Chuck's Occasional Rants (now banned in 15 countries)

Teabaggers, Their Philosophy, And Its Unintended Consequences...

2010-10-17T22:52:00.002-04:00

Hello again everyone! I hope everyone is doing well and still has their health (because having a job might be a little too much to ask.)
The topic of today's "rant" is the Tea Party, its philosophy, and the unintended consequences of that philosophy.
We all know that the Tea Party, or as I like to derisively call them, the "Teabaggers" (if you don't know what "teabagging" is, look it up on Google [trust me, to call someone a teabagger is NOT a compliment]), are a group of people upset that their fascist agenda has been derailed by the fact that a moderately liberal Democrat occupies the White House. Now the fact that most of this hand wringing by the teabaggers is primarily due to the fact that the occupant of the White House is Black (or African-American, if you prefer), has nothing to do with what I am about to speak about. While the racist element is a big part of teabagger philosophy (see their attitude toward Mexicans and Latinos in general), that is not the part of their philosophy I wish to address.
The part of their philosophy that I wish to address has to do with their espoused Libertarianism. Libertarians like to believe in something called "rugged individualism." Rugged individualism is the idea that people should make their own way in life with no help whatsoever from the government. In other words, if you lose your job and are starving, rugged individualism dictates that you should become homeless and starve to death rather than ask the government for aid such as food stamps. You should become homeless and starve because according to rugged individualism, and the teabaggers, it isn't the government's problem that you lost your job (even though your job loss probably wasn't your fault) and cannot feed yourself. The teabaggers add to this tenant that the reason that you can't get a new job isn't because the economy is in the shitter due to eight years of the Republicans raping it for their and their rich patrons' gain, but simply because you are LAZY. That's right, no one is willing to hire you because you are LAZY, not because there are few jobs to be had. Apparently, according to the teabaggers, unemployment isn't an economic condition, it is a character flaw. This lack of economic understanding is one of the first things that alarms me about the teabagger movement. These people want to lead our country. They want to take control of one of the world's largest and most complex economic systems, and yet they don't have the faintest idea of how that economy works. They bandy about slogans like "Buy American," but they haven't a clue as to how the world economy is integrated to such a degree that it is nearly impossible to buy something that is made solely and wholly in the US.
Another tenant of teabagger philosophy is that all spending on domestic infrastructure should cease. However, at the same time, the teabaggers believe that the domestic economy should grow. Once again this indicates that the uneducated leaders of the teabagger movement have no clue as to how economic growth and infrastructure improvements are interrelated. Way back in the 1800's, before America was an expanding country with an expanding economy, businessmen and the government wanted to expand their markets. The economy at the time was primarily regional rather than national. Businessmen wanted to expand the regions in which they did business to improve their profits. The government also wanted to expand the economy so that they could collect increased tax revenues and so that they could provide the citizenry with increased economic opportunity and access to the improved good and services that expanded businesses would provide. The solution to this desire to expand the economy was to improve domestic infrastructure. At first, this consisted of paving existing roads with, primarily, stones. Later, the national road system was expanded, followed by the digging of canals, then the railroads came along, and finally asphalt paved roads and the national interstate system we are familiar with today. At all stages of this improvement, the government spent money on domestic infrastructure by improving existing structures and building new additions. Now let us look at what the teabaggers would do. First of all, by stopping spending on infrastructure, countless highway and transportation workers would be thrown out of work, thus adding to an already flagging economy (just what we needed, more unemployment). Then, as less money was sent to the states for the purposes of upgrading infrastructure, roads would begin to deteriorate, bridges would begin to fail, and if left in place long enough, the economy would grind to even more of a halt due to the fact that you couldn't ship good from their place of manufacture to the existing markets. That means that, if you live in, say, Pennsylvania, and you need tires for your car, and those tires are manufactured in Ohio, you are shit out of luck since most of the interstate between PA and OH will be potholed beyond drivability, not to mention that most of the bridges between here and there will have collapsed due to lack of maintenance. On top of that, you won't be able to afford those tires because you won't be able to get to work since the roads you take will have long since fallen in to such a state of disrepair as to be all but impassable. But hey, if this is your idea of improving the US, just vote for those clueless teabaggers come November 2nd.
On top of this, services currently provided by the government such as school lunch programs, the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutritional programs, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Food Stamps, and just about anything that doesn't benefit big business or the military, will be ended by the teabagger agenda. If you want to see mass poverty and starvation on a scale not seen since the Great Depression, vote for the teabaggers. If you want to see the US turned into a third world country where the rich and big business can do anything they like, regardless of what the law says, vote for the teabaggers. If you want an employer to be able to work you 80 hours a week with no overtime, if you want to work for a few cents an hour with no minimum wage, if you want no unemployment insurance, if you want your Social Security to be invested in the stock market with no protection against market crashes, if you want no Workman's compensation protections should you get hurt on the job, if you want no paid holidays, if you want to be a slave to big business with little or no protections against unjust firings, if you want no leisure time whatsoever, then vote for the teabaggers. The above are all things that the teabagger movement has vowed to abolish, curtail, or enact if they are elected. These jerkoffs claim to be pro-American, they claim to want to improve the country, but their policies are anything but pro-American or improvement oriented. Instead, their policies will turn this country into a third world banana republic with untold riches for big business and the already rich and crushing poverty for the average person.
The teabaggers like to say that the national debt is the highest ever and that this will turn us into a third world country. Wrong (as usual). The uneducated, and frankly, dumb as dogshit leaders of the teabaggers can't even get simple numbers right. That or they are just outright lying. Which one is it guys, stupidity or lies? The current debt as a percentage of GDP, according to the Congressional Budget Office is 62%. The record, also according to the CBO, occurred in 1946 with the debt being 109% of GDP. Gee another item that Beck, Palin, and the teabaggers got wrong.
I hope and pray that people will see that the supposed "experts", like Beck, Palin, most Fox News talking heads, and the teabaggers are nothing more than shills for a new neo-fascist agenda. I hope and pray that people will wake up and see that these folks are more anti-American, and can do greater damage to this country, than all of the terrorists in the world. After all, these folks are espousing a return to the failed policies of the Bush Administration. The same policies that lead us into this recession/depression in the first place. Why in the world would anyone want to return to those policies, and why in the world would anyone with half a brain want to vote for a movement that espouses policies that will lead us to being a third world nation. Why would anyone want to vote for a bunch of uneducated rednecks who believe that the Constitution is something that says what they want it to say, not what it actually says, and who believe that the body of Constitutional law (all of the Supreme Court decisions regarding the meaning of the Constitution) is, in itself, unconstitutional? Mark my words, if the teabaggers come to power, blogs like this will be outlawed, and I will end up in prison, or in a camp with "Work makes you free" hung over the door, and all because I disagree, and am vocal in my disagreement, with the new teabagger master race.
Wake the fuck up America!
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant. Oh, and if you teabaggers are so smart, how about a debate on politics and history in a public forum where I can show exactly how inferior your sub-100 IQ's are compared to my 170+. What say you?

Talk About Bizarre!

2010-08-04T18:27:00.002-04:00

Howdy everyone. I hope you are all in good health and doing well.

Today's title comes from what has to be the most bizarre story I've read in a long while. According to a report in The Guardian (UK), there seems to be an ultra-nationalist movement afoot in Mongolia. It would seem that somehow, some way, neo-Nazism has taken hold among Mongolians who fear that China may be preparing to take them over. I'd write more on the story, but I am, having just read the story, still in a state of disbelief. Here is a link to the story.

I am Chuck and this has been a short rant. To paraphrase one "Joliet" Jake Blues, "Mongolian Nazis?!!? I hate Mongolian Nazis!"

The Assassin's Gone.

2010-07-29T06:30:00.005-04:00

Hello again everyone. I trust that everyone is getting by (I'd say doing well, but unless you've just hit the lottery, I don't know too many folks who are doing well in this economy.)

Today brings a sad post to the Rant. Yesterday, 28 July 2010, one of the truly great safeties in the history of the NFL passed away. I speak, of course, of Jack "The Assassin" Tatum. Mr. Tatum (and if you ever saw him play, you had better call him "Mr"!!) died of a massive heart attack in an Oakland, CA hospital. According to various reports, Mr Tatum had also been battling diabetes and other health issues at the time of his death.
Born John David Tatum on 18 November 1948 in Cherryville, NC, the young Mr Tatum grew up in Passaic, NJ. He didn't get involved in football until he started playing for Passaic High School. Mr. Tatum was gifted enough to be recruited by Ohio State's legendary Woody Hayes. Hayes recruited Tatum as a running back. Another legendary coach, Lou Holtz, convinced Hayes to move Tatum to defensive back where Tatum excelled. While playing DB for Ohio State, Tatum became a two time All American, helped OSU to a National Championship in 1968, and was named National Defensive Player of the Year in 1970. As a tribute to the ferocity of his hits, Ohio State gives the Jack Tatum Hit of the Week Award to one of its players after every game.
Jack Tatum was the 19th pick (overall) of the 1971 NFL draft. He was taken by the Oakland Raiders where he encountered another coaching legend, John Madden. From his first game in a Raider uniform, Tatum began to establish his reputation as a hard hitter. In that first game, against the then Baltimore Colts, Tatum knocked out two Colts tight ends (not one, but TWO, and in his first NFL game no less!!!!) Tatum went on to play 9 seasons with the Raiders. In that period, he started 106 of 120 games, had 30 interceptions, and helped the Raiders to win their first Superbowl title 32-14 over the Minnesota Vikings on 9 January 1977. Tatum played his 10th and final season with the Houston Oilers in 1980.
During his time with the Raiders, Tatum was also involved in two of the most memorable plays in NFL history. The legendary "Immaculate Reception", and the tragic paralyzing of New England Patriots wide receiver Daryl Stingley.
The hit on Stingley took place during a preseason game between the Raiders and the Patriots at Oakland Coliseum on 12 August 1978. On the play in question, Stingley had cut inside and lunged to attempt to catch a pass. Tatum, who was coming the opposite way at full speed, met Stingley while Stingley was off balance and leaning forward. The ensuing hit broke Stingley's fourth and fifth vertebrae and damaged his spinal cord, leaving Stingley a quadriplegic. Over time, Stingley regained limited use of his body, but was wheelchair bound until his death in 2007. Despite the intervening years, Tatum never apologized for the hit, and Stingley and Tatum never reconciled. According to sources close to Tatum, the failure to apologize to Stingley and the realization by Tatum that he ended another player's career and nearly killed him, had a great impact on Tatum, driving him to become a near recluse for a number of years.
The other legendary play Tatum was involved in was the "Immaculate Reception." The play took place on 23 December 1972 during an AFC Divisional playoff game between the Oakland Raiders and the Pittsburgh Steelers at Three Rivers Stadium. The Raiders had just completed a scoring drive to give them the lead 7-6. The Steelers were facing a 4 and 10 from their own 40 with 22 seconds left on the clock and no time outs. Bradshaw took the snap from center, dropped back, and under great pressure, threw the ball to Steelers halfback Frenchy Fuqua who was at the Raiders' 35 yard line. Tatum met Fuqua at the same time as the ball arrived. The ball bounced off Fuqua or Tatum or both (depending on who you were rooting for) and was caught by Steelers running back Franco Harris just before the ball hit the ground. Harris then ran the ball in for a touchdown giving the Steelers a 12-7 lead. The play was initially signaled a touchdown by one official and after a huddle by the officials and a phone call by the Referee to clarify the rules, the play was confirmed as a touchdown. The Steelers kicked the extra point and went on to win their first playoff victory ever by a score of 13 to 7. Neither Tatum nor Fuqua has ever stated specifically what happened during the play. Tatum claimed that he didn't know what happened, that he was just trying to tear Fuqua's head off and, for his part, Fuqua has claimed, "I know exactly (what happened on the play). What happened on that play was truly immaculate." NFL Films has called the Immaculate Reception the greatest, and most controversial, play in NFL history. To this day, John Madden, then coach of the Raiders, claims that the ball hit the ground before Harris caught it. (For a full and detailed description of the Immaculate Reception see the Wikipedia entry for it, here.

In his later years, Tatum battled diabetes, losing several toes and eventually a leg to the disease. Tatum also set up a charitable foundation in the Columbus, OH area to help kids fight diabetes and had, up until his death, raised over $1.4 million.
Tatum was also a published author. He wrote three books detailing his career, “They Call Me Assassin” in 1980, “They Still Call Me Assassin: Here We Go Again” in 1989, and “Final Confessions of an NFL Assassin” in 1996.

Mr. Tatum leaves behind a wife, Denise, and three children.
Jack Tatum was 61.

As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant. My sincerest condolences go out to the Tatum family during this sad time.

I'm Back With Truly Alarming News.

2010-07-24T23:58:00.005-04:00

Hello again everyone. I trust that you are all either rich and famous, or you are being crushed by the weight of 30 years worth of Republican economics (in other words, poor). I know that you aren't middle class.
How do I know that you aren't middle class? Well, take a look at this article on Yahoo. THE ARTICLE. And now you know how I know that you're not middle class.

Folks, the sheer fact of the matter is that the loss of the middle class is not the work of the Democrats, or the Obama Administration. The erosion of the middle class has been occurring ever since Reagan introduced the "Trickle Down" theory of economics. The idea in Trickle Down economics is that as the rich get richer, they invest that wealth in the financial markets (stocks, bonds, etc). As the rich invest in stocks, companies find that they now have more capital to work with and, subsequently, they can expand operations, hire new workers, and, generally, make the economy grow, which will have the beneficial effect of higher wages and benefits for the average Joe (due to a limited labor pool and higher demand for that pool).

Unfortunately, Trickle Down economics ignores two vital components of any capitalist economy, greed and limited demand for any product that any company produces. Let's start with limited demand, ok? In any economic market, demand for a product will be limited by it's cost and by the number of consumers who need or want the product. As an example, let's say you make widgets (economists love widgets). Let's also say that you make the finest widgets on the market and therefore you charge a bit more for them than the crap widgets from China. By pricing your widget above that of the Chinese widgets, you limit the number of people who can afford to buy your widgets. We'll say that your widgets cost $100 versus $75 for the Chinese version. Now we will say that the average widget buyer has $300 to spend on widgets, food, rent, etc. The average widget buyer will most likely buy the Chinese widget due to cost (if he spent all of his money on widgets, he could get 4 Chinese widgets as opposed to only 3 of your widgets). As consumers, we have been taught either through our parents, our education, or real world experiences to shop around for the best bargain possible. We are also taught that sometimes the best bargain isn't the least expensive item, but the item which offer the best value for money. Thus if you make widgets that break after 5 uses and the Chinese widget breaks after 5 uses, the Chinese one will be a better bargain, and more people will purchase it. However, if your widget breaks after 10 uses and the Chinese one breaks after 5 uses, then your higher priced widget is a better bargain (yours: $10 per use vs China: $15 per use) and, subsequently, consumers will pick your widget. However, there comes a point where, no matter the cost, everyone who needs, wants, or can afford a widget will have obtained one. At this point, your widget company, as well as the Chinese widget maker's, will start to experience downturn in the demand for widgets. As a result, you won't have to make as many widgets to supply the lesser demand. If you don't have to make as many widgets to satisfy the market demand, you will also experience a drop in profits. When a company's profits drop, people get laid off. When people get laid off, the labor pool increases and wages begin to shrink due to greater supply but lesser demand for the labor in the pool. That wage shrinkage means that fewer people will be able to afford to buy your higher priced widgets, which means less profit for your company, which means more lay offs. Trickle Down economics completely ignores this component of the market place. It offers no solution to a downturn in the economy. Trickle Down only works if the economy is already running at a high level. Trickle Down worked during the economic boom of the 1980s because consumer confidence was high and subsequently people spent their money freely. When the economy went to shit in the early 90s, people curtailed their free spending ways and we had a recession. The same economic model that made Reagan look like a genius made George HW Bush look like an inept moron. Why you ask. Simply put, the market was saturated by consumer good that we didn't want or need. When people realized that they could live without $150 sneakers, and bought a $30 pair, retailers started to feel a pinch in their profits and began to jettison unnecessary staff. On top of all this, real wages actually shrank in the period from 1981 until 1991 due to the change over from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. The wages didn't shrink by a vast amount, but it was enough to make people have to think about what they bought. This was coupled with the fact that the rich started to pull their money out of stocks and put it into safer investments (like Treasury bonds and gold), meant that companies had less money to put into wages, and thus wages shrank and people got laid off. Trickle Down never anticipated that the rich weren't about to lose money on a deal. It viewed the rich as benefactors when in fact, the rich are normal human beings with lots of money that they want to hang on to. If you inherited your money, you might be a little free with it, but if you earned your money, you're going to do everything possible to hold on to it and to make more if you can. Trickle Down economics never anticipated that someone might be somewhat greedy. It never anticipated that the rich might want to make more money off the backs of the working man. The tax breaks granted to the rich under the Trickle Down theory were supposed to be invested in things that would make the economy stronger. Instead, the rich pocketed the money that they saved through the tax breaks and, in most cases, moved that money into off shore banks (where they could hide it). They also took the profits that they had made on their investments, and instead of reinvesting it, moved the money out of the country.

After George HW Bush left office, Clinton got the economy going again by relaxing the lending rules for obtaining a mortgage, and by allowing the banks to now invest in the stock market (that is normal banks, not investment banks who were allowed to invest all along.) The problem with Clinton's plan was that by encouraging a relaxation of the rules regarding mortgage lending, banks were lured into making loans to people who couldn't afford to pay them back. At first, this wasn't a big deal. Then, as the rule of supply and demand kicked in, real estate prices started to trend upward to the point that a house worth $100k in 1990 was worth double or triple that amount in 2000. The real value of the house didn't increase, but the demand for the house drove the asking price through the roof. The idea behind increasing home ownership was a good one. Home ownership has always been a benchmark of being middle class. By increasing home ownership, the intent was to increase the size of the middle class (which had shrunk under Reagan and GHW Bush). While the intent was good, the results were not. When the sub-prime bubble burst, those who were barely making their mortgage payments each month ended up in foreclosure. Now couple that increased foreclosure with the tax breaks given to the rich by GW Bush and his Republican lapdogs, the increased drain on the economy by fighting a bullshit war in Iraq (not to eradicate terrorists, but to satisfy W's Macbeth complex), increased fuel costs due to the Iraq war, and the fact that the idiot Wall Street bankers invested in bad debt that they knew was bad before they invested in it (they were hoping to sell it before anyone realized what was going on, thus turning a quick profit), and you can begin to see how the economy went to hell in a hand basket.

Now for a real challenge. Guess who gets to pay for the mess that the Republicans and GW Bush made? Anyone, anyone, Bueller? That's right, the rapidly shrinking middle class. The rich won't be paying for it. They've already moved their wealth out of the country to places where it can't be taxed. As far as the money they have inside the country, well thanks to GW Bush and his Republican buddies, the rich aren't getting taxed on the majority of that either. So therefore, the burden of paying for Bush's failed policies, his war in Iraq (all because Saddam embarrassed W's daddy), the no bid contracts that Cheney got his Halliburton buddies, tax breaks for the rich, and W's free money giveaway to Wall Street (i.e. his "you don't have to pay it back" bailout) falls on an already overburdened middle class.

The Republicans and the Teabaggers are livid about the things that Obama is doing. They are completely incensed by the bailout (those companies and banks receiving money DO have to pay it back), the health care act, extensions of unemployment benefits, and the like. For the life of me, I can't figure out why. The things that Obama is doing are to help out the poor and middle class. Perhaps, if the Teabaggers turned off Limbaugh, Beck, and/or Fox News for a while, they might figure out that the person responsible for this mess isn't Obama, but George W Bush. If the Teabaggers became literate and read a bit, they might figure out that the legislation that has been passed is designed to help out people just like them. Given recent Teabagger behavior, the problem isn't so much that they have a problem with Obama's policies, but rather that they have a problem with his skin color. The legislation passed by Congress and signed by Obama will help more than 50 million Americans. That's 1/6th of the entire population. Meanwhile, the Republicans, fueled by the neo-fascist Teabaggers, continue to try to destroy the middle class and this country by doing things like twice (once in March, once in June) trying to kill extensions of unemployment benefits, introducing legislation that would reduce the inheritance tax for 55% to 35% for those that inherit over $5 million, and introducing legislation that would extend Bush's tax breaks for the rich. This is on top of trying to deny millions of Americans health care by attempting to block the health care bill (not to mention the outright lies they told while attempting to block it, things like it sets up "death panels", you'll have to get a chip implanted in your hand so that the gov't can track you, that our health care system is the best in the world [it's not, it's ranked 37th by UNWHO]and those with socialized medicine routinely let people dying in waiting rooms due to lack of funding). At every turn, the Republicans have tried to block any legislation that would help out the poor and the middle class. The Republicans have sold their souls to the rich and to big business. And the Teabaggers are supporting them every step of the way, either too dumb to realize that they are being financially raped by the Republicans or too brainwashed by Fox News to understand the issues and think for themselves. Hopefully the Teabaggers will wake up before November and realize that the Republicans using them in a blatant attempt to regain power. After November, the Republicans will jettison the Teabaggers, distance themselves from the Teabagger movement, and treat the the Teabaggers with contempt. Wake up people, if you are a Teabagger you need to know that you are being used by both Fox News and the Republican party to further an agenda designed to destroy you and your family by making you paupers while making the rich even richer. You have rights and dignity, why do you want to throw that away to grovel at the feet of a corporate master? If you Teabaggers don't believe that this is true, just look at the things the Republicans have done to try to destroy the middle class. Open your eyes people. The neo-fascist Republicans only have their own best interests at heart, they could care less about you Teabaggers and your ultimate success or failure. To the Republicans, you are just another resource to be used and discarded at their whim.

Well, enough ranting. The sheer fact of the matter is that the Republicans and their Teabagger bitches are trying to destroy this country and the middle class. It is time for the middle class and the vast silent majority to stand up and say "Enough is enough, we will not let the Republicans and the rich destroy us!" It is time to stand up and show the neo-fascists that spew their lies and vitriol from the bully pulpit of Fox News and talk radio that we see through their plans to turn this country into a third world nation and we're not going to take it anymore! Long live the middle class!

I am Chuck and this has been my rant. And if you're a Teabagger or a Republican and you don't like this, fuck off as I have had about enough of your treasonous, little dicked, homophobic, racist, nazi, theocracy-demanding bullshit!

What A Load Of Fertilizer!

2010-05-08T19:21:00.003-04:00

Hello again.
I'm writing today to tell you about something that has left me absolutely gobsmacked.
I recently downloaded a free program called TVU Player. The program is designed to receive channels broadcast over the internet by various users of TVU's services. Most of the channels are over the air stations from other parts of the world. A few are experimental, and a few are inaccessible due to regional or national restrictions (ex. Germany's DWTV is inaccessible due to the fact that it is available on some cable systems here in the US). Some of the channels broadcast are entertaining and worthwhile, some are the usual crap that you would find on any over the air or cable network channel. But one of the channels stands out.
The channel stands out not for the quality of its programming, but for the fact that it is absolute bullshit. There's no nice way to put it, the channel is crap. The channel in question is listed as channel 71495 and it is called "The Naked Truth."
I have been watching this channel over the course of several weeks off and on. I'm not sure where they dig up their "documentaries," but I do know that wearing a tinfoil hat might be helpful in understanding the shows.
What set me to writing today was a "documentary" on the banking industry. I will grant you that in the current economy, banks are not the most well liked institutions. However, if one believes the documentary, every President from Woodrow Wilson to Barak Obama has been in on a giant conspiracy with every bank in the world to bankrupt the US and Europe. Not only have the banks and the government been conspiring, but the Fed, the IMF, the World Bank, and the UN are also in on it. Apparently, if you believe the documentary, everyone except the common people are in on this conspiracy.
Now given the anti-big bank/anti-big money sentiments of a few presidents, most notably FDR, don't you think that this conspiracy might have leaked out? There is an axiom in intelligence work that the more people who know about a secret the more likely it is to leak. A little research shows that, according to AAAdir.com, there are 13018 banks in the world. These are not branches, they are actual incorporated banks. That makes the number of executive position people, who would most probably have access to information concerning this supposed conspiracy, at least 13018, more likely the true number is at least double to quadruple that number. So for arguments sake let's set the number of people who have access to this conspiracy at 2 per bank, which means that the total number of conspiring people at just the banks is 26036. Now add in the heads of the 10 largest economies in the world, that's 26046. Add in the heads of the World Bank (1), the Fed (1), the IMF (1), and all of the delegates to the UN from Western Europe / the EU member states (27), Asia (major economies like Japan, China, etc) (3), North America minus Mexico (2), Australia (1), and that brings the total to 26082. Now given that the length of time a secret is kept is inversely proportional to the number of people who know the secret, don't you think that somewhere along the line someone might have spilled the beans?!!?
Not only does this channel show tinfoil hat documentaries, but it also purports to tell the truth about things like the Health Care bill, and other somewhat controversial (at least to the right wing nuts called the "Tea Party") things like global climate change. Most of the thing spewed from this channel can be debunked with a simple trip to websites like Politifact and Fact Check. More worrying, however, is the fact that the propaganda shoveled out on this channel sometimes mixes enough fact with outright fiction to be believable. Even more worrying than that is that some people actually believe what the channel broadcasts is the absolute Gospel truth. What is the most worrying is that the people who believe this crap not only vote, but they tell their friends about this stuff. They tell one friend who tells another and so and so forth until you have a whole herd of people believing that the banks conspired to plunder the economy and that the new Health Care Bill will require death panels (not true) and computer chips to be implanted in your hand for identification purposes (also not true). The sad part of all of this is that, unfortunately, it occasionally finds its way to the likes of Fox News (specifically Glenn Beck) and gets dispersed to all the little "Beckites" who take this bull to be Gospel truth just because he said it.
Now, I am all for free speech (that's part of what this blog is about). However, I am not for turning off your brain and letting people like "The Naked Truth", Fox News, and Glenn Beck do your thinking for you. Unfortunately, this seems to be what a great number of people are doing in this country. Devoid of ideas of their own, people have started letting the right wing nutjobs on channels like "The Naked Truth" and Fox News plant ideas in their heads without realizing that those ideas run counter to what is in the best interest of the person parroting them. Of course, the people parroting these ideas also think that the Health Care bill sets up a system like Canada has (it doesn't, Canada is a single payer system, the US still gets to select a plan from among the dozens of private insurers out there, it is just that the gov't will subsidize insurance for those who normally can't afford it). They also think that some how the Health Care bill takes away their rights (it doesn't, it actually expands your rights if you have a preexisting condition). Yet when asked how the HC bill takes away their rights and freedoms, most have no intelligent response beyond "Fox News said it does and they always tell the truth, unlike the rest of the damned liberal media!" You know, I can name at least five different ways the George W Bush administration took away part of our civil liberties, yet not a single Teabagger can tell me how Obama has taken away their freedoms. I find that curious. But then again, what should I expect out of a movement that aligns itself with an intellectual giant like Sarah Palin ( a woman so dumb that she couldn't find Africa on a map).
So in conclusion, if you use TVU Player and want to be amused (or sickened) watch Channel 71495 "The Naked Truth", and if you don't have TVU Player but you do have cable or satellite and want to be sickened, watch Fox News. Just be sure to wear your tinfoil hat before tuning into either of them!
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

The World's Greatest April Fools Hoax

2010-04-01T09:21:00.003-04:00

Hello again everyone.
Today being April 1 or April Fools Day, I thought that I would bring you the world's greatest April Fools hoax.
Just follow the link below and you will arrive at a 1957 BBC report concerning the spaghetti harvest in Switzerland. I hope you enjoy the "report" as I much as I did (I laughed my ass off).

Here's the link --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27ugSKW4-QQ

Enjoy!

Ed Note: Edited to get the link working properly 1APR10 0932hrs.

Hello Again...

2010-02-26T15:57:00.002-05:00

Hello again. For anyone who is interested, this blog is NOT dead. I have been without an internet connection for a long time. I now have a borrowed connection, so stay tuned for new blog entries. Among the things to look forward to are commentary on Glenn Beck's historical knowledge (or lack thereof) (and believe me, the man's staff is screwing him over on the accuracy of his historical "facts", not to mention the historical quotes that are taken out of context), a solution to the current economic depression (yes, depression, NOT recession), and many other varied and odd observations. So stay tuned to this blog for more on these developing stories (film at 11).
Until then, I am Chuck and I will soon be ranting again.

Calling All Patriotic Americans.

2008-11-04T08:38:00.002-05:00

Hello again folks.
Today, I am calling on all patriotic Americans to get out and do your civic duty. If you are registered to do so, get out and vote! The polls are open from roughly 7am to 8pm in nearly every state (Dixville Notch, NH opens slightly earlier, around midnight) and your employer MUST allow you time to vote if you work across those hours (in other words, if you work a shift that starts before 7am and ends after 8pm, your employer is required by federal law to allow you time to go vote). Also, if you are a first time voter or cannot operate the voting machine by yourself, remember that the poll workers are required to offer you assistance if you request it. If you don't know where your local polling place is, look at your voter registration card, call you local board of elections, or look it up online (the major candidates websites can help you). So, I don't want to hear you whining that you don't have time, or that voting is too difficult, or that you don't know where your polling station is located.
Keep in mind that voting is not only your right, but it is also your duty. It is simple, easy, and (with a few friends) can be fun. So, now, get off your lazy asses and go vote. And remember, if you don't vote, you don't really have a right to bitch about who wins because you did nothing to influence the outcome.
And for those of you who are wondering, I voted at approximately 7:30 this morning, right after I got home from work. No, I will not tell you who I voted for, but I will tell you that in Pennsylvania there are four candidates for President listed: Larry, Moe, Curly, and Shemp (you get to figure out who is who).
Now quit reading this and go vote!
As always, I am Chuck and I approved this message.

Glory, Glory Man United!!

2008-05-21T20:00:00.000-04:00

Hello again everyone. It has certainly been a long time since I posted. I hope everyone is doing well.
Well, the subject of today's post is soccer (football for anyone outside the US). In specific, it concerns my favorite English Premier League team and their glorious victory in the UEFA Champions League final.
Not but ten days ago, Manchester United won the title in what is, perhaps, the best football league in the world--the English Premier League. They did so by the slimest of margins, a mere two points over rival club Chelsea.
Today, Chelsea had a chance snatch some of the glory from Man Utd. The two clubs were scheduled to meet today in Moscow in the Champions League final. It was to be the first all English Champions League final ever played.
The final, something I had been looking forward to for nearly two weeks, did not disappoint. It was everything one could expect from the top two Premiership teams. It was scrappy and hard fought. It was an all out effort from both sides. And in the end, it was harsh and somewhat cruel.
United drew blood first on a brilliant header from (who else?) Ronaldo in the 25th minute. Chelsea managed to even up the score on Lampard's 44th minute goal. And there it stayed for the next 75 minutes. Neither side seemed like it could find the magic spot in the back of the net. United had a few good shots which either sailed wide or were saved by the very good play of Chelsea goalkeeper Petr Cech. On the other end, Chelsea had some excellent chances, but seemed to have a penchant for hitting the woodwork instead of the net.
After 120 minutes of rather spirited play that included 7 yellow cards (Utd 4, Chelsea 3) and 1 red card (to Drogba [Chel.] in the 115th minute for smacking Vidic [Utd] in face), neither team held an advantage. So, in accordance with UEFA rules, it came down to penalty kicks.
Now, I personally hate penalty kicks. I'm not sure what the solution is for breaking a deadlocked game should be, but penalty kicks don't seem the way to go.
Personal feelings aside, the stage was set for what promised to be an exciting and extremely tense finish.
United won the coin toss and opted to go first. The clubs were all even until Ronaldo took his shot. He missed. This set the stage for Chelsea to win the match. All they had to do was put in the rest of their kicks. But alas, it was not to be as Chelsea captain John Terry sailed the final shot (of the initial 5) wide of the goal. United had dodged a bullet and the score stood at 4-4. In the next round of kicks, Anderson put United ahead. Kalou tied it up for Chelsea. Then came United legend Ryan Giggs. Giggs didn't hit the best ball in the world, but having faked Cech out his jock, he managed to score. Then it was Chelsea's turn again. Anelka stepped up and shot to his left. Van der Sar guessed the direction correctly and, in what has to be the save of the year, batted the kick away. United was the Champions League victor.
I have mixed feelings about this final. On one hand, I am positively ecstatic that United managed to pull off the double. But on the other had, I feel a bit sorry for Chelsea. They battled so valiantly for so long only to come up empty handed not once, but twice (EPL and UCL). I feel especially bad for John Terry, whose missed penalty kick set United up for the win. The tv kept showing him obviously blaming himself for Chelsea's loss. This is why I hate penalty kicks. Chelsea's loss was definitely NOT John Terry's fault. But because it boils down to a high pressure individual-player-in-the-spotlight type of situation (in a TEAM game mind you), you have a quality player like Terry just tearing himself apart over a kick that otherwise would have been largely ignored during the course of the game! If I had anything to say to Terry right now, I think I'd remind him that football is a team sport, and you win and lose as a TEAM, not as a collection of individuals.
Well, I have to go now. I would like to congratulate Chesea FC on a game, and season, well played. (And if you guys get rid of Avram Grant your nuts!)
Of all the things I'd like to say about United in closing, only one really sums it up...Glory, glory Man United, Glory, glory Man United...
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

A Page In Mourning...

2008-02-28T03:18:00.002-05:00

Hello readers. I hope everyone is well.
Today brought sad news to this diehard Steelers fan. Today a Pittsburgh icon passed into the hereafter.
Myron Cope, the longtime color commentator of the Steelers and inventor of the "Terrible Towel", passed away at the age of 79.
To anyone who ever listened to the Steelers, Cope was the voice of the common fan in the broadcasting booth. He was not only a part of the broadcast team, but he was a true Steelers fan. When the team was doing well, his voice was ecstatic, when they were doing poorly, you could hear his disappointment over the air.
My first introduction to the work of Mr. Cope was through a friend during my sophomore year at Pitt. I was living in the dorms at the time and a friend of mine from next door came over during a Steelers game. I was watching the game and listening to the tv commentary when he looked at me and said, "What the hell are you doing?" My response was that I was watching the game. He told me, "Well, if your gonna watch, do it like a real Pittsburgher!" (He was from New Brighton, so close enough.) He then proceeded to have me turn down the sound on the tv and turn on the radio. That moment changed forever the way I watched the Steelers. The broadcast team at the time consisted of Bill Hillgrove (play-by-play), Merill Hoge (former Steelers RB) and, the inimitable Myron Cope. My first impression of Cope was "Who is this crazy guy?" I mean Cope was all over the place with "yoi" and "double yoi" and "mmha" and the like. Not being a native Pittsburgher, I figured some of the lingo was just obscure "Pittsburgh-ese", only later did I find out that it was "Cope-ese". Over time I went from regarding Cope as being slightly crazy to being someone I looked forward to listening to on a Sunday afternoon.
So, I will cut through the "gargonzola" and offer up a "double yoi" salute to a man who will be forever missed by the Steeler Nation. I would also like to offer my personal condolences to the family of Myron Cope. Farewell Myron, you will be most definitely missed.
I am Chuck and today I mourn.

