Log in

No account? Create an account
A response for the Liberals responding to my Conservative posts. This is not for Conservatives responding to my Liberal posts, because they can keep a civil tone and do not condescend. I am a Moderate and believe in balance.

Guess I'm just a drooling idiot, eh? Guess I don't know shit about social programs. Here's a question for the high and mighty Liberals. Have you ever BEEN in the systems you are so in love with? I have, and let me tell you; THEY SUCK!

But, I'm being unfair. You guys have no Idea what I've been through, because I don't talk about it. It was an extremely dark time in my life, and in talking about I think that people will think either A: I'm trying to get attention (Oh, woe is me!) or B: I'm bragging about how I made it out. You guys deserve to know where I'm coming from and why my responses from now on to ANY extremist jerk-wad will be nothing but bile and scorn from now on.

Here's the long tale.... Read it if you dare....Collapse )
Sorry.  Forgot to add a cut.  Now I have.  Click above for the full thing.
I saw the cancellation coming from a mile away. Let's review:

Stargate: The Movie - High adventure with a streak of light-hearted fun thrown in.

Stargate: SG-1 - High adventure with a streak of light-hearted fun thrown in.

Stargate: Atlantis - Started off dark, attempting a more ensemble cast than previous versions. Few characters were likable and there was an air of desperation. Fans recoiled. Cancellation was threatened. The writers were consulted. The show changed direction and became high adventure with a streak of light-hearted fun thrown in.

Stargate: Universe - Basically it's Battlestar Stargate; the b@stard child of Stargate and Battlestar Galactica. To review:
Full ensemble cast, with a few characters high-lighted (like BSG)
Characters written "more human" (i.e. right b@stards no one can stand) (like BSG)
Air of panic, desperation and fear (like BSG)
Fans recoiled. Cancellation was threatened. The writers were consulted. Their response was, basically, "Screw the fans, this is our story." (I refer to this as GLA, or the George Lucas attitude)
Show gets canceled.

This happens anytime a spin-off strays too far from the original. Basically, the were trying to bring back BSG using Stargate so they could get both show's fans. They failed.

I'm sure the remaining episodes will be good. The characters are becoming more proactive and less reactive, or more like Stargate characters and less like BSG characters; too little, too late.

Don't get me wrong; Battle Star Galactica was great! But Stargate and BSG are not peanutbutter and chocolate ("two great tastes that taste great together"). They're more like garlic and strawberry jam. They are individualy two of my all-time favorites, but mix them together and (shudder) you end up with something vomit inducing.
Current Mood: cynicalcynical
22 September 2010 @ 11:41 am
The following is a public service announcement from your cat.


Thank you.
05 May 2010 @ 07:35 pm
If you enter a country illegally, you get:

North Korea — 12 yrs hard labor
Afghanistan — shot
Most other countries (European Union members, etc) — jail/deportation
USA — a job, driver's license, money for a place to live, health care, education, billions spent so you can read documents and signs in your native language, etc.

We have to carry passports in other countries or face jail time (with possible hard labor), deportation or even death. Is the Arizona law really that harsh?

A brief synopsis of the new Arizona Immigration law (from the NY Times):

"(1)It requires police officers, 'when practicable,' to detain people they reasonably suspect are in the country without authorization and to verify their status with federal officials, unless doing so would hinder an investigation or emergency medical treatment.
"(2)It also makes it a state crime — a misdemeanor — to not carry immigration papers. (3)In addition, it allows people to sue local government or agencies if they believe federal or state immigration law is not being enforced."

So, to summarize the summary, this law:
1) Allows detention of foreign nationals who are suspected of being here illegally, until their legality can be verified.
2) Makes a Federal law a State law as well (carrying required documentation).
3) Allows individuals to sue the Government for lack of enforcement.

Let's deal with number 2 first, because it's the easiest. By Federal law, Foreign Nationals who are in our country legally are required to carry appropriate documentation. Failure to do so breaks Federal mandate, so it breaks a Federal law. States have a difficult time enforcing Federal law, so in many cases will pass a similar State law to ease the enforcement process. Many of our traffic laws follow this method.

Keeping with traffic laws as a parallel, number 1 is easier to put into perspective. Under "reasonable suspicion", police officers can detain anyone they reasonably suspect of breaking the law. A driver is swerving, alcohol is smelled on his breath, his car smells of marijuana; all of these are reasonable reasons to hold a driver on suspicion of illegal activities. We accept this. But, what is reasonable suspicion of being an illegal alien?

