tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12311921596753707932024-03-12T20:23:04.625-07:00Thoughts on LifeMy life so fargakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-47618080994614633842016-04-10T10:26:00.000-07:002016-04-10T10:34:51.019-07:00I'm a bigot!<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Because I believe in, and have, science and nature on my side, I'm a bigot. Because I believe there is no room for political correctness in science, I'm a bigot. When gay marriage was the issue of the day, I supported it. Until, that is, the Miss Universe debacle with Perez Hilton. This clown and the Miss California pageant officials went off on Carrie Prejean with baseless insults and lies that, to my ears, were just beyond comprehension, simply because she stuck to her faith. But I wrote on that previously. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I recently found out about the multiple awards that the former Bruce Jenner got as woman of the year from Glamour Magazine and the ESPY's among others. If Glamour wanted to give out awards to strong women, why not Hillary for having the strength to run for president in a man's world. Why not women in education for helping make our youth stronger. Jenner is not the first to do this or the first to show how hard it is to say God got it wrong. Jenner did it at a time when it was relatively safe to do so. But, because we live in a politically correct society, it's now heroic to tell the world God got it wrong. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When I started my research on the Glamour award, the first thing I came across was a web article about a cop who lost her life in the 9/11 tragedy. She went into one of the towers to help and was in there when it collapsed. She was posthumously given the award for her heroism that day. The article was about her widower sending the award back to Glamour because giving an award to Jenner was an insult to his wife's memory. I believe he was correct in his actions. What is heroic about jumping on the band wagon at a time that is relatively safe to do so? Jenner didn't come out as gay early on as so many others like Ellen DeGeneres did. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Everybody on the gay support side is worried that they have all their rights. Among those rights is the right to adopt. Rosie O'Donnell was a big presence in that fight. What about the rights of the children they want to adopt. What does a gay marriage do to them. Anytime there was a study suggested concerning children in gay households, or almost anything else to do with the gay community, the gay community got militant in their efforts to shut down any thoughts on that. We should accept them for what they are, normal. If they were truly normal, they wouldn't need a sperm doner or adoption to have kids. This is political correctness rearing its ugly head. The American Psychology Association rewrote definitions and added new jargon, without any study's that I could find, to normalize homosexuality. Again, political correctness at work. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This whole rant came about because of that Glamour award. It is one more notch in the belt of worries I have about the world my children are inheriting. When I wrote about the Miss Universe debacle, I ended with a quote form the mother of one of the contestants. Now I'll end this with a quote from something I saw on the internet....I don't care how your son identifies, he's got no business being in the bathroom with my daughter. This is just my opinion.</div>
gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-18620528448681024102011-09-30T13:17:00.000-07:002011-09-30T13:47:49.781-07:00<strong><span style="font-size: large;">Security, Scams, and the Internet</span></strong><br />
<br />
This morning I received an email that looked rather suspicious. The email came from Dorris Maenpaa [maenpaavvdorris5@hotmail.com]. The email is pasted in below:<br />
<br />
<i>Dear XXXXXXX,<br /></i><br />
<br />
yesterday our company sent you an offer for an opening of a "Check Assist Manager".<br><br><br />
Unfortunately our website wasn't working by reason of too many visitors.<br><br><br />
To apply for this job please <span style="background-color: white;">href</span>="http://oauetnosu.blogspot.com"> fill form on our web-site</span><br><br> <br />
Thank you for your understanding.<br><br />
<br />
This email concerned me as I know blogspot (i post here) and I see no reason for a job poster to be using it as a job site. I hit the link and found that the website has a re-director on it. The individual sending the email uses a hotmail.com address and job description just screams scam. Just thought I'd post this to let anybody know I'm not going there. I tried to notify google as they own the website, but couldn't find the correct link in the short period of time I had. Just wanted to post something to warn people<br />
<br />gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-44273743149854007152010-04-19T14:15:00.000-07:002010-04-19T14:53:11.143-07:00My appologies, but this is an overdue rant<br /><br /><div align="justify">I came home from work today and sat down to my computer. The first thing on Verizon's news page is an article stating that 4 out of 5 Americans don't trust the federal government. the very next thing was a blurb that SCOTUS denied the retrial of a man convicted in Texas by a prosecutor having an extramarital affiar with the judge in the case. Gee, am I the only one here who sees something wrong with this? There should have been no decision there. The case had the appearance of being fixed and that alone makes it questionable in an "industry" that depends on transparency. Both the judge and the prosecutor should be dis-barred. We have no justice in this country anymore. </div><br />Why should anybody trust the feds when they can turn their backs on this. The supreme court has effectivly said in one decision that its ok to rig trials and exercise pull with our court system, nothing less. The idea that this judge wasn't "pulling for her beau" is just insane. Without transparency, the people can't trust the justice system. Wwe need that trust and transparency. SCOTUS said "no we don't". <br /><br />My brother likens todays society to Rome right before the fall of the empire. I suspect he is right. Free speech does not exist on college campuses anymore and it is slowly going by the wayside in free society. Political correctness has become a cancer deteriorating our society in ways I never thought would happen. Women can cry rape (falsely) and walk away without fear of discipline but the poor bastard she accuses is all over the front page of every Republican owned newspaper and tv station in this country. The Pottawatomie Iowa case pretty much shows that a prosecutor can get away with letterally framing an innocent man and not be punished for depriving that man of his rights or his life. <br /><br />I see a revolution in our future. The common folks have been convinced that taxes are way too high. Truth is, the tax rates in this country are the lowest they've been in 50 years. At some point the people have to realize that the Washington criminals we call the elected officials are taking advantage of us for the sake of big business. When will it stop.gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-43538174080893219852009-10-20T08:02:00.000-07:002009-10-23T05:38:55.827-07:00FEDEX UPS Follow-upI received 2 responses from my previous entry on the FedEx UPS fiasco. Interestingly, a blogger using the name <a onclick="" href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/06709326354160616516" rel="nofollow">Cager & Maris</a> (as it appears in my responses sections) states the following:<br /><br />"FedEx predominatly does business using aircraft. UPS predominatly does business using trucks. That's the difference in why FedEx is under one set of laws and UPS is under another set of laws."