I'm Still Here.

2008-02-22T04:55:00.002-05:00

Hello again readers. I am still around, and even though I don't blog as often as I used to, I felt I had to write about a few things currently in the news. Here goes...
I was reading the news today and a story about Pakistan caught my eye. As you may know, Pakistan recently held a general election. In that election the party of Pervez Musharraf was rather soundly defeated. Now the Bush Administration, in what has to be one of its stupider moves, is urging Pakistanis to retain Musharraf as their president. Huh?!!? Umm, let me get this straight George, the Pakistani people have just voted to boot out Musharraf and his party. Not only did they boot him out, they did so in a pretty big way. And now you want them to retain this clown? Uhh, George, I would take the time to explain the principles of democracy here, but I neither have the time nor the space. The people of Pakistan have democratically voiced their will and now you, George W. Bush, want to overrule them? Just who the hell do you think you are? When you were (sort-of) elected, the Pakistanis didn't come here and tell us to retain your predecessor. What gives you the right to tell them what to do? Oh, that's right, I forgot, sorry about that. I forgot that you know nothing about democracy, or the consent of the governed. Silly me, I thought you might have caught on during the last eight years that the will of the people is what's supposed to go in a democracy. So let me break it down for you W. In a democracy, when the people vote to elect their representatives, those representatives govern with the consent of the people. The representatives take their orders directly from the people. Not just the ones who voted for them, but all of the people (even the contentious ones like me). They, the representatives, do NOT take their marching orders from some lame-duck dumbass several thousand miles away who doesn't like the fact that they were elected! Of course, never having been actually elected yourself, you wouldn't know (or understand) any of this. I'd tell you to refer to the Constitution, but seeing as how you've violated that umpteen times, I doubt it would do any good. See George, you are just a moron. You constantly talk about establishing democracy in that part of the world, but just when you have a democracy reestablishing itself (such as Pakistan) you go and try to undermine it just because you and your anti-democratic administration don't like the results! And then, to top it all off, you can't figure out why people there don't like the US! Duh! My suggestion is that you wait and see if the new Pakistani government is friendly to the US. Then, if they aren't friendly, you can always have the CIA try to overthrow (or assassinate the leader of) their government and show just how much of a supporter of democracy you are! After all, the CIA did such a wonderful and successful job of that with Castro in the 60's. (Since I know you have no clue about history George I'll fill you in, I'm being facetious here. If you don't know what that means, ask Dick to look it up for you, it is under "F" in the dictionary.)
Speaking of Castro, I heard that Fidel is quitting as El Presidente (or whatever he calls himself). According to NPR's Morning Edition, he's decided to step down after nearly 50 years of rule. He will supposedly continue to publish articles in the Cuban press, but will no longer have any say in the ruling of the country. I say, Fidel, relax, enjoy retirement. To hell with the newspaper stuff. Get out, play some golf, get a tan, and let the worrying up to Raul. He seems to have his stuff together. Seriously though, it is kind of sad to see Castro go. For nearly fifty years he has been the whipping boy of US Latin American policy. All the way from the Cuban Missile Crisis to the continuing embargo on Cuban goods, Castro has served as one of the anti-Communist fanatics favorite boogiemen. If you listen to official government policy, the anti-Castro Cuban community, and anti-Communist (and mostly pro-fascist) nutjobs, Castro is Satan in a Cuban Army uniform. I can't say that I agree with his politics, or his techniques in dealing with dissenters. But I can say, that as the leader of a country 90 miles south of his biggest enemy (a country the US could have crushed at just about anytime it so chose), Fidel had some balls. Not only did he choose to ally himself with the Soviets at a time when the Soviets were the US's biggest enemy, but then he had the gall to not only challenge, but also to defy Washington's edicts. Love him or hate him, it is undeniable that Fidel Castro set the bar for pissing off the US, and has become a role model for other anti-American Latin American leaders such as Hugo Chavez. So, I propose that as an adversary who has played the game of international politics with both saavy and outright audacity, and who has done so quite well, we, the US, should extend an invitation to Fidel, and his big cajones, to retire in South Florida (just like everyone else does). In any case, good luck in your retirement Fidel!
Well, I gotta run off and do other things.
So until next time, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Merry Christmas (and an update)

2007-12-24T09:15:00.000-05:00

Hello again everyone. I'm not dead and neither is this blog. I haven't been posting due to time constraints.
Street in First, an update. I am no longer working with my consumer W (called so to protect his identity). Long story short, his father, a hypercritical little troll with an anger management problem, decided to accuse me of neglect in front of a mandatory reporter (a person who must report all accusations to the state). An investigation was undertaken and I was found to be not guilty of the charges (actually the charges were found to be "unfounded"). However, due to the fact that the father vowed to continue to accuse me of various charges (stuff that would get me investigated) and eventually get me fired, I decided to resign. I resigned not because of his charges, but simply because a working relationship with the parents would have been impossible from here on out. His son, my consumer, and I got along very well and had a good relationship (very important when working with a pedophile). I believe the father's real problem was twofold. First, he was losing control of his son as I was teaching W to be more independent in all aspects of his life. (Heretofore, W has been heavily reliant on his parents and his parents had greatly controlled the various aspects of W's life. In other words, the parents were control freaks). And secondly, I didn't march to the father's beat. In other words, I did what W and I wanted to do, not what the father demanded that we do. Furthermore, when the father tried to interfere in my personal life a few times he got told point blank to get bent. For those of you wondering what this defective piece of humanity's name is, it is James DeMarco, he lives on 11thBerwick PA and has a vacation home in Leesburg, FL. And just to give you an example of his concern for his son, he is so concerned about W's well being that he would try to have me removed, but he refuses to come up from Florida to visit his son over the Christmas holidays (a very important time to W). Yeah, DeMarco, you're a real winner, a real example of compassionate humanity. All you care about is money and power (as evidenced by the fact that I believe you are skimming the till on W's SSI and have told the Social Security Administration as much. They are currently investigating.) You don't give a shit about your son or his well being. Well, someday you'll kick the bucket and, although he'll be sad for a while, W will realize that he's much better off without you. (Just a note, the person I am talking about is James DeMarco the elder, not James DeMarco the younger. James the younger is an ex State Cop and a pretty decent person, as opposed to his control freak father.)
So having explained that, I am now living with my girlfriend and helping her with her consumer. Things are a little tough but we are making it pretty well.
In other news, I recently increased the size of my electronics collection. I traded that ratty assed computer I did have, the s7700n, on a brand new HP a6123w system. It's not bad for what I want to do. The system came with an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ (2.30 GHz), 3 GB RAM (DDR2), a 500GB HDD (SATA), nVidia 6100-4xx chipset, etc. I had to upgrade a bit to get it to play some of my games so I added an VisionTek Radeon X1300 (256MB) video card and another GB of RAM to the system. I also finished it off by adding an HP w2007 monitor (widescreen 20 in.) and hooked it up to a (secure) wireless home network. It isn't too bad now, going from a 2.7 Vista experience to 3.9. And by the way for those playing at home, Colossus is gone, the new systems name is "Napier's Bones" (I name all my computers after their famous predecessors, so far it has been Univac, Eniac, HAL-9000, Colossus, and, now, Napier's Bones.)
I also added a digital camera to the collection. The camera is actually my girlfriend's Christmas present. She got it early as she wanted to be able to take pictures of her new grandson. The camera is a Kodak C613. It is a 6.2 megapixel camera with all the usual features. I added a 1 GB SD memory card to it so that, now, she can take almost 1700 pictures (on the highest pixel rate setting) without having to empty the camera's memory! And don't let some salesman talk you into a $300 or $400 model, I bought the camera at Best Buy for $100 and, in my opinion, it takes pretty damned good pictures. I would say the pictures rival the quality of my old compact auto-everything 35mm, and are very close to my dad's old Canon 35mm SLR. So folks, if you are in the market for a digital camera, and you aren't a professional photographer, I highly recommend the Kodak C613. The camera is around $100 and the memory card will cost you about $10-$20.
The last thing that I added to my electronics collection is also the biggest. On Black Friday, I took advantage of an extraordinary value (even for Walmart) and picked up (after a little running and hunting) a Polaroid LCD HD TV for a bit over $800 (with tax). I also got a wall mount for it while I was there. The tv itself is 42 inches, black, and most importantly, it is a 1080p system. The picture quality is excellent. I think that it rivals some of the more expensive models I looked at in terms of the quality of it picture. I love watching the Steelers games in high definition, you can actually see the blades of grass when they show the low angle field shots! And the new video games look great on it. When I couple the tv with my Pioneer 5.1 surround sound, my movies definitely come alive. The only thing that I need to get for it is either an HD DVD or BluRay DVD player. I will probably get the Bluray simply because I am planning to purchase a PlayStation 3 with my income tax return.
Well, that's about it. I will let everybody know what I get for Christmas.
Speaking of Christmas, I want to wish everyone a happy and safe holiday. If I have one wish for the coming year, it is that we finally achieve some measure of peace before the next Christmas rolls around.
As usual, I am Chuck, and this has been my ho-ho-ho-holiday rant.

I'm Not Dead Yet!

2007-10-01T01:03:00.000-04:00

(Apologies to Monty Python for the title.)
Hello everyone, long, long time, no post. I apologize for that.
Well, this entry will not be some monumental pontification from the bully pulpit. Instead, this will be an update as to what I've been doing since my last post.
First, I continue to be gainfully employed in my position as a family living provider. Things have been going fairly well at my job if you discount the fact that my boss (whom I really liked) was demoted (can't say why--confidentiality), that I have to continue to put up with the anally retentive clean-freak controlling parents from hell, that my day programmer left, and that the yard is severely overgrown due to the fact that my company provided lawn mower is constantly broken. Yes, other than that, everything is just peachy!
Secondly, I learned in May that I am to be (sort of) a step-grandpa. It seems that my girlfriend's daughter is having a kid. It is a boy, and no, I won't tell you the due date or his name.
Thirdly, I got to see an incredible concert in July. On July 20th, I got to see the Police in Hersheypark Stadium. The concert was incredible. Sting was in great voice and, despite a little rust shown in a few songs, the guys were tight. It was as if the Police quit in the 80s, skipped the years in between, and picked it up right where they left off. If you have an opportunity to see them, I most highly recommend that you see them when they come to your city.
Fourth, in August, I got to see the Pittsburgh Steelers play the Philadelphia Eagles. My consumer is a huge Eagles fan and I am a HUGE Steelers fan. I checked online and found that the Eagles and Steelers were playing again in the preseason. I did some further checking and managed to get two tickets (for a reasonable price) in the nosebleed section (sec. 511) on the Eagles side. On the 26th of August, we set out on my longest roadtrip/outing in a long time (4 hrs to Pgh, 4 hrs back, and 3 hrs for the game, total 11 hrs). When we got there, I took the first place I could find to park...unfortunately, we parked in the USW garage downtown (just off the Blvd of the Allies) and had to walk all the way across downtown to the 6th St Bridge, across that, around PNC Park, and to gate B. All in all, it was a helluva a hoof on a hot muggy night. And then afterward, we had to do it all again. Suffice to say my consumer, who is always talking about walking and exercise, definitely got his fill of walking that night. He also got his fill of the Steelers who won the game 27-13. After we returned to the car, I took him out the Blvd and up onto Forbes and gave him the guided tour of Pitt and Oakland (both north and south at midnight). He seemed interested in it and told me that despite living in Monaca for a while, he never got to see more than Downtown. It was an enjoyable trip and, despite being dead tired the next day, I would probably do it again provided that the company allows me to get a hotel room.
Well, that is about all I've been doing lately.
My last item in this entry has nothing to do with me (except that I am a major James Bond fan).
I would like to offer my condolences to the family of Lois Maxwell. Ms. Maxwell played "Miss Moneypenny", the secretary of "M" who hoped in vain for a single date with Bond. Maxwell was in 14 Bond films ranging from "Dr. No" in 1962 to "A View To A Kill" in 1985. She will be missed by Bond fans everywhere.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my (very mild) rant.

I Have About Had It!!

2007-04-24T01:25:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
Today's post concerns the ongoing debate in American society over the usage of certain words.
First it was the outright censorship and firing of Don Imus over a joke gone to far. Now comes the next salvo by the politically correct censorship bunch.
Several news services today (story here) are reporting that Hip-Hop exec Russell Simmons has joined Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson and perennial pain-in-the-ass Al Sharpton in calling for a ban on the words "ho", "bitch", and "nigger". According to Simmons the words, considered offensive by some, should be treated as "extreme curse words" and banned from use in rap songs. Presumably he would also have them banned from use in the English language. The best misdirectional quote from the Simmons (and partner Benjamin Chavis) is "Our internal discussions with industry leaders are not about censorship. Our discussions are about the corporate social responsibility of the industry to voluntarily show respect to African Americans and other people of color, African American women and to all women in lyrics and images."
Can you say "bullshit"...I knew you could. Not about censorship? Hey Simmons, any time you talk about banning words, it is censorship! Anytime you recommend that record companies bleep certain words, it is censorship! Whether the words are offensive or not is irrelevant, when you propose any restriction in their use, you have just become pro-censorship. By becoming pro-censorship you join an illustrious group of small minded, thin skinned individuals who cannot take insults and to whom free thought is too dangerous to be handled by the great unwashed masses. By becoming pro-censorship you have just cast you lot with people like those who would ban any mention of evolution from high school science classes. By promoting censorship you have joined those closed minded individuals who would have all references to miscegenation removed from, well, everything. By jumping aboard the censorship train, you have joined a movement that has managed to get terribly offensive works such as "The Grapes Of Wrath", "The Color Purple", "I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings", and "Huckleberry Finn", among others, removed from public libraries and school classrooms. Of course you probably wouldn't object to the removal of "Huckleberry Finn", after all, it does contain the word "nigger". Oh my God, I mentioned that nasty "N-word", quick censor me, quick take me out and stone me to death.
I will agree with Simmons that certain words do offend certain people. However, let's stop and think for a minute about what would happen if we removed every offensive word from the language. If we removed every offensive word (offensive to somebody, that is) from the language, the dictionary would be about 3 pages long and would contain mostly articles, prepositions, and conjunctions. My point is that nearly every word in the language can be, or is, offensive to someone. Some of those words stand out as especially offensive, others are more subtle. Everyone knows that the "n-word" is considered offensive, but how about the word "geek" or "retard"? Aren't those offensive to certain people? How about the word "mafia"? Isn't that word offensive to Italian-Americans? An offensive word can be any word which elicits a strong negative emotional response in a person. Since an offensive word need not be limited to those pertaining to race, religion, sex, or intellectual capacity, how about words that pertain to politics? Can we count those as offensive, and therefore worthy of banning? I mean the words "neo-conservative" and "Republican" elicit strong emotional responses in me, does that make them offensive? Should we ban them? Or would banning such words stifle something larger, namely the exchange of ideas? See, R.S., when you talk about censorship and the banning of certain words, you aren't just talking about not offending people, you are talking about doing things like limiting the ideas and thoughts that someone can have (by limiting how they can express themselves). You are also talking about interrupting things like the free exchange of knowledge. You are also talking about limiting freedom of speech and thought. If there is one thing that someone associated with musicians and songwriters should understand and be sympathetic to, it is the freedom to express oneself, no matter what words are used. The thing that you seem to be missing, R.S., is that songwriters, just like any other writer, use carefully chosen words to convey their ideas. Perhaps by using offensive words, the writer's intent is to offend you. Or perhaps it is his intent to make you think. If you don't think that offensive words can make you think, perhaps you need to check out people like Lenny Bruce, Jack Kerouac, Arthur Miller, or even John Steinbeck.
If you haven't figured it out by now, I am greatly against censorship in any form. Do I find certain words offensive? Yes, I do. But ask me if they should be banned, and you will get a resounding "Hell no!" in response. Perhaps it is because I have been exposed to environments where free thought and free speech was not only tolerated but encouraged, but I happen to find the most offensive word in this whole discussion to be "censorship". Censorship for me is about more than restricting the use of a few slang terms that probably wouldn't be missed if they were removed from the language. Censorship to me is about restricting my right to think as I see fit. It is about someone else, someone I don't know, telling me that I do not have the right to think for myself. I wonder how it would go if the shoe was on the other foot. What I mean is, I wonder how these folks would react if I started a campaign to ban censorship. A campaign that would allow absolutely anyone to say absolutely anything they felt like saying. Hmmm, now there's an interesting idea. Oh, crap, it's already been thought of and written down. They even have a title for it, it is called "The First Amendment". That idea is what allows this blog to exist. And you know what...If this blog offends someone, tough shit! If you don't like what i have to say, you can always read someone else's blog.
To small minded clowns like Simmons, Sharpton, and Jackson, I say grow up, suck it up, quit acting like a bunch of crybabies, grow a pair of balls, and take it like a man. People are going to offend you everyday of your pathetic lives, get a thicker skin, learn to deal with it and quit your bitching. Your actions offend me, but you don't see me on the national news trying to have you banned do you?!!? And by the way, since you guys don't have a clue, I'll give you one...Instead of trying to ban offensive words, why not try to educate people on why, exactly, they are so offensive to you. Until you idiots figure out that banning words doesn't stop people from using them but education does, you will continue to fight a losing battle. Oh, and if my invective has offended you, good that's what I was hoping for. I hope it also made you think.
In closing, I'd like to leave you with something that Lyndon Johnson once said, "Words wound. But as a veteran of twelve years in the United States Senate, I happily attest that they do not kill." Something to think about in regard to the greater scheme of things.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

If You Don't Like It, I Don't Care!!

2007-04-17T22:57:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. Long time, no post. I hope everyone is doing well.
The subject of today's post concerns the heat that US gun laws have been taking after the Va Tech shootings.
It would seem that the AP is reporting that, in various countries around the world, US gun laws are taking a bashing. The AP reports that editorials in Australia, France, the UK, and even Commie China are bashing our gun laws. Well, I have one thing to say to those who view it as their right to interfere in our internal affairs...Go screw yourselves! If you want these laws changed so badly, why don't you come over and attempt to change them yourselves? Oh, that's right, you can't, you're not allowed to own a gun. I guess you're out of luck then.
The AP report is quoting various foreign officials and editors as basically stating "Gee, we're not allowed to own guns. In the US, they can own a gun. Our system is better because we have a lower incidence of gun violence." Well, duh. If no one can own a gun, I guess you would have a lower incidence of gun violence. But how about your incidence of knife crimes? Or how about blunt object crimes, hmm? The incidence of violence doesn't change because you limit their choice of tools, it changes because you change your cultural attitude toward violence in general. If your premise that gun ownership is the primary reason for gun violence is so correct, then how do explain Switzerland? Nearly every Swiss household contains an automatic weapon, yet their incidence of gun violence is virtually nil. The reason that Swiss gun violence is virtually nonexistent is because of the Swiss cultural attitude regarding the intolerance of disorder and violence! Some of these people advocating gun control need to pull their heads out of their asses and do a reality check. This country, the US, needs to change its attitude toward violence BEFORE it even considers changing its attitude toward gun control. If the current US attitude toward violence isn't changed, then you can ban every gun in the world, but people here will still find ways of killing each other. Don't believe me, then ask the UK. They banned handguns years ago, and they've been struggling with the problem of knife violence ever since.
Two of the countries that the AP cites as criticizing US gun laws shouldn't even be compared to the US. The AP cites France and Commie China as criticizing US gun control laws. France shouldn't be cited simply because the French never figured out that guns can be fired. They believe that they can only be dropped in the face of the enemy. And the ChiComs definitely shouldn't be cited. The AP reports that the Red Chinese state that the average citizen isn't allowed to own a gun. Well no shit! The average citizen isn't allowed to own a gun in China not because they want to control gun crime, but to prevent a violent overthrow of a repressive regime. Until the Chinese start to accede to our demands on things like human rights, as far as I am concerned, they don't have a right to criticize anyone.
The only country that I feel we should listen to is Australia. They have had similar experiences with gun violence there and they have a (somewhat) similar culture. Perhaps they would be the best country to model reformed gun control laws on. However, to the best of my knowledge, the Australians do not have a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing the average citizen the right to own a firearm and therein lies the rub. While Australia may be a good model, we in the US simply cannot adopt their laws (verbatim) due to our Second Amendment.
So once again, to the screaming imbeciles in the foreign press, I say, "If you want these gun laws changed so badly, then come over and do it yourself." Of course when a few thousand heavily armed NRA member meet you at the airport, don't say I didn't warn you.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Edited @ 2257 EDT 17 APR 2007 for typos.

Watch This...

2007-03-14T11:18:00.000-04:00

Hello again everyone. I apologize for not posting in a while, things have been quite busy around here.
The title of this post concerns a movie that I think everyone should watch. The movie is by filmmaker Aaron Russo and is called "America Freedom To Fascism".
The film starts out talking about the legality of the Federal income tax and slowly starts to delve into other government programs that we should be concerned about such as the Real ID act, the Patriot Act, and RFID chips.
In light of the recent revelations of FBI misuse of National Security Letters (NSLs), and the continuing lack of Congressional oversight of the Bush Administration, I think that this film is especially relevant.
The film is hosted by Google video at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=.
Either click the link, or copy and paste the address into your browser's address bar, to be taken to the film. The movie is 1hr and 49 mins long (so plan your time appropriately).
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my blurb.

A Few Blurbs

2007-02-20T00:54:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. Long time, no write. I hope everyone is doing well.
Today's post is a collection of fever induced random thoughts.
I see that Bush is at his brain-dead best again. Today he decided to draw parallels between the American Revolution and the current war on terror. Had George decided to pay attention in history class, he might have noted that, in British eyes, the American rebels were indeed terrorists! Had he paid attention in Political Science, he might also have noted that in drawing a parallel between the Revolution and the war on terror he just handed the terrorists a large propaganda weapon. What I mean is, now the terrorists can use his words against himself, casting themselves as the modern equivalent of the American rebels fighting for their freedom. What's worse is that they can cast the US in the role of revolutionary-era Britain, in other words they can cast us in the role of oppressor. Yes George, try paying attention more and talking less and you will find that you don't have to extract your foot from your mouth quite as often.

In other news, I see that Britney Spears shaved her head this weekend. I also see that there has been an uproar about it in the press. My take is "who cares". If she wants to do her Sinead O'Connor impersonation, let her, it is her choice. If the press wants to be outraged by her behavior, I would think the fact that she checked into, and out of, rehab might be a bit more worthy of a self righteous outrage. The question I have for the press is, why is it outrageous for her to shave her head, but not noteworthy, in your obvious opinion, to cover the fact that she has turned into a drug-taking party girl who may be neglecting her kids. I guess in the eyes of the press, the kids don't count.

In personal news, I finally took delivery of my new computer. Unfortunately, I had to wait a bit longer than I had expected as my supplier could not get the s7612n system he promised. Instead he substituted a HP s7700n system at no additional charge (damned nice of him!). The only differences between the 7612 and the 7700 is that the 7700 has a 250GB HDD instead of a 200GB HDD, and it came with Windows Vista. The Vista edition is Vista Home Premium. It is very much an eye candy operating system. It looks great. For me, it took some getting used to, but now I actually like it. Vista does have some drawbacks. First, it does indeed ask permission to run nearly anything. However, it only does this until it familiarizes itself with the software that you are running. For example, when I was setting up the system, Vista asked me to approve or disapprove something about every thirty seconds. Now that I have all of my software installed, the only time it asks me for something is when an app hangs. Then, when an app hangs, Vista becomes somewhat helpful in that it asks whether you would like it to go online and find a solution to the problem or not. Another drawback is, that like any new OS, enough has changed that not all of my software works with it. For example, I had a copy of Executive Software's Diskeeper for WinXP. When I tried to install it on Vista, I was informed by Vista that the software was not compatible. Vista searched for a solution, but in the end, the only solution to the problem was for me to buy a new copy from the manufacturer. That was actually the exception rather than the rule. Most of my software didn't need repurchasing, just updating. If you have Vista and something won't work, be sure that your software is updated to the latest version. An example of this is the fact that I bought Intuit's Quicken Basic from the local Walmart. When I got home, I installed it on the system. Vista quickly told me that the program had issues. So, I went to Intuit's website and found out that I had to download version 4 of the program (oob mine was only version 2). Once I updated the program the issues disappeared and Quicken now runs fine. My advice on upgrading from Windows XP to Vista is wait about 6 months or so. This waiting period will allow Microsoft to kick out some of the bugs in the OS and thus make it a more stable system. Speaking of stability, I have had the system for about a week now and haven't experienced the slightest instability (and I've even tweaked it a bit for performance). Also, don't believe all of the doom and gloom reviews, yes, the EULA is distinctly slanted against the consumer, but all of the bull about how Microsoft now controls you computer and can do things to prevent your software from running is just that, bull. The security programs that are included are easily turned on and off, and are easily configurable. It is my conclusion that the reviewers who are asserting these things should quit reviewing computer software and start working for the Department of Homeland Security. At least at DHS, they could put their baseless paranoia to good use. Short of that, they may wish to use the software for more than 15 minutes before writing a review. Unlike most of the kids doing the reviews, I have been working with computers for twenty plus years, and in my opinion, not only is Vista the best looking version of Windows to date, it is also the most secure, and the most stable. I will, however, reserve my final judgment of Vista's stability for about 6 months (I've only had a weeks worth of up time so far).

Well, that's about it for this entry. Judging from what has been going on lately, empirical evidence and critical thinking are no longer needed to write the news. Now all that's needed is ignorance, a misguided sense of morality, and a raging paranoia.
As always, I am Chuck and this post has been written on an HP Pavilion Slimline s7700n PC running Windows Vista Home Premium.

I Finally Went And Did It...

2007-01-29T10:50:00.001-05:00

Hello everyone. I hope you are all in good health.
Well, I finally went and did it (guess I am a damned, dirty ape!). I finally went and bought a new computer. Yes, I finally retired the venerable "HAL-9000". For those of you who don't know me, retiring HAL is a big step for me. HAL has been with me since roughly 2000. To explain a little further, HAL is the name I chose for my ancient Compaq Presario. I call it my "digital abacus" because it was/is an old AMD K6-2, 400 MHz system with a whopping 224 MB of ram. It also had an ATI Rage video card with 4MB of SGRAM and (originally) a 10 GB HDD (I later upped it to 90 GB total [80 GB + 10 GB]. When it came from factory it also had DVD-ROM. I changed that out for a CD burner.
To say the least, I extensively upgraded the system. I massaged, tweaked, and pretty much did everything by OC and make voodoo sacrifices to it to keep it running at a reasonable level. But, alas, all was for naught. In the last six months, it started crashing and corrupting files on a pretty regular basis. So I figured it was time for a new system (a decision not taken lightly). I know, people are saying what's the big deal, but I am a geek and I get somewhat attached to my electronics, especially my computer. I put in a lot of hours, sweat, blood, and, yes, even some tears (of frustration) to keep my system in good shape, and now I was going to junk it. I was going to relegate it to my pile of obsolete stuff. Eventually, part of the old system will live on in my new system, most likely in the form of cannibalized parts (probably the new 80 GB WD HDD and my CD burner). However, it didn't change the fact that a machine that had given me so much entertainment and pleasure was going to be tossed aside like so much other personal detritus. Alas, poor HAL! I knew him Horatio; a machine of infinite jest, of most excellent websurfing. (Yes, it is a paraphrase of "Hamlet" [act 5, scene 1])
So, the other day (Friday, I think), I finally got a new system. The system I ordered hasn't arrived yet, so the place I got it gave me a loaner. The system I ordered is an HP s7612n. It has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Dual Core (2 GHz), 1 GB RAM, 200 GB HDD, an NVIDIA GeForce w/ 256 MB, a dual layer DVD burner with LightScribe, and a 17" LCD monitor. I can hardly wait to get it.
Hell, the loaner system I am using isn't that bad either. It is an HP s7520n. It has a AMD Turion (1.8 GHz, 64 bit), 1 GB RAM, 200 GB HDD, an ATI Radeon w/ 256MB, a dual layer LighScribe DVD burner, and a 17" LCD monitor. I like it, but I would rather have the 7612 system.
I've already added a few accessories to the system already. I mean the monitor speakers that came with it just didn't quite cut it (bluntly, they sounded like crap!), so I added some Altec Lansing 80 watt speakers (2.1 type--2 desktop, 1 subwoofer). Now it sounds pretty good. I also decided to get a 1 GB thumb drive, and, most importantly, I got myself a copy of Sid Meier's Civilization IV.
For those of you who don't have Civ 4 yet, get it. I thought Civ 2 was great until Civ 3 came out. I thought Civ 3 was really good, but when Civ 4 came out, I wanted it. Unfortunately, HAL wouldn't play it (system req's were too high). Now that I have this system, I can play it, and do. It blows Civ 3 away. It is no contest. It has all of the stuff that Civ 3 had, except pollution and civil disorder, plus it has civics, religion, and is 3-D. If you like the Civilization series, and haven't done so, get this game. It is one of the few games that actually live up to its hype.
Well, I gotta run (I actually have work to do).
So until next time, I am Chuck, and my new system's name is COLOSSUS. (I name my systems after their famous (fictional or real) predecessors).

The Problem With Feeling Nostalgic

2007-01-16T17:27:00.001-05:00

Hello readers, I hope you are all in good health.
Today's post concerns that nostalgic feeling we all get once in a while.
I don't know about you, but I usually get to feeling nostalgic when I view something (usually on tv). For example, whenever I watch VH1's "I Love The 80's" I usually go into a week long fit of listening to 80's music and watching "Miami Vice" on Sleuth (and say what you will, Miami Vice was the most kick ass show on in the 80's!!). I also get to thinking that I'd love to go back to those days.
Well, today I did something that made me nostalgic for my college days. Usually, I only get to longing for a return to my days at Pitt when I am actually in Pittsburgh. However, through the modern wonder that is the Internet, I managed to find a webcam located on top of Hillman Library. Hillman Library is the main library for Pitt. As I was scrolling through the views from the webcam, all those good memories of college came rushing back. I looked at the sidewalk in front of the library and memories of working in the stacks came to me. I looked over at the Union and the memory of meeting up with the brothers from my fraternity (Alpha Phi Omega-Beta Chapter) to go on service projects came back (God, I miss those people). I looked over at the Cathedral and remembered my classes there, along with one of my most treasured memories, my first date and, subsequent, first kiss with Kat (and getting caught by the security guard making us both feel very 16 again). I won't go into Kat too much except to say that I dated her for about a year and a half, fell head over heels in love with her, and ended up losing her (something that, even after ten years, I've never quite gotten all the way over. Suffice to say that it doesn't interfere with my life today, but she will always occupy a special place in my heart). I continued to look around on the webcam and memories continued to flood my conscious mind. I looked toward the Carnegie Museum and noticed that they took out the big parking lot in front of the library. They replaced it with a grass field. I like the idea, but where is everyone supposed to park? As I continued, there were so many memories that I had to stop looking. Not because I don't want to remember these things, quite to the contrary, I do want to remember, but because of the feelings they bring up. I loved my time at Pitt. It was quite possibly the best time of my life. The memories that came up only served to remind me of how much I miss the people I associated with and the fact that, without a time machine, I can never go back to those days. The fact that I lost touch with the people who were my friends in college, and the fact that I can never recapture what was, is utterly heartbreaking. Couple that with the realization that, while I knew at the time that these were good times I was having, I never stopped to savor them as I should, and you end up with the depressing truth that a longing to return to those days just leads to wishes unfulfilled and more depression. And that is the real problem with feeling nostalgic.
As always, I am Chuck and I'm going to go be depressed and smoke cigarettes.

PS. If there are any members of APO-BC from the mid 90's (95-97) out there reading this, leave me a comment, I would love to hear from you.

Edited 17 Jan 07 @ 0125 hrs EST for typos and revision of content.

The REAL National Champion

2007-01-09T01:18:00.001-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope all is well with you.
The subject of today's post concerns college football's real national champion.
I just finished watching the University of Florida kick the crap out of Ohio State. As soon as the game was over, Florida was proclaimed and ordained National Champions by the all mighty folks at Fox (as we all know, Fox only broadcasts the greatest sporting matches of all time...at least according to Fox. Ergo, this 41-14 blowout was the greatest college football game of all time because Fox broadcast it, and, thus, Florida had to be immediately proclaimed National Champion lest Fox lose its status.) However, despite the proclamations of greatness by second rate sportscasters covering an over hyped blowout, Florida should NOT be the National Champions. True, Florida was ranked #2 and they did beat the number 1 team in the country. But all Florida did was eliminate one of the two division 1-A unbeaten teams. Ohio State was ranked #1 simply because they had gone undefeated until tonight. Florida, with one loss, should never have been ranked number 2, but they were. Granted, Florida did beat the number 1 team, but if the logic for ranking that team (Ohio State) number 1 was the fact that they were undefeated, then the only other undefeated team in the country should now be ranked number 1, not Florida. The only other undefeated team in Division 1-A football is the Boise State University Broncos. Boise State is currently 13-0 after defeating Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. It may have taken overtime for the Broncos to defeat the Sooners, and BSU may have only won the game by one point, but they are still the only 13-0 team in the country. And since any team that has been defeated at least once cannot logically claim to be better than a team that has not been defeated, Boise State should be the National Champions, not Florida. Boise State has a damn good case for being National Champions. However, until Division 1-A institutes a playoff system, smaller universities like Boise State will continue to get screwed over by pollsters who are more interested in promoting the "old boys", paying back favors, and setting up good tv matchups (ratings wise) in the bowls, rather than seeking out and promoting the nation's best college football teams.
Thus, I have decided that if Fox can proclaim Florida as the National Champion, I can proclaim Boise State as the TRUE National Champion based upon the fact that they are the only undefeated Division 1-A football team. Say what you will, but playing in an over hyped bowl game, wishful thinking, and public proclamations still doesn't change the fact that Florida has one thing that Boise State doesn't...a loss.
I am Chuck, and unfortunately I don't have a vote in the football polls.

