Friday, March 28, 2003
There is so much bad karma in this talk about the war. People are saying the most awful things, and wishing death on people. Beware. All the spiritual people and futurists are saying that karma is speeding up now, so if you do and say bad things, you'll get it back instantly. And with karma, you get it back three times.
Check this article out about a professor from Columbia University, Columbia teacher calls for `a million Mogadishus;' referring to 1993 ambush of U.S. servicemen.
What a fool! I think this professor needs some serious therapy, because he obviously has a ton of repressed anger. And he's an academic as well. No matter what side you fall on about the war, what good does it do to wish people to die?
This professor just adds the fuel to fire that conservatives have been saying for years, that public education is all about indoctrination by the hostile left.
The other thing I'm start to hate is ad hominem attacks against Bush. People say they're against the war, but instead of offering rational arguments for why, they will launch into saying how much they hate Bush and don't trust him. I hear very few voices of the anti-war movement, especially the ones who call up and give their opinions on radio stations, that don't within 5 minutes launch into an ad hominem attack on Bush.
Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies
One of the most common non-rational appeals is an argumentum ad hominem--or, as the Latin phrase suggests, an "argument against the person" (and not against the ideas he or she is presenting). Our decisions should be based on a rational evaluation of the arguments with which we are presented, not on an emotional reaction to the person or persons making that argument. But because we often react more strongly to personalities than to the sometimes abstract and complex arguments they are making, ad hominem appeals are often very effective with someone who is not thinking critically.
Ad hominem fallacies take a number of different forms, though all share the fact that they attempt to re-focus attention, away from the argument made and onto the person making it.
Among the most frequent ad hominem appeals are attacks on:
personality, traits, or identity:
"Are you going to agree with what that racist pig is saying?"
"Of course she's in favor of affirmative action. What do you expect from a black woman?"
affiliation, profession, or situation:
"What's the point of asking students whether they support raising tuition? They're always against any increase."
"Oh yeah, prison reform sounds great--until you realize that the man proposing it is himself an ex-con."
inconsistent actions, statements, or beliefs:
"How can you follow a doctor's advice if she doesn't follow it herself?"
"Sure, he says that today, but yesterday he said just the opposite."
source or association for ideas or support:
"Don't vote for that new initiative--it was written by the insurance lobby!"
"You can't possibly accept the findings of that study on smoking--it was paid for by the tobacco industry."
The point is that each argument must be evaluated in its own right. Information or suspicions about vested interests, hidden agendas, predilections, or prejudices should, at most, make you more vigilant in your scrutiny of that argument--but they should not be allowed to influence its evaluation. Only in the case of opinions, expert and otherwise, where you must rely not on the argument or evidence being presented but on the judgment of someone else, may personal or background information be used to evaluate the ideas expressed. If, for example, a used car vendor tries to prove to you that the car in question is being offered at lower than the average or "blue book" price, you must ignore the fact that the vendor will profit from the sale, and evaluate the proof. If, on the other hand, that used car vendor says, "Trust me, this is a good deal," without further proofs or arguments, you are entitled to take into account the profit motive, the shady reputation of the profession, and anything else you deem to be relevant as a condition of "trust."
I am no Bush supporter, but I hate people arguing their case and making it personal. Conservatives did the same thing with Clinton, and I hated it then. The other side is doing it to Bush, and I still hate it. Where the heck is all this emotion coming from? Argue the points and don't make it personal, because then I just think you're not very intelligent and your argument is totally worthless.
Check this article out about a professor from Columbia University, Columbia teacher calls for `a million Mogadishus;' referring to 1993 ambush of U.S. servicemen.
What a fool! I think this professor needs some serious therapy, because he obviously has a ton of repressed anger. And he's an academic as well. No matter what side you fall on about the war, what good does it do to wish people to die?
This professor just adds the fuel to fire that conservatives have been saying for years, that public education is all about indoctrination by the hostile left.
The other thing I'm start to hate is ad hominem attacks against Bush. People say they're against the war, but instead of offering rational arguments for why, they will launch into saying how much they hate Bush and don't trust him. I hear very few voices of the anti-war movement, especially the ones who call up and give their opinions on radio stations, that don't within 5 minutes launch into an ad hominem attack on Bush.
Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies
One of the most common non-rational appeals is an argumentum ad hominem--or, as the Latin phrase suggests, an "argument against the person" (and not against the ideas he or she is presenting). Our decisions should be based on a rational evaluation of the arguments with which we are presented, not on an emotional reaction to the person or persons making that argument. But because we often react more strongly to personalities than to the sometimes abstract and complex arguments they are making, ad hominem appeals are often very effective with someone who is not thinking critically.
Ad hominem fallacies take a number of different forms, though all share the fact that they attempt to re-focus attention, away from the argument made and onto the person making it.
Among the most frequent ad hominem appeals are attacks on:
personality, traits, or identity:
"Are you going to agree with what that racist pig is saying?"
"Of course she's in favor of affirmative action. What do you expect from a black woman?"
affiliation, profession, or situation:
"What's the point of asking students whether they support raising tuition? They're always against any increase."
"Oh yeah, prison reform sounds great--until you realize that the man proposing it is himself an ex-con."
inconsistent actions, statements, or beliefs:
"How can you follow a doctor's advice if she doesn't follow it herself?"
"Sure, he says that today, but yesterday he said just the opposite."
source or association for ideas or support:
"Don't vote for that new initiative--it was written by the insurance lobby!"
"You can't possibly accept the findings of that study on smoking--it was paid for by the tobacco industry."
The point is that each argument must be evaluated in its own right. Information or suspicions about vested interests, hidden agendas, predilections, or prejudices should, at most, make you more vigilant in your scrutiny of that argument--but they should not be allowed to influence its evaluation. Only in the case of opinions, expert and otherwise, where you must rely not on the argument or evidence being presented but on the judgment of someone else, may personal or background information be used to evaluate the ideas expressed. If, for example, a used car vendor tries to prove to you that the car in question is being offered at lower than the average or "blue book" price, you must ignore the fact that the vendor will profit from the sale, and evaluate the proof. If, on the other hand, that used car vendor says, "Trust me, this is a good deal," without further proofs or arguments, you are entitled to take into account the profit motive, the shady reputation of the profession, and anything else you deem to be relevant as a condition of "trust."
I am no Bush supporter, but I hate people arguing their case and making it personal. Conservatives did the same thing with Clinton, and I hated it then. The other side is doing it to Bush, and I still hate it. Where the heck is all this emotion coming from? Argue the points and don't make it personal, because then I just think you're not very intelligent and your argument is totally worthless.
Someone sent me this. This is funny in a sick way.
SECURITY NOTICE
We've just been notified by Security that there have been 6 suspected terrorists working out of your office. Five of the six have been apprehended. Bin Sleepin, Bin Loafin, Bin Goofin, Bin Lunchin and Bin Drinkin have been taken into custody. Security advised us that they could find no one fitting the description of the 6th cell member, Bin Workin, at your office. Security is confident that anyone who looks like he's Bin Workin will be very easy to spot. You are obviously not a suspect at this time.
SECURITY NOTICE
We've just been notified by Security that there have been 6 suspected terrorists working out of your office. Five of the six have been apprehended. Bin Sleepin, Bin Loafin, Bin Goofin, Bin Lunchin and Bin Drinkin have been taken into custody. Security advised us that they could find no one fitting the description of the 6th cell member, Bin Workin, at your office. Security is confident that anyone who looks like he's Bin Workin will be very easy to spot. You are obviously not a suspect at this time.
A rocket lands near a shopping mall in Kuwait City, and reporter on the radio said there was an acrid smell, Large Explosion Rocks Kuwait City Mall. Scary!!!
You know people are just hiding with their gas masks on. What a strange attack. In the morning, which means very few people were probably there, and at Kuwait of all places.
You know people are just hiding with their gas masks on. What a strange attack. In the morning, which means very few people were probably there, and at Kuwait of all places.
More WMD stories from Iraq, and this one is from the venerable NY Times, Army Reports Iraq Is Moving Toxic Arms to Its Troops.
What will the french and the protestors say now? Still, I pray to God that this scenario never happens.
What will the french and the protestors say now? Still, I pray to God that this scenario never happens.
A mainstream news outlet, PBS, covered the story about the troops finding gas masks, nerve agent antidotes and chemica suits,War News Roundup - 3/26/2003.
