This government is dumber than I thought.  Originally after the accident on BP's oil rig, the Federal Government took no action whatever to help prevent the oil in the Gulf of Mexico from reaching the shores of Louisiana.  That may have been the government's biggest mistake during this whole affair.  Did the Government learn from this mistake?  Of course not!  Instead, it compounded that error by watching the oil spread to other coastal areas without taking any action to prevent further contamination and loss of wildlife. 

This morning the oil is only 1/2 mile off the cost of Pensacola, Florida.  What has the government done.  Nothing!  Absolutely nothing, except to watch it come.  They had weeks in which to get booms into position for deployment or to build some barrier islands.  But in the face of pending diaster the incompetent bastards in Washington did nothing.  They worried too much about studies to determine the potential ecological impact of action, never realizing that the diaster was already upon them.  And so another State will now suffer damage it did not have to suffer.

I think this should prove to anyone who cares to watch that the government is utterly incapable of managing anything.  But that should not absolve the States of their responsibility in all of this.  The States have an obligation to protect their residents and their resources, regardless of the willingness the Federal Government to help with the effort or not.  Screaming for Federal help doesn't get it done.  Let the Governors act, and worry about the Federal Government after the fact. 

Is that what happened?  No.  All the Coastal States also stood by and watched while their wildlife and wetlands were decimated.  To the extent that they have done that, they are just as liable as the Federal Government has been.  They should have learned a lesson from the State of Arizona.  That is: when the Federal Government fails to act, they need to do it themselves. 

Let us suppose for a moment that by some quirk of fate you have suddenly been invested with the "gift" of doing miracles.  Yesterday you were just an ordinary person like everyone else, and today you accidently find that all your wishes, no matter how large or small, suddenly and instantly come true.  You can wish your breakfast into existence, and it immediately appears on the table before you.  Certainly transportation would no longer be a problem.  All you would have to do is wish you were home, or wherever else you might wish to be at any particular moment or in any particular time. 

Certainly you could wish all the wealth for yourself that you could ever hope to enjoy, but assuming that you are a decent sort of person, one might expect that you would soon wish to use this amazing gift to help people in need.  We can assume that another miracle would also allow you to keep the crowds of people away so you could have a few moments to yourself.

There is a question, however, that is not easily resolved with a miracle.  That is the question of how you will control yourself so as to prevent accidental and unintended consequences that might result from your idle wishes.  For example, in a frustrated moment of anger, you might wish someone to be in hell, and they would be there as soon as your command was uttered.  Or how about the much simpler, "Drop dead."

And then there are the unintended consequences that result from the best of intentions.  You might decide that your moral set of values should supersede those of others, thereby causing crops to fail, businesses to fail, and loss of millions of jobs the world over.  People could lose there homes and the ability to provide for their families. 

The land too could suffer.  What would happen if you wished a mountain out of existence just because someone didn't like the amount of time it took him to cross over it?  What would happen if you stopped the earth's motion about the sun for a day?  Or perhaps you accidently stop the rotation of the earth -- if only for just a moment.  Surely there would be unprecedented carnage and death as the intrinsic velocity of all things not anchored down became greater than that of the earth itself.  Assuming you can undo all that damage and make everything right again, you would still have introduced a small disruption in time, the consequence of which can not be imagined.

How do you prevent accidents like these from happening?

It has been 18 months since Candidate Obama became president obama, and in that time he has suffered three major political diasters that didn't have to happen, on-top-of reneging on numerous campaign promises. 

His first major political diaster was the war over his health-care proposal and its cost.  Then there was his day-to-day indifference to the views of the majority of voters regarding illegal immigration. This was soon followed by the past 40 days of dodging and dithering in the face of an environmental calamity.

Among the less politically catastrophic but still potentially deadly problems for the survival of his administration are:

• his failure to keep his promises regarding the closure of Gitmo,
• his failure to bring home the troops from the Middle East,
• his constant bowing before foreign leaders,
• his never ending attempt to place all the blame for his problems at the doorstep of previous administrations,
• his delay in repeal of Don't ask Don't Tell,
• his tripling of the national deficit,
• his failure to have a transparent presidency,
• his failure to address the economic problem of the nation,
• failure of his stimulus package to create jobs and move the economy toward recovery.

Add to these the political shenanigans (such as the Sestak mess) he once campaigned to end and the complete list becomes quite lengthy.