<br /><br />My original argument still stands. If FedEx just went away, would the shipping world cease to do business. The original intention of the RLA was because railroads were a lifeblood of this country. If the railroads stopped working, no automobiles would be delivered to dealerships anywhere. If the Air Traffic Controllers stopped working, ALL airports would shut down. FedEx and UPS both would be shut down. If FedEx Pilots stopped working, what would happen. The world would run to UPS, or the USPS or elsewhere. <a onclick="" href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/06709326354160616516" rel="nofollow">Cager & Maris</a> did not convince me that simply because a majority of their business is done by plane, that they qualify for some seriously restrictive labor laws.<br /><br />I'm further bothered by the "bailout" term they use. The've even gone so far as to register the websites UPSBAILOUT.COM and BROWNBAILOUT.COM. When I first heard of these sites, I thought UPS was in trouble and looking for the kind of help that the banks and auto companies were looking for. I was wrong. It was FedEx looking to make UPS look bad. UPS doesn't have a website called FedExMonopoly.com or some other silly name. If you want their side of it, you go to UPS.COM and then to their NEWSROOM page.<br /><br />I'm no fan of the bailouts that the Feds handed out like door prizes, but this isn't, in my opinion, a bailout. This is an attempt to level the playing field. Again, the RLA was for companies and jobs that, if they went away by strike or mass walkout, would stop the flow of goods and services in the United States. With the exception of the ATC and the railroads, I don't see very many others who would qualify.<br /><br />I encourage all to read the 2 responses in the previous UPS FedEx postgakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-30255555230529093652009-09-25T07:00:00.000-07:002009-09-25T08:32:04.924-07:00The UPS bailoutThere is a fight at full boil in Washington DC over a loophole in a law that allows <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">FedEx</span> to operate without interference from such issues as labor unions and labor concerns. I am just now becoming aware of this issue as it has not drawn much attention from the AP which seems to be the only news source on the web. CNN, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">MSNBC</span>, and many others post AP stories directly or a rewrite of them in some form.<br /><br />The fight, as I understand it, boils down to this. UPS is a company that must operate under the National Labor Relations Act. Under this act, it is less difficult for employees to unionize and demand acceptable standards of pay and benefits. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">FedEx</span> on the other hand operates under the Railroad Labor Act, which makes it much more difficult to unionize and when they can unionize, the unions have few if any teeth they can use for bargaining.<br /><br />The fight on the UPS/Teamsters side of the issue is that both companies are essentially the same. Both have trucks that pick up packages at businesses and deliver them anywhere in their network, again by truck, for a fee. UPS has a fleet of planes that they use for expedited shipping of packages. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">FedEx</span> has a fleet of planes that they use for expedited shipping of packages. Both will ship ground.<br /><br /><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">FedEx</span> on the other hand states that it ships 85% of its packages via air while UPS ships 85% of its packages via ground. Further <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">FedEx</span> states that this law will stifle competition. By keeping the <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">FedEx</span> employees under the more restrictive Railroad Labor Act, it makes it easier for companies to be competitive.<br /><br />I went to both sites for a comparison of shipping times. I entered into both UPS and FEDEX shipping calculators the following information:<br /><ul><li>1 package with a weight of 5 pounds</li><li>the origination zip code of 33612</li><li>the termination zip code of 11530</li><li>checked the option box for residential delivery</li></ul>Here is what I found out. Both companies cheapest option takes 3 days. I did not look at the price as that would tell me nothing as far as how things were delivered. What I did notice is that <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">FedEx</span> calls this option, Home Delivery and UPS is a bit more honest simply calling it UPS Ground. 3 days for each, is <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">FedEx</span> doing something in their process that UPS isn't wherein they use planes or trains to move this stuff?<br /><br />Here's the rub. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">FedEx</span> says that if they are forced to work under the National Labor Relations Act, this would put the shipping industry into very grave danger because a strike would cripple the industry world wide. Lets look at that, shall we.<br /><br />According to UPS, there are 45 other parcel delivery options available to customers if you don't include <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">FedEx</span> and UPS. I will only examine 1, the United States Postal Service. When the Teamsters union walked out at UPS a few years back, did the mail stop running? UPS openly stated that the walkout cost them market share. Did they earn it back, I don't know, but they are still running a company that is still number one in the business. If <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">FedEx</span> was shut down by a strike, would the parcel delivery system just stop. Would UPS be put into jeopardy because of it.<br /><br />Having its own fleet of planes, UPS does not rely <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">heavily</span>, if at all, on <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">FedEx</span> to move UPS packages overnight from NYC to LA. The USPS also has overnight options for letters and small packages, so if all else fails, they can do what USP and <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">FedEx</span> wouldn't be able to in an almost impossible to happen simultaneous strike.<br /><br />With the advent of fax and e-mail, how much business did everybody loose because we can now send a text document from Keokuk Ia. to <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">Auckland</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">NZ</span>. electronically? I didn't see <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">FedEx</span> or UPS put up a stink about that.<br /><br />My point is this. They are both working the same businesses as seen by the consumer. Both offer essentially the same services to the consumer. Both have 8 shipping options with 1 difference between the 2. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">FedEx</span> offers a same day delivery option and UPS will get it there the next day by 9am. If <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">FedEx</span> went away for good, would the shipping business be in such trouble that UPS and the Postal Service would just fold up? Why should <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">FedEx</span> be allowed to operate under a different set of rules then UPS. I've never been a fan of unions having worked in one and seen that it does nothing for its employees. A comment on the i<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">nternet</span> under a commentary article about this issue stated we shouldn't need unions, but business has a <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">habit</span> of treating its employees very poorly. Now is a time when I've never in my 50+ years seen such bad behavior by employers and poor treatment of employees on such a grand scale. I'm changing my take on unions in general.