The blog for those just a lottery win away from wealth

About < Liberal Blogs >

 
WILL THE SUPREME COURT GO TO POT?

The Supreme Court is currently considering arguments about the suitability and necessity of medical marijuana.

The issue centers on whether states can adopt laws that allow residents to use medical marijuana despite federal laws banning the substance. Ten states have passed medical marijuana laws: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.

Diane Monson and Angel McClary Raich, residents of California have filed a lawsuit that seeks to make it unconstitutional to prosecute patients growing and using medical marijuana upon the recommendation of a physician.

Raich has been diagnosed with more than 10 serious medical conditions, including an inoperable brain tumor and several chronic pain disorders. Monson has severe chronic back pain and constant, painful muscle spasms.

Marijuana relives some of their pain and allows food to be consumed without nausea. Without this help, both would be confined to wheelchairs, and Raich would probably die due to malnutrition.

Opponents, who are generally not trained in medicine, unless they are pharmaceutical corporation lobbyists, claim that there are no medical benefits to be derived from marijuana.

You'll note too that the ant-pot scare commercials are hitting the airwaves again. It's no coincidence; they always get dragged out whenever marijuana is on trial or up for a legalization vote somewhere or another.

These public service announcements appeal to probably alcoholic parents to keep a close eye on their kids.

Shouldn't they be doing this without being chided?

Gone is the dog and pony show of former HEW Secretaries Donna Shalala and Joseph Califano, who used to tour the country spouting off inaccuracies about pot being highly addictive, and possessing terrible, but unnamed, side effects.

There are however hordes of other grim faced purveyors of fear gleefully being interviewed by virtually every talking head on the news channels.

The warnings are always the same, that marijuana is highly addictive and destroys the brain. If that were true the country would be littered with millions of blithering idiots compliments of the freer times of the '60's.

It appears to me that these prophets of doom have confused pot use with the characteristics of excess alcohol use. Their inaccuracies are probably the result of foggy minds caused by their own use of "legal" drugs provided by the pharmaceutical corporations.

The Federal Government likes playing games with States rights. When an issue arises that the Feds wish to control, it is declared to be within the jurisdiction of D.C.

If the item up for debate is one that will not profit the D.C. politicos, or if it's a lose-lose situation, a determination that the States should handle it will be forthcoming.

In this case the real issue isn't whether or not pot helps seriously ill people, it's about corporate protectionism.

America's pharmaceutical companies are concerned about a cheap or free remedy for simple stomach upset, or a replacement for the millions of tranquilizers and other mood altering drugs taken on a daily basis.

And, of course, let's not forget America's premier beer providers, Anheuser-Busch and Coors. The last thing they want is a substitute for their brain burning, liver-killing poisons.

We'll see soon enough with whom the High Court sides.





Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 12/07/2004 08:14:00 PM

 
IT'S PAYBACK TIME FOR BUSH

The margin of victory in last Tuesday's Popular Vote, the only tally that makes sense and should count, was approximately 3.5 million, not a lot really, considering that over 100 million votes were cast.

However the Republicans interpret this as a landslide, and according to Bush it has provided him with "capital," a variant of claiming that he has a mandate from the people.

According to the political pundits and analysts, and the Republican election strategists, President Bush won the election largely due to the Evangelical Christians.

During the campaign, the President made frequent use of the political buzz phrase "person of faith," to describe himself, and he has implied that he has a hotline to heaven.

While he has never stated that Jesus speaks to him, President Bush has insisted that his decisions are guided by his faith, whatever the hell that means.

But there's a price to be paid for everything, and this time it's not an assurance of the passage of a Corporate America written piece of legislation that's favorable to their bottom line.

This time, the Religious Wrong is tendering the due bill.

What do these people want in return for their votes, or, "support," as is said nowadays?

They're not seeking new pulpits or bells for their churches, or anything material for that matter. What they want is a blurring of the line between the separation of church and state.

I've heard all the rhetoric about the USA being built by men of faith, that most State constitutions contain the word God, and it's on our money, and so forth.

"The country was founded by people who escaped England because of religious persecution," is another popular story proffered by "people of faith" as an excuse to inject religion into politics. Actually it's more probable that these people were thrown out of England because they were a pain-in-the-ass due to their attempts at forcing everyone to practice their faith.

What the "people of faith" want in return for their support of candidates they consider "right," is recognition and acceptance as a political force so they can impose their concept of "values" on all Americans.

Colin Hanna, who is the head of a Right-Wing Christian organization known as "Let Freedom Ring," is spearheading the movement.

The stated purpose of this non-profit organization is to: "promote Constitutional government, economic freedom and traditional values.

The organization will endeavor to educate and activate business and entrepreneurial organizations, pro-family organizations and persons of faith in principles, policies and projects consistent with its stated goals."

For now they are seeking small concessions such as the posting of The Ten Commandments in public places that are government owned. The organization selects sites that have been designated as "historic," and in the past have had the Commandments posted, and subsequently removed by court order.

These demands are being made under the guise of "tradition," and while I personally don't have a problem with The Ten Commandments as a model for morality, I do feel uneasy about any merging of Church and State.

If you don't think there's a direct connection forming between the Republican Party and Evangelical Christians check out the link on the "Let Freedom Ring" website to a group called "Pray the Vote." This is a "Presidential Prayer Team," which appealed to The Creator for intervention in the election on behalf of President Bush.

It's an insidious attempt to establish the USA as a Christian nation that tolerates other religions.

Consider the phrase: "One nation under God," it does not say under "Christ," or "Jesus."

How about the USA adopting the concept of a "Universal God," not one that necessarily denotes Christianity?

If the President and his fellow Republicans are serious about one "nation under God," I call for them to denounce an affiliation with any particular religious sect.



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 11/11/2004 02:00:00 PM

 
WILL THE GUY WHO WINS BECOME PRESIDENT THIS TIME?

Please click here to read this article on my "INDEPENDENT WRITER" website. Thanks!



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 10/28/2004 12:03:00 AM

 
BUSH SPINS 'EM LIKE A TOP

This Presidential race is a classic "guns versus butter" situation.

While Kerry has addressed both the domestic issues, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush continues pursuing his policy of, "Let's keep kicking ass, even though we don't know why," under the guise of keeping the world safe.

Of course Bush hasn't forgotten the domestic front, why just this past Friday he approved the latest round of Corporate welfare, in the form of tax cuts.

Didn't hear about this event you say? Well I'm not surprised, since it was done on Air Force One, more or less in secret, as are most dastardly acts.

This little bit of political thievery was conducted without the usual media blitz because of the Bush administration’s shame over it, and a desire to keep it off the front page.

It's so obscure a piece of landmark news that I had a problem finding a reference to it. I finally located a story about it in "eTaiwan News.com," which headlined the story as having been cloaked in secrecy.