Everyone has an agenda. The following appeared on Al Jazeera's website, Egyptian Economist: Economic Interests Guide the French, Germans, and Russians Toward Baghdad.
Thursday, March 27, 2003
So maybe my prediction about the war lasting six weeks wasn't that far off. I just found out Gulf War 1 lasted 6 weeks.
That question that reporter asked Bush and Blair this morning about how long the war will last was so nonsensical. Who can predict how long the war will last? We can't even predict when it will rain, when there will be an earthquake, and after the dot com bomb on the stock markets, we certainly can't predict the profitability of companies or their stocks. Didn't the media brush common business sense aside and say that a company without profits was worth over $100 on Nasdaq?
Who can trust the mainstream media after the way they hyped dot com companies?
That question that reporter asked Bush and Blair this morning about how long the war will last was so nonsensical. Who can predict how long the war will last? We can't even predict when it will rain, when there will be an earthquake, and after the dot com bomb on the stock markets, we certainly can't predict the profitability of companies or their stocks. Didn't the media brush common business sense aside and say that a company without profits was worth over $100 on Nasdaq?
Who can trust the mainstream media after the way they hyped dot com companies?
Wednesday, March 26, 2003
A fun link from space.com, The Greatest Myths, Hoaxes & Mysteries in Astronomy and Space Science.
According to this article, life is the greatest space mystery.
Life remains the greatest mystery of science. How did it start? Nobody knows. Does it exist elsewhere? Nobody knows. Now that astronomers have discovered planets orbiting other stars, the second question has taken on some added urgency, helping to spawn an entire new field called astrobiology. For now, astrobiologists are the only scientists I can think of who are more clueless than biologists, because they ask both of the biggest unanswered questions (the two above), whereas biologists mostly realize they have their hands full with the first one.
According to this article, life is the greatest space mystery.
Life remains the greatest mystery of science. How did it start? Nobody knows. Does it exist elsewhere? Nobody knows. Now that astronomers have discovered planets orbiting other stars, the second question has taken on some added urgency, helping to spawn an entire new field called astrobiology. For now, astrobiologists are the only scientists I can think of who are more clueless than biologists, because they ask both of the biggest unanswered questions (the two above), whereas biologists mostly realize they have their hands full with the first one.
The following is a transcript of an interview I heard on NPR on March 11 about new military strategies in Iraq if Turkey refused to allow US troops access to its country, Analysis: Pentagon Considering Other Options For Attacking Northern Iraq If Turkey Refuses To Let U.S. Soldiers Deploy There. It's interesting to reread this interview in light of tonight's news of US soldiers parachuting into northern Iraq.
People have been asking about where I heard the rumor about the US dropping an e-bomb in Bagdad to knock out Iraqi TV. Here's the link, U.S. Drops 'E-Bomb' On Iraqi TV.
CBS news reported it first, but then the story seemed to be dropped from the media. Later reports said that the bomb that destroyed Iraqi TV was probably a tomahawk. The fact that Iraqi TV was able to come on the next day discredits the e-bomb report, because if it was an e-bomb Iraqi TV wouldn't have been able to rebroadcast so quickly. You would think that CBS news is a credible source, but it just goes to show you that you can't believe the mainstream news sources or the alternatives new sources.
The Vietnam war happened years ago, and we're still discovering what happened during that war.
CBS news reported it first, but then the story seemed to be dropped from the media. Later reports said that the bomb that destroyed Iraqi TV was probably a tomahawk. The fact that Iraqi TV was able to come on the next day discredits the e-bomb report, because if it was an e-bomb Iraqi TV wouldn't have been able to rebroadcast so quickly. You would think that CBS news is a credible source, but it just goes to show you that you can't believe the mainstream news sources or the alternatives new sources.
The Vietnam war happened years ago, and we're still discovering what happened during that war.
I'm starting to hate the war coverage. I'm already bored by all the armchair quarterbacking going on by the military pundits and the media. It's worse than after a football or baseball game, and this is war people and not a sporting event.
People want instant results. It's a war for heaven's sake. The media sounds like a whining spoiled child: show me this, show me that, otherwise I'll hold my breath. The level of conversation about the war is like being back in junior high, or maybe it's the terrible two's. It's pathetic!
