The Myth of Sisyphys, or the Great Amercian Election Game

"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Pretty appropriate for Election Day 2010 here in the Excited States of America where the same old bums are arguing that they know better than the current bums.

Yeah, yeah, I have heard the rhetoric. We are done with socialism (oh really?), the current crop of deadbeats are responsible for high debt (forget for the moment that Reagan did more damage to the US budget than any president before and until Bush II), and on and on and on.

The real issue is the amazing shortness of memory. The amazing ability for the average, and not so average American to ignore the real issues and succumb to the rhetoric without applying any thought.

Changing the make up of the House of Representatives is a nice feel good measure that your voice is heard. Forgetting that those same representatives are not beholden to you the voter, but to the machines (and funds) that got them elected in the first place. It will not get you a new job. It will not turn the economy around. It will not automatically make it rain money. But it could have some very chilling effects that most people are overlooking.

A Republican house will likely overturn many of the valuable social programs that are preventing large numbers of Americans from dropping into abject poverty. The counter argument from my libertarian friends is that it isn't the government's job to keep them out of poverty. Fair enough. So what does the well educated, hardworking individual who has been out of work for more than six months do? Really? What do they do? The societal safety net that existed in the 1920s is gone. Many would argue it was pretty much gone by the 1920s. But what are they supposed to do? Congress cannot force companies to hire, and there has been very little hiring going on in the last 18 months. Most people are down to bare bones with high debt and many are trying to work, with little success. So just what are they supposed to do?

A Republican house has been trying, for generations, to tell the average, and not so average American who they can and cannot sleep with. With the backing of the even more right-wing tea party, it is likely that this time, should they win, that they might actually get the ability to enforce this view. At risk is a woman's right to chose, the rights of union between those of the same sex and raft of other rights and privileges that have been gained over the last generation.

And then there is the continuing myth that soldiers are dying in Afghanistan to protect our way of life. Right. Spin that one a little faster, because so far I am not seeing a lot of improvement in my way of life since soldiers were sent to Afghanistan and Iraq almost ten years ago. I have seen an increase in the federal deficit, although not on the official books. I have seen a degradation of my civil rights, in the form of increased security at borders and airports, and I have seen a lot of good men and women come back in steel boxes. All to protect my way of life? Death, cost, and degradation is not my way of life, nor is it the American Way of Life.

So today is the beginning of the next election cycle. Vote carefully. The devil you know could very well be better than the devil you do not.

Just Because It Is Protected, Does Not Make It Right

His [Jones] actions likely would be protected by the First Amendment's right to free speech. The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that speech deemed offensive to many people, even the majority of people, cannot be suppressed by the government unless it is clearly directed to intimidate someone or amounts to an incitement to violence, legal experts said. (WTOP)

I have said it before. I find this reprehensible. I do not know how Mr. Jones can claim to be a man of the cloth and still think there is nothing wrong with what he is going to attempt, but I guess smarter people than me feel he does have the Constitutional right to do it.

So, go ahead and burn the book Mr. Jones. Your act reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw that said Fascism will come wrapped in a Flag carrying a Bible. What you do, you do in your own name. No ethical person would support you.

This is Not a Protest, This is an Act of Hate

The pastor of a Florida church planning to burn Qurans told CNN Tuesday while the congregation plans to go through with the action to protest the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States by al Qaeda, the church is "weighing" its intentions. (CNN)

When I heard about this, I almost spilled my coffee. And then, this quote:

Terry Jones, pastor of Dove World Outreach Church in Gainesville, Florida, who was interviewed on CNN's "American Morning, said the congregation is taking seriously the warning from the U.S. military that the act could cause problems for American troops.

The congregation is taking warnings from the U.S. military seriously? Might just as well toss the Constitution on the fire while you are at it.

Now, before you get up and say that they have a First Amendment right to burn the Quran, remember that under that same argument I have the same right to burn a Bible. Or the U.S. flag. That does not mean that it is right or proper. If this was an Iman in Riyadh, planning a national Bible burning day in protest of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, do you think for one moment that every government in the Western World would not be condemning the action? Or ordering sanctions? Or similar saber rattling? So what gives Mr. Jones, or is short sighted, double-speaked named congregation the right?

This smacks of a hate crime, and the United States Government needs to condemn it as strongly as they would condemn any other act of hate speech.

Social Gaming Takes Another Step

Target will be the first retailer to sell Facebook Credits in its stores come Sunday. The Facebook Credits gift cards will be available in $15, $25 and $50 denominations at all 1,750 Target locations and at Target.com. (Mashable)

When I read this yesterday, my first question was why? The answer I received was "what do you mean, why? huge revenue potential. huge. holiday gift cards are big business. social gaming is big business." This caused me to pause a moment. And that moment lasted more than a moment.

