For Sale: Chicago Cubs- Sold!

Well not really, but If I had three quarters of a billion dollars I wouldn’t mind investing in a professional sports team as prestigious as the Cubs. Sadly, I lack that kind of capital (play lotto, get ripped off), but there is no shortage of individuals with that kind of pocket change. The move to wholesale the Cubs came earlier in the week after Sam Zell (who owns part of the White Sox and Bulls) purchased the Tribune Company for a petty $8.2 billion. He has declined to state why he wants to liquidate one of the Tribune Company’s biggest assets.

Estimates put the team’s worth at around $600 million, but I have the distinct feeling that by season’s end that number will be around the billion dollar vicinity (what’s $400 million between friends?). The Tribune Company only paid a miniscule $20.5 million for the team in 1981, which is a good indicator of the sway sports franchises have in our current culture in the U.S. Who has one eye on the team and one hand firmly attached to their wallets? Rumor has it that Mark Cuban, Jerry Colangelo, and even Bill Murray are interested in the team.

The first thing running through Cub’s fans heads is whether the team would be leaving Chicago or even Wrigley field if per se someone such as Cuban purchases them. Basically, my thinking is that it will be a cold day in hell before that happens, because if it does, the term “Chicago Riots” will become part of American folklore. With their local and playing grounds likely secured, I welcome a new owner, as the Tribune Company has lacked any positive influence over the franchise. But at least the Tribune Company has realized over the past few years that fans wanted to see a winning team, hence they $300 million they shelled out this past off season.

The plan is to sell the team by season’s end, which may or may not be a good thing for player morale and concentration. The bidding war for the team is going to intense, as the team is one of the most prestigious in all of sports. The Cubs have fans reaching into all 50 states and a few foreign nations. You are not a citizen of this planet if you do not know what the “C” means. Never the less, the new owner of team will undoubtedly be aggressive, which is what fans crave to end the 99 year World Series championship drought. Stay tuned folks; this one could get very interesting as the season progresses.

I Thought I Had Seen It All, Until…

I became acquainted with the Westboro Baptist Church located in Topeka, Kansas. These supposed zealots of theological knowledge base their beliefs around the denunciation of Roman Catholics (thanks), Muslims, Jews, and especially homosexuals. They have even condemned Canada and Sweden, two of the most “tyrannical” nations in history. But I am sure that Canada and Sweden aren’t concerned, only the families of fallen soldiers who have served in Iraq.

These so called primitive Anabaptists-Calvinists have helped to found the Anti-Defamation League, a hate group that protests at the funerals of fallen soldiers (Martin Luther and John Calvin would be proud). The Church and Anti-Defamation league is essentially made up of one family (a woman with ten kids) who broadcast hatred that Satan would savor. Various examples of their abhorrent slander includes: “Thank God for 9/11. Thank God for Katrina, Dyke Nuns and Fag Priests (outside of Catholic Churches), Fag Troops, and even Do Not Worship the Dead.”

I find it amusing that these people label themselves a church. I can deal with the hate group brand because it is true, but claiming you are from a church is crossing the line. I am Roman Catholic (Irish variety) and I am firmly aware of why the Reformation occurred. To make a really long story short, Protestant believe in justification through faith alone, while Catholics believe in justification through faith and good works.

The point is there maybe theological differences between Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and other denominations- but no one worships Satan. In essence we are all human, we just have a few minor differences in belief and these people exploit and blow these differences out of proportion at the expense of our dead soldiers. The last time I checked, the soldiers have done nothing wrong; they are in Iraq because they were sent there by the president.

Most western faiths are centered on the doctrine that we must submit to the authorities on Earth because God put those authorities here for us to follow. The soldiers are following that very authority that God put on Earth. The point is that the Westboro Baptist Church does not have an argument based on theology. They do not have an argument in general because their attitude is treasonous to this nation, no matter if we or they believe in the war that is being fought. Calling fallen soldiers fags is sickening, much less berating anyone who is a homosexual for their belief and actions. This is the land of the individual and of the aggregate of individual opinions and that aggregate says the “church” is wrong.

No More Sunsets

As I was browsing the annals of CNN, I discovered a report on a documentary detailing the last days of a meth addict’s life entitled, “No More Sunsets: The Last Days of a Meth Addict.” Shawn Bridges, a former truck driver died a few weeks ago at the age of 35, a seemingly young age by any measure. Bridges used a variety of drugs throughout most of his teenaged and adult life, with a special affection for methamphetamine, which caused his ultimate demise. Bridges thought it appropriate to film his impending death in order to possibly save others who may go down the very same path.

Bridges had 2 heart attacks during his short life, the first of which occurred when he was only 26. According to the trailer he was brought back both times, but never quit using. The trailer alone should be enough to persuade anyone from using meth, much less terrifying those who currently use to acquire the proper help. Meth has become a common occurrence in our culture, especially throughout the Midwest where it is produced in mass quantity. The documentary has even caught the eyes of many school administrators and teachers who are showing the documentary in schools.