I heard one pundit say that the media totally misjudged Gulf War 1, and said it would take long and it didn't. The media definitely misjudged the war in Afghanistan, and said again it would take a long time and it didn't.
My best guess is the war last six weeks. I heard this prediction on the radio by a credible source, and I believe it. That freak Paul Harvey said something interesting today. He said there was a whole american batallion in Kuwait who aren't even engaged in the war yet, and they're just waiting around. Paul Harvey asked why. I'm wondering why too.
I heard Thomas Friedman of the NY Times being interviewed on the radio today, and he was asked about what he thought about the current american war strategy. Mr. Friedman as always answered the question in the most intelligent way. Friedman said he wasn't surprised, "Iraq has always been a black box militarily so we didn't know what to expect". DUH! I mean, isn't that why we had UN inspectors in Iraq in the first place, because we didn't know what kind of weapons they had.
This is why I respect Mr. Friedman. He doesn't jump to conclusions and he thinks about issues logically and analytically. He's a breath of fresh air from all the military pundits and journalists, who talk and tallk and don't seem to think about what all they're spouting about.
People want instant results. It's a war for heaven's sake. The media sounds like a whining spoiled child: show me this, show me that, otherwise I'll hold my breath. The level of conversation about the war is like being back in junior high, or maybe it's the terrible two's. It's pathetic!
I heard one pundit say that the media totally misjudged Gulf War 1, and said it would take long and it didn't. The media definitely misjudged the war in Afghanistan, and said again it would take a long time and it didn't.
My best guess is the war last six weeks. I heard this prediction on the radio by a credible source, and I believe it. That freak Paul Harvey said something interesting today. He said there was a whole american batallion in Kuwait who aren't even engaged in the war yet, and they're just waiting around. Paul Harvey asked why. I'm wondering why too.
I heard Thomas Friedman of the NY Times being interviewed on the radio today, and he was asked about what he thought about the current american war strategy. Mr. Friedman as always answered the question in the most intelligent way. Friedman said he wasn't surprised, "Iraq has always been a black box militarily so we didn't know what to expect". DUH! I mean, isn't that why we had UN inspectors in Iraq in the first place, because we didn't know what kind of weapons they had.
This is why I respect Mr. Friedman. He doesn't jump to conclusions and he thinks about issues logically and analytically. He's a breath of fresh air from all the military pundits and journalists, who talk and tallk and don't seem to think about what all they're spouting about.
I received the following in an email. I'm not sure if it's one of those email hoaxes, but it seems like a good thing to start doing. Peace in our world, what a concept!
Dear Friends,
In W.W.II, there was an advisor to Churchill who organized a group of people who dropped what they were doing every day at a prescribed hour for one minute to collectively pray for the safety of
England, its people and peace.
There is now a group of people organizing the same thing here in America.
If you would like to participate, every evening at 9:00pm Eastern Time, 8:00 Central, 7:00 Mountain, 6:00 Pacific, stop whatever you are doing and spend one minute praying (meditating, visioning - whatever works for you) for the safety of the United States, its citizens, its men and women in the military, and for peace in the world.
If you know anyone else who would like to participate, please pass this along.
Dear Friends,
In W.W.II, there was an advisor to Churchill who organized a group of people who dropped what they were doing every day at a prescribed hour for one minute to collectively pray for the safety of
England, its people and peace.
There is now a group of people organizing the same thing here in America.
If you would like to participate, every evening at 9:00pm Eastern Time, 8:00 Central, 7:00 Mountain, 6:00 Pacific, stop whatever you are doing and spend one minute praying (meditating, visioning - whatever works for you) for the safety of the United States, its citizens, its men and women in the military, and for peace in the world.
If you know anyone else who would like to participate, please pass this along.
Now that I've lost enough weight to be able to fit into most of my skirts, I went to the mall last night to buy some pantyhose. Pantyhose is so expensive! Since I haven't worn a short skirt and hose in ages, I forgot how much the stuff costs. A pair of DKNY Ultra Sheer hose, the best hose for dressy short black outfits, costs $17.
