Middle East Uprisings and the Media

Enthralled with the wave of successful protests sweeping across north Africa and the middle east, I've been following as much as I can via daily visits to BBC with their continuously updating live feeds. Western media may be "losing the propaganda information war" as Hillary so boldly put it recently, but compared to the state of American media today, the Beeb is providing exceptional real-time world news coverage that would make McLuhan proud.

They've created thorough in-depth backgrounders on all the players in the region, both good and bad, going the extra mile with demographics and stability/corruption indices for each country presented in one of the many clickable maps on the subject.


But take a closer look at that map. What do you see? Or rather, what don't you see? It seems there is a sizable country comprised of a contented people brimming with peace, love, and tranquility caught right betwixt a hostile Syria and Iran. In the Middle East? Gee, what country could that be? Well, according to the Beeb, it's none other than that latest triumph of the west, Iraq.

Except it's not. You may not find alot of coverage in our western media concerning daily protests throughout Iraq, including the BBC. But it's boiling over just like its neighbors. And its government's tortuous repression tactics make the first days of Mubarik's ouster seem divine in comparison. I wonder, why aren't the aspirations of the Iraqi people being given the same respect by global leaders and their mouthpieces as say the people of Morocco? Do you even need an answer to that question?

On to Libya. Libyans were in full rebel mode a full week before the US had anything of substance to say about it. And our first official words were "we're waiting for other countries to say how they feel first, then we'll say something." I believe a more descriptive term for the administration's reaction would be impotence, and don't think for one minute this won't be thrown back at Obama come next summer. Who remembers GWBush's dogwhistle "we don't need no UN permission slip" targeting Clinton's dismal record of empire underachievement during his administration? Round and round we go.

But speaking of impotence, how about those British special forces, huh? British SAS captured by teenage malcontents! So much FAIL in that little episode. Who would have thought they're just a bunch of halfassed students of Klaatu? So, they set down in a strange land, disembark and promptly state, "take me to your leader?" It may look like failure to the average layperson, and of course it does, but come on, they accomplished their goal of establishing contact with rebel forces didn't they? Maybe they planned perceptions of failure into the mission to throw a wrench in Gaddafi's propaganda machine.

Tonight I was looking around to find out more information about the uprisings in Iraq and stumbled across this little gem. I have no idea who the author is, but I must say even if it's a complete work of fiction despite all the sources provided, it's an exceptionally captivating writeup. And well worth the eyestrain to read it all the way through.

What do you think?

Genuine Pound Cake for 1

My grandmother's satisfying and simple life can probably best be represented by the simplicity of her delicious Pound Cake. Pound cake = 1 pound of each of its 4 basic ingredients (flour, eggs, sugar, butter). Each ingredient is blended BY HAND in the proper order, and the total mixture beaten 100 strokes by hand before pouring it into the cake pan.

I've always remembered this recipe in part because it's called Pound cake (duh!), and in part because grandma let me lick the generously thick glops of batter left in the crevices at the bottom of the bowl and not quite dripping from the spoon once she put the cake pan into the oven. But I could never remember how long to cook it, and at what temperature. So a while back I went online to find comparable recipes to see the particulars like whether the oven should be preheated, etc.

One site that's obviously proud of its old-fashioned southern cooking had user-submitted pound cake recipes listing up to 15 different ingredients varying in complexity and stylish uniqueness. I couldn't help but chuckle to see these sorts of recipes submitted by users like "Margaret in PA" or "Nancy in Michigan." Well that explains it. Those liberal yanks never could leave well enough alone and always, ALWAYS make things so much more complicated than they should be. When you start adding 2 tablespoons of this and a quarter cup of that, well you're not making POUND CAKE anymore, are you? So stop trying to hijack perfection.

You want real honest to goodness genuine pound cake the way God invented it?
Here we go, in order:

1 lb butter (4 sticks)
1 lb sugar (4 cups)
1 lb eggs (10)
1 lb regular flour (4 cups)

Soften butter by either leaving it on the counter for a couple hours, or cutting it into square chunks and microwaving it for 30 secs (another 30 seconds if necessary, then another 30 secs if necessary, but don't cook it!).

Add the sugar and mix until smooth and creamy.

Add 1 egg and mix til the egg is well blended with the batter.
Add next egg and mix.
One at a time until all 10 eggs are added.

Add flour, a cup at a time, and mix about 20 strokes by hand. Then add another cup of flour and mix, and on like this til all the flour is added.

Now, beat the mixture by hand for 100 strokes. Pour into ungreased cake pan and place on center rack in a COLD oven.

Turn oven to 325 and bake +/- 1 hour and 15 minutes. Check doneness with a toothpick then let cool for about 5-10 minutes before removing from pan.

Then dig in if you're so inclined.

Since this post is intended to show you how to make a genuine old fashioned pound cake suitable for just 1 person on the fly (treat yourself!), it should be as easy as pie for even the most dense wannabe cooks to figure out how to make a "quarter pound cake."

Oh, and don't lick the bowl unless you know first hand exactly where your eggs came from.

Obamascare and other observations

This Ezra Klein commentary at the Washington Post blog site, It's Democracy, Not Health Care Reform, That's Sick, opens the door for me to respond to a number of issues emanating from the current shitstorm.

First, who are these protesters that allegedly sprang forth from a well-organized GOP weilding great power and influence over the grassroots, subsequently being branded racists by most media mouthpieces, and compared to Hitler's brownshirts by others of the same media?

I'm going out on a limb and assert that they're comprised of everyday Americans who have reached a tipping point as we sat idly by over the last year and watched our government take our money via taxes and inflation to "reward" failure on a massive scale through bailouts and handouts directed toward people and organizations who made ridiculously bad decisions, and in the process, essentially punishing those of us who played it safe, worked hard for what we have and lived within our means.

Before that, we were subjected to a government that, while under the control of our self-proclaimed "small government" representatives, rapidly metastasized into a more monstrous behemoth with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, expansion of Medicare, No Child Left Behind and other programs extending the government's tentacles ever further into our personal lives.