This, by the way, is a tax cut opposed by the likes of Republican Senator John McCain.

But, back to Bush as a warrior and champion of the protection of America.

"Stay the course," "don't change horses in mid-stream," blah, blah, blah, etc. is the mantra of Bush's campaign.

So if people believe that Bush is the better protector, how come matters in Iraq are worse now than shortly after the main war ended a year and half ago?

Huge numbers of Americans and innocent Iraqi's are being killed every day, and now we discover that some 380 tons of high explosives have gone missing, explosives that have or will be used to kill Americans.

Now how the hell could that have happened? Our forces knew of the existence of these explosives, and yet nothing was done to secure them, or destroy them.

However, the Bush campaign has put an amazing spin on the situation. Instead of expressing sorrow or shame over this inexcusable oversight, the matter is being used as an example of just how dangerous the terrorists are, and how necessary it is to reelect Bush so he can continue to keep us safe.

Do Republican spin-doctors have titanium balls or what?

This happened on Bush's watch, and I don't want to hear any shit such as, "oh that was the Army's fault," because Bush has taken the credit for all the good that our armed forces have done, so he has to accept the blame for this mammoth fuck up as well.

So do you want to stay the course, or change horses for a fresh ride to safety for America?



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 10/25/2004 09:52:00 PM

 
UNDECIDED VOTERS

What the hell is it with these "undecided voters?" The news channels or TV networks gather a group of these clowns, sit them in folding chairs to watch the debates, and then afterwards the hosts ask them if what they heard made a difference.

They sit in folding chairs with practiced, super serious, somber expressions of skepticism on their faces. If one didn't know better you'd think they were going to make a decision that's going to either save the world, or end it.

Gimme a break for chrisake! With about 2 weeks until the election, and after thousands of hours of speeches, commentary, analysis of the candidates remarks, political ads and so forth these dufusses still haven't made up their feeble minds?

There are only two guys up for the job, not 200.

These people are full of shit, from the woman who looks as if she cuts her own hair with a nail-clipper, and sits, unmoving, her arms folded across her chest, for 3 hours, to the fat-assed, beer-bellied guy in jeans, the waistline of which is an inch above whatever is masquerading as his balls.

They just want attention: "C'mon, try a little harder to convince me to vote for you," thinks the deviant looking guy who claims he's been searching for a wife for 30 years.

"Ask me again if I made up my mind, and oh, can I have another corn dog and a paper cup of that blue stuff," utters another loser whose hobby is collecting used mousetraps.

You know these people all won the lottery for a free lobotomy and now they have their moment of glory, oh how they try to look so concerned.

The Presidential candidates spend the bulk of their time trying to attract true Independent voters, and those from the ranks of the undecided. It makes sense since each Party has a hard core that will vote for their candidate even if he’s dead.

On Monday I heard some Republican clown rant about the evils of early voting. He claimed that anyone who votes before November 2nd would be doing so without the benefit of all the information necessary to make an informed decision.

Is this moron for real? I wish I had caught his name so I could publicly embarrass him but the station cut him short and went to something more interesting and sensible, a commercial hawking a cure for constipation.

The trick here to understand the method behind this guy's seeming madness that was masked with phony concern. He doesn't give a hoot about voters being fully informed.

What he wants is to prevent voters who would vote for Kerry from doing so, perhaps because his Party has another round of "Shitboat Veteran For Bullshit" type ads ready to air which he hopes will change people's minds.

Actually, what he really wants is to have people hold off and hopefully not vote at all.

See, Republicans and Conservatives never miss a chance to vote, even if it's only in a runoff election between a pair of candidates vying for a job as a street sweeper. These people live, eat, and breathe politics, as opposed to most Democrats and Independents who approach politics as a part of life, rather than life itself.

So Mr. Public Interest knows that if he can get the Indies and Demos to hold off, there's a good chance that they will either miss the opportunity to vote or decide to play Skittles on Election Day instead.

Early voting is great, by now nothing new is going to come out and the candidates have said all that they can possibly say. There's nothing new coming, it's all just a rehash of what they've said a thousand times before.

Kerry will continue reaching out to the intellectual set by making eloquent speeches about domestic issues, sprinkled with assurances that he won't allow the terrorists to shit on us again.

Bush meanwhile will reprise his trash talking, scare tactics, and silly attempts at humor designed to garner the thug vote. There's no need for Bush to play up to the intelligent, money people, and those who think they are, because they're already in his pocket since they're his greatest beneficiaries.

Early voting is great and it should be available in all 50 States. For people like me who have medical problems and can no longer stand in line for hours, which is what would happen if everyone had to vote in the same few places at the same time, it's the only way.

What's that, I can vote by mail you say? I don't trust it. My ballot might end up in Fiji, or take 3 months to travel a mile. It's good for those who are completely house bound however; at least they have a shot at having their voices heard.

As for the "undecided," most of them probably won't even bother to vote, not because they can't decide but because in reality they don't care, they just want attention.



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 10/21/2004 01:04:00 AM

 
MORE CHURCHES INVOLVED IN POLITICS

It's not just the Catholic Church that's violating the separation of Church and State laws in America.

In Ohio, Reverand Rod Parsley of The World Harvest Church located just outside Columbus recently told his parishioners, "We are going to vote our values."

Hmm, sounds like an order to his flock to me.

Later, outside the church, the Reverand told ABC News : "I can personally endorse a candidate … I'd like to see George W. Bush as president because of the stands he has taken."

Hmn, sounds like a church official playing politics to me.

Anthony Picarello, president and general counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of religious groups had this to say:

"If a pastor were to say the words 'vote' and 'Bush' or 'Kerry' in the same sentence, they are likely to have trouble from the IRS."

So what we have are religious leaders playing semantics, saying, from the pulpit, what they want to say without actually saying it. What we have are religious leaders taking a page from a lawyer's playbook and making suggestions or issuing orders to their faithful by inference.

To be fair, I must say that there are probably some religious leaders who support Kerry and make their feelings known to their congregations. However, it must be noted that Bush has made no secret of the fact that he and other Republican candidates have openly courted the "Evangelical" vote under the guise of "sharing the same values."

Use of the word "values" irkes me too. As used by politicians it is merely a synonymn for "preferences" and has no real relation to ethics or morality, which is what is being inferred.

As proof I offer the instance of a Wisconsin man, a self admitted Republican, who recently stated on National TV that many Wisconsinites: "go hunting, and watch the Packers play, and these are values that we share with Bush."

I don't see these activities as values but rather as preferences as to how one spends his or her leisure time. "Values" is just another buzzword used by politicians to align themselves with the "Religious Wrong," not Right.

