It’s Illegal Stupid!

The ACLJ (American Center for Law and Justice) wants everyone to sign its petition demanding that Iran free Pastor Saeed Abedini. Mr Abedini is a former Muslim who converted to Christianity and went on to become an ordained minister with the American Evangelist Association. He also became an American citizen through his marriage to an American woman.

Because Isam is the state religion of Iran, it is illegal to preach any other faith there. Very illegal. Pastor Abedini is in jail in Iran for working with an underground Christian group there. Now the ACJL are up in arms demanding his release. They are also demanding that the U.N., the U.S. State Department and everyone else also demand his release.

I’m not sure what grounds they have for demanding his release other than him being an American. Oh yeah… he’s a Christian spreading the word amongst the unbelievers. That makes him a big deal to the ACLJ. You see they are the legal arm of the empire of rabidly anti-gay, failed politician and televangelist Pat Robertson.

What does the ACLJ get up to when not attempting to rewrite the Iranian legal code? They fight against equivalent to spouse benefits for same-sex couples. They fight to keep prayer in schools (specifically Christian prayers). The ACLJ supports the funding of faith-based social services, religious proclamations in the public domain, and often equates religious expression with patriotism. ACLJ strongly opposes the right to legal, safe abortion and provides legal help to pro-life protesters who harass women seeking reproductive services. You get the idea.

So of course they’re outraged that Iran had the temerity to lock the nice Pastor up for spreading the Gospels. One somehow doubts they would have been so outraged had he been proselytizing the joys of the Hindu faith. More to the point, I don’t think anyone should be surprised or outraged by this. It’s not like that law is any kind of secret. Especially for Pastor Abedini… He’s Iranian by birth.
He traveled to Iran with the express intent of breaking their laws. He was arrested and put in jail. What about this is surprising to anyone? How is this anyone’s problem except for the pastor, his family and friends? Should Iran embrace religious freedom? That’s up to them, not the rest of the world. It’s certainly not up to Pat Robertson and his legal goonsquad.

To all those who are outraged that he was arrested for spreading Christianity in Iran there’s just one thing to remember…. It’s Illegal Stupid!

Cheers, Winston

Here’s Why The World May End On The 21st

I’m not a “Mayan Doomsday” believer. I just think there are some limits to how far a joke can go before the Universe hits “RESET”. If the following story isn’t a sign of the end times, it really should be.

According to this article on oregonlive.com two boys aged 11 and 7 attempted to carjack a woman in the parking lot of a local church. Police responded to a call from a woman saying that her son had seen a gun in possesion of another young boy. When Police arrived, the boys bolted, but were caught beside the church. Despite being told by police to keep his hands out of his pockets, the older boy attempted to reach the gun but was prevented by the officers. Police recovered a loaded and cocked pistol from the older boy.

Because the boys are too young for jevenile detention, they were released to the custody of their parents. That’s obviously the best thing because it’s worked well so far. I’m not saying they’re bad parents. I don’t know them, or their parenting abilities. What I do know is that whatever they’re doing so far isn’t working. But hey, let’s drop them back there anyway. As soon as he was dropped off at home, the 11 year old ran off, but was quickly caught and returned to his parents. Good luck with that.

Why you may wonder would a couple of boys that young try their hands at carjacking? Personally, I think that part of the answer lies in the total lack of anything like a consequence. They can’t be detained. They can’t be charged. They’re basically walking, talking teflon. Nothing they do is going to stick to them. So let’s ship them home and wait for the story about a “random” shooting in Portland.

These kids shouldn’t be roaming around loose. They should be in a mental health facility pending a full psych evaluation and some extensive and ongoing rehabilitation. I know it’s officially terrible to talk about committing such young children to that type of facility, but they obviously represent a clear and present danger to the community around them. I”d sooner lock up a couple of alleged innocents rather than wait for them to start killing people.

We live in a world where young children will give carjacking a try and then when they do, we just cut them loose and send them home. This is only partly about gun control (there is still some question as to where they got the gun), it is more about self control and what we aren’t teaching our young people. We aren’t teaching them to respect others, or themselves. We aren’t teaching them to work for what they want. It’s a culture of “I want what I want and I want it now and I don’t care what it costs as long as I’m not paying for it.”

By letting these boys walk away from an attempted carjacking, we’re just reinforcing the idea that they can take what they want without paying for it. I may be wrong, but I don’t think that’s an idea we should be encouraging.

I don’t know how far we can go with this before the universe voids our reality check. That’s why the world may end on the 21st.

Cheers, Winston

“Public Admonishment” Should Be Public Firing

Superior Court Judge Derek Johnson has been “publicly admonished”. Why? Because the California Commission on Judicial Performance is apparently just too weak and useless to fire him.