I have never had much faith in the American Voter in the short term.  Obama's election has only served to lessen that faith even more, because the nation welcomed this incompetent moron with open arms inspite of all the signs that he was not qualified to hold the high office that they were rushing to put him into.  It's as if the voters thought that all a man needs to hold office is the ability to turn a pretty phrase when he speaks.  It never occurred to them that he must also be able to do something.

As for president obama, his press conference this past Thursday demonstrated that he still is not quite playing with a full deck.  In times of a major ecological crisis, one has the right to expect that the man holding the office of the President of The United States should be able to come up with something more comforting for the nation than a report that his daughter has asked him if he's "plugged the hole yet."  Remarks like that really make me believe that he has not yet learned that "the buck stops" as his desk -- with him.

He has surrounded himself with advisors with experience as questionable as his own, and he seems to feel that he should have his way in all things just because he won the election, that the Congress and the People don't really have to be consulted or considered in any of it.  When all is said and done, I firmly believe that his will be recognized as perhaps the worst presidency in the history of our country.  I hope we can survive the remaining days of his term in office.

It cannot cripple Love
It cannot shatter Hope
It cannot corrode Faith
It cannot destroy Peace
It cannot kill Friendship
It cannot suppress Memories
It cannot silence Courage
It cannot invade the Soul
It cannot steal Eternal Life
It cannot conquer the Spirit.
--Author Unknown

What makes bar-b-q bar-b-q?  Is it the type of meat used (beef, pork, etc)?  Is it how the meat is cured?  Is it the cut of the meat?  Is it the taste of the meat?  Is it how the meat is cooked?  Or is it the sauce put on the meat?

I've heard charges of sedition levied against those who opposed president obama in recent days.  I wonder what they called it when the dems were bashing President Bush.  Oh!  Oh !  Let me guess.  They were called patriots.

Are those making these charges today unaware of the fact that all of the Founding Fathers were seditionists?  Do they not know that Rome executed Jesus for sedition?

At its core, sedition is nothing more than advocating change from the present policies, something our forefathers called a right.  We do that in every election we hold.  Are we all seditionists?

I'm tired of listing to all this crap about securing the Arizona border.  The administration knows full well that the "comprehensive" legislation that it says is needed has nothing at all to do with securing the border.  They can write all the laws they like, but it won't stop one person from crossing the border illegally.  It's all BS.  Just another reason to hate all career politicians.

As to the border itself, I think all 389 miles of Arizona's border with Mexico can be secured without too much time or expense with a low-tech solution.  Here's how: 

1. Provide for as many as 30 to 40 legal entry points along the border with Mexico.  That would place an entry point approximately every 10 miles apart along the border, allowing local access for those with valid work permits who otherwise could not journey to one of the few existing access points.
2. To hell with electronic barriers; they cost too much.  Begin a new wall using standard highway sound barriers, integrating and opening the new check points as construction proceeds. 
3. Start a second wall about 50 yards inside the first, constructing both of them together.  Use adobe brick if necessary for the second wall.  (It's cheaper than sound barriers.)  As they are worked, lay down several courses of military grade concertina (razor) wire 50 yards wide that lies between, and butts right up against, the two walls. This wire can be deployed at the rate of about 1 mile an hour and can be stacked several layers high.  It can be cut, but not easily from atop a ladder, and in bulk, it would be very difficult to move so as to clear a path. 
4. An optional electric current can be put through the Concertina wire -- not enough to kill, but just enough to jolt and discourage anyone who would try to cut his way through.  If the flow of current were broken, a control station could be notified with an alarm, and an inspection team could be sent to check it out. 
5. An optional third wall can be built with a second helping of concertina wire running between the 2nd and 3rd walls.  In combination, they would provide 100 or more yards of difficult terrain to cross.

Benefits:

1. These actions would end once and for all the business of just anybody scaling the wall(s) and then dropping down and running. 
2. It will also make it impossible to simply dig a hole under a section of wall and scoot under it.  Massive tunneling operations would be required to penetrate into the country.  Those kinds of operations require many more resources to mount than the average border runner can bring to bear.  They also tend to draw attention to themselves due to the amount of activity that has to be concentrated in and around the construction of such tunnels.
3. This approach also eliminates the cost of stationing troops for an indefinite period of time every 500 feet or so along the entire length of the border. 
4. It would have the added benefit of decreasing the mortality rate of those who currently cross the border illegally, since crossing would be rendered all but impossible for individuals not associated with organized, well funded cartels.
5. These measures can be implemented very quickly with readily available, off-the-shelf materials.  Wall construction will provide badly needed jobs for the local populations, and the Arizona National Guard, controlled by the Govenor in peace time, can be used to deploy the Concertina wire at almost no cost to the State.