Religious leaders should not be allowed to have their cake and eat it too. Anyone employed in a tax-exempt occupation by virtue of religious affiliation should stay the hell out of politics or start paying taxes.

After all, these "people of faith" would not like it if some governmental body began dictating which articles of faith they should follow, or, worse yet, outright endorsed one religious sect over another.



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 10/15/2004 09:44:00 AM

 
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SHOULD LOSE IT'S TAX EXEMPT STATUS

This is a topic about which I could go on forever, but since it really is a no-brainer I'll be brief.

I was born and raised a Catholic, and attended Catholic schools, so I feel I'm qualified to comment on this issue, but this is so obvious that anyone who is at all familiar with Federal law will see that the Catholic Church should lose its tax-exempt status.

Frankly I'm outraged by the Catholic Church's interference in our upcoming Presidential election.

This religious organization, which provides asylum for child molesters, as long as they are ordained priests, has made no secret of the fact that they favor Bush over Kerry. The reasoning given is that Kerry supports stem cell research, and that is a sin in the minds of the Catholic Church.

First off it's incredibly nervy that representatives of the Catholic Church would make public comments about any parishioner's status with regards to he or she being either in or out of, "the state of grace."

Second, there is no place for politics in any religious organization in the United States despite all the rhetoric to the contrary.

It's obvious to me why the Catholic Church favors the Republican Party, the party of Corporate America. After all, the Catholic Church operates more like a Corporation rather than a religious organization.

When the priests don't have their hands down the pants of some 6-year-old boy they are busy rifling the parishioner's purses and wallets taking money to send to The Vatican the Church's Corporate headquarters.

That's right, the bulk of the contributions made by the Church's well intentioned members goes directly to The Vatican to buy more wine and veal for consumption by it's corpulent Cardinals, while they sit on priceless antique furniture in rooms full of valuable paintings and other expensive artifacts. The small amount that is left to the local churches goes for maintenance and so forth.

When a parish requires money for a local project, a school e.g. a separate collection is made, and there are plenty of these special collections. When I was a kid there was a saying in my old neighborhood, which was nearly 100% Catholic: "Arrive at mass 5 minutes late and miss the first 10 collections."

But I digress because there are so many matters within the Catholic Church with which one could take issue.

In short, the endorsement of a candidate for political office, in any way, shape, or form, by a religious organization in the United States is wrong. Since the Catholic Church is actively engaged in this practice in a veiled, but obvious manner they should be stripped of their tax-exempt status.

Here's an article in "The New York Times" exposing the latest violation of this law by the Catholic Church in Colorado.



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito
posted by Jim Ippolito on 10/12/2004 02:25:00 PM

 
WHAT IS A PROVEN LEADER?

I've heard a number of people, who are openly Republican, state that George Bush would be a better President than Senator John Kerry because he is a "proven leader."

Lets examine the phrase "proven leader" starting with the word leader.

As soon as a person is elected or appointed to a leadership position, be it President of The United States, or head janitor of the night shift, that person is a leader.

As soon as this leader makes a decision, be it whether or not to go to war, or which toilet stall should be cleaned first, that person has proven that he or she can lead, merely by virtue of having made a decision to be followed by another, or others.

That person is now a "proven leader," because he or she has made a decision that another, or others must obey.

But does that mean that the "leader's" leadership is good, has the right decision been made?

General George Custer was a proven leader, but he was also a brash asshole, and a murderer. Because of his ego he stupidly lead his troops against a group of innocent, but tough, Native Americans, who, rightly so, defended themselves by wiping out him and his forces.

In 2000 Al Gore won the popular vote, which means that the majority of Americans felt that he was the better choice for "leader" of America.

However, the outdated, unnecessary, and completely senseless electoral vote process came into play and subverted the people’s will.

Then, because of the foul-ups in the election process in King George Dubya's brother Jeb's Principality of Florida, The Supreme Court appointed George Bush as leader.

Suppose we had a lame-duck president and neither candidate had previously acted in a leadership role? Voters would have to decide between the two based on other factors they feel indicate the ability to lead.

This leads us to a wide variety of concepts regarding the perceived ability to lead.

A candidate may have been the CEO of a huge corporation. In many person’s minds this would indicate leadership ability. Others, however, might feel that CEO’s are cold, calculating, heartless individuals who would favor business over people.

This is a subject on which one could speculate ad infinitum so I'll end it by saying that the words "proven leader" are meaningless.

Regarding the upcoming Presidential election the answer is clear. We have to choose between an appointed President with a 4-year record of his ability to lead, or the lack of it, and a seasoned, worldly, battle proven, caring US Senator with 20 years of experience from which to choose.

We can have 4 more years of the past 4 or elect a man with sensible, fresh ideas that will benefit all Americans, including our embattled armed forces.

As Ronald Reagan said: "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?"



Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 10/08/2004 01:23:00 PM

 
KERRY WINS FIRST DEBATE!

63% of the people polled stated that John Kerry won last night's debate.

Yet, on today's news every Republican and Conservative who commented on the debate claimed that President Bush was the strong, clear winner.

Were they watching the same debate?

Basically all I heard from the President was a rehash of his failed policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a promise of 4 more years of the same.

He was clearly outclassed and on the defensive. My opinion is that the President was appealing to his base and not in any way attempting to gain additional support from the undecided.

It appears that by sticking to his guns the President is relying on his slim lead in the polls to carry him through to victory rather than by trying to convince a substantial majority of Americans that he is the right choice.

The President relied on the old attack tactics of the Republican Party by refraining his cutesy, but inaccurate "flip-flop" accusations.

He acted more like he was playing up, and preaching to his typical supporters who have no idea about what the hell he's talking about, but who are satisfied as long as he makes fun of his opponent, mentions God, and assures them that he will kick ass.

Someone should have informed the President that he was addressing a diverse, national audience and not his usual handpicked mob of unsophisticated, indoor cap and cowboy hat wearing, booing, roughneck inbreeds.

The point that the President misses is that changing one's mind in the face of changing circumstances is the smart thing to do, it doesn't denote weakness. Sticking to a failed policy accomplishes nothing other than to prove that one is unwilling or unable to properly respond to change.

Overall, the object is to defeat terrorism, and in order to do so a President must be willing to change the tactics being employed to meet a dynamic situation.

Kerry has stated that he will appeal to other nations to provide more help in this fight and the President has either ridiculed that suggestion, or he states that he is doing that. Talk about a flip-flop!

The same terrorists that our troops are fighting threaten the entire world. So why shouldn't we elicit help in the form of military and money from other countries?

This notion that by doing so is tantamount to yielding control of our destiny to our allies is nonsense. Our "allies" need to take a more active role in the preservation of world peace which will be brought about by the defeat of terrorism.

After all, they will benefit from it, so why shouldn't they shoulder more of the risk and finance more of the effort?