You may now be wondering why I bear such animosity toward a person I’ve never met. Allow me to explain. During the sentencing hearing of a convicted rapist, the Dishonorable Judge Johnson made the following declaration: “I’m not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something: If someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case,”

Not only is this cretin not a gynecologic, he’s not a doctor. Nor does he possess any medical training. In short, he’s talking out his ass. More to the point, he was talking out his mass while explaining why said convicted rapist should only serve six years instead of the sixteen the prosecutor was seeking. According to Johnson, that’s what the case was “worth”. This despite the defendant having threatened to mutilate the victims face and vaginal with a heated screwdriver and beaten her with a metal Baton before raping her.

Don’t get me wrong here. Judge Derek is absolutely entitled to his opinion no matter how vile and wrong-headed it may be. He is not entitled to express it or use it as the basis of his ruling in a court of law. The judges are supposed to be impartial their rulings based on evidence and precedence. They aren’t supposed to go spewing whatever uninformed idiocy pops into their heads. Far more importantly, they shouldn’t base their sentencing judgements on it.

Let me clear about one more thing. I don’t want him removed from the bench purely as punishment for being an idiot. There is a far more pertinent and important reason. No matter what he does or says from this point forward, no victim of sexual assault will ever feel an reasonable expectation of justice in his courtroom again.

That’s why pubic Admonishment should be public firing.

Cheers, Winston

Dr Ablow Needs His Head Examined

Dr. Keith Ablow is a psychiatrist and a member of the “Fox News Medical A Team”. Despite that rather embarrassing affliction, he still feels qualified to offer the following advice to people. “Instead of getting a divorce, try a consorce.” Even though there’s no such word as consorce.

If the word did exist, the “good” doctor assures us it would mean something like this…. Don’t get a messy, expensive, painful divorce. It will be nasty for you and terrible for your children. What you need is a (made up word).

The consorce works like this. The couple agrees to continue living together as friends as friends and partners in child-rearing. They are to accept that the “romantic” phase of their relationship has ended and they should see this as an opportunity to strengthen their “platonic” relationship.

The following is a direct quote from Dr Reallystrangelove’s Guide To Consorce… “Why not just stay in the same house, continue to work together financially for the good of the family, and, perhaps sleep in the same room (without sexual contact expected by either individual)? original authors parentheses.

He also believes this is all in the best interests of any children involved. They have both parents in their lives full time and a greater likelihood of financial stability in the home. Ummm… Yeah… That’s what’s important… Financial stability and the business partners who make it possible.

So my first thought was that Doc KAblow is “nuttier than a squirrel turd”. (I don’t remember where I encountered that phrase, but I love the way it sounds). Then I started thinking maybe he has made it through his professional career without encountering anybody who isn’t BFFs with their spouse. After a few seconds of profound doubt, I called bull**it and chose option three.

Keith (can I call you Keith) has an agenda (the sanctity of marriage) to push and an ideology to promote. Clearly we can’t let something as arbitrary as reality get in the way. I’ve had the opportunity to observe the decline and dissolution of several marriages over the years and feel quite confident when I say I’ve never seen a single one where consorce would have been an option.

It’s pretty clear from his article here that Dr Ablow regards sex as the only real difference between marriage and consorce. Contrary to Dr. Squirrel-turd, sex is generally only a contributing factor, rather than a primary cause. The withholding of affection and decline in intimacy is more often a reflection of issues in other parts of the relationship. Where these deeper issues exist, the removal of the “romantic” component of the relationship isn’t going to resolve them.

That brings me to what is in my opinion his most egregiously stupid idea. Doctor Dumb claims that this is somehow in the best interest of the children. Sure, having both parents on hand is great. Financial stability is great. Growing up in an environment where love is sacrificed on the altar of expediency and commercial betterment… That’s not so great.

What are these hypothetical children learning about the foundation of a strong and meaningful marriage. Forget love, it’s all about financial stability, a nice house, the illusion is more important than the substance. What an utterly terrible thing to teach children! Love is the foundation of marriage not convenience. More to the point, love is the essential ingredient in a family regardless of marital status. That is by far the most important lesson we can model for our children, not some loveless partnership for the sake of a nice home.

That’s why Dr. Ablow needs his head examined.

Cheers, Winston

How To Scratch Your Own Back

There I was peacefully reading a Reuters article about the looming “fiscal cliff” in the U.S. When I stumbled upon this gem that almost passed tea out my nose.

With the clock running down on the budget negotiations, everyone who’s anyone is weighing in on the subject. So it’s no surprise that the chairman of the Business Roundtable would have an opinion on it. In his opinion, “We encourage both sides to work around the clock, if necessary, to avoid the severe repercussions that inaction would have on U.S. economic growth and job creation,”

Sounds good so far right? It’s just a hard working bureaucrat expressing his concern for the future of the country. We need more like him. More people who put the good of the nation ahead of their own interests. Am I right, or what.

