Political Campaign Rules

Politics is war. Any candidate who does not understand that should not be running for office, because he won't win. War has rules and here is what I think they should be in a political campaign:

1. You do not lie about yourself or your stance on issues.
2. You do not lie about your opponent or his stance on his issues.
3. You do not personally attack your opponent. You only attack his stance on issues or his political philosophy.
4. You do not attack his spouse or children unless they are "picking up arms" so to speak. If they are out on the campaign stump giving speeches for their spouse, for example, they are fair game. They just stopped being an innocent civilian--they just became part of the war.

The first two rules are the most important. People don't like political ads (or any advertisement for that matter) that are outright dishonest. They understand ads that show the opponent in a negative light--as long as it is truthful. It is part of the game. But start lying about yourself or your opponent then you lose your integrity.. In politics that's all you have in the end.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 10

• If a dictator wants to stay in power he has to ban guns, keep people poor, and control the press.
• I am thinking about writing an unauthorized autobiography.
• You think there has been an opinion poll on polls?
• All rivals in a group "get" or understand each other. It does not matter if they are military rivals, sports rivals, political rivals, or what have you. They all understand the nature of the game and have the same mindset.
• I think Congressmen should not receive any gifts, trips, or favors from lobbyists. These "gifts" are just bribes, because Congressmen are public officials no different than policemen or judges. It is against the law to bribe other public officials. It should be against the law to bribe Congressmen. I don't think lobbyist or Congress would see it the same way though.
• Oliver Stone is making a film about President Bush. If he made a film about President Clinton what kind of rating would that film have? An R-rating? Maybe even an X-rating?
• Suspense movie plot: A serial killer goes after a person who steals his/her identity. Question: Who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist?
• I wonder if a socialistic liberal would ever hire a public defender if they got accused and arrested of a felony crime?
• I wonder if AARP is going to endorse John McCain for president. I think they should since they say they are an advocate for the elderly.
• A person without morality or self-control is like a vehicle without brakes. Sooner or later something bad is going to happen.

Crazy Man with An Axe Scenario

Imagine this scenario taking place. You are outside minding your own business when a crazy guy comes after you swinging an axe. You look in his eyes and there is madness in them. What do you do? Do you...

1. Yell, "stop or I'll shoot" if you have a loaded gun.
2. Run and hide.
3. Try to reason with the madman, or try to apologize to him thinking you must have offended him in someway.

If you are a police officer you would probably do the first option. You want to give him a chance of putting down the axe. If he still comes at you, you would probably just shoot him. The second option is understandable especially if you don't have a weapon or don't know any self-defense. Fight or flight is the instinct here. The only problem is he might still come after you so you better hope he runs slower than you. The worst choice is three. You can only reason with sane people. This guy might be hallucinating you're a demon or an evil alien that needs to be stopped. You do not know what is in his mind or what his motivation is. Apologizing to the madman is even more stupid. The last option will definitely get you killed. It is all about self-preservation and common sense.

Compact fluorescents bulbs can poison you

From WorldNetDaily.com (February 26, 2008):

Despite a congressional mandate banning the sale of common incandescent light bulbs by 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is warning that their compact fluorescent replacements are not safe to use everywhere.

The EPA says breakage of the energy-saving, mercury-containing CFLs can cause health hazards, especially for children and pregnant women, suggesting use of the bulbs over carpeted areas should be avoided.

For the Maine study, researchers shattered 65 compact fluorescents to test air quality and cleanup methods. They found that, in many cases, immediately after the bulb was broken – and sometimes even after a cleanup was attempted – levels of mercury vapor exceeded federal guidelines for chronic exposure by as much as 100 [my emphasis] times.[...]

Just think the Congress banned incandescent light bulbs by 2012. Nice job guys. Morons. Banning incandescent only benefits the manufacturers of compact fluorescents. When you ban a product you take choice away from the consumer. You are also insulting his intelligence by implying he cannot think and decide for himself.

At least you can't be poisoned by incandescent bulbs. Burned by them when they are on, but not poisoned. I hope by 2012 there is a safer alternative to compact fluorescents.

A Science of Reporting

In their book, The Elements of Journalism (2001), Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel talk about the principles of a science of reporting which are:

1. Never add anything that was not there.
2. Never deceive the audience.
3. Be transparent as possible about your methods and motives.
4. Rely on your own original reporting.
5. Exercise humility.

The first two principles I think are very important. Without them you just have fiction at worst. At best innuendo or gossip. Like the book says starting with the first element: Journalism's first obligation is to the truth. It should be anyway. There are other elements, the first four are the most important.

