Belief in "God" has nothing to do with Patriotism

Ask anyone I know, they'll tell you I'm a "Militant Atheist". They'd be wrong, of course, I do not take up arms, burn down churches, murder Christian physicians, or fly airplanes into mosques. I don't even like the word "atheist", it's a label that delusional religious folks came up with to single out and marginalize those of us that refuse to believe in or "respect" their silly fairy tales.

No, I would characterize myself as an "Outspoken Non-Believer", or "Skeptic". If a person makes an extraordinary claim and expects me to believe that claim, they better have damn good, credible evidence to back it up. Religion, especially the three pillars of Abrahamic Idiocy, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, lack all of the above. All three claim to have evidence, which always turns out to be fabricated or at the very least, completely unverifyable.

Also, I don't care how many delusional people are infected with a religious mind virus, regardless of the strain...it is NOT up to me to prove that their imaginary friend does NOT exist. That's called a logical fallacy, "Burden of Proof" flavor.

I honestly wouldn't have a damn thing to say about religion if the religious would keep to themselves, stay out of our legislative processes, keep their ignorant noses out of the science classroom, and most of all, quit trying to marry "God" and country.

This guy:

Florida man says Home Depot fired him over "God" button.

...is a prime example of the latter.

But, you say, he was just wearing a button, right? It's not like he refused to comply with the company dress code or something! This is just another War on Christianity®, isn't it?!?

"A Home Depot spokesman said Keezer was fired because he violated the company's dress code.

"This associate chose to wear a button that expressed his religious beliefs. The issue is not whether or not we agree with the message on the button," Craig Fishel said. "That's not our place to say, which is exactly why we have a blanket policy, which is long-standing and well-communicated to our associates, that only company-provided pins and badges can be worn on our aprons."

Oh, er...well, how 'bout that.

I have a dress code at my job that I must adhere to...I may not like it, but it sure as shit isn't worth losing my job over. Home Depot sounds like they are in the clear on this one.

But that isn't even what chaps my ass about the story, it's this shit:

"It feels kind of like a punishment, like I was punished for just loving my country," Keezer said."

NEWSFLASH, moron, if you just want to "show your love for your country", as you claim, then wear one of those American flag lapel pins. Otherwise, you're just prothlesizing, plain and simple.

But maybe this good, honest Christian had no other option:

"Fishel said Keezer was offered a company-approved pin that said, "United We Stand," but he declined."

Natch. Again, his intent had nothing to do with patriotism, and everything to do with prothlesizing disguised as patriotism. This reminds me of the compelled patriotism one is forced to endure at Major League Baseball ballparks during the seventh inning stretch...one could write an entire blog post on that alone.

Then there is this bullshit:

"Skorupa noted the slogan on Keezer's pin is straight from the Pledge of Allegiance.

"These mottos and sayings that involve God, that's part of our country and historical fabric," Skorupa said. "In God we trust is on our money."

Skorupa has obviously consumed too much revisionist Kool-Aid. The slogan was not part of the original pledge...it was added much later. Our currency didn't have that First Amendment shredding phrase on it originally either.

Cases like this are EXACTLY WHY these idiotic statements do not belong on our currency, in our pledge, or in our ballparks...delusional revisionists just LOVE to pull these "examples" out of their pockets as *cough*, "evidence" to perpetuate the myth that the US is a "Christian Nation".

I live in this nation, I love my country, and I am not a Christian.
The revisionists are wrong...period.

So long, and thanks for all the Kung Pao...

Today, I mourn the loss of a good friend: Wan Fu Chinese Restaurant on West Camp Bowie Blvd. in Fort Worth, Texas...they shut the doors for good last night.

Yours truly has been gorging himself on their cuisine for 12 years now, my bloated wasteline being a testament to the fact. Great dumplings, great Kung Pao, perfect Garlic Chicken, all gone with the click of a lock.

I'm very lucky that I had a hankering for some Kung Pao Shrimp yesterday afternoon, otherwise I would have discovered their demise during lunch this week and gone postal.

I spoke with the owner and he cited ever rising food costs after Katrina as the culprit.

