main challenge for me is not to have something to write about. That actually comes pretty easily for me. Just a few moments of staring at my monitor, and I can usually come up with something, and more often than not, I end up writing several paragraphs. I usually think of my ideas for topics when I'm away from my computer, and then it's just a matter of remembering what I had planned to write about once I've gotten access to a computer with Interet access.

No, the main challenge is to write something that will draw a response from my readers. I don't want to write in a slew of profanity, or to say something that's just so outrageous and/or offensive that readers are guaranteed to respond. To me, that's both a shortcut and a copout to actually writing something substantive. I don't want to be that way, and I don't want to get into the habit of writing that way. No, I want to write in such a way as to make my readers think.

While I don't generally get responses here on my blog that get posted, I do have readers that I know in person or by e-mail that will respond in person or by e-mail. I like getting responses and reactions to something I've drawn or written, and it was what I missed from my college days when I first took up opinion writing.

And many times, I write something that isn't a complete thought with a formed opinion. Sometimes my topics are "works in progress" in which I ask an open ended question which will encourage responses and answers from my readers. My entry about women's magazines posted just today is one such example. And I've gotten responses. I'll be posting them in the next day or so once I've talked it out some with the respondents. The responses so far have proven to be very educational.

So in summary, I very much recommend taking up blogging if you have an inkling to write. Your blog will be a big test on whether you can sink or swim with your writing abilities. You will also find out just how much you love writing. So far, I've enjoyed it very much. :-)

Question for the ladies: Women's magazines

I posted this in another website, but what the heck - let's post it here as well:

------------------------------

When I went to the supermarket yesterday, I took notice of the number of women's magazines that were in the racks.

A great number of them - probably all of them, actually - gave all kinds of advice related to love, romance, dating, relationships, and so forth. So my question to the ladies is: Have any of those articles in those women's magazines ever helped you in your relationships with the opposite gender?

Has a "Cosmo poll" ever helped you to gain an understanding of the gents that you lacked before? It'd be helpful for the gentlemen if we had an idea on what we're up against in regards to all those articles in women's magazines, and what "Cosmo polls" (and others like them) expect us to live up to in regards to what they say we should be doing for you ladies.

Okay, I'll go to the doghouse now...

Weekend Wrap-up 11-4-2006

What amazes me, folks, is that it's already November!!! Soon we will be celebrating Thanksgiving and eating turkey and so forth! And yes, I'll be eating turkey, because PETA hasn't called to say that they're making their prolife views official. I actually don't expect them to do it at all, much less in the next few weeks.

Onward!!

Crossword puzzles
For some reason, I had quite a few people ask me where I get my crossword puzzles lately. It's because they see me doing them all the time. I get them from the Internet and print them out in a standard 8 1/2 x 11 size, because I have trouble reading those dinky ones that are in newspapers. Anyway, here's some links to the ones I use:

CBS News
Washington Post
Newsday

Enjoy!

John Kerry
What a doofus! Maybe he should have been the one who got "stuck in Iraq!" He may not have thought so, but his initial "joke" did indeed sound like an insult to the troops. He could have read a text of his comments to see that. But he's not a doofus because he botched a joke, he's a doofus because he didn't come out and apologize for his comments right away. Instead, he let this fester for a couple of days as Bush and his buddies in conservative talk radio had a field day with it. It got so bad that even his fellow Dems were telling him to apologize, and he also dropped out of planned appearances with fellow Dems running for office. From what I hear, he still wants to run in '08. Don't think so. Not no more, not after this.

Other election news
The governor's race in Texas still looks like it's going to go Gov. Rick Perry's way. Chris Bell had made some progress, but it looks like it was too little, too late. He didn't start coming around until one guy gave him a whopping donation - and he was a lawyer, no less (which the GOP happily noted). This lack of fundraising capability should say something to the Texas Democrats and how much they're not reaching their fellow Texans. Think, Texas Dems, think! Why aren't you reaching your fellow Texans? Is it because Texas have gotten collectively stupid, or is it more likely that you have gotten collectively clueless and out of touch with your fellow Texans? If it weren't for that last minute whopping donation, Bell would have still been in 4th place like he was before the debates. That should be speaking volumes to you - if only you'd listen.

And speaking of debates, Bell, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, and Kinky Friedman should have had other debates anyway like I told them. They all could have benefitted from the extra exposure, and they could have made Perry look bad by him not showing up. I even e-mailed those other candidates to have other debates, but I didn't hear from any of them. Now those three should see that they should have listened to me! See, this is why you're not leading in the polls, and why you're probably not going to lead when it counts come election day!

Website news
The more observant of you have noticed that the link to my website, araujoarts.com, isn't working. Well, I don't know why it's not connecting. I've asked my webspace provider and the guy who designed my webpage, but they can't bring it back up. I guess you might say that - I'm working on it. I'd like it to be back up, you know? After all, this blog's title is "The Blog @ AraujoArts.com", and it'd make sense if there were an "AraujoArts.com" connected to this blog, eh?

And maybe it's just as well, because I've got other things in the works. Most immediately, I have my comic strip, Along Party Lines, set up as a blog on this very site. When I viewed other web comics, I saw that the set-up in my site isn't set up like it is in other webcomics, so I'm trying this format instead. When I have some strips on it, I'll let you know, and I'll have a link to it from this blog. This should be coming atcha in the coming week or two. I gotta dig out some old strips to put on there, first.

A little further into the future is my superhero story, The Shamrock. I've always wanted to do a superhero story, and I've already got several storyline ideas set up, but doing the art is very time consuming. That's why I now have some artists set up to do the art part of this. I'm also talking to another web designer about making a whole new web page for The Shamrock. I've also set up a MySpace page for her as well, on the advice of one of my artists. Right now, this is still in the planning stage, and my earliest ETA on that site and so forth is in January 2007. I shall be keeping you up on this as well.

