Friday, November 30, 2007

Why Hillary Won't Win.

I didn't think I'd be writing about this least not at this stage in the election process.
In an earlier post-Pesidential Election Predictions- I predicted that Senator Hillary Clinton would win the Democratic nomination for President but would lose the general election in Nov. 2008.I'm still holding to that prediction, though it looks as if I need to clarify things a bit.
An anonymous commenter took issue with me for writing,
"Come the televised Presidential debates in 2008, when the voters see Hillary Clinton coming across as the incarnation of the proverbial "angry ex-wife", the Republican candidate will zoom ahead.".
This commenter pointed out to me that Bill and Hillary were still married.When I wrote that particular sentence, it never entered by mind that anyone reading my blog would not have the words "incarnation" and "proverbial" in her vocabulary.Never-the-less, I feel the time as come for me to expand upon that statement.
Like it or not, the sad fact is, there are a large number of voters in this country who will decide for whom they will vote- not based on political ideas or experience or the candidate's qualifications, but on touchy-feely imagery and appearances.They will pick a candidate because on how he or she makes them feel.
There are far too many people who will vote for or against a candidate based on the candidate's gender, race, height and the amount of hair the candidate has.
The candidate that comes across better on television will be the winner.
Hillary doesn't stand a chance.She does not have a likable personality; she doesn't know how to laugh and when she begins her banshee screech on T.V., the game will be over.
She may not actually be any body's ex-wife but that is the image she conveys.Too many men will see her and say to themselves, "Oh my's my ex-wife!". Too many women will see her and say, "Holy #$%$#@&^ she reminds me of my husband's ( or boyfriend's or brother's or son's ) ex !!!".
I'm quite sure there are a good many Democrats who know that what I'm saying is the truth , but they'll be powerless to stop their party from nominating her.
Her "incarnation as the proverbial angry ex-wife" may be the biggest obstacle she has in her way but, it is far from being the only one.
Truth be known, Bill probably dreads the thought of Hillary becoming President and wouldn't stop at sabotaging her candidacy if she gets too close to winning.
I'll save that theory for another day.

Thursday, November 29, 2007

My New Comment Policy.

Starting today,I won't be allowing anonymous comments on this blog.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Thoughts on Voting with a Religious Conscience

Recognizing that "Our nation faces political challenges that demand urgent moral choices", The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops released a number of statements after their recent meeting in Baltimore "to help Catholics form their consciences in accordance with the truth, so they can make sound moral choices in addressing these challenges".

To me, one of the more significant quotes from "The Challenge of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" describes the difficulty in choosing the political party which best addresses these problems :"In today’s environment, Catholics may feel politically disenfranchised, sensing that no party and few candidates fully share our comprehensive commitment to human life and dignity".

Often, when voting, I've had to make compromises. With of the Democrats' position on abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research, it's nearly impossible for me to vote for any Democrat, but that does not mean that I support everything the Republican Party stands for. I'm not comfortable with most of the Republicans' ideas on illegal immigration, prayer in school or capital punishment.

Neither party seems to have a rational view concerning the war in Iraq. In a statement from 2006, the chairman of the USCCB Committee on International Policy, Bishop Thomas G. Wenski, wrote:

“Our nation cannot afford a shrill and shallow debate that distorts reality and reduces the options to ‘cut and run’ versus ‘stay the course.’ Instead we need a forthright discussion that begins with an honest assessment of the situation in Iraq and acknowledges both the mistakes that have been made and the signs of hope that have appeared. Most importantly, an honest assessment of our moral responsibilities toward Iraq should commit our nation to a policy of responsible transition…. Our nation's military forces should remain in Iraq only as long as it takes for a responsible transition, leaving sooner rather than later.”

When you compare the "pro-life" positions of the two parties, most Republicans I know are in favor of capital punishment with the Democrats being militantly pro abortion. I believe, however, that one would have an better chance of changing the Republicans' view on the death penalty. It would be much easier to convince a conservative Christian that Jesus is against capital punishment than it would be to convince the Democrats that the unborn have a right to life.

Health care in this country needs improvement, to say the least. I don't know if socialized medicine would be quite the nightmare Republicans make it out to be, but, I know that, should the government have control over health care, the tax payer would certainly be funding abortions and I can't go along with that.

So, what does one do on election day? There's one small conciliation; with electronic voting machines, it's easy to hold your nose while you vote.

Monday, November 19, 2007

The more things change......

.......the more things stay the same.

The American humorist,Will Rogers once said:
"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."

Judging by the photo of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama below, Democrats haven't changed since Will Rogers' era.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Presidential Election Predictions.

A number of people, using the results of national polls, believe that former New York city mayor Rudy Giuliani will become the Republican Party's presidential nominee in 2008. Most are so convinced of this, they won't listen to any contrary argument. I don't happen to be one of those folks.

