Fear is getting too expensive

When Franklin D Roosevelt said, “The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself,” Roosevelt was referring to the depression and turning the U.S. economy around. The biggest reason to fear is fear; fear causes growth of government and fear is expensive.

Opinion news is loaded with stories of what we should fear and calls for the government to ‘do more’ to protect us. There are an endless amount of editorials about how ‘fill in the blank’ will destroy America, which elevate concerns to comic book level scenarios of doom and call upon government to protect us.

Here is a list of Super Villains the DC Hall of Justice is on the lookout for:

  • Terrorist – foreign and domestic
  • Climate Change
  • Illicit Drugs
  • Rogue States
  • Health Care costs
  • Recession or Depression
  • Excess body fat
  • Eco-Terrorism
  • Big Banks – foreign and domestic
  • Patriot Groups
  • Illegal Immigration and Arizonans

And that is the short list,–there are a host of other things we are supposed to be afraid of that, as George Carlin said, “could infect your mind, curve your spine and lose the war for the Allies.” In all the above, the underlying argument often used is leaving them unchecked will lead to the eventual destruction of America.

Its debatable if any of the above issues might actually lead to our demise, but its’ not debatable the price for all our fears is expensive because people look to government to calm their fears. As long as we’re cutting back on things in general, consider cutting back on fear and fear mongering.

It’s fine to express concern; but save the annihilation analogies only for things that actually cause total destruction, like a huge asteroid hitting earth. Lots of things could harm our country, but the list of things that could destroy the county is a lot less than we’ve been led to believe.

Share Button

News Journalist Grilling, Not Interviewing

Army Lt Col Birther Explains Why He Will Not Deploy (Spoiler Alert! It’s Obama’s Birth Certificate)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ujl-JjawWo&feature=player_embedded

Putting aside the subject matter and focusing on how an interview is conducted needs to be addressed. The aggressive style of interview towards people that represent unpopular views and brings higher ratings to the networks is annoying.

This is a difficult subject to write about because the people hardest to defend are the same ones most likely to get an on-air grilling. Pointing out the flaws in interviews often is misconstrued as endorsing the person or group being slammed.

There is an audience for giving those with unpopular beliefs an on-air grilling. The blogs show their support for this type of interview with comments along the lines of “Interviewer X slams the group I hate, so good job interviewer X! I’m surprised interviewer X did such a good job, because usually it’s just sucking up to that group.”

Included below are several other interviews which turn into debates and grilling of the guest. The last video on this list is an example of an interviewer keeping their cool while the person being interviewed is trying to stir a debate.

Regardless of the subject matter, I expect to be able to hear someone interviewed without interruptions, and not to hear a second question asked before the interviewee has finished answering. The point of doing an interview should be to gain insight into how the person being interviewed thinks, not solely how the interviewer thinks.

A test for any news journalist/television personality is doing an interview with someone who supports a view they personal find offensive. The test is to keep their cool, allow the person to answer and bring out the relevant facts.

Anderson Cooper failed the test and reminds me of a host of other bad interviews I’ve seen on cable news. Anderson Cooper has been added the list below in my mind.

Jeremy Glick vs Bill O’Reilly

Peter Schiff On The Ed Show

Shirley Phelps-Roper of Westboro Baptist Church on Fox News

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-STpW7jarrs

Ron Paul vs Bill O’Reilly

Wolf Blitzer keeps his cool and focus while interviewing David Duke. While no journalist/television personality is capable of doing an interview as well as Mr. Spock, Blitzer comes fairly close to that level and may just have some Vulcan blood in him.

Wolf Blitzer vs David Duke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM9WBS1q6k8

Share Button

Zombie Awareness Month: Political Zombies

Undead Nazi Zombies @ SMack! Halloween Fetish Ball 2009
Since May is the official Zombie Awareness Month of the Zombie Research Society, I’d like to draw attention to political zombies. Political zombie is a description applied to quickly dismiss all opposing views.

The Zombie label is where the name of this website originates. I found it ironic that both Democrats and Republicans dismiss each other with the zombie label without any awareness they were each others’ mindless zombie.

Republicans accuse Democrats of being Obama Zombies-infected with the Obama Zombie Virus, while Democrats refer to Republicans as Zombie-Con’s who caught their infection from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, as with these examples.

Now, f-off and leave us alone with your faux-news propaganda. there are critical thinking people here, not mindless zombies like your faux news viewers and Rush Limbaugh listeners.

I don’t even think the mindless zombies who watch Olbermann’s show are dumb enough to believe that Olbermann and Snow were pen pals.

Each of these statements implies they would not watch the network or shows in question. If only mindless zombies watch network X, then the person making that statement either does not watch that network or is calling themselves a mindless zombie.

The irony is that people that feel the most comfortable labeling others as mindless, uneducated, ignorant, robots, brainwashed, and indoctrinated, are the most likely to boycott opposing views and opinions. They are completely unaware of the self imposed ignorance caused by only listening to views they agree with.