The other parts of my website can still be where they're at, so long as I'm able to get the site back up. If my webgeeks are unable to find out why my site won't go back up, then I'll move it to another provider or something. As you can see, having a website is a never-ending work in progress!

Madonna, et al
I'm tired of hearing about celebrities and their self-absorbed lives, aren't you? I just wanted to say that.

Have a great week, folks!

Editorial statement for November 2006

I'm gonna come out and say it: I believe that human life is superior to animal life.

Don't get me wrong: I don't believe that animals should be abused or tortured, but when it comes to protecting their rights vs. protecting the rights of humans, I will go with humans EVERY SINGLE TIME.

I had decided upon this largely because of PETA's lack of an official stand on the issue of legalized abortion. You might be saying "Abortion?? What does legalized abortion have to do with this?" Here's the situation: PETA believes that basically, we are all animals - including humans. From this line of thinking, then, animals should have the same rights as humans. Some PETA folk go so far as to not only abstain from meat, but also eggs.

Okay, now keep up with me here. Eating eggs is a no-no because eggs are also our animal friends, just smaller and younger. So in other words, PETA would have a serious problem if I went around stomping on the eggs of various birds with golf shoes (which I wouldn't do, because I don't want egg stuff all over my shoes). Theoretically, then, if harming bird eggs is bad, then harming human eggs is also bad, right?

Because if we're all animals, and harming animal eggs is bad, them harming human eggs is also bad, because humans are animals (according to PETA), and harming animal eggs is bad. Yeah, I know that I just repeated myself, but that's because I want to emphasize PETA's view that we are all just animals and that harming animal eggs is bad.

So you see what I'm saying here? Because PETA is against the harming of animal life right down to their eggs, then they should be gung-ho members of the prolife movement! They should also be on our side in regards to the usage of embryos for stem cell research. So why isn't PETA officially a prolife movement? That's what I don't understand.

Understand this, folks, that some animal rights activists are indeed against legalized abortion for the reasons that I listed above. And I commend those folks for seeing that logic. However, I fail to understand why the entire PETA organization isn't also against legalized abortion. By not having an official position on the issue, they are trying to make it look like they are trying to see both sides of the issue, but based on the argument above, what other viewpoint would there be for them to see? If I have any prolife vegans reading this, I bet that you are nodding your head in agreement. :-)

If PETA would come out as prolife in an official capacity, then that would make their animal rights arguments and concern for life on earth that much stronger. However, their saying that all humans are animals, but that human eggs aren't worthy of the same level of protection of animal eggs is a logical contradiction that completely destroys their credibility.

Let me offer PETA a deal: If they will come out as prolife in an official capacity, then I will become a vegetarian. I know that I am in no danger of having to live up to this deal, because PETA won't change, but if they ever did, then I will honor it. Someone in the room who is reading my entry as I type this is laughing out loud at my saying that I'll become a vegetarian. In truth, it is funny. But I am serious - both that PETA won't do it, and that if they did, I'll then become a vegetarian.

But I won't respect the animal rights point of view so long as animal rights activists aren't out-and-out as against legalized abortion as they are against animal cruelty. And bottom line folks, from the PETA point of view, what is legalized abortion except animal cruelty to unborn human animals?

Halloween scary stuff!

It's Halloween! Time for some scary stuff!

For liberals: 4 more years of Dubya!

For conservatives: Speaker Pelosi!

For non-Cowboy fans: World Champion Dallas Cowboys!

For the ladies: "Hey, baby, what's your sign?"

For the men: "Does this dress make me look fat?"

I'll post some more later when I think of some, or if I get more from others.

Happy Halloween!

-------------------------------------

UPDATE: One person e-mailed me to say "Your Internet going out".

Now THAT'S scary! Yaaaaaa!!

And PETA's pretty scary because they're so dumb! More on PETA tomorrow, actually. Right now, just enjoy your Halloween! :-)

Why I'd rather live in Texas: Part 1

I got an idea to make an occassional "Why I'd rather live in Texas" blog entry just so that the poor, unfortunate non-Texans can see what they're missing. In fact, I already have an idea for an inaugural post!

In this story, we see that New York subway system is going to allow transgendered people (usually known as "cross-dressers") to use bathrooms designated for the opposite gender.

Well, the opposite gender of the body that they happen to be born into, that is. The man in the article feels that he is "a woman trapped in a man's body" - so therefore, by going to the ladies' bathroom, he's only going to the bathroom that coincides with the gender that he feels himself to be.

The way the judges see it, they are only helping the transgendered community to feel more welcome in the community at large, but what about the women who are going to be very uncomfortable with men coming into their bathrooms? Don't their feelings count? Shouldn't the input of women have been sought out first before this court decision was handed down? This decision is going to affect how women conduct themselves in public, and it was forced down their throat.

I thought that the advent of feminism was supposed to put a stop to this sort of legal heavy-handedness at the expense of women, but apparently not. The way I see it, one small group of people is being made to feel less comfortable at the expense of the comfort of a whole lot of other people.

And one woman in the story voiced the very thought that popped in my head; namely that heterosexual male sexual predators can now dress as women and lurk in women's bathrooms by calling themselves "transgendered". So right there, you see how this law can be exploited to the benefit of sexual predators. We should be making things harder for sexual predators, not easier.

And last, this idea of letting transgendered folks use the bathrooms "suited to their inner gender" only invites more lawsuits down the road. Women are going to sue. That's not a prediction, that's a fact. And I don't blame them one bit.

Texas Governor's race down to the home stretch

Okay folks, we're down to a little more than a week before the elections. Time to get down with the commentary.

