Boston Marathon and Finding Hitler
Does anyone else find it funny that this year's Boston Marathon was won by a fella by the name of Robert Cheruiyot - pronounced Chariot. A guy named Chariot won the Boston Marathon. Didn't they see that one coming?
I had a dream a couple of nights ago that I infiltrated Adolf Hitler's household, spotted him and turned him in after 60 years of being in hiding. Good for me.
Monday, April 21, 2003
Thursday, April 17, 2003
Saddomy Hussein
Former Iraq President Saddam Hussein has supposedly 80+ film credits on his resume of a long list of jobs. It is being reported that Hussein once starred in a gay porn film created back in the 1960s. Biographers believe it to actually be the leader himself. Since he doesn't have a country to run anymore, perhaps we'll see the return of Omar Studdif.
Believe it or not.
Former Iraq President Saddam Hussein has supposedly 80+ film credits on his resume of a long list of jobs. It is being reported that Hussein once starred in a gay porn film created back in the 1960s. Biographers believe it to actually be the leader himself. Since he doesn't have a country to run anymore, perhaps we'll see the return of Omar Studdif.
Believe it or not.
Wednesday, April 16, 2003
25th Amendment of US Constitution Misguided
I noticed this because of last night's episode of '24' where a section in the 25th amendment of the U.S. Constitution is being invoked by the Vice President on the show. The character wants to remove the President from power. I got to looking at the amendment and I think it's a poor amendment to have in the U.S. Constitution; worse than the maybe the 18th which was repealed in the 21st anyway. The 25th amendment gives the Vice President of the United States too much power and I think it needs to be rewritten to give that power to someone else. The first section states that when there is a vacancy in the Presidency, the position will be assumed by the Vice President. Even scarier (and the one that is being used in this television show) the fourth section of this amendment gives the Vice President a leverage (albeit a very difficult one to manage) to remove the President from power. That's too much power for a mere sidekick!
In our elections, the role of the Vice President is a very minor one. Officially, he (or she) serves as the President of the Senate which basically means he casts the deciding vote when there is a tie in the Senate. How often does that happen? The candidate's main and unofficial role is actually to help win the ticket for the President in an election. The Vice Presidential candidate is picked to bring in the votes on an election which means not so much emphasis is placed on whether or not he's fit to lead the country. Personally, I think the second in line for the Presidency should be the Secretary of State, not the Vice President. Some might say it is ludicrous because the Sec. of State is not an elected official, that he's appointed by the President as are all members of the President's cabinet, and we can't have a non-elected official become President. I would say consider a couple of things. First, the Sec of State is already 5th in line to succeed the President should the four people above him not be able to take the position. So there is precedent to allow a non-elected official to take office. Second, in a situation where the position of President needs to be suddenly filled outside of an election, it's probably a desperate measure that needs a desperate action. Would you want a person who was picked on his looks or home state to assume that role or would you rather have someone who was appointed by our leader because they have the skills and knowledge to run our country in some fashion.
So take away the Vice President's power in the 25th amendment of the United State Constitution. He's the election whore and not much more. (Hey that's a good rhyme for a picket sign... and so is that!) If it turns out that the Vice President has the skills to be able to run the country, then let him run in the next election so that he may pick a flunky to serve by his side.
For those of you interested in the right of succession for the United States Office of the President, it is as follows:
President
Vice-President
Speaker of the House of Representatives
President pro tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General
Postmaster General
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
This succession was established by an Act of Congress on July 18, 1947.
I noticed this because of last night's episode of '24' where a section in the 25th amendment of the U.S. Constitution is being invoked by the Vice President on the show. The character wants to remove the President from power. I got to looking at the amendment and I think it's a poor amendment to have in the U.S. Constitution; worse than the maybe the 18th which was repealed in the 21st anyway. The 25th amendment gives the Vice President of the United States too much power and I think it needs to be rewritten to give that power to someone else. The first section states that when there is a vacancy in the Presidency, the position will be assumed by the Vice President. Even scarier (and the one that is being used in this television show) the fourth section of this amendment gives the Vice President a leverage (albeit a very difficult one to manage) to remove the President from power. That's too much power for a mere sidekick!