<br /><br />Finally, <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">FedEx</span> is saying that because it can't improve performance, UPS is looking to cripple the competition with unique laws aimed expressly at <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">FedEx</span>. If you call UPS and state that you need late delivery to a residence, they will do their best to oblige. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25">FedEx</span> on the other hand will be happy to tell you tough luck. Who has the better customer service? By the way, that is my personal experience after receiving several packages from both.gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-2776040862483847672009-09-16T22:29:00.000-07:002009-09-16T19:29:54.362-07:00God Bless Us AllIts time for another rant I guess. I look around and see such chaos in the world. I fear for my wife and kids, I fear for my friends and their children. Political correctness has so permeated our society that we can not talk about anything for fear of offending somebody. The rules of popularity and money have taken over common sense and decency.<br /><br />Gays: We must support equal rights for gays or risk being abused and attacked by the gay community in often vicious and callous ways (see Carrie Prejean). The one thing that nobody can bring up is that there is credible evidence that children raised in gay households suffer from not having both male and female influences to learn from. To bring up this scientific fact, draws the ire of the gay community in often vile and sometimes violent ways. Somebody on the net published a "report" that children of gay unions turn out better. No evidence was supplied nor was there a breakdown of who was surveyed etc. Some woman on Slate.com simply used heart strings to point out what a good job her sister was doing providing a loving home with her partner. It doesn't seem to matter that scientific evidence shows that children in homes without fathers do suffer. But the gays must have equal rights.<br /><br />Government: Where do I start. The cliff notes version is simply this. Big business owns and runs this country as evidenced by such things as the bailout package for the banks and the bankruptcy laws that "W" signed. If you go into bankruptcy as an individual, you will need to pay off ALL outstanding balances. If you are a corporation, then that isn't necessary. The Republican propaganda machine is out of control. When Obama wanted to talk to school children about the need to stay in school, the Republicans were up in arms that he was pushing his political agenda on these young impressionable minds. Everybody is finding some way to blame Clinton for our current mess. Truth is, it doesn't take a genius to figure out it was Ronald Reagan. Reagan ran this country on the credit card and refused to pay the bill. Clinton balanced the budget and "W" came in and gave away the PROJECTED SURPLUS in his first year. Every deregulation law that Reagan signed along with Daddy and "W" Bush, took just a little bit more out of our pockets and gave it to business. That's what put our economy in the crapper, not Clinton. As for Congress, when Ken Starr couldn't get enough dirt on Clinton, he kept expanding the investigation.<br /><br />The media: The news media no longer reports the news. They are nothing but propaganda machines for their respective owners. I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is more spin in Bill O'Reilly's no spin zone then in a bey blade stadium. When GE bought NBC, one of Jack Welch's first orders to the new found resource was that they couldn't report on anything that could adversely affect the stock price. Fox news has a daily memo of what to harp on today at their Fox New Channel. Watch it over the period of a day and you can't help but see it. CNN, MSNBC, The NY Times etc. are all the same way. Report the party line or get out.<br /><br />Sports and Entertainment: I don't know who's cereal Michael Vick pissed in to warrant the wrath he had to endure, but when we give a sports figure that much money, what did you expect to find him doing when he gets board? Pete Rose was banned from baseball for life for betting, but Darryl Strawberry was given chance after chance to clean up. How many times have you seen this athlete or that entertainer pulled for drugs or DUI. TMZ has a picture of one rapper in a bar partying before he went to Va. to do community service. The drinking age nationwide is 21 and this guy is 20. Why wasn't that bar closed down. Paris (I'm a good role model) Hilton was photographed taking her younger brother into a bar for his birthday....His 19th or 20th birthday. Why wasn't that bar closed down.<br /><br />In General: The number of celebrity women who are having babies without benefit of a wedding ring is atrocious. Lest they forget, they are the roll models for today's young girls. Why is marriage so yesterday. It shows children what commitment is. I guess I could go on and on but I believe I've made my point.<br /><br /><br /><br />God Bless us allgakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-6049855893098043612009-04-26T08:56:00.000-07:002009-09-16T08:59:52.102-07:00An open letter to NBC and Donald TrumpAn open letter to NBC and Donald Trump<br /><br />I have been watching this fiasco unfold about Carrie Prejean. I can not believe the retaliation that this poor girl is made to suffer. A judge that called her answer "polarizing". Pageant directors who tried to humiliate her with news (true or false) of a breast enhancement that she denies. Statements from those same pageant directors about her opportunism. All this because she gave an honest answer to a question from a judge with an agenda.<br /><br />What were the pageant officials thinking when they invited a militant homosexual with his own agenda to judge this disaster. Mario Lavendiera is a man on a mission. His biggest claim to fame is a website where he draws mustaches and cocaine on pictures of celebrities. This is a man who's command of the english language is so deep and so broad that the best insult he could come up with is to call her a f***ing b*tch. His assesment of poor Miley Cyrus is "sl*t" I'm less then impressed with who you chose to select the ultimate girl next door. That's what this competition is supposed to be about, the perfect girl next door who wants the American dream, home, family, career, isn't it.<br /><br />Your own pageant directors are quoted on MSNBC as saying she forgot her commitment to the people of California. Lets look at that one shall we. Its the people of California who voted to ban gay marriage by saying yes to proposition 8. Tell me exactly how she would be representing the people of California by denying her religious beliefs and speaking out in favor of the minority. Shanna Moakler and Keith Lewis should be released from their duties ASAP because they have an agenda to humiliate her and make her suffer because she wouldn't speak the party line.<br /><br />Moakler and Lewis state she has gone beyond her right to her opinion and shown her oportunistic agenda. It wasn't Prejean who started this whole thing, it was the Miss USA pageant officials and its owners for not thinking that a man like Lavendiera with a very known and public agenda wouldn't use time on national television to his own advantage and for that agenda. He openly said he took points from her not because she was inarticulate, but because she gave the wrong answer.