Of course if other countries become more involved they will want a fair share of the "spoils of war," which in this day and age are lucrative contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq.

This does not set well with Halliburton, so we continue, under Bush and Cheney, to sacrifice our troops and create an enormous National debt for our children, grandchildren and beyond.

We need to continue the fight against global terrorism, but we also need to change the way the battle is being fought.

We need a President who is willing to change his methods of fighting terrorism as the situation warrants, while achieving the goals of his policies, both foreign and domestic.

We don't need, as Senator Kerry said: "More of the same."

 


Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 9/22/2004 01:02:00 AM

 
GOD SAYS "ENOUGH!" TO BIBLE BELTERS

Hurricane Ivan is currently bearing down on the Deep South. This storm arrives hard on the heels of 2 other horrendous hurricanes from which Bible Belters have not yet recovered.

I do feel sorry for the people affected by these disasters and my best wishes go out to them, but I have to wonder why God has chosen to bitch slap this area yet again?

Alabama, Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, and Georgia are part of the "Bible Belt," meaning that many of these State's Christian residents consider themselves to be quite religious by virtue of whatever standards are in place at the moment.

Along with the defense of their "right" to display the Confederate flag these people tend to treasure their other self appointed "right," that of vociferously denouncing anything or anyone which does not measure up to their definition of morality.

The area is rife with over the top Right-Wing Christian loonies who, in addition to their usual criticism of anything that runs counter to their own current beliefs, are quite quick to point out that as faithful followers of their various religions they are "right" thinking people.

When catastrophe strikes a place such as New York, an area considered by Bible Belters to be a den of iniquity inhabited by the much-hated "Liberals," you can count on one or another of their religious leaders to proclaim that God is punishing the non-believers for their evil ways. Pat Robertson, the euphoric, holier than everyone, businessman/preacher comes to mind.

On the other hand, when something goes amiss in the Bible Belters world, such as a flat tire, or a lost bible bookmark, it is considered to be "God's will," and not a form of punishment for a transgression.

So why is this area which contains the bulk of the Bible Belt's populace being butt-slammed a-la "Deliverance," yet again? One would think that the combined bible thumping of the faithful would have sent these storms elsewhere, to, let's say Minnesota, where there are some freethinking people. Well, the naysayers might point out that Minnesotans receive an abundance of snowstorms as their punishment, but hey, one can ski there, and build snow people, whereas all one can do in a hurricane or tornado is croak.

So what does all this mean? Well to me it means that the weather is no more controlled by God than it is by meteorologists, or shoeshine parlor attendants. If there is a God I'm sure that he or she could control the weather but I believe it's left to chance, like most things.

The true believers however are victims of their own devices, and unless they are liars, are stuck with the stark reality that according to their own doctrines, they are being punished by their God.

Therefore, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" seems like a good motto for the Bible Belters to adopt.

Of course the Muslims are saying that their entry into the God competition, Allah, has sent the storms to conquer the infidels. But that's a whole other story.

Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 9/15/2004 10:10:00 PM

 
SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE

Yesterday I saw a brief bit of Dick Cheney warning people that not electing Bush would result in terrible terror attacks on the United States. Does that mean that he and Bush will contract for these attacks if they are not elected?

With the Presidential election less than 2 months away it's impossible to turn on a TV news channel without encountering one or another of the candidates, or their proxies, babbling away about the merits of his or her party.

Meanwhile the President was performing for a bunch of awe struck gawkers in Missouri. That's the State referred to as "Mizz-oor-ah," by its inhabitants and others of their ilk.

President Bush dwelled for a while on the plight of our country's druggies and drunks, a subject all too familiar to him.

It was fitting that the speech was delivered in Missouri, home to the Anheuser-Busch Beer Corporation, whose bottles, cans and other debris of their drug delivery systems, litter the sides of America's roads in greater abundance than all other brands combined.

He said that these people are in need of help. OK, so far so good. Then he said that the help should be provided by "faith based organizations," funded by the Federal Government. Uh-oh, and he was doing so well.

The President makes no bones about his own faith and religious beliefs, and he often hints about being guided by a higher power, although he stops short of naming Dick Cheney, or any particular Corporation.

I have no problem with a belief in God but I do have a problem with organized religion being involved in any way, shape, or form, with government.

I'm sick of hearing people spout off about how many States have the word God in their constitutions. I'm sick of hearing people yap about how this country was founded by "men of faith." And, I'm especially sick of hearing people say that they're religious, in a way that implies that they are better than those who aren't. They're not.

Last week President Bush was preaching in Oregon and some yokel yelled out to him that he should pray for Oregon because it's the most "unchurched" State in the Union.

What the hell does "unchurched" mean anyway, and who gives a shit?

I don't want my President wasting time praying that Oregon become more "churched." I want him to do something tangible, for the good of the entire populace.

Apparently he didn't pray hard enough for Oregon since the Oregon State football team missed 3 extra point attempts and lost to LSU, by one point, last Saturday.

This concept of using federally funded "faith based" organizations to care for the country's addicts is nothing more than government sponsorship of, and worse yet, the subsidizing of organized religion, and it's wrong.

Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 9/08/2004 01:20:00 PM

 
WHY OBEY THE LAW?

A few days ago a young Cuban woman airfreighted herself from the Bahamas, to where else, Miami.

Of course the reason given for her act was "to escape political persecution and seek asylum."

And of course US Immigration authorities welcomed her with open arms. This is consistent with US policy of admitting anyone who claims to have suffered political persecution, particularly if they are from the hated Castro's Cuba.

Is this a good idea? I don't think so. Say what you want, but despite this seemingly admirable act against oppressive, Communist Governments, I honestly think that it is nothing more than lawlessness being rewarded.

One might be tempted to think that the Bush administration condones this sort of thing because of it's well known efforts to attract the Hispanic vote but, in fairness, this type illegal entry into the country has been tolerated for decades no matter who occupied the White House.

The rules governing illegal immigration have not been enforced with any degree of seriousness for years. "Refugee" stream across our borders day and night, most of whom are seeking employment, but a fair number have sinister intentions.

Of course the blame for this must lie directly with those individuals and institutions that willingly hire illegal aliens, usually for sub par wages. The answer to proper enforcement is simple, heavily fine those who do this, and close down their businesses for second offenses.

This will never happen of course, Corporate America, the true ruler of this country, will not allow it.

When it comes to Cubans the laws are different and allow for the belief that they are a persecuted people and thus entitled to a more liberal acceptance policy. This is all a left over from the "Cold War" days which started in the 50's.

Most Cubans arrive here with some degree of fanfare and publicity and actually make no attempt to hide because of their knowledge that a few correct answers to some well publicized, standard INS questions will allow them to stay, permanently.

