Blogging is Tough

Ok, so I haven't blogged in months but why does it have to feel like a chore? I enjoy blogging and sharing ideas and hearing from others with differing view points, I just have to do it on my own time. Don't fret, I've got a list of ideas of topics I've been wanting to write about. Unfortunately I never feel like posting them because they are never good enough or complete. Most are technical writings but in order to do them justice I feel I must include pictures or videos. Text is so web 1.0.

Anyways, I'll post a random thought that is complete enough to stand alone. I'll try to get the technical ones flowing more as those are certainly more beneficial than my personal opinion.

Get Ready for the Big Dance!

In just a few more days all the political garbage on TV will end and a new President will be elected. I have not held back my beliefs but during the last few months I have been ridiculed for them. I have defended Barack Obama on many occasions as I despise slander or spin and I have been questioned by my friends why I would do such a thing. Many concede that John McCain wouldn't be their first pick but he is better than Obama. My belief is either party brings essentially the same results and we need to really debate the issues rather than repeat what the talking heads on TV tell us. Below is an email chain I had with one of my friends. We thought it humous so I asked if I could post it and he agreed. His name has been changed for his sake.

--Oct 1, 2008--
Hey friend, here are a couple of videos explaining my thinking:
Why I won't vote for McCain: click here
Why I won't vote for Obama (despite the many obvious reasons): click here
Why I don't agree with either party: click here
Why I'm voting for Chuck Baldwin: click here
I have many other reasons but these explain my concerns and thoughts.
Regards,Jim
--Oct 5, 2008--
Jim, Jim, Jim,…. What am I going to do with you??!! The people who made these videos took 2-5 second clips of parts of sentences (and gaffes) and pieced them together in effort to sway the viewer by smearing McCain or Obama. BTW, I do not see anything wrong with those clips in the McCain video anyway.

Question: You take a test and one of the questions is “What is your favorite ice cream? Write down “A” for Strawberry or “B” for Vanilla.” The answer (either A or B) is worth 75% of the test. You actually PREFER orange flavor ice cream so you write  down “Neither, I want Orange”. Teacher gives you a F.

The lesson here is that although you may prefer Orange, that choice is not available! I probably prefer Orange as well. BUT, if you could do it all over again, it would be best to say to yourself, “Self, I really like Orange BUT strawberry is close to a fruit type of ice cream. Although I am not 100% on board with strawberry, I do believe that by choosing strawberry at least 65% of my taste bud’s goals will be accomplished. Not to mention that Vanilla is not a fruit ice cream flavor at all. So, self, the choice is easy, I don’t want an F so I will choose Strawberry.” Teacher gives you an A. Your friend
--Oct 5, 2008--
friend, friend, friend, that type of thinking is why America is no longer free and is on the path to a socialist nation. Congratulations. You've sold your soul and your freedom for convenience and "security." -Jim

'Personhood' Amendment On Colorado Ballot

NPR ran a broadcast about a new item on the Colorado ballots about defining 'personhood'. I'm surprised this amendment hasn't been proposed already. According to the broadcast it said that Colorado was the first state to get enough signatures. Are you serious? How did this of all amendments not get first created (and passed) in the Bible belt?

Regardless, the arguments brought against such an amendment (in my humble opinion) are lame. The many arguments are this would make us rethink all of our laws. Well duh. We've lived with Roe v. Wade for how many years now? I'm sure its bound to have impacted the writing of MANY laws. Regardless of this change the arguments brought against this amendment seem weak. For example, one person said: "what about HOV lanes?" Simple, if the person is occupying a seat then you qualify. Since the baby occupies the same seat as the mother, you don't.

But that was a weak argument. What about something like: "what if you drink without knowing you were pregnant or did something to kill the baby accidentally?" First, it would be hard to prove that drinking or some other action was the direct cause of the death so the case would likely be dismissed but even if it could, is the child not entitled to rights? The argument is the same as "what if I drive at night and hit a pedestrian I didn't see on the road?" It's called manslaughter. Oh no! we can't take responsibility for our actions because remember the baby is a parasite that invaded us first! /sarcasm    

The other argument brought forth is about frozen fertilized eggs. This one would obviously require some more legal work but lets think about this another way. Babies can't think or act for themselves but neither can mentally handicapped people. How do we treat them? We can spin circles around this argument all day but it would take some good work to convince me otherwise.