Based on the most recent poll that I remember seeing, Governor Rick "Goodhair" Perry was still in the lead, while Chris "Who?" Bell took second place. Meanwhile, the two independents, Carole "Grandma" Strayhorn and Kinky "Kinky" Friedman, have pretty much stayed right where they are.

I still don't know who I'll vote for. Basically, it's down to two though, because I won't be voting for Bell (because of his views) or Friedman (because I'm not certain of his ability to govern). So it's down to Goodhair or Grandma. There's still time, so I'll be checking their stands in the coming days.

By the way, since there's just over a week left before the election, and because Bell is highly unlikely to take my advice, I'll just go ahead and give it here. Bell mentions supporting stem cell research. I say fine and dandy - so long as it is the uncontroversial stem cells. In California, voters passed an initiative for $3 billion for embryonic stem cell research.

Problem is, embryonic stem cells have NEVER proven to work. Ever. Meanwhile, the other, non-controversial stem cells (adult and placental) have worked in ways that supporters of embryonic stem cell research WISH that embryonic stem cells would work.

So why continue to throw money away for something that hasn't proven to work? Somebody somewhere is making money off of this scam, that's for sure. And if California wants to be their pigeon, then so be it. Let them throw their money away.

Meanwhile, Bell can promote the other forms of stem cells that DO work, so that Texas can then become the leader in such stem cell research while California is bitching about the lack of results in their research. And for which they'll find some way to blame Texas.

Odd thing is, California passed this initiative at a time when they were allegedly in a budget crisis. And yet, they found this $3 billion. So someone tell me how throwing money away on a scam is going to help their budget crisis.

But California's budget crisis doesn't have to become ours, if Chris Bell does the right thing. He won't, of course, because he seems to be sold on the bill of goods (or is it "bads"?) of embryonic stem cell research. It's too bad, because he wants to pass Rick Perry, and this would be one way he could do just that. At least, though, someone tried to tell him otherwise.

Chris, get used to saying "Governor Perry" for the next four years!

Funny country song titles

I've seen these before (and you probably have, too), but they're still funny.

But since there's so many, I decided to post a link to them instead.

Funny country song titles

The Democrats' albatross around their necks

Two columns, one by Leonard Pitts Jr. and another by Larry DeWitt, discuss different topics, but arrive at the same solution; namely, that the reasons that liberals and Democrats are not the influence these days on society as they'd like to be is because of the big, bad GOP and its shenanigans. Understand that I say that NOT as a member of the GOP – which I am not – but as someone who is a former Democratic supporter who is tired of seeing the Dems shoot themselves in the foot.

First, don’t get me wrong; both columns are excellent in their analysis of their respective topics. However, they make the same mistake that most left-wing types make when it comes to analyzing what they (that is, themselves) are doing wrong: They pick the wrong group to lay blame on.

Yes, the GOP is up to its usual shenanigans – but aren’t they always? Isn’t that the nature of politics to be up to shenanigans to mess things up for other parties? And aren’t the Dems also up to their own shenanigans to mess things up for the GOP? So what point is there to accuse the GOP of being up to something that we already know that they are doing, and that the Dems are guilty of doing to the GOP?

It’s human nature – both of humans and of political parties – to blame someone else for their own troubles. But a sign of growth and maturity is the ability to be able to see the man (or woman) in the mirror and know that one’s own troubles generally start with the person staring back at you.

Roe vs. Wade became the albatross that the Dems chose to hang around their neck long ago, and if they choose to keep wearing that damn bird, then that’s their own damn fault. Is it the fault of the GOP to keep calling the Dems on it? They keep calling them on it because it works! And the nature of politics is to go with what works. What’s surprising is that it has worked for so long, and that it’s taken this long for any of the Dems to see it.

Some Dems see it, but way, way too many still don’t see it. It’s almost enough to push one to despair for the poor clueless Dems. However, let me give the Dems some free advice: If you can let go of your love affair with Roe vs. Wade and with embryonic (as opposed to the other, non-controversial) stem cells, then you can go a long way to having your eyes opened and removing that stupid bird.

It won’t turn things around for the Dems right away, but it will be a big, important first step. But will it happen? Time will tell. Stranger things have happened, folks.

One more video

This was sent to me just today - probably because of yesterday's video day entry.

Anyway, I thought it was so cool that I would go ahead and post it. It's a clip of a Charlie Chaplin mask as it slowly rotates from the front to the back. BUT - as it rotates to the back, the back can sometimes look like it's a separate mask, like it got turned inside out. Anyway, look for yourself and see if you can see what I'm talking about.

Funny how the eyes can play tricks on ya! :-D

Weekend Wrap-up 10-21-2006

Today's weekend wrap-up is video week, in which I post links to various videos that have been sent to me in recent times.

First up is a short cartoon that has Popeye in a Japanese style cartoon (usually called "anime"). It cracked me up when I first saw it. Whoever did this animation got Popeye down pretty good. I hope that they do other Popeye crossovers. The sailor man works surprisingly well in this skit, and I betcha that he can work in other animation. For instance, I'd like to see Popeye on the old Super Friends cartoon. And speaking of Super Friends...

Next up is the latest version of DC Comic's Justice League. Waaay back in the 1970's, the Justice League was shown in a Hanna Barbera cartoon called "Super Friends". The recent Justice League animation is on Cartoon Network, and it's called "Justice League Unlimited". What you're about to see is about 6-7 minutes long, but you'll see something the JLU Wonder Woman do that the SF Wonder Woman would never do. You'll just have to see what I mean. And to think that this was shown on the Cartoon Network! (Of course, CN also brings you "Adult Swim"...)

Next up is a collection of cat clips of cats doing crazy stuff. It still makes me laugh even though I've seen it several times. Ha! And a quick search on You Tube has brought up a second clip of cat craziness. I don't know why it's so funny to watch cats do all this crazy stuff, but it is.