Maybe it is because I come from a different generation. I grew up playing sports, on teams and as an individual, against other people, in real time on a field of grass, outside under a blue sky. Hey, we used to sweat on each other sometimes. Or, as a competitive swimmer, I would compete against them in a pool. To borrow a phrase, we could see the whites of their eyes. I grew up playing Dungeons and Dragons. Laugh all you want about geeks in a basement, but these geeks were socializing, using their brains. Sure it was not always as physical as when we were banging heads on the football field, but we were socializing, face-to-face. Even today, with all of the various on-line poker games that are available to me, I would much rather sit down at a table of complete strangers and play a few hands than stare for hours (OK, minutes) at a video screen.

I have a number of friends. Some I only know through the Internet and I have been on it a long time. And I can assure you that knowing someone on-line leaves a lot to be desired. You really do not know them. You do not know what they sound like, how they react, who they are. I have been fortunate enough to meet a number of them face-to-face and get to really know them better. I wish I had the opportunity to do that will all of my on-line friends, but because of cost, distance or other reasons, I know that I will not get to meet them all.

Almost a year ago, I wrote about Social Media, or more correctly, my increasing disillusionment with it, especially Facebook. I am more convinced than ever that closing my Facebook account was exactly the right thing to do. Target's decision to sell credit gift cards convinces me even more. I played Farmville, for all of about 10 minutes and all it did was convince me that I really should reinstall SimCity on my system.

I see two dangers with these cards. The first is people converting money into...I do not even know what to call it other than air (flushing it down the drain would be what our parents would say) without even the tangible benefit of something to show for it, just so they can purchase a virtual sledgehammer, or pig, or what have you. In Las Vegas, they convert your money into tokens (chips) because of the physiological impact losing real dollars at the tables tends to reduce the actually betting. But at the end of the day, if you win, you have the option of reconverting these tokens into dollars and taking your winnings home with you. Does Facebook intend to do the same thing?

The second thing that concerns me is that there are a number of people, so addicted to these games, that they will go out and spend the money on these gift cards. And more money. And more money. And in the end you have accomplished what? You have what to show for it?

In Las Vegas (and other places) it is called gambling and there are very tight rules and regulations, imposed by the State and Federal Government on what you can and cannot do. What do we call these social games? I mean other than a money making engine for Facebook. If this does not concern you, it should. And like me, you should be asking more than just why?

Pay Grade?

"Conservatives see her as a kindred spirit who lives her anti-abortion words in the most profound way: by giving birth to a child she knew would be born with Down syndrome. Gun owners see her as authentically one of them: a hunter with a passion for the outdoors and gun freedom." (Yahoo News)

This is not the first time I have asked this question, and I am sure it certainly will not be the last...actually there are several questions here, but let's go with the obvious one first, that being HOW can you possibly support guns and gun rights and be a parent? The logic just stupefies me. I have listened to the rants and the diatribes. Everything from "if you teach them safety they will know not to pick up a gun" to "if just one person had a gun, the carnage would not have been so bad" (yes, my tongue is only slightly in my cheek).

Let's face it, there are several things wrong with today's society that were not the case when the founding fathers set down the Second Amendment. The first is that there are no wild animals out there stalking your lively hood (in most cases). Yes, there has been the occasional report of a bear in urban areas, but you are not likely to be mauled by one. Secondly, you do not need to kill your food. The bacteria living on it is a different issue, but a gun is not going to help you there. I have also heard the argument that they are necessary "should we ever need to over throw the government." If you feel that strongly, I would not advertise it, especially if you have a security clearance as the folks at both the Department of Defense and Homeland (In)security tend to frown on the citizenry holding that Constitutionally protected (?) position.

The other question that is begged here, and really, truly is a personal one, is the whole medical ethics of bringing a child to life that is genetically flawed. I do not mean a minor glitch but Down Syndrome is Mother Nature's way of saying she goofed. Prior to even the last fifty years, a child with messed up genetics would not have survived. We can arge that "every life is precious" and "if it was your child" but there are some hard, root cause issues that have to be addressed, least of which is the costs involved and the morality and ethics of when life begins.

Obama has it right, it is above his pay grade. It is not a decision for the President of the United States to make. He is just one man. It is a decision for the country, and in this case, all of mankind to make. And anyone who thinks differently has not looked at the issue as anything more than a political statement.