On this foundation of public sentiment, following the wonderful successes of NCLB and the glorious TSA, the government next wants to "fix" the country's healthcare situation, an enormous undertaking by any measure. I don't think so.

Next, when reading the Klein piece linked above, one underlying thought kept surfacing: all these people who are now expending any energy criticizing the current protests WISH they'd had the balls to disrupt town hall meetings 6-7 years ago when the evil Bush forced his wars, torture, and domestic spying programs on us. Some of this was supposed to have been ameliorated with the recent election, but alas... We might not be at this volatile point in our democracy had the people stopped the government's numerous and blatantly unconstitutional expansions then.

Putting the death panels and abortion mandates from the Party of Death aside for a moment, and intentionally ignoring the Schiavo case, let's look at one common phrase hurled at those opposing healthcare reform: "you'll just let all these people die who can't afford care?" This type of rhetoric strangely and inadvertently reveals the blemishes in the classic "evolution vs creationism" debate. Do you ever find it ironic that the liberals, or evolutionists, have spent their lives authorizing government to fight evolutionary processes, while the conservatives, or creationists, are fighting with everything they have for the freedom to let evolution play out as it may, when it comes to personal health and safety? I think history will bear out that the evolutionists will ultimately lose, or recalling a common phrase first heard as a child, you can't fight mother nature.

I mean think about it. The liberals are working so hard to erect safety nets around everything we do, sanitizing our environment of all the potentially harmful elements it contains, protecting everything, from our fragile egos to our porous skin and brittle bones. How in the world did we as humans ever survive all the harshness nature and our own fellow man threw at us, and in such massive quantities as we did, before our self-designated saviors came along? From all the rhetoric, you'd think we didn't even exist then, and won't be able to survive and flourish without them now. Used to, they'd put people suffering from such delusions of grandeur in the mental ward. Now they elect them to national office.

--

Iranian Revolution of 2009

"I will participate in the demonstrations tomorrow. Maybe they will turn violent. Maybe I will be one of the people who is going to get killed. I'm listening to all my favorite music. I even want to dance to a few songs. I always wanted to have very narrow eyebrows. Yes, maybe I will go to the salon before I go tomorrow! There are a few great movie scenes that I also have to see. I should drop by the library, too. It's worth to read the poems of Forough and Shamloo again. All family pictures have to be reviewed, too. I have to call my friends as well to say goodbye. All I have are two bookshelves which I told my family who should receive them. I'm two units away from getting my bachelors degree but who cares about that. My mind is very chaotic. I wrote these random sentences for the next generation so they know we were not just emotional and under peer pressure. So they know that we did everything we could to create a better future for them. So they know that our ancestors surrendered to Arabs and Mongols but did not surrender to despotism. This note is dedicated to tomorrow's children..."

(extracted from an Iranian student's blog post June 18, 2009 (translated))

For several days I've been casually following the events of the post-election uprising in Iran. While the traditional news media have given some sporadic updates on the situation, nothing comes close to the eye-witness reports scattered far and wide across the internet via social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and hundreds of blogs direct from the ground level by the Iranians themselves.

One of the most concise locations where this information is being collated and shared is none other than the crass link sharing site fark.com. A community best known for its unabashedly crude sense of humor has generated some 36,000 serious posts directly related to the Iranian uprising, almost all of them in support of the Iranian Revolution. Iran discussion thread # XXVI on Fark.com is where I discovered the well-sourced quote you see above.

There is alot of noise in the mix, alot of disinformation surrounding these events for whatever reasons, but the gist of the matter is that the people of Iran are standing up to the current oppressive regime. They've had demonstrations daily since the election on June 12, with estimates of 1-2million people gathering in city squares throughout Iran to oppose the announced election results declaring Ahmadinejad the winner with 60% of the vote (despite Mousavi's lead in pre-election polls), and more broadly to oppose the regime itself. The allegedly defeated populist reformer candidate Mousavi (pictured at right) is the face of this new revolution, but the movement itself has become larger than him and his failed candidacy.

Today, the Supreme Leader Khamenei delivered a speech in which he declared the opposition protesters to be against Islam, which quite literally translates into a death sentence for anyone who continues to oppose the election and the regime. This is supposedly a huge development that could further ignite or suddenly deflate the reformer protestors.

I think one of the reasons so many Americans on the internet have tacitly or directly supported the opposition is because it's framed as a genuine fight for freedom and self-determination. What red blooded American wouldn't support a people's actions to throw off their oppressors when they've finally had enough brutality, corruption and lies from their dictatorship? It's been an awe-inspiring week watching it develop.

There are reports that the US planted the seeds of instability with our covert meddling in their internal affairs by funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into Iran the last couple of years through various US-sanctioned "democracy" organizations. Some people attribute this Iranian uprising exclusively to our alleged government involvement and consider the ongoing actions over there to be fake and not worthy of our supportive attention. Nonsense I say. For the uprising itself it matters not one bit who may or may not have planted the seeds for it. Of course from a constitutional perspective, our government has no right to use our tax money to spread democracy around the globe. But what is happening in Iran right now is both inspirational and historic: the Iranian people have taken actions into their own hands to determine the future of their country at very grave risk to their own lives and livelihoods.

Freedom is a powerful motivator, indeed. I write this in solidarity with the brave Iranian protesters.

--

Fried Green Tomatoes, Fried Squash, Fried Carrots

Anxious for my tomatoes to hurry up and ripen on the vine, I decided to pick a few of these firm plump green ones and fry them up for a snack.

After scouring the internet for some good fried green tomato recipes, I settled on a very simple flour dredge: 1/4 cup flour dumped onto an empty plate. Since I wasn't particularly in the mood for an extremely tart finished product, I mixed into the flour about 1/2 teaspoon of sugar. That's it. No salt, pepper, spices. Just flour with a smidge of sugar.

I also decided to make the most out of the prospect of making a mess in the kitchen and sliced up and parboiled some carrot stick quarters about 3" long, and cleaned up some squash and set them all aside to drain so I could experiment with all the various batter recipes I'd seen.