And before you cat lovers start yammering about how I hate cats and that I am partial to dogs (which is true, by the way), here's a crazy dog clip. It's just as funny as the two cat clips.

And last is a very cool clip of billiards and dominoes in action together. It must have taken forever for this guy to set all that up. Check it out and you'll see what I mean. If you aren't impressed after seeing all that, then you must vote Republican or something... ;-)

That's it for this weekend wrap-up. If you ask nice, maybe I'll do another video weekend at another time.

Have a great week, folks!

Voting strategy for those who don't normally vote

Joseph Sobran's column about a voting strategy for those who normally don't vote actually sounds like a very interesting idea.

Sobran suggests that those who don't normally vote - which is a great majority of us - should vote for the non-incumbent. And do that for every election. Ha! How interesting - and how fun - that would be! Many of these guys need to be voted out anyway, but those of us who do actually vote are the ones who keep those bums in office.

We should try that at least once every 5 years or so, so that the incumbents can't rest easy. Something's got to break the hold that special interest groups have on both (yes, both) parties so that the parties will be more responsive to their constituents again.

Apathy, unfortunately, is as strong an influence on the potential voters as special interest groups are on politicians. But change has to start someone, and it might as well be us - especially since we still have the power to bring about change. What say ye, folks? For once, exercise your right to vote, and if you have no particular favorite, then vote for the non-incumbent. Let's scare the hell out of the politicians by making them wonder just what the heck we are up to. >:-)

Ms. Dewey: online librarian

Here's an interesting site named Ms. Dewey.

Whenever you type in something, she'll respond in some form or fashion, and if you don't type something, she'll tell you that, too! And she's pretty cute, too. ;-)

Picasso Painting gets an elbow

Boy, I'd hate to be the guy who poked his elbow through a Picasso painting. It's a good thing that the elbow poker was the owner of the painting. Anyway, attached below is my edtoon done in my humble attempt at being Picasso-esque.

9/11: Then and now

Note: I am republishing my blog entry related to 9/11.

I had initially posted edtoons on that entry, but one comment made me realize that I should post links to those edtoons as I did with the Kim Jong-il edtoons. It's only fair to these cartoonists for me to provide links to their work as I do with the news articles that I comment on this blog. Since finding links to those 9/11 edtoons are not readily available, I decided to forego using them at all. If I can find my own edtoon related to this issue, I shall post it here.

-----------------------------------------------------------

As I was deleting some old e-mails, I came across one that I hadn't seen in a while. It contained editorial cartoons that related our moods in the days and weeks immediately following the 9/11 attacks. I remembered those days and how things seemed to be crazy and out of whack. There was shock, horror, confusion, anger, and a general sense of anomie. Fast forward to today.

Does it feel to you like our mood then seems quite a bit different than it is now? Understand that I'm not at all saying that we are no longer outraged - that sting will always be with us - but that, back then, we seemed more focused on what we wanted to do. We wanted to "kill the bastards" who did this evil act against our people. Today, though, we seem less focused. Why is that? Answering that is a bit complex, because the reasons come from different sources, but in short, it is because our war effort has not been focused like it needs to be.

Yes, we went to Afghanistan and Iraq, but our military efforts there didn't seem to stop the terrorists' effort in spreading fear. Granted, the mood that we felt 5 years ago demanded that we do something - and we did. But 5 years later, it doesn't seem to be enough. Yes, we chased out the Taliban from Afghanistan and we toppled Hussein from Iraq, but our victories there seem to be a Pyrrhic victory.

However, don't think that I'm saying that we need to pull out of Iraq, or that we need to cease our efforts in seeking out the terrorists to severely damage or even end their activities. What I'm suggesting is that we rethink how we're doing things - to find, in other words, how we might be doing these things better and more efficiently. So far, we seem to be doing things largely because we're doing them. That's not a good enough plan. Granted, I'm no military person, but even a civilian such as myself knows that we could be doing things better.

Come election day, think about which candidate that you vote for can do a better job on how we're conducting this war. The victims of 9/11 and our soldiers in the field deserve better than the leadership that is coming from our politicans right now. Their sacrifices must not be in vain, and we must do our part to make it so - and part of that effort comes at the ballot box.

Weekend Wrap-up 10-14-2006

Hello folks!

I have some news to report to you but I'll tell you at the end. So let's get on with the rest of this blog entry.

Texas governor's election race
Well, it has been a week since the debate, and already we have seen some interesting news items going on. First, Democratic candidate Chris Bell makes a good showing in the debate (although I thought he was a little robotic), and then he turns around and inserts his foot into his mouth. First he asks Kinky Friedman to bow out of the race and support him, and when Kinky doesn't do that, he then says that he is going to have Kinky painted as a racist in an upcoming election commercial campaign (details of this sorry drama are in blog entries from earlier this week). This tells me that either Bell is impulsive or just not very smart – and possibly both. Had he thought this over a little more, he would have seen that he just made himself look like he was going to ally himself with someone that he regards as a racist.

In the meantime, Republican candidate Rick “Governor Goodhair” Perry and independent candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn are left wondering just what the heck is going on. Well, I'll fill them in: All that Bell has accomplished is to make himself look bad while giving Kinky free publicity, and more free publicity that he's already been getting. This was not a good week for Bell, despite the fact that he has a fresh infusion of cash. Perhaps that donor shouldn't have wasted his money. However, Bell gives bloggers such as myself stuff to write about -- not that we didn't already have enough to write about, but we appreciate it anyway. I will most certainly be keeping up with this, you can count on that. :-D

Surprise at the gas pump
Yesterday, I got a big surprise when I went to fill up my car yesterday: the price of gas had actually gone under two dollars. I know there are some conspiracy kooks out there who say that this drastic drop in gas prices is just an election-year ploy by Bush to get votes -- so let me ask you this: is this going to make you vote for Bush? Well, you can't vote for Bush, because he is not running for office! You ask me, this conspiracy theory idea is a rather desperate act. First, Bush was responsible for the rise in gas prices, and now he's responsible for the gas prices going down.