<br /><br />In the 40's when someone wouldn't speak the party line we called it the holocaust. In the 80 when it was the few telling the majority how live, we called it apartied. What do you want to call this? I call it discusting. Perhaps its time to fold the pageants. Since the owners and directors of the Miss USA pageant and its source (state) pageants have blurred the lines between current events and political activism, maybe we should be rethinking what we want from our young girls. Mr Trump, would you have wanted Ivanka to forsake the values you taught her for some silly prize? Why let your staff punish Prejean for not giving up on hers? And for the record I did support the concept of gay civil unions. I'm rethinking that nowgakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-57484077561871564792009-04-23T11:11:00.000-07:002009-04-23T11:17:41.723-07:00Political correctness and beauty pageantsI guess its time for another rant. This time its Carrie Prejean.<br />What was The Donald thinking when he ok'd Perez Hilton as a judge for his Miss USA pagent? Hilton is a militant homosexual on a mission and to think he wouldn't use this platform for his agenda is silly. This is a guy who is famous for calling celebrities names and making life hell for them as well. His claim to fame is photoshopping photo's with imaginary cocaine and mustaches. I am told that after the show, in an interview, he called her answer polarizing. What kind of an answer did he expect to get from a polarizing question? <br /><br />An AP story on CNN.com or MSNBC.com quotes him as saying she is supposed to represent ALL Americans. First off, how is she supposed to represent me? I'm a 51 year old married male. I've been married for 21 years. I lost interest in beauty pagents years ago. What she is supposed to represent is the perfect girl next door. She is supposed to be the good girl who studies and wants the American dream (husband, family, home etc). Exactly what does Mario know about women other then he wants to be one and wants everyone to accept him as one? He is not and even if he has a sex change, he still has that nasty Y chromasome. Sorry big guy. This is a man who rode Lance Bass and Reichen Lemkuhl so much that they finally broke up. His public comment after the break up was that now Reichen couldn't ride Lance's coattails. Um, I'm guessing that Paris Hilton must be thrilled that Mario is trying to ride hers. <br /><br />The problem I have with the whole gay acceptance thing is not the lifestyle. Its that they want to legislate religion. The term marriage is a religious one. The gay community wants a law saying that a union between 2 homosexual partners should be called a marriage. The concept of a union between 2 same-sex partners bothers me because it goes against religous law, laws of nature and laws of science. In England, they have that law but to make it work, they don't call it a marriage, they call it a civil union and I'm ok with that.<br /><br />Now I'm reading that Keith Lewis, co-director of the Miss California competition told FOXNews.com that he was "saddened" by Prejean's statement. Hey Donald, I'm thinking that Keith and Shanna Moakler should be looking for other work right now. Your folks who are openly stating that Prejean was wrong, (Lewis and Shanna Moakler) should be released from their duties. The idea that these 2 believe her answer was hurtful because she relied on her religious upbringing have no business working your competition. <br />A quote from the Fox article (<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517215,00.html">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517215,00.html</a>)<br />Charmaine Koonce, the mother of Miss New Mexico USA Bianca Matamoros-Koonce, argued back. "In the Bible it says marriage is between Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!"<br /><br />God bless mothers. Its time to get political correctness out of America.gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-4104838416684980252008-10-07T07:54:00.000-07:002008-10-07T08:52:34.210-07:00Palin, The Election and JusticeIt's time for another rant. I don't trust anybody on either side of the aisle on Capitol Hill, however the Republican choice for this years presidential contest is just crazy to me. In her acceptance speech at the RNC, Sarah Palin says she has her share of troubles like everybody else. This may be true, but "everybody else" isn't trying to convince the American public that they are the best VP choice going.<br /><br /><br /><br />I have never been accepting of the Hollywood stars that don't need a husband to have a baby. This is wrong. I understand that accidents happen, but in this day and age, the number should be very small. The idea we are sending a just-approaching-middle-age grandmother of an illigitimate kid to Washington just shuts me down. She wants the world to know that she is ready to look after our country when she can't even look after her kids properly. I'm sorry, but a mother in her situation put in place as the VP just sends the wrong message to the American public. Palin can't wait to tie Obama to this radical or that "terrorist" or whoever, but while she may not be a member of the Alaskan party her husband belonged to, sleeping with the enemy just doesn't send good messages either.<br /><br /><br /><br />Enough on Palin<br /><br /><br /><br />The bailout package that just recently passed is a big sore spot for me. I saw on the internet the other day, a picture of a man carrying a sign that read "pennies for the people, billions for the banks". I feel this is more truth then anybody on Capitol Hill will admit to. As for what caused the problems, this is where it really gets silly to me. Everytime something goes wrong the Republicans can find a way to blame Clinton. Somehow they look and don't see the deregulation that Regan started in 1980. Regan, GHW Bush, and their allies made life misserable for people like me. Every time a Republican cries tax cut, I'm spending more out of my pocket. It cost me $200 to put my kid in one semester of marching band in the 9th grade. I work with a woman who's teenage girl is a cheerleader. For her, that little treat cost her $600. I had $400 in savings 2 weeks ago. Its gone just paying the dentist and my kids tutor. Who do I turn to when my bills outlast the money that comes in for the month.<br /><br /><br /><br />The Repbulican crowd in this country talks about how Gorlick and her Democrat friends ran Fanny or Freddy and caused all this. BULLSHIT. It wasn't the Democrats who said give out liar's loans. It wasn't the democrats that made mortgage money available to instutions that had no expertise in mortgage lending. The idea that you have a segment of society earning 8 to 9 figures a year from this mess and another (far far larger) segment struggling with the day to day expences of living is just criminal.<br /><br />While Al Gore is a favorite to be made fun of, I believe he is correct about his call for civil disobedience. I'm not running out and starting a riot, but lets look at where we are today in this country as far as justice is concerned. Nifong got off with only a token day in jail for all the trouble he caused. We have the Durham PD rivialed by the Hillsborough County Sheriff''s Office (Baby Sabrina Aisenberg) for being able to manufacture evidence quickly. How many Crystal Mangums do we have to watch lie and profit before we start calling for justice. How many innocent men and women have to go to jail and be proven innocent 3,5,maybe even 20 years after the fact before we start investigating DA's. My brother is a lawyer. He is the first one to giggle when I talk about the DA's duty to the truth and not convictions. It was a nice dog and pony show to put Bernie Ebbers in jail and give him people to talk to like Kozlowski of TYCO or Skilling of ENRON. I believe there should have been more. Will there be an investigation into the WaMu's and other instutions that failed followed by prison for the people who ran our financial sector into the ground. I hope so but it will be at best, another dog and pony show.