First I fried up six tomato slices about 1/4" thick in olive oil using the simple flour-sugar dredge, and let me tell you the sugar really does kill the tart aftertaste of fried green tomatoes. These were the best I've had in years.

For the remaining vegs, I used vegetable oil as it can get alot hotter without smoking. I wanted a really hot grease pan to keep the liquid batter from separating from the veggies so quickly.

I made up a tempura batter using buttermilk instead of water: 1 egg, 1/2 cup buttermilk, the rest of the flour from the tomato dredge and an additional 1/4 cup more, and two ice cubes to keep the batter cold.

I fried up half the carrots simply dipping them into this batter and dropping them into the oil one at a time. The batter did not stay on the carrots too well, but the carrots came out deliciously sweet and tender like I'd expected.

Next I fried up a handful of thinly sliced crookneck squash, by first sprinkling the slices with a dusting of corn starch then dipping them into the batter and dropping them into the hot oil. The corn starch, scant that it was, helped keep the batter on the veggie and also hardened into a tiny inner shell to give the veggies a crispier bite. This was pretty good, I can't say I've ever had crunchy fried squash before, but if that's what you're into, then definitely use a light corn starch dusting before you dip it into the batter.

For the next evolution, I mixed the corn starch residue into the batter, which was probably a little less than a teaspoon of corn starch. I fried up another handful of sliced squash by dipping them straight into this batter and into the oil one at a time. No pre-batter dredge of any kind. The batter stayed on the veggies much better this time, perhaps the corn starch helped stiffen it enough to stay on the flesh. These closely resembled the fried squash I grew up eating. Yum.

Next up, I sprinkled plain flour onto the squash before dipping into the batter. These came out very similar to the ones right before with just a tad thicker crust.

Finally I coated the remaining carrots with flour before dipping them into the batter and into the oil. OMG! THIS is the FRIED CARROT RECIPE of the CENTURY. The tomatoes and squash came out great, but of all the veggies you can fry, carrots are my absolute favorite. They always come out soft and so so sweet.

What a wonderful Sunday afternoon! By the time I was done, I'd eaten about half the outcome and was too full to even think about fixing supper.

Jesus Face on Peru Mountain

Stumbled across this image on google maps, which looks like a shadowy face carved into a sand dune in Peru, about 22km west of Arequipa:


View Larger Map

This same image appears on the aerial views at both Bing Maps and Mapquest (extreme zoom below):



After googling "Jesus Face in Peru," I managed to find two or three other references to this illusion, with no explanations for it:

http://www.geckoandfly.com/2006/10/03/strange-google-earth-objects/

http://www.gearthhacks.com/dlfile546/Optical-Illusion-(Jesus)-in-Peru.htm

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=49453

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/20/more-pareidolia/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/15/google_spots_jesus/


So. Does anyone have an explanation?

And now the angst of Tea Party Politics

The Rally
I attended the Macon (GA) Tea Party during lunch this past Wednesday. It was unclear who organized it, and which organization(s) were behind it, but being loosely billed as a tax protest I felt obligated to show my support.

It was already being labeled in the media as an astroturf campaign organized by billionaires to create the illusion of a grassroots movement against government spending and taxes. Since I participated in several past "tea party" actions during the Ron Paul presidential campaign, and was aware of CNBC's Rick Santelli's impromtu call for a protest against the bailouts and how motivating that was to the libertarian/liberty groups I occasionally frequent, I assumed the media branding was more propaganda than actual truth.

There were about 300 people present when I got there, and about half of them had all sorts of clever signs that mostly reflected an anti-tax, anti-government sentiment. Signs ran the gamut from "Don't Tread on Me" to "T(axed) E(nough) A(lready) Party" to "Don't Share My Wealth, Share My Work Ethic" to "Pass the Fair Tax." I walked around and through the crowd several times trying to read all of them while hoping to recognize friends I'd met through the Ron Paul campaign. I only encountered three or four that I knew, but it was pointed out to me several others who were also involved.

I read somewhere that the state libertarian party was behind at least some of these rallies, and was aware that Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty supporters were enthusiastic about them also, but still was not sure who/what was really behind this one. Local talk radio personality Chris Krok assumed credit for organizing the event, but one of the speakers tried to attribute the organization "Americans for Prosperity" as the event organizer, and instructed people to sign up with the volunteer making her way through the crowd. Since I consider the DC-based AFP to be more concerned with redirecting government resources toward big business rather than reducing the size of government and spending, this Tea Party's significance suddenly began to wane.

I started to realize that this grassroots effort was in the process of being hijacked by those whose agenda was not entirely in sync with the crowd's. This assessment became even more pronounced when the participating elected officials began to hoist "socialist/fascist Obama" above the crowd as the single unifying target toward which all our anger should be channeled.

Prior to handing the mic over to some of the elected officials, a few regular folks made speeches that were right on point. Their speeches were focused on genuine conservative issues that included shrinking the size of government, reducing both taxes and spending, restoring freedom and returning to the principles of our country's founders (but alas no mention whatsoever of the insidious inflation tax). However, these speakers had the gall to suggest that we hold our representatives accountable by voting them out of office when their votes violate these principles (ie. the bailouts), be they democrats or republicans. And the crowd seemed to receive these remarks with enthusiasm.

But as one elected official after another took the mic, the rally shifted from its original anti-tax tenor to the primal anti-Obama (and by extension anti-liberal) rage. I commented to a friend that the rally was starting to sound more like an attempt to reinvigorate the GOP than to address the issue of taxation. A stranger overheard me and turned around to say that's correct, that's what we're trying to do. I asked him what about the tax issue, and he said they talked about the Fair Tax a few minutes ago. I just rolled my eyes and sauntered on, trying to come up with a concise rebuttal that explains how horrible the Fair Tax is and how it's designed to keep the government as corrupt and well-fed as it is now, in case the opportunity comes up again in the next few minutes.

By this time I'm no more hopeful that we'll accomplish any significant reductions in the government's size, spending or modes of taxation than before the rally started. This event had truly been overtaken by establishment party members and their accomplices intent only on deflecting all accountability and protecting the status quo.