Did You Ever...

2007-01-07T03:19:00.001-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone had a pleasant and safe holiday.
Today's post concerns the fact that I cannot seem to gather my thoughts enough to write a coherent post.
It would seem that I have too many subjects and not enough "umph" to write just one post. On top of that, all the subject seem to be jumbling together. What I mean is, I would like to write about my reaction to Bill Cowher's decision to resign as the head coach of the Pittsburgh Steelers. But then again, I would like to write about how my Friday went (lousy). And all of that is being mixed around with concerns for my girlfriend's health (she was in the hospital for a few days) and the fact that I am about 3/4ths burned out in my job (I think I need a break, but the company, being the dicks that they are won't give me one). With all that in mind, I have just decided to write a blurb on each. Here goes...
First, I am sad that Cowher has decided to resign. I am not unhappy that he is pursuing another course, I am just worried about what direction the Steelers will take from here. I mean the Steelers have had only two coaches in my lifetime and both of them have done very well. I am just worried that the third coach will finally be the one that sends the Steelers back to their pre-Chuck Noll mediocrity.
As for my Friday, I have one question...Is it some unwritten rule that every driver in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania must lose their higher mental functions the moment that the first raindrop hits the ground? It seems like it to me. On Friday I had to take my consumer to an appointment 40 miles from our house. On the way there, I saw people executing nearly every form of stupidity that one can commit in a car. From going 70 mph in the rain to swerving from lane to lane (without signals, I might add), to "multitasking", you name it, some idiot was doing it. WTF, people? Do you not understand that hydroplaning, and thus lack of control, can occur at 55 mph? Do you not know that you can be cited for failure to signal a lane change (or did you just run out of "blinker fluid")? Do you not know that "multitasking" increases your chance of having an accident? Or are you, as I have surmised by your behavior, just idiots? I guarantee that if one of these idiots hits me, and they aren't injured in the accident, they will be by the time the police arrive!!! For those of you wondering, no, I don't have road rage. Bad driving is just one of my pet peeves. People constantly complain about the increase in the number of drivers on the road every year. If I had my way, that number would drop drastically. First the age at which you can get a drivers license would go from 16 to 19. Second, all new drivers would have to pass a test as stringent as the current CDL-A test. And last, in a phased program taking no longer than 10 years, all current drivers WITHOUT a CDL would have to the new CDL-like test and pass it before they could renew their licenses. In addition, if you failed the test 3 times, you would have to wait at least 6 months before retaking it. If you failed it 5 times, the wait would go to a year. And if you failed it 7 times, you would be banned from driving permanently. On top of that, driving without a license would get some teeth. The new penalty for driving without a license would be: 1st offense, 6 month suspension-$10000 fine (mandatory), 2nd offense, 1 year suspension, 3 months in prison, $15000 fine, and 3rd offense, lifetime suspension, 6 months in prison, $25000 fine. All subsequent offenses would carry a minimum of 1 year in prison and a maximum of up to 10 years in prison. It would have to be that harsh because those who lose their license would just say, "So what, I can still drive" and then commence driving without a license, so there needs to be a harsh deterrent.
Well, I think I have complained enough. I am glad I got that out of my system, I feel much better now.
As always, I am Chuck, and I say "learn how to drive, ya moron!"

Happy Holidays To Everyone

2006-12-23T22:00:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
Well, it is December 23rd and there is one official shopping day left until Christmas. So, those of you who are waiting until the last minute have one day to get to the malls and stores, then you're up the creek. Of course, if you do head to the local Walmart, make sure to leave plenty of time to get there as it will take you an hour to make a trip that, under any other circumstances, would take you 5 minutes. Be sure to use plenty of caution as the people around you on the highway, who have made the same trip a hundred times before and are usually reasonably intelligent, are now driving like drunken brain-dead blind crack addicted tourists. When you get to the Walmart, please note that in 47 states it is now apparently legal to use your vehicle as an offensive weapon while in the act of hunting for a parking space. Grandma got run over by a reindeer? No, grandma got run over in the Walmart parking lot by a Dodge pickup truck driven by a guy with no teeth who was leaning out the window yelling, "It's got a hemi!!" Once you find out parking space, be sure to have on your good walking shoes as you will have to walk the 7 miles from your space to the front doors (Walmart doesn't run shuttles). When you finally get inside the doors, be sure to take out your baseball bat and commence your holiday shopping. Try to avoid the electronics department as they are setting up for this evening's three round brawl to see who gets the last PS3. (If you wish to see the fight, tickets are free with a $20 purchase. Get them at the customer service desk.) After selecting your cheap Chinese merchandise, proceed to the checkout. I usually try to select a line with 47 people or less. While in line take in all the joys of holiday shopping, the sights (the guy with the crossed eyes and no teeth who is staring at you [maybe, who can tell!]), the sounds (the screaming kid who will NOT shut up, even though he is 17), and the smells (the guy in front of you who smells like a combination of B.O. and bad meat [or good cheese]). Also, enjoy the fact that the line is moving at the speed of a frozen snail in January. When you finally do get to the checker, it is inevitable that the guy in front of you will attempt to pay with one of his 17 credit cards. It is also inevitable that 16 of his cards will be maxed out (and therefore be rejected). Of course he will have to try all of them before getting to the non-maxed card. I say don't get stressed by this, make it a game. Make small wagers with the people behind you as to which card will eventually be accepted. When you do get checked through, try to make the check out person have a stroke. I like to do this by paying cash and by offering unusual cash combinations. For example, I recently went to Walmart and had a final total of $14.19. I told the checker, "I'll make it easy for you" and gave her $15.24. It was rather fun to watch her brain crash as she tried to figure the change. After checking out, make you way to your car (you can usually hire a Sherpa to help guide you back to your parking space and carry your packages). When you leave, remember that Warp 9 is an acceptable speed for exiting the lot. A bit of holiday advice, if you purchased anything that requires you to put it together, stop at the local liquor store as you will definitely need it. Once home, my advice for wrapping your gifts is to use a normal amount of paper, but use enough tape that the person receiving the gift will have to use a plasma cutter in order to open it. Put your gifts under the tree. Then, on Christmas morning, enjoy the wonder in your kid's eyes as they open that hard gotten, expensive gift, set it aside, and play in the box!!!
Hey, I'm just goofing. All in good fun. This author wants to wish everyone a happy and safe holiday. Remember not to drink and drive. And let's try not to kill each other...at least for one day out of the year, anyway. Happy Holidays!
As always I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Here It Comes...

2006-12-19T23:14:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is well.
It has been a while since my last post. First, I would like to thank everyone who has visited lately, you really pumped up my hit rate!
Secondly, it is time to return to this blog's theme, politics. With that in mind, on with the show.
Today, the Bush administration announced that it plans on expanding the size of the US military. Ostensibly, this expansion would be to deal with the long term problems associated with the war on terrorism. In reality, it is the Bush Administration's trial balloon for something people have been predicting since the beginning of the war in Iraq, namely the draft. With no specifics on how the Administration plans on expanding our military, with experienced military personnel leaving in droves, and with people avoiding recruiting offices, only one logical conclusion is left as to how the Pentagon will meet its expansion goals. That conclusion is that they will extend all enlistments indefinitely and they will attempt to institute the draft.
I oppose the draft as it tends to degrade the quality of your force. It has been shown time and time again that an all volunteer force tends to yield a better quality soldier. By a better quality soldier, I mean a soldier who is smarter, more dedicated to serving, and is more satisfied in his job. If the Pentagon is smart, they will attempt to expand the military by offering more incentives. The incentives should be too good to resist. Might I suggest, higher enlistment bonuses, FREE (not partially paid) college educations (at the college of the soldier's choice), free health care at the provider of the soldier's choice (not just the VA), and available low or no interest housing loans and the like. These are only a few suggestions, and, surprise, surprise, they are not new. These are the type of things provided for in the post-World War 2 GI Bill. However, if it is a choice between treating our soldiers right by helping to boost their position in life with a new GI Bill or instituting the draft so that the poor can fight the war for the rich (and then get treated like dirt by the rich upon their [the poor's] return), you can probably guess which the Bush Administration will choose (and no, it won't be the GI Bill option).
So, if you are between 18 and 42, have a legally required Selective Service card, and aren't dead, the US government may have a job for you...as cannon fodder.
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Not So Breaking News...Disaster Strikes Home Update...

2006-12-03T03:51:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. Your on the spot reporter has just returned from inspecting the damage from a tornado in Halifax, PA and here is my updated report:

(Dec. 3, 2006)---Halifax, PA. A tornado struck 1.5 miles south of the central PA town of Halifax on Friday. The tornado left a path of destruction in it wake now estimated at approximately $2.5 million dollars. The tornado struck at approximately 4:15-4:30 pm. The storm is being classified as an strong "F1" tornado with sustained wind speed approaching 112 mph. The tornado damaged several business in the area, some quite severely. The businesses most affected were Accumold and Patton Tire. Accumold estimates their damage at approximately $1.3 million, while Patton Tire is estimating damages at approximately $500,000. Apart from the businesses damaged, several dozen houses were also damaged by the twister. An estimate of the residential damages comes to approx. $700,000.
The storm was responsible for one death. A woman police are now identifying as Wanda Duplassie (sp?), age 50 of Millersburg, was killed when a tree fell on the car she was driving. Fire crews took several hours to extract the woman from her car due to the size of the tree. There are no reports or estimates of other injuries at this time.
The tornado also left hundreds without electricity and telephone service. As temperatures dropped into the 30's following the storm, utility crews rushed to restore electrical service to the area, and local emergency officials scrambled to set up emergency shelters. Two shelters were set up to handle local residents, one at the Halifax Fire House and one at the Halifax Township Municiple Building. As of the time of this report, both phone and electrical services have been restore to most of the affected area.
Officials expect the clean up of the area to take several days. The rebuilding of the area is expected to take several weeks to several months with at least one business, Accumold, closed indefinitely.
Police are still asking people to avoid the area if possible. If you must travel through the area, they are advising people to exercise caution and expect delays. [End of report]

I managed to travel into the affected area yesterday (Dec 2) afternoon. After parking in the Giant grocery store parking lot, I walked few hundred yards south to the area between Accumold and Sheetz. As I walked, I passed several utility crews working on the telephone lines and a lot of house that were missing shingles. Several of the houses also had trees down in the front yard. As I got up to Accumold, things got worse. Accumold is destroyed. The Community Banks building doesn't look bad until you notice that the large billboard that stood next to it is now in the parking lot wrapped around the bank sign. Lisi's Shell no longer has a roof over the carwash, it no longer has a sign, and it looked like it no longer has several of its windows. The houses behind the old Treat parking lot were playing host to several downed trees and a great deal of roofing material. The roofing material apparently came from the large canopy-style roof at Patton Tires. While Patton Tires is still there, its canopy roof is not. The coffee shop to just to the north of Patton's was missing siding and had what looked to be a pretty sizable hole in the side of the building. Sheetz sustained some minor damage to the canopy above the gas pumps and also to the small canopy around the store. According to the reports I received from various sources, the area behind Accumold and Community Banks was pretty severely damaged with the worst damage being a tree that fell down and split a house in two. There was also a report of a small wooden utility shed that was blown into a tree. According to the report, the shed was sitting in the tree apparently undamaged, but approximately 15-20 feet above the ground! Unfortunately, I wasn't allowed to venture back that way by an overzealous, underintelligent, fire cop. Apparently she thought that the downed telephone lines were just to dangerous to be around. Go figure. I did manage to take 25 pictures of the damage. The photos can be found at--- http://new.photos.yahoo.com/halifaxtornado
Well, that about does it for me. I will post any updates to this story as I get them.
Until then, I am Chuck, and this has been your on the spot report.

P.S. If anyone from Halifax is reading this and you have more information or spot an inaccuracy, please let me know by leaving a comment. Thanks.

Breaking News...Disaster Strikes Home...

2006-12-02T12:11:00.000-05:00

Hello again everyone. Not to be rude, but right to the story.
(Dec. 2, 2006)---Halifax, PA. A tornado struck the area just outside of the small central Pennsylvania town of Halifax, yesterday afternoon. According to witnesses, a funnel cloud was sighted at approx. 5 pm just south of town. According to reports, the area sustained heavy damage, with numerous building destroyed. There has been one confirmed death. An unidentified woman was killed when a large tree was blown onto the car she was in. The National Weather Service has not yet categorized the tornado. A state of emergency has been declared for the northern section of Dauphin County, police are asking that people restrict their travel in and around the Halifax area as to aid emergency personnel with the clean up.[End report]

I will report more as I get the information. Right now, I am off to see the damage myself. Stay tuned for updates as the day progresses. --Chuck.

What A Sorry State Of Affairs...

2006-11-30T06:15:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
The title of today's post refers to the current state of football in Pittsburgh.
As anyone who has read this blog knows, I am a huge fan of the University of Pittsburgh Panthers and an even bigger fan of the Pittsburgh Steelers. To say that I am a bit unhappy about the direction these two teams are taking this season is a large understatement.
I kind of figured that Pitt probably wouldn't do much this season since they had lost a large number of starters from last years team. The loss of those starters coupled with the fact that Dave Wannstadt is still the head coach didn't give me much hope at the start of the season. However, the Panthers surprised me with two quick wins over Virginia and Cincinnati. I began to feel hopeful about the rest of the season. Then they lost to Michigan State. The Panthers then rattled off 4 more wins and by mid October they were 6-1. I was beginning to think that maybe, just maybe, Wannstadt and crew had finally gotten their shit together. I was also beginning to think that maybe, if Pitt beats Rutgers, they will finally get ranked and possibly go to a decent bowl game. But, alas, it was not to be. Apparently Wannstadt finally remembered who he was and Pitt collapsed, losing their last five games. So much for a decent bowl game (or any bowl game for that matter). The final record for Pitt this season stands at 6-6 (2-5 in conf.). What makes the 6-6 record especially repugnant is the fact that the six wins all came against unranked opponents. Pitt failed to beat a single ranked team this season. What's worse is that the six teams that Pitt defeated have a combined record of 30-41. Only one of the teams Pitt defeated actually has a winning record (Cincinnati, 7-5). Hey Dave, you don't get ranked and go to decent bowl games if all you do is beat "weak sisters"! You need to beat ranked teams if you are going to impress the pollsters. Dave, you had three opportunities to beat a top 25 team (Rutgers, West Virginia, and Louisville) and you blew all three. I will give you credit though, Wannstadt, you sure showed that you could out coach those football powerhouses like the Citadel and Toledo. Keep doing that and I am sure that you will impress people on the Tidy Bowl committee. So, since Dave Wannstadt has proven that he can neither beat a quality NFL team nor a ranked college team, I think it is time for him to go. Both Wannstadt and the AD who hired him should be fired forthwith. Should Pitt decide to keep Wannstadt, mark my words, next season will be no better (and will probably be worse) than this season.
Now on to the Steelers...
Oh how the mighty hath fallen. Just a mere 8 months ago, the Steelers were at the pinnacle of professional football, having won their fifth Super Bowl title. Now, less than a year later, they are struggling to get to .500. Currently the Steelers are a lousy 4-7. They are coming off of a beating by the hated Baltimore Ravens that would have made the Marquis de Sade proud. My question is "What the hell's the problem?" What I mean is, the Steelers lost very few people from last years Super Bowl team, so, at least in theory, they should be as good as they were last year. But they aren't. I think that the problems with this team rest squarely on an offensive line that has been shaky at best. At their worst (like last week against the Ravens), the current line couldn't have blocked the Girl Scouts from sacking Big Ben. The line just plain looked confused against the Ravens stunts and blitzes. I don't know whether the Ravens defensive coordinator called that good of a game, or if the Steelers line was that ill prepared. Either way, if the Steelers are going to start winning games (and keep Ben from getting killed), it has to start with the line. If the O-line doesn't start picking up the blitzes and stunts, and if they don't start sustaining their blocks, Roethlisberger will continue to have to run for his life, the running game will be a non-starter, and the Steelers will continue to lose games. Since the Steelers are now 4-7, and since a 9-7 record probably won't get them into the playoffs, perhaps the Steelers should start working on some of the basics. What I mean is, they should start working on establishing good line play, from there they should start working on re-establishing their run game, and finally, they should work on getting Ben to make good, solid decisions when throwing the ball (he has 19 INTs with only 12 TDs).
Finally, I would like to offer my condolences to former Steeler Jerome Bettis whose father, Johnnie Bettis, died of a heart attack on Tuesday.
I am Chuck, and anyway you look at it, it has been a sad year for football and football players in Pittsburgh.

What I've Been Up To.

2006-11-14T00:56:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is well.
Well, as promised, I thought that I would fill you in on what I did during my absence from the blog.
To start with, on 28 August I changed residences. I moved from my home to a house owned by the company I work for. Along with the change of residence, I also got a new roommate.
As I am a family living provider, my roommate is also the person that I am paid to care for. I won't reveal his name, but I can tell you that the person is a mildly retarded sexual offender. The last several months with him have not only been a bit of an adventure, but also a learning experience. I have learned more about sexual offenders than I ever cared to know. While I can't reveal specifics due to the various confidentiality rules and laws, I can tell you that the two months of hands on work has taught me more than I would have learned with a year of university classes. The only drawback is that, when it comes to his target population, I have to be on my "A game" everyday as one slip by me could lead to him re-offending. To give you an example of what I am talking about, I have to monitor his tv viewing to make sure he doesn't look at or seek out programs containing his target population, I have to make sure that he doesn't look at or seek contact with his target pop. when we are out in public, I have to monitor and censor his mail to prevent pictures of his target pop. from getting through to him, I have to monitor his mood, thoughts, and fantasies (he reports these things to me) to determine whether he is into, out of, or entering the "offender cycle", and I can never, ever leave him alone. To say the least it can be extremely stressful. In fact, he drives my absolutely nuts from time to time. However, most of the time he is extremely cooperative, and, generally, a nice guy. I'm glad he isn't a jerk, but his being a nice guy can lead to problems too. Generally, when someone is nice you will let your guard down when you are dealing with them. I have the same tendency as most people, and it is something I must guard against as one slip up by me could lead to his re-offending, and his re-offending is something that I have vowed will not happen on my watch!
As for other things that have been going on, I finally decided to join the 21st century (6 years late) and got myself a cell phone. Until October, I got along rather well without a cell, now I don't know what I ever did without it! It isn't so much the ability to make phone calls from nearly everywhere, it is the accessories like the datebook, the built in alarm clock, and the automatic reminders. I must admit to being completely converted from a cell phone skeptic into a cell phone lover. I guess I should tell you what I got. I went to the Cingular store at the local mall and picked up a lovely Motorola Razr. I actually got two Razrs, one for myself and one for my girlfriend. Mine is the traditional, and basic, black, hers is pink. I also managed to get myself a Motorola H500 Bluetooth device. I really like the Bluetooth as I can talk on the phone and keep both hands on the wheel while driving. If you don't have a Bluetooth and you do a lot of driving, I highly recommend that you get one, it really seems to be a much safer way of talking on the phone while driving.
About the only other thing that's new is the fact that I got a DSL connection (finally). Unfortunately, the only company to offer DSL in my area was Verizon (so now the NSA can read my words directly instead of waiting for them to be posted to the blog). I finally got my connection on the 9th of November after being promised a hookup on the 8th. I guess one day late isn't too bad, but being an internet junkie and a geek, the delay about half killed me. Oh well, the connection is fairly speedy (for DSL)(3Mbps) and it works. Now I just have to go buy a new computer so I can truly take advantage of all that speed. I figure the computer will probably be purchased in January.
On a political note, I did vote and I am exceedingly happy that the Republicans got the crap kicked out of them. I am happy that the corrupt-criminal-pervert Republicans are gone, now we will get to see if the corrupt-criminal-pervert Democrats can (or will) do any better.
Well, it is late and I need to sleep (big day tomorrow).
So, as always, I am Chuck and this has been my post.

I'm Back...Again

2006-11-11T01:45:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
I just wanted to post a brief blurb to let everyone know that my hiatus is over. I am now established at my new residence, and I have a brand spanking new DSL connection. I am planning on posting an update on what I have been doing during my absence. Until then, I have to attend to my job (and it is 1:45 am!!)
As always, I am Chuck and, like MacArthur, I have returned.

Here We Go Again...

2006-08-20T02:18:00.000-04:00

Hello readers, I hope everyone is in good health.
The subject of today's post refers to the fact that I am going to have to take another break from this blog.
As you may know, I have a job doing what is called "Family Living" or "Life Sharing" with developmentally disabled people. And as you may also know, I had done a temporary assignment and I have been waiting to be notified as to when I would be starting my permanent assignment. Well, I finally got the notification. I will be starting my permanent assignment on 28 Aug 06. As the permanent assignment requires that I relocate, I will be without internet access (except for occasionally at the local library or internet cafe to check my email). That means that I will not be able to make any entries to the blog for a while. I figure the break should last anywhere from 1.5 to 3 months. The reason for the rather lengthy time estimate is that it will take me at least 1 month to get a paycheck and then it will take another 0.5 to 1 month to get the DSL line hooked up. Unfortunately I cannot get cable at my new place so I have to go with DSL, and that DSL is, unfortunately, provided by Verizon. I generally do not like Verizon because of their connections to the NSA and the fact that, at least in the area I am moving to, they are not too speedy when it comes to hooking up new lines. But the alternative, going with Jack Flash DSL from Commonwealth Tel., is so repugnant that I cannot bear the thought of it let alone seriously consider them as a provider (let's just say that their service is a bit on the poor side of good and lousy).
So, in summation, I will be offline for the next 1.5 to 3 months. Hopefully this break will be on the short end of my estimate, but don't count on it. I will let everyone know when I am back on via a post on the blog. Until then, I wish everyone good luck and good health.
I am Chuck and my rants will be delayed due to technical difficulties...Please stand by.

Random Stuff

2006-08-09T04:19:00.000-04:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
Today's post concerns a variety of topics and the thoughts I've had about them. None of the topics or thoughts is/are enough to fill an entire post, so I thought that I'd combine them.

First up is something I just read about in the EFF Effector newsletter. It would seem that late last week the US Senate passed a Cybercrime Treaty. The treaty would, ostensibly, bring US laws into line with other countries laws as they relate to things like hacking, copyright infringement, kiddie porn, and the like. Now that doesn't sound bad except that the treaty requires the US to help in enforcing other countries' laws here in the US. So if you do something online that violates another country's laws but isn't a crime here in the US, you could still be arrested for the crime and extradited to the country whose laws you broke. So much for US national sovereignty. It also doesn't bode well for this blog (or any blog that is critical of governmental actions). In theory, since I have been critical of China from time to time, and since Chinese law doesn't allow for the criticism of its government, I could be arrested and shipped to China to stand trial for exercising my (US) Constitutionally guaranteed right of free speech. Thanks alot guys! In one idiotic action you morons in the Senate have not only proven that you don't have the sheer intelligence necessary to run a complex government, but you've signed away everything that the people of this country have tried to preserve for the last 230 years. From now on, I think that an intelligence test should be part of the process for qualifying to run for public office. If you don't have an IQ of at least 150, you should be summarily disqualified from running. This would at least keep the morons we have now from gaining reelection and screwing up the country even more!

The second item concerns the recent BP announcement that a major oil pipeline in Alaska is going to be shutdown for repairs. According to BP, the pipeline has some corrosion issues and it will take several months to repair them. Now I like the fact that BP is being (somewhat) environmentally conscious and trying to keep the pipeline from rupturing and spilling oil all over Alaska. However, I have to question their timing for shutting down the pipeline. It is obvious that they had to know about the corrosion for sometime (as evidenced by their [BP's] statement that corrosion inside the pipeline had cause a few minor oil spills several months ago). So why, then, is it that BP waited until the price of oil was high before shutting down the pipeline? According to their own figures, BP estimates that shutting down this pipeline will decrease US supplies by 400000 barrels per day. The also estimate that it will drive the price of oil up by roughly $10 per barrel. So why then, when oil is in short supply and demand is at its highest (during the summer) would you turn off a major supply? Is it to drive oil (and gasoline) prices higher? What, you're not making enough money, is that it? Or do you just want to see gas top $4 per gallon? My advice to anyone who wants to get rich quick is start buying cornfields. I have a feeling that alcohol (for vehicular consumption) is about to become real popular, real quick. Just remember not to drink up all of your profits.

The third subject I want to address is the issue of preachers rewriting history to suit their religious agendas. It would seem that the guy I was taking care of (during my temporary work assignment) wanted to go to church. Since part of my job is to aid the consumer in fulfilling his spiritual needs/choices, I was obligated to take him to church. Knowing that I have a problem with organized religion, my girlfriend volunteered to help me out and invited me to attend her church. Her church is a very small non-denominational congregation. Since the service follows no set order that I can discern, I have taken to calling her church "disorganized religion". The Sunday that we attended was the Sunday closest to the 4th of July, so, of course, the preacher had a sermon concerning the direction that the US is heading. The sermon started out ok, with the usual admonition that this country needed to "return to God", but quickly deteriorated from there. The preacher launched into a tirade about how homosexuals were ruining this country and how they were child molesters. He also started ranting about how all of the journalists in this country were "secular humanists" and how the founding fathers would be turning over in their graves at the state of religion in the US because they were all good church-going folks. The sermon also contained other items like how George W Bush was the greatest and most righteous president since Lincoln, how the liberals in this country were destroying it, and how he (the preacher) now had a choice between paying for his car or paying for his Medicare part D. The tirade lasted for about 45 minutes. During this time I had no chance to respond to the preacher's errors and inaccuracies, so I sat there boiling mad. If there is one thing in this world I cannot stand, it is a preacher who deliberately lies and distorts the truth just to advance his agenda. Since I had no chance to respond to him then, I will respond to him here and now.
First of all preacher man, I have no problem with you call for people to go to church...if that is their choice. Religion and state were separated for good reason by the Founding Fathers. The reason that they separated the two was that they had seen what happens when religion is intertwined with government. They lived under a system (before independence) that excluded Catholics from holding governmental offices. They had read about the religious persecution conducted in England against Catholics, Puritans, and others by the king on behalf of the zealots who controlled the COE at the time. They also read about the persecutions conducted by the Puritans under Cromwell during England's time as a Commonwealth. All this weighed heavily on their minds as they set to separating church and state. As for your statements against homosexuals, well, everyone's entitled to their opinion no matter how uninformed it is. However, if you wish to argue facts, then I might refer you to any one of numerous studies that show that homosexuals are no more prone to molest children than heterosexuals. In fact, heterosexuals have been shown to be more prone to such molestation. You may be confused by the fact that, while most molesters are heterosexual, the acts that they commit tend to be homosexual in nature. Oh, and if anything is to blame for the downfall of this country, it isn't homosexuals, it is hate spewing demagogues like yourself. As for the Founding Fathers being good Christian folks, wrong. Most of the Founding Fathers considered themselves to be believers in God, but a great number of them fall into the category of "Secular Humanist". You know, the one you despise so much. The most notable of these secularists was Thomas Jefferson. You might remember him, he's the guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, not to mention that he was the third president. He was more influenced by the works of Rousseau, Locke, Hobbs, and Voltaire than the Bible (you may want to note that Voltaire was an outspoken critic of religion, not the type of person you would call a "good Christian"). I guess the fact that this country was founded on what you would call "secular humanist" values is just another fact that you will choose to ignore in your future tirades because it doesn't fit your agenda. One last thing, your assertion that George W Bush is the greatest president since Lincoln just doesn't wash. Objectively, Bush is the worst president we've ever had. Prior to Bush, Buchanan was cited as being the worst because of his inability or unwillingness to address the growing issue of secession in the south prior to the start of the Civil War. Bush has far surpassed Buchanan in inability to form consensus among the people. In fact Bush has been more divisive, more power hungry, and more deceptive than any president in the history of this country. But, then again, these facts don't fit your agenda, so they will conveniently be ignored. As for Medicare part D's high cost making you unable to pay for your car, what did you expect? Welcome to the club preacher man, you just join millions of other working Americans who have been screwed over by the Republican led government, the same Republican led government that you so wholeheartedly support! My advice to you preacher man is to stick to the things you know, like religion and the Bible, and leave politics and history alone, otherwise you risk showing your ignorance of those subjects and you risk having someone like me point out that ignorance to you (and the rest of the world)!!

Well, that about wraps it up. As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Editor's Note: This post was revised @ 0419 hrs EDT on 9 AUG 06 to remove a section that could have been construed as a threat.

What I Did During My Vacation (From This Blog).

2006-07-29T01:35:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone out there has been doing well and staying healthy.
Since I spent about a month and a half away from this blog, I thought that I would share what I was doing with you.
As you may know (if you are a regular reader), I got myself a new job. My job was suggested to me by my girlfriend who knew of openings at the company we both now work for. I now work in the mental health/mental retardation (MH/MR) field. My position is (officially) Family Living Provider (FLP). I am not an employee of the company I work for, but an independent contractor. Because of a shortage of people willing to do the work I do, the company has a very attractive setup to offer. What I mean is that to attract people, the company is currently offering the following company provided (at no cost to me) items: housing (in an actual house), food, all utilities (incl. cable or satellite tv), all household necessities (cleaners, toilet paper, furniture, etc.), a car, and a nice tax free income. Yes, you read it correctly, a tax free income. I don't want to bore you with the gory details, but suffice to say that because the family living program is funded by the federal, state, and local governments, the program has a tax exempt status.
Now all of this doesn't come without a catch. The catch is that I must provide a safe, healthy, and clean atmosphere for the MH/MR person (called a "consumer") and I must be with them at all times except when they are at work or at a "day program" (it usually means that I am with the person 16 hours a day during weekdays and 24 hours a day on the weekends). I (and the house) are subject to both regular and random state inspections. I (and the house) am also subject to random, unannounced company inspections (in which a company rep. just kind of walks in whenever they feel like it). I am also responsible for all of the cooking, all of the cleaning, minor maintenance, minor first aid, administering all doctor prescribed medications, and providing recreational/community integrational programs for the consumer.
All of that sounds like alot, but it isn't really. I will give you an example. During my temporary duty assignment, I was place with a male consumer. Due to certain confidentiality policies and laws, I cannot reveal the consumer's name or medical information, but suffice to say that the person was a MR male in his twenties with a few behavioral problems. For the purposes of this example, I will call this man "C" (for "consumer"). When I met "C", I had been given information (by the company) that caused me to be somewhat weary of him. As I got to know him, the information given to me proved to be mostly false. "C" is a caring, considerate individual. He is somewhat educated (although he cannot read, he can write his name, knows his "ABC's", and knows his numbers.) Despite a few outbursts, I would describe "C" as an all around nice guy. Some of C's behaviors were a little more annoying than others, but manageable nonetheless. For example, when C would see something he wanted, he would obsess about getting it to the point of driving me a little nuts. By obsess about getting it, I mean that he would ask me over and over again whether he could get the item. Usually I could redirect him, but sometimes I could not, and it was those times when he would drive me nuts. I usually cured my temporary insanity by going outside and smoking a cigarette. C is very high functioning and can do most things himself, such as toileting, bathing, cleaning his room, etc. I was pretty much there to cook, clean the rest of the house, and give meds.
A usual day with C would start around 6:30 or 7 am. I would get up, smoke a cig (or 5), then get him up around 7:15 or 7:30 am. By that time, the day programmer would be there (a day programmer is someone who takes a consumer out in the community for 8 hours[+,-] to improve the consumers social interaction skills). C would get up, get a shower, get dressed, and get himself breakfast (usually a bowl of cereal and some PopTarts). In the meantime, I would get C's medications, and fill the day programmer in on any troublesome behaviors or appointments that C had. Usually around 8-8:30 am, C and the day programmer would leave the house. This would allow me to do really important things like wash the dishes, do paperwork, or play GTA: San Andreas (I couldn't play this around C due to the game's violent and sexual content). Around 4 or 4:30 pm, C would return to the house. The day programmer would tell me what they had done, how C's behavior was, and fill out a daily progress report. The day programmer would then leave. After the day programmer left, C and I would sometimes go for a ride or take care of necessary household errands (that I thought C could benefit from) like going to the grocery store or pharmacy or the like. If we didn't go out, I would start supper. Sometimes C would assist me with a few of the simpler tasks in the preparation of the meal (like setting the table). After supper, the night usually consisted of either going to visit C's girlfriend (yes, he had a g/f [who was very sweet, giggled like a schoolgirl, and was madly in love with C]), going for a drive, or watching tv. At 9 pm I would give C his evening medications. Because the medications made him sleepy, the night would usually end by 10:30 pm. After C went to bed, I would fill out the required paperwork on how the day went and was usually in bed by 11:30 pm. On the weekends things were slightly different as there was no day programmer to take C out for 8 hours. Therefore, I was with him 24 hours a day on the weekends. During this time, we usually went on an outing. Most of the outings consisted of just going to the mall, or for a ride, but one was a bit special. C is an avid fisherman. Knowing this, I arranged to visit my place and pick up my paycheck (so we had a little money, C didn't receive much money during the month and what he did get was spent on necessities like soap and shampoo, etc). After picking up my check (my mom cashed it for me, yay mom!), I took C for a long ride in which I promised him that, if he had patience, we would go someplace special. That someplace special was a BassPro Shops store located in a (relatively) local mall (if you call 80 miles away local). Now in my time, I have seen alot of fishermen enter BassPro, but never have I seen someone's face light up like C's did when we walked in and he seen all the boats, rods, and other fishing equipment. He reminded me of the proverbial kid in a candy store. He literally ran through the entrance turnstiles (almost knocking them over) and was like a kid on Christmas morning who just got everything he asked for. Unfortunately, we could only stay for about an hour and a half. But in that hour and a half, we managed to see the entire store, and C managed to ask for roughly one of everything therein, including a Desert Eagle pistol! I had to laugh when he asked for that as he wasn't even allowed to have sharp scissors at home. I had to turn his request down, telling him that "I don't think the boss will consider purchasing a 50 caliber automatic pistol a good idea!" (When I told my boss about it, he laughed until he cried). C did manage to purchase a souvenir cup and a catalog while we were there. For the next week, C told everyone who came to the house (including the two Jehovah's Witnesses) about the trip.
People tell me that it takes a special person to work with the developmentally disabled. I don't think it takes someone special. I think that it takes someone who gives a damn about their fellow man and is willing to treat a person with a disability no differently than anyone else they encounter. If you care about money, or how you appear in public, or what people will say about you or your consumer, then you probably don't belong in the MH/MR field as a provider. The trials of working with a developmentally disabled person can be great (especially emotionally), but the rewards can be just as great, if not greater. I can tell you from personal experience, some of the things "C" did really got on my nerves, but to see his face light up on the BassPro outing, to have him hug me afterwards, tell me thank you, and know that he was really sincere in his sentiments, meant more to me than all of the money and amenities that any company could provide.
So when people ask me what I did while I was away from this blog, I tell them that I grew up and became a man.
As I always, I am Chuck, and this is what I did while I was away from my blog.

