Whilst I admit that airlines may have been a bit lax with security until (and since) 11 September, I think it’s complete idiocy that people are suing airlines for the terrorist attacks. The attacks did not occur because of the airlines, which could be the only viable case for a judgement against them. The attacks occurred because of terrorists. Neither the airlines nor the government should be held responsible for the existence of terrorists.

Unfortunately, I think most Americans think that their problems will be solved if they find someone to blame. If the victims and their families truly want justice, they won’t find it by suing the airlines or the US government (as was done in the 1993 attack on the WTC), but rather by supporting and contributing to the war effort. The terrorists are not under the jurisdiction of our legal system, and thus civil litigation cannot be levied against them. Thus, we can only react by projecting what is the only means a nation has for protecting itself from those outside its borders: militarily.

Instead, I’m sure we will continue to see these dickheads going after the government, trying to get themselves set for life by sucking off the system, whether that may be the Red Cross, some randomly involved corporation or the US Treasury. They ultimately don’t care about who is really to blame, nor do they even remotely believe that justice matters. Like most pragmatists, they throw justice and morality to the wind and sell their soul in order to avoid the burden of leading a rational life.

The best thing about the latest WTC replacement proposal is that the designers start out by declaring their particular memorial to the World Trade Center be temporary. I find it inspiring and comforting that the people of New York appear, for the most part, to be shrugging off the rhetoric of the odious Giuliani and his exiting declaration that the site of the WTC be put to no commercial use.

It pleases me that New Yorkers haven’t lost the commercial resilience and drive which made their city the greatest in the world. After all, it is industry and trade which has made them great, not symbolism or martyrdom. Despite what Mr. Giuliani would like to think, New York isn’t a “symbol” or a “beacon” but rather a motor, well-oiled and ready to get back to work. Thank you New York. For everything you do , in addition to everything you are.

One recent politician’s ad in particular has annoyed me as I drove around Fresno the past couple of months: It shows a certain State Assembly candidate with his ugly daughter and two ugly sons and his rather homely wife, all lovvy dovvy for the camera, with the heading “He’s one of us!”.

Oh, is he? Well, I live alone. I don’t have any ugly children, and I sure as hell don’t regularly run for political office. I doubt most Fresnans would disagree. Fresno (despite it’s higher-than-average proportion of Mormons and trailer trash) matches closely the new Census discovery that (gasp!) most households aren’t Cleaver-style. It’s no longer the suburbia of Ma, Pa, an hier and a spare. Rather we have lots of housholds in our suburban conglomerations these days: unmarried couples, single parent families, roommate households, queer households, empty nests, etc. Just trying to symbolically splash your dubious “family values” won’t get you elected when the majority of the voting public consists of pensioners who are twice your age and college activists who are half your age. Oy.

Whilst I am increadibly amused by the bomber’s confession, the article brings up yet another thing that annoys me about things today: the constant labeling of all behavior as a “mental illness”. Is it just me or is every flaw in a person considered an illness these days?

I’m sorry, but to be able to plan such a cute little terrorist plot, this guy had it together. He had all his logical patterns laid down, he was just an evil fucker. I think the idea that there are no “bad” people, just “misguided” people is what brought on this ubiquitous “mental illness” lobbying about. The fact is, some perfectly together people are just plain evil. Look at Hitler and Stalin and Pinochet and other very smart, very powerful but very wicked individuals in history.

This kid will most likely have diminished charges laid on him on account of his “mental illness” and he’ll end up doing less time than a drug dealer… How I long for some judges that will stop humouring these stupid “mental illness” lobbyists…
Anyway, new m.o.t.m. . Ran a much-delayed after-hours work errand last night, and on the way back I stopped by Rob & Al’s , on one of their off-days… Damn, they’ve been busy. I was a bit skeptical of their little “B&B” scheme until I saw what can actually be done with a double-wide, two single-wides, a lot of deficit spending, and a whole lot of patience… Gawd knows I’d never be able to do something on that kind of scale without going homicidal…

I was contemplating a party tonight, but I’ve decided to stay home instead, in order to get some much-needed housekeeping and papaerwork done. And maybe continue this job hunting. Send all San Francisco employment leads my way! Then it’s off to Cambria for Mother’s Day weekend. Have you hugged your mama today?

