Follow Me On Twitter!

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Kids' Electronic Lifestyles Threaten Biodiversity

I thought this was an interesting follow-up to my last blog entry about Mark Zuckerberg.

Click here for story: TV, Internet harming protection of biodiversity: UN

Granted this is from the UN, but it makes an interesting point. As kids become more abstracted from how nature works, they begin to think of things like plants and vegetables, and even meats, as a product. Since everything they use is mass-produced, they don't see how the food on our shelves begins: as living things.

Credit Zuckerberg, as I said last week, for getting back to the basics. Prior to the industrial revolution most people grew and cultivated the foods they ate. Most people slaughtered their own livestock for the meat that was on the table.

I run into this attitude all the time. A few years ago I bought a fresh turkey for Thanksgiving from my preacher. He used to raise them every year. Once my brother and sisters found out this turkey came from my preacher's farm and had never been frozen, then they wanted nothing to do with it.

I asked them why a turkey from Butterball, that was raised and slaughtered just like this turkey had been, but then frozen for an unspecified amount of time, was better. They couldn't answer that. All they knew is that all of the turkeys they'd consumed their whole lives came from the grocery store, and that one didn't.

Sad commentary on our modern society.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg A Trend Setter? Well, Not Really.

So Mark Zuckerberg, the man who gave us one one of the biggest scourges that planet earth has ever seen called Facebook, announced recently that he is only eating meat that he himself has killed.

Click here for story: Mark Zuckerberg's new challenge: Eating only what he kills (and yes, we do mean literally...)

First of all, good for Zuckerberg. So many people think that their meat is a product grown on trees. They never see what happens to actually produce that meat.

In fact, I blogged on this subject a while back. When Aaron Sorkin bashed Sarah Palin for hunting, I noted that Sorkin is an idiot because he admits to eating meat and using leather, but leaving the actual harvesting of those products to others. Apparently Aaron wants someone else to do his dirty work.

Click here for blog posting: Aaron Sorkin Is An Idiot

So Zuckerberg is to be commended for "disambiguizing" (I love making up my own words!) the process of harvesting meat. Of course, many will look to him as a trend setter on the issue, and he really isn't.

You see, lots of people every year harvest the meat that they provide on their dinner tables. Meats of all kinds from a variety of creatures. Those people are called hunters and farmers. Zuckerberg is late to the table on this issue, but still to be commended for not making the mistake that Aaron Sorkin made.

Now if we could just Zuckerberg to shut down Facebook.

For my thoughts in the past on Facebook, see these blog posts:

Facebook Is Rotten
Facebook Is Rotten Part 2
Facebook = Digital Crack

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Surely The Pro-Abortionists Don't Approve Of This!

Caught this headline today:

Study shows girls increasingly aborted in India

One thing that pro-abortion feminists cannot condone is singling out of female babies being aborted. Am I right? Feminists have taken up abortion as a woman's rights issue, surely they feel the rights of future women are important too.

And lest you start crowing that this doesn't happen here, bologna. I've known several couples that purposely had another child hoping it was a boy or a girl. Less scrupulous couples might abort a child over their sex, and I am sure many have done that very thing.

This has always been one of the dangers of abortion. It is bad enough that it is used as birth control, but people using it to get a designer child is appalling.

The Ultimate Warrior's Fitting Tribute To Randy The Macho Man Savage

I won't say too much to set this up, except to say that The Ultimate Warrior was, is, and always will be my favorite wrestler of all time. And the Warrior had a very fitting video tribute to Randy The Macho Man Savage, who passed away at the age of 58 last Friday. Here is the link to the video:

The Ultimate Warrior video tribute to Randy Savage

My thoughts and prayers go out to Randy's family. You will be missed.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Obama Thinks 8 Years Is Long Enough

I happened to catch this little news item yesterday.

Click here: Clinton says Obama believes 8 years is enough

Call me skeptical, but I don't believe for a minute that Obama will be happy about leaving office. Whether that is in 2013 (LET'S HOPE!), or 2017. Either way a man like Obama, with an inflated ego and a power hungry disposition, will want to hold onto his presidency as long as possible.

All you have to do is look at his handling of Nicaragua. Or how he shoved Obamacare down our throats after Scott Brown's election in Massachusetts sent a clear, strong, anti-Obamacare message. Obama is man that wants power.

This part of the article is laughable:

She (Clinton) told a State Department forum that neither she nor Obama can understand leaders who refuse to transfer power and cling to office for 10, 20, 30 or 40 years.