As long as they are welcomed with open arms they will continue making the treacherous 90-mile voyage in 1951 Chevy trucks converted into boats, on swimming pool floats lashed together, and I suppose, now that it's proven that it can be done, in packing crates loaded onto airliners.

If the Federal Government wants to continue playing this silly game with Castro, one illegal immigrant at a time, for long outdated political reasons, so be it.

However, when it comes to the hordes of nightly overland infiltrators that the government seems to care little about I have a proposal.

The cost of dealing with them, that is, medical care, schooling for their sure to come future offspring, the costs associated with any crimes they commit, and so forth, should be shouldered by Corporate America since they are the major benefactors of their presence.

Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

posted by Jim Ippolito on 8/30/2004 12:01:00 AM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

DO YOU PAY FEDERAL TAXES?

If so you should be outraged by this.

We are, the richest country in the world, and yet a country where the Federal Government has the temerity to tax unemployment benefits. Now, a few days ago, it suddenly comes to the attention of our legislators that the winner of a 10 billion-dollar contract awarded by the Office Of Homeland Security, is based offshore, so as to avoid Federal tax.

What the hell happened? Did someone finally notice the address on their letterhead? Or, have they been using a ten-dollar per month mailbox at MailBoxes etc to conceal their location?

The company is Accenture, and they are/were to provide extensive security services by tracking foreigners at our Nation's airports, and other ports of entry.

Accenture used to be part of Arthur Andersen, Enron's book cooker. They split off in 2001, but apparently not before they picked up a few accounting tricks of their own.

Now, defenders of the company basically say that it's not their fault if the tax laws have loopholes that are favorable to Corporate America. They also remind us that the firm employees about 25,000 Americans. Woop-dee-doo!

Someone should remind their executives that someone has to do the work while company executives sit on the beach in Bermuda, which is where the company is based.

I wonder if the legions of unemployed Americans can obtain a Bermuda address so their unemployment benefits escape Federal taxes?

The answer is clear. The tax laws need serious revisions. I say take out the double-talk and make it clear that regardless of where a Corporation calls home it will pay full taxes.

Just think, that will require the rental or construction of office buildings in America, which is good for Joe and Jane Nobody.

Write to your Congresspersons and Senators and urge them to bring about this much needed correction to our tax code.


posted by Jim Ippolito on 6/15/2004 12:07:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

Religious Ramblings

It seems fitting that on Easter Sunday I take brief notice of happenings in the world of religion. While Catholics are feasting on a traditional rack of lamb and the wealthy are dining at McDonalds, a spokesman, a bishop I guess, has publicly proclaimed Democratic candidate John Kerry not a candidate for the reception of the sacrament of communion.

This statement was issued from deep within the bowels of The Archdiocese of Boston, that perenial Paradise of Priestly Pedophiles.

The reason Kerry has been barred from partaking of the consecrated host is his support of the Pro-Choice movement.

I guess the Archdiocese never read the part about, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Meanwhile as our brave troops in Iraq lose their lives in an effort to promote, among other things, freedom of religion, the two major Muslim factions, which hold historically opposite views, the Sunnis, and Shiites, have now begun to join forces in opposing the Coalition.

I guess these two groups have heard about: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

For me the old saying," Lord save me from a religious person," seems like the best route to follow.

"For centuries, theologians have been explaining the unknowable in terms of the-not-worth-knowing."
H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
posted by Jim Ippolito on 4/11/2004 05:20:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

Reaganomics & Social Insecurity

President Bush's claim that his administration is one of "compassionate conservatism" seems to have been missed by Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan. A few days ago he suggested that the way to trim the Federal deficit is to further increase the retirement age, and lower Social Security benefits for future recipients.

Almost simultaneously the President was attending a fundraiser in Kentucky where he swore to make the tax cuts for the rich permanent. He left about an hour later with a check for 1.2 million bucks in his pocket, compliments of the 1000 attendees.

Perhaps "compassionate conservatism" is really just "compassion for corporations."

The President doesn't seem to be very concerned about the 3 million or so unemployed in our country but he sure is concerned about the 3000 or so same-sex couples who got married in California. It's easier to deal with smaller numbers.

Last week the President suggested that workers in America's fast food industry be reclassified as "manufacturing employees, rather than service industry workers." I suppose that the stacking of bun bottom, meat, cheese, lettuce, onions, tomatoes, and bun top is considered akin to building houses or cars.

This change would make the Labor Department statistics, which clearly show huge losses in the manufacturing sector of the workforce, appear to be taking an upward swing. Most people would not be aware of this bit of chicanery as the election approaches and the President points out the recent increase in manufacturing jobs.

I foresee a bright future for the members of this administration as top-notch Hollywood fiction writers after their tenure in office ends.
posted by Jim Ippolito on 2/29/2004 11:01:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

Are we really The United States?

Taiwan's pro-independence president, Chen Shui-bian announced that he is not ruling out the possibility of reunifying with Communist China. Although the two countries are diametrically opposed in their approach to politics apparently the leaders of both countries realize that there is more strength in a united China.

Chan Lien's Nationalists, who ruled China for five decades before being ousted by Chen, endorses a policy of reunification with Communist China, so it seems that regardless of who wins the next election reunification may occur.

Meanwhile most of Europe is attempting to unify in order to better counter the economic prominence of The United States. Evidence of this is the recently adopted Eurodollar, a currency system designed to better allow for the exchange of funds among countries subscribing to the system. Open borders have further promoted the notion of a united Europe, similar to travel in the United States.

Meanwhile in America we promote the concept of differences among our population and encourage the establishment of conflicting laws. This is most pronounced in the South where the melding of government and religion is constantly attempted.

While the rest of the world seeks to unify their legal systems Americans are consumed with non-issues as same sex marriage. Bible thumpers who claim that God abhors Gays scorn people who merely wish to profess their affection for and devotion to each other publicly. Is the word Gay even used in the bible?

Of course the real motivation for this push to invalidate same sex marriages is the avoidance of benefits, paltry as they may be, by Corporate America. If you assure America's CEO's that benefits will not have to be granted to the same sex partners of their employees they will gladly endorse any relationship. This would no doubt include cross species marriages such as a man and his horse, which may go over quite well in places like Texas and Oklahoma.

Other non-issues such as TV censorship over a harmless flash by Janet Jackson make front-page news while the complaining parent's kids continue viewing ultra violent movies, and playing video games that feature tasteless violence. I guess it's OK to feature a woman's mammaries as long as they're being sliced off in a movie or via a computer game joystick but the normal desire to view a nicely formed rack is considered immoral.

While on the subject of sex how about the President's recent request for virtually unlimited funding for his ridiculous "abstinence only" plan for teenagers, which is supposed to help prevent the spread of AIDS? Is he for real? Does anyone actually believe this will work? Of course the sensible alternative of sex education is strictly taboo in the Bible belt, along with anything else that makes sense.