If all your information about the world is from the media and you never actually witnessed the news story first hand then what the media reports has to be accurate and objective because that is your only source. In a way they are like the Outer Limits: They control all you see and hear. The media can effect everyday events because they can influence perception of the world. So, what they report must be accurate and not have an agenda to it.

It's an interesting book that the media and even the media's consumers should read.

Glacier Woes Overstated?

From Science A Go Go.com (11 January 2008):

New research from the University of California - San Diego challenges the generally accepted belief that substantial ice sheets could not have existed on Earth during past super-warm periods.

The new study examines geochemical and sea level data retrieved from marine microfossils deposited on the ocean floor 91 million years ago during the Cretaceous Thermal Maximum (also known as the super-greenhouse). This extreme warming event in Earth's history raised tropical ocean temperatures to 35-37°C (95-98.6°F), about 10°C (50°F) warmer than today [my italics], thus creating an intense greenhouse climate. [...]

Hmmm. Glaciers surviving a global warming period. Interesting. If those glaciers could survive past global warming (caused by natural causes) then couldn't present day glaciers survive today's global warming?

The NIE Iran Report

Below is from The Israel Project.org. I subscribe to their email newsletter.

• The new U.S. intelligence report [pdf] makes U.S. intelligence look like an oxymoron. If Iran isn't working towards nuclear weapons, why does it continue to violate international laws and hide its program from nuclear inspectors? Why would Iranian leaders risk more economic sanctions if they don't have a weapons program? Wouldn't they allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to fully access their sites if they weren't pursuing nuclear weapons?
• Iran claims to have 3,000 working centrifuges. If they continue to operate successfully they will create enough fuel for a nuclear weapon in a year. Why, given that the president of Iran has said he wants to dominate the world, would we think Iran’s nuclear program is only for peaceful purposes?
• Iran has been identified as the world’s leading state sponsor of international terrorism, funding Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and Hamas, as well as Shiite insurgent groups. Iran is even recruiting its youth and students across the Middle East for suicide operations against Western targets.
• Religious extremism, particularly Islamic fundamentalism, is one of the key dangers in the world today. The Iranian president is a religious extremist who believes that it is his destiny to trigger a period of chaos, war and bloodshed in order for Islam to dominate the world.
• Nuclear proliferation is one of the greatest dangers to world peace. We must act to stop Iran before it can develop nuclear technology, because the Iranian president has said that he would share nuclear technology with like-minded Muslim countries.
• The new NIE report is ambiguous, contradictory, and hardly reassuring, but it clearly states that the timeline for making a nuclear bomb has not changed.
• Most Western countries continue to offer strong support for using economic diplomacy with Iran, led by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
• The president of Iran believes he is creating an Islamic “superpower,” which will bring down the West, including the United States. He says that he will have hundreds of millions of Muslim “holy raiders” eager to become martyrs.
• The Iranian president calls the Holocaust a “myth” and frequently calls for the destruction of Israel. If we do not act, we run the risk of placating an extremist and making the same mistake we made with Hitler, which led to World War II and the deaths of millions.
• We must act now, using more economic diplomacy and greater economic pressure, to help prevent a war.

If there is one international intelligence agency I trust above all others it would the Israels. Why? Because Israel is sitting right next door to Iran, and Iranian leadership wants to see Israel become extinct. They have a invested interest to get the best intelligence about Iran's intentions. This is not to say Israel's intelligence agency is perfect--no intelligence agency is. The intelligence agencies of France, England, Germany, Russia, America and yes Israel thought Iraq had WMDs. This was because Saddam Hussein bluffed countries into thinking he had them in order to bluff Iran. Even Saddam Hussein's top generals believed he had WMDs.

FYI: The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) is made up of 16 intelligence agencies of America. The keyword here is estimate.

Miscellaneous Thoughts Part 9

• If Satan had tempted politicians with ultimate power, not only would they take the offer but ask how soon could they get it.
• I think Jesus and Buddha would have been good friends.
• Instead of having Congress' wages increasing automatically why not have their wages freeze and have the troops' salary increase automatically.
• If socialists want a universal health care system why don't they create a fund themselves for people they think deserve health insurance. They can put their own money in it and run it as they see fit. I don't see any socialist doing this.
• I would think AARP would be in favor of global warming. After all the elderly have a low tolerance of cold weather. Why isn't AARP supporting global warming?
• I wonder if there is a self-help group for people addicted to self-help groups?
• To say the earth is warming, is the equivalent of saying you have a fever to a doctor. If that is all you say, he will ask you what other symptoms do you have, what did you do before the fever, etc. Global warming could be caused by many factors.
• If you want to tick off a liberal/socialist/communist take away their power.
• I was disappointed that the Rosetta Stone software did not have the language of Aramaic in it.
• Computer tip: Don't make a shortcut point to another shortcut; make it point to the actual program, file, or folder. If the intermeditory shortcut gets corrupted or accidentally deleted then the first shortcut points to nothing.