I'm Back!

2006-07-23T01:35:00.000-04:00

Hey there loyal readers! Long time, no post.
I just wanted to drop everyone a line to let you know that I am back. I finished my training and my temporary duty assignment, and I am back and ready to go. I will post an entry on what I was doing during my assignment (kinda like those "What I Did During My Summer Vacation" essays from school) and then I will start tackling those political issues again.
Unfortunately, I may have to take another break sometime in August to move into my new, permanent assignment. But until then, I plan on posting as much as time and my girlfriend allows.
So to reiterate, and to use an Aerosmith lyric, I'm back in the saddle again!
As always, I am Chuck and I will be ranting again soon.

Loyal Readers Take Note.

2006-06-01T02:10:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is in good health.
The title of this post isn't a warning or anything like that. It is a notice to my readers that my posts (which have been rather sparse in number) may decrease of the next couple of weeks.
It would seem that I recently got a new job. The job, which is set to begin on 5 June, will involve a great deal of training on my part. In other words, I will be attending a great number of training sessions and probably will not have time to post much. The job will also require me to relocate, so I may not have an Internet connection for a few days/weeks.
Do not fret, dear reader, this blog is NOT going away. Once the training and relocation period is complete, I plan on resuming my postings. The period should last no longer than a month or so (hopefully). I ask that my readers bear with me during this period. I also apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause.
As a side note, the job I am getting had to do a background check on me to determine if I was a criminal or a nut. Both checks came back clean. I don't know which is more odd, the fact that I am not wanted by the government yet or the fact that someone actually considers me to be sane!! Oh well, in the words of Robbie Nevil, "C'est la vie, that's just the way it goes."
I am Chuck and where else are you going to find a Robbie Nevil reference on a political blog?!!?

Something You Should Read.

2006-05-27T02:54:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
Today, as I was going through my usual routine of reading the news and a few of my favorite blogs, I came across an article that I think you should read.
The path I used to find the article was somewhat circuitous and the blogs involved deserve both credit and a mention here. The story goes like this; I was reading a post on "Politics through the eyes of a teenager". The article, concerning a humorous video clip on the subject of illegal immigration, had a reference to another blog at the bottom. The blog mentioned at the bottom of the article is called "Terrorism News". I clicked on the link and began reading the blog. As I read, I came across a post called "Top 10 Signs Of Impending US Police State". The post had a brief comment and a link leading to the article I think you should read. The link lead to an article called "Top 10 Signs of the Impending U.S. Police State" by Allan Uthman and Buffalo Beast. While it is obvious what the article is about, I think that it is a very good, thought-provoking, and chilling piece. I urge all of my readers to go to the site, read the article, and then see if you don't find yourself agreeing with the authors' points and conclusions.
I am Chuck and this has NOT been a rant, but rather a recommendation.

Edited: 27 May 06, 0257hrs to correct an HTML link.

Long Time, No Post...

2006-05-25T00:17:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well. First of all, I apologize for the delay in posting. Things have been rather hectic here at the Chuck Ranch (and House of Ill-Repute).
There are two subjects that I would like to tackle in today's post. The first subject deals with the fact that Iran now wishes to engage in talks concerning its nuclear program. The second topic concerns an FBI raid on the offices of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-LA).
The Washington Post is reporting that Iran now wants to talk directly to the US concerning its (Iran's) nuclear program. According to the Post's story, this signals a change in the Iranians attitude toward the US. The story also is reporting that US intelligence officials are regarding this as a major overture by the Iranians. According to the Post, administration officials, including Bush and Rice, have dismissed the overture as nothing more than a "tactical move" and have stated that the request contains nothing new.
Ok, let me get this straight, the Iranians want to talk about their nuclear program, the overture has been assessed by experts on Iran as being "real", and yet, the Bush Administration says that the Iranian efforts are nothing more than a "tactical move". Gee, George, what tactic would that be? The tactic of trying to avoid a war? If this is a real effort for the Iranians to engage the US diplomatically, as the experts have said it is, then what is the harm in talking to them? Someone wiser than I once said that there is no last word in diplomacy. If you are so smart George, then prove it, talk to the Iranians and do so in good faith. I realize that talking to them might delay your timetable for starting World War 3 and completing your program of world conquest, but look at it this way, at least the military will have more time to prepare for the upcoming war. George, are you so stupid that you can't see that talking to the Iranians will at least delay a war, if not avert one? Are you so blind that you can't see that the American people don't want another Middle Eastern military adventure? I don't know what is going through your head George, but this is not the 19th century and the doctrine of Manifest Destiny went out with the end of the Civil War! Furthermore, the Age of Imperialism is long over. This is not the British Empire and you are not Queen Victoria. This is America and, in case no one told you, we believe in talking to anyone who will talk to us. On top of that, we don't believe in going to war with someone just because they pissed us off, or at least we didn't until you took office. George, pull your head out of your ass, start paying attention to the people we pay to be experts on the subject at hand, and then tell your empty headed Secretary of State to set up a meeting with the Iranians. If they are truly serious about resolving this issue, who knows, they might just show up to that meeting and they might just talk about it. And, who knows, we might just avoid a war and the thousands of dead servicemen that will ensue. Of course talking to someone as bloodthirsty, vindictive, insane, and stupid as you, George, is like teaching a pig to sing...All it does is frustrate the teacher and annoy the pig.
Let us move on to our next subject, the FBI raid on Rep. William J. Jefferson's offices. Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that the FBI raided the Congressional offices of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-LA). Jefferson is currently under investigation for taking bribes for promoting business ventures in Africa. According to the story, Jefferson denied any wrongdoing and called the raid an "outrageous intrusion". The story goes on to report that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL), and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are all up in arms over the raid. They view the raid as violating the Constitutional clause concerning separation of powers. According to both the Constitution and the courts, a raid such as this violates the prohibition on the Executive Branch of the government intimidating the Legislative Branch.
Well, I can see why Hastert is up in arms, he is afraid that the FBI is going to raid his offices as he is under investigation regarding his ties to the convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The other two may have a point though. When conducting a corruption investigation, usually the FBI subpoenas the relevant documents from the office of whomever they are investigating. This raid does seem to be very unusual. But then again, stop and consider a few things. First, the Representative in question is a Democrat. Second, he is from Louisiana and has been critical of the Bush Administration concerning the government's response to the Katrina disaster. Third, he is up for reelection in a district that, if there were no allegations of wrongdoing, would probably remain in Democratic hands. And lastly, the FBI is part of the Department of Justice which is run by Bush lapdog Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales is the man who wrote justifications of torture and the NSA spying program for the Bush Administration, so why should we expect him to respect the norm or the law when it comes to conducting this investigation? The answer is that we shouldn't. You can bet that this raid was conducted on orders from the top in an effort to both intimidate Congress and to discredit a Bush opponent.
As for the Congresspersons complaining about their rights being violated, all I can say is, "Shut up!" Where were you guys when the Patriot Act was being debated and passed? I didn't hear you screaming about rights then. And what about the efforts to try and legalize the NSA spying program? How much complaining about rights violations did you do then? When your rights are violated you complain to anyone who will listen, but when the rights of the American people are violated, strangely enough, you are silent. People have told me that I should treat our elected officials with respect. Well, I hate to tell you boys and girls, respect is something which is earned and not given. Until you crybaby Congressmen start standing up and fighting for the rights of those you are elected to serve and represent, you will get no respect from me. And the more you complain about your rights while disregarding the rights of your constituents, the less respect you will earn as far as I am concerned. If you want to earn the respect of the American people, I suggest that you quit complaining about your rights being violated, start opposing the Bush regime instead of rubberstamping everything he wants, start thinking critically about the direction this country is headed, and start serving those who put you in your position in the first place (the people, not the special interests you've been serving). Until then I will continue to consider you to be nothing more than lying, corrupt, reprobates whose only interest is in lining your pockets at the expense of the American people, and, therefore, not worthy of my respect.
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

The Tangled Web: Part 2, The Plot Thickens

2006-05-19T04:21:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is in good health.
The subject of today's rant is once again the NSA and their illegal and ill-advised domestic spying program.
Since the last post on this subject, it would seem that BellSouth, and Verizon have been vigorously denying their involvement in the program. The companies have issued several statements saying that they never cooperated with the NSA and that the USA Today story claiming that they did is just plain wrong. They have also called on the USA Today to retract the story.
Well boys, if the story is so wrong, why not just sue the USA Today for libel? After all, statements such as those contained in the USA Today story are, according to you, damaging and false. As I am sure your corporate attorneys are aware, damaging and false statements in print are the foundation of any libel suit. However, since there is no suit forthcoming, I am left with only one alternative and that is to believe that the USA Today report is substantially correct in its assertion that you did, indeed, cooperate with the NSA and thus committed a violation of federal law. The USA Today has issued a statement in response to the BellSouth and Verizon denials asserting that they believe their story to be correct.
In other news regarding the NSA domestic spying scandal and these companies, BellSouth, Verizon, and AT&T have all been named in a suit in New York. The suit alleges that these companies have all violated federal law and customer trust by divulging their customers' information to the NSA without a warrant. According to CNN, the class action suit, filed in the Manhattan District Court, is asking that the companies pay $200 billion to their 200 million subscribers. Wow, talk about a helluva a rebate on your phone bill!!
The Manhattan suit is not the only court trouble for AT&T. AT&T is currently in the process of being sued by the Electronic Frontiers Foundation in US District Court in San Franscico for their (AT&T's) role in aiding the NSA. A retired AT&T employee has alleged that the company had installed equipment in a San Francisco office that was tapping into customers' dial-in information. The retired employee supplied EFF with documents substantiating his claim which EFF then filed under seal in US District Court as part of their lawsuit against AT&T. EFF then asked the judge in the case to unseal the documents so that they could be made public. AT&T opposed the move claiming that the documents were obtained illegally and contained "trade secrets" that could allow hackers to compromise their (AT&T's) system. In the meantime, the US Department Of Justice has gotten involved in the case. The DOJ is claiming that unsealing the documents and allowing this case to proceed could jeopardize national security. On Wednesday, the judge in the case ruled that the documents would remain sealed until he considered the DOJ's claims and, if the suit isn't quashed, until AT&T and the EFF could come to an agreement regarding the potential trade secrets contained in them.
What a load of crap. I can understand AT&T's desire to have these documents suppressed. If they are incriminating, AT&T's case would be shot to hell. I can also understand AT&T's claim that the documents contain trade secrets. The "trade secrets" claim is a commonly used tactic when companies don't want damaging documents released to the general public. However, the DOJ claim that national security may be compromised is pure bull. This is nothing more than one government agency stepping into to cover evidence of wrongdoing by a company on behalf of another government agency. At best, this is a misguided policy, at worst, it is criminal obstruction of justice and conspiracy in the advancement of a criminal enterprise, specifically the NSA spying. A quote from the San Francisco Chronicle shows just how far the DOJ is willing to go to obstruct justice in this case:
"When Justice Department lawyer Carl Nichols urged Walker to read the classified material -- which would have to be transported from a secure department site -- before ruling on the dismissal motion, the judge asked whether that would be fair to the plaintiffs, who will have to contest arguments they will never see.
'That is how it has to be done,' Nichols replied. 'To do otherwise would be to disclose facts, the result of which would be harmful to national security.' " (source: SF Chronicle, 05-18-06)
So according to the DOJ, it is harmful to national security to allow the plaintiffs to see the arguments that they will have to contest. In a country where the justice system is supposed to be transparent and the courts are supposed to be open to public scrutiny, this is the worst kind of obstruction possible. The DOJ is saying that now, due to "national security", you have to defend yourself against secret arguments. How can someone defend themselves against a secret argument? It is illogical. If you don't know what the argument is, you can neither defend against nor counter that argument. This is the DOJ saying to someone that "We have something against you. We're not going to tell you what it is, but you better be prepared to argue against it in court!" The sad part of this whole affair is that the DOJ is obstructing the very thing that they are charged with defending, JUSTICE! Tactics such as this have turned the Department Of Justice from an organization designed to defend the American people from the unlawful excesses of their government into the governmental equivalent of a Mafia lawyer who is less worried about true justice and more worried about assigning guilt.
In other news, Gen. Michael Hayden, Bush's choice to head the CIA, continues to insist that the NSA program is legal and necessary to catch terrorists. He also claimed that the privacy rights of American citizens were a constant concern at the NSA. Yeah, right, let me guess, they were a constant concern that you considered and dismissed as being unimportant. Furthermore, General, you claim that the program is legal, how the hell would you know?!!? As evidenced by a recent MSNBC interview, you don't even know what the Fourth Amendment says. If you don't know what the Constitution says, how can the American people depend on you to make an informed decision about what programs are legal and what programs aren't? I will give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that you are using the same logic that the DOJ uses in it's "national security" type cases!
I am Chuck and I am sure that I will have a few more rants on the NSA before this is all done.

Who'd Have Thunk It!!

2006-05-16T04:05:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
The subject of today's rant is Bush's speech on immigration earlier tonight. The title comes from the fact that I actually agree with most of what Bush said.
The speech, 18 minutes in length, addressed the current controversy regarding illegal immigration. The complete text of the speech is available here. Bush put forth proposals that included moving 6000 national guard troops to the Mexican border in support roles, hiring and training 6000 new border patrol officers by 2008, building a new high tech fence and barriers, increased federal funding for local law enforcement agencies that aid the border patrol in the apprehension of illegals, a guest worker program that includes background checks and tamper-proof ID cards, and a procedure for making [now] illegal immigrants who are in the US into legal immigrants and, eventually, citizens.
Now, believe it or not, I agree with most of the proposals. The only proposal I don't think is a good idea is moving the 6000 national guard troops to the border. There are better things these troops could be doing, like helping with the Katrina cleanup, prosecuting the war on terrorism, or being at home working in their normal jobs. As it is, the national guard is stretched pretty thin, which makes me wonder if there truly are enough troops available to fulfill this mission. What I mean is that between their deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan and the high attrition rate that the military is currently experiencing, the guard, as well as the regular forces, are shrinking. Bush states that there are enough guard troops to fulfill all of their missions, but I am not convinced.
The proposals that I like the most are the plan to hire more border patrol officers, and the guest worker program. I think that both of these ideas are prudent responses to a difficult problem. The proposed increase in border patrol officers leaves the responsibility for securing the border where it should be, in the hands of civilian authorities, not in the hands of the military as some have proposed. Provided that the government does thorough background checks on the applicants, I think that the guest worker program is a very good idea. Not only does it allow for Mexican citizens to legally enter and work in the US, but it also secures a reliable, legal labor force for the agricultural businesses who are now dependent on illegal immigrants.
The big question with these proposals now is how much will they be altered by the corrupt grandstanders in Congress. As I sit here listening to the reactions on the news, I can tell already that both the Republicans and the Democrats are practicing their political posturing. Well, here's an idea for those Congressmen...Can the political bullshit. Sit down, read the proposals, think about and debate the points, then get off your lazy asses and craft legislation that will incorporate these proposals. I know it is a radical idea, guys, but just for once try to doing something that benefits the country as a whole instead of lining your pockets as usual!
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Oh What A Tangled Web We Weave...

2006-05-15T01:30:00.000-04:00

When first we practice to deceive!--Sir Walter Scott, Marmion Canto vi. Stanza 17 (Source:Bartlett's Familiar Quotations)
Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
The subject of today's post is the NSA wiretapping affair. The title refers to the Bush Administration's obfuscation efforts regarding that program.
For those who don't know, multiple media sources are now reporting that three major communications companies (BellSouth, Verizon, and AT&T) have been supplying user/customer data to the NSA. The NSA has been using this data to discern the calling patterns of these companies' customers. This discernment is routinely referred to as "data-mining". The data being supplied isn't the US-origin-foreign-country-termination communications as previously claimed by Bush and the NSA, but domestic calling information. The Bush Administration, the NSA, and the communications companies involved are claiming that no customer's individual information (name, address, etc.) is being passed on to or stored by the NSA.
Well, whoop-de-doo, so no individual information is being passed to the NSA. Does that make the obtaining, storage, and data mining of such information right or legal? The answer is resoundingly no!
Despite the Bush Administration's best efforts to justify such actions, they have yet to prove that the program is legal under the Fourth Amendment. They also have yet to prove that the Executive branch has the right to enact such a program under Article 2 of the Constitution as Bush has previously claimed.
Furthermore, the Bush Administration's and NSA's claims that no individually identifiable information is being collected and stored lack are somewhat unbelievable to me. This administration has a severe credibility gap. The lies from the Bush White House concerning this program have ranged from "We're not illegally wiretapping American's communications" to "We're not tapping domestic communications" to "We aren't collecting individual's personal data." Everytime the administration has claimed that they aren't doing something, it turns out that they are doing exactly that. Couple the lies concerning this program with the lies about Iraq and their supposed WMDs, the lies concerning the federal response to Katrina, and the infamous "Mission accomplished" deception, and you begin to see how this administration might have a small credibility gap. And Bush wonders why his approval ratings are hanging around 30%!??! It is because the American people, even hardcore conservative Republicans, are sick of the lies.
As for the companies involved, we can't expect the whole truth out of them either. The companies involved (BellSouth, Verizon, and AT&T) have a vested interest in preventing the whole truth from coming out. Under the Federal Communications Act of 1934, communications companies are prohibited from handing out an individual customer's personal information except when required to do so by a search warrant. What that means is that if these companies have been giving the NSA individual customer information, and since the NSA program is warrantless, then these companies are guilty of committing a federal crime. The penalty for such a breach of the FCC Act of 1934 ranges from $130,000 to $1.35 million per violation per day. That means that, conceivably, these companies could be responsible for fines ranging from several million to several billion dollars depending on the number of violations and the length of their cooperation with the NSA. However, if the companies are not giving out individual information, only things such as general calling data (i.e., number of calls per day, peak usage hours, etc.), then they are breaking no laws and would not be responsible for such enormous fines. Now if I know this, I would certainly think that the management of these companies would know this, and no company is going to voluntarily disclose the fact that they have been betraying their customer's trust and violating federal laws. Therefore, I have to conclude that these companies will never tell the whole truth as to the extent of their cooperation with the NSA, nor will they ever disclose the entire truth as to what information they did give to the NSA.
I would like to see the termination of this illegal program immediately. I would also like to see a thorough (and I do mean THOROUGH) Congressional investigation of this entire program conducted by an impartial third party such as a special prosecutor who is neither Democrat nor Republican.
As long as I lived, I thought that I would never, ever see the day when a dissenter such as myself would have to be guarded in his criticisms of the government for fear of being targeted as a terrorist or terrorist supporter. I never thought that is my lifetime I would see the day that America would become a true police state. But now that big business has decided to forgo the best interests of their customers in the name of "national security", now that the government has decided that the citizens of this country are more of a threat than the terrorists and foreign powers, and now that the government's covenant with the people (the Constitution) has been violated and ignored by a power hungry madman who calls himself the President, that day has come. How sad will it be when, in years to come, people will tell their grandchildren, "I can remember the day when America became a dictatorial police state, and I did nothing to prevent it." Perhaps it is time for people to remember something that Thomas Jefferson once said and take action to prevent the government from robbing you of all of your rights. Jefferson once stated, "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." How much do you fear your government?
I am Chuck, and this has been my rant.
Oh, and if this rant gets me on an NSA list, let me know so that I can change the subtitle to "now banned in 16 countries!"

Let's Talk About...Things.

2006-05-09T01:57:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is in good health.
The odd title of today's post refers to the fact that this post isn't on one specific topic. Since there isn't much going on in the news that is worthy of a rant, I have decided to take this opportunity to pontificate on a few topics that have been on the backburner. I will also address a few current topics. So without further ado...

Here in Pennsylvania it is primary election season. The spring primary is scheduled for May 16th. The most interesting race in my local area has to be the Brightbill-Folmer race. Chip Brightbill is the current incumbent state senator. Mike Folmer is a former Lebanon (PA) city council member. As an incumbent, Brightbill is/was responsible for helping to pass the unconstitutional legislator pay raise. According to reports, as a councilman, Folmer didn't show up for meetings a great deal of the time. Both are running for the Republican nomination. What a sorry state of affairs it is when your two choices for the Republican nomination for a state senate seat are between a politician that willfully violates the state constitution and a supposed deadbeat. I guess we should expect nothing less than this from one of the entrenched political parties be it the Republicans or the Democrats. (BTW, I am an Independent, they don't let us vote in primaries. I guess we are a bit too free thinking for the established parties.)
I read a story a few weeks ago about a San Diego school district banning t-shirts with "hurtful" slogans. The school district was sued in Federal Court by a student who wore a shirt that said "Homosexuality is shameful". It would seem that the school district banned the shirt and the student sued stating that the district's dress code violated his freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and right to due process. The US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 that the district could ban shirts that contained "hurtful slogans". The judges gave various longwinded decisions, but what the majority opinion boiled down to is that the First Amendment (in their opinion) apparently no longer protects unpopular speech. I guess idiocy isn't limited to politicians. Apparently the judges who were in the majority in this case must have skipped the class in Constitutional Law while in law school. If they had attended that class, they might have learned that the First Amendment does, indeed, protect unpopular speech. In fact, the First Amendment was specifically designed to do just that. It was also designed to give an unpopular minority protection against majority repression. I guess since the Executive branch of the government has decided that the Constitution is no longer a valid document, the Judicial branch has decided to join them. If I were the student in question, I would definitely appeal this decision.
I see that Zacarias Moussaoui is now trying to change his plea. According to various news reports, Moussaoui has instructed his lawyers to submit a motion to change his plea from guilty to not guilty. He says that his story about being involved in the 9/11 plot was a complete fabrication. He is also saying that since the jury gave him life in prison instead of the death penalty, he is now convinced that he could get a fair trial here in the US. Well, Zac, I will let you in on a little secret, you can't change your plea after you have been sentenced. Does the phrase "a day late and a dollar short" mean anything to you? And, gee whiz, what happened to the "I won and you lost" rhetoric? Did you finally figure out exactly what it is that you "won"? I thought you were a big, bad, macho terrorist hellbent on destruction. I guess the thought of spending the rest of your life in a small cell is showing you for exactly what you and your kind are, sniveling little cowards who make up for their inadequacies by inflicting pain on others. Now shut up and get back in your cell little girl!
I read an article on CNET News (a few weeks ago) that reported that the US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, is calling for US ISPs to start retaining user data. The plan he is proposing is similar to the data retention provisions recently passed by the EU. The supposed reason for proposing this retention is to aid law enforcement in catching sexual predators on the Internet. While the idea of making it easier to catch sexual predators is laudable, I don't for a minute believe that this is the real reason for this proposal. Given that Gonzales has helped the Bush administration justify torture and warrantless wiretapping, I believe that his stated goal of protecting children from perverts is pure bull. This is nothing more than an attempt to allow the government to conduct more domestic spying, and all without a warrant. However, despite the fact that this kind of spying is illegal, this proposal will be codified by Congress because anything that "protects the children" gets passed without question and without any kind of verification that it will, indeed, protect kids. Seeing as anything that supposedly "protects the children" gets passed, I am proposing that sugared bubblegum and candy be banned because, as we all know, it rots your teeth and ruins your supper. We must protect the children against the evil forces of tooth decay and bad nutrition. All the data retention proposal will succeed in doing is generate more dead-end leads that waste precious FBI resources, and it will violate your right to privacy in your communication. But then protecting your rights doesn't seem to be a priority of the current administration.
Thinking of the current administration...Now that the Moussaoui trial is over, I am wondering when the administration is planning to bring the other 9/11 conspirators to trial. What I mean is that we hold 5 or 6 of the 9/11 co-conspirators in Gitmo, yet there are currently no plans to try these people for their crimes. What is the administration waiting for? Trying these guys for their crimes would be the best thing the administration could do insofar as showing the American people that they (the admin.) is actually doing something to win the war on terrorism. I can't fathom why they wouldn't bring these people to justice unless they are afraid of something. Could all the crazy conspiracy theorists be right?
On the subject of 9/11, I read a news story that one Representative is blocking a monument to Flight 93. The story goes that a group, consisting of family members of the passengers and crew, has proposed that the Federal government help to construct a monument to the victims of Flight 93. The money for the proposed monument has to be approved by the House Interior Appropriations subcommittee as they are the subcommittee responsible for approving Federal property acquisitions. Normally, proposals such as this one fly through the committee and are passed to the full House in due course. However, this time the chairman of the subcommittee has seen fit to block the proposal. The Federal government has been asked for $10 million dollars to help in purchasing the land needed. The chairman of the subcommittee, Rep. Charles H. Taylor (R-NC), has decided that this is too expensive and is blocking the proposal from coming to a vote before the subcommittee. Apparently, Rep. Taylor has unilaterally decided that these people do not deserve a monument. I guess that he feels that since these were common, everyday people who rose to the defense of their country and not the scions of the rich and powerful, they deserve no recognition. I hate to tell Rep. Taylor this, but there are more common people in this country than rich and powerful people. I hope that these common people show up in November to voice their opinion of your decision (Taylor is up for reelection this year). Of course, I would have expect nothing less from a Republican than to reject anything that benefits the average person.

Well, I think that is about it for now. So until next time, remember...
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

The Verdict Is In.

2006-05-04T05:34:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
The subject of today's rant involves our favorite "bit part" terrorist, Zacarias Moussaoui.
According to various wire service reports, the jury in the seemingly neverending trial and sentencing of Moussaoui has found that Moussaoui is deserving of life in prison. According to the AP report, when sentenced Moussaoui said, "America, you lost, I won" and then clapped his hands.
I decided long ago that this clown wasn't nuts. I didn't know what was wrong with him, just that he wasn't the looney that his lawyers claimed he was. I now know what his problem is...He is blindingly stupid.
What I mean is, here is a guy just sentenced to spending the rest of his natural life within the confines of the USP Florence ADMAX (aka the "Supermax") and he thinks that he won?!!? Well, Mr. Moussaoui, let me tell you what you've "won" and then we'll see if your opinion of the verdict changes.
Mr. Moussaoui, you've won a fabulous stay at the United States Penitentiary-Florence Administrative Maximum Facility (accommodation courtesy of the Federal Bureau of Prisons). While in USP Florence, you may enjoy their fabulous guest program. The guest program includes a lovely 7ft by 12ft concrete cell luxuriously appointed with a concrete desk, concrete stool, and concrete bed (it also has a toilet and shower). You will enjoy plenty of solitude as you will be confined to your cell 23 hours a day with no contact from anyone except the guards. Your gourmet prison meals will be delivered to you on the finest styrofoam and eaten with utensils lovingly machine crafted by skilled plasticsmiths. You will get to look at the four walls and not much more as your cell has a window, but it is too high up for you to see through. Your cell also has mood lighting consisting of rather harsh fluorescent lights creating a mood style we like to call "interrogation". And while your buddies Richard Reid, Omar Abdel-Rahman, and Ramzi Youssef are also imprisoned in USP Florence, I highly doubt you will EVER see them. Yes, Mr Moussaoui, for playing the "I'm a terrorist" game with the US Government, you've won a fabulous stay at a sterile Hell-on-Earth. I hope you enjoy every minute! Oh, and by the way, while you are rotting, the country you tried to destroy will be going on as usual right outside your door. Mr Moussaoui, that is the price of playing and losing.
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Hey Stoners, Get Your Passports Out!

2006-05-03T01:47:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well and feeling good.
The subject of today's rant comes from a story by Reuters called "Mexico's Fox To OK Drug Decriminalization Law". The story reports that Mexico's president, Vincente Fox, is going to sign a bill that decriminalizes possession of small amounts of various drugs. The bill is designed to help combat narcotics trafficking and drug gang violence. The bill would do this by legalizing small amounts of marijuana, opium, heroin, cocaine, LSD, hallucinogenic mushrooms, amphetamines, ecstasy, and peyote. The story goes on to state that this will probably complicate Mexico's relations with the US.
Well, I guess spring break in Cancun just got a lot more interesting. Seriously, I am curious as to how this will complicate Mexico's relations with the US. Mexico is, after all, a sovereign country, they can do as they please when it comes to drug enforcement within their borders. If this will solve the epidemic of drug violence that has plagued Mexico for the last couple of decades, all I can say is, "Pass the bong, man." It should be interesting to see how "Snort" Bush and his administration handles this. I predict that they will severely criticize Mexico, threaten to cut off any foreign aid that may be headed Mexico's way, they will threaten to list Mexico as being off limits to American tourists, and they will threaten to start the second Mexican-American war. After all, we all know that the neo-conservatives only want freedom and democracy if it is freedom and democracy as they say it should be. And as we all know, the Reagan-begun, zero tolerance "War On Drugs" has gone so well and has had such success that it should be a model for the rest of the world when it comes to dealing with drugs. Oh, wait, that failed, whoops, my bad. In all seriousness, this is going to drive Bush and the neo-cons nuts. On one hand, Mexico supplies a great deal of oil to the US and too much criticism from Bush could threaten to cut off that supply. On the other hand, the neo-cons have a stated position as tolerating NO drug use by anyone (except themselves and Rush Limbaugh). The conflict between securing this supply of oil while condemning Mexico's tolerance of drug use should drive the neo-cons absolutely batty. I guess in the coming months we will see which factor is more important to the neo-cons, ensuring a cheap oil supply so that their buddies in Exxon-Mobil can make obscene profits on the backs of the average American, or attempting to further their policy of supporting a failed prohibition that denies individual freedom and wastes taxpayer money.
Until then, however, stoners, get your passports out, it is party time Mexican style!
I am Chuck and my actual question is, "What are you people, on dope?!!?"

Fair And Balanced, My Ass!

2006-04-26T23:46:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing alright.
The subject of this post is the appointment of Tony Snow as White House press secretary.
As you may or may not know, the current White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, is leaving the White House. Bush has appointed Fox News analyst Tony Snow to the job. Bush has stated that he is hoping that his appointment of Snow will improve the White House's relations with the press.
Now I have no problem with Snow being appointed as White House press secretary. Bush can appoint whomever he wants to the post. I think that it is entirely fitting that the Bush press secretary have a name like "Snow" since it seems like that is what the White House does to the American people most of the time.
My problem, for lack of a better word, is with Fox News. Fox News likes to bill itself as "fair and balanced" when it comes to reporting the news. It (FNC) likes to claim that its reporting is free from bias toward any political party or political viewpoint. Basically, Fox News likes to present itself as saying (more or less), "here is the news, you decide what it means". However, anyone who watches Fox News on any kind of regular basis will know that "fair and balanced" is just not the case. Fox News is, for all intents, either the Republican Party news channel or the government news service (take your pick, they are interchangeable). The appointment of one of Fox News' main contributors/commentators to press secretary in the exceptionally conservative Bush White House only goes to show that they (FNC) are anything but their claimed "fair and balanced".
Therefore, I am calling on Fox News to fulfill their stated mission of delivering the news in a "fair and balanced" way. What I mean by "delivering the news in a fair and balanced way" is that Fox News should abandon their apparent neo-conservative agenda and start delivering the news without the "Republican Party line" political comments that so often accompany their stories. They should also abandon the practice of only reporting news that is favorable to either the White House or Republicans in general and start reporting ALL of the news (favorable and unfavorable).
If Fox News feels that they cannot do this, then I call on them to drop the facade of being "fair and balanced" and try a little truth in advertising. Fox doesn't have to change their name to accomplish this. All they have to do is change their slogan from "fair and balanced" to something like "All Republican news, all the time" or "Neo-conservative news for neo-conservative people". If Fox News wants to change their name to reflect their reporting style, might I suggest "The Bush Propaganda Network" or "The White House Approved News Network". Or perhaps they could change both their name and slogan at the same time, I would suggest "The Neo-Conservative News Network--News for people with an IQ lower than Bush's approval ratings." At least these names and slogans would be more truthful than "fair and balanced"!!
I am Chuck and this rant is anything but fair and balanced!

A Personal Congratulatory Note

2006-04-26T12:31:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
Today's post is neither political nor of great public interest. Rather it is a personal note to a good friend of mine who shall remain nameless to protect her and her fiance's privacy.
It would seem that a certain friend of mine and her fiance decided to have a baby. The decision was made about 9 months or so ago. The kid is their first and as such a bit overdue, meaning she hasn't had it yet. If it is any consolation to her, remember that airlines don't arrive on time, and kids are a bit more complicated than airlines!!
In any case, I wanted to offer them both public (and slightly premature) congratulations on the birth of their child. I hope everything goes well and that the child has the usual ten and ten combo. I hope this is something wonderful to remember for the rest of your lives!
So...*raising a Mt. Dew (I don't drink alcohol)*...here is to R.S. and J.S. and their new baby, may you only ever have joy, good luck and happiness in your lives!
I am Chuck and this has been a personal note.

Get Back On Your Meds!!

2006-04-21T01:40:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is happy and healthy.
I usually do not post this soon after a previous post, but I couldn't pass this one up.
Today I read what is possibly the most bizarre (and ridiculous) news story I have seen in a very long time. According to a Reuters story entitled "North Korea Says Has 'Shocking Evidence' Of US Plot", the North Korean government is accusing the US of printing counterfeit US currency and framing North Korea. It goes on to say that the North Koreans have accused the CIA of orchestrating this "plot" in order to convince the rest of the world that North Korea is a criminal state. The story also says that, according to N. Korea, the CIA is using various US military bases to carry out this plot. The North Koreans are also accusing Japan of conspiring with the US to produce cartoons attacking North Korean leaders.
What a bunch of morons. Apparently the North Korean leaders must have skipped their economics and government classes a bit too often. That or they are off their psych meds again.
Ok, just so that the North Koreans are clear on this, the government is allowed to print copies of their own currency. Unfortunately for us non-wealthy, the government is the ONLY entity allowed to print copies of its currency. If the government didn't print copies of its currency, there wouldn't be a whole lot of money in circulation, not to mention that a lot of people now employed by the Bureau of Printing and Engraving would be out of work.
As for the CIA, they have come up with quite a few odd schemes in their time, but I don't think this is one of them. On top of that, the military has better things to do than to print money for a CIA plot against the North Koreans. Consider for a minute that this plot could be true. The question becomes "By printing counterfeit US currency and releasing it into circulation, whose economy will this destabilize, the US or North Korea's?" I highly doubt that even someone as unaware as Bush would have approved this scheme.
On the cartoon issue, listen up N. Korea, these are called "political cartoons". Political cartoons are often used to satirize the behavior of government officials. Generally, they make fun of the person's behavior while making a point. Now given that Japan has a free press and freedom of expression, cartoonists there can draw cartoons of anyone they want to. It just so happens that this time they may have drawn cartoons of the North Korean leaders. Wah, cry me a river. What's the matter guys, did they hurt little Kim Jong-Il's feelings? What, did they draw him as the impotent psychotic he is? Deal with it. Everyday cartoonists skewer politicians with satirical cartoons. Unlike your state controlled press, the free, market driven press is allowed to do that. Everyday, the politicians satirized see those cartoons. They may not like them, but there isn't much they can do about them. When you guys finally overthrow the little psycho you call a leader and emerge from the Dark Ages, you may finally figure out what democracy and freedom is all about. Until then, get back on your meds and shut up!
I am Chuck and I'll bet this rant won't be read in the DPRK! (You do know that DPRK is short for "Demented Paranoids Raving in Korea", right?)