All the years I've been going to Wan Fu they've always been friendly, provided great service, and the food quality was never once compromised. Those times when I'd get a little burnt out on the place and subsequently take a break from it, never once did I get an annoying "Where have you been?!?" from the owners or employees (I actually quit going to a different place years before I discovered Wan Fu for that very reason).

Adios, good friend, you shall be missed.

Yes, I'm bummed.

:^(

--Browncoat

Good, er-ay-uh, Riddance!

I know it's rude to speak ill of the recently departed, but I'd rather be rude than dishonest:

GOOD RIDDANCE to that piece of shit Ted Kennedy!

The only "legacy" that corrupt, leftist, machine politician leaves behind is the rubble of what's left of our alleged constitutional republic.

I'm as relieved to see him part as I was when this self-righteous ass-hat croaked:



And while I'm at it, how about some preemptive "rudeness", i.e. others I will be overjoyed to see six feet under:

1. Barney Frank, Architect of the current recession.

2. George W. Bush, Architect of the accelerated US Police State.

3. Pat Robertson, Another Religious-Right Asshat.

4. Tom Daschle, Why is this guy still being quoted in the media...oh yeah, the media are nothing but a bunch of leftist, partisan DNC ass-kissers.

5. Nancy Pelosi and this entire crop of socialist-democrats infesting Congress.

6. All Neo-Con Republicans currently infesting Congress.

7. Rick Perry and his anti-evolution dimwit religious coherts who corrupt Texas Politics and make Texas science-education a laughing stock.

8. And of course, The Obamessiah and his socialist regime. (I'd include his Useful Idiot, "Progressive" flock, but some of these unfortunates are friends of mine).

Ahhh, I feel much better now.

:^)

--Browncoat

How Misinformation is Born

The other night I'm sitting at Pop's Safari Room having a discussion with fellow libertarians regarding how the USA has become the self-appointed World Police, the insanity of the Iraq War, and how tax-payer dollars are being spent on propagandist recruitment advertising by the U.S. Military to sucker young men and women into joining these unneccesary, meddling conflicts around the globe. The main focus of our ire wasn't military recruitment or even military advertising, but specifically, propaganda-style recruitment a la those ridiculous Kid Rock "American Warrior" videos one gets bombarded with before every movie at the theater.

See, I have no problem with military recruitment or advertising for the sake of recruitment. We need to keep our military staffed, I get that. And there's nothing wrong with laying out the benefits derived from military service, i.e. learning a trade, college tutition, serving your country, etc.(all, let's not forget, at the expense of taxpayers)

But I have a problem with popular entertainers creating testosterone-driven, nationalist propaganda music videos to brainwash young minds into thinking it would be "cool" to join the National Guard because Kid Rock says it's bad ass!

That night, this led to a discussion of the Nazi propaganda films, Hitler youth, etc. and as luck would have it, there was a couple sitting near us who were not part of our group, and who apparently had not heard all of the lead-up to the Kid Rock/Nazi propaganda portion of the discussion. The gal portion of the couple spoke up first, asking us in a fairly disgusted tone, "So, you don't think the military should be able to recruit?", followed by the guy she was with pointing out that he was an 11 year veteran of the Air Force.

There was no mistaking the assumptions made by said couple: Libertarians are anti-armed forces. I tried frantically to explain what led up to the bashing of the Kid Rock video, and that libertarians are FAR from anti-military, but alas, I could tell the seeds of misinformation were sown. Plus, being the crappy "salesman" that I am, I failed to convince them of what a ludicrous piece of propaganda the Kid Rock video truly is.

We're all doomed.

What's wrong with this story teaser?

I saw this headline teaser on CNN.com today...take a guess at why it pisses me off:

Angry crowd confronts senator on health care
A hostile crowd shouted questions and made angry statements today at a Pennsylvania town hall meeting on health care led by Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter. The meeting drew an overflow crowd of about 250 people, with more gathered outside to demonstrate for and against President Obama's push to expand health insurance for 46 million people without coverage while bringing down costs.

