Ground Zero Mosque

I have decided to weigh in on the Mosque at Ground Zero. First, a warning to my ultra-conservative friends: you are not gonna like this post. Sorry.

Let me start by saying that the Right of Religious Freedom is just that: a Right. This means that any citizen has the Right to practice their religion in this country.

Now, that said, this does not have anything to do with what I believe the majority of Americans have expressed as their views. After all, the majority of Americans support the constitution. I believe that the majority of Americans understand and respect the Right of Religious Freedom. And, I believe that the majority of Americans are simply expressing their desire to have the mosque built some place else. They do not want to impede anyone's Religious Freedom. Rather, they would just like for people to be sensitive to the location where the mosque is to be placed. And, to some degree, I think the majority of Americans are both disappointed and angry about the apparent lack of compassion from the organization that is trying to build the mosque.

I think that is enough said about the mosque topic. And, frankly, I do not consider this to be news worthy. This goes to my next point. This mosque is becoming a political football. And, I think this needs to stop.

To be clear, this all started when the President decided to provide his position on the mosque. And, to be honest, what he said was quite literally correct.

1. The constitution provides for religious freedom
2. The issue is more about the "judgment" rather than the legality

Here's the deal:

• The president should stop trying to have beer summits every time two people have a disagreement; there are lots and lots of other issues which are far more important (e.g. jobs, border security, government transparency, etc.)
• The conservative media should stop trying to pin this mosque on the President - yes, he stuck his nose into yet another social issue, but, enough is enough

I will agree with the conservative media on one point: the President only seems to focus on those issues which will continue his celebrity status. Lets face it; why on earth would the President feel the need to get in the middle of every little dispute? By sticking his nose into this (and other similar issues), it is providing fuel for the conservative media. It just helps to fuel the image of the president as the head of a government that is out of control (even drunk) with power. Mr. President, is that what you want?

Yes, building a mosque next to ground zero is really bad judgment. But, don't we have more important things to worry about right now?

Mom was right!

Mom, I know you have been waiting a long time to hear this, but, you were right.

When I was younger, my mother continuously told me that Television was evil. And, that if I watched too much Television, it would rot my brain. Well, like every other kid in America (at that age), I thought my mother was crazy.

I admit: it took me a really long time to figure it out. In fact, it was not until about four years ago that I started to realize that there was something disturbing about some of the television shows. Up to that point, I would just watch the shows and be entertained - just like everyone else in America. Then, I started to notice patterns in the situations that were being portrayed in the shows. These were situations that were not really that prevalent, but, these situations were being portrayed as being very prevalent. At first, I thought the choice of situations was based on dramatic license; doing something that was out of the ordinary in order to keep the interest of the audience. Then, I realized that the scenarios were aligned with liberal social issues.

I started to pay much closer attention to the plots; noting the messages that were embedded in the plots. And, over time, I realized that the plots were crafted to garner sympathy (or tolerance) for certain social situations. You see, when someone sees a certain situation over and over again, they begin to adjust what they consider to be normal. If you are curious about the psychological principles, your should read about hostages and the Stockholm Syndrome. The messages have been extremely subtle over that last couple of decades - kind of like boiling a frog. :-)

I would like to give you a scenario. Now, what I am about to say is going to sound really strange. When I first wrote this blog (months ago), I could not bring myself to publish it, because I was afraid that it made me sound like some kind of nut. But, I remembered something my mother told me: "Don't let someone else think for you - that is why God gave you have a brain". I decided to go ahead and post this blog; with the message that readers should use their brains, and make up their own minds about things. And, now that I have given the disclaimer, I will get on with the scenario.

The thing about Television is that it enables viewers to immerse themselves in a fantasy world. Viewers can experience all kinds of scenarios and situations through the drama of Television. The problem is that viewers can begin to adjust their perceptions on things, based on repeated exposure to a particular theme from certain Television shows. You see, the brain (over time) will treat the Television shows just like any other real-life experience. And, repeated exposure to a common theme will effectively brain-wash a viewer. Believe me, I know how crazy this sounds. It has taken me four years to finally come the realization: mom was right!