The true mindlessness is believing other people have been brainwashed and that makes their views irrelevant. Being able to vote in the political process makes all views relevant. Even if you think your neighbor is a complete idiot, they still get to vote and that makes even an idiot’s view relevant.

The choices are taking other views seriously and debating them vs. dismissing them as mindless zombies. Dismissing through name-calling does not change anyone’s mind; it makes those with opposing views angry and reinforces opposition to your views.

Sexy Brain Eating Zombie NurseI prefer my Zombies Uncensored.

Share Button

O’Reilly Misrepresents Facts on Westboro Case, Again

Megyn Kelly discusses Westboro Baptist Church with Bill O’Reilly

Kelly argues areas where O’Reilly has misrepresented the facts surrounding this case. O’Reilly accused Kelly of saying the case had no merit, while Kelly’s position was that it was going to be a closed case.

O’Reilly accused the other two judges in the case with concurring with Judge Shedd’s view that “reasonable people can debate the worthiness the appropriateness of Westboro position.” Kelly points out the other judges threw the case out for other reasons, and did not need to concur with Judge Shedd.

Kelly goes on to explain to O’Reilly that Judge Shedd has a point. “It may not have been intentional infliction of emotional distress, for this Westboro Baptist Church people to go outside of that funeral and protest, because to make that claim under the law you have to prove conduct that is extreme and outrageous, but extreme and outrageous don’t have the meaning that you and I understand them to have;  legally it means something else.”

Latter on Kelly also points out that the Westboro protest was a thousand feet away from the funeral. For a moment, I thought Kelly was going to point out another area where O’Reilly has misrepresented this case, as the protesters didn’t disrupt the funeral.

O’Reilly states at the start of the clip:

As you may remember, these fanatics disrupted the funeral Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, twenty years old, killed in Iraq.

Evidently the Westboro group wasn’t very successful in disrupting the funeral in question. The father of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder did not see t signs of the protesters until he saw them on television later that day.

Kelly points out this case has serious implications on free speech, which it has; but this case has also been a serious misrepresentation of the facts by O’Reilly.

Share Button

O’Reilly Misrepresents Facts on Westboro Case, Again

Megyn Kelly discusses Westboro Baptist Church with Bill O’Reilly

Kelly argues areas where O’Reilly has misrepresented the facts surrounding this case. O’Reilly accused Kelly of saying the case had no merit, while Kelly’s position was that it was going to be a closed case.

O’Reilly accused the other two judges in the case with concurring with Judge Shedd’s view that “reasonable people can debate the worthiness the appropriateness of Westboro position.” Kelly points out the other judges threw the case out for other reasons, and did not need to concur with Judge Shedd.

Kelly goes on to explain to O’Reilly that Judge Shedd has a point. “It may not have been intentional infliction of emotional distress, for this Westboro Baptist Church people to go outside of that funeral and protest, because to make that claim under the law you have to prove conduct that is extreme and outrageous, but extreme and outrageous don’t have the meaning that you and I understand them to have;  legally it means something else.”

Latter on Kelly also points out that the Westboro protest was a thousand feet away from the funeral. For a moment, I thought Kelly was going to point out another area where O’Reilly has misrepresented this case, as the protesters didn’t disrupt the funeral.

O’Reilly states at the start of the clip:

As you may remember, these fanatics disrupted the funeral Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, twenty years old, killed in Iraq.

Evidently the Westboro group wasn’t very successful in disrupting the funeral in question. The father of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder did not see t signs of the protesters until he saw them on television later that day.

Kelly points out this case has serious implications on free speech, which it has; but this case has also been a serious misrepresentation of the facts by O’Reilly.

Share Button

Fears of US Political Violence Put in Perspective: Softcore

Warnings of political violence and domestic terrorism in America seem to be all the rage these days. Bricks thrown through windows and buses being egged–oh my!

It is just talk; for real examples of political violence, you have to look outside of the US: places like Iraq, where today suicide bombers killed 42 people. Or South Africa, where President Jacob Zuma called for unity after the murder of a white supremacist on Saturday.

No curfews in America due to riots, as there are in India right now. Police in riot gear aren’t battling protesters, but they are in the UK where the EDL clashed with police over a new mosque being built.

Below is a video that sums up the fighting being waged in America today. When it comes to political violence and domestic terrorism, I think the US might just come in dead last.

Washington D.C Monument pillow fight April 3rd 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYLPvZiBuog

Share Button

Bill O’Reilly on Westboro Baptist Church: Disrupting the Facts

Bill O’Reilly’s Talking Points: Hating America – 03/30/10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qKPka-cwwA

O’Reilly at 1:25 into the clip:

Its obvious they were disturbing the peace by disrupting the funeral. They should have been arrested.

There is a problem with accusing the Westboro Baptist Church of disrupting the funeral. They didn’t disrupt the funeral, as 4th District which reversed the judgment pointed out.

The protest was confined to a public area under supervision and regulation of local law enforcement and did not disrupt the church service.