<br /><br />More latergakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-47905692072138190642007-04-01T15:20:00.000-07:002007-04-01T17:26:31.983-07:00"Left Wing / Right Wing" Wingnuts AllI've been reading the Duke related blogs for several months now and I am absolutely astonished at the "left wing / right wing" crap that I've been reading. The news media (print and televised) aren't a bunch of left wing shills. Quite frankly after watching BOR, gotta love it, thats Bill O'Reilly to folks like you and me, he has become such a raving lunatic cheerleader for the current president, that I want to throw up.<br /><br />Nobody seems to remember a word that we used "back in the day". The word is radical. It means to go overboard, go to extremes, go to the outer limits. The media isn't radical left, and I'm not sure its radical right. The media has become a source for making news, not reporting it. When your new article starts out that...The New York Times is reporting........ or The Washington Post is reporting.....or The LA Times has confirmed....etc, there is a problem in your news organization. Quite frankly, if I read that "TMZ has confirmed/is reporting..." whatever, I'm going to start going to the horses mouth directly, and not reading it 3rd hand from someone who told me they got it from, who got it from. I should thank men like Dr. William Anderson of lewrockwell.com or Dr. KC Johnson of Durham In Wonderland for helping me get back on track with my reading.<br /><br />What I'm seeing is not media biased toward this side or that, I'm seeing media that can make a big enough spectacle that it will sell. Based on what I'm reading in the NY Times or on CNN or where ever, the mass media takes whatever track will get you aroused enough to click on the story and trip their counters so they can sell ad space. This is not leftist, this is not rightist, its amoral fertilizer.<br /><br />I get so upset when people look at a group like the Dixie Chicks and say things like they represent the lowest 5% of the population that get their news in 5 minutes at the top of the hour. Why, because I don't agree with them, President Bush is a disaster in office. He has not been a friend to the working man. He has given Cheney's buddies at Haliburton and Assoc. 27 billion of our money in "no bid" contracts and now they are moving to the UAE. 6 or 7 million new people now qualify for overtime according to his new rules......11 million lost it and those 11 million are the ones at Wal Mart and K Mart and elsewhere who didn't have it to loose to begin with. The press has been cheering him like dutiful little girls at a football game. Fox is the worst. The name callers are the ones calling "leftist" or "leftist agenda's" or whatever.<br /><br />Nancy Grace is not leftist. She is a wingnut who will walk past evidence to sell her show. She is on a crusade to make cash and to hell with anybody who gets in her way. Anybody includes the mother of that missing boy she prosecuted....I mean interviewed.<br /><br />Lest this be perceived as a rant against Nancy, BSNBC and FOX both had the round table discussions about Nancy like they were above any such thing.<br /><br />I truly am disturbed by the state of the media these days.gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-75183876670521847652007-03-29T18:31:00.000-07:002007-03-29T18:50:13.124-07:00Its Getting Old AlreadyDear Atorney General Cooper<br /><br />My guess is that you are trying to figure out how to get out of this without further damage to the democratic party. It ain't happening. What you need to do is end it quickly and let the healing begin. I probably wouldn't be writing this except the camel's back broke today reading the blogs. 7 of the best years of my life were spent in Charlotte and Salisbury. What broke the camel's back was a line I saw in the comments of a blog. "The Banana Republic of North Criminila."<br /><br />You have had in excess of 70 days to review 1850 pages of documents. Thats less then 27 pages a day and dropping as you prolong this nonsense. Given 2 hours for reading, and 6 for data sorting, I'm thinking that you should have had this figured out by now. I realize that this doesn't include Interview time and photo op time, but it all averages out.<br /><br />There is no way that you are going to get the public to take that spoonful of sugar to make this medicine go down. I've been a lifelong card carrying democrat for over 30 years and I assure you that under the current circumstances neither you nor Governor Easley would get my vote and I've always voted along party lines. I grew up believing that the democrats are the peoples party. History has told me I'm right. This is the exception to the rule.<br /><br />Enough is enough already. What more do we need to wait for. If you do have any evidence that the public isn't aware of, then share it with defense council and lets get this show on the road. If not, then let the 3 innocent men move on. My father had an expression. To phrase it politely, it states "Poop or get out of the bathroom". I believe it applies here.<br /><br /><br />Sincerelygakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-75747738226374929132007-03-17T10:19:00.000-07:002007-03-18T08:11:58.509-07:00Higher EducationI don’t really care what happens to Duke University, as I’ve never been a member of the faculty or staff nor an alumnus. I am sure the alumni care a great deal. This rant has less to do with Duke itself then with the bigger broader picture of what I see in their teaching staff. This is not limited to Dukes teaching staff as Peggy Reeves Sanday from Penn State and her, of late, biggest cheerleader, Dr. A.G. Rud from Perdue are guilty of the same thinking patterns as the 88 of Duke University.<br /><br />There seems to be a great deal of friction between those academics who support Dr. KC Johnson and those who support the 88. Dr. Johnson, in his Durham in Wonderland blog looks at facts as pretty much black and white. Sanday, Rud, and most if not all of the 88 see facts as, to quote Dr. Rud, “open for discussion.” Where this comes into play is that the 88, Rud, Sanday, and others still see the disaster in Durham as a good example of the race, culture, privilege war.<br /><br />Let’s look at the 88 and a quote from Dr. Baker. When asked if he or the rest of the 88 regretted the original ad now referred to as the listening ad, Dr Baker Responded<br /><br />“We had a long discussion about what the word ‘regret’ means, and philosophy professors weighed in and we had detailed discussions in terms of the epistemology of specific words,” says Baker. “If you talk to 80 different college professors, you’ll have 80 different opinions.”<br /><br />The very idea that the dictionary wouldn’t due for this, tells me not only that the above “open for discussion” concept, applies to everything in their lives, but that they are living in a 60’s hippie commune fantasy world where everything must be discussed. They are not willing to speak for themselves and hide behind the commune (group) walls they have created. The problem here is that most of the rest of the world sees facts as Dr. Johnson does. They see the word regret as the rest of us do. Had they had a consensus meeting and agreed that the definition of regret meant this or that, I doubt an apology statement would have been issued because nobody would have known what THEIR definition of regret meant. Perhaps worse, they might have issued one and been laughed at because of their obscure and philosophical definition.<br /><br />On the subject of Dr. Rud, I read his blog and all I can think is that this man is easily impressed with his own hot air. Here are two quotes on evidence and its status as open for discussion:<br /><br />“(using quotes I am)….. merely emphasizing that I see facts as conditional and open for discussion”<br /><br />“I also use quotes to indicate my concern that these so-called "facts" be arrogated by one particular viewpoint, with what appears to me to be its attendant literalism and epistemological imperialism.”