Turns out to be “or what”. You see, the chairman of the Business Roundtable is a gentleman by the name of Jim McNerney. That’s nice you think, but so what. Here’s what… Mr. Jim McNerney just happens to be the Chief Executive Officer of Boeing. That’s right, the same Boeing that proactively cut a ton of jobs the day after President Obama was re-elected. Now Mr McNerney is lecturing about job creation because there’s nothing ironic about that. Oh yeah… Boeing also stands to lose billions of defense bucks if the U.S. sails blissfully off the fiscal cliff.

So what’s a person to do? If you’re Jim McNerney, you put on your Business Roundtable chairman hat and demand a solution to the problem so that Boeing CEO Jim McNerney can keep getting rich off of defense contracts.

That ladies and gentlemen is how to scratch your own back.

Cheers, Winston

What Created These Student Debts?

I was reading an article about the student debt crisis in the U.S. and it started me thinking about the students I know here in Canada. The national number may be lower (some estimates put U.S. student debt at $1,000,000,000,000) but on an individual basis, it’s just as painful to those who must repay it.

All of this raises the question of why this debt exists in the first place. Why do students take out loans they have no reasonable hope of repaying? Having taken the loan, why are they then complaining about their debt levels and defaulting in record numbers?

At least part of the answer lies in our societal notion of entitlement. We are trained from an early age to expect the world to give us what we want. We are taught that our jobs should be fullfilling and where possible, something we love and want to spend the rest of our lives working at. Which is why I’ve known several young people who enrolled in film school. It is their passion… but how employable is it?

That is a major consideration when looking at the student debt issue. When taking out that student loan, how many people are looking at the actual projected demand for their eventual skills. Likewise, most “academic” subjects such as English Literature, Political Science, Anthropology etc have relatively few postings relative to the number of people enrolled in each cohort. A prime example being a very pleasant young man I knew several years ago. He spent 6 years working as an investment banker to pay off his Philosphy degree. He hated working as an investment banker, but there just weren’t that many paid openings for a philospher.

Since many students have shown a fairly consistent disregard for this idea, it falls to the lenders to implement it. A simple actuarial table such as those employed by insurance companies would be a start. All that would be required would be data tracking which career paths have the highest probability of repaying the loan. It’s not perfect, but it’s a place to start.

At the same time, everyone from parents to guidance counsellors need to start rethinking the message they give their children. It’s not about doing something you love, it’s all about making a living… and repaying those loans. Most people don’t love their jobs. That’s why employers pay them to show up for work. By encouraging our young people to focus less on the “dream” job and a little more on “real” jobs, we might give them a better chance to get out from under those student loans before their own kids go all post-secondary.

I know that it’s everybody’s dream to see their children graduate from college or university. The problem isn’t the dream, it’s the nightmare. It’s a student loan that prevents them from getting a car, or a house, or travelling or any of the other things that they can’t dc when they have to spend every dime servicing a massive student loan. I’m not saying they shouldn’t get a post-secondary education, I’m just saying they should be a little bit smart and a little bit choosy about what they get.

Until people on both sides of the process start thinking it through before signing the loan application, it’s not going to change. Until then, bad decisions are what created these student debts.

Cheers, Winston

“The Beast” Is Going High Tech

John Jay High School, is part of the Northside Independent School District in Texas now requires its students to wear I’D tags with RFID chips to track students whereabouts during the school day. While some people are raising concerns about privacy, student Andrea Hernandez has a very different issue with them. Miss Hernandez believes the tags are “the mark of the Beast” as seen in the book of Revelations in the Bible.

The school has offered to issue her a tag with the chip and battery removed but this is not enough. With the support of her family, she is refusing to wear any form of ID tag issued by the government via the school. The school is being demonized in the media for allegedly threatening to expell Miss Hernandez for refusing to be tracked with an RFID chip. This is not the case.

The school district has offered a compromise, but the Hernandez family allegedly believes that “any kind of identifying badge issued by the government is the mark of the beast”. As a result, Andrea refuses to wear even the ID badge with the chip removed. That’s her right.

I don’t believe what the Hernandez family believes and that’s okay. I don’t have to share their beliefs to respect them. I would question whether either of her parents have a drivers license or social security number. Regardless of the answer to that question, what is wanted here is a little reciprocity. The Hernandez family needs to respect the school districts belief that all students need to be treated equally.