The government should get the hell out of people's bedrooms and concentrate on matters vital to our nation's security and economy.

While foreign countries provide universal health care some of our states are asking the Federal Government for permission to purchase American made pharmaceuticals at lower prices from foreign countries while some states say to hell with any kind of help for the aged and the sick.

Is this really The United States I ask again?

As Americans ponder Alex Rodriguez' trillion dollar contract to play games our government ships money to Russia by the boatload. They then use it to develop ICBM's that are better than ours.

Their latest strategic weapons are then displayed and demonstrated in the Barents Sea under the watchful eye of a not to be trusted President Vladimir Putin who presided over the activities while wearing a Naval uniform.

Wake up fellow Americans!
posted by Jim Ippolito on 2/20/2004 10:25:00 AM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

GOT GAS?

Here in Las Vegas gasoline prices are rising at the rate of about 3 cents per gallon per week. Currently it's about $1.77 per gallon. I just saw a crybaby being interviewed on TV and he was complaining that he can no longer afford to drive his Ford Expedition to work and it just sits in his garage. Poor baby.

I can't help but be judgmental on this one. The guy was barely over five feet in height, did not haul any cargo, rides alone, etc. So why does he need a behemoth like that? Well as Orrin Hatch, the great Republican luminary from my neighboring state of Utah said last year: "We're not a country ruled by need, we do and buy what we want." Ah, the wisdom of the rich.

Next up to the plate was some Corporate clown who defended the price increases without offering any reason as to why they are occurring. He did however feel it necessary to state that Americans should consider themselves lucky because in most of Europe the price of gas is about $3.00 per gallon. This pisses me off, and it should loosen your bladder as well.

Every time Americans complain about something there's always a well to do bigwig who compares life in America to life in Europe. This selective comparison is yet another way Corporate America and our current D.C. Monarchy attempts to convince people to look the other way while the Federal Treasury is raided by the likes of Halliburton.

Why is it that the only time a comparison is drawn between the U.S. and Europe is when it's advantageous to the rich? I don't hear any calls from the country club set for changes to government spending that would benefit the common man and woman rather than the Corporations and their CEO's who are eliminating and farming out American jobs faster than a tornado dissipates cow flatulence.

Europeans may pay $3.00 per gallon, but they drive sensible vehicles so their overall gasoline expenditures for an equivalent amount of driving are no higher than ours.

The question as to why gasoline is going up in price remains unanswered. Our troops are dying in Iraq fighting terrorism, or so we, and they are told. The truth though is that an uninterrupted flow of oil is what's behind it all, oil that continues making the likes of Vice President Cheney richer by the hour.

Meanwhile OPEC has just announced that effective April 1st, crude oil production will be decreased by 10%, which could trigger a 20% increase in prices at the pump.

I find it interesting that the date chosen is April Fool's Day.
posted by Jim Ippolito on 2/11/2004 02:17:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

GOOBERS AND GOD IN GEORGIA

The former Confederate, and still retrogressive State of Georgia continues to distinguish itself as a haven for God fearing peanut brains.

Like most of the states south of the Mason-Dixon line, where a politician's stance on only 3 issues, God, gays, and guns, are taken into account by the voting illuminati, science and God cannot coexist in Georgia.

The word "evolution" will probably be removed from schoolbooks thanks to The Superintendent of Georgia's schools, Kathy Cox, a Republican, needless to say. Ms. Cox said she made the suggestion to avoid offending parents of children in the more religious, conservative parts of the state.

God forbid the kids are thought of first by these people by insuring that they receive a well rounded, based on facts education. No, apparently it's better to satiate the parents and avoid conflict.

I can just imagine the arguments from these pathetic excuses for parents: "We all don't be wantin' our chilluns to get smarter than we all are. They gots their bibles and they got everything they all needs to know in there."

In Georgia evolution is considered a theory, which of course it is, but then creationism can't be scientifically proven either, a fact that seems to escape notice in the Peach State. This is just great. America's children are often referred to as "our future." Well, while the rest of the world's kids are being taught cold, hard, useful facts, kids in America are still being screwed over by a bunch of backward people who refuse to stop farting around with mystic matters. I don't think the future of America is very bright when our kids compete with the rest of the world's kids armed only with bibles and crosses.

Now here's a hypothetical situation. Let's say that a family of bible thumping Georgians are faced with the prospect of Dad's place of employment being relocated by Corporate America. In our example Dad works for the Acme Bible Printing Company of Georgia, and its parent company, "The We'll Do Anything For Money Corporation," discovers that they can make a nickel more per bible if they move the factory to the Republic of Georgia.

Ok, the first thing Dad does is thank God that the company isn't moving to that God-awful latte loving state of California because Liberals live there. So, what to do? Move the family from God and corn dog loving Georgia to the Republic of Georgia, a former Soviet State where goats and yogurt are common fare, or go on unemployment?

Chances are Dad will consult with the pastor of his church who will no doubt tell him to stay in the USA and continue attending services. When Dad asks what the family will live on since there aren't any jobs he will be told that God will provide. That of course will be his only hope because Corporate America and the government won't give a hoot.

The point of all this silliness is that we need standardized curriculum for all of America's schools and we need to see to it that religion remains a private matter and not something insidiously injected into children's minds by easily insulted idiots who are smitten by fantasy rather than common sense.

How about striking a middle ground? Since the plan allows for the teaching of evolution, without using the word, and creationism will be taught as an "alternative" theory, why not do the sensible thing and combine the two notions?

I propose that my theory of "Evocreationism" be adopted whereby it is accepted that God created life which then evolved into what we are today?

That probably won't fly in Georgia though because the bible says that God "created man in his own image," and I can't imagine Georgians believing that the first humans were the half-monkey people unearthed by archaeologists.

On A Somewhat Related Note:

On 01/23/04 an Eckerd's pharmacist in Denton, Texas refused to fill a prescription for the "morning after" pill, legally prescribed by a doctor for a rape victim. The pharmacist claimed it was violation of morals.

What consummate gall this religious fanatic possesses. Are people who claim to be "religious" the most judgemental people in the world or what? How dare someone interfere with a legally prescribed medical practice based solely on his or her own interpretation of right and wrong.

Fortunately the woman had the prescription filled at another pharmacy but what if the incident occurred in a tiny, in the middle of nowhere town with only one drugstore, and she had no means to travel elsewhere to obtain the medication?

Eckerd's announced that the pharmacist was in violation of company policy and had been subjected to disciplinary action but no details were given.