In our elections, the role of the Vice President is a very minor one. Officially, he (or she) serves as the President of the Senate which basically means he casts the deciding vote when there is a tie in the Senate. How often does that happen? The candidate's main and unofficial role is actually to help win the ticket for the President in an election. The Vice Presidential candidate is picked to bring in the votes on an election which means not so much emphasis is placed on whether or not he's fit to lead the country. Personally, I think the second in line for the Presidency should be the Secretary of State, not the Vice President. Some might say it is ludicrous because the Sec. of State is not an elected official, that he's appointed by the President as are all members of the President's cabinet, and we can't have a non-elected official become President. I would say consider a couple of things. First, the Sec of State is already 5th in line to succeed the President should the four people above him not be able to take the position. So there is precedent to allow a non-elected official to take office. Second, in a situation where the position of President needs to be suddenly filled outside of an election, it's probably a desperate measure that needs a desperate action. Would you want a person who was picked on his looks or home state to assume that role or would you rather have someone who was appointed by our leader because they have the skills and knowledge to run our country in some fashion.
So take away the Vice President's power in the 25th amendment of the United State Constitution. He's the election whore and not much more. (Hey that's a good rhyme for a picket sign... and so is that!) If it turns out that the Vice President has the skills to be able to run the country, then let him run in the next election so that he may pick a flunky to serve by his side.
For those of you interested in the right of succession for the United States Office of the President, it is as follows:
President
Vice-President
Speaker of the House of Representatives
President pro tempore of the Senate
Secretary of State
Secretary of Treasury
Secretary of Defense
Attorney General
Postmaster General
Secretary of the Interior
Secretary of Agriculture
Secretary of Commerce
Secretary of Labor
This succession was established by an Act of Congress on July 18, 1947.
Tuesday, April 15, 2003
Friday, April 11, 2003
School Ties, Roomies Again
My old college roomate is moving in with me for the month of April. I last roomed with this guy during our college days back in the early 90's. Now it seems his relationship is finished and his apartment that he planned on moving to will not be available till May 1.
Of course I checked with my girlfriend first before okaying it. I didn't want my relationship ending as well and then both of us not having a place to stay in April. The only thing she was worried about is the constant (video) gaming that will take place. He's bringing his Xbox. I have my Gamecube. We'll never get out of the living room. I feel I should mention though that my girlfriend's concerns are not because she won't get to spend any quality time with me. Nooooo, it's because she's an addict on a couple of games herself and tries to get an hour or two of playing time in every night. She claims it's a stress reliever. I can think of other ways (more fun) of relieving stress but apparently she gets more satisfaction gaming and doing it by herself. What does she need me for? Oh the Gamecube is mine. I bring a game console to the relationship. Ah, glad I can contribute something. So she's worried about us being console hogs. We'll have to work something out. The family that plays together, stays together.
My old college roomate is moving in with me for the month of April. I last roomed with this guy during our college days back in the early 90's. Now it seems his relationship is finished and his apartment that he planned on moving to will not be available till May 1.
Of course I checked with my girlfriend first before okaying it. I didn't want my relationship ending as well and then both of us not having a place to stay in April. The only thing she was worried about is the constant (video) gaming that will take place. He's bringing his Xbox. I have my Gamecube. We'll never get out of the living room. I feel I should mention though that my girlfriend's concerns are not because she won't get to spend any quality time with me. Nooooo, it's because she's an addict on a couple of games herself and tries to get an hour or two of playing time in every night. She claims it's a stress reliever. I can think of other ways (more fun) of relieving stress but apparently she gets more satisfaction gaming and doing it by herself. What does she need me for? Oh the Gamecube is mine. I bring a game console to the relationship. Ah, glad I can contribute something. So she's worried about us being console hogs. We'll have to work something out. The family that plays together, stays together.
Tuesday, April 08, 2003
Government Needs to Respect the Press
I try not to be preachy in my column here but I'd like to remind the citizens of the United States government that in a democracy, that government works for its citizens. Let me repeat that. Government officials work for its citizens. They are the servants, not the boss. And it is the press' duty to drill the representatives of our government on the performance of the job we've hired them to do.