I spent five minutes contemplating whether I really needed to spend $17 on a pair of pantyhose, but I rationalized the expense and told myself DKNY is the best and lasts a long time. I can't believe I used to have to wear pantyhose every day, and had to buy the stuff constantly.
I needed to buy four more pairs, but settled on only the brands that were on sale like Nine West or Calvin Klein. Even on sale the hose still cost about $5-6 per pair, but at least they were cheaper than the $17 DKNY pair.
Strangely enough, there were sale signs in every window of almost every store. It makes me think that retailers aren't doing that well, and are desperate to lure shoppers by having sales. I don't remember March being a big sales month. Desperate mall retailers is not a good sign.
I spent five minutes contemplating whether I really needed to spend $17 on a pair of pantyhose, but I rationalized the expense and told myself DKNY is the best and lasts a long time. I can't believe I used to have to wear pantyhose every day, and had to buy the stuff constantly.
I needed to buy four more pairs, but settled on only the brands that were on sale like Nine West or Calvin Klein. Even on sale the hose still cost about $5-6 per pair, but at least they were cheaper than the $17 DKNY pair.
Strangely enough, there were sale signs in every window of almost every store. It makes me think that retailers aren't doing that well, and are desperate to lure shoppers by having sales. I don't remember March being a big sales month. Desperate mall retailers is not a good sign.
Tuesday, March 25, 2003
Disturbing news from the New York Post about Iraqi soldiers found with gas masks and nerve agent antidotes on them, CAPTURED FOES FOUND WITH CHEM-WAR GEAR.
I'm trying to find articles on the e-bomb the US military used to knockout the Iraqi television station. The e-bomb is supposedly an electromagnetic pulse bomb, which shorts out everything than runs on electronics in its range. Remember that series on Fox called "Dark Angel"? In that show, the modern world was wiped out by an electromagnetic pulse. There was an e-bomb type device used in the new movie remake of "Oceans 11" with George Clooney and Brad Pitt. And in the movie "The Matrix", Morpheus said an electromagnetic pulse was the only thing that could kill those giant metal squids that were attacking the ship.
I'm trying to find articles on the e-bomb the US military used to knockout the Iraqi television station. The e-bomb is supposedly an electromagnetic pulse bomb, which shorts out everything than runs on electronics in its range. Remember that series on Fox called "Dark Angel"? In that show, the modern world was wiped out by an electromagnetic pulse. There was an e-bomb type device used in the new movie remake of "Oceans 11" with George Clooney and Brad Pitt. And in the movie "The Matrix", Morpheus said an electromagnetic pulse was the only thing that could kill those giant metal squids that were attacking the ship.
Interesting article from the The UK Sun Online how the biased the BBC's coverage of the war is, BBC's own man blasts his bosses over 'bias' . I always thought the BBC was very unbiased, but not according to this Sun reporter.
Here's an excerpt:
In one blast, he storms: “Who dreamed up the line that the coalition are achieving ‘small victories at a very high price?’
“The truth is exactly the opposite.
“The gains are huge and the costs still relatively low. This is real warfare, however one-sided, and losses are to be expected.”
Here's an excerpt:
In one blast, he storms: “Who dreamed up the line that the coalition are achieving ‘small victories at a very high price?’
“The truth is exactly the opposite.
“The gains are huge and the costs still relatively low. This is real warfare, however one-sided, and losses are to be expected.”
This war on Iraq seems to be as much a war of words and propaganda as it is a war of military campaigns. The real time coverage of the war and the fractured reported is so weird. I'm not sure you can get a good picture of what's really going on with the war. All I can deduce from watching coverage is every reporter has a point of view and agenda, and that no one is objective.
I thought news was supposed to objective, but watching the war coverage by the american and foreign media it is obviously not. Even the BBC, which is supposedly famous for being the most objective media organization in the world, has an obvious anti-american bias.
And what's worse, the war coverage brings out the worse in the news reporting. The coverage has been on the bad news, the newsworthy stories, the sensationalist aspects of the war.
The truth of the war is out there somewhere, but it's definitely not coming from either the american or the foreign media. I am an intense lover of spin, but the spin on the war is just a bit too much for me.
I think this 24/7 war coverage will really make people take a second look at objective news coverage, and what that means or doesn't mean. My trust in both the american and foreign media diminishes daily.