If the intent of the Westboro Baptist Church was to disrupt the funeral, they failed badly. Albert Snyder, the father of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder who died in Iraq, did not see the signs of the protesters until he saw them on television later that day.

Reporting the church members disrupted the funeral is inaccurate. The lawsuit isn’t even about disrupting the funeral; the lawsuit alleges privacy invasion, intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy. If the Westboro Baptist Church had disrupted the funeral, they probably would have been arrested.

I don’t know which category this misreporting falls under: defamation, libel or slander. I see a potential for news outlets to be sued by Westboro Baptist Church, for the very similar reasons they were being sued by Albert Snyder–intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The church could claim their image has been harmed, by news outlets falsely reporting they were engaged in an illegal activity. Westboro has ammunition to backup the claim because the court has stated they were not disrupting the funeral.

Bill O’Reilly has offered to pay the $16,000 court costs for Albert Snyder to the Westboro Baptist Church. This sad story has the potential to become even more shocking and depressing. If O’Reilly continues to misrepresent the facts, he might end up handing over even more money to the church.

Share Button

War on Drugs Shenanigans: Free Drug Samples

FREE COCAINE SAMPLES!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvb6ae7eyWI

California Gang Gives Away Free Samples Of Cocaine

Police in California are on the hunt for members of a local gang after they say they’ve begun targeting teens in the area by offering them free samples of cocaine and teaching them how to smoke it.

La Crescenta and northern Glendale police say a Hollywood area gang is swarming the area with the product and providing freebies to eager teens to up their clientele. The News Press reports that after giving the children the substance, the gang which has not been identified, would reportedly give the kids free lessons.

I call shenanigans for these reasons:

  • Very similar to the “strawberry quick handed to kids in school yards” myth.
  • Or the Drug dealers handing out LSD-laced tattoos of cartoon characters myth.
  • Originally the story was heroin being given away for free.
  • The gang is not mentioned, probably because it does not exist.
  • The reporter states “its happening allegedly in the Glendale area,” so no effort has been made to confirm the police statement.

It’s not impossible that drug samples might be given away for free; it’s just highly unlikely.

Chris Rock put it best:

“Drug dealers don’t sell drugs. Drugs sell themselves. It’s crack. It’s not an encyclopedia. It’s not a f**king vacuum cleaner.

You don’t really gotta try to sell crack. Ok? I’ve never heard a crack dealer going, ‘Man, how am I gonna get rid of all this crack?!'”

Share Button

War on Drugs Shenanigans: Free Drug Samples

FREE COCAINE SAMPLES!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvb6ae7eyWI

California Gang Gives Away Free Samples Of Cocaine

Police in California are on the hunt for members of a local gang after they say they’ve begun targeting teens in the area by offering them free samples of cocaine and teaching them how to smoke it.

La Crescenta and northern Glendale police say a Hollywood area gang is swarming the area with the product and providing freebies to eager teens to up their clientele. The News Press reports that after giving the children the substance, the gang which has not been identified, would reportedly give the kids free lessons.

I call shenanigans for these reasons:

  • Very similar to the “strawberry quick handed to kids in school yards” myth.
  • Or the Drug dealers handing out LSD-laced tattoos of cartoon characters myth.
  • Originally the story was heroin being given away for free.
  • The gang is not mentioned, probably because it does not exist.
  • The reporter states “its happening allegedly in the Glendale area,” so no effort has been made to confirm the police statement.

It’s not impossible that drug samples might be given away for free; it’s just highly unlikely.

Chris Rock put it best:

“Drug dealers don’t sell drugs. Drugs sell themselves. It’s crack. It’s not an encyclopedia. It’s not a f**king vacuum cleaner.

You don’t really gotta try to sell crack. Ok? I’ve never heard a crack dealer going, ‘Man, how am I gonna get rid of all this crack?!'”

Share Button

I’m Retarded but I’m not Braindead

The debate over using the R-word leaves me wondering why it is politically correct to call others braindead. Why is it politically incorrect to call someone slow, while calling someone mindless OK?

Retarded means slow, as in slow to learn or grasp a concept, but still has a brain and can learn. In political discussions those with opposing views are often labeled as mindless, braindead, or zombies. They don’t always come right out and call you stupid for disagreeing, but thats the implication.

Examples:

I was surprised because I was sure that she was a thinking person’s Republican, a moderate suburbanite not captured by the tea bagger set.

And it’s triply amazing, of course, because as every right-thinking person knows, Barack Obama is soft on terrorism and wants America to fail.

You have the vote of every thinking person.

I will not dwell on that, but any thinking person should recognize the difference and not blur the discussion.

Each of these basically states is you disagree with the views presented you don’t think, you have no mind. I’m retarded, as in being slow, because I don’t always catch being labeled a braindead zombie at first glance. As every slow thinking person knows: I’m retarded but I’m not braindead, because I know when I’m being insulted for disagreeing.

Share Button