In all actuality Methamphetamine is a simple concoction of ingredients, which up until a few years ago were readily available. Meth (or crystal meth when made in a woodshed out back) is also known by the name Desoxyn, a legal prescription drug used to treat disorders such as ADHD and narcolepsy. The structure of the pure version of the drug is quite similar to synthesized versions of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine. Ephedrine was banned in the U.S. by the FDA a few years back due to a serious health risk the stimulant posed on the hearts of athletes, as the drug was typically used in athletic and weight loss supplements.

States such as Illinois have imposed a registry for those who purchase pseudoephedrine, which is commonly used in cold medicines like Sudafed. Needless to say, it does take a massive amount of these over the counter drugs to produce meth, but the trouble is that the purification process tends to quite literally “blow people up” due to the massive amounts of explosive chemicals used in the process. Besides death, the common addict will deal with symptoms that include “meth mouth,” where the teeth and gums essentially rot away, skin lesions and ulcers, and the essential shorting out of their sex drive.

I believe that individuals should at least take a look at the trailer for the film, as it is quite powerful in itself. If kids knew that they could one day end up like Shawn Bridges, the world would be a safer, healthier, and smarter place. Addiction does ruin lives and this is a drug that no one should ever experiment with; it is that powerful. Watch the trailer and you will get my point; there are indeed no more sunsets for those who are addicted to meth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ng-vxTx6h8

Why We Do The Things We Do

I wish I had solutions to offer for this cause, but as of right now I believe that none would work and you shall see why. As I sat around this evening consuming a Miller High Life (I beg to differ that it is the champagne of beers), I asked myself what in the hell I was doing. I then recalled a quote from one of the most prolific cinematic features of the twentieth century, Terminator 2: Judgment Day. The Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) proclaims, “It's in your nature to destroy yourselves.” Psychologists term self destruction as “self defeating behavior.”

The Terminator trilogy may not be the most credible source of infinite knowledge, but the quote has rained true since humans have roamed the Earth (at least homo sapien sapien). Even in an era where modern medicine and technology has augmented the life span of someone in the industrial world to almost 78 years, we still find new ways to destroy ourselves and everything around us. It was built into our most basic genes long ago that we do not know when to stop; for good or bad.

Look at OUR planet, planet Earth. No matter how you look at it, Earth was placed in our charge by either God or evolution. What has our “progressive” species done to it? We have managed to screw it up to the point where we are on the brink of disaster for ourselves and the other creatures that call Earth home. I subscribe to the theory (or paradigm) of global warming. We have managed to crank out more carbon dioxide and other various pollutants than our atmosphere can handle. In turn the average global temperature will shoot up over 3 degrees in the next 50 years, which on a planetary scale is massive and in this case, catastrophic.

We have even managed to over populate the Earth. I am not claiming that 6 billion people are too many people, nor am I claiming that a socialist utopia is the answer. Everyday we add somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 million new people. The newest members of Earth are more often than not born in the 3rd world, where in essence, they do not consume anywhere near the amount of resources that an American newborn will. Those of us in the industrialized world consume more than our fair share of resources, which is what I mean by over population. But on the other hand by 2010 there will be over 7 billion people living on the Earth. There will come a time when we run out of resources for those of us rich and poor. When we eliminated “natural population control”, i.e. diseases such as smallpox, the plague, TB (for the most part), etc…we hastened the demise of future generations.

What about our “personal habits” that leads to our demise? By far the most preventable cause of death has to do with smoking. The World Health Organization predicts that over 1 billion people will die this century due to smoking. Maybe I was wrong when I said that population control methods were out of the mix. It is a scientific fact that smoking is detrimental to human health, yet we do it because we think we are invincible (or vain in some cases). The leading cause of death worldwide (which can be attributed to smoking is heart disease). Over 8 million people die a year in the world from heart disease. Why? The answer is simple; our eating habits are atrocious (in the industrialized world we do not know when to quit, i.e. stress). What ever happened to fruits and vegetables, you know natural produce?

It seems to me that no matter what we do, we are essentially defeating ourselves. We find ways to defeat ourselves on a personal level and we manage to find even more ways on the collective level. It is as if we choose to intentionally suffer. Maybe suffering is part of being human (such as the crab fisherman I am watching on TV). I do not think that there is one cause for our self destructive behavior, but I find it amusing how it manages to catch on to everyone in all cultures and societies all around the world. Maybe this is a theory that will be debated for the next millennia, if we are around that long.

What to Do With Iran (or the Islamic Republic of Iran)?

Over the past week events within and outside of Iran have come to a head with the international community. Earlier in the week 15 British marines and sailors were “detained” by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s naval force (an elite group that I will return to) in the Shatt al-Arab waterway. The waterway is around 125 miles long and essentially separates Iraq and Iran. Iran claims that the British were infringing on their territorial waters, but obviously the British are thinking the other way. Tony Blair called the acts unjust and illegal. Obviously all British ships have the best technology on them, including GPS, which in this case is a good indicator of where exactly the British ships were at.