How Earmarks Work

Earmarks: A four-step program for cash-hungry politicians:

1. A business or local government agency hires a lobbyist and pays him/her a fee. According to Open Secrets.org the top five donors are:

   American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees	$38,673,449
   AT&T Inc	$38,076,096
   National Association of Realtors	$30,873,798
   National Education Association	$27,267,750
   American Association for Justice	$27,117,606

2. The lobbyist donates money to a congressman's campaign war chest. Nine Republican Senators (3 are out of office now) & 8 Democratic Senators each received at least $500,000 from lobbyists. In the House: 11 Republicans and 6 Democrats a piece received at least $500,000 from lobbyists
3. The congressman earmarks cash the business or gov't agency wants.
4. The business gives the congressman campaign contributions.
5. Go back to Step 3.

Source: Outrage (2007) by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann.

All parties involved in the transactions above are happy except the taxpayer. You cannot really outlaw lobbyists because that would violate the first amendment. Although lobbyists from other countries should probably be outlawed because they are really looking out for their countries best interest--not necessarily America's best interest. To limit earmarks you have to have line item veto for the president or just ban riders. The first option would be the easiest. I don't see Congress banning riders in the near future though. Also, the authors suggest letting the president impound appropriations. Another good idea. By the way the American Association for Justice used to be called the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. Why the name change guys?

One final note, The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste has a earmark reform pledge that it wants the Congress to sign.

Liberal Football

This is my idea of football if liberals ran the game:

1. There would be no score keeping because we don't want the loser I mean the losing team to feel bad.
2. If the score was kept track of then the most winning team would be handicapped by not being allowed field goals or limiting the number of timeouts. The non-handicapped team could be given a lot of timeouts.
3. You cannot name your team after a weapon or any thing that seems violent. You are better off sticking with name like roses, daffodils, etc.
4. There would be a quota for non-athletic players. For example receivers who aren't very good at catching the football or quarterbacks who are not very good throwing the football.
5. Coaches cannot yell at their players. It might hurt their feelings.
6. If the game is close by 1-4 points the losing team can ask to see all the replays to make sure the other team was not cheating or to make sure the referees were doing there job.
7. If the game ends in a tie, this a good thing because everyone wins. No need to go into overtime. Overtime causes too much stress.
8. No praying by the coaching staff or football players before the start of the game as this violates the separation of church and football and will make the ACLU angry.
9. If a football player makes a touchdown and then dances in the end zone to celebrate, he could be kicked out of the rest of the game. Dancing can hurt the feelings of the opponent's fans or the opponent's feelings themselves.
10. Fans can not boo anyone.
11. Only vegetarian food and/or low-fat foods are served at the game. We want to keep the fans healthy.
12. You cannot be proud of your team or feel it is exceptional. After all your team is no better than any other team. No waving of team flags will be allowed or anything else that might make it seem you are proud of your team.
13. If a someone enters a stadium without buying a ticket he is allowed to stay and can be escorted to a good seat. This is called the "open stadium" policy. Anyone can enter any football stadium during a game without a ticket.
14. Tackles would be disallowed because someone might get seriously injured. Instead touch or flag football would replace tackle football.
15. If the points spread is 20 or more then the team ahead has to share at least 10 points with the other team so the team behind has a fair chance to win. This is called "points justice" or "score justice."

That's all I can think of for now.

Tasermania

Here are my thoughts on tasers. I should say in full disclosure I do not own a taser. Note: This is only for entertainment purposes only except maybe the first thought.

• I believe interrogators should be able to tase terrorist suspects.
• American people should have the right to own tasers. The Constitution should be amended to allow this right.
• Not only parents should be able to spank naughty children but should be able to tase them too--although the taser's power should be lowered.
• Taser football anyone? Instead of tackling players the defense would tase the offense.

Trivia: Taser is an acronym for Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle.

Evolution is Deterministic

ScienceDaily (2007-11-19) -- Biologists have concluded that developmental evolution is deterministic and orderly, rather than random, based on a study of different species of roundworms. The researchers note that even where we might expect evolution to be random, it is not. [...]