In retrospect, I wish I'd had the guts to ask for the mic for two seconds and thank everyone for being here and especially the speakers who remained on point, turn to the crowd and empower them with their first assignment as a participant of this tea party movement: charge them with the task to impose accountability on our representatives by firing every representative who voted for any of the bailouts, and rally them as an army who's got Congress in its sights. "We're coming after you, Congress! If you voted for TARP I, TARP II, The Stimulus, the Auto Bailouts, then you're fired! Accountability starts right here, right now!" Sigh.. the good stuff always happens in retrospect.


The Groups
So "Americans for Prosperity" has gotten its tentacles into the movement; how deeply or irreversibly remains to be seen. Browsing around the web to grasp the magnitude of the event nationwide, I ran across these tidbits that only convolute the whole thing into a heaping pile of mess.

1. The libertarians have held tax-day anti-tax rallies for years, before Ron Paul's latest presidential campaign, though they weren't called Tea Parties. The libertarians are rightfully feeling a little bitter over the lack of attribution for this event, with not even an utterance of the word "libertarian" in any of the national media coverage. Thankfully, one tv station included a few words from local libertarian icon David Corr castigating the GOP for taking over and explaining the anti-tax rally origins.

National media coverage: what a joke! ... more on that later.

2. Apparently the "T(axed) E(nough) A(lready) Party" slogan is the brainchild of the American Family Association, whose theocratic extremist agenda includes more government control over all aspects of our lives, and is one of the main reasons the GOP has fallen out of favor with the masses. Come to find out the AFA, in concert with globalist Newt Gingrich and his American Solutions organization, are one of the leading sponsors of this event, which jades the movement even more. And it saddens me that I saw at least 20-30 Taxed Enough Already signs at the rally.

3. FOX News heavily promoted this event, which should give us pause to consider whether the perceived intent of the participants far and wide is genuine, since FNC's one notable consistency is its commitment to run interference for any criticism of the GOP. However, I've come to the conclusion that alot of the criticism from the left over Fox's coverage of these rallies is actually rooted in jealousy.

Over the last decade, the left held numerous nationally-coordinated rallies designed to draw attention to everything from human rights violations of corporations to the largely ignored anti-war sentiment felt across the country. But they never had the aid of a national broadcast network to bring these events into people's living rooms like they'd hoped would occur. So the mere fact that Fox promoted, and then spent ample time covering, these rallies makes them just a little upset. I think the word for that is butthurt, lol.

The Solution
My solution to preventing Newt, et al from being successful in their attempts to ride our angst back into power is to faithfully adhere to the accountability pledge, with only one condition placed on the leading challengers: no former congressmen allowed. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Newt.

"I vow to support the leading challenger of every congressman and senator who voted "yes" on any of the bailouts, regardless of his/her party affiliation, and will continue to do so until the last one of the big spenders has been FIRED."

How about you?

--

Tea Party politics

I went to the local tea party on April 15th and came away with mixed feelings that I'll share later. What I want to share today is a very inspiring clip from a tea party in South Carolina. The speaker is GOP representative Gresham Barrett, who supported both the $700 billion TARP bailout and the current Obama stimulus package. He's come to be known to his own as Bailout Barrett.

The crowd relentlessly rejects him throughout his speech, and watching this renews my hope that we the people will indeed rise to the occasion and start tossing these faux conservatives out on their butts.


I would like nothing better than to see the tea party movement immediately adopt an interim agenda to hold the big spenders in Congress accountable regardless of their party affiliation, by uniting the people to remove them from office. Anyone who voted for any of the bailouts MUST BE FIRED in the next election, and that means uniting behind the leading challenger in order to be successful in finally throwing the bums out.

So here and now, I'll take the accountability pledge, as a grassroots participant in the tea party movement:

"I vow to support the leading challenger of every congressman and senator who voted "yes" on any of the bailouts, regardless of his/her party affiliation, and will continue to do so until the last one of the big spenders has been FIRED."

Hopefully this sort of action will diminish the clutches of neocons and party insiders on the movement and restore the integrity of the voters' intent. In addition to actually holding our representatives accountable for once by the only means available to us.

Pass it on.

--

Count Your Change!

You could say I'm fortunate to have eight or ten convenience stores within a two mile radius, because it provides ample choice in walking distance when one of them screws you over and rips you off, as was the case today. I walk alot, almost daily, and usually stop in one of these nearby convenience stores for a drink, newspaper, pack of smokes, loaf of bread, lottery ticket or whatever else comes to mind as I approach.

Today I stopped in this unbranded mom&pop store and made two purchases: a lotto ticket at one window, and a bottle of cheap pineapple soda at the second window. I've stopped in this store many times, hundreds at least, and almost always purchase this same drink when they have it in stock. So I know how much it costs: $.89+ $.03 tax = $.92 total. I also know the staff at least by sight, and the clerk behind the second window was someone I'd never seen before. I put the drink on the counter for the clerk to see it, and as he clicked a few buttons on the register I slid a dollar bill into the recessed passthrough under the glass. Without a word, he takes it, places it in the register, and proceeds to place a nickel in the trough as my change. I looked him in the eye curiously waiting for some sign in his face that would help explain the single coin in change he's giving back to me. He didn't return my gaze, instead he looked past me to the next customer, indicating to me that we were done with our transaction. I took the nickel and the drink and walked out the door kind of slowly trying to figure out what was going on. Several things ran through my mind: maybe the price went up a few cents and I didn't see the new price on the cooler door; maybe his drawer didn't have any pennies. The further I walked from the store property, the more convinced I was that this sonuvabitch just ripped me off. I was about a block away when my confusion congealed into anger, and I spun around and walked purposefully back to the store.