<br /><br />And as best as I can translate with my Greek to English dictionary, he means this:<br /><br />I also use quotes to indicate my concern that these so-called “facts” are claimed only by one particular viewpoint, with what appears to me to be its associated rigid adherence to that viewpoint and explicit imposition of power based only on those facts and viewpoint.<br /><br />The first fallacy in his argument is that facts are open to discussion. They are not. They are however open to interpretation. There is a difference. For example, we find a dead body with a disfigured head and a bloody rock 3 feet from the body. Fact, the body is dead. Fact, the rock is bloody. Fact, the rock is in close proximity to the body. Discuss that! On the concept of interpretation, does the rock fit the disfigurement of the head? Is the blood type the same as that found on the dead body? Is the proximity of the rock to the body relevant to the fact that the body is dead? In short, was this a murder?<br /><br />Lets apply this to the scandal, shall we. First, what facts do we have? We have a party attended by some of the lacrosse team. We have a party where drinking was involved. We have a party with entertainment (strippers). We have an accusation of rape and finally we have the ever-popular racial epithets.<br /><br />If you listen to the 88 and company, they would have you believe that racially biased elitist men threw a party to get drunk and rape a stripper. Male bonding, as they like to call it. How do they come to this conclusion? They drag up a history of slave owners “having their way” with black slave women per Dr. Chafe. (Dr. Chafe, is this the explanation you would give to give to Heidi Klum’s kids?) They rely almost entirely on questionably anonymous quotes that in some cases are so carefully constructed that they sound more like a 50-year-old professor then a 20-year-old coed. They take individual facts and use them out of any context to support these ideas. The interpretation of the facts by the 88 and company would have you believe that this “girl who cried wolf” story is a fact that fits their cause. There in lies the crux of the feud. They see the story of an increasingly discredited storyteller as the backdrop for their cause. Then they claim the story as fact.<br /><br />The story as fact is another fallacy. In proper research, you find an incident that actually happened and use its facts. You don’t find a story and use it. Sure, the men hired strippers, sure the men drank, BUT WHERE IS THE RAPE? They may be able to claim a group think mentality or a mob mentality, based on facts, but if they look at their own actions they are just as guilty. They would have you believe that the party and the drinking is an example of white male privilege. Tell that to the students at the strike parties after a show on campus. Tell that to the African American frat where the last alleged rape occurred. They would have you believe that a racial epithet is racism. Not to sound childish, but Kim started it, the SOLE offender to this was just following suit. If I took a story to my psychology professor and said, “Here, this is an example of my claim.” he would have said that it exists only in my mind and maybe in the mind of the author.<br /><br />On the subject of racial epithets, the group claims racism. I don’t see it. First and foremost, the group keeps using the word epithets, the plural. The only proof of epithets is a single exchange between Kim Roberts and one of the players. Kim Roberts according to witnesses started the exchange. Far too many of the individuals who use them at a time like that are guilty of venting stupidity with their anger. As a youth, I was guilty of using the N word in anger. Not because I am racist, but because my vocabulary was insufficient to defend myself otherwise. I never actually heard the word till I was 10 years old or so. Instead of requiring a diversity course for all students, they might try an English class with a focus on vocabulary.<br />As this paper is into its 3rd page, it dawns on me that it could become a book. A book I would say, I have no time to write and others are more qualified to write. To sum up the above, the 88 have taken facts out of context and claimed them as support for a cause. They appear to manufacture facts as they need (I wonder any of them taught Nifong), and they refuse to see the other side as they want others to see theirs. This scares me out of my shoes. The idea that more then 10 percent of a college faculty think along these lines is bad enough, but to find it at one of the most prestigious schools in the U.S. should be criminal.gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-147608424011686452007-03-15T13:41:00.000-07:002007-03-15T13:42:33.496-07:00An Open Letter To Duke University President BrodheadDear President Brodhead:<br /><br />I am writing you in reference to the public disaster your school and surrounding community faced last year. I’m sure we both understand I am talking about what is now commonly known as the lacrosse rape scandal. Social or otherwise, I’m sure we both agree that this was a terrible disaster. <br /><br />I read the blogs and I read the newspapers but these are not the reasons I’m writing. I am writing because of what this outsider sees happening to your school. I am a married father of 2 looking at my first tuition bill in about 5 years. While I’m not sure I’ll be able to afford your institution, I’m equally not sure that I would encourage my children to go. The disaster your community experienced last year could have been better survived with great strength and leadership at several levels. Sadly, this was not to be seen. <br /><br />While you as an individual and president of the school cannot stop freedom of speech, you should have cautioned your faculty at all levels, both publicly and privately, that they are seen as representatives of your school. I do not mean just those individuals known now as the Group of 88, I am referring to the entire faculty. Those who openly support either side are going to upset somebody. This should have happened very early on. We, the national community have not seen strength or organization from Duke at the levels we should have. We did not see strength to stand up and protect those 3 individual students or the rest of the team while evidence was still being collected. <br /><br />What we the outside, national community have seen is tremendous infighting between students and teachers, and amongst the faculty. This infighting, this disorganization is doing very serious damage to your school’s image. For schools at your level, image is a very great deal as I’m sure I don’t have to remind you. Further, this lack of organization has cost you a coach and who knows what, that we haven’t heard about. <br /><br />I firmly believe that this situation is correctable. To correct it will take strength in the face of adversity. I believe several actions are long past due and still not too late to take. These actions will anger many I’m sure. The question I would pose is simply this: Does the current Duke administration have that strength? <br /><br />First, The longer Collin, Reade, and David are in the news, the longer Duke is known for a scandal. I believe you should exercise whatever resources you have to show Attorney General Cooper and Governor Easley your support for those men. This scandal is still going and needs to end. <br /><br />Second, the faculty, and I mean the entire faculty, must show unity in the face of this disaster. This unity will take a great negotiator. It will also show organization. It has been a year since this started. We, the national community, still haven’t seen organization from Duke. <br /><br />The publicity that the 88 professors are garnering needs to be handled through one source. Whether that source is one of the faculty directly such as Dr Lubiano or Dr. Chafe, or an outside agency, one source is needed. This will also show organization and take a great negotiator. It will also show the tolerance those 88 professors were looking for. <br /><br />Finally, and this is very telling to me, is the alumni. I am aware of Friends of Duke University, which was started by an alumnus. It should tell you something when the alumni are talking and it’s not in agreement with the loudest voices currently on the campus. There are no Friends of Duke University, no alumni, coming forward to say the group is correct. What do they know that the 88 don’t? Ask them.