I tell you, the office of the President must really have some juice to be able to make gas prices fluctuate so much. Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez must be green with envy. In the meantime, I managed to fill my tank with less than $30 this time. I don't remember the last time I was able to do that, but it didn't seem all that long ago that I actually complained when gas went up to two dollars a gallon. Boy, the times change pretty quickly.

The television show “Heroes”
I don't know how many of you folks are watching this show, but I am hooked. I'm still not quite sure what's going on in that show, but I already know that my favorite character is the Japanese guy Hiro, because he is such a comics nerd and not ashamed of it. In fact, if it wasn't for Hiro, the show would actually be a little boring. It's in its third episode, and the stories are still building up. I'm ready for the characters with superpowers to start interacting with each other.

As for the other characters, the cheerleader's power of fast healing is rather interesting, and it makes me wonder if she is actually immortal now, and perhaps eternally young. As for the brothers -- or should I say, the flying brothers -- I'm not quite sure where the writers are going with them. I guess we will just have to wait and see. The cop that can read minds can also be an interesting character. He seems to be a decent guy, but I wonder if he is strong enough to do the right thing when he needs to. Something else that will have to wait and see.

As for the stripper, I am not quite sure what her power is. She seems to have an alter ego that she sees whenever she looks into a reflective surface, and then at times the alter ego seems to take over and do terrible and violent things, and then the stripper suddenly “wakes up” and finds herself in the middle of damage and destruction that she doesn't remember causing. This sounds more to me like a psychological problem rather than a super power. So far, we haven't seen the stripper when her alter ego is in control. I'm curious to see how the alter ego will be portrayed once she's finally shown.

I'll say this for the show, “Heroes” -- I am watching it longer than I watched “Survivor” that had race-based tribes. I only watched “Survivor” for two episodes before I lost interest in it, and I hear that by the third show, they weren't even broken up into race tribes anymore. That pretty much ended the sociological experiment before it even really got off the ground. It sounds to me like the producers of that show lost their nerve before things really got interesting. I guess this shows us where we are at in race relations today; basically, that we are not there yet in regards to achieving total racial harmony. It's too bad that the producers lost their nerve so quickly, because producers want ratings and had they allowed this sociological experiment to continue, they would have gotten those ratings that they really want.

Interesting photographs
Check out these pictures I took yesterday while walking around. I came across this little caterpillar and I happened to have my digital camera. It took me a bit to set the camera to be able to zoom in close, but fortunately the caterpillar was going slow enough for me to make the settings, and it happened to be in bright sunlight where it would photograph very well. Sometimes I marvel at the things that we see in nature. While I might not be an outdoor person, it doesn't mean that I can't appreciate the wonders of nature.












































Note on the Journey to Nerdville
Okay, now it's time to tell you my news: this whole blog entry was done by a voice recognition program in which this whole text was typed as I spoke. Right now, it's still learning to adjust to my voice, so I'm having to stop and start as it learns to understand what I am saying.

This also makes me enunciate my words more, so perhaps this will also have the side benefit of making me speak more clearly. I was told that it gets better the more I use it, because it will adjust to me more and more. But already, I can see the benefit of using this program. I also need to learn more about how to do some commands by voice instead of going back and forth to the keyboard to make corrections.

I think this will also help me to write better because I am concentrating on how my words sound to the ear as well as what I write. Whenever I write columns, I will type out what I say, then print it out and read it aloud to listen to how it sounds. This helps me to make my columns sound like a conversation rather than an essay. In turn, my columns will be more basic and to the point and understandable to my readers.

But with this new program, I can both speak and write at the same time so I am already hearing how my words sound as I type them, which might make me an even better writer -- and being an even better writer is exactly my goal. This is why I love our current day and age of all this marvelous technology.

The thing I do have to watch though, is that the program doesn't accidentally type something that I don't want it to type. After all, I don't want to be like Chris Bell and have something overheard that I didn't want to be heard. Hmm. Perhaps Chris Bell should look into getting one of these programs as well!

Have a great week, folks!

Okay, now to check the e-mails. Hmm. Boy, some of these e-mails that I get are really dumb. I wonder if they still write in crayon? Hehe. I didn’t know that people could type with their knuckles! Hey, the typing program's still running! No, don't write that! You weren't supposed to write all that - stop typing! Stop it! I said stop typing! Dang, where's the “off” button on this thing? Stop typing!! Ah, here's the “off” button. Whew!

Okay, now have a great week, folks!

"There's something stinky about Kinky"

First, Chris Bell had reached out to Kinky Friedman as a potential ally. And now, barely two days later, Bell's camp is going to have him pegged as a racist. I tell ya, folks - I busted out laughing so hard that I was banging my head on the computer monitor, and I ended up damaging it so much that I had to switch computers.

Oh, this is rich! I love it! See folks, this is one of the reasons that I love election seasons. :-D

Okay, now down to business. If asking Kinky to drop out earlier this week was desperate enough, then turning around and calling him a racist is even more desperate. So what was Chris Bell doing earlier in the week trying to ally himself with someone that he regards as a racist? Apparently, no one in the Bell camp has a clue on how clueless that they just made themselves looked.

C'mon, Bell - knock it off already. You're embarrassing yourself, man, and people are looking at you. And not only that, you're giving Kinky even more free publicity than he's already gotten. Talk about shooting one's foot while being hoisted by their own petard.