The waterway has been a constant point of dispute since 1639 when the Ottoman Empire and the Persians signed an agreement that divided up the waterway and other parts of the land surrounding it. The trouble is that no boundaries were drawn and ever since then, Iraq has claimed the waterway as its sovereign territory. Evidently Iran has thought different over the past few hundred years, as shown by their recent act of aggression. A treaty was signed by the two nations in 1975 that divided the waterway down the middle, but that has never been enforced.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard is an elite military group that only answers to either the Shah (top religious leader of Iran) or the president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. One needs to understand that the religious leaders of Iran call the shots, not so much the president, even though you may see him on the news more often than not. The religious leaders will pick a group of candidates for president and then the public will cast their vote. Not exactly the most stable process that you will ever see, but whatever works for them.

Since the early 1980’s, Iran’s power in the region has gone unchecked, which leaves us in the current situation. On top of it all, it seems as if the Iranian government wants to trade the 15 Britons for a few of their own people who seemed to have “disappeared” over the past few months, including a former leader of the Revolutionary Guard. Depending on how far Blair wants to take things, he very well may have to deal with Iranians. Ahmadinejad may not deal though, as the UN Security Council today passed more sanctions on Iran for their continued pursuit of nuclear weapons (or “power” as he claims).

Where does this leave us? Ahmadinejad is severely ticked off right now and could easily have the 15 soldiers done away with. But on the other hand he would lose his leverage, much less half of his country at the expense of a lot of bombs and such. If the U.S. and our “coalition” were not in Iraq right now, there is a good chance that no one on the face of the planet would careless what Iran is doing, whether they are building nuclear bombs or making fried camel. President Bush underestimated the unyielding role that Iran has in the region and it makes me worry that our war monger president will pick another fight that he cannot possibly win out of sheer spite.

You may ask what exactly should the world do with Iran? I would have said leave the country alone, but that has obviously gone out the door and went on a permanent vacation. The U.S. is actually attempting to talk with Iran on diplomatic terms, but the president’s propensity for being a statesman is not exactly forthright. Iran is still a few years off from acquiring nuclear weapons, which does give the world some time to deal. Toothless resolutions by the UN are not the answer. I believe before we go in an shoot up the place, we should seriously consider this diplomacy stuff. But I have a feeling that it will not happen during this administration. Hold onto your horses, this could get messy.

Wanted: Coach for Prestigious College Basketball Program

As much as I would relish verbally punishing Tony LaRussa for his DUI gaffe yesterday, I will hold back the wave of castigation. We are all human and I understand that no one is perfect; unfortunately I am familiar with the procedure and punishment for a DUI, so I am not exactly one to talk. But there is other news that has roused my inquisitiveness, which happens to be with my favorite college basketball team, the Kentucky Wildcats; one of the most storied programs in NCAA history.

Even though he had four years remaining on his contract, Head Coach Tubby Smith resigned yesterday in favor of taking the head coaching position at Minnesota only a week after falling out of the NCAA tournament at the hands of Kansas. I sympthize with Tubby, as he has done a marvelous job over the past ten years. The trouble is that he peaked too soon, winning a national championship in his first year as head coach in 1998. After that he spent the rest of his time trying to live up to the storied legacy of the University of Kentucky basketball program.

The Wildcats have not been back to the Final Four since that 1998 season, which for a prestigious program like Kentucky’s has been the longest in school history. Smith won 263 and lost 83 games in his tenure as head coach, which is winning at a 78% clip. Fans have been calling for his ouster the last four years because winning at a 78% clip is not good enough for Kentucky basketball and I concur. I do not doubt Tubby’s ability to coach what so ever; it takes a bold man to attempt to live up to the standards set by individuals like Adolph Rupp.

But as stated earlier he did deliver a national championship and ten NCAA tournament appearances, a truly admirable record by anyone’s standards. His decision to leave now was best for all parties involved; Minnesota needed a proven winner and no one wanted to see him fired. Tubby’s experience and winning record will undoubtedly resurrect a basketball program in desperate need of a savior. On the other hand though, it leaves Kentucky without a coach. But I highly doubt that the job will stay vacant for long, as this is a dream job for any college basketball coach.

I would personally love Kentucky to pursue Michigan State Head Coach Tom Izzo, who has proven himself as a winner by establishing Michigan State as a powerhouse in the Big Ten and nationally, even winning a national championship in 2000. Izzo seems to be the best ideological fit, as well as the man with a plan for how to win to a conference as demanding as the SEC. Other potential candidates include Marquette coach Tom Crean, Memphis’ John Calipari, Gonzaga's Mark Few, Notre Dame's Mike Brey, Texas' Rick Barnes, Texas A&M's Billy Gillispie and Villanova's Jay Wright.

I’m No M.D., but…

I recently came across a story on CNN pertaining to the overuse of antibiotics, especially during this time of the year. Winter is turning into spring, but the trouble is that the temperature never stays consistent and we all get what is affectionately called “the crud.” The most common variance of “the crud” is the dreaded sinus infection, which is in all essence a viral infection. A recent study concluded that doctors prescribe antibiotics in 82% of acute sinus infections and 70% in chronic situations. In sum, over 50 million pounds of antibiotics are produced in the U.S. each year, compared to 2 million pounds in 1954.

