It seems that this weeks' news wire is abuzz with the continuing saga of many stories. That's good. All too often a story gets a prominent spotlight only to vanish backstage and never be heard or seen from again. (Did we ever find out who sent the anthrax to Congress? Or who placed the put-options on United and American Airlines stock days before 9/11?)
Global warming - peak oil: I tend to put them in the same category since the latter is causing the former, but also because they're both happening at the same time. It's going to create quite a calamity, as I've blogged about here. Thankfully, I'm not the only one to see this and recognize other facts like how over 99% of Americans are dependent on the 0.3% of us that grow our food. Tom Whipple and the coming storm is here.
According to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 8: "The Congress shall have the power to...provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States...[and] to regulate commerce with foreign nations...."
What part of that does the Bush Administration not understand? And will Democrats or Republicans in Congress do anything about it? Let's bet they won't.
The following is from: Bush officials: Congress irrelevant on Iraq.
"The Bush administration also feels it does not need to seek the authorization of Congress to ratify two pending agreements with Iraq: a “Strategic Framework” that would govern “normalized” relations with the U.S., and a Status of Forces Agreement that would govern the “authorities and protections” of U.S. troops in Iraq past Dec. 31, the expiration of a U.N. resolution that the administration says authorizes their presence."
Our precious supply of fresh drinking water is running out. The FDA thinks you don't need to know about cloned meat or milk. And Monsanto, of Agent Orange fame, is trying its hardest to keep you from knowing the dangers of rBGH - or recombined Bovine Growth Hormone. They're injecting dairy cows with it. It's genetically modified. It's linked to cancer. Read all about it here. If you want to live long and prosper - Buy Organic!
Our friend Hillary "I"ll say whatever I have to in order to be elected President" Clinton has contradicted her policy platform yet again. Yesterday, I wrote about her ties to corporate America. Today it's her lack of ties to the American worker.
Three years ago, she helped negotiate a deal for 23 high-tech "Marine One" presidential helicopters being made by numerous companies - including European ones. However, "this past week, [she] derided the Pentagon's decision to award a $40 billion defense contract to build mid-flight refueling tankers to a team consisting of Northrop Grumman and EADS, a European company." Sam Stein has blogged his analysis here.
Are any Americans paying attention to this? If your priest, pastor, car salesman, father-in-law, school teacher, or any such person in a position of authority consistently changed their story only for the benefit of selling you a car or getting some extra bills in the collection plate, would you stand for it? If you're a Hillary supporter, why is this ok? Someone help me on this...please...
This would definitely be a follow-up on my hypocrisy rant: with an endorsement from this guy, John Hagee, how can McCain seriously represent anything approaching Christian morals or American values?
Do not watch this if you're a human being. This really has nothing to do with the fact that this guy is an American. It does, however, have everything to do with what war does to the consciousness of a human being. The last paragraph of this story explains it well.
Something fun, something light, something cool...Volk Hände.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Yes, you are correct. The one thing that Pandora managed to keep from escaping the box was Hope. Do you know what it symbolizes?
Three predictions on why you did not post a response:
1.) I should be expecting a 35 page response on the meaning of Hope, because you’ve been studying it in depth over the past week.
2.) The question bores you and you choose not to respond, because it has nothing to do with what you’ve posted.
3.) I should have said “What do you think it symbolizes?” Then underlined you so that you knew that I was interested in a response…
Funny, at the time….I thought that it would be an interesting conversation to engage in with you, however, now…I find myself bored with my own question and think “who cares what Hope means, Greek mythology stinks anyway”. Plus, after reading several more of your entries I can predict pretty much on my own how you feel about Hope in a box.
Actually, Mr or Ms. Anonymous,
I did reply to your question - however not the one asked on this post. On my "Drug Free America" post you asked if I received your last message, to which i replied: "Yes, I did receive it. What does her leaving hope in the box symbolize?"