I swung open the door and stepped into the small crowd of customers that had accumulated since my previous exit and waited in line. The clerk now working this window was a member of the family who owned the store, while the first clerk was standing between the two service windows hidden from direct view. The customer in front of me was joking with the clerk about his purchase cost including or not including tax, and the clerk tried to hand him his change through the window, all 2 pennies of it. The guy told him to keep it, stepped aside and glanced at me to signal he was done. I told the customer that the clerk is about to give those pennies to me and plopped my bottle of soda on the counter, forthrightly asking him how much it costs. As I expected, it was $.89+ $.03 tax = $.92. Upon his answer I said, "you owe me three cents."

He looked at me a second, hesitating, while I continued, "I gave the other guy a dollar and he only gave me back a nickel so you owe me three pennies." The sternness in my voice let him and everyone around me know I was pissed off for having just been ripped off so brazenly. The familiar clerk punched some buttons on the register, mumbled something to the new clerk in their native language, and kindly handed me the three cents. I slung open the door with a demeanor further signaling my anger and resumed my regular walking path with a briskness that would put me back home in half the time. I was pissed, and thankful I was already walking so that some of this tension would more healthily dissipate via the enhanced physical exertion.

Fastfoward about three hours. My drains are gurgling as if they're about to seriously clog so I grab my keys, wallet and two fives off the table and run up to the nearest Kroger to get some drain cleaner. I had intended to get some earlier but kept forgetting about it. On the way I try to remember what else I might need while I'm there, and realize I'm constrained to $10 because that's all I grabbed off the table. Maybe I'll have enough money for a bottle of clorox also, so I can resume the laundry that's been piling up for a while.

Always preferring the self-checkout, I quickly ran my items through the process and punched through to pay in a hurry. The total order came to $9.03. After inserting the two fives, the machine dutifully spits out a healthy quantity of coins, but as per usual, not quite enough. I scooped up the coins with my left hand extended, and my body turned so that I'm completely open to the attendant's view. I scattered them out in my hand to count them: I see three quarters, a dime, two pennies. What's that, 87cents? Goddammit. Hand still extended I call out to the attendant, "sir, sir... the machine gave me 87 cents, my change is supposed to be 97 cents. It's short a dime." He turned to his register almost as if this is a normal routine for him, pulls up my transaction on his screen to confirm the amount of change I'm due, and grabs a dime from his drawer to hand to me.

I wish I could say this is the reason I normally never shop at this Kroger, but this same shit happens with startling regularity at the other Kroger I use. In fact it's been happening for at least 4-5 years, since they put these self-checkout machines in. In my experience, these machines almost NEVER spit out the correct coin change. You have to wonder how much money these stores amass this way. Afterall, machines only do what they're programmed to do. Hell, soda machines have been stealing your money for decades.

The lesson for you is to ALWAYS COUNT YOUR CHANGE. ALWAYS. Whether it's the beady-eyed slimeball working at the convenience store, or the latest in automated self-service technology, assume you're being screwed. That's the only way you will stop it.

Obama's press conference

I only caught the last few questions of Obama's press conference last night, and am looking for a video clip or two online that would compliment my thoughts. In the meantime, here's what I saw.

A question was asked about the progress of Obama's overall agenda, and he responded that all his time has been focused on the financial crisis. Where's that all-powerful multitasking Obama we saw during the campaign?

Another question was asked about moral considerations regarding stem cell research. Obama fell back on scientific consensus concerning the need to lift the ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, but he confessed to serious contemplation on almost a daily basis over this issue (There's our multitasker!). When the reporter asked if the scientific community was capable of exercising its own moral judgement, Obama immediately answered NO!

Well he didn't call them atheistic heathens, but made it perfectly clear he believes the government is and shall be the moral arbiter on all things related to the "life sciences" field. Oh brother, here we go with legislating morality again.

In response to another question, he said homelessness was bad, was especially bad for children and families, and more especially bad for veterans (most of whom are without child or family).

Someone needs to ask him, being a constitutional scholar, how he feels about the possibility of being profiled as a potential domestic terrorist now that "knowledge of the constitution" has been deemed bad for the safety of our country.

--

Amero trial balloon

Researching some stock news the other day, I stumbled onto this article questioning the fate of our own currency, with the subtle suggestion that a unified North American Currency is in our future.

Canadian economist Herbert Grubel first introduced a potential manifestation of this concept in 1999. The North American Currency -- called the "Amero" in select circles -- would effectively comingle the Canadian dollar, U.S. dollar and Mexican peso.

On its face, while difficult to imagine, it makes intuitive sense. The ability to combine Canadian natural resources, American ingenuity and cheap Mexican labor would allow North America to compete better on a global stage.

A smooth market recovery, one based on actual market values placed on assets and obligations, rather than artificial values papered over with government bailouts, would likely help us avert such currency evolution. However...

If forward policy attempts to induce more debt rather than allowing savings and obligations to align, we must respect the potential for a system shock. We may need to let a two-tier currency gain traction if the dollar meaningfully debases from current levels.

If this dynamic plays out -- and I've got no insight that it will -- the global balance of powers would fragment into four primary regions: North America, Europe, Asia and the Middle East. In such a scenario, ramifications would manifest through social unrest and geopolitical conflict.

The conspiracy theorists among us insist this was the plan all along: to bankrupt the country with the most reckless fiscal & monetary policy imaginable, and force an evolution worlds beyond, and outside of, the limits of our Constitution. Though the Constitution has long been dead and trod on for decades, the blurry illusion that it holds some relevance to our way of life persists. The social unrest the author predicts would be our society convulsing at the final purges of it from our public consciousness.

Consider for a moment what our country would be like without a Constitution. A modest comparison for this purpose would be to consider what life would be like without your bible.

Welcome to the wilderness.

--

The Brunswick Stew Code

1. All meat in Brunswick Stew is GROUND. No pulled, diced, cubed, chunked, shredded or otherwise mangled meat is in genuine Brunswick Stew. Whatever meats your recipe calls for, they MUST BE GROUND UP to achieve the consistency of authentic Brunswick Stew. If you don't like ground meats in your stew, then you won't like authentic Brunswick Stew. Go make a pot roast instead.