Well, if roundworm evolution is deterministic then how about other animal evolution? I mean natural selection is natural selection.This finding in a way gives a boost to the Intelligent Design theory.

I can understand why evolutionary biologists would say that evolution is random. Randomness is the easiest assumption to make. Randomness does not need any explanation. A mutation just happened. It could be caused by when DNA failed to copy correctly or it could be caused by external factors. Take your pick: Chemicals, cosmic rays, UV rays, etc. We (the scientists) just don't know. But to say it is deterministic, you are hinting at a designer or something guiding the evolution. Now you are venturing into philosophy which is not part of the scientific methodology.

Four Rules for Republicans

These four rules comes from Bernard Goldberg's 2007 book Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right. My comments are in brackets.
One, you can never outspend Democrats. Never. It is mathematically impossible. Like trying to reach infinity, it cannot be done. [True. I think one of the reasons the Dems got back into Congress is because the voters thought well, if you are going to have a spending Congressmen you might as well have the ones who do it professionally. The bad thing was the voters forgot about the Dems loving to tax as much as they love to spend. Oops!]
Two, you can never out-compassion Democrats. They own the issue. [The Dems like to think they own the issue and the main stream media try to convince the viewers and readers that this is the case. The media likes to show the Republicans (especially the Conservatives) as oppressors. Conservatives are environmental polluters, won't feed the poor, and won't give health insurance to children. I could go on, but I won't. You get the point. But is it compassionate to try to make people dependent on the government? I never really did like the term "compassionate conservative." If you don't call yourself a compassionate conservative does that mean you are not one? (Not that I am saying President Bush isn't compassionate, just why do it at all.) If you are one then why do you need to call yourself that? Just be compassionate. It seems kind of alienating to me to label yourself that.]
Three, no matter how much money Republicans throw at the voters in an attempt to make over their image, it will never be enough. The liberal media simply won't let it happen. [The Democrats in Congress and the liberal media are basically share the same ideology, so the negatives of the Dems will not be reported (unless the negative is really bad and has to be reported or the media is fearful of losing their credibility) or the negatives will be put in a positive light. Reverse this for the Republicans.]
Finally, Republicans who try to repeal rules #1, 2, and/or 3 above will succeed only in losing an important constituency---fiscal conservatives, who will instantly see the cynical game they're playing and despise them for it. [Conservative Republicans will be better in the long run if they are honest, optimistic, and talk about conservative beliefs. They don't even have to use the word "conservatism." Non-political savvy voters won't know what the word means. This is exactly what Ronald Reagan did. They also have to learn to get their views out and be passionate about it. Drop the elitism, have faith in the American people and definitely look out for the national sovereignty of the country. Forget about the liberal media being your friend. They never will be. Go around the media and get your message out.]
All these rules are good rules to live by for Conservative Republicans.

LAPD's Muslim Plan Facing Criticism

The liberal Democrats have a habit of calling anyone who profiles militant Jihadists a racist. Take for instance the LAPD. I just seen on The O'Reilly Factor yesterday that the LAPD is being criticized for asking young Muslims to report on any extremist Imans in their Mosque. The critics call this profiling. Possibly, but this is what the FBI does all the time when they try to define a serial killer. I think what the LAPD is doing is a good idea and that all police forces should be doing this. How is this any different than the police asking for people in a neighbor to report any drug gangs in the area to them? It's not. Even if the gang would be Hispanic or black I still believe it would not be profiling. In my opinion, it is not profiling if the group is illegal or is involved in terrorist activities.

If a moderate American Muslim cares about his Mosque and his Muslim community I would think he would want to tell someone about his extremist Imam. Especially if that Imam is talking about illegal activities and wanting to undermine the Constitution. Yes, I know this is hard to do, but he/she can do it anonymously.

What Increases & Decreases Crime

What increases crime? According to the book Freedomnomics (2007) by John R. Lott, Jr., Ph. D. it is:

• Legalized abortion. An unmarried woman becomes pregnant. Her partner who feels he has been tricked doesn't want the baby and expects her to have an abortion because it is legalized. She does not want to have an abortion for whatever reason. He leaves her to take care of the baby alone.
• Affirmative action hiring in the police force. The police force lowers testing standards for new recruits so its population matches the demographic ratio of the surrounding community. It lowers testing standards by replacing cognitive or intelligence exams with more nebulous psychological tests that aim to gauge a candidate's temperament. Also, the police force implements affirmative action programs by assigning different standards to different groups of candidates in order to ensure similar pass rates.