*rolls eyes*

--Browncoat

The Knee-Jerk Idiocy Meter

I should really stay away from CNN.com and their Knee-Jerk Idiocy Meter, i.e. their "Quick Vote" polls. The poll I see this morning: "Should texting while driving be banned?". The results: 92% Yes, 8% No.

By all means, let's encourage the idiots in Washington to pass another unenforceable law just so they can justify their existence and get re-elected year after year.

This isn't the first "Quick Vote" that has irked me. Almost every one of these "pulse taking" polls contains a carefully calculated question just begging for the knee-jerk answer. What typically follows the results of these polls is a CNN.com article claiming, e.g., "Majority of Americans Want Texting in Cars Banned". Irresponsible "journalism" like this just provides fuel for more of the knee-jerk legislation that is eating away at our liberties.

We are a nation of childish morons.

Cartoon from The Daily Scoff, along with a humorous related article.

Yes, They Can

Please forgive the redundancy, but this is more of an add-on to my previous post, "An Incoherent Truth".

I got to thinking more about Uncle Sam controlling my health care and how this will indirectly give the government power over my entire life. Many of the interventionist fools I talk about this with just laugh at me, calling me paranoid. I reel off potential infringements of our liberties that may come to pass because of this scam, and I get laughed at again, with them saying things like "They can't do that!"

Well, I've got news for you: Yes, they can. Here is a real-life example I experienced a couple of months ago:

One Sunday afternoon, the Mrs. and I lugged our masses of bulk trash out to the curb, which, while close to the street, is still our property. A week goes by and the bulk trash still hasn't been picked up by the city. No biggie, I have no complaints about this...my stuff on my property. Then we get a notice from the city telling us we have 48 hours to clear the bulk trash from the curb...again, our property. Seems we missed the memo that accompanies the rest of the unnecessary junk in our City of Fort Worth water bill stating that bulk trash week has moved. Fine, my bad, but I tend to ignore the non-bill nonsense that typically accompanies my, again...and remember this...water bill.

Now, consider this: the next new bulk trash pickup day was only about a week and a half away, yet I was going to get fined if I didn't clear the bulk trash off the curb (to the garage, wherever) in 48 hrs, then have to drag it back out a mere week and half later. We call the city to point out how ridiculous this situation was. Sorry, move it or get fined. My first reaction was "Well, screw you, I just won't pay this silly-ass fine."

This is where the real-life example of government control over ones life comes in: Trash pick-up is billed via the City of Fort Worth Water Department. Had I left my trash out and gotten a fine, the fine would be tacked on to my water bill. If I chose only to pay the water portion of the bill, no matter, the city could still SHUT OFF MY WATER because I objected to paying an unnecessary punitive fine for leaving bulk trash on the curb of my property. I can, however inconvenient, live without the trash pickup...I have a truck and can haul it down to the dump if I so choose. Last time I checked, I can't live without water, nor do I have a reasonable alternative to the municipal monopoly on the water supply. Sure, I can still haul my own trash down to the dump if I want, but guess what? The city still gets to bill me for trash pickup because the local-government controlled water system is, naturally, tied to the local-government controlled waste management system. I no longer have the freedom to make a reasonable decision regarding bulk-trash on my curb. Liberty, albeit a miniscule piece, has been lost here.

And you interventionists want the government holding the keys to your healthcare? Can you not see the logical progression of this unmistakeably Orwellian disaster you are supporting, as demonstrated in the example above? Do you really want the government micro-managing your life in the name of cost-cutting(see my previous post)?

"Oh, they can't do that."

Yes, they can.

--

An Incoherent Truth

I'm in one of "those" moods. It's my Incoherent Rant Mood, i.e. so many things in the world of politics are ticking me off I just don't know where to start ranting, so you might want to move along, there's nothing to see here but directionless rambling about things wayyy out of my control.

