Global Warming or Global Whining?

Lately, especially with Live Earth having been yesterday, no one on the news can put down the discussion of Global Warming. Some agree, some disagree and neither side will leave the other alone. Personally though, I don't see why no one has tried to unite the two groups with something that everyone cares about.
What do you prefer, tiny bills or huge ones?
What about gas, $3.00 a gallon, would you prefer to pay thousands a year on that or hundreds?
Turn off lights, conserve water, maybe use renewable power. It will shrink your bills drastically.
http://www.hybridcars.com/calculator/ Take a look at this and compare your current car to the Toyota Prius or the Honda Civic Hybrid and just look at the first three columns. Ignore the rest, just look at the amount of money you're shelling out yearly. A Prius uses 30% the gas that a Hummer H3 does. That means every $100 the Hummer owner spent on gas the Prius owner saved $70 of.
Mind you, that H3 gets better gas mileage than the Chevy Silverado and that Chevy isn't alone.
Come on, tell me all that saved cash doesn't look really, really good.

Hillary

My french teacher asked the class "Do you think the United States are ready for a female president?"

I said no, not until that question no longer needs to be asked.

'New Dark Age'

An interesting subject caught my eye today. Mark Steyn predicts that we may enter a "New Dark Age" if the Muslim population persists and continues to grow. Yes, I agree, it is racist, yet, I see where he gets the point: the "majority" of suicide bombers and other known "terrorists" are Muslim.

As a result of the demographic changes in Europe and parts of Asia, Steyn
anticipates the Muslim world will have three reliable votes on the U.N. Security
Council in the not too distant future. Furthermore, by 2050, Russia well may be
a majority Muslim nation, he added.

What really caught my eye was the fact on Russia. Russia, one to two hundred years ago, Russia's majority religion was, in fact, Jewish.

Here's the link to the article: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/1/11/160759.shtml?s=lh

Then again, this "New Dark Age" is just an idea...

...that could be true.

New Presidential Speech

The President addressed the nation last night from a room in the White House Library. He summarized the situation in Iraq, admitted that he made mistakes (better late than never), and laid out his heavily-leaked and debated "new course" for Iraq. Here is what he wants:

"... This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them -- five brigades -- will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs. ..."
-President George Bush, January 10th, 2007
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-7.html

The American people are not taking this very well. It has already been established that most of the nation believes that a surge would be a bad idea, more of them saying that we should withdraw. And it's not just the electorate that thinks that, military anaylsts and the generals on the ground are generally opposed to a surge. An increase of 20,000 troops is like sticking your fist in a sinkful of water and taking it out, described one journalist. It would take far more than 20k to make a big difference, and the American people are not willing to give any more lives for this cause.

Congress isn't taking this lightly either. The Democrats and a growing minority of Republicans are opposed to this surge as well. According to The Blue State, only 12 of the 49 Republicans in the Senate back the surge. The rest are doubtful, Vietnam vet Chuck Hagel is cynical:

"I think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam if it's carried out."
-Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), January 11th, 2007
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/1/11/120902.shtml

The Democrats, who control Congress, are trying their best to stop the surge. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) introduced legislation to stop the escalation of troops and the funding for said troops. White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said that the Congress has only the power of the purse, and the President controls the military. Let's see what the Constitution says:

"Section 8: The Congress shall have power...

... To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress..."
-Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution

Tough luck Tony.

-Josh

Evolution vs. Creationism?

First of all, I want you to take a good, hard look at this: http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=536 and think about it's implications. Creationists don't bother me, creationists who shove their beliefs in your face, especially in such gaudy a way as this do.
When will people learn that faith is a personal matter and your beliefs or lack thereof are your own business. You cant be forced to think evolution is wrong by moving a small rubber brain around a board and answering questions that are meant only to throw creationism in your face and present evolution in an all but fair manner. Bullshit they're fairly comparing the two viewpoints.
That "bullfrog"'s part of their proof that evolution was impossible, showing an obvious lack of comprehension for the theory they are speaking against, at least when I argue I understand both fucking platforms....honestly, I'm speechless at how utterly stupid they had to have been to have put such a product on the market. Someone shoot me before they make the movie.

Impress me, without a dress.

On January 2, 2007 Oprah opened a school in South Africa for young girls who had suffered from rape, killings of their parents and enslavement. She spent the amount of 40 million dollars to open this school, holding 152 students out of thousands who applied.

This is ridiculous.

The floors, their rooms are beautiful. They have drawers she uses in her own home. When asked 'Why give them these beautiful hotel rooms if they don't even have things to put in them, like clothes?' She simply did not know what she was saying.

"These girls deserve to be surrounded by beauty, and beauty does inspire," Winfrey told Newsweek.

She also said she was tired of making check after check, without seeing anything (or believing), and to not be there. This school has a lot of good intent, sure. But you know the things that could of been done with 40 million dollars? Try subtracting the feeling of being in rooms you feel you don't belong in, with no food, no clothes, or even a toothbrush. An empty room that glosses nothing but I need more, not this.

These girls will surely graduate, have a nice college education, which is so rare, and soon a job. And maybe after that, some fucking clothes to put in those luxurious drawers.

What I mean is, those thousands of girls could of all had the same education, and food and clothing and a nice building with that amount. Really.

(PS: It's even more ridiculous that nearly every book that is now a best seller says 'Oprah's Book' on the side in Barnes and Nobles.)

-Yanira.

What is the best way to get to know a (wo)man?

What is the best way to get to know a man, a woman...anyone? Do you glance and look away if they're not as pretty as you are or as you want them to be? Do you converse until they bore you to tears or fuck you, whichever comes first? Do you admire them from a far, gathering worthless facts that you hope might one day impress them but really just scare them away? Do you read what they really have to say about both themselves and the word around them?
I'm Jeanette. The youngest contributer to this blog (at least as far as I know) and one of only two females. If you're one of those stalker-esque fact collectors you might like to know that I drink too much coke for my own good, like dying my hair red even though it rarely turns out well, wear glasses and happen to be bisexual. But what does all that really say about who I am? If you were trying to buy me a gift what would it be? Flowers, chocolates, a video game? Would you love me or hate me? Would you fuck me?
And...after all that, do you want to know me better? If you do, try this, read what I have to say. The best way to get to know me is to read what I have to say and try thinking about it. About what everyone here has to say, you won't find a single stale opinion among them. And if you do then we're not doing our jobs.

-Jeanette