I thought news was supposed to objective, but watching the war coverage by the american and foreign media it is obviously not. Even the BBC, which is supposedly famous for being the most objective media organization in the world, has an obvious anti-american bias.
And what's worse, the war coverage brings out the worse in the news reporting. The coverage has been on the bad news, the newsworthy stories, the sensationalist aspects of the war.
The truth of the war is out there somewhere, but it's definitely not coming from either the american or the foreign media. I am an intense lover of spin, but the spin on the war is just a bit too much for me.
I think this 24/7 war coverage will really make people take a second look at objective news coverage, and what that means or doesn't mean. My trust in both the american and foreign media diminishes daily.
Monday, March 24, 2003
So I know it's a bad time to go on vacation, but I'm leaving on a cruise on Saturday.
I made these plans back in January, when my friend and I thought we were going to laid off our jobs. We figured it was the only time we could afford to go on vacation before we both got laid off, so we booked. I was going to go and visit my mom sometime in April, but my aunt was visiting and staying in the house and there wasn't room for me.
As it turns out, we're both still working but now a war has broken out. Back in January, I had a feeling we might be at war by the time our cruise was underway, but my friend persuaded me that we would be safe on our cruise. I hope so.
The cruise is leaving from San Francisco, and sailing down to Cabo San Lucas. We'll stop in Monterey first, then Catalina Island off of LA, and then down to Cabo. It's my first cruise, and this one is going to last seven (7) days.
I'm excited but a little apprehensive about going, since we are at war. I'm hoping I'll be able to get away from all the depressing war news, but if there's a TV on the ship I know I"ll be watching it. Plus I'm sure I'll be having conversations with people on the boat.
It feels kind of awful to be going on vacation, while our there are pictures of US soldiers with execution gun shot wounds in their foreheads, and probably being tortured by the Iraqis. I bet some people in Berkeley are loving those videos and pictures of executed and frightened American soldiers, since they had a sign on a Berkeley freeway overpass last Thursday which said "We love you Sadam".
I have a feeling that all these anti-war protests are going to force people who are on the fence politically to make a choice, and go conservative. No data to support this, but it's just a feeling I get. People are already going that way, and extreme incidents like the anti-war protests just push many people over the edge. I'm sure this isn't the anti-war protests intent, but I believe it's what happening.
I also have a feeling that Bush will be reelected in 2004, much to the anti-war protestors chagrin, but they have themselves to blame for it if he does. And that will be ultimate irony I think of all of these anti-war protests. And I don't put it past evil John Ashcroft to roll out Patriot Act Phase II, or parts of it to crack down on the anti-war protestors. I'm sure all of these anti-war protests are making him very happy.
It's not the anti-war protestors are bad, beause they're not. They're just expressing their opinions. It's just that the violent ones are pissing people off, and worse, making businesses lose money. And if there's one single way to get the law to come down on people, it's to stop businesses, large and small, to stop making money.
If the anti-war protests really wanted to make Bush wake up and pay attention, they should have demonstrations in the heartland like in Nebraska, Texas or California's Central Valley or any other city that Bush has visited since he's been in office. He's never been to San Francisco, and he only went to NYC because of 9/11. Has he even been to Chicago? I doubt it.
The battle for American opinion has never been won on the coasts, but in the heartland. Look at where the most fierce presidential campaigning has taken place. Not on the coasts, but in the middle of the country, Michigan and Florida. There are so many more republican governors than democratic governors. That fact alone should tell you something.
I made these plans back in January, when my friend and I thought we were going to laid off our jobs. We figured it was the only time we could afford to go on vacation before we both got laid off, so we booked. I was going to go and visit my mom sometime in April, but my aunt was visiting and staying in the house and there wasn't room for me.
As it turns out, we're both still working but now a war has broken out. Back in January, I had a feeling we might be at war by the time our cruise was underway, but my friend persuaded me that we would be safe on our cruise. I hope so.
The cruise is leaving from San Francisco, and sailing down to Cabo San Lucas. We'll stop in Monterey first, then Catalina Island off of LA, and then down to Cabo. It's my first cruise, and this one is going to last seven (7) days.