The trouble is that antibiotics do not cure a viral infection. Viral infections are not living, but instead they live off of a cell in order to keep replicating. This is the equivalent to spraying a block of ice with a fire extinguisher. The ice stays cooler longer and you just waste the fire extinguisher’s fluid. By using antibiotics in mass quantity, common bacterial infections (what antibiotics are meant to treat, a living organism within a cell) are building up a tolerance to the treatments (bacterial resistance). Some antibiotics are becoming obsolete due to their over prescription and this could have disastrous consequences for the future.

The CDC is even concerned about this problem, as it is one of the most concerning public health problems the world faces today. Common ailments such as pneumonia and tuberculosis may one day become a problem once again. I am not saying that the controlled use of antibiotics is detrimental in anyway. But when we stuff our faces with them every time we have a slight post nasal drip or a sore throat, we need to take a step back and take care of things the old fashioned way. Take some vitamin C, drink some orange juice, catch some extra zzzzzz’s…

The Role of Morals in the Military: Any Room?

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace recently criticized the role of gays in the military. In a radio address last week, Pace termed gay acts as immoral and that gays should not serve in the military. I find these remarks rather ironic, as the U.S. military is in severe need of bodies for service in our “war against terror” in Iraq. Even presidential hopeful Senator Sam Brownback agreed with Pace’s remarks by sending President Bush a letter of support (Bush has no coattails to ride, so God only knows why he is kissing up).

The current administration needs to understand that this “moral crusade” has boundaries, one of those boundaries being the military. Everyone has the God given right to believe what they want, but what does being gay have to do with someone’s ability to serve in the armed forces? I really do not see the logic in Pace’s comments when I put it into that context. I do not doubt his abilities as the top general in the military by any means, but when you are in the military your views on “moral issues” need to “stay in the closet,” Peter.

The last time I checked, the U.S. has been involved in a war of attrition for the past five years and it appears as if “the terrorists” are doing a knock up job of outlasting us. General Pace needs to worry about commanding the military, not commanding the views of the “Christian right.” For all I care he can pull a Wesley Clark by retiring and running for president, but he has yet to retire. As one can probably tell I am all for gay’s serving in the military. I am not concerned with someone’s sexual preference as a measure of someone’s ability to serve.

Another Line of BS?

Gambian President Yahya Jammeh claims that he has the answer to the world’s AIDS problem. The herbal treatment that he claims cures AIDS, came to him in a dream late last year. He has yet to release the ingredients of the concoction that has been given to AIDS patients since January, but users of the substance claim that it is working.

AIDS was first brought to the attention of the United States (The West) in 1981 when the viral disease surfaced throughout the gay community. Scientists have been aware of the disease since 1959 when the virus was an invisible entry in the medical books. No one is exactly positive where or how the virus originated, but anthropologists point to the jungles of the Congo (Democratic Republic of Congo) where HIV was somehow passed from monkeys (primates) to humans.

Today HIV/AIDS has been tamed in the West, partly because of massive educational campaigns and the relative easy access to anti-retroviral drugs. But Africa is a different story, as AIDS has run rampant since the late 1970’s. Today over 25 million people on the continent are infected with either HIV or AIDS and more are contracting the virus each day. The spread of the virus has been slowed due to the increase in donations from Western pharmaceutical corporations and the UN, but the problem still remains.

Because the virus has been tamed in the West, some people are oblivious to the consequences of HIV/AIDS. HIV/AIDS are not one disease, but in fact are separate diseases. HIV or human immunodeficiency virus is the virus that causes AIDS or acquired immune deficiency syndrome. HIV can be kept in check with anti-retroviral drugs, which in the West infected people can live normal life spans if they take the drugs religiously.

But when HIV turns into AIDS there is nothing that can be done. AIDS is defined by the medical community when an individual’s T-CELL (immune system cells) drops below a specific level. AIDS does not technically kill people; it is usually a common ailment such as pneumonia that causes the demise of an individual.

If President Jammeh’s herbal concoction is indeed inept as the UN claims it is, the results will be devastating for Africa. The UN fears that people afflicted will quit taking their anti-retroviral drugs, hence hastening their ultimate declines. I believe that the president had the best of intentions, but like the old saying goes: some of the worse things imaginable have been done with the best of intentions.

What's The Deal with "March Madness?"

As I sit fixated to ESPN’s coverage of “March Madness,” I couldn’t help but wonder why Americans are suddenly obsessed with college basketball when the brackets come out. Oddly enough, I find myself apart of the vogue and I am firmly aware of my prospects to come out with an untainted bracket (I am already screwed). “March Madness” reaffirms one of America’s grandest pastimes, the art of gambling.

Besides rioting in large mobs, Americans cannot resist gambling, as it is part of our moniker to bet collateral that we do not have on the off chance that we actually succeed (writing checks that our asses cannot cash). The brackets were spurred forth last Sunday and to no one's surprise, we have gobbled them up like a blue whale feeding on plankton.

ESPN has their own little bracket challenge (which I entered to no avail) and they claim over 3 million people entered the contest. People, that is around 1/300th of the population, a majority of which are probably men, but still that is a considerable portion of the population.
One cannot forget the countless office pools that boast grand petty grand prizes of $100 or so. Over 10% of Americans participate in these office pools. Surprisingly, the $5 entrance fee is well worth the off chance of winning that immaculate load of cash that will in all likeliness, be blown at the local pub moments after winning it.