The national polls can't be used as a reliable predictor at this stage of the game. Giuliani has the greatest name recognition and that tilts the scales unrealistically. The Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary will give the best indication of who the party favorite will be. Former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney holds a substantial lead in both those races. Winning in Iowa and New Hampshire will give Romney the Big Mo to carry the next primaries.

The "conventional wisdom" says that Romney can't win the Republican nomination because the party's large number of Evangelical voters won't vote for a Mormon. I'm not buying that, either. Faced with a choice between Romney's Mormon faith and Giuliani - a pro choice "Catholic in name only"- who has had several marriages and divorces, I'm sure most Evangelicals won't pick Giuliani.

I'm predicting that Romney will be the Republican candidate.

Hillary Clinton has been getting a bit of flack lately from her Democrat opponents but, in the end, she'll still take the nomination. In spite of what they would have you believe, Democrat liberals are too racist to nominate Barack Obama as their top candidate.

Come the televised Presidential debates in 2008, when the voters see Hillary Clinton coming across as the incarnation of the proverbial "angry ex-wife", the Republican candidate will zoom ahead.

I'm predicting Mitt Romney will be the next President of the United States. You heard it here first.

UPDATE: April 15, 2008.
Looks like I was wrong on all counts.

Monday, November 12, 2007

Ga. Governor turns to prayer to ease drought.

In an earlier post,Scientists a Step Closer to Steering Hurricanes I wrote a bit about the current drought in Georgia. A good deal of our rain comes as a result of hurricane activity in the Gulf of Mexico.After New Orleans was flooded by Hurricane Katrina, global warming alarmists predicted that the number of hurricanes would increase due to the rising temperatures.The opposite has happened and the decreased number of hurricanes in the Gulf has made the drought here worse.

Now, in an attempt to alleviate the drought, Georgia Governor, Sonny Perdue will host a prayer service tomorrow to ask God for relief from the drought gripping the Southeast United States. Perdue's office has sent out invitations to leaders from several faiths for the service, set for 11:45 am. on Tuesday, 13 November 2007 at the State Capital Building in Atlanta.

My own personal belief is that God chooses not to interfere with natural phenomenon. He will not make it rain just because we ask.It would serve us better if we were to pray for the guidance to be better stewards of the environment.

The Atlanta Freethought Society (AFS), along with the two national organizations for "freethinkers", the Council for Secular Humanism (headquarters in Amherst NY), and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (headquarters in Madison WI) will hold a protest against the prayer service from 11:00 to 1:00 the same day.

According to an AFS press release, which I clipped from their web site:

"A major reason for protesting is the egregious violation of church-state separation that the Governor of Georgia is leading at the Capitol at that hour flouting the First Amendment and the Georgia Constitution.

This protest will be directed at the Governor's actions on the basis both of violations of religious liberty and on the basis of absurd religious ideas.
Deeply religious Christians and other believers should take offense at this as bad religion and as a threat to religious liberty.

Deeply irreligious Georgians should take offense that someone representing us should engage in such illogical nonsense, with the potential to embarrass us all internationally.
Georgians of all religious or irreligious beliefs and of every political philosophy should take offense at this waste of our tax dollars and plain violation of separation of church and state and of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and straightforward violation of the Georgia Constitution, Article I, Section II, Paragraph VI:

"Paragraph VI. Separation of church and state. No money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, cult, or religious denomination or of any sectarian institution." ".

I'm not quite sure that a prayer service violates the First one is being forced to participate and I doubt that money is being taken from the State treasury to pay for this. What does it cost to pray?

I don't see this as a threat to my religious liberty as the AFS opines. The Governor isn't restricting my religious activities by holding this prayer.The State isn't preventing the AFS from holding their protest.

From a theological point of view, I don't believe Perdue should be praying for rain, but it doesn't upset me and I don't see the need to protest it.

Thursday, November 8, 2007

The Intellectual Dishonesty of the Modern Atheist.