I agree with the Court. The majority of lawmakers and the majority of Americans think the 1954 version of the Pledge is better. This is because most lawmakers and most Americans are faith-based ballast. America is a secular state, and its laws should all be secular. America should have no institutions, laws or representatives that make reference to or base their policy upon faith or values which contradict the constitution.

I wrote an essay last October about how wrong I felt it was for the post-9/11 political rhetoric to make so many references to God - “God bless America” was the song of the year. That really disturbs me, because America is a secular nation. No legal system can survive without a secular morality, especially if it hopes to be free and noncultural. With every call for “In God we trust” and “God bless America”, we buy into the morality of the terrorists and dictators that want to destroy us.

People should keep in mind that Eisenhower changed the Pledge in ‘54 as a reaction to the “Godless” Soviet Union. In reality, Soviet Russia had a more faith-based and mystical government than America has ever had. Eisenhower and MacArthur were convinced that the fight against communism was about God - rather than about economics or philosophy, like it really was. Communism didn’t fall because America and the West became more Godly, it fell because it ate itself alive - like any cannibalistic slavery-based system would. The reciting of the Pledge should not be required of teachers, students or any other American in the first place, with or without it’s ‘54 addition. If only that had been the basis of the court’s ruling, rather than just toying with the syntax.

In other news: MCI Bye Bye … As if everyone didn’t see that one coming. The most disorganized, horribly mismanaged telecoms company - which as far as I’m concerned has been a laughing stock for years already - announces that all their plans for reorganization and better management resulted in the discovery of even worse management . If I was working on that sinking ship, I’d have bailed 2 years ago. I’d like to see Sidgmore try to find a job paying more than minimum wage the rest of his life (if he’s not in jail). Funny Andersen was WorldCom’s accountant as well - maybe Enron wasn’t as evil as we assumed - maybe it was Andersen all along?

With the writer’s block and yearning to be closer to a certain someone getting the better of me this morning, I will leave it to Chuck to provide the Independence Day entry.

For those of you reading this from America, I embrace you as my fellow countrymen, and hope you share the unbending love I possess for the ideas and philosophy upon which this nation was founded. For those of you on the outside, I wish for you and your countrymen the rights and freedoms which Americans enjoy because of the ideas and philosophy upon which our nation was founded. America is still a shining beacon to the world, and if we remain vigilant and strong, we will be an example of what can be achieved when a people choose to dissolve the divine nation and the despot nation, and adopt the nation of law under a legal constitution, with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as its basis and the only end it needs. Enjoy your celebrations today, my fellow Americans, we’ve earned it! 

If that guy wins his lawsuit , I’m leaving the country. [This was a commenary on the obese man from NY who was suing McDonalds for making him fat]

I have an idea for the next series of [anti-smoking] ads. They should buy ad time at the Superbowl.

Black television screen. White lettering. No music, just words. 
“This ad cost {insert millions of dollars figure here} to air” 
“It was paid for with taxes on cigarette sales.” 
“We have 9 billion dollars left over.” 
“When you smoke, you’re sending a dollar a pack to the government.” 
“And we’re just going to waste it.”

That would make me quit. And I’d appreciate the honesty.

Finally I find someone who put two and two together on the whole Pledge of Allegiance issue: the problem isn’t the forcing of children to Pledge in public schools, but the public schools themselves…

I am so incredibly pissed off about the idea of hate crimes. In general. First of all, why is it that you should get a lighter sentence for committing a crime just because you’re a fucked-up person? And what exactly will the guvmint constitute “hate”? Basically, hate crime laws would allow congress or the courts to legislate thought. It would mean that a man’s ideological beliefs are what deserve punishment, not his actions. By giving this sort of authority to the government, you basically destroy freedom of thought.