2. Attention all you Yankees out there: THERE ARE NO POTATOES in authentic Brunswick Stew. You might find recipes calling for corn and tomatoes and okra and even peas, but you will NEVER find a recipe for genuine Brunswick Stew that contains POTATOES. Got it?

As a lifetime southerner raised on authentic Brunswick Stew, I declare this the Official Brunswick Stew Code. If you're eating stew with chunks or strands of meat, or with any kind of potatoes in it, it ain't Brunswick Stew.

Hair On Fire Roundup

Madoff: Warnings were ignored
This WaPo article says that the SEC had received several credible warnings over the years about the Madoff business being a ponzi scheme, and the SEC is beside itself trying to defend its multiple failures to detect and act on the fraud.

Who can read that and not remember all the warnings our government received over the years about 9/11 but failed to act?

As with 9/11, and Enron, and Katrina, and the meltdowns in Iraq, they didn't see this Madoff crisis coming, despite all the hair-on-fire warnings over the years. Even though the government's main priority: tax revenues will take a tremendous beating as a result, they still dropped the ball. Forget about us, they can't even protect their own interests. How's that for a laugh? God forbid these incompetents assume control over the auto industry and healthcare too.

Here's another couple genuine hair on fire warnings that nobody is taking seriously:

David Walker: this country's bankrupt.

Celent Report: On the Road to Weimar Republic inflation.

...there has been an entirely unprecedented increase in the money supply. By the week of 3 December 2008, the money supply was a staggering $630 billion, or 74% higher than it was during the week of 3 September 2008. An increase of this size in the past took on the order of a decade.

Such an increase in the monetary base should be cause for alarm, and would normally be seen as an indicator of a pending bought of hyperinflation. [...]

...one might be excused for thinking that the frequent comparisons with the Great Depression of 1929 are not the most apt. Perhaps the economic crisis in the Weimar Republic some seven years earlier could provide a better comparison.

Who out there actually believes that we can spend our way out of any problem?

--
Bush Approval Rating at an All-Time High
At least, according to this UPI headline: Survey: Bush disapproval at new low. The article itself reports Bush's overall approval rating at 24%, and his "positive legacy" rating at an astonishing 11%. LOL

--
Where's the turning point?
Negative public sentiment regarding local law enforcement seems to be growing, no thanks in part to incidents like this, where an innocent 12-year-old girl was beaten in her own front yard by 3 unidentified police officers alleging she was a prostitute even though she didn't match the description they were given, then was belatedly arrested for assault when she tried to fight off her assailants. Not to mention all the no-knock raids on the wrong houses that we read about regularly, and the general thuggish behavior routinely exhibited by police. (Sidenote: Here is an excellent resource to see just how bad the problem has become.)

Mistakes can and do happen, and the appropriate response in a civil society is to acknowledge the mistakes when they happen, apologize, and take steps to minimize them in the future. What we have instead is a policy of official defense of the indefensible when municipal authorities determine these unconscionable actions of the officers are appropriate and they'd do it again if given the opportunity.

I'm sure there are good cops out there who take their roles as public servants seriously, who don't appreciate being the target of increasingly negative public perceptions, but when they stand shoulder to shoulder defending and protecting the thugs among them, they acquire the taint as if they themselves are the culprits.

The late entertainer Aaron Russo had an easy test everyone should try. He once asked his audience to notice their response when they see a police car driving behind them. If they are taken by a sense of comfort and security at the sight of the police behind them, they live in a free and just society. However, if they are immediately overcome with apprehension upon seeing the police car, they live in a genuine police state. It's an easy test: When a police car pulls in behind you, do you calm down or tense up?

Will this be turned around in my lifetime so that the public can believe and trust the "protect and serve" motto, or will the public trust continue to erode until the police and the public ultimately become warring factions in the long lost land of the free?

--
God's Law or Man's Law?
Here we have an interesting case where a church member confided in her mentor about her relationship with her boyfriend. Being that this relationship is sinful in the eyes of the church, they proceed to act upon Matt. 18:15-17,

[15] Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
[16] But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
[17] And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Seeing as how the woman thought her conversations with her mentor would be kept confidential, you can see why she has a problem with this, and formally resigned from the church. Thing is, the church is going to announce it anyway, even though she's no longer a member there.

It would appear that the church may already find themselves in a bit of hot water, to the tune of 5-15 years in prison. Florida statute 836.05 states thusly:

836.05 Threats; extortion.--Whoever, either verbally or by a written or printed communication, maliciously threatens to accuse another of any crime or offense, or by such communication maliciously threatens an injury to the person, property or reputation of another, or maliciously threatens to expose another to disgrace, or to expose any secret affecting another, or to impute any deformity or lack of chastity to another, with intent thereby to extort money or any pecuniary advantage whatsoever, or with intent to compel the person so threatened, or any other person, to do any act or refrain from doing any act against his or her will, shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

This might explain in part why they've essentially gone into hiding.

But the question is, which law prevails: God's Law, or Man's Law?

--

Amending the Constitution to eliminate the Natural Born Citizen requirement

As I said in my first post on the Obama Birth Certificate/Citizenship issue, the left has been trying for several years to eliminate the natural born citizenship requirement for anyone to serve as POTUS.

While their arguments are based on the requirement's impediment to globalization, something I'm vehemently against, I do tend to agree that the requirement should be expanded to include naturalized citizens. Emotional arguments against it using the spectre of stealth candidates with anti-American ulterior motives fail to consider that those with un-American ideals can just as easily be born here as abroad. Especially since the America we have today isn't so much the land of freedom that once stood in stark contrast to a world of tyranny, a land by its respect for liberty and its equitable system of laws once inspired the sacrifice of life, limb and fortune to preserve, the very rationale behind the Constitution's 14 year residency requirement. The inherent motivation of our natural born citizens to preserve our precious freedoms has been eroded right along with those freedoms themselves through decades of big government liberalism followed by such heinous legislation as the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, numerous executive orders and the behemoth that has become our federal government over the last few decades.