What is the off chance of producing a perfect bracket? 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 to 1, which in Lehman’s terms means 9 quintillion to one. If you do not like those odds, you have no business participating in “March Madness.” The FBI estimates that over $2.5 billion in illegal funds will be wagered on “March Madness,” but on the bright side 4% of that sum is wagered legally in Nevada.

Besides risking arrest from the FBI and forgetting the massive odds of losing, which any Texas Hold Em’ player would drop dead upon hearing, the answer to my question is simple; gambling has systematically been built into our genes over the past two-hundred years (I am sure science would refute it, but who cares)!

It’s 2007, not 2004…duh!

What is the big deal about the recent firings of 8 U.S. Attorneys? We must first begin with exactly how a U.S. Attorney gets their job in the first place in order to understand the overall significance of the firings. Generally U.S. Attorney’s are nominated by the president based on the input of Senators from selected districts. Usually the individuals that are nominated are from the president’s political party; the GOP in this case. In a sense, becoming a U.S. Attorney is a patronage affair. And they all serve at the pleasure of the president.

But the thing is, after becoming a U.S. Attorney, your politics suddenly goes out the door, as it is the job of an attorney to be fair and unbiased in all legal matters. Democrats allege that the 8 U.S. Attorneys that were unceremoniously dismissed were fired for their politics. This is a serious accusation because most U.S. Attorneys eventually resign at the end of a president’s term and are either retained or let go. It is no secret that U.S. Attorney’s are fired, but during the middle of a president’s term is something else.

It was originally the idea of Harriet Miers, former White House Counsel, that all 93 U.S. Attorneys be fired at the beginning of President Bush’s second term. Oddly enough, the Bush Administration declined to fire anyone. Even though these attorneys do serve at the pleasure of the president, they should only be fired in circumstances in which they are not performing their job in a satisfactory manner. Three of the individuals fired did receive poor ratings, but it still does not explain the sudden urge to fire the individuals.

The attorney in question in this case is David Iglesias, who had received a superb rating and was not on the original list of candidates to be fired. He was fired because New Mexican Republicans were irritated that he was not prosecuting enough voter fraud cases. Yes, there is a voting fraud issue in New Mexico, but it does not explain why Iglesias and 7 other U.S. Attorney’s were removed from their offices during the middle of the president’s term. If this is a blatant abuse of power that the Democrats are claiming it is, Alberto Gonzales should be fired to.

Pardon Me, Scooter

Former Dick Cheney top aid, Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted on four counts of perjury, false testimony, and obstruction of justice last Tuesday. Libby, who was essentially part of the top brass in the White House and chief confidant to the vice-president, will face up to 25 years in prison when his sentencing hearing begins in June. But our endless judicial appeal systems will more than likely spare “Scooter” a trip to repair shop.

His conviction stems from accusations that he revealed Valerie Plame as a covert CIA operative, which in turn could have potentially put her life in grave danger. Libby was not convicted of leaking the name, but his convictions stem from interfering in the investigation of the leak. Democrats greeted news of the conviction with bliss.

"It's about time someone in the Bush administration has been held accountable for the campaign to manipulate intelligence and discredit war critics," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi added, “This trial provided a troubling picture of the inner workings of the Bush administration. The testimony unmistakably revealed -- at the highest levels of the Bush administration--a callous disregard in handling sensitive national security information and a disposition to smear critics of the war in Iraq."

Democrats are concerned that President Bush may pardon Libby if the appeals process goes on long enough. The key words in that sentence are “long enough.” Bush is hurriedly approaching the “lame duck” stage of his presidency and if he has nothing to lose by late 2008 (depending on what the GOP does in the presidential elections), he very well may pardon Libby before he leaves office. This is nowhere near the magnitude of the Nixon pardon, but the principle behind a potential pardon is the question at hand.

It is no secret that Dick Cheney operates White House intelligence; in essence he is a sort of dictator of intelligence. With Cheney running the intelligence show, it was Libby who had access to almost the same information as Cheney. But like most of the debacles that have taken place within the Bush Administration, there is more to the story.

Many have claimed that Bush or Cheney may have ordered the release of Plame’s name because her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson openly questioned Bush’s basis for invading Iraq in a New York Times op-ed piece in July 2003. It would outwardly appear that Scooter is a scapegoat for the administration, as his role in the “scandal” seems minimal.

Many commentators have placed the blame on Dick Cheney for sticking Libby out on the end of the stick to be sacrificed. What is the significance of this conviction, regardless of whether Libby gets a new trial or not? As Speaker Pelosi stated above, it may act as a basis for Congress to investigate the authenticity of the Bush Administration’s intelligence on a wide range of issues, including Iraq (and a little thing called credibility, which Bush and gang are slowly running out of).