The first law, the first commandment, the first right established for this country supports the freedom of press. The three branches of government; judicial, legislative and executive were designed with 'checks and balances' in mind. That is they have to keep an eye on each other and make sure one does not get too powerful. Well the press is that 'check and balance' for our whole system of government and officials will be better off showing more respect for them and answering the questions that the citizens of this country have a right to know.
The American press is criticized for asking dumb questions or questions that would threaten national security or military action. It's the press' job to ask all questions, there is no such thing as a dumb one. If someone is disgusted that a reporter would ask for operational details of a military action that would threaten the soldiers in that action, he needs to realize that all the government official has to do is refuse to answer the question on the grounds of security. It's just that simple. Yes, it is! The responsibility of national security lies in the government officials hired to protect that security and not with the press members who question the performance on the job. If it leaks, it is not the press' fault. If the US Government wants to hide details that would threaten an activity, they can and should. If it leaks, then they have a weakness in their chain that needs to be rectified but they are still fully responsible. No one said their job is supposed to be easy. Being a servant of 260 million people isn't supposed to be.
Having said that, the relationship between the U.S. government and the American press actually is becoming a symbiotic one lately and has been established in a way that has never been seen before. They support each other instead of being at odds. It is a fact that the US military has used the American press to provide false information of an action to help establish a feint or communicate with threats directly - and it works! If anyone who still harbors prejudices against the American press as a threat to our nation's interest is just stuck in an archaic (and inaccurate) attitude that definitely has no place in our society today and you will be better served by removing such prejudices. You need to adapt with the times and help out or you're just in the way of this great country's evolution. You should realize that the press ensures that our money is better spent and that decisions are being made constructively by the officials who were appointed by the representatives we elected. That is in your best interest. Give them your support if you're too lazy to investigate for yourself what every government official is doing to our nation behind closed doors.
The U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld displays an example of how not to treat the American press. The man has it in for them and takes any questions posed to him as a personal attack for some reason and responds to it as a personal attack when it is completely unwarranted. He is the king of question dodging when his subordinates in the pentagon are open and have established a good relationship with the press. Secretary Rumsfeld is an example of a dinosaur official who is accustomed to treating the press as the enemy just like they did in the 'old days.' His resignation was called for by the American press years ago and had it not been for 9/11 attacks, he would have been removed from his post.
Rummy you old fart, show some respect for the American press. I guarantee your life will be a lot easier if you do. When you talk to the press that way, you are talking to your bosses, the American people, that way too. Get with the program, buy a clue, wake up, grow up or get out.
I try not to be preachy in my column here but I'd like to remind the citizens of the United States government that in a democracy, that government works for its citizens. Let me repeat that. Government officials work for its citizens. They are the servants, not the boss. And it is the press' duty to drill the representatives of our government on the performance of the job we've hired them to do.
The first law, the first commandment, the first right established for this country supports the freedom of press. The three branches of government; judicial, legislative and executive were designed with 'checks and balances' in mind. That is they have to keep an eye on each other and make sure one does not get too powerful. Well the press is that 'check and balance' for our whole system of government and officials will be better off showing more respect for them and answering the questions that the citizens of this country have a right to know.
The American press is criticized for asking dumb questions or questions that would threaten national security or military action. It's the press' job to ask all questions, there is no such thing as a dumb one. If someone is disgusted that a reporter would ask for operational details of a military action that would threaten the soldiers in that action, he needs to realize that all the government official has to do is refuse to answer the question on the grounds of security. It's just that simple. Yes, it is! The responsibility of national security lies in the government officials hired to protect that security and not with the press members who question the performance on the job. If it leaks, it is not the press' fault. If the US Government wants to hide details that would threaten an activity, they can and should. If it leaks, then they have a weakness in their chain that needs to be rectified but they are still fully responsible. No one said their job is supposed to be easy. Being a servant of 260 million people isn't supposed to be.
Having said that, the relationship between the U.S. government and the American press actually is becoming a symbiotic one lately and has been established in a way that has never been seen before. They support each other instead of being at odds. It is a fact that the US military has used the American press to provide false information of an action to help establish a feint or communicate with threats directly - and it works! If anyone who still harbors prejudices against the American press as a threat to our nation's interest is just stuck in an archaic (and inaccurate) attitude that definitely has no place in our society today and you will be better served by removing such prejudices. You need to adapt with the times and help out or you're just in the way of this great country's evolution. You should realize that the press ensures that our money is better spent and that decisions are being made constructively by the officials who were appointed by the representatives we elected. That is in your best interest. Give them your support if you're too lazy to investigate for yourself what every government official is doing to our nation behind closed doors.