I'm excited but a little apprehensive about going, since we are at war. I'm hoping I'll be able to get away from all the depressing war news, but if there's a TV on the ship I know I"ll be watching it. Plus I'm sure I'll be having conversations with people on the boat.
It feels kind of awful to be going on vacation, while our there are pictures of US soldiers with execution gun shot wounds in their foreheads, and probably being tortured by the Iraqis. I bet some people in Berkeley are loving those videos and pictures of executed and frightened American soldiers, since they had a sign on a Berkeley freeway overpass last Thursday which said "We love you Sadam".
I have a feeling that all these anti-war protests are going to force people who are on the fence politically to make a choice, and go conservative. No data to support this, but it's just a feeling I get. People are already going that way, and extreme incidents like the anti-war protests just push many people over the edge. I'm sure this isn't the anti-war protests intent, but I believe it's what happening.
I also have a feeling that Bush will be reelected in 2004, much to the anti-war protestors chagrin, but they have themselves to blame for it if he does. And that will be ultimate irony I think of all of these anti-war protests. And I don't put it past evil John Ashcroft to roll out Patriot Act Phase II, or parts of it to crack down on the anti-war protestors. I'm sure all of these anti-war protests are making him very happy.
It's not the anti-war protestors are bad, beause they're not. They're just expressing their opinions. It's just that the violent ones are pissing people off, and worse, making businesses lose money. And if there's one single way to get the law to come down on people, it's to stop businesses, large and small, to stop making money.
If the anti-war protests really wanted to make Bush wake up and pay attention, they should have demonstrations in the heartland like in Nebraska, Texas or California's Central Valley or any other city that Bush has visited since he's been in office. He's never been to San Francisco, and he only went to NYC because of 9/11. Has he even been to Chicago? I doubt it.
The battle for American opinion has never been won on the coasts, but in the heartland. Look at where the most fierce presidential campaigning has taken place. Not on the coasts, but in the middle of the country, Michigan and Florida. There are so many more republican governors than democratic governors. That fact alone should tell you something.
Life imitates TV. There was a British science fiction series shown here a couple of years ago called "Survivors". The series was about a superflu that wiped the world's population, and followed the adventures of people from London and their plight to survive.
The opening sequence for the show showed a test tube being dropped, then an asian man sneezing, and then the man flying all over the world. From the asian man sneezing, the superflu spread all over the world and killed people.
Well, check this headline out from the SFGATE.com: Mystery illness traced to Hong Kong doctor Globalization has quickly spread disease -- 386 cases in 14 other countries.
Life imitating TV? The series was created by the great Terry Nation, who also created "Blakes 7", "The Avengers" , "Doctor Who", and of all things "MacGyver".
The opening sequence for the show showed a test tube being dropped, then an asian man sneezing, and then the man flying all over the world. From the asian man sneezing, the superflu spread all over the world and killed people.
Well, check this headline out from the SFGATE.com: Mystery illness traced to Hong Kong doctor Globalization has quickly spread disease -- 386 cases in 14 other countries.
Life imitating TV? The series was created by the great Terry Nation, who also created "Blakes 7", "The Avengers" , "Doctor Who", and of all things "MacGyver".
Sunday, March 23, 2003
I'm watching the Oscars, although it seems so trivial because there's a war going on. I watch it more out of habit and history. Heck. When I was in London on vacation, my friend and I stayed up to watch the Oscars in our hotel room.
But does it really matter? What's so scary is how fascinating it is watch the live broadcasts of war battles because of the recent reality TV shows. However, this is real reality TV. Are we becoming like the ancient Romans? They watched those gladiator fights, but we're watching war live on CNN.
I try to only watch CNN by the way, only because while I was in Bali during Gulf War 1, it was the only show news program covering the war. I think it's what most of the world watches. Sadam Hussein is said to be an avid CNN watcher as well.
But does it really matter? What's so scary is how fascinating it is watch the live broadcasts of war battles because of the recent reality TV shows. However, this is real reality TV. Are we becoming like the ancient Romans? They watched those gladiator fights, but we're watching war live on CNN.
I try to only watch CNN by the way, only because while I was in Bali during Gulf War 1, it was the only show news program covering the war. I think it's what most of the world watches. Sadam Hussein is said to be an avid CNN watcher as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)