We have no National Language, so being unable to speak English, while suspicious, is not enough for "reasonable suspicion". What about not having a Driver's License? By law, if we drive, we are required to carry one while we drive. What if ALL drivers who are stopped without one are detained until proof of identity can be found?

Currently, under traffic laws, police officials can already do this, but it is infrequently enforced. The same goes for providing a Social Security card to work or passing a credit check to buy/rent a place to live (OK, the second one is only policy, not a law). This law is only reiterating existing laws across the country that require individuals to carry proof-of-identity. Hey! That ties right into number 2!

The only new bit, really, is number 3. This is a radical idea. Making officials legally responsible for upholding the law? We should vote them out of office for this! We should demand an official inquiry that could cost appointed officials to be fired! We could... Oh, wait ... that's what we have now, isn't it? Currently, anyone can sue anyone for anything. It's up to the judges if they want to throw it out for absurdity. This "new law" isn't any different.

So, why is this "new law" such a flash point? It has "immigration" in the text. Politicians on one side yell "citizens rights", and get everyone rooting for them. Politicians on the other side yell "human rights" to get everyone rooting for them. When is a side going to yell "common sense"? Oh, yeah. Common sense doesn't get you any attention. Who wants that?
Current Mood: frustratedFlabbergasted
22 January 2010 @ 01:27 am
Just got back from seeing the new Eddie Izzard show. Awesome!
18 November 2008 @ 10:34 pm
Your Result is: Hobbes

Hobbes, (from Calvin and Hobbes) is understanding and kind. He's funny and always sticks to his best friend.


Take What comic character are you?
05 November 2008 @ 01:42 am
Protect us from our saviors.

This is the first election I have voted in (I’ve only missed 2 local elections in the last 20 years... Hey, they have them every few months it seems and I was out of town!) that I did not feel good about once I finished voting. I even felt unclean. There was only one individual on the entire ballot whom I thought was worthy of the job he was running for (a Texas congressman no ones heard of). The rest??? Any way we voted, we're screwed.

McCain is basically "Four more years!" Obama is "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

I'm not going to go on and on why each man isn't right for the job. I'm going to focus on my hopes for who won.

I REALLY hope his promise to tax the rich (those making 150-250k or more a year, depending on which speech you listened to) was an empty promise. Those are the guys who employ the rest of us and will just keep their profit margins up by firing us!

I hope he balances the budget and doesn't add all the new spending he promised. While I like the idea of lower taxes for myself (low end of wage earners, guys), I don't really pay much. I'll happily keep paying my current tax rate to accomplish financial solvency.

I hope he doesn't throw away Iraq. I know lot's of people in the armed services. They have told me of the wonderful changes over there. A good friend of mine, exiled in the Sadam years was able to see his family for the first time in over a decade because of what we did over there.

But our accomplishments are tenuous. They could collapse if we leave before Iraq's forces are able to fend for themselves. We might have to go over there AGAIN to throw Iran out of Iraq like we threw Iraq out of Kuwait. That just means MORE dead soldiers. We might have gone over there for the wrong reasons, but we stayed for the right ones. If we leave immediately, it was all for naught.

I hope he meant what he said about Afghanistan. Same reasons as above.

I hope he learns the difference between the Federal Governments responsibilities, State Governments responsibilities, Local Governments responsibilities and our Personal responsibilities. Maybe someone should send him a copy of the Constitution?

I hope he condemns the actions of numerous political extremist groups in this election. For example, the Black Panthers who were sitting outside of polling locations with batons in hand (the fighting kind, not the twirling kind), intimidating anyone who entered who were McCain supporters. Or maybe those ACORN yahoos (read Gulliver’s Travels for the definition of this… It doesn’t mean users of a specific search engine) who registered the entire starting line up of the Dallas Cowboy’s (American Football team for the unaware) in Nevada… Um, they are a Texas team, and while not all of them are residents of Texas, none of them have residences in Nevada.

I truly hope that when (not if, but when) he is tested in an upcoming crisis, he has the mettle to deal with it. While invading other countries is an extreme reaction to a terrorist attack (9/11), shaking a finger at a camera and bombing a few long abandoned, former terrorist training camps (World Trade Center bombing, 1993) is a pointless reaction. I hope he finds a middle ground when it happens in his presidency.