FOX News: Fair and Un-Biased My Ass

The Nevada Democratic Party is pulling out of a schedules debate that was to be co-hosted by Fox News in Reno on August 14th. The sudden pull out from the debate stems from a comment that Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes (he appears to be a larger version of Albert Hitchcock) made earlier this week. Ailes believed that it would be apposite to crack a joke comparing Barrack Obama to Osama Bin Laden by stating:

"And it is true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don't know if it's true that President Bush called (Pakistani President Pervez) Musharraf and said, 'Why can't we catch this guy?' "

Ailes’ comment capped off a tension that had been brewing for weeks, as John Edwards stated that he would not be participating in the debate due to Fox’s conservative ties. Fox News blames the cancellation on MoveOn, a “radical” left wing organization that has been calling for the debate to be cancelled with a staggering 265,000 signatories to a petition sent to the state Democratic Party.

Democrats believe that they should not have to defend themselves against such bigotry and I concur. I am not so ignorant to the world not to believe that every single American news outlet does not have a bias. But when it comes to moderating a debate, it is not the job of the so called “moderator” to throw a curveball; the politicians will throw each other enough curveballs.

Whether we like it or not, our news media will continue to put their own spin on politics. But when a news network decides to get directly involved in politics, they have stepped over the already stretched line. Plus the so called “joke” was rather insensitive. So begs the idea of whether you like Obama or not, he is a U.S. Senator, not the leader of a major terrorist organization that has claimed the lives of thousands.

The commentary by Ailes was absolutely uncalled for and his network is going to suffer the consequences in August with a lack of ratings and suffer even more as the general election approaches. If you thought that Fox News was not exactly reputable before the joke, it is fair to assume that the organization’s reputation is now debunked in the eyes of many more than before (it rhymes!).

Are You Kidding Me?

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich admitted in front of a conservative Christian group today that he was having an affair at the same time he was leading the charge for Bill Clinton to be impeached. When I read that, I asked myself, ‘Are you kidding me?’ Gingrich did not call his actions hypocritical, as he did make a valid point that Clinton perjured himself in front of a federal judge. The thing is though, Newt, that the whole impeachment thing and independent counsel Ken Starr were not looking into Clinton’s illegitimate comments in front of the judge, but instead were running a witch hunt comparable to the Salem Witch Trials. Newt and the gang were out to crucify Clinton for anything and when they couldn’t succeed on an actual legal premise, they played the moral card.

Newt, who fancies himself a potential presidential candidate in 2008 (I ask myself again, ‘Are you kidding me?’) has campaigned in the past on a generic GOP platform of family values and morals, evidently something he forgot that he lacks (he forgot to look in the mirror). He has been divorced twice, with his most recent divorce in 2000. Newt now resides with his third wife, a former congressional aid who is 20 years his junior (robbing the cradle) and the one whom he had been having the affair with. One can sense that I have a lot of pent up hatred towards Newt Gingrich and for good reason. Like a lot of his GOP friends (Rush Limbaugh- OXYCONTIN and Bill O’Reilly- BEATOFF) who tout the family values and morals line, Newt is what I term a hypocrite.

This is a man that even Bill Clinton despises and Bill Clinton does not despise many. Say what you want about Bill, but I did not see Newt’s approval rating through the roof when he resigned from Congress (his approval rating as speaker was at 28% and he resigned for violations of ethics and hypocrisy rules). I am firmly aware that humans are not perfect, trust me. But when you’re a politician and you attempted to crucify a man for his moral values and you committed the same act, I believe it becomes necessary for Newt to cease to chatter, much less run for president. If Newt does indeed run for president, there is a good chance he will receive a taste of his own medicine, either from the Democrats or the media, as I am sure that he has a few more infidelities somewhere in the closet. Newt, your 15 minutes has been up for a few years now; drop the politician act, it’s not your thing.

President for a Day?

What would you do if you were president of the United States for a day? Maybe drop some bombs on an ex-girlfriend’s house? The possibilities could be endless with the amount of power that POTUS wields. Ever heard of David Rice Atchison? Not too many Americans have; I’ll admit that I had never heard of the man up until tonight. Atchison’s story is worth telling though, as his chronicle has become a renowned urban legend over the past century. The urban legend states that Atchison was president for exactly one day, March 4, 1849, which would have made him the 12th president instead of Zachary Taylor.

The legend states that Zachary Taylor was set to be inaugurated the 12th president on that very day, March 4, 1849. But the trouble was that Taylor refused to be inaugurated because it was a Sunday, the Sabbath, so the inauguration was moved up a day to March 5, 1849. The trouble with moving up the “big day” was that the 11th president, James K. Polk’s term expired on March 4th. Essentially then it left a 24 hour period in which the U.S. lacked an elected president. What about the vice-president you ask? George Dallas, Polk’s VP had resigned as president of the Senate on March 2nd, which along with the end of Polk’s term, ended his constitutional right to the presidency.

So with the president and vice-president’s legal terms ending on March 4th and Taylor refusing to be sworn in until the next day, someone technically had to be in charge of the executive branch. At the time the line of succession was different. Unlike today, if the president cannot perform his duties and there is no VP, the speaker of the House is next in line for the presidency. But in 1849, the president pro tempore of the Senate was next in line and guess whom it was? That’s right, it was David Rice Atchison. But again, there is more controversy. He was the president pro tempore for the 29th Congress, but Congress had already let out for the session.