I think the latest "last straw" came yesterday while reading one of my favorite baseball blogs. Said blog is a brilliant mix of baseball, wit, politics, and more wit. Now, I don't know why I was so surprised to get bothered over one of the posts, I know the author is a "progressive" Democrat Obama-worshipper and that he works in D.C., so naturally he is going to spew Obamessiah "New New Deal" propoganda and regurge all of the "FDR Policies got us out of the depression" lies we were all brainwashed to believe in high school/college. But it did bother me. Subsequent comments on said blog just gave virtual nods to the interventionist bullshit, which just ticked me off further. The Cold War and all the trillions spent fighting government-enforced collectivism was for nought. Our nation has become infested with Big Government, feel-good collectivists. How the hell did this happen?

Later, at lunch, I go to the cafeteria, only to hear a cafeteria worker telling another how she got the government to pay for her analog-to-digital converter for her TV set. The sense of entitlement in her voice was flabbergasting. Our nation has become infested with entitlement-minded losers. How the hell did this happen?

Then I hear bits and pieces on the news about the inevitable national healthcare system that is about to be thrust upon us. All the feel-good interventionists seem to care about is that "the poor" and "everyone" get insurance coverage. That seems to be all that matters to them, forget the quality of care or the inevitable rationing of healthcare(see Canada), just as long as they can say everyone is "covered", everything will be utopian. None of them seem concerned about the rest of us ultimately being forced into this socialized medicine disaster and all of it's unintended consequences. Think about this for a sec: Uncle Sam is in charge of your healthcare needs. Uncle Sam needs to keep costs down, so suddenly, Uncle Sam can start dictating how you live your life, i.e. the risks you are willing to take with your health, be it riding a motorcycle, climbing a mountain, or eating too many cheeseburgers...the government can now penalize you in the name of cost savings. Why? Your risk-taking is bad for the collective. Because YOU took the risk of riding that motorcycle and getting in a wreck, YOU climbed that mountain and got injured, or YOU chose to eat too many cheeseburgers and got fat, YOU have run up costs for the collective. Our nation is surrendering individual liberty, the absolute keystone of this nation's founding, to feel-good collectivism.

How the hell did all of this happen?

Baseball, Apple Pie, & False Patriotism

So I've had a few days to reflect upon my July 4th weekend, a time of mixed emotions for me since my feline friend of 16.5 years, "Bill the Cat", died on July fourth of last year. Despite this sad reminder, I did enjoy an outstanding weekend of baseball(Rangers swept Tampa), apple pie, and love of country. Unfortunately, I was also subjected to numerous incidents of dishonest, false patriotism. Even though these incidents annoyed the shiite out of me, I was going to abstain from posting an angry diatribe here on the Interwebs. Then I ran across this story. Several of my biggest soap-box "buttons", dear readers, were subsequently pushed.

Seems that in August of 2008, this unfortunate fan at Yankee Stadium decided to go take a whiz during the 7th inning stretch singing of that annoyingly false anthem, "God Bless America". Said Whizzer was ushered out of the stadium by the NYPD under the pretense of "drunk and disorderly conduct". The man says he had two overpriced beers...one hour apart.

Now, I wouldn't blink an eye if this story took place here in Jesusland(Texas), hell, I'm surprised the Jesus-Police haven't already locked me up for my deliberate butt-planting at Rangers Ballpark during the 7th innning stretch. But [NASCAR Redneck Voice] Newww York City? [\NASCAR Redneck Voice] That bastion of Blue State, "progressive" thought? I couldn't believe what I was reading. I did some additional reading-up on this, only to find out that this was an ongoing issue at Old Yankee Stadium, and that stadium ushers used to chain up aisle barriers to prevent people from leaving their seat during "God Bless America". Again, in Newww York City?!? No freakin way!

Then I had to remind myself that Newww York City is also the country's petri dish of Nanny-State thought leading us down the road to, yes, I'm going to say it: a Police State. You scoff. I can hear you scoffing through the Interwebs, really. But think about this for a sec. A citizen of this "free" country was ejected from a baseball game because he was being "disrespectful to his country". He failed to obediently stand during a fking song! The Jackboot who ejected the man pulled the "drunk and disorderly" card, which is Orwellian Police-State code for "Urinate on the Bill of Rights". Fortunately, the man sued Newww York City and won.