Foolproof?  No, but it would put a very big dent in illegal traffic, especially as valid work permits were issued, and it can be implemented quickly and without a massive design effort followed by years in the execution of an international plan of some kind. 

The Feds should do it, but they obviously won't, so it's time for Arizona to stop talking and demonstrate whether or not it's serious about closing its borders.  My thought is that the State should just do it immediately and with all haste.  If the government objects, or if it goes to court to stop the State, Arizona could argue that it is not securing the border per se, but simply building a wall on State property, and that the Fed can administer the check points that the State has so thoughtfully provided. 

After construction is complete, Arizona could then sue the Federal Government for the cost when the work is complete.  They might also have a separate suite for criminal negligence.  A separate wrongful death suite might be entertained for each case where said deaths can be traced back to a failure of the Federal Government to do its job.

Lindsay Lohan is one of several celebs who think that the law doesn't apply to her.  This spoiled brat needs to spend 30 days in jail.  The treatment seems to have done wonders for Paris Hilton. 

Incoming students at the University of California's Berkeley campus will be asked to submit a sample of their DNA.  The test results will be put in a 'secure' online database, and according to Jasper Rine, Professor of Genetics and Development Biology, they will help students make decisions about their diet and lifestyle.  

While the submission of a student's DNA is voluntary, there will be a variety of events and lectures at the campus on lifestyle choices for all undergraduate students who choose not to participate in the DNA program.  I wonder if these are voluntary too.

Would you submit a sample of your DNA to a college, or any other organization, without a court order?

It was bound to happen.  I'm talking about prepaid credit cards, often called a "cash card" or "Visa Debit Card" or "electronic cash" or whatever term is being used in your area of the world.  You can prepay a certain amount of money (cash if you will) and then use the card like a regular credit card.  There are no PIN numbers associated with these cards, so anyone who finds one of them can use it, but at least your liability is limited.  Once you drain the available funds, you can reload the card with new funds and continue to spend.  I don't personally use them, but they do provide a way for someone who can not qualify for a credit card to get a piece of plastic and avoid carrying around large amounts of cash.

What I object to is private corporations issuing these cards to employees in lieu of a standard paycheck, direct deposit, or cash envelop containing one's wages.  I don't like this because many banks will not accept the funds on the card for deposit without charging you a service fee.  That could reduce your wages by as much as 20%.

I also object to places like Wal-Mart and Verizon issuing these debit cards in lieu of traditional cash refunds or rebate checks.  At best, this amounts to me making an interest-free loan of my money to the organization that issues the card.  Sometimes these cards are even restricted to making purchases in the store or chain that issued the card.  I object to this practice because if I return an item, I want to spend my refund money wherever I like. 

I also object to cash cards being issued because the possibility is very high that it will be tossed into a drawer at home where it will be forgotten and never used by the recipient, or if it is used, all of the available money on the card will not be spent.  People will spend it down to the point where it will have insufficient funds available for the next purchase and they will toss it out with 2, 3, 5, or 8 dollars still available for use.  That money stays with the company that gave you the card to begin with and enriches them by billions of unearned dollars over time at the expense of the consumer.

Don't be afraid to make some noise over this policy.  (A pox upon the lot of them.)  Demand cash refunds.  Let store managers know that their's is not the only place in town where you can spend your money.  If you must accept a cash/debit card, my advice is to use it quickly for all of your daily needs.  This will avoid any time or date expiration that might be associated with the card.  And remember that most places will allow you to spread your payment for goods and services across multiple cards, so if you get to the point where your cash/debit card won't cover an entire bill, use it to cover part of the bill and then put the balance on your normal charge card.  When it's empty, don't throw it in the trash.  It's still registered to you, so cut it up or shred it.

Hummmm. I just thought of something else.  Plastic is petroleum based, so all those extra cards that companies are busy making fly in the face of their stated efforts to "go green."  That kind of makes them hypocrites.  You might remind them of that too.