However, even with this latest debacle, my offer still stands for you folks in the Bell camp to e-mail me for my idea on what you can do to energize your campaign. Look, you screwed this up pretty much already - what do you have to lose from asking a blogger for his idea for a campaign strategy? Other than the election, that is?

And please, please don't do anything else this dumb, okay? I already busted up one computer monitor from laughing so hard, and I can't afford to bust up the other one.

Chris Bell wants Kinky Friedman to drop out

It has been revealed that Democratic candidate for Texas governor had asked Kinky Friedman to drop out of the race and to join him. Of course, the Bell camp denies that this is a desperation tactic, but how else are they supposed to answer that question?

I could make an edtoon out of this. Bell, dressed as Darth Vader, implores Friedman, "Join me, Kinky, and we can rule the galaxy together!"

Anyway, that Bell resorted to such an act demonstrates that he indeed is desperate. After all, Bell did very well in the debate, but still lags Friedman, who did the worst of the four candidates. I guess I'd be desperate, too, if I were in his shoes. Despite their denials, it seems to me that had Bell been a stellar candidate that the voters all loved, then he wouldn't need to go to Friedman to ask him to drop out.

You know what this looks like? It looks like Bell is proactively covering his ass just in case he does lose next month. In other words, he's going to pull the Al Gore tactic of blaming someone else (in Gore's case, Ralph Nader) instead of the man in the mirror as to why they lost the election. To use such a tactic after an election is bad enough, but to use it before the election...? Sad, man.

I could tell Bell what he could do to draw voters if he were interested, but I don't think he'd do it. I would say it here, but I don't want to make it that easy for him. But if he can ask another candidate to drop out of the race, then he can ask a blogger for campaign advice. If he's gonna ask, though, he'd better do it soon. Time's a wastin'!

By the way, I had told you folks that I e-mailed the candidates after the debate about having more debates, but I have not heard from any of them yet.

Kim Jong-il edtoon

Here's my edtoon on North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-il:




















----------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE:
Upon viewing CagleCartoons, I see that I wasn't the only edtoonist to think up this idea. Check this out:

Kim1
Kim2
Kim3
Kim4

What this shows is that editorial cartoonists often think alike. Kim Jong-il's weird hair leads to the idea of a mushroom cloud as his hair style. (Don't they have hair stylists in North Korea?).

However, I thought of my idea first, and it's the funniest one, in my humble opinion. :-)

Alaska village rejects free Venezuela oil

Can someone explain to me why our country has enough money to build the infamous "bridge to nowhere", and yet can't be bothered helping our fellow Americans?

Especially since these native Alaskans are refusing free oil from Venezuela because of Hugo Chavez's senseless remarks about President Bush.

C'mon, folks. Surely some of you out there can help these brave fellow Americans in their time of need, or have ideas on how to help them. I'm willing to post them here if you've got some good ideas on what we can do.

Let Americans help the Alaskans, instead of Hugo Chavez!

Something to make Democrats scream

Imagine, if you will, if the 2-term limit for U.S. presidents were repealed. Well, such legislation has been introduced. But fear not, Democrats - Bush wouldn't be eligible if this should come to pass.

But I had you going for a second there, didn't I? ;-)

Immediately after the article's text is a link to another article stating that Bill Clinton supports removing the 2-term limit. Now it's the GOP's turn to scream. But fear not, GOPpers, Clinton likely wouldn't be eligible, either.

But I had you going as well, didn't I? \:-)

I'm just in the mood to make everyone jumpy today. Hehe. X-D

Hey, did you hear that North Korea just tested a nuke?

Haha! Got you again! \;-D

Uhoh. Wait. That's for real! 8-(

I shoulda left well enough alone...

(By the way, I'll be posting an edtoon on North Korea either later today or tomorrow).

Governor's debate: Recap

After watching last night's debate, I have concluded that more debates are needed. There should be at least two more, and preferably three - but of course, Governor Rick "Goodhair" Perry only agreed to do this one. However, I have a way to hopefully prod ol' Goodhair to do at least one more. But more on that later.

As for the rundown on how the candidates did, the short story is that Perry probably won that debate, not because he was that good, but because the other candidates didn't step up like they needed to.

Perry was the most polished, and he said all that you expected him to say. His experience in doing this showed, and compared to the other candidates, he seemed the most confident. However, he also didn't do much beyond what was expected of him. He didn't take any chances because he didn't need to, so we didn't get a real good look at the real Rick Perry. He didn't have to take any chances because no one challenged him enough to take any. Which is why we need more debates with him.

Carol Keeton "Grandma" Strayhorn could have come away the winner of this debate if she hadn't sounded so much like a commercial all the time. How many times did she answer her questions with variations of "We need a governor for all Texans" and "We need to shake up Austin", even if the question wasn't related to her answer? Of the three other candidates, Strayhorn stands the best chance of actually beating Perry, and this debate could have been her moment to shine - and to make Perry sweat. But with only one debate, she probably felt that she needed to get her pitch in while the opportunity presented itself. Too bad she sounded too much like a commercial too much of the time. If there's another debate, the main thing she needs to work on is to stop sounding like a commercial!

Kinky "Kinky" Friedman did the poorest job, but that's mostly because he's not a politician. He had his moments, but they were not often enough. His campaign staff didn't do enough to prepare him for this, and it showed. But something to keep in consideration is that this was his first ever debate, so any one of us going into our first ever debate probably wouldn't do that well, either. He would benefit from more practice so that he can apply from what he learned this time around, and then to use that in other debates. If those occur.

Chris "Who?" Bell needed the most to shine here, and he didn't do it. Is "Al Gore" stiffness part of being a Democrat these days? He needed to show us why we should vote for him rather than Perry (and the other candidates), but all I saw was why the Dems are in a spiraling decline in this state. Don't get me wrong; he wasn't "Kinky Friedman" bad, but he wasn't sparkling, either - and he needed to be sparkling. Instead, he was a monotone robot. If there's another debate, then he should work on being more - lifelike.