ANYWAY, while I was surprisingly not jack-booted from Rangers Ballpark this weekend, I was subjected to our ballpark PA announcer's false-patriotic preamble to the singing of GBA...he always says something to the tune of "To honor our men and women serving in the armed forces around the world, please stand as [some twit] sings "God Bless America". No thank you. I will honor our service folks by keeping my rather large buttocks planted firmly in my undersized, maximum attendance-generating seat. "But why?", you ask with incredulous indignance. Simple. What the hell are our members of the armed services (alledgedly)fighting for, or more appropriately, against? They are fighting against this exact form of false patriotism, a.k.a. Islamacism, a.k.a. Theocracy, a.k.a. Marriage of Church and State.

How do we combat this domestically? Easy. Start with the Separation of Church and Baseball: keep your hiny planted during "God Bless America".

I refuse to embarass myself by believing in Bronze Age fairy-tales, yet I still bleed red, white, and blue. Imagine that.

Polluting the Message of Liberty With Irrelevant Christianity

When it comes to alliances in the fight for liberty, I am not one who subscribes to the "Politics makes strange bedfellows" way of thought. I often butt heads with my fellow libertarians on this issue when fiscal-sanity/smaller government "alliances" are proposed with groups like the Glenn Beck 9/12ers, The Constitution Party, Republican Tea Partyists, Meetup.com groups like the Texas Liberty Campaign, and yes, to some extent, The Campaign for Liberty, aka Ron Paul Republicans.

Why? All of the above groups(some CFLers) seem to insist upon injecting their Christian beliefs into the fight-for-liberty equation. Case in point: this meetup posted by the Texas Liberty Campaign. In what universe does Christianity have ANYTHING to do with responsible fiscal policy and limiting the size and scope of the federal government?

"But why not ally with these groups in order to win the battle for fiscal sanity and smaller government? Strength in numbers, you know."

Simple. I do not want to trade one form of tyranny for another, i.e. Big Government for Big Theocracy.

"Well, aren't you injecting your atheism into the same equation?."

No. Take the inane meetup linked to above. Did you see the text of the signs being proposed for the "liberty sign wave"? Here they are:

Side 1:Be Free in Christ
Side 2:Christian Libertarian (or Christian Constitutionalist) ETC

Side 1: I am for peace, but when I speak, they are for war.
(Psalm 120:7)
Side 2: Jesus Christ: Prince of Peace

Side 1: No King but King Jesus
Side 2: Resistance to Tyranny=Obedience to God (Debbie's personal favorite!)

Side 1 and Side 2: Fish swimming against the tide/school of fish image

Side 1: It was for freedom (Galatians 5:1)

Side 2: that Christ set us free

My desired ommission of the Christian nonsense proposed above is NOT "injecting my atheism". Read up on the burden of proof fallacy if that's what you were thinking.

Now, if this were MY "Celebrate Freedom Sign Wave", I'd at least keep it honest. You'd never see something like "Freedom From Religion", "The Bible is Bullshit", or other non-fiscal policy/smaller government sayings on the flip side of my liberty signs. THAT would be injecting atheism into the equation.

Again, what the hell does any of the above Xtian signage have to do with liberty?!? (I especially love the contradictory "Resistance to Tyranny=Obedience to God" proposed sign.) Yeah, I know, the meetup specifies that it wants to "Spread the Liberty Message to Christians..", but it's doing this at the "Celebrate Freedom Sign Wave"! And to boot, this meetup is posted on a religion-neutral sounding meetup called "Texas Liberty Campaign"! How in the name of Jeebus can you possibly "Celebrate Freedom" in one breathe then brag about "Obedience to your imaginary master" in the next?

Anyway, I believe all of these pseudo-libertarian groups don't give a crap about true liberty. Their ultimate goal is a Christian Theocracy, and as I said earlier, I will not ally myself with people trading one form of tyranny for another. I will not exhaust my energies in the battle for fiscal liberty, only upon victory to have to fight again for social liberty.