And you are correct in that I'm a bit slow to respond to a question that, on its face, is just plain question about Greek mythology and has yet to be linked to something I've written about.
Linking your questions to a topic or main theme that I've blogged on would be helpful.
Thank you for your timely response.
The question that I posed to you (I felt) was related to your comments (a bit abstract perhaps). You often write about the evils of mankind (although you may not directly call them so), poisoned foods, corrupt politics, war, liars, etc. I just so happen to connect your comments with Pandora. It was strictly my own curiosity that made me question you on the symbolism of Hope. I was wondering whether or not you felt that all Hope was lost because it was not released with the evils of mankind or the exact the opposite, that we still have Hope, because it was the one thing that Pandora managed to hold onto.
If you wish you, I welcome your response. However, I understand if you do not respond because at face value it does not directly connect with just one of your comments. It addresses everything that you write about in instead.
Do I feel hope is lost because it wasn't released with all of the other evils of mankind?
No. For two reasons. First, while I do consider the topics I cover to be "evil," or in other words not good and not in the best interest of society, I do not fully believe that those committing these acts think they are doing something bad or evil. Humans justify everything they do to fit within their context of good and bad. One quick example would be that of the average American investor. She's told to diversify her portfolio, so she buys biotechnology stock (Monsanto), energy (Exxon), and a bunch of others. She's not taught to invest in companies that are sustainable and good for the environment as well as a profit. All she (and the rest of us) are told is that growth is good, profits are good, etc., and anything hindering that is bad.
How is giving money to Exxon (who's currently trying to weasel its way out of paying damages from the Valdez oil spill in Alaska) a good thing? They're funding global warming deniers by the millions of dollars, for one thing. So, is her choice to invest in Exxon a sound one? Is it good or bad? If you're just looking to make money and nothing else, then it's good. If you're looking to be an active participant in the global community; one who also values health and quality of life, it might not be such a good buy.
Second, even if people are doing "evil" acts intentionally, I feel that they can be shown a better way. The best way to be the change you want to see in the world is to do all the things yourself that you want to see done. If you think the world would be a better place if everyone recycled - are you recycling? If you don't feel like sweatshop and child labor-produced clothing is a good thing, do you buy fair trade or sweatshop free clothing?
So, in sum, no, hope is not lost because we can show those who are ignorant of a better way what one example of a better way would look like. And we can embark on a new, life-long educational process that shows children (and adults) how everything is related to everything else. Why it's not just bad for business if the honeybees disappear, but why it's bad for the environment, bad for our health, and bad for the planet.
There is always hope. But hope is not something bestowed upon someone by a higher being or force. Hope is what gives us the intelligence to dream a better way of life and the courage to start making that dream a reality.
http://www.blehert.com/gallery/JPEGS/Pandoras_Box.jpg
A picture is worth a 1000 words. Not exactly Dante’s Pandora, however I do believe that it wraps up our conversation quiet perfectly.
Blogs are not so much a conversation as a statement; a place where you can say what is on your mind (when you can’t keep someone engaged long enough at a coffee shop). I wish that this tête-à-tête would have been more interactive (back and forth), lasted longer, but it seems that you’ve always ended your thoughts with a period statement. That’s pretty hard to follow with anything but an “Okay”.
It was my pleasure; I do hope that our brief conversation might inspire you to write about Hope, what people can do instead of pointing out what they have already done. I’d like to read a lighter side of you.
I'm at a loss to understand why you feel this can't be a back and forth discussion. I think that a lot of discussions end in period statements. It is then up to the next person to comment on what was said. Usually, the two (or three) sides, are debating differing points of view. You are just asking me questions; you're not saying whether you agree or disagree with anything I've said to you or blogged about.
The first thing people need to do in order to change and give "hope" a chance is to learn the true nature of how our society works. That's one of the goals of this blog - to write about the things that aren't being said in the mainstream media.
Honestly, I'm still unsure as to exactly where you want this to go. Furthermore, you're still anonymous.
Post a Comment