What decreases crime?

• The death penalty. The author lists nine independent publications that support this position. Three independent publications say it has no effect either way. No publication says it increases crime.
• Police arresting criminals.
• Right-to-carry laws. The author found that significant evidence that criminals move out of areas where concealed handguns are legalized. Fifteen journal publications say that right-to-carry laws reduce violent crime. Ten publications say the laws have no effect either way. No publication say it increases violent crime according to the book.

Random-Access Warehouses

From Technology Review.com:

A company called Kiva Systems is speeding up Internet orders with robotic systems that are modeled on random-access computer memory.

Kiva Systems' CEO and founder, Mick Mountz, likens the system to random-access memory chips. The warehouse is arranged in a memory-chip-like grid composed of rows and columns of freestanding shelves. The grid gives robots access to any product in the warehouse at any time. The robots serve two basic functions. First, they deliver empty warehouse shelving units to workers who stock them. The workers might stock one unit with a mix of paper, various types of pens, and computer software, all compiled from large pallets that had been delivered to the warehouse. Then, when a consumer submits an order, robots deliver the relevant shelving units to workers who pack the requested items in a box and ship them off. "We turn the whole building into a random-access, dynamic storage and retrieval system," Mountz says. [...]

Luke's Binoculars

From Wired.com:

U.S. Special Forces may soon have a strange and powerful new weapon in their arsenal: a pair of high-tech binoculars 10 times more powerful than anything available today, augmented by an alerting system that literally taps the wearer's prefrontal cortex to warn of furtive threats detected by the soldier's subconscious.

In a new effort dubbed "Luke's Binoculars" -- after the high-tech binoculars Luke Skywalker uses in Star Wars -- the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is setting out to create its own version of this science-fiction hardware. And while the Pentagon's R&D arm often focuses on technologies 20 years out, this new effort is dramatically different -- DARPA says it expects to have prototypes in the hands of soldiers in three years. [...]

If this technology ever gets developed, the secret service could use it to protect the president and personal body guards could use it to protect their clients. Or even airline security could use it to prevent terrorists from boarding planes.

Questioning Interrogation

From National Review.com is an interesting article by Deroy Murdock. In it he talks about how the prisoners at Club Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay) are being treated and that President Bush should fight back against allegations of prisoner torture. According to his article this is how we are torturing them:

• Guantanamo’s library offers detainees such soothing titles as John A. Day’s The Book of Clouds, Pete Carmichael’s The World’s Most Beautiful Seashells, and Tony Sweet’s Fine Art Flower Photography.
• Detainees’ Islamically correct meals include fruits and nuts shipped from their home countries during special events.
• Atop taxpayer-funded [italics added] prayer mats, prayer-bead-wearing detainees hear the call to prayer five times daily. That’s when everything at Gitmo stops — including interrogations — so these Muslim fanatics can face Mecca. That’s easy: They follow the large, northeasterly arrows painted on the floor.

Oh, man when will the agony for these souls end? This torture must stop immediately! I agree that the president cannot let the press set his War on Terror agenda--they are definitely not his friend. Oh, by the way, water boarding is not physical torture--maybe psychological--but not physical torture in my humble opinion.

British Army Tests Invisible Tank

From Ananova.com:

The Army is reportedly testing secret technology which makes tanks and troops invisible.

The Ministry of Defence revealed they made a vehicle seem to completely disappear in trials last week.

The breakthrough uses cameras and projectors to beam images captured from the surrounding landscape on to a specially-adapted tank coated with silicon to maximise their reflective qualities.

Fascinating. For more invisibility technology read my Cloaking Technology blog.

Happy Halloween!

Isn't that a cool looking pumpkin carving? I believe that pumpkin came from the web site Extreme Pumpkins.com. Anyway, I saw it on the web site under the title "They Eat Their Own." If you want to look at other cool pumpkin carvings go to Pumpkin Gutter.com. Scott Cummins, the carver, does a pretty good job of carving.

Now, to the creepy. If you want to hear some good electronic voice phenomena go to South Jersey Paranormal Research web site. Especially, listen to the "Horn blaring...halt company!" one. It's loud and clear!

In the 1970s, a psychical research group "invented" a spirit named Philip. To their astonishment, Philip actually made contact with them. You can read more about this experience in the "How To Create a Ghost" article. Real ghost or not? What happened with this research group might explain some seances that are not deliberate scams. Seances should not be done anyway, in my opinion, because you never know what you will conjure up.