Here is the really scary part: imagine if a person or group of people could have their perception modified over time. People would not know who or what to believe. Or, they would only believe, based on the major source of the information that was used to form their perceptions. In other words, if they are basing their beliefs on what they have learned from Television, then it is likely that they would trust the Television more than any other source. Got goose bumps yet?

Lets take this one step further. Why would anyone want to manipulate the perception of a population of people? Well, the answer seems to be very straight forward. If people are thinking for themselves, then they are more likely to ask questions. And, if they are more likely to ask questions, they are less likely to just blindly do what they are told. So, it's all about control; the ability to control a population. In fact, with Television, it's not likely that the viewers would even know they were being manipulated. It's like: The Matrix. :-)

So ... mom ... I know you have been waiting decades to hear this. Here goes. You were right about Television. God gave us all brains, and we should be using them to think for ourselves. I know it took a really long time for me to figure this out. But, I finally did!

Thanks mom!

Border Security: What Happened?

What happened to all the discussion about the Border Security???

No one in the media is covering this topic anymore. And, I am sure (since I live in a border state) that the problem has not gone away. Yeah, sure, they put a few National Guard troops on the border. And, I understand that they are going to hire more Border Security personnel. But, a month ago (or so) none of these plans were good enough to address the problem. Now, all of a sudden, its like we have given up and moved on to a new "hot topic".

This is not about immigration - this is about security. My concern is about the drugs (and who knows what else) that are being smuggled into the country across our southern border. One of the most important roles of the federal government is to protect the Nation; that includes border protection. And, if things are still being smuggled in, then I do not think they are doing a very good job.

Have you flown lately? You are practically strip searched prior to entering the boarding area. Then, even in the boarding area, there are TSA agents walking around constantly asking for your identification papers. This is so ironic, given the Democratic claims that the Arizona law would violate people's civil rights. Well, what about being repeatedly asked for my identification papers, while I am waiting for a flight within my own country!?! An even bigger irony is that it's the same government agency that is hiring lots and lots of TSA agents, yet not hiring enough Border Protection Agents. That just smacks of political agenda to me.

So, do we have a problem with border security or not? Is there a solution that will fix the problem, or not?

This administration has time for beer summits for all kinds of topics that are best left to local governments. I think it is about time for this administration to focus on the things the federal government is supposed to be doing.

Well folks, I think this is a serious problem. And, I think we need to stay on the administration until the problem is completely resolved. If we do not stay on them, they will continue to "wait us out" on issues where they (the administration) want to do something contrary to the majority of us working class Americans.

Border Security needs to stay on the front page until we are sure the problem has been resolved. We should not be playing political games with our Border Security.

NAACP Racist Claims

This morning, I heard on the news that the NAACP is calling everyone in the Tea Party a racist. I suppose asking why, would be unacceptable; since we are not supposed to question anything that is done by this administration, or the evangelists of its political agenda. Even though I am not a member of the Tea Party, I suspect they will be calling me a racist next! It seems that anyone who does not endorse the political agenda of this administration is a racist.

I'm a math and logic guy. So, I have some knowledge of things like mathematical proofs. I also understand logic. There is a well know mathematical principal: a single example does not prove a theory. A single example can be used, however, to disprove a theory. The NAACP claims that all members of the Tea Party are racists. This is a statement of a theory. The beauty of this claim is the damage it can do, whether it is proven or not. And, I suspect this is the goal. But, I digress; back to the theory. It's simple and logical: this theory can be dis-proven by having one member of the Tea Party that is not racist. So, can the NAACP prove that every member of the Tea Party is a racist? If not, then this theory is false. It's what we call an unsubstantiated statement.