<br /><br />In conclusion, I’d like to thank you for the time you invested in reading this letter. I understand you receive many demands in your daily duties at Duke, most of them being time. I have pointed out only what I see as limits on the future of Duke and a long history of high educational standards. I pray that you, the university and the surrounding community affected by this, find peace.<br /><br /> Sincerelygakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-10140186203025758572007-03-15T10:30:00.000-07:002007-03-15T15:44:39.390-07:00What I learned from the Duke Rape Scandal (continued)The 88 loudest voices on campus are wing nuts. This is my own personal opinion. Back in my college days we learned, in various classes, how to make and support arguments. One of the first things I learned is that anonymous informants and anonymous quotations are very dangerous. To use one or two judiciously in your work might be justifiable, but to rely on only anonymous quotes and sources leads the reader to think that you made them up, or plagiarized your research or other negative responses from the reader. To that end, let’s look at the “Group”.<br /><br />The “Listening ad” is the first and most egregious example of this. I will not debate the intent of the words written by Dr. Lubiano and any others who wrote it. I will however address the line in that ad that states as follows: “These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to the young woman and to themselves”. If you are shouting about unjust treatment, even using the most poetic and creative literary meaning of the word shout, I suspect anonymity is not your primary goal. The professors would have helped their cause(s) more if they could quote somebody and attribute that quote to a name and or a face. There are at least two quotes used by Dr. Chaffe in 2 separate articles that have eerily similar content and structure, but different specific meanings. This leads me to believe that Chaffe, Lubiano, and the group of 88 are, much like the Durham PD, manufacturing evidence. Go figure. There are quotes that are so carefully structured and phrased, that they sound more like a 50 year old college professor and not a 20 year old college coed. I will post some of the quotes in the next few days.gakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-22554285768812113262007-03-14T04:47:00.000-07:002007-03-15T12:26:03.429-07:00My Letter Writing CampaignBelow you will find letters I've sent to the NAACP, Governor Michael Easley, and others. Use these as a sort of template if you wish, to write your own.<br /><br /><br /><br />NAACP National Headquarters<br />4805 Mt. Hope Drive<br />Baltimore, Md. 21215<br /><br />March 12, 2007<br /><br />Re: Duke Lacrosse legal matter in Durham<br /><br />Dear Sirs:<br />I am writing this letter to voice my concern and dismay at the N.C. chapter of the NAACP. I am sure you are thinking “why not write them directly?” I wanted the national office to understand just what the N.C. chapter is doing to the credibility of your entire organization. Because of the magnitude of the case, every chapter in every state is going to end up paying for the sins of the N.C. chapter and its case monitor, one Irving Joyner. We have seen time and again that the NAACP calls upon ALL citizens to help fight and show light upon a blatant and corrupt prosecution of some obviously innocent African American individual. Now, I submit, it is time to be evenhanded in this pursuit.<br /><br />Mr. Joyner has gone on record on numerous occasions in support of District Attorney Michael B. Nifong. Even as the case has unraveled and it has become clear that an entire community rallied around a woman who used a lie to stay out of mandatory detox, and a District Attorney who used this same lie to sway minority votes in an election, Mr. Joyner has steadfastly supported Mr. Nifong and this hoax. A man I might add, in his defense to the state bar, has said if a defendant can afford the best lawyers to read reports fine, if not then oh well. Can you truly support this man in good conscience? We obviously know that the majority of African American residents of Durham and elsewhere are not in financial shape to afford the best legal defense. Sadly, the next time you call upon ALL citizens of our local and national communities to support your next case of injustice, there are many who are going to remember the Duke case and how you persisted in your cries of "Wolf" instead of insisting upon scrupulous fairness for all citizens. Further, how is this going to help the next poor innocent soul whom you choose to support? People will remember this case. It will destroy your credibility. Is this really what you want? More importantly, is this what men like Dr. Martin Luther King fought so hard for? I think not. He demanded true justice for all citizens, not justice based on our personal likes or dislikes.<br /><br />This is a very sad commentary on a man that so many claim to respect and a very sad commentary on a man whose ideas many pledge to build upon. The only conclusion I can come to after examining the whole situation is simply that Mr. Joyner and the N.C. chapter officers caved in, reflexively, to local pressure. I would hate to see more Alan Gells come before the justice system anywhere knowing how your support is, at face value, different based on skin color.<br /><br />Please, I would respectfully ask, Demand of the State of North Carolina that this injustice end now.<br />Sincerely<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Governor Michael Easley<br />Office of the Governor<br />20301 Mail Service Center<br />Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-0301<br /><br />March 13, 2007<br /><br />Re: Duke lacrosse legal matter<br /><br />Dear Governor Easley<br /><br />I am writing as a former resident of North Carolina and a concerned citizen for justice. I am sure you are aware of the situation in Durham. Three young men are charged with crimes by the state that not only did they not commit, but that never happened. All evidence made public to date shows this to the conclusion of any reasonable individual.<br /><br />I understand that you have many factors to consider. Among these factors are the residents of Durham and how they will react when they find out that a district attorney running his first election campaign, mislead them for personal gain. It is my personal opinion that somebody in power should stand up and say enough is enough. As a lifelong registered democrat, I see it as an opportunity to show the citizens of Durham and beyond that Justice in North Carolina is not done in secret or done for the personal gains of the various officers of the court. I believe that if you or Attorney General Cooper were to make a public showing with a full investigation of the corruption, you would show democrat and republican alike that justice is justice and not politics.<br /><br />I would like to think that I am a reasonable man. One of the first things to cross my mind upon reading about the case and where it stands today is that any future vacations should avoid the state. I bring this up because in my home state of Florida we see tourism board ads for many states. I just happened to see a tourism ad when reading about the case. If I can make that association, I’m sure many, many others either can or already have. The potential for damage to the democratic party nationally, North Carolina as a state, and the political officials within that state is to my mind almost beyond comprehension. The discussions on the internet about the deep roots of corruption in Durham and beyond are truly very sad.