Every other student has to wear these ID tags. They have chosen to go along with the program in order to continue attending school in that district. No one is forcing Andrea to wear an ID tag. It is entirely Miss Hernandez choice. What is missing here, is the understanding that choosing not to wear the tag means choosing not to attend that school. No one is forcing her out. It’s all about the choices she is making. I’m not judging her choice as right or wrong. I simply want it acknowledged that she is the one making the decision about whether or not she will attend this school, not the school district.

Over the years I’ve attended many Bible studies and read much of the Bible. Nowhere in it is there anything to suggest that school ID cards, even ones with RFID chips are “the mark of the Beast”. It’s actually pretty clear about what that will look like. It’s nothing to do with school IDs. Unless the Bible got it wrong and the Beast is going high tech.

Cheers, Winston

Romney’s Bitter Over “Gifts”

Once in a while I suspect people of being psychic. That’s the only way I can explain them saying things that make me laugh so often. Today I would like to thank Mitt Romney for providing another ray of sunshine in my day.

Mr Romney basically said that President Obama used social programs (most already enacted during his first term) as gifts to buy votes from poor people. He bought student votes with a promise to forgive student loan interest. He bought generic poor people with free health care (Obamacare). Latino votes were apparently all about the “Dream Act kids” which will allow some of the children of of illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. For an extended time. (Ironically those most affected, illegal aliens, couldn’t vote anyway.) The list goes on.

What Mitt forgot to mention were the gifts he was offering to his voters. Tax cuts to the ultra rich and major corporations. Relaxed environmental regulations. Repeal of Obamacare and cuts to other social spending. Increased defense spending. Possibly revisiting Roe v Wade and other reproductive health laws. But of course none of Romney’s platform was intended to pander to his core constituents. Such a thought would never occur to someone who’s entire campaign was predicated on telling voters whatever the pollsters told him they wanted to hear.

What he’s really complaining about isn’t the gift-giving. He’s bitter that there were more voters interested in what the President was offering than the Republican counter-offer. That’s the whole problem with allowing women, immigrants, young and or poor people to vote. Corporate tax cuts are less important to them than affordable health care or more affordable education.

Like so many others, he seems more interested in attacking the winner instead of looking at why he lost. I guess that’s why Romney’s bitter over “gifts“.

Cheers, Winston

My Vote For President

I don’t live in the United States, I’m Canadian. Even so, as our closest neighbor and largest trading partner, they have a huge influence on us. We are saturated with American media and culture.

All of this to say that although I can’t vote in their Presidential election, I definitely have a preference. As much as it will annoy a very good friend of mine in California, I truly hope President Obama will get a second term. I’m not about to claim that he has been a perfect President. I don’t believe that there has ever been such a creature.

Even if I didn’t generally prefer Democrats over Republicans, the coverage I have seen of this race has made it clear to me. At no point in the Republican leadership race was there a candidate that I thought should be allowed to run the country. Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich none of these people seemed even marginally Presidential to me. As for Mitt Romney, his sole credential for leadership is his ability to convincingly say whatever his audience wants to hear. He flip-flops so often he’s like a living, breathing rag doll.

Long story short. Good luck today President Obama.

Cheers, Winston

Why Is It Even A. Question?

Disgraced former media mogul and ex-con Conrad Black is saying he shouldn’t be stripped of his Order of Canada.  Why not?

He is a convicted criminal who served over three years for fraud and obstruction of justice.  What part of that sounds like he should be allowed to keep one of Canada’s highest honors?  Oh, he also renounced his citizenship in order to accept a British Peerage. That’s how important Canadian honors are to him.

Yet now that his appointment to the Order of Canada is under review, he has decided this Canadian stuff is important to him.  So important in fact that the rules about such things shouldn’t apply to the mighty Lord Black.

He was told to submit in writing his arguments for not being stripped of his Order of Canada.  He is now engaged in a legal battle to give an oral presentation instead.  The judge said no, so now con Conrad is appealing.

Of course he is.  If there’s one thing we’ve learned about this man it’s his deep and abiding sense of his own importance.  The rules shouldn’t apply to Conrad Black because he is a great man and great men shouldn’t be bound by the same rules as the commoners.

Lord Black seems to have let his title go his head.  As with the aristocracy of old, he wishes to be elevated above the reach of the laws and obligations of the rest of society.  Unfortunately for him, that’s not how Canada works.

Lying, cheating and stealing your way to wealth and privilege doesn’t make you better than everyone else here.  In fact, in the eyes of many, it makes you a great deal less worthy of honors and accolades.  Like the honor of being a member of the Order of Canada.

In fact, since being a Lord was more important to him than being Canadian, maybe they could revoke the special pass that let’s his sorry ex-con ass stay here and kick him out.  Then he could move to Britain and see if anyone there cares if he’s Lord Black.  Nobody here does.

Should they strip Conrad Black of his Order of Canada?

Why is it even a question?

Cheers, Winston