I believe that people from abroad who are lured to this country for its historical promise of freedom and prosperity, and who go through the pains of learning about the foundation of those promises, are much more inclined to protect them than the natural born citizens who seem to know little about our founding principles, take for granted what freedoms we still have, and allow the rest to slip into obscurity out of fear. I won't go so far as to call us a nation of wimps, because we face down death every single day as people crowd themselves onto highways, malls, subways, office buildings with a potential bevy of armed or drunken loose cannons in our midst. Not to mention our propensity to establish residence in the belly of earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, mudslides... the risks to life and limb are enormous and we taunt and tease them every single day by virtue of our lifestyles, yet we clamor in fear for 100% protection from a handful of evildoers half a world away, so much so that we throw our freedoms out the window for the mere illusion of gift-wrapped protection. Those who venture here seeking relief from the oppressive regimes of their homelands may indeed be more inclined to stand up for and defend freedom's principles than we are.

Debunking the Debunkers

Finally a Google news alert keyed to "obama birth certificate" arrived in my inbox tonight pointing to a mainstream news outlet's mention of this issue. And as I expected it's another attempt to smear those who are pursuing the issue as conspiracy theorists. Let's take a look:

It's the rumor that won't go away. I continue to get e-mails about why mainstream media are not pursuing the challenge to the authenticity of President-elect Barack Obama's citizenship. The answer is that this allegation has been vetted and debunked.

Not so fast. There are several reasons it won't go away. First, Obama continues to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting lawsuits being brought for the sole purpose of forcing him to reveal the actual birth certificate on file. Which is more cost effective at putting these rumors to rest: spending $10 +/- to obtain a copy of the original birth certificate to end these rumors, or spending close to a million dollars to prevent it from ever seeing the light of day?

Second, three of these lawsuits have made their way onto the Supreme Court docket. For a mere rumor that's already been vetted and debunked, you'd expect SCOTUS to spend their time on more pressing things. While the rumor and all the supporting evidence behind it may not be considered newsworthy to mainstream media, Supreme Court cases should merit some attention at least.

While it is true that Hawaiian officials have not made the document public because of privacy laws, the state's health director said she and the registrar of vital statistics have personally inspected his birth certificate and can vouch for its authenticity.

I'd like very much for the actual quote from these officials be published in the mainstream media, because all I've seen are quotes stating that they have seen the birth certificate with their own eyes, vouching for its existence in Hawaii's records of vital statistics. I have also read that of those officials interviewed, none would vouch for the information contained therein.

Citing the media reports on snopes.com, "Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino says she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate." So, let's see a quote from these named officials that actually vouches for the authenticity of the publicly-displayed birth record on Obama's website.

That pretty much amounts to "case closed" for anyone but the conspiracy theorists who are convinced that Obama was born in Kenya and his mother fraudulently applied for a Hawaii birth certificate. Even if this were true - it seems rather silly to engage this argument, but here goes - I can't imagine anyone being able to put together sufficient evidence to invalidate a birth certificate that has been in the official vault for 47 years.

Evidence has been presented that Obama was born in Kenya, via statements made by both his relatives and Kenyan officials. Now, is it true that Hawaii allowed the parents of children born outside the US to register their births in Hawaii in 1961, under certain conditions? I've read assertions that it is. This is a simple question that the mainstream media should have no trouble asking, and getting a legitimate answer to. While the birth certificate may have been in the vault all these 47 years, nobody in the mainstream media has any idea what information is contained in that original document, other than what Mr. Obama himself has chosen to reveal, and continues to fight strenuously to limit to that information. See my previous post for more very simple questions the mainstream media seem to have problems with.

--

Another Obama Birth Certificate post 11-26-08

One question today.... well, two actually, regarding the Obama birth certificate issue.

1. Which hospital was he born in? Over the last decade, his sister has given the name of two hospitals in Honolulu that he could have been born in. Which of those two is the correct one?

2. Who is the doctor that delivered him?

The "birth certificate" he released doesn't provide this information. Does yours?

--
I posted these two questions in one comment, and another asking who might have standing to sue over candidate qualifications, on this post at the blog Voenix Rising. Rather than attempting to intelligently answer the questions, both of my comments were promptly deleted. And believe it or not, with a straight face Obama loyalists continue to deny a coverup of this issue.
--
Some links to columnists and bloggers recently discussing this issue:

• Is the President-Elect blackmail-able over his birth certificate?
  
  
• The Great Birth Certificate Scandal-Cover-Up of the 2008 Election
  
  
• A last electoral hurdle for *Obama*
  
  
• Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate Issue For Dummies OR Leo Donofrio’s Suit (includes links to audio interviews w/Donofrio)
  
  
• Why the Barack *Obama Birth Certificate* Issue Is Legitimate
  
  
• SITREP Obama Citizenship Nov 26 08 -- Truth or Consequences
  
  
• Rathergate II: Certification of Live Birth a clear forgery
  
  

--

The issue of Obama's citizenship is bigger than a birth certificate

I stumbled onto this post explaining that once again the Supreme Court will decide the presidential election. Written by obsessive Obama supporters, it mocks in standard liberal fashion the current court battle regarding the issue of President-elect Obama's actual country of birth. Apparently an attorney filed suit a few weeks ago to delay the election until Obama produces his birth certificate to prove his constitutionally-required qualifications to become president. The case was initially rejected by Justice Souter, but a re-filed petition was accepted for review by the radical right's darling Justice Clarence Thomas.

Several weeks ago I remember a news article reporting that the appropriate authorities in Hawaii had verified the existence of Obama's original birth certificate, and for me the matter, scant that it was to begin with, was settled. After reading the comical indignant retorts in the comments on the above mentioned liberal blog, I tended to side with their assertion that the "wingnuts" will lose this one, mainly because it seems like such a trivial, inconsequential matter. But there's the rub. If it's so trivial, why would a Supreme Court justice agree to review it? Souter already rejected it once. So why would Thomas take it?