I have no doubt that Obama would prefer to hold onto power as long as possible. After all, most ex-presidents retire from political office after their terms in office. He'd have no where else to go. I can't imagine Obama's ego allowing him to quietly ride off into the sunset like George W. Bush has done. Nor does Obama have the class to do something like that.

No, mark my words, if Obama is reelected, God forbid, there will be rumblings in 2016 of trying to amend the constitution to allow him to serve another term, or two. Just like liberals made noise about doing at the end of the Clinton years. Liberals love nothing more than to change the rules to their benefit.

And Obama is as liberal as they come.

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

A Great Point: Waterboarding Bad, But Shooting In The Head Good?

For the last several years the left in the U.S. have been beating this "anti-torture" drum. Now we know that liberals aren't very consistent. As I pointed out in my last post, Ann Coulter took heat for suggesting 10 years ago what the Obama administration did last week: invade Muslim countries and kill their leaders. However, they are really starting to look silly now.

President Bush in his autobiography admitted to approving Khalid Shaikh Mohammed be waterboarded in order to extract terrorist information from the 9/11 mastermind. Obama and his fellow liberals were outraged by this. After all, strapping someone down and pouring water over their face is akin, in their mind, to sticking needles under their fingernails. They seriously think that.

As the days following the bin Laden killing unfolded, the question began to be raised about whether enhanced interrogation tactics (IE waterboarding) had been used to find bin Laden. The answer was yes, it had been the result of Prsident Bush's okay of those tactics.

Then over the weekend, FoxNews' Chris Wallace asked another question. Why is it okay to shoot bin Laden in the head, but wrong to waterboard Kalid Shaikh Mohammed? Especially considering that the first couldn't have been accomplished without the second? -insert chirping crickets-

I am on record as applauding the taking out of bin Laden. It was a longtime in coming. What I don't understand is how liberals could applaud that (and they did) yet be so upset about the pouring of water over a terrorist's face. Amazing hypocrisy, even for the idiotic left in this country.

And Obama now refuses to stop the investigation, and possible prosecution, of CIA interrogators. Oh, but he'll bask in the glory of their efforts in that he gave the okay to take bin Laden out based on those interrogations. What a hypocrite.

Friday, May 06, 2011

Nearly 10 Years Ago Ann Coulter Suggested What We Should Do

In the aftermath of 9/11, Ann Coulter who is an outstanding conservative columnist, made a very heartfelt suggestion about how to deal with Islamic terrorism:
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.
http://old.nationalreview.com/coulter/coulter.shtml

The left mouth breathers (redundant I know), were all in a tizzy about Ms. Coulter's suggestion. In fact, the National Review fired Coulter over the uproar that resulted.

Fast-forward to May 1, 2011. What did Barack Obama do? He invaded one of their countries and killed one of their leaders. Where is the outrage? Where is the left to demand he be punished for being so cold and callous. Obviously Obama left out the "convert them to Christianity" part, but he is very hostile toward Christianity so that is to be expected.

While I agree with the decision to kill bin Laden, and applaud the president for his (ever diminishing) role in that decision, I have to laugh at the left in this country for their blatant hypocrisy. Merely make a suggestion as a conservative, and they want you tarred and feathered. If one of their own actually carries it out, they applaud it wildly and speak of reelection.

I guess I should be used to the left's inconsistency on such matters.

Monday, May 02, 2011

Bin Laden Dead! My Thoughts

So last night, at about 1am, my wife woke me up to inform me that Osama Bin Laden was dead at the hands of American forces. I turned on Fox News and the coverage was on! Great news. Of course as more and more comes out about all of this I am finding some interesting things. Here are a few of my initial thoughts:

1) Gitmo detainees provided the information that led to Bin Laden's location in Pakistan. If Obama had closed Gitmo in Jan. of 2010, as he said he would, we may never have received the information. Even if we already had the information it is still an argument for the initial idea of opening Gitmo and detaining terror suspects there. I doubt Obama will admit this.

2) Obama HAD to have Bin Laden killed. The political firestorm of capturing and detaining him would have gone against everything Obama has been preaching since he began his run for president in 2007. Holding him indefinitely, and never bringing him to trial would have had those on the left howling in protest. No, Obama had to get Bin Laden dead, not alive.

3) Unilateral operation. Those words keep ringing in my ears. I am actually impressed that Obama had the guts to pull this off, but I am also shaking my head at his hypocrisy. Is unilateral military action right or wrong? For years he railed against it, but when it was convenient he ordered it. I am glad he did, but hope he will no dial down the anti-Bush rhetoric on the subject.

So while I am happy, and pleasantly surprised,  I am also going to be watching Obama's handling of the aftermath with keen interest. I already have noticed that in his statement last night he used I and me an awful lot.