Bush & Miers: Not Another Computer Entry
Posted by Chris | Filed under Politics
I am very pleased that my wife is accepting me for the pseudo-nerd that I am. The only reason I say “pseudo” is because we’re poor and I can’t afford all the gadgets that would make me a full blown nerd.
Anyway, this is going to be a political entry *gasp*
I took a road trip yesterday and stopped in a fast-food restaurant (that shall remain McNameless). There were several TVs in the joint. The one I was watching was, of course, showing sports. However, as I was walking out, another TV was showing a prominent, fair and balanced news station. On the TV was our beloved President Dubya. Granted I was just walking by, so I didn’t really hear what he was saying, but I did read the captions. And having watched the station enough, I know that the captions are usually a one-sentence summary of what the speaker has said within the last 2-20 mins (depending on the weight of the topic).
The caption read (something to the effect of): “Bush: I picked Miers partly because of her religious beliefs.” And I quickly strolled past.
Now, I’m no political expert, nor did I hear the comments that he made in context. However, I think I know enough that, even if you have chosen someone on their religious beliefs for a prominent government position, you probably shouldn’t tell the media that.
That said, I turn my attention toward another aspect of the nomination, best quote from Casey from CommentSense:
I’ve delayed commenting on President Bush’s nomination to the Supreme Court because I don’t know what to think. I am shocked at the nomination of Harriet Miers, but I am equally shocked at the media’s low key response. Very few articles have come out criticizing her personally as much as criticizing the conservatives for being critical of the nomination. VERY interesting. VERY untypical of the American-media-hate-flingers. Nominating two Supreme Court Justices to the bench, including the Chief Justice is a rare honor, and my prayer is that President Bush either made the best decision, or would be compelled to withdraw the nomination. I suppose that’s a safe position to take at this point.
Another beef I have with the media, is, why do we give so much political credibility to people in Hollywood? These people are paid to entertain us, and, somehow, through the years, we’ve put them up on some sort of pedestal where they have all sorts of influence. They control what toothpaste we buy (the Olsen twins), what shampoo we us (Eva and Pantene), etc, etc.
The thing is, they only have this power because we, as a nation of iPod loving, TiVoing, streaming video watching, music downloading, and internet surfing in the bathroom people, give it to them. How do actors and actresses know so much more about politics than we do? They may have more time to look into issues, but do you really think that they take the time to? Maybe on one or two issues (read: Pam Anderson and PETA).
Okay, I’m done ranting. Any questions?
By the way, I hate to admit it, but the celebrity/political beef wasn’t an original SR idea. If I could find where I got the idea, I would link, but I forgot where I read it. And I want an iPod, have a TiVo, watch (and provide on occasion) streaming video, and download music. I just don’t have a computer in the bathroom.
Yahoo! News
Posted by Chris | Filed under Don't Even Think About It, Politics
6 Court-Martialed for Scrounging Equipment
Granted Yahoo! isn’t known for its hard-hitting news stories, it’s our homepage in our break room at work and I always peruse the top headlines @ noon each day. I usually read at least one, usually two to three stories. This one caught my attention.
Let it be noted that I am all for freeing the people of Iraq AND for bringing our troops home as quickly as possible.
But why is it that when our forces need resources, we can’t take what’s available. This story says they stole the vehicles. They STOLE the vehicles - FROM OURSELVES!!! It’s like my wife going in and using my socks (which she does) b/c mine are warmer than hers!!! These soldiers took a couple trucks in order to get their job done. By the sounds of it, the equipment was abandoned! No one ever reported the trucks as stolen or even missing! And whatever happened to “Get the Job Done By Any Means Necessary”?! What, we can go over there and shoot up the streets of Fallujah (remember, I support this war), but we can’t use our own trucks to get fuel to other troops who need it?!?! It literally blows my mind…
The report also says that the troops should’ve returned the vehicles. “Yes, we put them back in the middle of the freakin’ desert just to rot away and be an eyesore in the middle of nowhere.”
I know very little about military etiquette, but the report says “The deal was, when you are moving, if it was going to take more than 30 minutes to fix it, you left it,” as stated by an officer. Can the powers-that-be not see that it was going to take more than 30 minutes to fix these things, so they were left? What if rebel Iraqi forces would’ve gotten there first? Would we have tried to try them in the World Court on theft as a war crime? Or what if the equipment would’ve been the enemies and they left it? Could we have taken it then? Would these six have been punished the same way they are now?
You could also view this as too many levels of management and too much disconnect between the top and bottom levels. Just like in a huge corporation, the CEO doesn’t realize how each plant functions, all the CEO sees is what is put on paper in front of him/her. All he/she sees are the hard numbers — production, man hours, down time, widgets produced, widgets discarded. The CEO doesn’t know that a widget can be made several different ways—some saving time, others not. So a CEO might go in there and say, “Why aren’t you making more widgets?” Really, all one can say is, “We’re doing the best that we can with what we’re given.”
What’s really sad is these soldiers were just doing their jobs. However, 23 soldiers refused orders from a superior and nothing is going to happen to them: “Last week, the military said it would not court-martial any of 23 other Army reservists who refused a mission transporting fuel along a dangerous road in Iraq, complaining that their vehicles in poor condition and did not have armor.”
For their “crimes” these men and women are getting six months in jail and dishonorable discharge. These are men and women who are protecting our freedoms, who did the best they could with the resources that they were given.
I’m sorry guys - you can’t go around using America’s equipment like it’s yours. Because it’s not.
Four More Years!
Posted by Chris | Filed under Politics
Just announced on Yahoo.com 10 minutes ago:
Bush Re-elected; Kerry Concedes.
Thoughts?