But he was elected president pro tempore for the 30th Congress, but he had not been sworn in yet as of March 5, 1849. When asked what he did on that fabled day, Atchison, being the hardworking politician he was had a long night closing out the 29th Congressional session; so he slept all day. But sadly this story is not “that” true. Legally he was not president for a day, but he was president for about 7 minutes. Before Taylor was sworn in, Atchison was sworn in as president pro tempore; so he technically had power for a few minutes. If that happened today, I would wager that the media would collectively have a heart attack and World War III would break out.

A Gap in the System

On Monday witnesses testified of the abysmal conditions at Walter Reed Army Hospital, as well as the thick bureaucratic red tape that delayed the recovery of countless soldiers wounded in battle before a congressional panel. News of the horrid conditions in building 18, a building where recovering soldiers and their families reside came to the attention of the media and since then the outcry has been loud and to the point. So much to the point that the army’s top civilian, Francis J. Harvey, Secretary of the Army resigned this past Friday. Defense Secretary Robert Yates had already fired the Walter Reed’s commander, Major General George Weightman before Friday, but the damage has already been done to the Army’s reputation for medical care.

More fallout may occur due to the scandal, as Lt. General Kevin Kiley, the Army Surgeon General seemed to be testifying for his job on Monday. He essentially admitted that the Army dropped the ball, but in so many words as not to make it appear that things were as bad as the media would lead us to believe. Besides the conditions of the hospital, witnesses also testified to the fact that extreme gaps exist in the system. One witness testified that it took months for a vital test result to come back, which typically only takes a few days. Others testified that the wait for services and support took months, sometimes appearing as if the Army did not know that these people existed. Lt. General Kiley acknowledged that gaps existed and that they would be fixed.

It appears as if the Army hasn’t exactly been prepared for the sharp influx of severely wounded troops to enter their facilities. In turn this has led to a sharp decline in the quality of care that some of our wounded soldiers are getting, which is inexcusable. I may disagree with the war, but I do not disagree with the troops. The troops deserve the best care available, no matter what the situation may be. A Congressman asked Lt. General Kiley is he had the appropriate funding in order to ensure that this would never happen again. Kiley responded yes, but the Congressman reiterated that Congress is fully behind supporting the medical care of troops, damn the costs. If Congress is behind the funding of the medical system and the funds are there, one must ask, what in the hell went wrong?

We Did It Again: Damn Liberals!

As I was viewing time’s blog, specifically a blog by Joe Klein exclaiming the characteristics of “left wing extremists.” These are not just characteristics of say, Fidel Castro or Tito, but characteristics that seem to resound in our current political system. These are the type of comments that infuriate me, as it is ludicrous to believe that anyone would buy into such blasphemy. Allow me to address a few of Mr. Klein’s claims.

In the realm of foreign policy, we have these comments:
--believes the United States is a fundamentally negative force in the world.
--believes that American imperialism is the primary cause of Islamic radicalism.
--believes that the decision to go to war in Iraq was not an individual case of monumental stupidity, but a consequence of America’s fundamental imperialistic nature.

A lot of these comments are going to be blown out of proportion and “misread,” but it is the opinion of many that the US is an increasingly negative actor in world politics. I would not say that America is again an imperial power, such as England was throughout much of the 18th, 19th, and some of the 20th centuries. But needless to say, it is a terrifying prospect and could soon become reality, especially if our war monger president decides to pick another fight. America is not the cause of Islamic radicalism, but in essence our current activities in the Middle East are pissing off a lot of Islamic fundamentalists, which could lead to perpetual terror in our nation.

In the realm of domestic policy, we have these comments:
--believes that eternal problems like crime and poverty are the primarily the fault of society.
--believes that America isn’t really a democracy.
--believes that corporations are fundamentally evil.
--believes in a corporate conspiracy that controls the world.
--is intolerant of good ideas when they come from conservative sources.
--dismissively mocks people of faith, especially those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage.
--regularly uses harsh, vulgar, intolerant language to attack moderates or conservatives.

I disagree that our society has caused poverty, but it is the fault of the individual. Remember, we all have a little thing called free will, which we can think how we want, hence we can motivate ourselves to work anytime that we want. I have news Mr. Klein, America is not a democracy. America is a federal republic with democratic tendencies. It does not take a scholar to figure that one out. The founders did not want to create a democracy, but a republic. Democracy in its own right is one of the worse forms of government on the planet; nothing would ever get done, just ask the Greeks.

Corporations are really not a bad thing, they help to drive the economy and make the U.S. a world power. Corporations just add to income inequality and such minor pains in the side. I am not going to even address the comment about corporate conspiracies, which is simply not even true. I cannot speak for my fellow liberals, but I personally look at new ideas without filtering them through my party ID. I give the ideas careful though and if it is a decent idea, I am game to listen more. If not, chances are it was a dumb idea. I do not dismiss those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage, I simply disagree with them. I am sure that they have their reasons for their beliefs, as well as I do. Did I use intolerant and vulgar language to express myself? Nope!