What Next? Jugglers?

2006-04-20T01:25:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. I hope all of you are in good health.
Today's post concerns the ongoing saga of our favorite convicted terrorist, Zacarias Moussaoui.
I have been reading the news reports of his defense during this penalty phase, and I am thoroughly convinced that the next thing they (the defense) will present is jugglers. What I mean is that, first, they presented a psychiatrist who testified that Moussaoui is schizophrenic, then they presented a psychologist who happens to be a cult expert who testified that Moussaoui was caught up in an Islamic "death cult", and now they have presented several family members of the 9/11 victims who basically said, "Don't execute him, that would be bad."
Now, I am not going to knock these family members for doing what they think is right. Quite to the contrary, I think these family members should be both congratulated and praised for having the moral courage to stand up for their convictions. I do not agree with their sentiments, but I certainly do respect them.
As for the schizophrenic defense, I say bull! Moussaoui's habit of standing up and yelling "Death to [the group of the day]" sounds more like a mild case of Tourette Syndrome than schizophrenia! I would also have to question the assessment of the psychiatrist who concluded that, because Moussaoui had trouble doing two things at once, he had schizophrenia and, thus, would never have learned to fly a plane. Hmmm, so to his (the psychiatrist's) way of thinking, everyone that has trouble walking and chewing bubblegum is schizo?!!? The prosecution asked if Moussaoui had such trouble doing two things at once, then how'd he learn to drive a car? The psych basically said that driving a car isn't as complicated as flying a plane. Well, duh! But that still doesn't answer the question. The last time I checked, yes, flying a plane was far more complicated than driving a car, but both required some degree of hand-eye coordination and the ability to do two things at once!
As for the whole "death cult" thing, I think the defense is beginning to really grasp at straws here. Basically, the defense is saying, "If you don't believe he is nuts, then please believe that the devil made him do it!"
So far nothing that I have read convinces me that the guy didn't know what he was doing when he participated in the planning and run up to 9/11. Nothing I have read convinces me that Moussaoui didn't know right from wrong (a key element of a mental illness defense). And nothing I have read convinces me that Moussaoui is anything other than what he claims to be, a completely sane, cold blooded, wannabe terrorist murderer. I understand the defense team's desire to throw in everything including the kitchen sink to get their client life instead of death, but about the only thing they have left to try is jugglers. Guys, I think it is time to call it a day and let his fate be decided by the jury.
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Georgia's On My Mind

2006-04-18T02:07:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
Today's post concerns Georgia's new immigration bill. The bill, as reported by Reuters, would deny essential state services to illegal immigrants, penalize employers who hire illegals, and limit the services that commercial companies can provide to illegals.
The governor of Georgia , Sonny Purdue, said, "It's our responsibility to ensure that our famous Georgia hospitality is not abused, that our taxpayers are not taken advantage of and that our citizens are protected."
I would like Sonny to explain to me exactly how immigrants (legal or illegal) are abusing Georgia's hospitality. I would also like to know how they are taking advantage of taxpayers (given that most of the social programs Georgia would like to protect are federally funded). And exactly how is this bill going to protect your citizens?
I guess the governor of Georgia would rather see people starving in the streets than to give them food stamps. I guess he would rather see people dying of simple, curable diseases than to have them going to hospitals for treatment. I guess he would rather have them stealing to support their families rather than giving them aid. After all, aren't these the ways that most illegal immigrants take advantage of taxpayers?
Tell me, governor, how is isolating and forcing illegals to turn to crime going to protect your citizens? If protecting them means that they won't be robbed by a hungry, desperate illegal, then your program just failed. If protecting your citizens means that they won't be paying taxes to support an illegal on welfare, ok. But then how do you explain spending the money on keeping that illegal in jail when he or she turns to crime to survive? I guess it is an accounting thing.
So now I guess that Georgia's "famous hospitality" is only extended to those who are not non-white, illegal, poor, or from someplace other than Georgia (guess the folks from Alabama and South Carolina are out of luck). So if you are white, rich, legal, and a citizen of Georgia, then you are most welcome. I should have expected nothing less from a state that has the most hate groups in the nation. Perhaps after this bill, Georgia should erect signs at their borders reflecting their new attitude. Those sign should say, "Welkkkome to Georgia (locals only!)"
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Moussaoui Mental? Bull!!

2006-04-14T03:47:00.000-04:00

Hello readers, I hope all of you are well.
Today's post concerns the trial of Zacharias Moussaoui. For those of you who are severely out of the loop, Moussaoui is the only person to be tried for being part of the 9/11 conspiracy. He has been found guilty in a federal court and is now in the penalty phase of the trial. The same jury that convicted him is now deciding whether he will face life imprisonment or execution.
After having read about the information the government has presented during the penalty phase, and after having read Moussaoui's remarks today, I have decide that if anyone deserves to be executed, it is this guy. Not only did Moussaoui show no regret for his actions, he also wished that the victims (and their relatives) had suffered more.
Now the defense plans on contending that Moussaoui is nuts. I say bull. Moussaoui is not nuts, he knows exactly what he is doing. He has stated that he does not want to spend life in prison, he wants to be executed and become an Al Qaida martyr. He knows that by inflaming the jury he will get his wish. I, generally, am not for giving someone like Moussaoui his wish, but in this case I will make an exception.
I think that Moussaoui, indeed, deserves death, but not to make him a martyr. I think he deserves death as no other punishment is severe enough to fit his crime. Unfortunately, in the federal system, execution is done by lethal injection. I think this is a far too easy way out for Moussaoui. I am advocating the institution of a different manner of death for Moussaoui. I believe that he should be put to death using the old English punishment for treason.
The punishment for treason in England, from about Norman times to roughly the 1700's or 1800's, was extremely harsh. If you were convicted for treason (and were not a royal), first you would be hanged, but not until you were dead. Instead you would be hanged until you were nearly dead. Then you would be taken down. After that, you would be eviscerated (while still alive), and your bowels would be burned to ashes before you. Then, whether you were still alive or not, your head would be lopped off (it usually took the axman a few tries to get it off entirely). After that, your limbs would be tied to four horses and your body would be quartered. From there, your body parts would be sent to four different towns as a warning against treason and your head would be stuck on a pike on London Bridge (also as a warning).
I think that this would be a very good way of executing Moussaoui (and even this might be a little too mild). Of course a guy I talked to on the Yahoo message boards had a punishment which I won't go into except to say it involved the desert, some stakes, some honey, and a red ant hill. Either way, this guy should be made to suffer before we send him on his way to receive his 75 virgins and he should be made to suffer as much as the victims, their friends and relatives have been made to suffer since 9/11/2001!!
I am Chuck and some will say my bloodlust is showing.

Note: Edited 0347hrs EDT on 14APR06 for typos.

Did Ya Ever Have That Sinking Feeling?

2006-04-11T00:42:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers! I hope everyone is doing well.
The subject of today's post is the results of a new Washington Post-ABC News poll concerning George W. Bush's approval rating.
According to the poll, Bush's approval rating now stands at 38%, his lowest ever. The Washington post cites "...Political reversals at home and continued bad news from Iraq..." as the reasons for the decline in Bush's rating.
Also according to the poll, only 35% of registered voters approve of the way that the Republicans in Congress are doing their job. The poll also found that 55% of the registered voters surveyed would vote for the Democratic candidate in their House district while only 40% would vote for the Republican candidate. In fact, the poll found that the only place that the Republicans do not significantly trail the Democrats is on the subject of terrorism. There Republicans and Democrats are in a dead heat with the Democrats getting a 46% to 45% (for the Republicans) edge.
So what does this mean? Well, simply put, it means that people think Bush is a dolt and doing a poor job running the country. It also means that they think that the Republican lapdogs in Congress are just as bad as Bush.
Personally, I disagree with the Post's analysis of why Bush's ratings have fallen. I think that it is a matter of the American public finally waking up and realizing that Bush is clueless on every major issue from the economy to immigration to terrorism. I also think that the public is finally realizing that having idiots and criminals in charge of the country is a bad thing. Maybe the public is finally waking up to the fact that George W. Bush is a fake, a personable con man who would rather give taxbreaks to companies that export jobs than try to keep those jobs here in the US. Maybe the public is finally realizing that Bush is the type of president that would rather enrich his oil buddies than try to find a workable solution to end foreign oil dependency. Maybe the public has finally had enough of Bush's violating the Constitution and laws of this country in the name of "national security". Maybe the public is finally realizing that Bush has been the most ruinous president in the history of the US, undoing guarantees and rights that took 230 years to build in the space of a mere 6 years! Maybe the public is finally realizing that this petty, idiotic, dictator-wannabe needs to go. And, for once, the public seems to be realizing that the Republican members of Congress who toe the party line and rubberstamp Der Fuhrer's orders need to go too!
Oh, to sleep, perchance to dream! And to dream a dream that in November America is finally liberated from the clutches of a wannabe dictator who isn't evil, but is dumber than a bag of hammers. Oh what a fantastic dream that would be.
Oh well, time to wake up. You want to know what this poll really means? It means that 1027 random people were sufficiently pissed off and/or bored enough with "American Idol" to have taken the opportunity provided by this poll to do a little government bashing. Nothing more.
I am Chuck and I am way too cynical for my own good.

What Energy Policy?

2006-03-30T08:30:00.000-05:00

Hello again reader. I trust everyone is slowly going bankrupt buying gas for your SUV.
Today's post concerns the current spike in US gas prices and a report published today by Reuters.
I have been reading the news again (always a bad sign) and came across a report published by Reuters entitled "Americans at 'tipping point' about energy-poll". The report, written by Lisa Lambert, states that in a poll of 1000 Americans conducted by Public Agenda Confidence, nearly half of those surveyed gave the government a failing grade when it comes to weaning the US off of foreign oil. It also stated that 90% of those surveyed thought that US foreign oil dependence was a threat to national security. The poll also found that 85% believe that the government could do something about foreign oil dependence if they (the gov't) really wanted to. It also found that those worried that foreign conflict could cut off the supply of oil to the US rose from 42% in August 2005 to 55% currently. The report goes on to say that Americans are now as concerned about the issue of foreign oil dependency as they are about the war in Iraq. The report defines the "tipping point" as being when the public is "...gravely concerned about an issue and believes the government has the ability to change matters."
So, what does all this mean? What it means is that the American public is finally getting pissed off enough to start demanding action on the issue from the government. It also means that the current US energy policy is a miserable failure.
The energy policy, combined with the hurricane-related production problems, and the White House's inability to figure out that if you piss off all of the Arabs they might stop sending us oil (or at least may raise the price), has lead to a current (as of today) pump price of $2.51 for regular unleaded (Nat'l Avg., Source: AAA). When you combine all of that with the fact that the government's inaction on the problem has allowed the oil companies, through a program of flimsy excuses and price gouging, to make record profits, you begin to see why the public is regarding this as a problem worth getting angry about.
Will this public outcry cause the government to do anything about oil? No, absolutely not. The Bush Energy Policy, designed specifically to enrich Bush and Cheney's oil buddies and impoverish the American public, does not begin do enough to encourage domestic exploration for oil, let alone encourage the development of viable oil alternatives. In short, Bush's Energy Policy is one of retaining the status quo at the expense of destroying the economy and impoverishing the average American.
Can the US break free of foreign oil dependence? The answer is a resounding "yes". However, the solution to breaking free of foreign oil will take a somewhat radical change in governmental policy and the public's attitudes regarding conservation. First, the government would need to stop being big oil's "bitch" and start enforcing existing laws regarding deceptive business practices and price gouging. Once that is done, then the government would need to start encouraging or "incentivising" the development of alternative fuels. From there, the government would need to encourage the American public to change their attitude when it comes to things like conservation and hybrid vehicles. Without a change of attitude on the part of the American public, all the governmental policies in the world will not change the current situation. However, without the government encouraging that change of attitude, the American public will continue to drive SUVs and complain about oil prices rising and then wonder why. Finally, we all need to realize that as long as big oil continues to control its puppet in the White House, NONE of these changes will take place.
So, how do we change? 1. Get rid of Bush and his big oil friendly policies. 2. Call your Senator and Representative and demand to talk to him or her directly (remember, they work for you, and you can demand to talk to them) and tell them to promote a consumer friendly energy policy (as opposed to the current policy). 3. Trade in the Escalade or Navigator and get a hybrid (Lexus even has a hybrid SUV now!). And 4. Start to practice good oil conserving techniques (you can find these by Googling "Conserving oil" or similar)
If you start doing these things, not only will oil prices begin to come down, but you may also start to see side benefits such as cleaner air (eliminating the need for emissions testing in your area), and more spending money in your pocket!
I am Chuck and if you don't want to change your attitude toward oil conservation, then don't bitch about the price at the pump!

Where's The Savings?

2006-03-28T01:40:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
Today's post concerns the debate on illegal immigration currently going on in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The title of the post is a play on an old telephone commercial tagline.
As you may or may not know, there is currently a new immigration bill before both the House and Senate. The House version of the bill would make being in the US as an illegal immigrant a felony, would impose stiff penalties on companies who hire illegal immigrants, and would fence 1/3rd of the US-Mexican border. The Senate version is a little softer, decreasing the penalties for being in this country illegally (vs the House vers.), offering a way for illegals to become US citizens, and, essentially, creating a "guest worker" program. It also contains the provision for fencing the border.
The House version of the bill was passed ostensibly to aid the government in addressing the drain on limited social welfare resources. It is said by some House version proponents that, eventhough a great number of illegals work and pay their taxes, the illegals are a massive drain on social programs such as Medicaid. Ok, fine, if that is the case, then why not just send every illegal immigrant you catch back to his or her country of origin? Why make it a felony to be in the US illegally? Is it that much cheaper to take a productive (meaning employed and taxpaying) illegal off the streets and house him in a federal penitentiary? If these people are an economic drain by utilizing programs such as Medicaid while working, won't they be a greater economic drain if they are locked up and not working?
The penalties for hiring illegal immigrants are a bit unrealistic also. Right now, the going price for a head of lettuce in my area is $1-$2 depending upon the store. If these penalties are enforced, the illegals ejected or imprisoned, and the agriculture industry forced to hire American workers, the low prices on produce that we have come to expect will be a thing of the past. Like most industries, the agriculture industry will be forced to pass along the increased production costs to the consumer. Do you really want to pay $4-$5 a head for lettuce? And it won't just affect supermarket prices, this will have a ripple effect that will spread to other industries such as fast food and the restaurant industries. If the aim of this provision of the House bill is to cause the economy to come to a grinding halt, then I suppose they have made a good start. I mean it is bad enough that rising energy prices have cause food prices to increase, do we need another government action to squeeze the already limited resources of the average American even harder?
Also, do we really need another bill to address the problem of illegal immigration? What I mean is that if the immigration was illegal to begin with, then why do we need another government action to address the issue. What are they going to do, make it more illegal? I wasn't aware that something that was outside the law in the first place could be made to be even further outside of it. I guess I was wrong. Then again, maybe I was right. I was always taught that if something was illegal, it was illegal period, not a little illegal or a lot illegal. I was taught that the law didn't recognize varying degrees of illegality, that if you were charged with a felony it was a felony, not a small, medium, or large felony. In light of that, how can illegal immigration be made anymore illegal? This is the House saying, "We don't have a clue how to fix the problem." Folks, this bill (the House vers.) is nothing more than a smoke and mirrors solution to the problem. The problem with the bill is that, while it is smoke and mirrors, it will affect and penalize one large key group...the average American! It will penalize the average person by raising food prices, thus shrinking the average person's ever diminishing resources even further. And it will penalize the average person by shrinking the available tax base and increasing government expeditures (a brilliant maneuver in this era of record deficits).
With this bill, once again the government has proven that it doesn't care a bit about the effects of legislation upon the average person. So long as you continue to vote for the person they tell you to vote for, they (legislators) could care less about you and your concerns. Is this (illegal immigration) a real problem? No, it is nothing more than a bunch of Representatives and Senators wanting to appear to be doing something (in an election year) about a problem as real as "Harvey" the giant rabbit in the old Jimmy Stewart movie. Gee guys, why not try something novel, like solving real problems. You know, the kind of problems that real Americans struggle with everyday. Things like the rising cost of energy, or the rising cost of education, or the erosion of rights brought on by poorly crafted legislation. What about these things? Or are you, our Representatives and Senators, finally conceding that you don't have a clue about how to fix the REAL problems that affect this country? I guess it was probably wrong of me to expect so much out of our elected officials, you know, things like simple competency and the like. Find a solution to a real problem? Hell, these guys couldn't find their asses with both hands and a flashlight!
I am Chuck, and this has been my rant.

Why The Stupid Should Not Become Criminals.

2006-03-23T00:55:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone out there is doing well.
Today's post concerns an email I recently received from a person calling himself "Mr. George Adam". The contents of Mr Adam's email (the quotes are mine):
"I am Mr. George Adam, Manager of Cent Royal Hotel, Lagos Nigeria.

We are on the second phase of recruiting workers. We are currently looking for 10 to 20 energetic young individuals to join our working team under their following positions:

1 Manager
2 Assistant manager
3 Secretary and assistant
4 Hotel Attendant
5 Chef with not less than 2 years cooking experience
6 Men/women who can host people on stage
7 Security men

8 And other

Our salary is very attractive as we pay what is obtainable in our hotels here in Nigeria and other developed countries. If you are interested to work for us.

Application is now online >> http://centroyalhotel.tripod.com/

Tel/Fax: (+234)-8064218261 or +447031817587

We shall help you to process your document and pay for your flight ticket with your one-month visa as a tourist to enter here in Nigeria and work with us.

N/B: all expenses incured to bring you to Nigeria must be dully deducted from your monthly salary while working for us here.

Mr. George."
(Note, the spelling errors are his not mine, the letter is copied from my email exactly as I received it.)
Please note the supposed location of the hotel in question (Lagos, Nigeria).
Now, if you want a good laugh, go to the website for the hotel (here)and check out the "About Us" page. Go ahead, I'll wait...
Notice anything unusual about the description of the area surrounding the luxurious "Cent Royal Hotel" in Lagos, Nigeria? I wasn't aware that Lagos, Nigeria was the home of Niagara Falls or Fort Erie! I'll bet the nice folks who call Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada home weren't aware that they actually lived in Nigeria (not Canada)! I also like how the nearest listed airport on the page is Buffalo. While that may be true for Niagara Falls, flying into Buffalo to go to a hotel in Nigeria could make for a bit of a long cab ride. (Not to mention that I don't think that the bridge to western Africa is done yet.)
As far as the letter goes, I like how the main hotel number is a Nigerian number, but the fax number goes to the UK. (Nigeria's calling code is 234, the UK's is 44). Doesn't that make picking up your faxes a bit inconvenient?!!?
I know that I probably shouldn't have published this letter here as it is an obvious scam, but I just couldn't resist exposing this guy's stupidity.
So, Mr George Adam, for trying to convince people that your non-existent hotel is in Lagos, Nigeria while listing Niagara Falls/Fort Erie area attractions on the "About Us" page, for including a map to your hotel that clearly shows the Niagara Falls area and not the Lagos area, and for listing a main hotel number that is in Nigeria but having a fax number that is in the UK, I hereby award you the first ever "Chuck's Occasional Rants Dumbass Of The Week Award." The award includes an all expense paid vacation to the federal correctional facility of your choice, three meals a day, and a lovely view of the prison yard. Enjoy it, Mr Adam, after all you've earned it by being dumber than a brick and, then, writing emails to others proving that rocks can outsmart you. Mr Adam, perhaps you should have taken the advice of the famous author Mark Twain when he said, "It is better to be silent and thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."
I am Chuck, and this has been my rant.

Spyware? We Don't Want No Stinking Spyware!

2006-03-15T03:52:00.000-05:00

Hello again reader. Everyone doing ok?
The title of today's post is a takeoff on a line from the old Mel Brooks film "Blazing Saddles" (one of the funniest, and definitely not politically correct, movies ever made imho). I won't go into detail, but the actual line is "Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!"
The subject of today's rant is a new and disturbing trend in the world of antispyware, the rogue antispyware program. I know this has nothing to do with politics, but I thought I would write about this as kind of a public service.
Up until yesterday, I was unaware that the so-called rogue antispyware problem existed. An article in the PCMag Security Watch newsletter I receive alerted me to this developing problem. I did a little reading on the subject and found out that the trend has existed for a little while and has been, seemingly, gathering momentum.
What the problem exactly is, is this...
As everyone with a computer knows, spyware and adware are a constant threat to the average 'Net surfer. Not only do they seem to be omnipresent, but they are almost never innocuous. Aside from the more malicious aspects of spyware, such as stealing your identity, personal info, or other sensitive info, they are annoying in the extreme. I put the distributors of spyware and adware in the same category as spammers, they are the scum of the internet. My personal solution to the whole spyware/adware/spam problem would involve a red-hot poker and a reference to King Edward II of England, but that is another story.
The way to rid yourself of spyware and adware to this point has been to get yourself a good antispyware program such as Spyware Search and Destroy, Ad-Aware, Spyware Blaster, or the like.
Heretofore, spyware distributors have pretty much left the antispyware programs alone. But lately, it would seem that these malicious individuals and companies have decided that the best defense is a good offense through deception. It would seem that, now, the companies and individuals distributing spyware and adware have gotten into the antispyware game by attempting to distribute rogue antispyware. These rogue programs do nothing to eliminate spyware on your system. In fact, they may, and usually do, install more spyware and adware than you may have originally had. These rogue programs do not solve your spyware problems, they only add to it.
The way these guys get you to install one of their junk programs is simply by deceiving you. They will try to lure or convince you with an ad or popup that claims you have spyware on your system, or they will run a banner ad with the name of a real antispyware program. The banner ad will, when clicked on, redirect you, not to the advertised program's site, but to the rogue program's page. Then if you click on the "download" button, what you get isn't an antispyware program, but a program that installs tons of spyware and adware and pretends to do a scan of your system.
In the course of my reading, I came across an excellent page that lists not only the good/trusted antispyware programs, but also the rogue antispyware. This allows you to determine whether your antispyware program is actually doing its job or is one of these bogus programs. The page also gives a ton of information concerning just about anything having to do with spyware/antispyware. The author of the page is a woman who calls herself "The Spyware Warrior". If you are at all concerned about spyware or adware, I highly recommend this page.
Here is the link:
The Spyware Warrior List of
Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products & Web Sites

I hope your program isn't listed in the rogue section.
I am Chuck and this has been a public service announcement brought to you as a public service of Chuck's Occasional Rants. We now return you to your regularly schedule lives.

Feingold's Fine Idea

2006-03-14T14:55:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. I trust that everyone is doing well.
Today's rant concerns an article I read last night.
It would seem that Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) is proposing a bill in the Senate that would censure George W Bush for misleading Americans about the legality of his NSA wiretapping program. According to the AP version of the story, censure is, essentially a scolding, and it has been used against a president in the past. Specifically, it was used in 1834 to reprimand Andrew Jackson for a dust up concerning the (non) withdrawal of federal monies from the Bank of The United States. (See this link for the complete Jackson story).
Now, I like the idea of telling Bush that he has done something wrong, but I don't think that censure goes far enough. After all, this is a "president" that has repeatedly ignored laws that he doesn't agree with, what makes anyone think that a censure will affect him? I would rather see something like Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) is working on.
Conyers is the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee and is pushing for legislation that would determine if grounds for the impeachment of Bush exist. I don't think that Conyers will have much trouble finding those grounds.
Out of the whole AP article, the two quotes I like the most belong to Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN). The first calls the censure idea "a crazy political move that would weaken the US during wartime." The second comes from an interview Frist did on ABC's "This Week" news program. During the interview he said that he hoped that Al Qaida was not listening to the political fighting and also said "The signal that it sends, that there is in any way a lack of support for our commander in chief who is leading us with a bold vision in a way that is making our homeland safer, is wrong."
Been drinking the Kool Aid again Bill? I have a few questions for the clueless senator from Tennessee. First, "When did the US declare war?" We have a military action going in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there has been no declaration of war by Congress, so how can this be "wartime"? I would think that as a senator, and the Senate Majority Leader at that, you would know that an authorization to use military force is NOT the same as a declaration of war (legally, politically, or semantically), and the Congress has not considered, nor passed, any articles of war. Second, "Why is it 'crazy political move' to propose that someone who has committed a crime be punished for it?" Why are you considering this a political move at all? George W Bush violated the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution with the NSA eavesdropping program. He has already publicly admitted to bypassing the FISC and authorizing the wiretapping without warrants. That means that he violated the FISA and the 4th Amendment. Senator, those things are called "criminal acts" and, generally, they are dealt with by giving the offender some sort of punishment. No amount of political wrangling, no amount of disingenuous arguments concerning George Washington's electronic surveillance and a twisted interpretation of Article 2 will change the fact that what George W Bush did was patently illegal. Or are you proposing that the president is now, somehow, above the law? Are you now saying that conservative Republicans, who for years have supported the ideas of "law and order", are now abandoning those principals? It looks to me, Senator, that what you are truly saying is that everyone is subject to the law except for the politically powerful, the rich, and those with connections to the politically powerful. That type of thinking is what leads to dictatorships and oligarchical regimes. Or could it be, Senator, that you are nothing more that George Bush's clueless lap dog, mindlessly repeating whatever the Administration tells you to say? So, Senator, what are you willing to admit to, being a mindless follower of Bush, unable to think for yourself and acting as his Senatorial puppet, or being a legal elitist advocating a system of laws and harsh punishments for the common folk, but placing yourself (and your master, Bush) above those laws? So which is it?
As for your second quote, the infighting tells everyone exactly what you fear it tells them, that, indeed, there is no support for the commander in chief. Commander in chief, hmmmm. That's the problem! I get it now, I get why the Republicans react to criticism of Bush the way they do! If you call Bush the "president" it makes him look like just another political figure. As such he is subject to the faults of any other political leader. It also makes him subject to being questioned by the people who pay his checks. However, if you call Bush the "Commander In Chief", it makes him look strong and manly. His decisions then become orders, and as such, they are not to be questioned. Calling him the commander in chief also makes it look like anyone who tries to hold him accountable for his actions is insubordinate, one of those "How dare you question the glorious Commander!" type of things. Senator, I must congratulate you on your choice of words, "commander in chief" and "bold vision". They paint a picture of a strong decisive leader. Senator, you've studied your Goebbels! The unfortunate part of this is that, despite your best efforts to paint him a strong decisive leader, George W Bush boils down to nothing but a bumbling, tongue-tied criminal. His efforts to change this country from a democratic republic to an oligarchical dictatorship are neither "bold" nor visionary, but they are criminal. Mark my words Senator, the time is coming for you and your fellow Republicans when all of your verbiage, all of your demonization of the opposition, all of your questioning of the patriotism and loyalty of people like me, and all of your corruption will end. Then it will be time to pay the judicial piper and answer to the people for you felonious ways. I just can't wait until it does!
I am Chuck and I would compare Bush to Hitler, but as someone on the Yahoo Message Boards pointed out, it is an unfair comparison...Hitler was more militarily astute and had better oratory skills than Bush!

note: edited for typos, 14MAR06 @0255 EST

Come And See The Corruption Inherent In The System!

2006-03-08T09:15:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers. I hope everyone is well.
The subject line of today's post is a play on a line from "Monty Python And The Holy Grail". It comes from the scene where Arthur is talking to the people digging up mud in a field. After a bit of conversation, Arthur grabs one of the characters and starts bouncing him up and down and the character shouts "Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed!"
Well, after much criticism of Bush and the Republicans, I have decided to criticize the Democrats and thus prove that I am a fair guy. The inspiration for today's rant comes from an article I read in the Washington Post entitled "Democrats Struggle To Seize Opportunity". The article explains how the Democrats are having a tough time coming up with a coherent platform in the face of the problems that the Republicans are having.
My question to the Democrats is "What is the problem?!!?" The Republicans are self-destructing and you guys can't come up with a coherent platform to take advantage of their screw ups? Are you really as braindead as the Republicans say you are? Look, the Republicans have botched everything from A to Z and you still can't come up with something! This should be easy, unless...you are just as guilty of screwing things up as the Republicans. Is that what you are saying? Are you saying that you are truly not an alternative to the Republicans, but merely a slightly different shade of the same party? Are you saying that you are just as guilty of corruption, screwing up the Katrina response, letting Iraq become a fiasco, and depriving Americans of their civil rights in the name of security as the Republicans? I hope not, because it sure looks like that is what you are saying.
Since you boobs in the DNC can't come up with a platform on your own, how about letting me help you.
Ok, DNC, listen up because here's your November platform.
1. We oppose corruption in government in all forms and vow to eliminate it via legislation and criminal prosecution. We further vow to restrict all forms of undue influence that special interests and lobbyists may have now, or in the future, by authoring and passing new ethics legislation.
2. We propose a full investigation into the botched Hurricane Katrina response. If the findings of that investigation warrant such, we propose that those officials guilty of criminally negligent actions in the response be prosecuted for such.
3. We believe that the Constitution of the United States is a sacred and inviolable document. Pursuant to our belief, we propose that any legislation, such as the USA Patriot Act, which contains clear violations of a citizen's civil liberties be repealed or amended to better protect those civil liberties.
4. Consistent with our belief in the Constitution, we believe that the President's NSA Wiretapping is a clear violation of a citizen's Fourth Amendment rights. Therefore, we propose an end to the program, followed by hearings into the program, and, if warranted by the findings of the hearings, criminal prosecutions on federal civil rights charges for any parties guilty of such offenses up to and including the President.
5. We believe that the situation in Iraq has become untenable in its current form. We believe that a new solution to the situation must be found before more servicemen and women are killed. Therefore, we propose new hearings into the matter. We also propose that new legislation be enacted to rectify the situation at once. Furthermore, if the proposed hearings should yield evidence that the war in Iraq was precipitated based upon false or misleading information, and in violation of US principals or laws, we propose criminal prosecution for those guilty of abuse of power.
Gee, there are five planks for you November platform. Now what was so hard about that. It took me roughly 45 minutes to come up with and type these planks. Most of that time was spent trying to word them correctly. The actual time to create the concepts behind them took about 15 minutes. 45 minutes for me, since before November 2005 for you. Your problem Democrats isn't that I am some political supergenius (I'm not), your problem is that you try to do too much "by committee". What I mean is that whenever Democrats try to do something, they don't just do it. First they form a committee, then they debate it, then they think about it some more, then they act. Being circumspect is fine, but sometimes you just need to do it. I used to have a teacher who always said, "Gee, let's rule by committee and get nothing done!" So, quit thinking about it, and as Nike used to say, "Just Do It"!! Unless, of course, you would like to admit that you are as guilty of corruption, incompetence, and abrogation of your responsibilities to the citizens of this country as the Republicans. If that is the case, just let the American people know in advance so that we may vote for someone who will truly bring change to the government as opposed to you or the Republicans (seeing as how both of you are, seemingly, for more of the status quo rather than true change.)
I am Chuck and the DNC may use the above planks as long as they send me a bumper sticker for the most obscure candidate they have running.

Where To Now?

2006-03-07T08:22:00.000-05:00

Hello again readers, loyal or otherwise. I hope everyone is feeling good and doing well.
Today's post is a bit of a play on the old Disneyworld commercials. You know, the ones that had a sports star winning a championship and being posed the question, "Joe Schmo, you just won the World Tiddlywinks Championship, now where are you going?" And the guy would always reply, "I'm going to Disneyworld!"
Well, my question is for George W. Bush. And it goes like this, "Gee George, now that you've betrayed the conservative ideals of smaller government, fiscal responsibility, and more personal freedom, where are you going to?"
Apparently, according to a report put out by Reuters, most Americans believe that where Bush is going is towards a civil war in Iraq. According to the report, an ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 80% of Americans now believe that a civil war in Iraq is now imminent. The story went on to breakdown the numbers a bit, saying that 7 in 10 Republicans and 8 in 10 Democrats and Independents now believe that an Iraqi civil war is likely.
What that means to GW is that 70% of his own party now regard him as being incompetent on the subject of Iraq. All I can say to the 70% is "Welcome to the fold." We Independents knew he was incompetent a long time ago. Oh well, Republicans always have been a little slow when it comes to accepting change.
What the results also mean, is that, if founded (meaning an Iraqi civil war does happen), our military will be caught in the middle and, possibly, fighting against both sides. If a civil war in Iraq does come about, the only one to blame for it will be George W. Bush. Why Bush? Well, let's see...Iraq before the US invasion was stable. Sure Saddam was a petty dictator, but at least the country was relatively calm meaning that the Sunnis and Shiites weren't at each other's throats. Yes, from time to time Saddam needed slapped down, but at least Iraq wasn't a terrorist breeding ground like it is today. And, Iraq, while being somewhat of a danger to Kuwait and Iran, was a secular counterbalance to Iran's Islamic fundamentalist regime, meaning that it played the role of regional stabilizer in a area of the world sorely lacking in stability. Since the ill-conceived invasion, Iraq has deteriorated into a quagmire of daily terrorist attacks, has become the largest breeding and training center of terrorists in the world, and now stands at the brink of a civil war which may bring about the thing that we least needed in the Middle East, another fundamentalist Islamic state!
Yeah, George, you screwed up good. All of this just to impress your daddy. I am sure that if you wanted to impress daddy, he'd have much preferred you to actually learn a little history before attempting to invade a country. You might well have learned what happens when the US gets caught in the middle of a foreign civil war. If you hadn't been so coked out, you might have figured out that Vietnam was one of those places where the US did become involved with a foreign civil war. And how did that war turn out George? Now, given that lesson, how do you think that this situation will turn out, eh?
Ok, George, since you are too stupid or incompetent to come up with your own solution to the problems in Iraq, I'll give you one. First, withdrawal all US personnel and equipment back to a position in Kuwait and/or Saudi Arabia. Second, let the Iraqis have their civil war. Third, see who wins the war. Fourth, if the people we want to win have actually won, establish diplomatic relations with them. If they haven't, meaning that the terrorists have seized power, at least we will know where to find them, and can, subsequently, eliminate them at our leisure.
See, George, that is called a "strategy". You may have wanted to consider making one before invading Iraq. It would have helped greatly. See George, the advantage of a plan or strategy is that it allows everyone on the team, from you and Rumsfeld to the field commanders actually on the ground in Iraq, to know exactly what is expected and what is to be done. Of course, I realize that the dissemination of so much information would have run counter to your program of total governmental secrecy, but sometimes it has to be done.
So now, what have we learned George? Besides the fact that you are an incompetent, we've learned that you know nothing about conducting strategic or tactical military operations. We've learned that you are an inveterate liar, and that, due to your lies, you are going to get our military involved in the middle of a foreign civil war. We've also learned that you obviously paid no attention in History class.
"Gee George, now that you've destroyed your own party's ideals, gutted the US Constitution, destroyed the military, and made the world safe for terrorism, what are you going to do next?"
"I'm going to Texas, where Dick and I can shoot anyone who criticizes us!"
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Who's Left To Investigate Things?