One would think that by committing a crime, punishment should be equal among all citizens. Isn’t that the very definition of legal justice? Basically, hate crimes legislation will allow a court to rule that a man’s thoughts make his crime worse. Isn’t committing the crime bad enough? How far does one extend the idea? It’s wrong and ridiculous that the motive of a crime should determine the severity of the punishment. Men should be free to think evil thoughts, but not to act on them. We can morally condemn a man who honestly believes that Jews are inferior as humans, but he doesn’t deserve any further physical or legal condemnation until he acts on that belief. If he kills a Jew because he hates jews, his punishment should be no more nor less severe than the man who kills the store clerk in a robbery or the gangster who kills a random strager for initiation rites.

Read more »

It is often baffling to me how small-thinking our leaders are when it comes to the issue of immigration. It’s a hotly debated topic these days, but it seems that neither “side” of the issue have the concept down correctly, nor understand the wider implications of the issue.

The “left” views immigration negatively due to its alignment with the statist socialist element. Immigrants, it is argued, jeopardize American jobs by providing a glut of labor, and jeopardize American wages by being willing to perform the same tasks as unskilled American laborers for far less money. Additionally, the “left”, with its catalogue of social programs and welfare interests, tends to view immigrants as a competing interest in the battle over the tax spoils made available by said programs. At its base, the “left” wants to enjoy the fruits of America’s productivity, made possible by the principles and convictions of the founding fathers, without the necessity of conviction or allegiance to any country, any principles, and without conviction.

The “right” is afraid of immigrants for more simplistic reasons, in most cases. They fear exotic traditions, religions and ideas. They fear racial diversity and they, too, smell a threat in the foreign immigrants willing to take up work for lower wages than their American counterparts. At its base, the “right” wants to enjoy and indulge every privelage obtained by prospering in America without having to recognize any basic principles or rights which created that prosperity.

Read more »

I feel physically ill. Freedom in America takes another giant step backwards, as the arbitrary whims of an unaccountable government with unlimited power, imprisons one more of the world’s most productive and admirable women.

All for the love of the humdrum and humble. Once again, the totalitarian state needn’t be made by revolution, when it can simply be made by default.

Well Said. I’ve often found it a bit queer that endorsing an individual candidate or issue almost invariably chains one to a whole slew of platforms upon which one is expected to stand and defend without question. Sort of the mild trepidation I felt standing in line to marry my husband and chatting uncomfortably with the sods on the sidewalk as they unquestioningly obliged me to not only enjoy a same-sex marriage, but also to volunteer to help the homeless, free Mumiah and end the War in Iraq at the same time…

Along the same lines, I think individuals from all sides seem to be bundling their politics too much these days. As politics gets increasingly divisive, people seem to take shelter in group-think, which leads to blind acceptance of “platform politics” rather than rational opining of specific issues and candidates. My own dad has fallen victim of this crisis: upon learning that I planned to vote for Kerry, he immediately knew I preferred high taxes, tighter business restrictions, a big European welfare state, pulling troops out of Iraq, lying, cheating and molesting children. Uniting values with specific candidates and issues tends to create this all-or-nothing mentality. You can no longer split your ticket. You’re either with us or against us.

David’s car was broken into Saturday night for the second time in less than a year. He is always careful not to leave anything of value in the car to avoid tempting unfortunate people with Earthly delights. However, the person or persons that have broken into it these past couple times don’t seem to have been interested in any specific item within, but rather we’ve found the seat positions displaced in such a way as to suspect that the culprit is a homeless or bedless individual in search of shelter.

I just want to let everyone know that I’ve changed my ways and I’m not angry at the person who broke into the car. I understand their plight, and 150 bucks for a new window is a small price to pay for providing some poor junkie with a place to sleep. I know that it’s my fault that they got this way. If I would only give up the profit motive and accept a life of poverty in the pursuit of the happiness of others, our world would be without want and without war. Thus, I am glad to give up such things as security of person and personal property. These people aren’t criminals, they’re victims of corporate greed and stuff. Right?

“Jesus died for our sins. That sacrifice should not have been in vain. Thus, let us all go forth and sin as much as we possibly can.”

- “Anonymous” post at InTheFaith.com