Here's what I think should be done to prod ol' "Goodhair" to participate in at least one more debate. Other debates should be scheduled anyway. Like I said above, there should be at least two more and maybe a third. This would give Strayhorn, Friedman, and Bell other chances to polish their act so that their public persona come across better. And in those other debates, there should be a fourth podium as a way to symbolize that Perry isn't there. And be sure to have this podium in the 2nd or 3rd position instead of at one of the ends. That way, the empty podium stands out. The debate coordinator can say each time- that "Governor Perry was invited, but declined."

However, in order for this idea to work, these other three need to get really, really good at this. They need to do so well that Perry will feel pressured to attend at least one more debate if for no other reason than for damage control. If Perry never shows up, then the other three candidates will be free to be their best and be themselves. And of course, the media can keep noting the fact that Perry hasn't shown up, and they can keep asking him during press conferences if he plans to show up at the next debate so the he keeps having to say that he's not. I hope these other candidates give my idea serious consideration. I hope they at least read the e-mail that I am going to send to each of them of this blog entry.

Stay tuned, folks! The festivities are only beginning! :-D

Texas Governor's debate is tonight

Tonight will be the first and only debate among the 4 candidates. Governor Rick "Adios, MoFo*" Perry has agreed to appear at only one debate. That's probably the right thing for him to do, because the more he appears in public with them, the greater the chances that he might do something stupid for the others to capitalize on - and he don't wanna do dat.

This means that the others need to take advantage of the time that they have with Perry. Preparation will be key. The candidate who needs to be the most prepared is Carol Keeton Strayhorn. She will have to absolutely pounce on any opportunity that Perry gives her, but in an "Anne Richards" type of smoothness rather than a "pit bull" type of attack mode.

Kinky Friedman will need to use this opportunity to show the voters that he is indeed serious about running for governor. He's gotten the most free advertising because of his unique personality, but that can also work against him, especially when he acts like a goofball. He needs to be more selective on when he uses humor, and on what kind of humor he uses. Yes, humor is part of who he is, but if he wants to be taken serious as a candidate, then he needs to learn how to be serious when he needs to be serious.

Chris Bell MUST do well in this debate. A mediocre or substandard showing will kill any shot (and it's a long shot as it is) that he might have at winning the governor's seat. Of all the candidates appearing tonight, the most pressure is on him to succeed. Succeed, and his candidacy will receive a shot in the arm. Fail, and he might as well sit out the rest of the race, or hope that the other 3 candidates do something spectactularly bad that he looks good by comparison.

Tomorrow, I'll be posting my take on how each of the candidates do tonight.

----------------------------------------------------

*"Adios, MoFo" is what Perry had said to reporters one time when a press conference that he was in had ended. The reporters picked up on that, and it became something of a minor controversy, but it also gave a more human touch to someone who often looks and acts rather stiffly. That comment also spurred a line of t-shirts and other products, which can only help him with free advertising if Perry opponents are foolish enough to wear those things as a way to turn others off on Perry.

By the way, "MoFo" is shorthand for "mother f****r", which I didn't know until a friend of mine told me. He then said, "Didn't you ever hear that phrase in high school?" I told him that, at the high school that I went to, they used the whole phrase, and not just the shorthand version of that phrase.

Staples "Easy" button really works!

Hey, folks... what I'm about to tell you is the honest-to-goodness truth!

I went to Staples yesterday to see if they had a voice-recognition software program that I was looking for. They didn't have it, but they said they'd order it, and it would come in about a week. I went ahead and got that set up.

I got a call today from Staples, and they said that my order was going to be even later. Seeing as how the Staples store that I ordered the software from was on the way back from one of my errands, I thought that I'd drop by to see how much later it was going to be. One of the sales folks said that she was going to check in the back about the order. As I was waiting, I saw one of their "Easy" buttons in a display. I pressed it just for the heck of it, and a recorded voice said "That was easy."

And folks, not even a minute later, I happened to look at their software shelf --and there was the very software that I had ordered! I swear to you folks, I checked there yesterday, and it wasn't there! It really works! I showed it to the clerk who had come back out of their offices. She was surprised as well, and she gave me that software and said that they would just put the ordered software on their shelf.

So folks, for once, one of these companies actually lived up to their advertising!

That was easy! :-D

Ms. Magazine's omission on the abortion issue

Ms. Magazine is going to run an article in which women state that they've had abortions and are happy about their decision. However, in this article, the LifeNews.com website says that Ms. is only running the stories that they want to hear (in other words, that "abortion is a good thing"), and will not be telling the stories of the women who regret their abortions.

While Ms. Magazine is entitled to run with what they please, it also seriously undermines their credibility and professionalism to be ignoring one whole side of this issue just so that it can put a sunny face on their side. Imagine if you will, another women's magazine that ran a similar article presenting itself as discussing the abortion issue, but ran only the horror stories? Would this be regarded as fair and unbiased? If you think that, then you also believe that Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh are fair and unbiased.

This situation makes me ask, "If Ms. is so certain that they're right about the abortion issue, then why wouldn't they run the stories of women who regret their abortions?" The only answer that I can think of is that Ms. subconsciously is afraid of giving exposure to views that don't agree with theirs. Why would they be afraid? Because they don't want to be wrong on this issue. For someone to not allow the opposition to have their say is a virtual statement that this person is not confident in their own views.

No one wants to be wrong, but a mature person will face up to their error and learn from it. For someone to manipulate a discussion so that his opponent does not get their say implies that they are hiding something. My hope is that the media will step up and point that out to Ms. They probably won't - but one can only hope.