2006-03-01T01:45:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers and welcome to passers-by. I hope everyone is feeling good and doing well.
Today's post delves into a subject that I don't often visit, entertainment. I usually ignore the entertainment industry because I generally don't care about things like who is dating who and who wore the worst outfit at the Oscars. However, today I will touch on the entertainment industry because one of my favorite genres took a heavy hit this past week. The genre is speak of is crime dramas.
The crime drama genre is currently doing well with shows like "CSI" and "Law And Order" (and their attendant spinoffs) being very popular. However, this past week the genre lost one big named detective, one funny cop, and one lesser-known, cult classic detective.
The big named detective was Dennis Weaver. Weaver is best known for his portrayal of "Gunsmoke" deputy Chester and his role as Sam McCloud in the show "McCloud". He died Monday at the age of 81.
The funny cop was Don Knotts. While he is remembered for a number of rolls, the one I refer to is his portrayal of the shakiest cop in all of Mayberry, Barney Fife. Knotts died Friday at the age of 81.
The lesser-known, cult classic detective was Darren McGavin. Who, you may ask. McGavin played "Mike Hammer" back in the 50's (long before Stacey Keach), and was the lead in the cult favorite "Kolchak: The Night Stalker", in which he played an investigative reporter who hunted various monsters (an investigative reporter kinda counts as a detective, right?). Most people will remember McGavin not from the aforementioned roles, but for his role as the dad in the holiday classic "A Christmas Story". McGavin died Saturday at the age of 83.
They say the true measure of an actor's success is in how many people remember him for a certain role. By that yardstick, all three of these men were quite successful. I don't think anyone will forget Weaver's "McCloud" riding his horse down a New York City street as the credits rolled. And who hasn't called a somewhat nervous local cop "One-bullet-Barney Fife", recalling Knotts' classic portrayal of that character. And, at least for me, McGavin will always be remembered not only as the reporter/investigator chasing strange monster stories, but also every Christmas when TNT shows 24 hours of "A Christmas Story" ("You'll shoot your eye out, kid!).
I am Chuck, and I remind everyone that death's scythe eventually reaps us all...even the one's who can solve crimes in 30 minutes or less.

It's My Way Or The Highway!

2006-02-25T00:05:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is in good health.
Today's post concerns the Bush Administration's unwillingness to reconsider the ports deal.
As those of you who follow the news know, a United Arab Emirates-based company called "Dubai Ports World"(DPW) recently completed a takeover deal with the UK-based company "Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation" (P&O). The deal would turn over control of several large American ports to DPW.
Now in my opinion, this is a bad idea. The UAE has, in the past, supported Al Qaida money laundering operations and two of the 9/11 hijackers came from the UAE. In the UAE's defense, they have recently been cooperating with the US in intelligence operations and have been allowing US ships to anchor in their ports. However, given that the UAE has a past record of supporting terrorist operations, is in a part of the world where radical Islamic fundamentalists have a real chance of co-opting the government, and that allowing a company from such a place to run one of our strategic assets would be giving the terrorists a wide open backdoor into the US, I believe that this is a bad deal. I believe that it is so bad that it is akin to giving aid and support to terrorists.
In order for the deal to proceed, the White House needs to give its blessing to the deal. They have already done so and, according to an AP report today, they are refusing to reconsider the deal. In essence, the Bush Administration is saying that on this deal, "It's my way or the highway!" Then again, perhaps Bush is afraid that reconsidering the deal would be an admission that he didn't investigate the matter as thoroughly as he would have us believe (in other words he lied, again). After all, just the other day he claimed that he didn't even know about the deal. Of course, later that evening it was revealed that the White House had a secret agreement in place with DPW. That leads me to believe that this deal is a "payoff" of sorts for the UAE's recent cooperation.
As I recall, didn't Bush state that countries that had supported terrorist operations were enemies of the US? Well, given the UAE's record concerning terrorism and money laundering, isn't this selling a strategic asset to an enemy? Do you know what giving US strategic assets to an enemy of the US is called? It is called "treason"!
We now know that Bush had a secret deal in place for this sale, we know that the UAE has supported terrorist money laundering, we know that a government that supports terrorism is an enemy of the US, and lastly, we know that turning over control of US ports to DPW is, essentially, assigning US strategic assets to an enemy of the US. We can also speculate that turning over these ports to DPW would give the terrorists a potentially large backdoor into the US and that, according to the information put out by the Bush Administration, the most likely place for a terrorist to get a WMD into the US is through the ports.
Now, I ask you the readers, is the Bush Administration a collection of the mentally challenged or are they criminally negligent? By approving this deal the Administration is not only giving "aid and support to terrorists", but they are also giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and they are committing treason! This deal, coupled with the fact that Bush likes to violate the Constitution on a regular basis and the fact that his administration has violated or ignored several other federal laws, should give Congress enough to impeach him. But will they? The answer is a resounding "NO". This Congress is the biggest bunch of cowards and turncoats that I have ever seen, heard, or read about (and remember, I am a historian, so I have read about quite a few!) This deal should be the final nail in the coffin for the Bush dictatorship, but, again, nothing will come of it.
Folks, we need to stand up and demand that George W. Bush, et al, be impeached, tried for treason, and, at least, imprisoned. And we need to do it before the terrorists can smuggle a WMD into the US through the soon to be DPW/terrorist-controlled ports!
I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Star Naming For The Mentally Challenged Or The Independently Wealthy (Or Both)!

2006-02-24T02:30:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
The title of today's post concerns star naming. By "stars" I do not mean the folks on tv and in the movies, they are "actors" not stars. I mean the celestial balls of (mostly) hydrogen that shine in the night sky (they shine in the day sky, but our own star is so bright that you can't see them).
It would seem that because I listed astronomy as one of my hobbies in my email profile, the scum of the internet (spammers) have seen fit to bombard me with dozens of emails concerning certain star naming organizations. The organizations mentioned in the spam are not the International Astronomical Union (IAU) which is the organization that gives stars their official scientific names. No, the organizations mentioned are the ones that will name a star for or after someone for a fee.
Now being an amateur astronomer, I know that if I discover something, I am supposed to send a telegram to the IAU telling them exactly what I discovered, where it is located in the sky, and when I made the discovery. After they receive the telegram, they will have the object confirmed, and make sure that no one has discovered it before me. Once these, and a few other checks, are done I would get the credit for the discovery (providing I did indeed discover the object), but as I read the rules, they, the IAU, get to name the object. As it sits now, planets pretty much get named after Greek or Roman gods, comets get named after the discoverer, and stars get a rather mundane catalog number owing to the fact that there are so many of them. So, if I discovered a star, unless it is something spectacular, or unless I am a world famous astronomer (say on the par of someone like Stephen Hawking or Carl Sagan or the like) the star would get a number and not a name.
Having said this, there are certain companies (who shall remain nameless to keep me from getting sued rather than to protect those who are obvious scam artists) out there who are more than willing to name a star for a fee. The companies will allow you to name a star anything you like as long as you pony up the cash. The fee for naming your own star runs from roughly $40 up to roughly $150. For your cash, you get a nice certificate, the coordinates of your star, and, in some cases, the star is placed in a book containing the name you give it and the coordinates. That is all well and fine except for one thing...no legitimate astronomer in the world will be using the name of your star to refer to that star! I'll give you an example of what I mean: Say your pet turtle passes on to turtle Heaven. Having had your pet for some number of years, and while grieving his loss, you decide that you want to do something special in memory of him. So after searching a bit and finding that headstones cost too much, you decide to name a star after your late pet turtle. So you go to a star naming company's website and enter all of the necessary information, pick your naming package, and voila, several dollars later you have named a star Gamera after your deceased turtle. After a few days, you decide that you want to see your star, so you truck on down to the local observatory and hook up with the resident astronomer. You tell the astronomer that you want to see your star named Gamera. It is then that the astronomer has to tell you that there is no star with the officially recognized name of Gamera.
Now this may not sound too bad, considering that the star was named for a pet turtle, but imagine being an astronomer and having to break that kind of news to a person who named a star after a recently departed loved one. Let's just say that I wouldn't want to be the one to do it.
So my advice to those who want to name a star is: Avoid the commercial star naming places, take your $40 to $150 and get some nice certificate making software, pick a random star either out of a star catalog or the sky, then use your computer to print out a nice certificate with your name for the star and the star's coordinates on it. It will be just as official as using the commercial star naming places and it will save you a few bucks.
Oh, and to the spammers who keep sending me these emails...don't bother, they just get trashed anyway, so you are wasting your time!
I am Chuck and I will be having the spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, eggs, and spam! (Apologies to Monty Python for the shameless reference).

A Little Something To Think About...

2006-02-10T03:12:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I trust everyone is in good health.
The subject of today's post is "A Little Something To Think About". I arrived at the subject after reading several newspaper reports on the current NSA wiretapping scandal. After reading a few that basically said that Congress is about to waffle on the scandal and let Bush slide on the legality of it all, I came across one report that said that, according to an AP-Ipsos poll, 48% of Americans now think it is "OK" to conduct warrantless wiretaps as long as it is to stop terrorism.
It depresses me to think that 48% of Americans are willing to give up their Constitutional rights just to obtain a little security. Are you really that afraid of the big bad terrorists? The terrorists are an unconventional enemy, but they are not the omnipotent, omnipresent bogeymen that Bush has fashioned them into. If Bush gets away with warrantless wiretapping in the name of fighting terrorists, when and where will he stop (or be stopped)? If the blatant disregard of the Constitution continues, pretty soon we will have no rights whatsoever! With no rights, you won't have any protection against the government. Who's going to tell the government "No, you can't do that" when they want to take away your guns, or your property, or you? Are you going to be the one to stop them? How about your neighbor? No, you in the 48% will stand idly by and watch people who disagree with the government be dragged off to God-knows-where, just as long as you are safe, secure, and comfortable.
How long will it be before we are reciting Martin Niemoller's 1946 poem to express our own regrets at letting our government get out of our control. How long will it be before we are saying...

First they came for the gays, and I did not speak out - because I was not gay;
Then they came for the civil libertarians, and I did not speak out - because I was not a civil libertarian;
Then they came for the liberals, and I did not speak out - because I was not a liberal;
Then they came for the Muslims, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Muslim;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me.

I changed the groups contained in the original to more contemporary political targets, but the sentiment is the same, as is the message. (The original and a biography of the author may be found here.)
Think about the poem and think about the actions of the Bush Administration. Then think about how long it will be before they come for you or your family. The only solution, the only way to avoid this, is to demand that the Bush Administration adhere to the rule of law and the Constitution. If we fail to do that, then these things will come to pass, the poem will become an American lament, and we will only have ourselves to blame.
I am Chuck and I can see the writing on the wall. Can you?

Those Who Forget Their History...

2006-02-08T03:10:00.000-05:00

...Are doomed to make idiotic statements before Senate committees!
Hello again everyone. I hope you are all doing well.
A bit of explanation may be needed for the title and above statement.
As you may know, if you read or watch the news, the Senate Judiciary Committee has been holding hearings on the NSA wiretapping scandal. So far the committee has been hearing testimony from Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales is the current US Attorney General.
I don't know where Gonzales grew up or went to school, but he must not have paid much attention in history class. In his testimony to the committee, Gonzales made the statement, "President Washington, President Lincoln, President Wilson, President Roosevelt have all authorized electronic surveillance on a far broader scale." Hmmm, really?!!? Washington authorized electronic surveillance? When did this happen?
I have checked both my primary and secondary sources on the American Revolution, and nowhere can I find anything on Washington's electronic surveillance.
Furthermore, I am curious about how, exactly, he authorized electronic surveillance in the days before electricity and electronics existed! Did he use a Leyden jar as a power source?? Perhaps he tapped into some long forgotten work by Ben Franklin. I'd suggest that he used the principles established by Michael Faraday (concerning magnetism and electrical current generation) except that Faraday wasn't born until 1791!!
However, I have figured out that Washington could have conducted electronic surveillance, and this is how:
First, Washington had the continental army construct a HUGE Leyden jar (a type of primitive capacitor). Then, he took some old English pennies he had laying around, had them melted and drawn into copper wire. After that, and on the same fire used for the copper smelting work, he had his men make charcoal (for carbon). From there, he constructed a crude microphone using the carbon, some of the copper wire, and a magnetized nail that he once used as a primitive compass. He then ran a lead to a speaker (also made of the copper wire and carbon along with an old magnet Franklin had laying around). In the meantime, he sent his men out to a sheep pasture with a little of the wire and the Leyden jar. He had his men attach the wire to two different sheep. The men rubbed the sheep together until they had adequately charged the Leyden jar (rubbing wool against itself will generate a static charge. Think socks on a carpet. The whole process took several days and the sheep were not especially happy.) The charged Leyden jar was then returned to the camp and isolated, lest the jar discharge and kill a regiment or two. Then, when Washington was ready to conduct his electronic surveillance, he hooked the microphone to Franklin's famous kite, wired the kite to the speaker, and finally to the Leyden jar. From there he sent the kite aloft and was able to listen to the British plan their next attack. As Washington later learned, sending the microphone up on the kite was a stroke of genius as it had the side benefit of keeping the Leyden jar charged during thunderstorms! (Yes, Washington was the MacGyver of his day!)
What? What do you mean you don't believe it? The Attorney General of The United States said Washington conducted electronic surveillance before a Senate committee, and he would never lie to a Senate committee! Oh, that's right, I keep forgetting, those who forget their history are doomed to make idiotic statements before Senate committees!
I am Chuck and you may be interested to know that, according to the Bush Administration, James Madison used a Mac G5 and an iPod to decode British messages during the War of 1812!

Edited for typos 9FEB06 @ 0037hrs--C.

Why You Shouldn't Let Important Legal Justifications Be Written By Idiots

2006-02-07T03:03:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone has recovered from their Super Bowl parties.
The title of this post refers to the current battle over the legality of the NSA wiretapping program.
I was reading the Bush Administration's arguments for justifying the NSA wiretapping program when I came across something that I hadn't noticed before. The administration states that presidential authority to conduct warrantless surveillance has been around for as long as there have been US Presidents. It goes on to cite the fact that, during the American Revolution, George Washington himself authorized the intercept of British mail.
Now, this is true. George Washington did authorize the interception of British mail during the Revolution. However, this citation fails to take into account one small, but exceedingly important, fact...George Washington WAS NOT the US President at the time!!! At the time of the interception authorization, George Washington was merely the leader of a band of rebels. As such, he was already acting outside of the law and one more illegal act would have made little difference in his fate had the revolution failed. Also, it is implied that because Washington was authorized by the Continental Congress to lead the American forces, the Continental Congress was the legal authority in America at the time. Bad news for Bush, it wasn't. The Continental Congress was meeting illegally at the time that it gave Washington his authority. The officially sanctioned legal authorities in America were (from lowest to highest) the individual colonial assemblies, the royally approved colonial governors, the British Parliament, and finally, King George III (and Parliament and the King can be reversed depending on your interpretation of British law at the time). Furthermore, because he was appointed by an illegal body, under British law Washington had no more authority or standing than any other British subject at the time, and was, in fact, considered an outlaw by both Parliament and the Crown!
What all this means is that Washington had no more legal authority to intercept mail than any other citizen at the time. His order to intercept the British mail would the equivalent of your neighbor swiping your mail out of your mailbox today.
Thus the Bush Administration's assertion that Presidential surveillance authority dates back to the time of George Washington and the American Revolution fails due to the fact that Washington was not the President at the time, was appointed by an illegal body, and, while leader of the American cause, he had no more legal authority than any other citizen.
I'm not sure whether the Bush justification is disingenuous or, plainly put, borne of stupidity. I do know that the next time the White House wishes to make a historical argument they should probably consult a historian first (or at least someone who has taken more than just a freshman level Intro to American History). And as I said to open this post, this is why you shouldn't let important legal justifications be written by idiots!
I am Chuck and this has been a brief "bitch slapping" of the historical arguments of the Bush Administration!

Ok, I Had To Write About This...

2006-02-06T01:33:00.000-05:00

Hello again sports fans and loyal readers. I trust that everyone is ok.
Well, I could not resist. I just had to make a post concerning the fact that approximately 3hrs ago, the Pittsburgh Steelers became only the third team in the history of the NFL to win 5 Super Bowls. The also became the only playoff 6th seed to ever win the big dance.
Yes, as probably most of you know by now, the Pittsburgh Steelers defeated the Seattle Seahawks 21-10 at Ford Field in Detroit.
As a lifelong member of the "Steeler Nation", I am unabashedly overflowing with joy, pride, and a tinge of sadness right now. I am joyful that the Steelers finally won "one for the thumb". I am proud of the Steelers for the season that they had and for what they've achieved. And I am touched by a bit of sadness as one of all-time great players in Steelers' history announced his retirement after the game.
When asked about next season, Jerome Bettis (#36,RB), a much loved figure in Pittsburgh who goes by the affectionate nickname of "The Bus", said "I'm a champion. I think the Bus' last stop is here in Detroit. It's official, like the referee whistle."
I can't say that I blame The Bus for ending his career in this manner. After all, every athlete, no matter what the sport, wants to go out a winner. All I can say is, "Say it ain't so Bus!" If Bettis sticks by his decision to retire, and I suspect he will, he will be greatly missed, not only by the team, but by loyal Black and Gold fans everywhere.
So, at least for a week or two, I am going to enjoy the fact that the Pittsburgh Steelers are Super Bowl XL champions. I would advise members of the Steeler Nation everywhere to do the same.
After that it is time to start thinking about how we are going to win Super Bowl XLI next year in Miami!
I am Chuck and like the one song in the pregame show said, I am "dancing in the street"!

You Heard It Here First...

2006-02-05T05:37:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I trust everyone is doing well.
Well, right to it. As the title says, you heard it here first. In a post dated 22 Dec 2005, I asked which Constitutional Amendment the Bush administration would attempt to destroy next. Well, according to a Washington Post article entitled "Goss Says Leaks Have Hurt CIA's Work, Urges Probe" by Spencer S . Hsu and Walter Pincus, the answer is the First Amendment. According to the article the current director of the CIA, Porter J. Goss, is more than a bit miffed at the leaks. The Post reported that, "CIA Director Porter J. Goss told a Senate committee yesterday that unauthorized leaks of classified information about agency activities have caused "severe damage" to the CIA's operations and that journalists who report leaks should be questioned by a grand jury."
Yup, that's the ticket Porter, let's not do an in-house investigation to discover and stop the leaks, let's go after the reporters who reported the information. Yeah, instead of stopping the leaks ourselves, let's question, and possibly indict, reporters for doing nothing more than reporting the news. So, Porter, what was it that got you all fired up? Was it the fact that the news came from a leak? Or is it the fact that the reporters reported news that you didn't like? Or is it just the fact that you, as part of the administration, hold the same disdain for the Bill of Rights as your more illustrious colleagues? Oh, and why can't you discover the leaks without questioning the reporters? I mean, after all, isn't the CIA supposed to investigate and develop intelligence for this country. I would think that doing that would be somewhat more difficult that catching a leaker. Or are you admitting to the country that your agency's derisive moniker as the "Central Incompetence Agency" is correct? Nope, wait, I finally got it, you and the boys haven't had any good torture candidates in weeks and now you want to torture the messengers, right?
The fact that another administration official wants to use official pressure and intimidation to violate another Constitutional Amendment should give everyone cause to suspect this administration of being repressive. Even you sycophantic, empty headed, hardcore Republicans should now be questioning the methods and goals of this administration. My question is "WHEN ARE YOU PEOPLE GOING TO GET IT?!!!???" This administration, everyday in every way, is pissing away YOUR rights. And all I hear from people is, I am not a terrorist, what do I have to worry about. I have an idea, how about this, for all those people who feel that way, I want you to go buy a bucket of sand. Then take that bucket of sand everywhere you go, that way when someone tells you something that you don't want to hear, you can just stick your head in the sand. Wake up America! The NSA, the CIA, and the administration have all now admitted to having as a goal of their policies the wholesale violation and disposal of your Constitutionally guaranteed rights. This must stop now or one day we will all wake up to find we have no rights anymore!
I am Chuck and this has been my rant. I've decided that I stand for one thing, the preservation of our constitutional rights, and if you don't like it...I don't give a damn!

PLEASE NOTE: This post may show up twice. If it does, please leave me a comment stating that it does so. The reason that it may show up twice is that the first version of it published, then, for some mysterious reason, it stopped showing up in my list of published entries and on the main page of the blog. This may be due to a problem at Blogger, or it may be due to someone having the post removed (for unknown reasons). Therefore, I have decided to republish it. The above post appears in its original form (as published the first time, on Feb 4, 2006 @ 0142hrs EST). If it goes down again, I will simply continue to republish it until the problem is fixed or until whoever is having it removed realizes that fighting with me is an exercise in futility.--Chuck.

Something To Contemplate As You Go On Your Merry Way...

2006-01-26T01:36:00.000-05:00

Hello again folks. I hope everyone out there is happy and healthy.
Here is something to think about during the course of your day.
I was reading an article on the Patriot Act in the Washington Post and something that I learned in college started buzzing around my head. I left it go for a moment, but then I started reading an article on George W. Bush and the DOJ paper justifying the NSA's warrantless spying over on a site called "The Slate". As I was reading, the thought buzzed louder and louder until I decided that perhaps I should write about the thought.
As I stated the thought was of something that I learned in college. While attending Pitt, I took a few courses in terrorism (LONG before it was fashionable to do so). During the course, the instructor started going over what the goals of your average terrorist were. Among things like wholesale political, social, and economic changes and the infliction of mass terror upon a population, was one thing that struck me then, and has comeback to me now.
The instructor stated that when attacking the US, terrorists could not hope to win militarily, nor could they hope to win by injuring our economy. The only way that a terrorist could beat the US was to cause political disruption on such a scale that it would cause us to abandon our constitution and the political principals that we hold dear. Also, the political disruption would cause the government to become more repressive (of our freedoms) in pursuit of security.
Given the current state of affairs with the US holding people indefinitely without a right to an attorney, committing acts of torture, spying on people domestically without first obtaining a warrant or requesting judicial oversight, and with the White House claiming that it has a right to do so by twisting the interpretations of Article II of the Constitution, the Congressionally passed Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), and the theory of Unitary Executive Power, aren't the terrorists winning? By combining the above offenses and the Patriot Act, the government has shown that, in the pursuit of security, it is willing to abandon both the Constitution and our cherished principals freedom and civil liberties. This is the exact manner in which a government becomes repressive. So, I ask you, the readers, if the way a terrorist "wins" is to cause a government to become repressive in pursuit of security, then how can Bush and his pals come on tv and say that we are "winning the war on terrorism"?
I am Chuck and I believe that an educated, free thinking populace is the best armor any republic can have!

Well, Here They Are...Finally!

2006-01-23T01:20:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well and feeling fine.
Well, you've been waiting in anticipation of this post. So here it is, my somewhat skewered, slightly looney, and fairly facetious predictions for 2006.
In reverse order (from least important to most important):

10. The Pittsburgh Steelers will win the Super Bowl (Ok, everyone run out and put down money on the Seahawks. You probably won't be wrong given my record in college bowl predictions!)

9. The New York Mets will again spend as much on payroll as the old Soviet Union did on defense, and, again, they will finish out of the playoffs

8. Congressional hearings on mining will yield the conclusion that working underground is dangerous. Thus, Congress will mandate that, from now on, all underground mining must be done on the surface to minimize the danger and maximize worker safety.

7. George W. Bush will sign an executive order stating that all non-Republicans are a threat to national security and must be spied on, harassed, fired from all public employment, and imprisoned. The order will include all public office holders from Congressmen on down.

6. The current NSA domestic spying scandal will be shown to be more widespread than originally believed. It will be shown that the NSA not only spied on innocent people, but also data mined not just some, but all internet traffic in the US. It will also be shown that they gathered damaging information on anyone who opposes The Glorious Leader (aka GW Bush) for the purposes of (at a later time) harassing, intimidating, incarcerating, and/or generally ruining the person's life.

5. Gasoline will hit $4.50 per gallon by the end of summer. Oil will not actually be in short supply. The oil companies will state that with oil in abundance, new storage facilities will need to be built, and thus, the price of gas will need to increase to pay for the new tanks. When asked for a comment, the White House will reply, "Who cares about the increased price of gas, the collapse of the economy, and the little guy! We're [the White House occupants] getting rich here and that's all that counts!"

4. While out "pressing the flesh", Vice President Dick Cheney will step into a mudpuddle and accidentally short himself out. He will spend months, not in a hospital, but in an appliance repair shop waiting on parts to come in so that he can be adequately rewired and repaired.

3. As more about the Bush/NSA spying scandal becomes public, Congress will hold hearings to determine how best to draft articles of impeachment against George W. Bush.

2. In an effort to forestall his imminent presidential demise, Bush will issue an executive order suspending Congress. He will also order troops to enforce his decree. Fortunately, the troops will refuse the order as being unconstitutional. (For his order, Bush will also be inducted into the "Petty Dictators Club" joining such infamous company as Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and Saddam Hussein.)

1. George W. Bush will be impeached. Dick Cheney will take over, but will soon resign citing health reasons. In the resulting confusion as to who is president, Alexander Haig will resurface and claim that he is in charge. (For those wondering, the Speaker of the House [J. Dennis Hastert, R-IL] would actually be the President.)

Well, there you have it, my predictions for 2006. As always, if you don't like my predictions, feel free to make up your own (heck, they might even be better than mine). Also, as with all "psychic" activities, these predictions are provided for "entertainment purposes only". And for those of you who want to know how I come up with my predictions, suffice to say the process involves sleep deprivation, staring into an empty Mt. Dew bottle, and an old head injury! (Not really, I kind of make it up as I go.)
On that note, as always, I am Chuck, and these predictions have been brought to you by the Bad Psychic Network (Remember, our motto is "I knew you were going to say something like that!")
Oh, just a reminder, comments (good, bad, indifferent) on this and any other post are always welcome. Let me know what you think folks! --C.

A Personal Revelation (Or Not)...

2006-01-17T01:24:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
I will post my predictions for 2006 soon (I'm not quite done with them yet.)
This post concerns a minor personal revelation.
I was sitting at the computer playing solitaire and listening to some old 80's music (specifically, "Never Surrender" by Corey Hart) after an evening of updating, downloading, and general surfing. While I listened to the song, my mind wandered, as it is wont to do, and then it hit me. Does anyone know why nostalgia-based industries make so much money? Anyone...Bueller? Well, I will tell you. It is because, as everyone gets older, they start remembering and reassessing their youth. Whether it is consciously or unconsciously, enough people do it to drive a industry that is nostalgia based. By "nostalgia-based industries", I mean everything from "classic rock" FM radio stations and "TV Land"-style television stations to the folks who put out those "Best Of" Decade X albums and the producers of shows like VH1's popular "I Love The" [insert decade here] fare.
Now there is nothing wrong with a little nostagia. In fact, in tough or bad times, memories from our youths can be quite comforting (and in some cases, inspiring.) As long as you don't overdo it, I don't think that any p-shrink will tell you that reminiscing about days past is a bad thing.
The revelation I had doesn't so much deal with wondering about memories or reassessing my youth as it does with why we feel so nostalgic when such memories pop up. The revelation goes a bit like this:
First, I know that music can be an incredibly powerful tool insofar as churning up memories are concerned. Second, I know that those memories with strong emotions (good or neutral emotions such as those that give you a "warm fuzzy" feeling) attached to them can lead to deep feelings of nostalgia. The question I posed to myself was "Why does this happen?" So, I thought about it for a while. Using a combination of inductive and deductive reasoning coupled with personal thoughts and feelings, I came up with my hypothesis. That hypothesis is, when we are young, specifically when we are teenagers, we are transitioning from childhood to adulthood. During that transition, we are going through several difficult periods concurrently. Physically, we are going through puberty. Socially and emotionally, we are dealing with becoming aware of the opposite sex, dating, and, generally, the whole high school social period. Intellectually, our thinking is being transformed from the learning by recitation model of primary education into the critical thinking model of secondary education and adulthood. Generally, we enter, traverse, and exit this entire period in less than ten years (that is from the start of puberty to its end). To experience this massive upheaval and change in less than ten years means that the changes we are experiencing and information we are gathering about ourselves and the world around us happens extremely rapidly. This rapidity means that certain things get lost, forgotten or ignored. Couple the lost, forgotten, or ignored items with a teenager's desire to "cool" and aloof or with (as I put it) their inability to be anything but egocentric and you can begin to see that during our teen years we neither have the emotional maturity, nor the intellectual maturity, to appreciate the subtleties of the world around us. Couple that immaturity with the fact that the world around them is coming at them at an alarming rate, and you can see how the average teen may miss a few things. Now, one thing that any parent will agree with, is that the average teen doesn't miss much in the way of popular music. As we already know, music is a powerful memory agent.
Now, leap forward to your 30's and 40's. Time has eliminated the bad memories of our youth and polished the good memories. Suddenly, on the local radio station, a song from your lost youth appears. All of those good memories, so carefully polished, come flooding back, and suddenly you find yourself longing for the "simpler days" of 1985. You invariably remember something like sharing a romantic dance with "Mary Jane Rottencrotch", but you never remember the 16 girls who turned you down flat for that dance because you were either not in the "right" clique or because you were an a/v geek. (This may pertain to people feeling nostalgic for their high school days, but college nostalgia may be looked upon as merely an extension of the same processes described above but with a bit more maturity involved.)
Thus it is my conclusion that nostalgia occurs for two reasons. The first reason is that as teenagers we are aware of our environment, most specifically social happenings and the music associated with them, but are either too overwhelmed or immature to appreciate it at the time. And the second reason is that, as adults, we have eliminated, repressed, or just plain forgotten, all of the unpleasant memories, retained and enhanced the good memories, and have learned how to appreciate the environment around us.
Those nostalgia-based industries I spoke of earlier have learned how to tap the second reason above. That is how they manage to sell people their products. So next time you are considering shelling out $20 for a "Best of" Decade X cd, think about the reasons you want the cd. While you may still get the cd, you may also get a bonus while thinking about your reasons for the purchase...you just may discover something about yourself you never knew. And that in itself is well worth the $20.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been a minor revelation (more than a surprising thought but less than an epiphany). (And now you also know why I majored in History and not Psych!!)

Happy New Year To Everyone!

2005-12-30T02:20:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone has sufficiently recovered from Christmas enough to be ready for New Years.
I want to wish all of my readers a Happy New Year and remind you not to drink and drive. I would also like to remind my readers that you need to eat pork and sauerkraut on New Years Day (at least if you want to have good luck in 2006).
Having said that, I would like you to note a few changes on the page. The most notable change on the page is that a link to EvoStats has been added, and for those of you who do not use Mozilla Firefox (or are using an outdated copy), there should be a button on the page that says "Upgrade To Firefox 1.5" (or similar). I have been having trouble with the Mozilla button, so if you are using Explorer, Opera, Safari, or the like and you are not seeing this button, let me know. EvoStats is a free service that allows me to see where my visitors are coming from. If you have a blog or webpage, give them a try.

And now the part you've all been waiting for (or not), my predictions for the college football bowl games. Ignoring the bowl games that have already been played, and going with the theory that the closer you play to New Years Day the more important the bowl game (excepting the BCS bowls which have their own rules), here are my predictions for the remaining games:

Music City Bowl--Virginia 27, Minn. 12
Sun Bowl--UCLA 41, Northwestern 7
Independence Bowl--South Carolina 17, Missouri 14
Peach Bowl--Miami 35, LSU 31
Meineke Bowl--South Fla. 38, NC State 35
Liberty Bowl--Fresno St 31, Tulane 14
Houston Bowl--TCU 21, Iowa St. 14
Outback Bowl--Florida 28, Iowa 17
Cotton Bowl--Alabama 35, Texas Tech 24
Gator Bowl--Louisville 42, Virginia Tech 35
Capital One Bowl--Auburn 27, Wisconsin 21
Fiesta Bowl--Notre Dame 38, Ohio St. 6
Sugar Bowl--West Virginia 45, Georgia 28
Orange Bowl--Florida State 22, Penn State 21 (upset game of bowl season)
Rose Bowl--USC 56, Texas 49

Now if you are smart and want to make alot of money, run out and bet against every team I predicted to win. You should make a killing! These are my predictions and they stand as called. I must note that if you actually bet on the basis of my predictions, you are a very large fool (I am a notoriously bad handicapper). (Oh, and before anyone gets mad and tells me that I am wrong [after the games, of course] about the predictions, 1. these are made as a wild guess, and 2. I expect to be wrong in nearly everycase. So read them at your own risk.)
Once again, Happy New Year to everyone, and don't drink and drive.
I am Chuck and this message is a service of the (bad) psychic sports network.
Coming Soon: My predictions for 2006!

Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays

2005-12-25T01:04:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is well.
Well, there are officially NO shopping days left until Christmas (unless , of course, you are Eastern Orthodox, in which case there are roughly 12 or 13 shopping days left. The reason for this is complicated and I won't explain it here).
So, I want to wish everyone a Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Happy Holidays, or Happy "Whatever-You-Care-To-Celebrate".
I hope everyone gets what they want.
Here are a few personal Christmas wishes for people I know (minus the names):
For My Friends: I hope you get everything that you want and the batteries to go with it.
For My Girlfriend: Love, Happiness, and a bright, shiny, new pony (and all the stuff to go with it). (She REALLY wants a pony!) I suggest you name the pony...Norman.
For My Relatives: A day free from turmoil, family disputes, strife, and cooking.
For My Country: A day without anyone getting killed (anywhere).
For the World: At least one day where we all just stop and get along (or at least don't irritate one another)
And yes, I even hope George W Bush has a merry and happy Christmas (although I hope he gets coal in his stocking...along with an indictment on wiretapping charges).
So, from me to all of my readers and their families, Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, and remember not to drink and drive.
I am Chuck, and this has been anything but a rant.

Apparently It Was "Faulty Intelligence"

2005-12-23T00:30:00.000-05:00

Hello again everyone. I usually don't post so soon after a previous post, but this story has me shaking my head and wondering.
As loyal readers know, I have been on a tear about the whole Bush Admin/NSA domestic spying story. Just when I thought it couldn't get any stranger, this comes along.
The Washington Post is reporting that, earlier this week, the President rebuked reporters for breaking the NSA domestic spying story. During the rebuke, the President took reporters to task about publishing stories based on governmental leaks (basically he told them that they were being un-American by publishing news that might hurt intelligence gathering operations related to the war on terrorism. Call me a misguided idealist, but I thought that reporting news was the press' job. Guess White House approved news is the only acceptable news now!) Anyway...During the chastisement, Bush cited a 1998 news story (developed from a leak) that reported that Bin Laden was being tracked using his cell phone. The report supposedly caused Bin Laden to turn off his phone, and, thus, he was able to elude tracking for a while. Now, apparently in Bush's mind, no other reason would have caused him to shut down his phone. I mean the fact that we used cruise missiles to bomb his camps the day before he shut off the phone had nothing to do with him actually shutting it down, it was the newspaper story (yeah, that's the ticket).
Now the Post is reporting that the newspaper story cited by Bush is an urban myth. Plainly put, there never was any story. This "damaging" story never even existed, yet it was cited as "fact" by Bush. I guess it falls into the same category as the other facts bandied about by Bush and the White House. Facts like "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction", and "Iraq was involved in 9/11." Facts like "The Patriot Act isn't eroding or taking away your rights if you have nothing to hide" and "We don't have secret CIA prisons overseas and we never torture the prisoners in them." I guess this "fact" was just another example of the faulty intelligence that Bush is getting. It must have come from the same source as the Iraqi WMD intelligence. Gee, I wish Bush would get start getting some decent intel, and do so before more "faulty intelligence" kills another two thousand service men and women.
As always I am Chuck and this has been my "defeatist," but factual, rant.

This Just In To Fox News...

2005-12-22T01:42:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I trust that everyone is doing well.
Today's post concerns something I heard on Fox News yesterday (21 DEC 05).
I was watching Fox News yesterday afternoon. They had on a news discussion show (I don't recall the title) in which they present the days news and allow audience members to participate in a discussion of the day's events. As I watched, a young lady in the audience got up and made a comment. The comment was in reference to Bush's authorization of the NSA to conduct domestic spying without court oversight. When asked what she thought, the woman replied, "The only ones who have something to worry about are those with something to hide." This struck me as being a hideously ignorant comment (ignorant of the real issues at hand, that is) until I realized that Fox News is not "Fair and Balanced" as their tagline states, but rather tilted toward the Neo-Conservative viewpoint. In fact Fox News is so tilted toward the Neo-Cons that they should change their name to the Neo-Con News Network. Of course that would probably get them sued by CNN as Fox's new "call letters" would be NCNN. I also think that they should change their tagline from "Fair and Balanced" to "Whatever The Bush Administration Wants You to Hear" or "All Government Approved News, All The Time" (of course they'd probably get sued by Pravda for using the latter tag).
Having said that, my purpose in writing this is not to bash Fox News (I actually kind of like Neil Cavutto's business show), but to address the appalling ignorance of the woman's statement.
The woman making the statement can't really be faulted for feeling the way she does. She was merely parroting a sentiment that the Bush Administration and The Republicans have been spouting for the last 3 or 4 years. "Gee, Mr. President, what about the erosion of civil liberties under the Patriot Act?" "The only one's who need worry are those with something to hide." "Gosh, Mr. President, don't you think that domestic spying without court oversight is not only a bad idea, but downright illegal?" "No. The only ones who have something to worry about are those with something to hide." "Gee, Chancellor Hitler, isn't locking up all of the Jews and other non-conformists a bad idea, not to mention a violation of their human rights?" "No. The only ones who have something to worry about are those with something to hide." You see where I am going with this?
"Those with something to hide" aren't the only ones with something to worry about. You, the average America, should be worrying also. This departure from the rule of law is perhaps the most troubling of all of the developments during Bush's reign as president (or wannabe dictator, your choice). The Patriot Act, in all of its repugnance, is a law. It was approved by Congress, and it can be repealed by Congress (with enough popular pressure). The NSA spying was authorized by EXECUTIVE ORDER, Congress cannot repeal an executive order. The only person who can repeal or withdrawl an executive order is the president. Now given that this president authorized this order, I highly doubt he is going to recind it. This particular order is troubling in the fact that, heretofore, spying on American citizens was conducted by either the Secret Service, or the FBI, and then only after receiving judicial approval! The NSA spying has neither asked, nor recieved, any judicial approval, not even from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)(the secret intelligence court)! As a matter of fact, the Washington Post has reported that one of the judges on the FISC has resigned in protest over the spying citing the fact the information gather may have been used to obtain tainted FISA warrants (tainted due to the lack of judicial oversight).
The problem with all of this domestic spying isn't that it is aimed at catching terrorists. The problem with it is that it represents, and embodies, a blatant disregard for the Constitution and the safeguards contained therein. The Constitution's Fourth Amendment reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Now I don't know about you, but what that means to me is that the government shall not come into my house and look around for illegal things without first having probable cause and, second, a search warrant. The Fourth Amendment is, essentially, both a limitation on the government's powers and a safeguard for the people. It limits the government's powers in that, without probable cause, they can't get a judicial order to enter your house, and without a warrant based upon that probable cause, you can deny the government entry to your home. It also safeguards you against governmental harrassment at your residence, not to mention that it stops over eager, under intelligent, and just downright nosy cops (and other government agents) from entering your house "just to see if you're up to no good". By ordering the NSA to spy on Americans without judicial oversight, the Bush Administration has pretty much thrown the Constitution out when it comes to catching terrorists here in the US. By engaging in this activity, the Bush Administration has shown that it will let nothing, not even the US Constitution, stand in the way of its wholesale attempt to seize unchecked power. Bush claims that the spying was prompted by his desire to catch terrorists. Might I remind the President that, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." No matter what your intent, as the President, you, above all people, must respect the rule of law, especially the Constitution (which, by the way, you are sworn to uphold). By tossing away one Amendment, you are essentially tossing them all away. Upholding the Constitution is an "all or none" proposition. One cannot just arbitrarily choose which Amendments one wishes to uphold and disregard the rest.
This administration has thrown away, violated, and just plain ignored our Constitutional rights for far too long. We, the average citizens, have a right and a duty to call them on it. We have a duty to see to it that those rights are restored. The Constitution allows us to do this by any means necessary. I personally prefer the ballot box, but you can decide your own path. My concern with this whole thing is, if we allow the government to just toss away the protections of one amendment, how long will it be before they decide that another amendment is "just in the way" and discard it? Which Constitutional Amendment will it be next? The First so as to shut up "troublemakers" and "rabblerousers" like me, or the New York Times? Maybe the Second, that way the populace can't fight back with anything BUT words. Ah, the hell with the Fifth and Eighth Amendments, now we can force you to testify against yourself, and we can torture you too (whoops, they already did do away with the Eighth. See CIA torture of terrorist suspects). The Sixth Amendment is already gone by virtue of the Patriot Act and the fact that domestic terrorist suspects are now considered "special enemy combatants" and, therefore, not entitled to the luxury of an impartial trial by a jury of their peers. Nine and Ten are already gone too. Nine says that any rights not listed in the Constitution shall be construed as belonging to the people. And Ten actually states that the individual States (or people) retain all the rights not given to the Federal Government. Silly States, thinking that they have rights, tsk, tsk, tsk. I left out amendment Three dealing with the quartering of soldiers in private houses as it seems to me that, since the members of the National Guard most likely own those private houses, and since the only military option we seem to have anymore is the National Guard (the regular Army seems to have all quit, or at least most of it [not the Army's fault, see defense cuts, ill advised miltary adventures {aka Iraq War}, and problems recruiting]), this wasn't really an issue. However, the issue at hand is how are we, the average American citizen, going to react? Are we going to finally stand up and say enough is enough and take back our Constitutionally guaranteed rights? Or are we going to react as the woman on the Fox News show did and say, "The only ones who have something to worry about are those with something to hide"?
I know what choice I am making. And if believing that the US Constitution is both inviolable and the highest law of the land makes me an enemy of the Bush Administration and the powers that be...so be it. But I shall remind the powers that be that being a patriot is neither a crime, nor is it defeatist (see Bush Speech, 18 DEC 05), nor is it terrorism.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

The KGB Is Alive And Well And Living In Fort Meade, MD.

2005-12-18T04:45:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well today.
Today's post concerns a recent story I read in the Washington Post.
It would seem that our cluless leader, one George W. Bush (male, caucasian, no distiguishable intelligence or scars), authorized the National Security Agency to spy on Americans here at home. He did so in 2002 via an executive order and then renewed the order a further 36 times!! Since the authorization, the NSA has been surveilling hundreds (possibly thousands, the exact number is classified [like most things in the Bush Admin.]) of Americans, not overseas where the NSA is allowed to operate, but domestically. The NSA has been gathering intelligence on Americans who communicate with individuals overseas. The NSA has been conducting both electronic and physical surveillance of people through various military intelligence agencies. The spying has been conducted without the judicial oversight required by the Patriot Act, FISA, or the Constitution. Whatsmore, during the entire time that this has been going on, the information has been released on a need-to-know basis. That means that only two people outside of the Bush Administration, and those directly involved, knew about this. Both of those people were sitting judges on the ultrasecret Intelligence Court (see unconstitutional "Star Chamber"). They were briefed in about the operation by then-AG John "I admire Himmler" Ashcroft. His succesor in the post as Reichsfuhrer Attorney General Alberto "I wanna be like 'Iron Felix'" Gonzales is quoted as saying that terrorism is a war of information and that the DOJ will be aggressive in gathering that information, but "...we will always do so in a manner that's consistent with our legal obligations." Yeah, ok, this from a man who composed a memo stating that torture was legal! I don't think Al would know constutionally legal if it bit him in the ass!
Now all this might not sound to bad until you consider that the surveillance could have been requested (without too much trouble) under the Patriot Act. However, the Bush Administration decided that it would be too much bother to follow the rules (or at least to comply with the law) in this case. So in classic Bush style, it was decided "the hell with the law, we'll do what we want! It is secret, who'll be any the wiser?!!?" On top of that, the memos discussing this basically have said that the President has unlimited powers to fight terrorism. Unlimited powers...hmmm, what about the law? What about the limits on Executive power contained in the Constitution? Unlimited power my ass! Of course given the Bush Administration's propensity for flippantly ignoring the law, I guess GW would have unlimited power.
Of course this brings up several issues. The first issue is, if the NSA has been surveilling people using military intelligence, isn't that a violation of the Posse Comitatus prohibition on using the Armed Forces to maintain domestic order? For those of you who don't know what I am talking about, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the military in performing domestic law enforcement. Posse Comitatus is the reason that FBI is the federal government's chief law enforcement agency and not the Army.
The second issue raised is that this spying has gone on without judicial oversight. This intelligence gathering has been done with no warrants. Thus, this has been a warrantless surveillance. That makes the surveillance patently illegal. Under the rules, intelligence gathered from a warrantless surveillance is considered to be tainted and, therefore, inadmissible in any court case. Since there is a veil of secrecy around who was surveilled and what was gathered, it can be argued that it is possible that any terrorist trial held since 2002 could have used evidence gathered through this operation, therefore the evidence was inadmissible. That makes all terrorism convictions from 2002 to present suspect and in need of review. Furthermore, it can be argued that, if indeed intelligence from this operation was used in the government's cases, the convictions should be overturned, AND under the rules of double jeopardy, the terrorists should go free without the government getting another shot at the prosecution.
Another issue that is highlighted by this whole mess is the fact that the Bush Administration is treating the "War on Terror" as exactly that, a war. Now the last time I checked the Constitution, only Congress had the power to make war. If the Bush Administration wants to treat this as an actual war, then GW's powers are (Constitutionally) very limited in what he can do. If he wants to treat this as a limited military operation, then his powers are (legislatively) very limited. Either way, the President's is not omnipotent in fighting terrorism. However, as long as Bush continues to think he is all powerful, abuses like this will continue to be exposed.
Back in the 90's, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about an extramarital affair. At the time, I supported the impeachment because no person, President or otherwise, should be above the law (and Bill did lie). Bill was also indicted on "abuse of powers" charges. Now it is 2005 and we have the Bush Administration showing everyone exactly what "abuse of power" is all about. George W. Bush should be impeached immediately! He should be brought up of charges of abuse of power, criminal facilitation, criminal conspiracy, lying to congress and treason. It is clear that Bush views his power as unlimited with no constitutional or legislative bounds, it is also clear that he abuses that power on a regular basis. Mr Bush and his administration did work to criminally facilitate warrantless searches, he conspired with others within his administration to circumvent legislative and constitutional protections and guarantees (concerning civil liberties). And lastly, he committed treason by conspiring with at least 2 others within his administration is violate several Constitutional amendments and provisions.
Will GW be impeached, well let me put it this way...NO! Not with the gutless Congress currently being run by the Nazi, er, Republican Party. To show you how gutless these guys are, and after all this about domestic spying by the NSA, when asked about the whole affair, Sen. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) said "I don't agree with the libertarians. I want my security first. I'll deal with all the details after that." Well, Senator Lott (by the way how are things in the Klan nowdays?), a man with more wisdom in his little finger than you have in your entire body (and a man who had a helluva lot of guts) once said "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" The man who said this was none other than Benjamin Franklin (scholar, inventor, and Founding Father). Given that Ben went through a revolution against the most powerful nation on earth at the time (Britain), I think he had a bit more balls than you, eh, Senator?
Well, time to go.
As always I am Chuck, and in the words of 80s one hit wonder Rockwell, "I always feel like somebody's watching me..."

The Barbary States Are No More...

2005-12-16T02:55:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well out there in cyberland.
This post concerns my recent problems with copyright infringement (a type of "print piracy"), thus the odd title. Without going into a history lecture, suffice to say that the Barbary States were a group of states in North Africa (in the vicinity of present day Tunisia and Libya) that conducted what US considered, at the time, to be piracy. We attacked and defeated them in the early 1800's. It is from this war that the "shores of Tripoli" phrase in the US Marine Corps Hymn originates. Lesson over, now on with the show.
From reading an earlier post, you may know that one of my posts, "Updating A Few Things..." was recently reprinted without permission by another website. After much digging, I finally found the true owners of the offending website.
I must stop the story here and apologize to the people involved with California Regional Internet, Inc., of San Diego, CA, and "jlambert@complexdrive.net". While the Whois on the IP address came back to California Regional Internet, Inc, and subsequent investigation yielded the email address above, California Regional Internet, and the owner of the above email address had NOTHING to do with this. Thus I am apolgizing for naming them in the previous post.
Now on with the rest of the story...
As I said, after much digging, I finally found the party responsible for the offending website. I subsequently emailed the person and received a very polite reply. After a bit of discussion and the email below, the person responsible agreed to remove my post from his/her site. I won't reveal the person's name out of respect for their privacy. Other than taking out the names, the letter appears unedited.
Here is the letter I sent:

Dear [person responsible's name],
I am the owner of a blog called "Chuck's Occasional Rants" (http://lobstercigs.blogspot.com). During an inspection of my blog, I came upon a link to your website under the "links to this post" section of an entry entitled "Updating A Few Things..." I clicked the link and was directed to an entry on your website. Upon examination, I found that the entry on your website was an exact duplicate of my post including the title.
As you may, or may not, know the entries on my blog are both my intellectual property and are copyrighted. The fact that the reprint appearing on your website is not an excerpt (and thus subject to "fair use"), but a reproduction of my work in its entirety, without my permission, constitutes "copyright infringement" as defined by Title 17 United States Code.
I am asking that you take one of the following actions concerning this matter:
1. You may remove the entry on your site, within 7 calender days, without penalty provided that you do not repost the entry in question ad infinitum. ; or;
2. You may retain and display the entry entitled "Updating A Few Things..." provided that you prominently credit me with the work. The credit shall contain my name, my blog's name, and a link to my blog. The limited permission to reprint granted herein shall not exceed 180 calender days. Furthermore, at no time shall you remove the credit from the entry. After the expiration of the limited permission to reprint, you may seek a renewal of this agreement. If you do not seek said renewal, the permission will be considered to have been willingly terminated by both parties. Upon termination, the entry must be removed and must not be reprinted at any time in the future without seeking a new permission agreement.
For the purposes of measuring the 7 calendar days and the 180 calender days, the date of this letter shall be set as 16 December 2005.
I am not seeking anything unreasonable here, nor do I have a great desire to engage in a lengthy criminal investigation and possible prosecution. I am merely seeking to be credited with the authorship of my own work.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
[my name here]

I sent the email and within minutes the post was removed from the offending site. I have left the link intact so that you, the reader, may verify that it is indeed gone (the post, not the link).
While I retain all rights to these posts, I am not adverse to someone republishing them on another site. I don't want money for the posts (they're not good enough for that). All I ask is that the person seeking to republish any of my posts obtain permission to do so first (you may leave a comment asking to do so), and that they give me full credit for my work. I don't think that this is unreasonable. However, if you just come and grab a post without permission and republish it without crediting me, then I have a problem with it and shall seek any and all legal remedies.
As for the issue with the offending website, I consider the matter closed. Also, I am claiming a victory (albeit a small one) against copyright infringement.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

Aaarrrggghhhh, Piracy Strikes The Rant!

2005-11-29T01:51:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
The title of today's post reflects something that has recently affected this blog. It would seem that someone out there is so mindless, so intellectually deficient, and so mentally enfeebled as to not be able to come up with original posts. So, in an effort to fill a bogus blog with information, they have taken to plagiarising this blog.
If you scroll down to the entry entitled "Updating A Few Things..." and click on the "links to this post" selection at the bottom of the post you will notice a link with the same title as the post. If you click on the link it will take you to a page called "newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com". There you will find MY post in its entirety. The page does not provide a reciprocal link to this blog, nor does the page credit me with being the original author of the post. This page has done nothing more than to steal my post outright. The open theft of intellectual materials is not what linking to this blog is about. The intent in providing the option to link to my posts was/is to provide my readers with a convenient way to cite (not wholeheartedly copy) my works and to provide me with some way of tracking the dissemination of my ideas.
But back to the problem at hand, the theft of my post.
When I discovered that the linking website had stolen my post, I was, needless to say, quite angry. As I cooled down, I didn't know whether to be angry or flattered. What I mean is, on one hand they (the website in question) have stolen my material outright, but on the other hand they found it so valuable and so good that they decided to commit a federal crime to obtain it. I decided to be angry rather than flattered. After investigating the website, I used my trusty copy of Sam Spade (an excellent program by Steve Atkins) to convert the page's name to an IP address that I could then put through a whois search. The DNS-to-IP yielded an IP address of 209.126.254.105. I then did an ARIN whois search of the IP. The whois search told me that the website was hosted by California Regional Internet, Inc. The company is out of San Diego, CA. With this information in hand, I decided to write to the system administrator of the company in the hope that he or she could aid me in getting the problem resolved. Here is the letter I wrote [edited to omit my name]:
"Dear Sirs,
My name is [my name here]. I run a small
weblog entitled "Chuck's Occasional Rants (now banned
in 15 countries)". The blog is hosted by Blogger.Com
at the address "http://lobstercigs.blogspot.com".
While recently checking through my weblog, I noticed
that a site called "newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com"
had linked to an post entitled "Updating A Few
Things...". Upon further investigation, I found that
the site "newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com" had
reprinted my post in its entirety without first
obtaining the necessary permission of the author (me).
The evidence of infringement may be obtained by
following this link:
http://newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com/blog/?p=34
As all of the entries/posts on the weblog (Chuck's
Occasional Rants...) are the intellectual property of
myself, and as all of the entries/posts are
copyrighted by me, the owners of
"newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com" have committed a
clear violation of current US copyright laws. The
notice that all entries/posts are copyrighted (with
all rights reserved) by me appears at the bottom of my
weblog.
I am requesting that you, as the administrator of
the system hosting
"newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com", do a few things.
The first request is that you send me the contact
information for the registered owners of the site
"newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com" so that I might
contact them directly concerning this matter.
The second request is that you suspend the webpage
"http://newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com/blog/?p=34"
until such time as the copyright infringement can be
resolved.
The last request is that you forward this message to
the parties responsible for the infringing website
(newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com) with the notation
that, should they seek permission to reprint my post,
I would be so inclined as to grant a limited
permission to reprint.
Please note that this is not a DMCA takedown notice.
I am requesting these things so that the issue at
hand may be resolved in a timely and amicable fashion.
Your cooperation toward this end is greatly
appreciated.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
[my name here]
Owner, "Chuck's Occasional Rants""

I would have thought that by now I would have heard back from them. Instead, I got a letter (from a mailer daemon) telling me that the letter was being forwarded to a "jlambert@complexdrive.net" and that the forwarding had not yet succeeded.
So, not having heard back from the folks responsible for the page, I decided to lookup the IP for "complexdrive.net". The lookup yielded an IP address of 209.126.254.29. Look familiar? It should, it is part of the block assigned to California Regional Internet, Inc. Hmmm, that's an odd coincidence, don't you think?
Since it is obvious that the person or people responsible for the offending website read this blog, hopefully this post will serve as their notice that I have been trying to contact them regarding this obvious copyright infringement and that they should contact the system administrator at California Regional Internet, Inc concerning my efforts to do so.
As indicated in the letter, I am not adverse to someone republishing my stuff. All I ask is that they ask permission to do so, and give me proper credit (we're not talking about a line or two citation, that falls under fair use). However, should they fail to do so, I will be left with no recourse but to remind them that copyright infringement is a federal crime, and that I will pursue a prosecution of the offender(s) through any means available. No one can claim that they didn't know the material on this blog is copyrighted, a notice of copyright ownership appears at the bottom of each and every page on this blog. Furthermore, that notice also specifies "All rights reserved." What that means is that, outside of a fair usage citation, I own the material here, lock, stock, and barrel! It also means that you need to ask permission before using my stuff (outside of the fair usage exception).
As fair warning to the party or parties responsible for "newyork-legal-attorney-lawyer.com", if I do not hear from you by Monday, 05 December 2005, no later than 12:00 noon EST(1800 hrs UT), I will be forced to contact both the FBI and Federal Prosecutor in my area to pursue legal action against you on the charges of copyright infringement.
If anyone wishes to offer advice, or suggestions on how best to pursue this, please leave your suggestions in the comments. Thanks.
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant. (Betcha they don't link to this post!)

The Title Change...

2005-11-26T02:36:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is well and had a good Thanksgiving (at least those of you in the US).
As you may have noticed the title of the blog has been changed slightly from "Chuck's Occasional Rants" to "Chuck's Occasional Rants (now banned in 15 countries)". The reason for this is that due to the content of this blog it doesn't meet the standard of acceptability in 15 different countries on the world. The countries ban certain websites according to their own rules however idiotic those rules may be. Because my blog talks about politics, foreign affairs, freedom, and political dissent, I have violated the Internet rules for 15 different countries. The countries are (in alphabetical order): Belarus, Burma (Myanmar), China (Communist version), Cuba, Iran, Libya, The Maldives, Nepal, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam.
Most of these countries come as no surprise. In fact, the only surprise on the list is North Korea. I didn't even know that that backward-assed country even had computers, let alone the Internet. Hmm, guess you learn something new everyday. As I said, I am not surprised by the list. Of the 15, 12 are dictatorships (all but Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria), and the remaining three are the home of terrorist regimes. So as I said no surprise here. Oh well, what does one do when confronted by a group of nations run by degenarates with small penises and low IQs that make up the world's collective rectum? (There, that ought to really get me banned!)
As always, I am Chuck and to the countries that don't like what I say, kiss my big white ass!

Welcome To The Occupation...

2005-11-23T02:22:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers. I hope everyone is doing well.
The title above comes from an old R.E.M. tune by the same name (off the "Document" album [I highly recommend the album. It is essential R.E.M.]) However, I am not here to talk about music. I am here to address the serious violation of oaths and ethics by the current Congress.
When a Representative or Senator is sworn in they take an oath to "...preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign or domestic...". This past week, the House and Senate saw fit to compromise on a bill that violates that oath. The bill I speak of is an extension of the USA Patriot Act.
The bill had been passed by both the House and Senate in different forms back in July. Those two seperate forms had to wait until this week to reach a committee that would hammer out the differences between the two versions and recommend a compromise bill to both the House and Senate for approval. That committee has done its job and the compromise bill is now awaiting formal approval (essentially a rubber stamp in this case).
The compromise would make permanent 14 of the Patriot Acts most controversial sections and would allow the use of "National Security Letters" (the most odious of the bill's tenets). National Security Letters would allow the FBI to conduct searches of a person's records without first obtaining a search warrant. All that would be required of the FBI to use an NSL is the desire to do so, and the rubber stamp approval of the Special Agent in Charge (of the given office). Now not being a legal scholar, I could be wrong about this, but isn't that a violation of the Constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure? And should the FBI actually seize something, isn't that also a violation of the right against being deprived of property without due process of law? The saddest part of the NSLs is that they can be used against anyone...even if you don't have anything to do with terrorism!
The bill also allows (without judicial approval) the government to look into library records, medical records, financial records, in short, every record that may (or may not) be remotely connected to you. The government is now allowed to tear your life apart all without you even being allowed to defend yourself against such an inquisition in a court of law. The people who are contacted are NOT ALLOWED BY LAW to inform you that the government is investigating you. Furthermore, should you be taken in for questioning in one of these NSL investigations, you aren't even allowed to tell your lawyer about it. Nice paradox, eh. You can have a lawyer, but you can't tell him why the government has you.
If the US had been conquered by a despotic regime, I could probably understand all of this. However, we have not been conquered by anyone. This bill comes from the (supposedly) democratically elected representatives of the people, namely the Congress. This bill so violates the Constitution and, subsequently, the individual liberties guaranteed by such that I would have expected this piece of legislative crap to be something crafted in Red China, the old Soviet Union, or Nazi Germany, not in the US! By coming up with a piece of legislation that violates the Constitution this egregiously, the Congress has abrogated their responsibilities to the people and violated their oaths of office. That is at least a violation of the ethics codes pertaining to government employees. A government employee guilty of ethics violations usually gets fired. I say that we have a mass firing of the US Congress, followed by a firing of the moron in the White House who pushed for all of this. It is time to tell the Congress that violating a person's Constitutional rights is a crime. A cop who violates your rights usually gets fired and sometimes goes to jail (depending on the magnitude of the violation), why should a Representative or Senator be any different?
As I see it, we have three ways of disposing of the current congress. The first, and least effective, is that we can vote them out of office and hope that their successors rectify the problem (not likely as incumbents generally win reelection, and the successors would probably be no better than the current bunch). The second, and somewhat more effective, is to recall each Representative and Senator and replace them with people who know what the Constitution says. The last involves somewhat more trouble but is probably the most effective solution. It involves two words, one of which starts with an "o" and the other starts with an "r". The first word, the one starting with "o" is the same word that sportscasters use when a quarterback passes to a reciever but the ball is too high and out of reach for the reciever. The "r" word is another word for one complete orbit of the sun by a planet, or the first word in the anagram "rpm". I can't say those words on this blog for fear of being put on a government watchlist, blackballed concerning future employment, having the FBI come knocking on my door, and possibly being deported (despite being a native US citizen).
Now the "o" and "r" would not be a whole new system with a whole new constitution or the like, it would merely be to restore the system back to what the current Constitution had in mind. That is to say that the current neo-Fascist government has to go in order that we, the people, might restore the system to one that recognizes that the rights of the individual outweigh the right of the government to do as it pleases (something the current regime in DC has rejected time and time again).
We face a grave choice, not in the future, but right now. The choice is between whether we, as a democratic and free people, will allow an elected government to guide us into a police state where the power of the government is all pervasive and allows for little or no privacy or dissent, or whether we, as a democratic and free people, will take back power from the government, restore sanity to the politcal process, and show the world that in the United States of America the right of an individual to do as he or she pleases is both inviolable and politically sacred.
In 1933 the German people faced a similar choice...they chose wrong and brought years of terror, in the form of an evil dictatorship and war, to their country. What will our choice be?
As always I am Chuck, and if this gets me deported I want to go to England.

Updating A Few Things...

2005-11-13T03:11:00.000-05:00

Hello again, loyal readers. I just wanted to update folks on the success or failure of a few previous posts.
The war against the spammers is going exceptionally well. By instituting the Turing Test (the "enter the word or letters seen here" part of the comments page), I have completely eliminated the scripted comment spam that was taking place. Thus I am claiming a provisional victory over the spammers. To the spammers: I won, you lost, now pack up your stuff and leave quietly! *sticks tongue out at departing spammers* (Ok, it is juvenile, I admit it, but if you hated spammers as much as I do, then you'd do it too!)

Speaking of things I hate, here's something for you if you haven't already heard about it.

As the people who know me can attest, if there is one thing dealing with computers that I hate above all others (including spam), it is spyware and malware. Spyware and malware, at least to me, are the scourge of the internet. They are generally unwanted and, sometimes, univited pieces of trash that do nothing more than gather information about you (generally stuff you don't want disclosed), slow down your machine, and eat up bandwidth. They are pathtically bad programs written by pathetically bad programmers, and doing bad things to your machine (especially in the case of malware).
Having said that, a new and despicable use for spyware has emerged this past week. Spyware is now becoming digital rights management (DRM). For those of you who don't know what DRM is, basically it is an attempt by certain companies to digitally protect the content of their products (it is a little more complicated than this, but this is the basic concept). DRM can be found in everything from computer software (see things like "safedisc" by Macrovision) to audio compact disks. DRM is a corporate illusion as hardcore computer junkies can, and have, found ways around it or have cracked it outright.
As for the spyware as DRM, here is the story. Sony, the Japanese electronics giant, has introduced a new type of DRM on certain audio cds. The DRM is called "XCD". The idea behind it was to stem the tide of piracy that (supposedly) currently exists. XCD does this by placing a program on your computer to limit the number of times you may copy a disk (I guess Sony hasn't heard of the "fair use" clause in US copyright laws). The problem with the new XCD DRM comes in the fact that the software copied onto your system is nothing more than a "rootkit". A rootkit is a program or package of programs that can allow a hacker to break into and control your system (in simplest terms). Not only does the XCD install as a rootkit, but it also hides itself on your system so that you can't tell it is there. This leaves a potential security hole in your system for hackers to exploit. In fact there have been reports of a virus (just now coming out) designed to exploit the security hole that the DRM opens up.
Sony has release a patch that will reveal the installed program and its components, but the patch does nothing to remove the software. In order to get the patch, you must first jump through half a dozen hoops and "request" it from Sony. Then Sony will send you an email. Then you must jump thorough a few more hoops, and Sony will send you another email. The finally, you must download the patch (which includes a few undisclosed "updates"). All of this just to reveal the program! The patch does not uninstall the software. In fact, if you try to unistall the software you run the risk of not only getting a blue screen error, but you also run the risk of rendering your computer's cd player/recorder inoperable!! In other words, trying to removing this unwanted p.o.s. will break your cd-r/rw!!
Now Sony isn't entirely at fault. The company responsible for coming up with this pathetic piece of crap is a UK-based company called "First 4 Internet". They claim to be a developer of "advanced software" based in Oxfordshire. I am guessing that by "advanced software" they mean software capable of making your system do its doorstop impersonation.
The man responsible for finding this Sony screw-up is Mark Russinovich of Sysinternals. Russinovich discovered the problem while having diffculties with his own system. For those of you who have never heard of Dr. Russinovich, he is the chief software architect and co-founder of Winternals (a company that makes advanced systems software for Windows-based machines). He has a Phd from Carnegie Mellon University (just up Forbes Ave from Pitt [in the Shadyside neck of the woods]) and is generally considered to be one of the world's foremost authorities on the Windows Operating System. So, therefore, when he says he found that Sony's DRM is a rootkit, I am pretty sure that he knows what he is talking about! Dr. Russinovich's blog explains the problem in more detail and much better than I ever could. The blog is located at Mark's Sysinternals Blog.
Also, the Electronic Frontiers Foundation has a page (here) listing the signs to look for to check if you have one of these rootkit "protected" disks. They have also compiled a list of the Sony CDs containing the XCD (rootkit) protection (here). If you have recently bought a Sony CD or have a Sony CD (or any cd as Sony publishes under many names, most notably Sony and BMG) that you are not sure of, I urge you to check out both of these sites. Then check out the Sysinternals Blog for ways of dealing with it if you are infected.
Finally, in my opinion, Sony has gone to far. In resorting to installing rootkits on the computers of people who have legally bought a Sony CD, Sony has resorted to a tactic once considered to be the sole province of internet criminals. We have laws on the books dealing with this sort of thing. People who hack your computer are (under many federal and state laws) criminals. Sony has hacked your system, and the people responsible for this debacle should be held criminally liable. But, Sony being a large company, and the Federal Government being in the hip pocket of the corporations, Sony probably won't be prosecuted. And more's the pity, as Sony has set a new precedent in how companies, in the future, will protect their products. If Sony gets away with this, it will open up the door to more companies (and not just the record companies, either) protecting their product by breaking your computer. This is the equivalent of a record company thug coming to your house and saying "I don't give a damn about the law and fair use, I don't like the way you are using your cd!" and then smashing your cd player or stereo. If someone actually did that, you'd call the cops and have them arrested (if you didn't shoot them first). In this case, Sony is actually doing that, but without stepping foot onto your property. Sony also thinks that their End User Licensing Agreement (EULA) will protect them. I have bad news for Sony. Their EULA is the equivalent of someone having you (voluntarily) sign a paper saying that it is ok to shoot you. Unfortunately for the person pulling the trigger, the shooting is still a criminal act and the paper means nothing as you are prohibited by law from signing any contract that entails breaking the law as one of the conditions of fulfillment. Therefore, Sony's EULA is worthless as it requires a criminal act to fulfill the EULA. If you have been affected by one of these Sony CDs, I urge you to contact a lawyer and your states Attorney General (to see if criminal charges can be brought against Sony). If you haven't been affected, then I urge you to boycott Sony products (or at least their audio cds).
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant. Oh, and this entry is protected by my version of Digital Rights Management. It is digital, and I manged to write it. (And unlike Sony's DRM, it won't break your computer!)