I heard an interview, where an advocate of the NAACP's position stated things like "small government" and "states rights" were code words for racism. Wait - I thought racism was treating someone different because of their race. How did states rights and small government become part of the equation? It's almost as if the NAACP is saying that the only way to avoid racism, is to have a centralized government (opposite of small government and states rights) to control its citizens - to ensure racism does not happen. Well, history tells us that governments can have racists policies; depending on the people who act on behalf of the government. So, I am not sure why someone would trust the government not to be racist. But, I guess someone might believe that the government would be able to prevent racism. It's ironic; the Tea Party is the party that basically says government is supposed to serve the people, rather than the other way around. The Tea Party advocates personal liberty. I guess it comes down to whether you trust the government more or less than the people around you. And, I guess if you are a minority, it would be hard to trust those who are in the majority. That said, we do have laws in this country that expressly make discrimination illegal.

Lets go back to logic for just a moment. Is it logical that all people are racists, if only one person is proven to be racist? The answer is no. So, since racism is assumed when we talk about the need for big, centralized government, can the conclusion be true if one of the fundamental assumptions is proved wrong? The answer is no. The reality is that people are being manipulated.

What could possibly be accomplished by claiming that the Tea Party is racist? It's all about guilt. That's right. It's about the fear of being called a racist. It's leverage against people like me, who try to be independent of the political parties. And, as hard as this is for me to admit, It's leverage against people like me who have been afraid to be called racist.

You see, some people will almost always vote Republican. And, others will almost always vote Democratic. The independents are the ones that really determine elections. They are the group that were fundamental in the 2006 and 2008 elections. They are the group that were upset with President Bush and the Republicans (for any number of reasons). The independent voters are the ones who put the Democrats in control of Congress in 2006. And, they are the group that elected President Obama in 2008.

Why would anyone want to use racism to manipulate a population? Simple - Power. By manipulating people into thinking they are victims of racism, you can get them to support your political agenda (enemy of my enemy, etc.). And, by making people afraid of being called racist, you accomplish the same exact thing. Basically, it's all about fear. Fear of being a victim of racism (on the one hand), and fear of being called a racist (on the other hand). I think it goes without saying, that this kind of public manipulation is just plain bad.

By the way, if the agenda is a centralized government, to ensure that racism does not occur, then the government would have to be able to control everyone. People who are dependent on the government would be very easy to control.

I was taught to treat people the way I want to be treated. And, I have tried to live up to this every day of my life. To me, this is what is important: living according to my values. I have decided to get over my fear of being called a racist. I have never treated someone different because of their race, and I never will. I refuse to be manipulated, based on my fear of being called something that I know I am not. If someone calls me a racist, I could spend lots of time trying to prove they are wrong. Or, I can take it for what it is: an inaccurate statement. No more guilt. I will not be manipulated.

Way to Go!

I just found out that a bunch of friends, who live and work in Houston, have been released from their jobs with oil companies. And, I understand that more people will be losing their jobs over the next couple of weeks. We (as a Nation) are still struggling with a bad economy. People need jobs! And, yet, this administration takes the decision to stop deep water oil and gas activities in the Gulf. Why?

Well, this administration is all about perception. And, by shutting down deep water drilling in the Gulf, it looks like the administration is being tough with the oil industry. Maybe this administration should have thought this through. Clearly, stopping oil and gas activities in the Gulf is costing jobs. This, at a time when we really need fewer unemployed people - not more. The situation in the Gulf is an environmental tragedy of epic proportions. But, shutting down the oil and gas industry in the Gulf is just making the problem worse.

I wonder ... what if these oil and gas workers were union workers? Would this administration have been so quick to cut off their lively-hood? We know the administration used tax payer's dollars to save auto worker's jobs. What if these jobs were in a blue state? Statistics show that most oil field workers are very conservative; thus, not Obama supporters. Let's keep this simple: Did the administration consider the loss of jobs before they shut down the oil and gas industry in the Gulf? Was there a political agenda?