The U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld displays an example of how not to treat the American press. The man has it in for them and takes any questions posed to him as a personal attack for some reason and responds to it as a personal attack when it is completely unwarranted. He is the king of question dodging when his subordinates in the pentagon are open and have established a good relationship with the press. Secretary Rumsfeld is an example of a dinosaur official who is accustomed to treating the press as the enemy just like they did in the 'old days.' His resignation was called for by the American press years ago and had it not been for 9/11 attacks, he would have been removed from his post.
Rummy you old fart, show some respect for the American press. I guarantee your life will be a lot easier if you do. When you talk to the press that way, you are talking to your bosses, the American people, that way too. Get with the program, buy a clue, wake up, grow up or get out.
Monday, April 07, 2003
From the Iraqi Newswire of Poor Propaganda
The Iraqi Minister of Information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf was gracious enough to update us on the recent activity of the coalition troops and give us information on the military's movement. According to the Minister's latest comments, the coalition forces had just recently reached the city of Oslo (Norway) and is still quite some distance from the country of Iraq. He went on to say with any luck and the wind at their backs, they might reach the borders of Iraq sometime in late August. At which time, the Minister declares, "Iraq will be ready."
The press conference that the Information Minister held was outdoors to prove that the capital city of Baghdad was quite safe. When questioned about the Minster's mysterious tick which resembled a ducking motion following a series of loud booms that could be heard throughout the city, the Minister explained, "It's a medical condition that I contracted since the start of the war-uh since late March and should probably see a doctor about it... that is if I can find one. And the sounds you hear are simply our troops running a weapon synchronization exercise so that we may be ready by the time the silly Americans reach the middle east sometime in the fall." The Minister then declared in the midst of another tick, "We will be victorious!"
The Iraqi Minister of Information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf was gracious enough to update us on the recent activity of the coalition troops and give us information on the military's movement. According to the Minister's latest comments, the coalition forces had just recently reached the city of Oslo (Norway) and is still quite some distance from the country of Iraq. He went on to say with any luck and the wind at their backs, they might reach the borders of Iraq sometime in late August. At which time, the Minister declares, "Iraq will be ready."
The press conference that the Information Minister held was outdoors to prove that the capital city of Baghdad was quite safe. When questioned about the Minster's mysterious tick which resembled a ducking motion following a series of loud booms that could be heard throughout the city, the Minister explained, "It's a medical condition that I contracted since the start of the war-uh since late March and should probably see a doctor about it... that is if I can find one. And the sounds you hear are simply our troops running a weapon synchronization exercise so that we may be ready by the time the silly Americans reach the middle east sometime in the fall." The Minister then declared in the midst of another tick, "We will be victorious!"
Friday, April 04, 2003
-Bombed In Baghdad
Here's a blog worth reading. It's managed by a resident of Baghdad. The posts aren't daily, for understandable reasons. The power is out in most of Baghdad now so I imagine we won't see updates for a long time now.
I could make posts about the going ons in my midwest city here, but I don't think anyone would find them nearly as interesting as a city under siege. That writer in Baghdad, he's so lucky.
On another note, it is my youngest brother's birthday. He turns 23 today and will be spending it with his army collegues somewhere in Kuwait. I have no way to get a hold of him and wish him a happy birthday. I hope he knows already and does so.
Here's a blog worth reading. It's managed by a resident of Baghdad. The posts aren't daily, for understandable reasons. The power is out in most of Baghdad now so I imagine we won't see updates for a long time now.
I could make posts about the going ons in my midwest city here, but I don't think anyone would find them nearly as interesting as a city under siege. That writer in Baghdad, he's so lucky.
On another note, it is my youngest brother's birthday. He turns 23 today and will be spending it with his army collegues somewhere in Kuwait. I have no way to get a hold of him and wish him a happy birthday. I hope he knows already and does so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)