I hope he is everything he claims to be. I wish him (and all of us) well in his presidency.
Current Mood: depresseddepressed
27 August 2008 @ 07:11 pm
Current Location: Washington, D.C.
Current Mood: determineddetermined
Current Music: Hail To The Chief
04 May 2008 @ 10:02 am
When I first heard about a live-action Iron Man movie in the works, I have to say I was highly skeptical. As a comic book fan, I have been disappointed over and over on the retelling of origins in movie adaptations. Don’t get me wrong! With one or two exceptions, I have thought that the recent string of Super Movies in the past decade have been fantastic. I have just been disappointed in the way Hollywood has discarded a wealth of story arcs, characters development and back-story in search of the almighty dollar.
My fear over how well they would adapt the Iron Avenger started with the animated flick released a couple of years ago to DVD. While it was a well done story and had decent animation, they completely threw out Tony Stark’s personality, motivations and demeanor. The names were the same, but the story was changed to protect the innocent. Would they do the same to the live-action?
I was really afraid when I heard they signed Robert Downey Jr. to the lead roll. Hadn’t he been fired from numerous past rolls for (in no particular order) being late to set, not showing up to set, attitude while on set, showing up drunk to set, showing up high to set, etc.? Would he even make it to the end of production? Then, I thought “Well, he has the part of a millionaire playboy down pat. He’s kind of perfect for the roll… If he can stay clean long enough to do it!”
Then came the rumors. They had to change the origin a bit. I mean, Vietnam ended over 30 years ago. Conveniently for the writers, the US can’t stay out of other countries for too long, so they had Afghanistan to work with. At least it wasn’t Iraq. While yet another terrorist based story didn’t thrill me, I could see the need for the change.
Previews. Blast! They looked really good! How dare Hollywood give me hope that this could be a decent flick! Let me go in with low expectations and I might enjoy the movie, even if it’s sub-par. But hope? Yeah, the previews were really good. Would the movie disappoint?
Finally, I saw the movie. In a word? WOW! I loved it as a story. I loved it as an action flick. I even loved it as a comic geek! This is by far the most faithful recreation to date. And what ever you do, stay through the credits!
14 February 2008 @ 08:39 pm
Much as I hate to admit it, I am a man.
Does this mean I wish I were a woman? No. They have their own foibles and psychosis to deal with.
This does mean that I have all of the foibles and psychosis associated with being a man. I have an advantage, though. I know what they are and I fight against them when I can. What are they? I’m not sure I should post them openly. I might be thrown out of the Guy’s Club (formally known as the Men’s Club, but that seems to be associated with hair loss now for some reason) for revealing club secrets.
In the interest of better Male/Female communications, I am willing to take the risk! Here we go!

Communication: This is really not a big club secret, so I think I am safe on this one. As a matter of fact, it is well documented in Psychological Annuls, but who reads those anyway? I use language like a man. This is a fundamental difference in the way a woman uses language. What do I mean? Men use language as a tool while woman use it as a means to… well, communicate. This leads to a great amount of confusion between the sexes. Allow me to illustrate.
Tools fix things. Tools build things. Hence, when a man uses language, he is building sentences and fixing misunderstandings. If a man communicates a problem to someone, he expects that person to fix said problem. Conversely, if someone communicates a problem to a man, he believes that someone expects him to fix it.
Women use language as a means to communicate thoughts, feelings and emotions. They use language to commiserate. To get things that are bothering them out into the open so they can deal with them. If a woman communicates a problem to someone, she doesn’t expect that person to fix the problem. If someone communicates a problem to the woman, she believes that someone is sharing the problem to feel better (or commiserating).
Can you see how this difference in communication styles causes problems? If a man tells a woman about a problem, it is because he expects here to fix it. She believes he is just sharing the problem to commiserate. The problem is not fixed and the man gets even more frustrated. Conversely, if a woman tells a man about a problem, she does not expect the man to fix it. He believes she expects him to fix the problem, so he tries. This frustrates the woman because the man is interfering.
Is this always the case? No. These are fundamental, basic differences and people are extremely complicated beings. Just keep these things in mind.

That’s enough for now. I will continue this diatribe at a later date... maybe.

I do realize I communicate, for the most part, like a man. I do not apologize for this. I do, however, apologize for any misunderstandings.
Current Location: Home
Current Mood: sicksick
Current Music: none