Lastly, one guy pointed out that it was unconstitutional! What does that even mean? Of coarse it would contradict existing law, that is the whole point! People act like once a law is written it can't be changed (at least not if the law plays to their interest).

Those Who Don't Learn History Are Doomed to Repeat It

"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...[we will] have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers... And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for [another]... till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery... And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression." -Thomas Jefferson (see full quote and context here). See modern context here.

Through My Eyes

A tragic story came to a close recently about a woman who was convicted of microwaving her 1 month old child to death. The woman was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Around the country I’m sure people rejoiced over this woman’s just sentence. What saddens me is the absurdity with our culture today. I cannot see how “pro-choice” is ever a choice. Take this case for example, would this be such a heinous crime if it were committed 1 month earlier when this child was still in its mother’s womb? Perhaps if the child wasn’t microwaved but rather scrambled, suctioned, injected, or had it’s skull crushed, would that make it less heinous? Of course not.

The argument over privacy is ludicrous. Are any crimes ever attempted out in the open? If I murder someone in my house is it just because it’s on private property? No. The only argument then is on a woman’s “right” to her body. This argument too is crazy. How is it we live in a country that says we can’t put drugs in our body or take our own life but we can take the life of another who grows in us? The argument is often presented as the child is an unwanted “parasite.” The woman thus has a right to remove it. How is it we’ve come to think of humans as parasites? I guess the homeless could be thought of as parasites to society, maybe we should free ourselves of them as well?

A problem I have with the Democratic Party in general is that they tend to embrace “pro-choice” as the idea, “we know what is best for others.” (I hope you see the irony in this stance and the Democratic Party's many others). The argument goes that it would be better to not be born at all than be born unloved or unwanted… Tell that to my adopted friends.

Lastly, what about the rare but terrible circumstances of rape or incest? If we follow logic rather than our emotions the answer is obvious. Again, tell that to some of my adopted friends. I don’t know which ones may have such a horrible story but I’m sure they wouldn’t want to know either. What about the woman? Will taking the life of this unwanted child take away her memories of the horrible event? This argument is just a cop-out.

Perhaps only in the event of medical necessity should such a difficult decision ever be made but even many doctors will tell you this is an extremely rare circumstance. To me the choice is obvious. I'm saddened in knowing most abortions are due to people who have no desire to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. I see this through a moral lens instilled in me by my religious beliefs. Others may see it through their own philosophical moral view. The question now is, can we come to agree as a society if we don’t have an absolute moral reference?

Corporation's Ignorance of Their Consumer Base is Astounding

You would think my title would be something out of an Onion article but sadly it isn’t. I’m dumbfounded at how corporations don’t
understand their consumers. Take for example Business Week’s recent article on Ford. Ford comes up with a vehicle that gets 65mpg (that’s 17mpg more than the Prius) but say they won’t sell in the U.S. because A.) It uses diesel B.) It costs too much to import.

To point out the absurdities in those arguments seems too simple but apparently I need to because Ford thinks their valid. Ok, so diesel costs more than regular gas but the fact it gets that much better gas mileage makes up for it. Ford also believes consumers think diesel is too nasty for Americans. Are you kidding me? The majority of Americans buy a Prius because
their fuel efficient. They don’t care about “going green”, that’s just an added perk, not the other way around.

Lastly (and this one really gets me) they can’t IMPORT it because the engine is made in Britain and costs too much. Uh, why can’t an American company make its own engines by American laborers for American consumers? Maybe it’s the US pension plans they can’t afford… or maybe the U.S. is just living too much off of borrowed time and money all because we make such terrible mistakes.

[Update 9/8] Yea for Chevy for actually listening to their customers. Let's just hope they build a big enough gas tank to ensure motorists don't get stranded between stations.

Screw Innovation, Just Dig Deeper

If you haven't heard, ISPs are blaming bandwidth hogs for your slow internet and their solutions aren't in your best interest. Heaven forbid companies actually try to create solutions that customers actually want rather than find ways to "dig deeper into their pockets". What I don't get is why they don't just run more fiber if bandwidth is the issue. Amazingly one of the telecoms that likes to screw their customers as much as possible realizes this and is at least trying to do something but even this won't satisfy our bandwidth needs in the near future (e.g. streaming HD video & phone). I guess the other option is we just never see these "scifi" technologies. The sad thing is we continue to fall behind the rest of the world and yet we continue to take on the rest of the world like Leeroy Jenkins in thinking we've got it all together.

[Update 9/12] Perfect example. Case and point.