If this administration understood the concept of a free market, they would not have needed to shutdown the oil and gas industry in the Gulf. It's really simple. It's called risk. Businesses (particularly the oil industry) are constantly evaluating the risks they are willing to take, in order to earn revenue. I assure you: no oil company (or any company) wants to take the risk of losing billions of dollars because of an accident; like the one in the Gulf. It's just common sense. If this administration understood more about business, they would have realized that they did not need to shut down the oil industry in the Gulf; they would have realized that businesses know how to manage risk in order to get a return on investment.

Yet another reckless action by this administration, is resulting in more unemployed people. This administration claimed that GM was too big to fail. Really. They claimed that if GM went bankrupt, that all the businesses who depend on GM would also go bankrupt. What about the large scale economic havoc, that shutting down the oil business will have on the Gulf States? How is this different? Oh yeah, this administration bailed out GM; and, they caused the shutdown of the Gulf oil industry. Isn't this a double standard?

It gets even better. Not only has the administration destroyed the oil industry in the Gulf, they have severely impacted our supply of oil. We are still in an economic crisis! If you do something to drive up the cost of oil, you will make the economic crisis worse. It's called inflation. Oil is required to transport goods. That cost is passed onto consumers. I will not even talk about all the foreign countries that are still sucking our (American) oil reserves dry. What were you thinking!

This administration had an opportunity to demonstrate leadership. Instead, they have cost more American jobs at a time when jobs are scarce. And, this administration has put our supply of oil at risk. I just don't understand the rationale for such reckless behavior. Don't you care about the American people?

Filibuster Kagan

Hello!?!? Any Republican Senators out there?!?!

Where in the world have all the Republican Senators gone? What are you doing?

Perhaps it is time for you to do something. Here's an idea: how about taking a stand on the appointment of an obviously extremely liberal supreme court judge.

We need checks and balances. Given the importance of the Supreme Court, I would think this is the perfect time, and issue, for the Republicans to take a stand. Democratic strategist have painted Republicans as advocates for big business, and not as advocates for the American people. Why not show the American people, that the Republicans are willing to stand up for the preservation of the Constitution?

Get off your butts and stop the Kagan appointment to the Supreme Court! Prove to the American people that your party is truly all about the Constitution.

Hannity Hype

I did not like the Bush bashing, when Bush was President. And, I do not like the Obama bashing. I know that Obama, himself, bashed Bush mercilessly during the 2008 election. So, maybe he deserves all the abuse. But, I was taught that "two wrongs do not make a right".

During the 2008 election, Obama was bashed regularly. And, what happened: he got elected. I don't believe the bashing does any good.

I sometimes have to drive for two or three hours, as I live in one town and work in another. The last two weeks I have had to change radio stations, because the attacks on Obama were just too much. Enough already. If I am changing the channel, then I assure you other like-minded independents are changing the channel. Obama is in office. He is going to be in office until 2012. I really do not want to have to listen to the Obama bashing for another two years.

Here's the deal. The 2010 elections are just around the corner. And, I know that you (Hannity, et al) think that the Republicans are going to get majorities in both the House and the Senate. I am not so sure. While you are bashing Obama, the Republican candidates are losing ground against the Democratic candidates. If you really want to get rid of this Democratic Congress, you had better find a way to start helping the candidates that are running against Democratic Congressmen and Senators. It's almost like you think that bashing Obama will translate to votes against the Democrats. I am not so sure.

It seems to me that if you really want to vote out all the Democrats, you need to start talking about what the American people need to do to make this happen. What is the battle plan? Who are the Democratic Congressmen and Senators who are vulnerable? What are the specific issues that indicate why their Democratic Congressman or Senator should be voted out of office?

Enough Obama bashing. Let's focus on how we get these government elitists out of office; starting with the 2010 elections.