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

How much can we save?

Nazanin Fatehi (17 years old) may get the death penalty for fighting off three rapists. She had stabbed one of them and killed another, she was also defending her 16-year-old daughter who were both pinned to the ground as they tried to escape. Thousands are trying to see why they would sentence this girl to hang. According the Iranian law, 'One Man's life is worth twice as much as a woman's life.' The retrial is set for January 10. There is a petition online.

Here it is.

Another really weird way I personally think to support Nazanin, is to attend a reading of The Vagina Monologues. I've been to one and I really don't see how this will make people aware of what this global fight against violence toward women is. But anyways it supports it so that's good:

Check if there's a show in your area, gives good laughs.

I was reading letters concerning an article on an American soldier that plotted with two other American soldiers to rape this girl that lived nearby where they were stationed at. They locked the family in their room and raped her, killing the family and the girl afterwards. People were appalled saying how dare they write an article on the soldiers that are trying to help, they already have it bad. Here are two different letters.

"I'd like to thank you for running the article about the soldier Steven Green and the horrors he committed in Iraq ["Soldier, Rapist, Killer"]. I'm an American Muslim, and it makes me furious to hear about instances like this where American soldiers victimize the people they're allegedly helping. It makes America--as well as the rest of the hardworking soldiers--look bad. I'm glad you published this article because we hear about American soldiers dying every day, but rarely do we ever get a picture of the other side."
Angelique, 22, Ozone Park, NY.

+

"You should be ashamed of the story "Soldier, Rapist, Killer." There is already enough negative press press concerning our soldiers, and it is awful of you to add to it. Be different from media today and publish a story on the good troops are doing overseas. I know that I, along with many military wives, girlfriends, and fiancees, would appreciate it."
Kasey, 21, Fort Hood, TX.

Some people are pretty amazing. And yes, This was from my Seventeen issue of February. What do you guys think? I think Kasey hasn't heard many of these stories either like me, if she knew someone like she knew her boyfriend there, I think she'd think different. Too many people are subjective. Bye.

-Yanira (First actual blog!)

Blog Update: Feeds

http://feeds.feedburner.com/AMorePleasantBlog

You can now better keep track of posts on this blog through that site. You can either read the blog through that link, subscribe to one of the many feed options they list (I now have A More Pleasant Blog on my Google homepage ^_^), or, if you use Firefox, you could've subscribed to the feed beforehand using the little chiclet to the right of the url.

Check out how cool this is:


If you don't know what a web feed is, read up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_feed

Have fun!

-Josh

And even Thomas Jefferson...

What would Thomas Jefferson say about the current state of the country? What would he say about our laws, our policies, our viewpoints? Is this country what he and the other Fathers saw as the future of their budding democracy? If not, can we still reach their high expectations?

What would Thomas Jefferson say about Keith Ellison, the first Muslim to ever be elected to Congress? Jefferson was a strong proponent of religious freedom, being well-read in whatever beliefs he could and helping shape the Government into a tolerant one. He would surely be overjoyed, or at least indifferent to the idea. For someone to overcome the sterotypes of their religion and to succeed in the political spectrum regardless of their party and position would be seen as remarkable by him, especially in times such as these.

But wait, there's a catch. Representatives take the office collectively, and without fluff. However, they also take seperate oaths of office with the Speaker of the House. This is mainly a photo-op. He goes up to Nancy Pelosi, she swears him in with hand on the Bible, and the photographers go nuts.

But Keith wanted something different. Instead of taking his photo-op oath on the "traditional" Bible, he announced that he will be sworn in on the Qur'an.

And the loonies in Washington went ape-shit. They attacked him left and right for wanting to do so, the head chicken in the pack being Virginia Rep. Virgil Goode, who called Ellison's humble request "a threat to American values." This is nothing but pure bigotry on Goode's part.