Then it occurred to me, on the issue of the citizenship requirement, "wingnuts" have been joking about electing Schwarzenegger as president ever since he got into politics, and liberals have been advocating for the elimination of the citizenship requirement for some time because of the multicultural diversity of our nation. So I thought it would be really funny if this whole Obama birth certificate suit backfires on the "wingnut" with Thomas ultimately doing a little legislating from the bench and deciding to rescind the natural-born requirement altogether*. This country's leadership has been pushing the globalization envelope so fervently over the last few decades that this would be the perfect opportunity to take down that tiny, insignificant, inconsequential little technicality. And who would argue? It's a silly requirement because naturalized citizens can be just as devoted to our constitution and founding principles as natural born citizens, and probably even moreso given that they're required to actually know the constitution in order to become a citizen.

So I decided to visit the wingnut's website to see what kind of evidence he has that would compel Supreme Court Justice Thomas to take this ridiculous case, and started watching the "wingnut's" press briefing video made about a week before the election. This "wingnut" claims to be a lifelong Democrat, and makes a rather compelling case that his motivation to bring this challenge rests entirely on constitutional grounds. And he's right, the constitution is very clear on the qualifications for our president: he must be 35 years old, lived in this country for the last 14 years, and must be a natural born citizen. Cherishing the constitution as much as I do, I can't simply wave this natural born citizenship thing off as a minor triviality no matter how silly I think the requirement is. Nor can I condone the blatant alteration of the constitution via one single judge's ruling. I did however find myself wishing someone had this guy's fortitude to bring all kinds of other lawsuits to the Supreme Court to challenge the rest of the things our government does that violates the constitution... but I digress.

Berg also presents some compelling evidence that Obama may infact not be a natural born citizen, from remarks by his Kenyan relatives to his early travel history and legal requirements for such by all countries involved. But I'm most convinced something's awry by the simple fact that Obama absolutely refuses to provide a copy of his birth certificate, an act each of us regular citizens has had to do several times in our lives. And he also refuses to release his medical and postsecondary education records, reasons for which Berg believes are to protect Obama's citizenship status.


That's when the red flags started going off. The documents obviously exist otherwise Obama wouldn't have had an early passport and Hawaiian officials wouldn't have certified it. And being the Constitutional Scholar that he is, he wouldn't have dared run for president if he didn't qualify under the Constitution. So Obama's refusal to produce them must be based on principles alone. What principles though? It's looking more and more like Obstinence and Defiance rather than the privacy of the 4th Amendment. It's a birth certificate for Christ's sake, the only means available to prove compliance with 2 of the 3 Constitutional requirements for holding the office of the Presidency.

Senator Feingold, probably the most libertarian democrat in the Senate, has just professed his faith that Obama will be joyfully forthcoming with all the required information legislators need to do their oversight jobs, in stark contrast to the belligerent Bush administration. Feingold's remarks on the matter had instilled a little hope in this libertarian constitutionalist that Obama would regard our constitution a bit more respectfully than Bush, even if just a little. But after learning of the possibility Obama very well may become our first unconstitutional president, and his obstinate refusal to do something every other citizen of this country has been required to do multiple times in our lives, that hope is obliterated.

I'm now fully convinced Obama will conduct affairs in his administration with the same disregard for the constitution and outright stubbornness he exhibits in refusing to produce records we the citizens demand in the course of vetting our public servants. But worse than that, he will do so following in the same footsteps of the most horrendous president this country's ever had.

Now the issue is very unsettling, and much bigger than simply resolving Obama's citizenship.

* - The case before Thomas is solely to decide whether Berg has standing to sue, and has no bearing on the facts/evidence regarding Obama's citizenship.

--

To Vote, or Not to Vote.

Growing increasingly disgusted with the seedy game of politics, both local and national, I feel drawn to follow the respected advice of others and just stop participating in such an illegitimate charade. Lew makes an excellent point about the sham of our democracy and how it's manipulated to further the state's agenda. But I've always voted because I feel it legitimizes the complaints I have, and it allows me to exert a microscopically small amount of power over the government-inflicted conditions impacting my life.

But in his bidding to drop out of the elections process to instill fear by eliminating government's mandate, Lew focuses exclusively on the presidential race. I wholeheartedly agree that "neither of the candidates for president wants to do anything about" the problems that are rapidly eroding our freedoms. And I agree that among the two major candidates it's a choice between socialism and fascism. I would argue however that voting for a third party, or a write-in candidate of your choosing, has the same effect on reducing the mandate afforded to the victor of that particular office.

The damages inflicted on liberty over the last hundred years have not transpired solely at the hands of the president; none of his actions would be successful without the full complicity of the criminal gang of legislators up on the hill. When Lew talks about the need to instill fear into the government, I can think of no better method than holding each legislator personally responsible for his complicity and firing his ass at the earliest opportunity.

Which brings me to the crux of my dilemma: the need to hold these criminals responsible for, among other things, their one single vote that officially enslaved every citizen of this nation in service to mammon far outweighs the urge to just ignore them all by not voting.

Not voting is essentially ignoring these parasites, passively condoning their insidious behavior while also "voluntarily" funding it with our taxes. Evil prevails when good people do nothing, and I have a difficult time convincing myself that doing nothing will diminish the evil that has already entrenched itself in our lives.

And I cannot just sit here while Congress contemplates sacrificing our firstborn to Wall Street. The senators and congressmen who voted for this bailout bill have to be punished, and I'm eager to pile it on with vote after vote for this year's incumbent challengers. It's as close to a public flogging as we'll get in this country.

Rising acclaim on The Revolution: A Manifesto

Everywhere I turn, people are praising Rep. Paul's new book The Revolution: A Manifesto. I guess it's about time I read it, huh?

(Get the audiobook here).

Patriot Games

The topic of being an American citizen came up in recent discussions about the 2008 presidential race with friends, and I discovered that most people have trouble coming up with a solid response. The most substantial reply was something along the lines of "I'm proud to be an American citizen and can't stand the thought of having been born to another country, but we're going to hell in a handbasket because [insert elaborate list of complaints about people, culture, society in general]."

Here's the question: what does it mean to you to be an American citizen?

What kind of response can you come up with? Take as much time as you need and post your responses below.