This person should have his or her license revoked and be permanently barred from the profession.
posted by Jim Ippolito on 2/04/2004 12:22:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

American Citizens Are Getting Bushwacked

Vicente Fox, Mexico's President, has given his stamp of approval to U. S. President, George W. Bush's plan to reward lawlessness. He said it's OK with him if President Bush forgives the actions of millions of his fellow Mexican citizens, who are in the U.S. illegally, and grants them some sort of semi-citizen status. What the hell, he doesn't know what to do to help his own people, so he may as well reduce their ranks.

What a great example this sets for our nation's children, commit a crime, get a pass, be granted privileges. What a great example from the President, our nation's number one role model. What a terrific impression of America this creates around the world, just sneak into the U.S. and demand rights. What strength this will add to the ability of our Chief Diplomat, the President, to negotiate with foreign powers. What a terrific message this sends to our gallant troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, sacrifice yourselves protecting Corporate America's interests so your homeland can be handed over to criminals by your Commander-In-Chief.

Perhaps we should just poll the leaders of all the world's countries when a decision faces America. Should we build a new road? Let's see what the president of Russia has to say about the proposal. Should we change our tax laws? Let's query The Sultan of Brunei and the president of South Africa. Should Federal election laws be modified? Let's elicit input from the leader of Austria. Why not, everyone but the legal citizens of America, save the Corporate lobbyists, seems to have a say in the decisions made in Washington D.C.

Whatever happened to majority rule in America? All the polls show that the majority of Americans, which includes many Republicans, oppose the President's plan, but he ignores the majority because Corporate America and the rich want an open border policy allowing the continued flow of the cheap labor they cherish.

Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board says new jobs will be created to replace those taken by illegal aliens. Oh, I'm sorry, calling persons what they really are is politically incorrect these days. I meant to say, "undocumented workers," yeah right.

And where are those jobs going to come from? He didn't address that issue, the rich never do. Is this man unaware of the number of highly educated, qualified workers in the U.S. who are unable to find employment?

Illegal aliens are demanding driver's licenses in California and Kansas, and there's a move afoot in California to allow illegal aliens the right to vote in non-Federal elections.

Have our country's legislators gone nuts?

What incentive is there to be a legal, law-abiding citizen of our country?

Are our politicians determined to prove that crime pays? It seems so.

I'll be posting an expanded report on this matter, including shocking revelations by the U.S. Border Patrol, on my website in the near future. Be sure to check for it.

In the meantime I suggest you visit:

"Lou Dobbs Tonight", on The CNN website for additional information about the problem and a link to a list of U.S. Corporations engaged in exporting American jobs.

posted by Jim Ippolito on 1/28/2004 07:41:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

If There's Any Money Not In Their Control Corporate America Is Scheming To Get It.

The President delivered the State of The Union address on 01/20. I missed it due to a desire to do something meaningful but did catch the highlight's of it on ESPN, I think, or was it that other station that broadcasts nothing but reruns of the past 30 year's shows? Whatever, it was the same thing we've been fed by the Feds for quite some time now and I'm fed up with it.

I must say though that I was impressed with the President's honesty when he shouted: "Americans are the hardest working people in the world." Sure, when so many people have been let go and the volume of work remains the same or increases the remaining employees have to work harder to get the job done.

Now that Corporate America has fired enough people to get the stock market back over 10,000, and redistributed the "savings" to it's shareholders and board members it's time to tap some fresh resources to keep it going. After all, as much as Corporate America's CEO's would like to see everyone fired except for their personal assistants, chauffeurs, nannies, housekeepers, gardeners, personal trainers, attorneys, investment counselors, caddies, chefs and what nots, all the wishing in the world will not get the work done without at least a skeleton workforce.

So, the President has resurrected his plan to privatize the Social Security fund, once again turning to the have-nots to provide the means to indirectly help the rich secure their third or fourth vacation homes.

This is a dangerous concept which the Republicans feel will be appealing to the younger workers in the job force. The President's cry to "let people decide for themselves," is nothing more than a thinly veiled disguise to throw some money to their Corporate allies (big time contributors) on Wall Street. After all he can't send all the money to Halliburton and NASA's contractors. Someone might notice.

Rest assured that while the Enron and Worldcom criminals are doing the "perp" walk to their jails cells others are eager to take their shots at lining their pockets with this new found source of wealth.

Young people rarely feel the need to prepare for the future, especially in today's "extreme" youth society where the live for today attitude runs rampant. By the time they realize the error of their ways, should this scheme be adopted, it will be too late to turn back.

These are the same people who have already lost small fortunes gambling in the stock market under the guise of investing. What makes them think that the persons selected to manage the SSA funds in The Casino of Wall Street will fare any better with these public funds?

Tax Cuts For The Rich, Part Deaux

The President also called for a permanent extension in the recently enacted tax cuts for the rich. Tax cuts? I don't think so, it's more like a transference of "tax burden" to the country's already beleaguered cities and states.

I don't think the rich should be taxed at rates higher than common folk, but they should pay tax on all their income, regardless of its source. I mean the Federal Government goes so far as to tax unemployment benefits so the least they can do is tax the money the rich take when they fire their Corporate workforces.

Food For All

Yesterday First Lady Laura Bush kicked off a campaign encouraging Americans to donate one dollar from their Super Bowl party funds to ease hunger in America. Excuse me but didn't her husband recently authorize the release of about 70,000 tons of food, to charter member of the "Axis Of Evil," North Korea, on top of what has already been sent?

This is quite interesting since North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-il, maintains a "military-first" policy whereby their army always gets first pick of food supplies while the rest of the population starves.

How about a little "charity begins at home" movement? That will never happen because there's nothing to be gained from it by the rich whereas the taming of North Korea means new markets and yet another source of cheap labor.

I wonder if the President will try to enlist Willie Nelson and John Cougar Mellencamp for a "Farm Aid" concert for North Korea?




posted by Jim Ippolito on 1/23/2004 01:01:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

CORPORATE AMERICA CELEBRATES

Unemployment is creeping upwards dragging the Dow along with it. If anything makes Corporate America and it's greedy shareholders blush with pride and pleasure it's cost cutting in the form of firing people. The CEO's and their minions know the remaining employees will gladly work even harder to avoid the axe.

The President says Corporate America knows what's best for the working class and the populace should be patriotic and go along. Meanwhile money monger VP Dick Cheney drives the point home by inferring that those who question the President's actions are harboring treasonous thoughts.

So on 12/15/03, IBM announces their intention to outsource 4700 jobs to China and India, as a cost cutting measure. Actions like this confirm that patriotism is for the little guy and gal, and money matters are best left to those who have the most and control what they can't purloin for themselves.

White House spokespersons always say, "Corporations create jobs." What's not stated is that the jobs will now be in foreign countries.

Again With The Space Shit

On 01/14/04 the President announces his commitment to NASA by calling for support for their recent wish list consisting of the completion of the mostly American funded international space station, a new shuttle fleet, a moon base, and manned missions to Mars.