But what is Keithy to do? Admit defeat and praise Jesus? Hallelujah! Lawd Amighty! He wasn't willing to do that. He defend his request as anyone would, but the attack from the Right was unrelenting. They claimed that the Bible is the main base of American Law, and as such, no matter what Ellison's religion, he should show his respect for the book, and that is partly true. The Bible did have a crucial role in the shaping of this country, and most of the Founders were religious (Deists, but religious), Jefferson among them. But should that mean that Ellison is wrong?

Keith was not going to back down, and he had a plan, a plan that is one of the most politically-savvy moves I have seen in a long time. After a month of waiting, Mr. Ellison made an announcement: yes, he will still be sworn in on the Qur'an, but the specific Qur'an he will be sworn in on will be one owned by—you guessed it—Thomas Jefferson.

"He wanted to use a Koran that was special," said Mark Dimunation, chief of the rare book and special collections division at the Library of Congress, who was contacted by the Minnesota Dem early in December. Dimunation, who grew up in Ellison's 5th District, was happy to help.

Jefferson's copy is an English translation by George Sale published in the 1750s; it survived the 1851 fire that destroyed most of Jefferson's collection and has his customary initialing on the pages. This isn't the first historic book used for swearing-in ceremonies -- the Library has allowed VIlPs to use rare Bibles for inaugurations and other special occasions. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/03/AR2007010300075.htm)

Eat that, bigots. That is a very smart move, a VERY smart move, and I applaud him for having the intelligence to come up with it. The justification of this move was stated eloquently by Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert: "Keith is paying respect not only to the founding fathers' belief in religious freedom but the Constitution itself."

How will Virgil Goode react to that? Who can say? Who cares? It'll all be over in 10 seconds, and we'll all move on, though some will take longer than others.

-Josh

Not Too Amazing

Just a few minutes ago the body of President Gerald R. Ford was driven to his museum in Grand Rapids, Michigan, past a crowd of admirers who were willing to wait outside on a cold, January day just to catch a glimpse of the hearse as it passed. Waiting at the museum was his wife, Betty Ford, and a small army of children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren, as well as the presidents of the University of Michigan and Yale, the mayor of Grand Rapids, and former President Jimmy Carter. Tomorrow's ceremony will be shorter, with eulogies from Jimmy Carter, Donald Rumsfeld, the Cheneys, and the Ford children. But today is today. Ford's flag-drapped casket was revealed in the back of the hearse to the tune of "Hail to the Chief" and all was serene and quiet across the plains...

...until the bagpiper began. Ford had specific requests for his funeral, he had picked out his exact burial spot and all the rituals that would accompany him into the ground. One of his requests was for a bagpiper to play the hymn "Amazing Grace" as his casket was brought into his museum for the public to show their appreciation. And the city of Grand Rapids answered his request, producing a police bagpiper to play at the ceremony.

Apparently they like that.

Now, I'm not the biggest fan of the bagpipes. They are generally loud and annoying. But the guy they dug up (forgive the burial pun) was absolutely dreadful. When I think of a good bagpiper, I think of a skilled someone able to use that despicable sack of noise to lure us into a soft, pastoral land far from the white noise of the city, invoking images of Burns' Scotland.

This numb-nut must not have practiced enough.

The sound that came out of the bagpipes as the Honor Guard beared Ford's body into the museum was not "Amazing Grace," and I would deny its encore on the grounds that it is a cruel and unusual punishment to all within the absolute threshold of hearing. The rendition, for lack of a better term, was even more squeaky and out-of-tune than most bagpipe preformances, and listening to it brought to mind a million wet sneakers running across an unbegotten and boundless linoleum floor. I think even Betty Ford, in her quiet mourning, was thinking "who is that and why are they strangling a cat?"

And the icing on the cake comes from Norah O'Donnell, who is that is currently covering the service for MSNBC, who commented on how beautiful the music was. I'd give an exact quote but it was too ridiculous to remember. Thank God for the choir chiming in during the ceremony, for helping to reunite my torn eardrums and easing my mind's pain. Will they pardon the bagpiper in the end? Guiltier men have gone free.

R.I.P Jerry. I hope they play better music in Heaven.

-Josh