<br /><br />In conclusion, I believe this is a great opportunity to show the rest of the nation that democrats are only human and more importantly, we as a party are willing to admit mistakes and clean them up. Even if my take on that opportunity is wrong, do 3 innocent young men need to be punished over a crime that never happened? Thank you for taking the time to hear my plea.<br /><br /><br />Sincerely<br /><br />Email to Dr Brodhead<br /><br /><br />Dear Dr. Brodhead<br /><br />I am writing to you because of the events of last spring. I’m sure you realize I’m talking about what is now referred to as the rape scandal. You have my deepest sympathies, not only for what the apparently false claims did to the school, but because you are being looked at under a microscope. Your every action is sadly being analyzed by everybody from highly qualified academics, to armchair quarterback pseudo-intellectuals. I’m sure this has made for some very short nights for yourself and your faculty and staff.<br /><br />My “agenda” in this letter is simply this. Duke needs to be out of the press. We, the outside world, see a lack of organization at your school. We see faculty vocal against students and faculty infighting. Please don’t take these words as an insult. They are not meant to be. I am stating only what I see here in Florida as evidenced by the civil suit and the news reports. I understand that you have healing to do and intricate problems to resolve, and appearances can be very deceiving. Every time Collin, Reade, and David are mentioned, Duke University and its lacrosse program follow. Then, along come statements about corrupt prosecution, the protests sponsored and or supported by the 88 vocal professors, and a litany of expressions and comments that are just not needed.<br /><br />The only way that Duke University is going to get the “rest” that it needs is to push for an end to a scandal that is still ongoing. As long as Collin, Reade and David are still charged with crimes, Duke is still associated with that scandal. To those ends, I would implore you to marshal your resources and take a more vocal and postured stance in support of the 3 students. Show Governor Easley and Attorney General Cooper your support for these men. Once the scandal is out of the news the healing can truly begin. Once the scandal is history, the press won’t have an interest and your university.<br /><br /><br />Sincerely and respectfully submittedgakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1231192159675370793.post-60031965695268820812007-03-13T13:00:00.000-07:002007-03-14T06:31:47.196-07:00The Duke Lacrosse Scandal and What It Taught Me<br /><br />I should preface this essay by telling you the reader that I got interested in the Duke case because of 2 similarities between Collin Finnerty and myself. First, Collin and I both come from the same hometown, Garden City N.Y. Second, we both chose to go to school in North Carolina. I did not attend Duke. I went farther south to a little town named Salisbury, which sits about 30 minutes north of Charlotte on I85. I moved out of town 2 days after graduation only to return three times in the 30 years I’ve been gone. I am not scholarly save to say I have some college under my belt and that I read and further my interests in watch repair, music, science fiction, and amateur radio (I hold a technician licence with code).<br /><br />Where to start….who knows. I remembered hearing about the case and the charges and then let it go. Then one day I tried to lookup the case on the net to see if a resolution was to be found. That’s when I was hit with several (excellent) blogs and the realization that the case wasn’t even close to over. So I did what any cybergeek does at a time like this….I read. What I read was just about as bizarre as the success of William Hung as a singer. I’m still reading the archive sections of some of the blogs and commentary. At this point I should state that the major blogs I read on this are Durham In Wonderland, Liestoppers, John in North Carolina, and the Johnsville News. Add to that the excellent work of Dr William Anderson at Lewrockwell.com. On to what these 5 sources and others have taught me.<br /><br />In reading these blogs, the single biggest thing I’ve learned is how the main stream media is no longer a source for news. After seeing K.C. Johnson pick apart this news story or that academic’s essay, I’ve learned to read the heartstring tugs or the inflammatory phrases more clearly. On the subject of the mass media, I’ve been looking on the net for any news video about the case. I believe that the major news outlets are about to self destruct. CNN is going after Fox. MSNBC is going after CNN, and Fox is willing to take on anybody who gets in the way. Just my personal opinion. The media, no matter which side they are on, seems to discount this evidence or vilify whomever they see fit. So now I read my news on the net from less known sources like slate.com or similar sites.<br /><br />What else I’ve learned. I have 2 boys ages 10 and 12. I would hope that down the road I will be able to either see them through college or at least help them part of the way. To that extent I am absolutely amazed, no, make that shocked, at the number of academics who are trying to build a case for their cause on the foundations of the “Duke rape case”. If you are not familiar with that case, its now referred to as the Duke rape scandal or the Duke rape hoax. In short, the accuser lied to stay out of detox as I understand it.<br /><br />I read Peggy Reeves Sanday’s article wherein she tries to put the case into perspective by sidestepping the 2 points that are the perspective of this case. She won’t address if the rape actually happened and she won’t address District Attorney Michael Nifong’s role in the case. This shows me she is trying to build a case for her gang rape mentality, on which she is supposed to be an expert, on a story that is as much fiction as Harry Potter. If her research were as thorough as this, I wouldn’t want my children learning from her. In college, I was expected to show facts in my psychology classes to support my assertion that something exists or not. If I took a story to my professor and said this supports my assertion that such and such exists, he or she would have responded that it does only in my mind and the mind of the writer. The gang of 88 did this when they rushed to judge the lacrosse students as guilty because of race, class, and privilege. Now we have numerous professors at Duke who are trying to show racism or sexism from the fictitious facts surrounding this “case”. This truly frightens me. I was relieved to know that the group of 88 are only 88 of over 750 teachers.<br /><br />What else I’ve learned. The writings I’ve read talk about race/gender trumps class/whatever…..what is true most of all is opinion trumps fact for far too many people with the power to affect you and your family. If you are young and in college, these folks are especially worrisome. If you are like me with a family as I stated above, these folks will teach our kids.<br /><br />Opinion trumps fact. Irving Joyner is the case monitor for the NAACP in North Carolina. In reading his statements and bringing them to a criminal lawyer I know, Joyner is commenting on what he would like to see, not what is. I wrote to the NAACP about him and their official stance on the case. I would hate to have Joyner defending me based on his opinions.<br /><br />There are other things I’ve picked up on during my time reading about this case. While I knew that corruption existed and people in positions of power used that power for personal gain, I never thought that the corruption could run as deep as it does in Durham. The appearance alone is chilling.<br /><br />Perhaps I will continue this thought later, for now its time to gogakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08800375939733250154noreply@blogger.com1