The President beamed when he said: "This is something that will lift our national spirit."

This is nothing more than feel good nonsense in the guise of patriotism.

The pretext to justify this massive increase in Corporate Welfare, is that jobs will be created. I guess these jobs will replace those being outsourced to foreign countries by other members of the Corporate America Club.

Funny thing though is that the places that will reap the lion's share of the jobs will probably be Texas, the President's home state, where the Houston Space center is located, and Cape Canaveral, in Florida, where baby brother Jeb Bush is Governor.

Ah what the hell, the Super Bowl is nearly upon us so it's time to lighten up and allow it to distract us from contemplating dreary matters such as unemployment. After all didn't the masters of ancient Rome provide entertainment in the form of feeding unpatriotic citizens to the lions in order to keep their populace from thinking about their problems?

This year's half-time show is supposed to be spectacular, but unfortunately that's when I clean the kitchen and take out the trash so I'll miss it again. On 12/10/04 Time-Warner announced that they paid $7.5 million for the privilege of sponsoring it. An early Christmas gift for the masses I suppose.

They then slipped in another announcement regarding the firing of 450 employees, as a cost cutting measure. A little something for the shareholders I guess.

I wonder if those 450 people are football fans?

posted by Jim Ippolito on 1/19/2004 12:57:00 AM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

SILLY SPACE STUFF

The European Mars rover, Beagle2, is still missing but the first of four of NASA's newest toys, the half-billion dollar Spirit, is alive and well and sifting through the dirt and rocks on Mars, much the same as I did in my parent's backyard when I was six-years old. The results will be the same, that is to say, nothing will be gained from said expedition.

An astonishing 59% of recently polled Americans agree with the President that the U.S. should conduct manned, or womanned trips to the moon and Mars.

Why? What possible practical good will come of this insane spending spree? Will this wasteful endeavor eliminate the National Debt or secure health care for all Americans, or create jobs?

No.

However, it will eliminate personal debt, insure good health care and continued employment for the precious few, otherwise useless egotistical eggheads involved in the space program.

This is another corporate welfare program approved by the members of the party of the rich and funded by your tax dollars.

The average American gets bragging rights as a result of this folly. I can imagine a debate between a non-space program involved American and an average resident of Italy, Germany or some other industrialized European nation. It would go something like this:

"So, Joe Average American, what's new in the U.S.A.?"
"We're going to the moon and Mars."
"Why?"
"It's really neat."
"Why?"
"It's like way cool man. You know, space travel."
"What do you get out of it?"
"It's like so cool. So what are you doing next week average European whose country lost WWll?"
"My family is going on the first of three two-week vacations this year. How much vacation time do you get?"
"Fifty-two weeks a year?"
"Are you rich?"
"No I'm unemployed."
"I'm sorry for you."
"It's OK, I can watch the news about the space program all day at my parent's house."
"You still live with your parents?"
"Yeah, I'm only thirty-seven."
"Are your parents retired?"
"Are you kidding? They're only in their early seventies. They got over fifty years with The XYZ Corporation."
"When do they get their pensions? We can retire on full pension at age fifty-five, our government sees to it."
"What the hell would they do if they retired? They like working, and besides, they don't have any money to do anything anyway. Their medicine takes up most of their income."
"Oh, in Europe most people have free, government provided health insurance."
"Yeah, but that's like Communism or something right?"
"No it's just the way our governments use the tax money paid by it's citizens."
"Yeah but that's like Communism. In America everyone has the right to make it on their own. The government doesn't make us do anything, like go to the doctor."
"How many astronauts do you know?"
"None, they're like special, you know. But anybody in America can become an astronaut if he or she wants."

See "Federal Government Moons Entire U.S. Population" and "The Space Program, What's In It For Me?" in
"The Curious Cat Archives" for additional enlightenment on NASA's madness.

posted by Jim Ippolito on 1/10/2004 11:14:00 PM

 
Visit "The Independent Writer"
and have a good laugh on Jim Ippolito

WHAT'S NEW FOR 2004?

Well so far, for me at least, nothing. People certainly haven't become more polite or developed better manners. During the first two days of the New Year I received 5 phone calls for other people. Of the 5, 3 resulted in slam-downs at the sound of my voice. I guess these cretins can't bear admitting that they had made a mistake. Certainly it couldn't have been the mellifluous tones of my Jersey boy accent that incensed them.

I made several short jaunts to take advantage of post holiday sales and encountered endless episodes of ridiculously bad driving, usually by those piloting SUV's or some other truck type vehicle. I guess size does matter to these mostly lone occupants of silly dinosaur sized livery vehicles. Anyway it was worth risking my life to get a nice new jacket at 60% off their "already heavily discounted prices."

Funny about people and their choice of vehicles, which so many seem to feel represents their status in society. Maybe it's just me but I always thought that farmers, for example, used pickup trucks, to haul things. These days, however, someone piss poor, who owns less stuff than would fill a short pickup bed, seems to feel that this is the way to go. People really do buy into Detroit's bigger is better marketing tactics.

So guess what? The new American philosophy, fostered by Corporate America, apparently has most Americans believing that "backwards is better."

Instead of producing reasonably sized, practical, safe, fuel efficient vehicles, today's "Detroit Iron" is offered in the form of behemoth trucks and now, by Pontiac, the reintroduction of the GTO, the overpowered gas-guzzling muscle car of the sixties.

Chevrolet, America's self-billed "traditional car company" has upped the ante as well. New on their menu is an almost truck, almost sports car, almost convertible, almost sedan, sort of new, sort of retro vehicle called the SSR.

Apparently it is intended for those confused about what image they want their vehicle to portray. It sports 300 horsepower, costs $42K+, and has a pickup-like cargo area so a farmer can race the nouveau GTO owner while relocating a load of animal manure.

It's bad enough that America didn't learn its lesson from the oil shortages of the early seventies, but now, in the midst of the Iraq war, which costs American lives every day, the automakers are back to the old horsepower and size war, which will make us even more dependent on foreign oil and the whims of its purveyors.

In the 40's, 50's, and part of the 60's it was fashionable for those with money to burn and a desire to practice conspicuous consumption to buy an overpriced, undersized two seater sports car in addition to their American land yacht. The idea was to let everyone know that they could afford impracticality.

Nowadays, it's an oversize, usually 4 wheel drive off-road capable vehicle, that sits in one's city or suburban driveway assuring that everyone who notices will be aware of the owner's ability to buy something overpriced and impractical.

So that's the start of 2004. Did I make a New Year's resolution you ask? Yes, the same one I've made for the past 57 years, "to have a better year than the previous one."

Do I have any advice for you? Yes, never watch a TV show that has a laugh track.





posted by Jim Ippolito on 1/05/2004 01:12:00 AM