Whenever I have difficulties thinking of subjects for the blog, I follow a certain routine looking for inspiration.I'll check out a couple of my favorite blogs,but if that fails, I'll go to Drudge Report for the latest news.If that doesn't give me enough to think about, I'll check out a second tier of blogs.
I was doing that a few days back. I went to a blog that I only rarely read.The young woman is certainly a talented writer but her posts are far too often filled with too much angst for my tastes.That day, she had written a piece about the possibility that she may----or may not----become an atheist.
I decided to write something about my thoughts on atheism and that called for a bit of research.
From what I've read, most modern atheists are not so much true atheists as they are anti-religion, particularly Protestant fundamentalism.
Looking at various blogs and web sites, I don't see them providing arguments attempting to disprove Islam or Hinduism although they have a lot to say about the Bible and Jesus.They seem oblivious to that fact that there are entire religions that don't believe the teachings of Protestant fundamentalism but still believe in a God.
It seems to me that if these folks were really intellectually honest, they would be arguing against "God" in all His forms.They'd be attacking the idea that there really is an underlying "creative intelligence" behind it all. That is, after all, what they claim to believe. If they could prove that this universe is just a random collection of atoms ( that appear from who knows where ) coming together under uncreated laws of physics they would not have to confront each religion individually.
On a less serious note; I went to the American Atheists website and discovered that they are planning a Winter Solstice party in New Jersey this coming December 22ND. I don't understand the point of that.Winter Solstice celebrations been associated with paganism and sun-worship.Surely, they don't subscribe to any of that.
My guess is, that most modern atheists come from a Judeo-Christian background and miss celebrating Christmas and/or Hanukkah. Having a Winter Solstice party allows them to have the Yule decorations and Santa Claus.
Ho Ho Ho.

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

The Tao te Kling

And now something for the true Geek......
It shouldn't have come as a surprise.There is actually a Klingon language. I kid you not. According to the wikipedia article:
"The Klingon language (tlhIngan Hol in Klingon) is the constructed language spoken by Klingons in the fictional Star Trek universe. Deliberately designed by Marc Okrand to be "alien", it contains many peculiarities, such as Object Verb Subject (OVS) word order. The basic sound (along with a very few words) was first devised by James Doohan ("Scotty") for Star Trek: The Motion Picture. That film marked the first time the language had been heard on screen, all previous appearances of the Klingons being in English. Klingon was subsequently developed by Okrand into a fully fledged language."
There is even a website for The Klingon Language Institute .
If that's not geeky enough for you; there's even a Klingon translation of the Tao Te Ching of Lao Tse.

Monday, November 5, 2007

On Donating Blood.

There was a time when I wouldn't even consider donating blood. There wasn't any logic behind it....I guess you can say that it just boiled down to fear- a fear based on ignorance.
As time went by,with a raising of consciousness, I realized that a life could very well depend on my blood. I began donating on a regular basis; usually, two and three times a year.
When I was on a self-proscribed aspirin regimen I was unable to donate platelets as aspirin interferes with the body's production of platelets.I started donating platelets by apheresis earlier this year. A single apheresis donation of platelets can provide as many platelets as 5 whole blood donations. Not only that, but, whole blood can only be donated every 8 weeks where as platelets can be donated 26 times a year; the process of apheresis returns certain components of the blood back to the donor.
The last time I went to donate platelets I ended up donating just whole blood instead....the young woman taking the donations didn't feel comfortable taking platelets from me because of the small size of my vein. She felt OK about drawing whole blood, however. I set up another appointment to give platelets this coming Saturday. She had suggested that I try increasing my intake of water and decrease my coffee drinking. She believes that a slight dehydration may have been the problem. It's always been difficult drawing blood from usually takes an expert. I'll try to hydrate myself this week to see if it really does make a difference.

Friday, November 2, 2007

Ending Daylight Saving Time.

This is the weekend folks living in the U.S. set our clocks back to Standard Time.......ending Daylight Saving Time (DST) for the year.
This whole idea of DST borders on the surreal.We don't really save squat. All this talk of saving energy is unproven propaganda.
It's been said that the idea came from Ben Franklin. The idea might have made some sense in the 18th or 19th century but not today. We live in a 24/7 society and people can stay up or go to bed any time they like.....there's not need to keep up this ritual of moving our clocks forward and backward.
Any money that may be saved from not having to turn on the lights at 8:00 o'clock is probably offset by the increase in automobile accidents in the days following the change.Also, research suggests that worker productivity goes down immediately after the clocks are reset.
Now, as if I didn't have enough reasons to hate the change; my son is 2 years old and doesn't live by the clock. He wakes up every morning by his internal biological clock. He'll wake up the same time next week (according to his internal clock) but for me it will be an hour earlier. One less hour of sleep for me.
Personally, I think it's just the government's way of manipulating us.

Thursday, November 1, 2007

All Saints Day

A prayer for today:
Father, all-powerful and ever-living God,
today we rejoice in the holy men and women
of every time and place.
May their prayers bring us your forgiveness and love.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, Your Son,
who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.

Today is All Saints Day, a Holy Day of Obligation in the Roman Catholic Church.In terms of Catholic theology, the feast remembers all those who have attained the beatific vision in heaven, while tomorrow, All Souls' Day, commemorates the departed faithful who have not yet been purified and reached heaven.
In countries with a large Catholic population, the custom is to attend Mass, visit the graves of loved ones and relatives as well as praying for the dead and lighting candles.
In Mexico, today and tomorrow are celebrated as Día de los Muertos -the Day of the Dead.