And The Debate Rages On

It has been a bedrock principle of Christianity for the past 2000 years that Jesus Christ died a single man and rose from the dead in order to save man from his sins. But a recent documentary produced by James Cameron entitled ‘The Tomb of Christ’ presents a challenge to the paradigm that has guided man for two millennia. The documentary, which is to air on the Discovery Channel on March 4, is based around ten ancient stone boxes (coffins) discovered in Jerusalem in 1980, which carbon date back to the time that Jesus lived. Within those ten boxes were believed to be the remains of Jesus, Mary Magdalene (his supposed wife), and remainder of his family.

One box even has an inscription stating, “Judah, son of Jesus,” which could signal that Jesus had a child, which would refute the basis of Christianity. But of course there are those that refute the evidence, especially scholars and those in religious community. It is believed that Jesus and his supposed family would have no business being entombed in an area that was of middle class status in Old Jerusalem, as Jesus is referred to as a poor man in scripture. Plus, it is widely believed that he spent three days lying in “state” at a temple across town, far away from the middle class area.

Others all calling the documentary propaganda aimed at misleading people and making money. Other say such names like Jesus and Mary were rather prominent during the time period the boxes were entombed. It is not even known if the boxes actually state the name Jesus, as the language of the time period (Ancient Semitic) is rather hard to decipher. Never the less this is another potential dent in the armor of Christianity. Other evidence has come to prominence that possibly disproves the legend of Jesus, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls found from 1947-1956.

The scrolls include what is referred to by religious scholars as the Gnostic Gospels. These particular gospels were not included in the New Testament (completed around 300AD) and include the gospels written by Judas (the apostle who betrayed Jesus) and Mary Magdalene herself. In a historic sense, we do know that Jesus did exist (unlike Abraham or Moses, which is in doubt) from 4-33AD. But the trouble is that he is only written about in an external source once, a book of Antiquities composed in 90AD. It is obvious that Jesus existed, but it is not so obvious of what context he existed in.

The Loophole America Has Been Waiting For?

A Senate resolution to revoke the president’s ability to wage war in Iraq is currently in the works. Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) are working towards drafting a revised version of the 2002 resolution that gave President Bush the authorization to wage war in Iraq. The draft resolution will call for the removal of all US troops from Iraq by March 2008, with a select few being left behind to assist Iraqi forces in counterterrorism measures. Whether or not the resolution will have the number of votes to pass the Senate and House remains to be seen. But this is by far the most aggressive piece of legislation that has been discussed in Congress to date.

Last week the House failed in passing a non-binding resolution that condemned the surge of 21,500 more troops to Iraq, which is a strong signal that Democrats do not have the necessary votes to pass the new potential restrictions on the president. The revised resolution will be presented to the Democratic caucus and some Republicans on Tuesday and then the “politicking” for votes will begin. Even if enough votes are garnered to enact the resolution, there still remains the question of whether the resolution will interfere with the president’s constitutional commander-in-chief powers. Like many presidents before him, Bush has always been protective of his war making power.

Constitutional scholars will be debating the issue for weeks to come, but I believe that the issue is cut and dry. The president will contend that Congress never declared war on Iraq in March 2003, which they did not. Instead the original resolution granted the president the authority to dispatch troops to Iraq in order to halt Saddam Hussein’s production of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and other assorted issues that deal with terror. The original pretext of the resolution was debunked when no WMDs were located, which in theory deflates our whole reason for being there. Yes, the president can command the troops, but if his basis for commanding the troops is revoked, he should in theory not be able to continue to run his personal war.

Does the News Still Exist?

It has become apparent over the past few weeks that the media has overstepped the bounds of what one would consider news. The news has been a firm part of the American psyche since the advent of radio and more recently, television. The modern news media is a questionable institution based on the fact that news conglomerates do not give us the whole story of the events that pervade our lives. Never the less, at least they were giving us the scoop on matters that we concerned ourselves with, that is before CNN became the E! Channel.

There are three things that sell news: sex, scandal, and controversy. Besides Bill Clinton, the media market has a severe lack of attention gathering stories, besides the lives of celebrities. The most recent binge that the media has been on has been in concern to the death of Anna Nicole Smith and the less than reputable behavior of Britney Spears. Even reliable news networks like CNN and MSNBC ( I enjoy their point of view) cannot get enough of these people. Personally, I would love to hear about real news, no matter how disturbing or "honest" it may be.

But instead, the news directors of these conglomerates subject us to live feeds of the trial for custody of Anna Nicole Smith’s body; her body. Who wants to hear a blubbering judge decide who gets the decomposing remains of a blonde bimbo who fancied herself a modern day Marilyn Monroe (she was far from it). Sadly, that is not all that the news can get enough of. Who can forget Britney Spears? I enjoy turning on CNN at 9AM to hear that she has no business being around kids, much less her own, shaved her head, and checked herself into rehab, again and left, again. Honestly, who in the hell cares?

I am firmly aware that the American infatuation with the lives of celebrities is a multi-billion dollar (my net worth) a year industry, but how much can we really take? I would like to assume that celebrities are human and enjoy the right to privacy like the rest of the civilized world. Yet we have to place these people on a pedestal to boost our own egos with the fantasy that famous people are human just like us. If I want to stalk these people, I will buy the National Enquirer or turn on the E! Channel. If I want to enlighten myself about the events of the world, I will turn on a reputable news network; get the "scoop" straight.