From the Dept. of Redundancy Dept.

I had to comment on this news headline, because it's just too funny to let go by without saying anything. Isn't saying that a clown is running for office a bit of a redundancy? ;-)

UPDATE:
First we have clowns running for office, now we have someone on the ballot who wants the voters to vote for his opponent. What the heck kinda freak show elections are we running this year?

New safety feature?

This story tells of a woman who survived a car crash not because of airbags, but because of the silicone implants in her breasts. In addition to providing monologue material for late night shows, no doubt that the implant industry will try to capitalize on this. This kind of story says something about our day and age, but I ain't quite sure what that is...

UPDATE:
I was informed of this story, in which a woman in Lebanon during the recent war was saved from shrapnel by her breast implants. I STILL don't know what this says about our day and age.

Weekend Wrap-up 10-1-2006

Hugo Chavez: Open mouth, insert foot
As a result of Hugo Chavez's comments regarding George Bush, some people are boycotting the Venezuelan company, Citgo. 7-Eleven, which had previously served Citgo gas, now will be dropping it, though they deny that it has anything to do with Chavez's comments. It certainly won't hurt them in any case to stop, because if they continued serving Citgo, they most likely would have gotten protests and such. Chavez's comments were ridiculous not only in that he didn't say anything beyond name-calling, but also that he insulted his country's biggest customer. While Americans can be tolerant to a fault, they aren't stupid, either. While I never purchased Citgo gasoline before, I certainly won't be buying it now. And I hope this boycott works, because I want to see what Hugo Chavez does once he sees that his best customers are walking out on him.

Editorial statement for October 2006
Continuing something that I started last month, here is my one sentence editorial statement for October 2006: "The easiest way to deal with the problem of illegal immigration is to deal with the reason that they're coming here: the U.S. companies that hire illegal immigrants." I am bringing this up because it is likely going to be an issue in next month's election. The thing is, most debate and discussion on this issue are going about it in the wrong way. They are dealing with the illegal immigrants themselves - which is important, but it's not the best way to take care of the problem (and yes, I believe that illegal immigration is a problem - specifically the "illegal" part). The way to look at this issue is to see why they are coming here in the first place.

It is because they know that there are companies here that will hire them, this despite the fact that they know that they are here illegally. So why would a company hire illegal aliens? It's because illegals work for much less than American workers. And illegals have no other expenses attached to them, like health insurance, overtime pay, and other benefits that the rest of us take for granted in this country. Illegals work much cheaper, and with no union to back them up, they can't complain about the working conditions, because their illegal status hangs over their head like the proverbial sword of Damocles.

So essentially, dealing with the illegal immigration problem by dealing with the illegal immigrants themselves is seeing this issue from too small a perspective. All that these critics accomplish is to plug the holes in a leaky dam while ignoring who is making the holes in the first place. And that hole-maker is the companies that hire illegals. During most of this year, the Democratic party and even unions had tried to court illegal immigrants, but this is a mistake in so many ways.

For Dems, it gives the regular working American the idea that the Dems are more concerned about people who are here illegally than for the constituency that they allege to be serving: the American people - especially the American worker. Plus, this tactic gives "ammo" to the GOP to use leading up to November's election day. For some reason, the Dems are making into an art form the handing of such political "ammo" to the GOP. It's like they want to fail, and it's disturbing. But I digest...

For the unions, there's no better way for them to shoot themselves in the foot than to support illegal immigrants - who are taking jobs that union workers could have! If an illegal works in the place of a union worker, then this deprives the union of the dues that could be paid by a union worker, along with the "clout" that being in a union brings to the negotiating table. If a union is stocked with illegals, then what power do they have in contract negotiations? None, son. If anything, unions should be the most outspoken against the practice of U.S. companies hiring illegals. But I shouldn't have to be saying all this; unions should know this already, and if they don't, then they deserve the reduction of influence that they've had in recent decades.

And last, the hiring of illegal immigrants does very little to motivate them to eventually becoming U.S. citizens. Actually, the U.S. companies that hire illegals wouldn't want them to become legal citizens, because then they'd have to pay them more, for then they'd qualify for the workers' rights that U.S. workers get - which defeats the whole purpose of hiring illegals in the first place! So the best way to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants is to deal with the reason that they risk so much coming here: the U.S. companies that hire them. A united effort to truly punish companies that hire illegals will make it less palatable to hire them, and thus, it makes the risk that illegals go through to get here not worth the trip. Deal with the people who are making the holes in the dam in the first place, rather than dealing with the holes themselves.

Texas Governor's race
As a political commentator, I love the fact that the race for the Texas governor's mansion is a four-way race. From Rick "Governor Goodhair" Perry to Carole Keeton "Grandma" Strayhorn, to Kinky "Kinky" Friedman to Chris "Who?" Bell, this is one race that's for the ages. Not surprisingly, Perry is limiting his debate appearances to just one. He has nothing to gain from appearing in these debates (at least not too many of them), and he has his governorship to lose. For Perry, all he has to do is to basically avoid doing anything stupid, and he's likely to win re-election.

However, if he does slip up, then I believe that it will be Strayhorn first, and then Friedman next who will most benefit. For Bell, he is a longshot under any scenario other than the other candidates dying under mysterious causes (and let's hope that it doesn't come to that!). The Dems really needed a more sparkling personality as a candidate, and Bell ain't it. For the rest of this month leading up to election day, I shall try to post at least two entries a week related to the governor's race - and more if certain news events call for it. Oh yeah, and I definitely need to work on making some edtoons of this. Have a seat, folks - the fun's just starting!

Haircut
For a brief moment last week, I entertained the idea of having my hair cut into a mohawk style. However, a mohawk on a person with a receding hairline is a rather sad sight, so that idea died rather quickly.

Have a great week, folks!