An Appeal...

2005-10-31T00:42:00.000-05:00

Hello again loyal readers, I hope everyone is doing well.
The subject of today's post, "An Appeal..." is in reference to the American Red Cross and their current financial difficulties.
For those of you who don't know, the American Red Cross had to borrow $340 million to cover expenses related to their hurricane relief efforts. I am asking you, my readers, to contribute to the Red Cross if you haven't already done so. If you have already made a donation, thank you, and consider possibly giving again in a different form (i.e., if you already gave money, consider donating clothes or blood). While the Red Cross maintains a relationship with the federal government, it recieves no money from them. That is why public donation is so important.
In case you don't know, the Red Cross provides more than major disaster relief. While the major disasters garner the most public attention, the Red Cross (more quietly) provides aid to people who have experienced local tragedies such as the loss of a home to fire. The Red Cross also provides disaster preparedness training to individuals and groups (such as local fire companies/fire departments). They also provide support for members of the military and their families in the form of aid in times of family emergencies (i.e., if someone in the military experiences a death in the family while away on active duty the Red Cross can help to arrange an emergency leave and aid the serviceperson in getting back home) and they provide the (somewhat) famous "Red Cross packages" that prisoners of war receive while being held by the enemy (although these aren't the only ways that the Red Cross helps the military and their families). These are only a few of the services that the Red Cross provides to both local communities and to the nation at large.
If these services have some value to you or someone you know, or if you have benefitted in some way from the services of the Red Cross, then I urge you to support them in their hour of need. If you do wish to donate you can call the American Red Cross at 1-800-HELP NOW (1-800-435-7669) or you can visit them at their website, http://www.redcross.org. And remember, while they may be in the hole $340 million, each dollar goes a long way toward getting them out of the red and back into the black. And if that isn't enough to motivate you, think about this...who would you rather have doing disaster relief, the Red Cross (who have proven they can do it) or government (who've only succeeded in falling flat on their collective faces, see FEMA's response in Louisiana, and Florida's inital response to Wilma)?!!?
As always, I am Chuck and this has been an appeal to the "better angels of our nature".

Just A Small Notice...

2005-10-28T00:44:00.000-04:00

Hello loyal readers, I hope everyone is doing ok.
This is just a small/short notice about a few changes to this blog.
The first change you may notice is that, from this point forward, you will need to use "word verification" in order to post a comment. I have enabled this option because in the last 2 days I have received roughly 15 spam comments. These comments are posted (usually) by a script running on a machine. Since only a human can read and correctly enter the information contained in the word verification window, this should cut down on the spam comments. (This type of thing is also known as a "Turing Test." Do a Google search if you wish to know more about the test.)
The second change that you will notice is a small addition on the same line as "post a comment" called "links to this blog" (or something like that). I added this to track backlinking. This will let me know if anyone has linked to my blog. So far no one has linked to me, but hopefully this will change soon. If you spot a link in the backlinks section, I would greatly encourage you to follow it and see what the other person has to say.
Well, that is about it.
I am Chuck and this has been an update.

The Rules (Revised Edition)

2005-10-13T02:10:00.000-04:00

Hello again loyal readers, I hope all of you are well.
The purpose of this post is to publish my revised rules for this blog. Recently I have been receiving a great deal of what I call "spam comments". This has led me to conclude that a revision of the rules is necessary. Some of the rules are all new, while others are revisions of the rules posted by myself on 4 NOV 04. I ask that you read them carefully and abide by them when posting a comment. Comments that do not comply with the rules will be subject to deletion and the poster may be subject to further actions depending upon the nature of the comment, the comment itself, the number of rules violated, and whether I feel that it is necessary to pursue further action.

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a person (me) to define or alter the rules of this blog I shall be the one do so. Until then, the rules are:
1. No hate mail. I don't mind criticism, but try to make it both well thought out and constructive.
2. No spam. I have been working with computers on one level or another for the last twenty years. If you spam me, I will find you. Once I find you, I will force you to watch Andy Worhol's "Sleep" until you die of boredom! (Not to mention that an instant email will be sent to "Abuse@" your ISP.)
3. What I say is my opinion. If you have a comment on it, fine. But do not threaten me with lawsuits, cease and desist notices, etc. Most people who post these are wanna-be lawyers who will very quickly be told where to go and what to do once they get there.
4. Do not assume that I like you just because I let you post comments on my opinions. Never confuse tolerance for affection.
5. All posted comments must be on topic with the exception of general comments on the blog. I will no longer allow comments off the topic of the post being commented upon, i.e., no more Google AdSense comments under the "Warning..." post. Furthermore, I reserve the right to determine whether any comment is acceptable or not. Those comments found to be in violation of this rule will be deemed unacceptable and deleted. There will be no exceptions.
6. If you are offended by anything I say, tough. Do not post to say something like "He said 'shit' in his last posting, how terrible!"
7. A comment shall not be deemed as spam if the comment contains a link to the poster's blog. However, a comment will be considered spam if the commentor posts a link to a website for any product or service. So you can post a link to your blog, but not to a website espousing the merits of "Product X". Violations of this rule will lead to the comment being deleted.
8. If I make a typo and you spot it and post a comment saying "you made a typo" (or similar), great! I can use all the help I can get somedays. However, please read the previous comments to make sure that someone else has not posted the same notification. Letting me know about it is fine, but I don't need to be let know about it 23 times.
9. I reserve the right to be absolutely arbitrary in my judgement of a particular comment. In other words, if I don't like your comment, I reserve the right to get rid of it. I also reserve the right to retain any comment. In other words, if I don't like you comment, I reserve the right to keep it.
10. Anyone who posts a comment on this blog is deemed to have read these rules and agreed to them.
11. I am the ultimate arbiter and interpreter of these rules. There is no process of appeal. All of my decisions on the fitness of a comment are final. That may be unfair, but this is my blog and I need to do something about the spam comments on it.

These rules shall be effective starting at 0601 UT (0201 EST), on 13 OCT 05. Any post made before this date and time shall be considered to be "grandfathered" and shall not be subject to these rules. Therefore, all currently posted comments shall remain. Any comment made after this date and time shall be fully subject to the above rules. Violators of the said rules will thus be subject to deletion at any time. (Spammers, you've been warned. There will be no warnings from this point forward.)

I am Chuck and these are the new rules. Read the rules, know the rules, be the rules.

A Warning...

2005-09-26T00:46:00.000-04:00

Hello again loyal readers. I will skip right to the chase in this post as I believe that it is very important to get to the message with a minimum of bullshit.

This is a warning to all AOL Instant Messanger users living in Millersburg or Upper Paxton Township Pennsylvania.
It has recently come to my attention that the Millersburg Municipal Police Department is currently monitoring AOL IM conversations. The Police Department currently has a list of AOL IM users residing in Millersburg and Upper Paxton Twp. The list consists primarily of persons under the age of 18, but may include adults. The Millersburg Police compiled the list from parents who sent the police department their children's buddy lists.
The police originally started the monitoring to protect kids from sexual predators and other perverts on the internet at the behest of several parents who were "fed up". Apparently knowing a good thing when they saw it, the Millersburg Police Department began compiling lists of users with the help of several parents. The lists are currently used to not only monitor the conversations that the users have while within chat rooms, but also to monitor whether the person is online or not. They also use the monitoring to gather evidence of criminal activity outside of the original intentions. In other words, they are using the monitoring to gather evidence of crimes other than that of perverts soliciting minors!
Now I am no legal scholar, but I am pretty sure that this type of monitoring violates several federal wiretapping statutes and at least one federal internet privacy act. Furthermore, if the Millersburg Police Department does have a warrant to monitor the conversations that go on in an AOL IM chatroom, that warrant is being violated. What I mean is that the warrant would have been issued to gather evidence relating to sexual predators soliciting minors. By gathering evidence of other crimes, the police department is violating the scope of the original warrant and therefore conducting an illegal wiretap, if indeed they ever had a warrant in the first place!!
So, what can I do you ask. Well, you can take the following actions:

First, make sure that you do not use AOL IM. I have nothing against this messenger, and use it myself, but given the nature of the threat to you or your child, I would get rid of it.

Second, if you insist on using AOL IM, change your user name IMMEDIATELY! Get your friends and others to do so also. Then, "dope" the info you enter into your profile. In other words, enter only false info into your new profile, such as "Name: John Smith" "Age:1001" "Location: Io (a moon of Jupiter)", etc. Tell them nothing that can be remotely traced to you.

Third, learn how to use a proxy server. Instruction on the use of proxy servers along with lists of free proxies can be obtained by doing a Google search for them. Using a proxy server will make it harder (but not impossible) for the police to track your actual location (thus protecting to a degree your identity).

Fourth, I would suggest getting a secure messenger client. You want one that not only obscures your personal information, but also encrypts the messages that are sent. Once you have a secure messenger client, make copies and give it to your friends (that way you can talk to them).

Fifth, never invite someone you do not know to chat. The Mbg PD likes to use the following intro: "Hi, you don't know me but I am a friend of Joe Schmoe's" (Joe being your friend)"Joe told me that you and I might hit it off. I'd like to find out more about you and talk a bit. How about it?" Now that isn't word-for-word what they use, but you get the gist. If someone approaches you with that type of intro/come on, check with the friend named to see if your friend knows the person and did actually tell them to contact you. If your friend doesn't know them or didn't tell them to contact you, might I suggest replying with "Nice try 5-0. Now we know why you're a cop and not a brain surgeon!" While it is nice and cocky, it also let's them know that you are onto their little (illegal) game. Be sure to remember the guy's user name so that you can tell everyone about it (thus blowing that user name for the cop).

Lastly, never admit to anything online, especially to someone you don't know (or know well). Unless you've met the person face to face, you have no clue who is actually behind that user name. Off line you have been cautioned about talking to strangers, remember that when you are online also. Hell, I wouldn't even admit to being alive online!

To reiterate, if you or someone you know uses AOL Instant Messenger and lives in Millersburg or Upper Paxton Township Pennsylvania, the Millersburg Police Department is monitoring your online conversations. If you read this and know of someone living in that area, I urge you to pass along this warning. You can do so by directing them to this blog (http://lobstercigs.blogspot.com), or by emailing them this article. (To email this article, just click on the little envelope at the bottom of this post and fill in the require info).

As always, I am Chuck and this has been a public service announcement (Not to mention a good way to "stick it to the man"!!)
(Note: This post was edited on 26 Sep 05 to change the wording a bit, improve the "readability", and to fix those nasty typos.)

I Told You So...

2005-09-10T09:42:00.000-04:00

Hello again sports fans. As the sun rises on another autumn Saturday, that means one thing...college football! Yes, from Boston to Honolulu and all points in between, people are gearing up to head to stadiums all across America to witness the pomp and spectacle that is college football. When I was at Pitt, I used to love going out to old Pitt Stadium on a crisp fall Saturday to watch us get the shit kicked out of us. Which brings me to the point of today's post, the current state of Pitt football.
Now as anyone who knows me can tell you, I am a rabid University of Pittsburgh Panthers football fan. I love watching them, especially when they are winning (no, I am not a fair weather fan, but when I was in college Pitt lost a lot more games than they won. Therefore, watching them win is both unique and a helluva lot more fun than watching them lose!) During the last couple of years, Pitt has been winning on a regular basis (which gave me a great opportunity to return some of the shit I got from Penn State fans over the years). Perhaps those winning years have spoiled me, perhaps I don't want to see a return to the bad old days of the late-80's through mid-90's, or perhaps I just don't want to take shit from the Penn State fans, but I find the current situation at Pitt unacceptable. I will explain.
So far this season, Pitt has yet to win a game. They are currently 0-2. They started the season with a tough home opener versus Notre Dame. At the time, Pitt was undoubtedly overrated with a ranking of 23rd. Notre Dame was most certainly underrated as they were not ranked at all. In a game featuring two new head coaches, Dave Wannstedt for Pitt and Charlie Weis for Notre Dame, there were a lot of unpredictables and unknowns. To make a long story short, Notre Dame outplayed Pitt, and Weis definitely outcoached Wannstedt. Notre Dame won 42-21 in a game that was effectively over by halftime. While I wasn't very happy with the outcome, I could accept this loss as, good or bad, Notre Dame always plays us tough.
The second loss I cannot accept. I cannot excuse it. Pitt was scheduled to play a rare Friday night game versus Ohio University. Ohio, not Ohio State. The game was to be played at Ohio. It started out well enough with a kickoff return for a TD by Pitt. After that, it was all down hill. Ohio, a team that has had 29 losing seasons in the last 35 years, played Pitt to a tie in regulation, then returned an interception for the winning score in overtime. The final was Ohio 16, Pitt 10.
This is the second week in a row that a Pitt team has showed up completely unprepared for their opponent. I dread next week when they go to Lincoln to play Nebraska. The problem lies not in the quality of the team or the talent present (by all measures, Pitt is loaded with most of the offense and defense returning from last year's Big East champion team). The problem lies in the fact that, for the second week in a row, Dave Wannstedt was outcoached. Wannstedt needs to learn a few things about college football. First, contrary to what they teach in the NFL, in college football, field goals DO NOT win games (or national championships). Second, this particular Pitt team is a PASSING team. I don't give a rat's ass how much you want to turn it into a running team, it is built as a passing team. The last I checked, winning coaches played to their team's strengths, not against them. And lastly, you learned how to lose at the professional level with the Bears and the Dolphins, now you are learning to lose at the collegiate level with Pitt, here's a unique suggestion, resign now, take a position with a high school team and LEARN HOW TO WIN!!! It is obvious that Wannstedt does not know how to win, nor does he know how to prepare a team.
Another guy looking like a real genius right now is Pitt AD Jeff Long. He is the one who essentially fired Walt Harris (a winning coach by the way, one who had taken Pitt to five consecutive bowl games). Boy Jeff, you really showed everbody, didn't you?!!? Gee, let's fire Harris and get Wannstedt, that'll show everyone! Well Jeff, it has only shown that you either hate Pitt, or that you are an idiot. A Harris coached team might have lost to Notre Dame, but I guarantee you they WOULDN'T have lost to Ohio!! I think it is high time to fire both Long and Wannstedt and try to get Harris back anyway possible (if it is even possible to do so). Pitt could hire back Pederson (I forget his first name), the old AD to replace Long (at least he knows what he is doing). This season is shot already, it is time to start looking toward restoring what Pitt had so that next season might be a WINNING season.
Oh, and by the way, I addressed this in a post dated 24 December 2004 entitled "A Coaching Change And A Prediction". Therefore, I can truthfully say "I told you so!"
I am Chuck and I believe that Wannstedt and Long should be fired NOW!!!!

More Random Musings...

2005-09-09T01:59:00.000-04:00

Hello again everyone, welcome back to the blog that refuses to die.
Today's post concerns my thoughts on a variety of topics.
First, gas prices. Well, as everyone knows, gas is outrageous. In my area it is around $3.00 per gallon (+/-) for regular (87 octane). That is down from the high of roughly $3.19 per gallon. That high came 2 days after Hurricane Katrina hit the gulfcoast area. Now I understand that a goodly portion of our domestically consumed oil comes from the Gulf of Mexico, but what I cannot understand is how the price of gas can be affected so quickly. What I mean is, from the ground to your car oil takes several days/weeks to go from being raw crude oil to being refined gasoline. Therefore, I have to wonder why (if it takes even a few days to go from the rig to your local gas station) gas prices rose by roughly 50 to 60 cents only TWO DAYS after the hurricane. Even in the simplest of economic models, the time that it takes for gas prices to rise should be equal to the time that it takes to use the last of the available gulf-originated oil. What that means is if it takes a week to refine and deliver all of the gulf-originated oil, then it should take a week for gas prices to rise (prices should rise gradually as the supply gradually diminishes). The gas in the tanks at the local gas station was refined BEFORE the hurricane, therefore I have trouble seeing exactly how the hurricane caused gas (refined days or weeks before) to suddenly cost more! It isn't as if the storage costs increased. Hmmm, I think I have figured out this economic conundrum. The solution is quite simple...it is called price gouging. Now price gouging is illegal in nearly every state (if not all states), but do we see the government starting an investigation? Nope. After all, should the federal government start investigating the oil companies, the Republicans stand to lose some of their largest contributors. And right now Bush can't afford to lose contributors of any sort. I mean his approval rating has tanked, he has managed to bungle what could be the largest disaster relief effort in US history, and his policies in Iraq have led even his own party members to compare it to Vietnam! So investigating the oil companies is the last thing you will see the Bush Administration do. After all, GW is too busy trying to be a bungling, petty dictator to worry about the economic destruction of both the US and the common man! (And if he cannot grasp the ill effect that higher gas prices have on the economy of the US, then he is dumber than a bag of hammers!)

Thinking about the victims of the hurricane, I would urge all of the readers of this blog (those who have the means to do so, anyway) to contribute to the American Red Cross' disaster relief effort. You can find the Red Cross (usually) listed in your local phonebook or just do a Google search for their webpage. The last I heard (from the local news) was that they (the ARC) are looking for cash donations right now, but in the coming weeks they will be looking for blood donations. The news said that before coming to give blood you should give the Red Cross a call to schedule an appointment for giving (blood has a very limited shelf life). And whatever you do, don't count on FEMA to give these people any relief (after all, the Federal Emergency Mis-management Agency has already fumbled the ball more times than even CNN can count!)
And speaking of CNN, I think I have reached the Hurricane Katrina coverage saturation point. I've been watching the news and it seems that every other story is about the hurricane and the victims. Yes, it is bad, and yes, I pity the people who lost everything, but I think I am "hurricaned out". And I swear that the questions the reporters ask the survivors are becoming more and more ridiculous. I mean even more senseless than the "Gee, everything you know and loved is gone, and you've lost everything that you worked for your entire life...Tell our viewers, what's it like and how do you feel?" questions. I am just waiting to see a reporter ask some survivor "Gee, your property is under water, you've lost all of your material posessions, your entire family was killed, you are suicidally depressed and living in deplorable conditions. So, tell our viewers...How do you think the Saints will do this season?" I hope they keep the cameras rolling as the person being interviewed beats the reporter to death with his own microphone!! Now that's good tv!!
As always, I am Chuck and this has been my rant.

How Congress Works (the real world version)

2005-08-19T00:47:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. Today's post concerns an article recently posted on Rolling Stone.com (yes, the music magazine). The article concerns how the US Congress really works as opposed to how it is supposed to work (you know, the Civics class stuff from school). I must warn you, this may be quite depressing for some of you who believe that Congress actually serves the people who elect them (of course it does prove my theory that the US Government is neither a democracy nor a republic but rather an corrupt, self-serving oligarchy that doesn't give a shit about the citizens as long as they keep voting the way they are supposed to and don't raise too much fuss [gee, I'm not a little cynical, am I?])
The article is called Four Amendments And A Funeral (click on the link to view)
I am Chuck, and this has been my rant. (Also, thanks to Rolling Stone for publishing this excellent piece).

Random Musings...

2005-08-17T00:32:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. I trust that everyone is doing well.
Today's rant (which isn't really a rant) concerns something that popped into my head as I was watching my favorite tv show.
I was watching an old taped episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000, specifically, "Hercules Versus The Moon Men" (didn't Bullwinkle once fight moon men? Or was that moon mice?), when a thought occurred to me. That thought was "If Laverne and Shirley lived and worked in Milwaukee, then why did they have Brooklyn accents?" Someone will undoubtedly say that they were originally from Brooklyn, but in that case, then why does the rest of the cast have Brooklyn accents also?? Shouldn't someone sound like they came from Milwaukee?? I guess the inanity of tv only becomes apparent if you think about it.
In other thoughts regarding entertainment, I see that Dick Clark has decided to comeback and do ABC's "New Year's Rockin' Eve". For those of you who don't know, Dick Clark suffered a stroke prior to this past New Year's Eve and thus was unable to host the show. I also see that he will have a "co-host". Apparently, Ryan Seacrest (from "American Idol") will be Dick's minder. First he hosts "American Idol" (a show that utterly is a waste of airtime), then he buys out "America's Top-40" and puts radio legend Kasey Kasem out of a job, and now he is trying to put Dick Clark out to pasture. How much and how long will it take before people finally realize that Ryan Seacrest is a talentless hack with too much money for his own good who is trying to buy his way to hosting legitimacy? Now I find that most of the shows on network tv today are a waste of time (exceptions: the news, CSI, and Law and Order), but American Idol is at the bottom of the populist trash barrel, and now they are taking the talentless host of a show featuring talentless people being judged by the has-been's or never-were's and pairing him with a broadcasting legend. ABC have you no sense of decency?!!? There are many, many very talented people out there who would jump at the chance to co-host with Dick Clark (and they would do it for free) and yet you pick a person who is perhaps the most lackluster host of a show since the invention of the medium. Yes, Newton Minnow was (and is) right, tv "...is a vast wasteland."
I am Chuck, and I don't practice populist demagoguery therefore I will never be a television network executive!!

The Official Response Should Be, "Get Bent!"

2005-07-06T22:29:00.000-04:00

Hello again loyal readers! I hope everyone is well.
The subject of todays rant is the current attempt by the Chinese eneregy company CNOOC to takeover UNOCAL.
For those who do not know what I am talking about, the Chinese energy company CNOOC has put in a bid to takeover UNOCAL. The CNOOC bid currently stands at $18.5 billion. CNOOC has competition in the bid for UNOCAL from Chevron (whose current bid is $16.5 billion). CNOOC is currently owned by the Chinese government (as are most Chinese firms).
For once I agree with the Bush Administration (imagine that!) who called this takeover bid a threat to national security. Congress endorsed a resolution that would block the sale of UNOCAL to CNOOC as exactly that, a threat to national security. On Monday, July 4th, while America was celebrating its independence from tyranny, the ChiCom Foreign Ministry decided to get in its two cents. The ChiCom Foreign Ministry released a statement saying, "We demand that the U.S. Congress correct its mistaken ways of politicizing economic and trade issues and stop interfering in the normal commercial exchanges between enterprises of the two countries. CNOOC's bid to take over the U.S. Unocal company is a normal commercial activity between enterprises and should not fall victim to political interference. The development of economic and trade cooperation between China and the United States conforms to the interests of both sides."
Now I am no politician, but I think my official response to this "demand" would be something along the lines of "Get Bent!" or "Demand in one hand and shit in the other and see which get full faster!" or perhaps the simple "Go to Hell!" would suffice. The message to the ChiComs should be direct and harsh. It should be along the lines of when you people learn about freedom, democracy, human rights, and what a free market economy REALLY is, then talk to us about "normal" economic activities. If CNOOC is allowed to acquire UNOCAL, that would be the equivalent of having allowed the Soviets to acquire a company like IBM! The sale of UNOCAL to CNOOC must be blocked lest we allow our future energy supply to be dictated by Communist China. I don't know about you, but to me it makes no sense to have spent 40 years defeating one Communist regime (the Soviets) only to have another start dictating to us. So as for me, my official response to this ChiCom demand is "Go fuck yourselves!"
I am Chuck, this has been my rant, and if you are a ChiCom and don't like it...tough!

Goodbye Google AdSense

2005-06-20T05:15:00.000-04:00

Well, the 72 hours have passed and Google AdSense has not restored my ads to normal (as opposed to the Public Service Ads). Oh well, their loss, not mine. I may not have the most successful blog in the world, but I do not deserve to be dicked with. I merely tried to increase my earnings and they decided to stick me with the PSAs. Well, you will no longer see ANY Google shit on this blog. So goodbye and good riddance to Google AdSense!
I am Chuck and this has been my (albeit) brief rant.

Is It Just Me??

2005-05-31T02:46:00.000-04:00

Hello again readers. The subject of today's rant, which isn't a rant but more of a musing, is "Is It Just Me??"
As I was wandering the aisles of the local grocery store earlier today, I had an odd thought. I went to pick up a loaf of bread and thought "Is this loaf of bread smaller or is it just me?" I couldn't tell which was true (the loaf being smaller, or just appearing smaller). So therefore I thought that I would consult my readers. So which is it, are loaves of bread getting smaller, or do I just think that they are getting smaller? (Believe me, it isn't just loaves of bread which are shrinking in the stores) Let me know what you think.
Another random thought, is it me or has the price of food gone up greatly in the last six months? It seems to me that my food bill used to be lower six months ago.
And one last thing, it occurs to me that this country (the US) may have too much or too many of certain consumer items. What I mean is, the other day at the local grocery store (while looking for toilet paper), I counted 29 different types and sizes of toilet paper on the shelf. They had everything from a single roll to giant multipacks with 24 rolls in them! It occurs to me that 29 different varieties may be just a bit of overkill when it comes to toilet paper.
I am Chuck and I have way too much time on my hands for my own good!

[This post removed due to the dickweeds at Google AdSense]

2005-05-28T03:00:00.000-04:00

The post that was here concerning raising my earnings by including certain keywords in the title has been removed. It would seem that the dickweeds at Google AdSense like to have you place their ads on your page so that they can make money, but as soon as you put up something that might make you a few bucks, then that is a no-no. AdSense has seen fit to remove the normal advertising content and substitute it with public service ads (which make me no money whatsoever). Therefore, I have removed the post which appeared in this space talking about Cialis, Viagra, Levitra, Texas Hold-em Poker, and more. Gee, let's see if Google restores the normal ads to this page or not. I am hereby giving Google AdSense 72 hours to return the ads, or they are gone...permanently. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
I am Chuck and I am sick of Google trying to dick with me!

This just in...

2005-05-28T00:43:00.000-04:00

Hello readers, I am happy to say that this blog is not dead yet! (Hopefully, it is getting better.) (Apologies to Monty Python).
Today's rant is from the Electronic Frontier Foundation's weekly news letter, the Effector. It concerns the Senate Intelligence Committee's current debate on the Patriot Act. If you are from Kansas, Utah, Ohio, Missouri, Maine, Nebraska, Georgia, Virginia, West Virginia, Michigan, California, Oregon, Indiana, Maryland, or New Jersey, listen up as your senator(s) is (are) on the committee. I now present the item in its entirety:

* Congress Considers PATRIOT Expansion Behind Closed Doors

EFF Supporters Fight Back

Today the Senate Intelligence Committee is considering,
behind closed doors, a bill that would not only
renew the USA PATRIOT Act's most dangerous provisions,
but would also expand the FBI's power to secretly
demand the private records of people who aren't
suspected of any crime - *without* a judge's approval.

The FBI already has dangerously overbroad subpoena powers
under PATRIOT. But if this bill passes without
modification, the FBI could use new "administrative
subpoenas" to get practically anything from anyone -
Internet logs and emails from your Internet service
provider, health records from your doctor, financial
information from your bank, borrowing records from your
library - without a judge's permission. The Justice
Department has long sought this kind of unprecedented
subpoena power for the FBI, but Congress has always
said no - even in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11
terrorist attacks.

Earlier this week, we sent out a special action alert
asking EFF supporters in the states that have senators
on the Intelligence Committee to speak out against the
bill. The response was swift. Within 24 hours, you
sent more than 1,600 faxes and emails to the committee.
Seven of the senators received 90 or more messages;
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) received more than
680 messages. Now the figure is up to 2,050 - roughly
half the number of letters typically sent over a
full week's time for alerts that are not restricted
to specific states.

We succeeded in attracting the senators' attention, but
the battle against PATRIOT expansion has just begun.
Early reports indicate that there is strong support for
the bill within the Intelligence Committee, despite the
public outcry. If you live in Kansas, Utah, Ohio,
Missouri, Maine, Nebraska, Georgia, Virginia, West
Virginia, Michigan, California, Oregon, Indiana, Maryland,
or New Jersey, and you haven't contacted your senator,
it's not too late. Take action today, and stay tuned to
EFFector and the EFF Action Center for the next steps
- your voice counts!

Say No to New PATRIOT Spying Powers:
http://action.eff.org/site/Advocacy?id=133

The above item is by, and courtesy of, the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
I am Chuck and this has been my blurb for the day.

PLEASE NOTE: This post has been edited to reflect a correction made in a revised edition of the Effector (the EFF newsletter) dated 26 May 2005. Also note that you no longer have to sign in or register with EFF to get to the Patriot Act notice. If you wish to send your senator the letter provided on the site, you merely need to enter your information (name, address, etc) in the appropriate boxes. Sorry for any problems this may have caused. --Chuck.

The End!??!

2005-04-27T07:10:00.000-04:00

Hello again.
I am surprised that no one commented on the previous post. Perhaps my girlfriend is correct in her assessment of this blog. That assessment was/is that no one gives a shit about this blog or my opinions. If that is the case, then you, the readers (if any) don't need to do anything. If that is not the case, then you, the readers, need to leave me some comments so I can show her that people do indeed read my blog and that they do give a shit about what I have to say. Plainly, and simply, no comments, no blog. If I don't get some feedback from the readers of this blog (if there are any), then two weeks from today (today being 27 April 2005) this blog will be dismantled and discontinued.
I am Chuck and (sigh) this may be my last rant.

A Tragedy

2005-04-11T10:11:00.000-04:00

Hello again kind and loyal readers. Today I am writing with a heavy heart.
It would seem that this past week a tragedy struck my girlfriend. Her beloved dog Hicks was cruelly and deliberately murdered by a complete asshole!
The Story:
On Tuesday or Wednesday of this past week (I don't remember, the days have been hectic and blurred together), I was told by my mom that my friend Charlie was urgently trying to get ahold of me and that I was to call him at my g/f's place. I did so and was met with the news that Hicks had been killed. After asking about how my g/f was doing, I asked him what happened. He told me (later confirmed by the neighbors) that Hicks had escaped out of the front door of the house when my g/f's daughter came over. Hicks then ran to the edge of the small street that she (my g/f) lives on. Hicks was standing between the road and the mailbox (a space of about two feet) and was well off the road. While Hicks was escaping, a couple of guys were (illegally) driving their 4 wheeler ATVs up and down the road at high rates of speed.
Hicks, having some experience with roads and being scared by the noise, stood by the side of the road and watched. One of the ATV riders, having been suitably "liquored up" and feeling his own inadequecy, started at the other end of the street. He ran a stop sign, acheived a speed of 55 miles per hour, then apparently saw Hicks, swerved towards him (remember Hicks is off the road and in the yard), and in an instant mortally injured the dog. The asshole on the ATV hit Hicks so hard that he flung him about 20 feet, then he ran over him again. This time Hicks got caught in the wheels of the ATV and was dragged the better part of 100 feet. After hitting Hicks the second time, the asshole stated "I just hit somebody's ugly fuckin' dog!" He then took the ATV to the house of a person he knows and ask the person to conceal the ATV so as to avoid getting in trouble. Hicks was immediately taken to the veteranarian. Sadly, Hicks died shortly after arriving at the vet's office due to massive internal injuries sustained as a result of the asshole's hitting him. After literally begging the Pennsylvania State Police quartered at Elizabethville (they refused to respond three times, that is they refused the 911 call three times), they finally came down. By this time, the local equivalent of an old west lynchmob had formed. The trooper who responded was refusing to do anything until a guy on another ATV passed by. Then, and only then, did the trooper believe the 20-odd witnesses and went to the asshole's house. (Gee, makes one feel good about the police protecting them. "Nope, sorry sir/maam, we can't do anything. Don't care how many of you witnessed the crime. Sorry but we're either too lazy or incompetant." As I said to a friend afterward, the PSP should stick to writing traffic tickets, after all, they certainly aren't good at things like, oh, maybe LAW!) Upon the arrival of the PSP at the asshole's house, the asshole told the trooper that it was an accident (not a deliberate act, which it actually was). The trooper, ignoring the statements of 20-odd witnesses, believed the asshole. He was cited for riding the ATV on a public street. The the trooper came back and informed my g/f of such. The trooper also stated that if a suitable arrangement could be made as to restitution for the dog, all charges pending against the asshole would be dropped.
Well, I did some checking. The trooper cannot drop the charges, nor can he not file them unless they are unfounded (i.e. no evidence). If the trooper decides not to file, he can be charged with criminal conduct himself (this according to a source at the PA Atty Gen.'s office). Furthermore, this was no accident. This asshole on the ATV deliberately swerved, he deliberately hit the dog, and then he willfully tried to conceal the evidence of his crime, he was also operating the ATV while under the influence of an intoxicating liquor. If Hicks had been human instead of being a dog, this would have been a vehicular homicide or deliberate murder.
Hicks was a sweet, little Chihuahua/Jack Russel mix. He was full of life. He liked everyone he met. He loved to jump, especially at feeding time when he would jump up and bounce off of your butt. He used to snuggle up to my g/f in bed (he would even bury himself in the covers) when I wasn't here. Hicks didn't even dislike cats! He didn't deserve to be murdered by a worthless, drunken reprobate who obviously gets his jollies from destroying things or animals. Why did you do it asshole? Making up for a, um, inadequacy? Feeling a little short? Or were you just an abused child? Why did you feel the need to MURDER a helpless little dog? Did it make you feel like a man? It is my conclusion that you, asshole, are among the most worthless pieces of humanity, lower than shit. You certainly couldn't live up to the standard of behaviour set by a little dog who hurt no one. I would thrash you, but you aren't even worth my time, you piece of shit. You will probably forget, and you and your braindead ignoramus buddies will have a good laugh about this. I will not and neither will my g/f. I hope my reader will not also. And speaking to the readers of this blog, you may want to let the asshole know how you feel (cards, letters, etc).
The asshole's name is PAUL ENDERS III, he lives on PINE STREET in MILLERSBURG, PA. His phone number is [has been removed at the request of my g/f]. (The zip in Millersburg is 17061. If you put a name and rudimentary address on things they usually get there [it is a small town])
It is time to show Mr. Enders how much stupidity and cruelty cost.
I am Chuck, and this has been my rant.
P.S. Don't bother sending a takedown notice. The statement contained in this post are factual and part of a publically available record (the police report). So give it up. Oh, and I do not intimidate easily!