So to all of the above groups, stop calling yourselves "libertarian", you are nothing but refried neo-conservative sore-losers. Leave your religilous idiocy out of the fiscal sanity/smaller government equation, and I'll be happy to chat with you about alliances.

----
Image from here.

When "Belief" Becomes "Delusion" (Part Two)

I think the slaying of Dr. George Tiller says more about this than I could ever write. (Yes, I'm in another blogging rutt)

EDIT - ...and the religilous nut discussed in this Whited Sepulchre piece is just icing on the cake.

When "Belief" Becomes "Delusion" (Part One)

The last couple of weeks I've spent quite a bit of my time arguing with those of the religious persuasion. The arguments have included a variety of topics, including why I consider the "We believe in God" principle of the Glenn Beck 9/12ers to be divisive and unnecessary in the fight for less government and fiscal sanity, the effectiveness of prayer, the existence of Jesus, "God" as a delusion, and even the nature of the "real world". Each culminated, just as they usually do, in either the incredibly weak "it's all about belief/faith" rationalization/surrender or the "agree to disagree" compromise.

(Note: henceforth, I'll use the words "faith" and "belief" interchangeably, since the two are equivalent within the context of this discussion. Also in the context of this discussion, I will be using the following definition of the word Faith: firm belief in something for which there is no proof (i.e. blind faith), and NOT - Faith: complete trust (i.e. contingent faith), which the religilous love to falsely equivocate.)

The common thread I see among each of these arguments? : how "benign belief" (i.e. imagination, open-mindedness) can mutate into "benign delusion" (i.e. dogma, true closed-mindedness), and ultimately, provide the scaffolding for "malignant & destructive delusion" (i.e. flying planes into skyscrapers, undermining public school science classes with creation myths, electing fking morons to the U.S. Presidency)

Now, the simple cognitive act of believing in the possibility of something, i.e. the existence a god, gods, evil alien overlords that populated the earth by dropping souls into volcanoes, or alternate states of reality, is not, in and of itself, delusional. All of us have some degree of imagination, and simply positing the existence of something is harmless...life would be pretty boring if Gene Roddenberry had never imagined the world of Star Trek, Joss Whedon had never believed in the possibility of the Firefly universe (or simply 'Verse, as we Browncoats like to say), or the Wachowski brothers hadn't challenged our notion of "the real world" by positing The Matrix (and subsequently flubbing the sequels). Accepting the possibility of these and other products of the imagination that might be is benign belief. This is using one's imagination. THIS, is open-mindedness.

However, one begins descending into "benign delusion" and true close-mindedness when the "possibility" clause is removed from the notion of benign belief. When one starts actually believing that Lord Xenu populated Earth with(whatever the fk Scientologists believe), The Matrix is actually real, or that unseen deities actually exist and control our fate...again, actual belief without a shred of creditable evidence to support the belief(which is now a truth claim)...one has, by definition, become delusional.

So is the individual's delusion benign, or malignant? The delusion is relatively benign as long as the delusion motivated actions of the individual do not infringe upon the life, liberty, and property of other individuals who do not share the delusion. Building conceptual models of alternate realities, prayer, attending church, abstaining from sex, drugs, and rock n roll...all benign. Unfortunately though, when an otherwise benign delusion begins to be spread and shared amongst groups of individuals, the scaffolding for malignant delusion begins to manifest.

I'll tackle "malignant & destructive delusion" in Part Two of When "Belief" Becomes "Delusion". Right now, I'm hungry.

Random Rant: Preemptive War Muggering, Iraq, and "The Meth Lab Next Door"

So I'm helping man the Tarrant County Libertarian table at the Fort Worth Gun Show last Saturday, when up strolls the inevitable NeoCon Republican ready to educate us on why the libertarian policy of "isolationism" is just flat WRONG and why Uncle Sam was perfectly justified in the mugging of Iraq.

First of all, it's a "non-interventionist" foreign policy, not an "isolationist" policy....there is a HUGE difference between the two. See, Libertarians believe in "National Defense" in it's purist form, the optimal word of the phrase being "defense". If our nation is attacked, we believe in kicking the buh-jesus out of the attackers. We do not, however, subscribe to the notion of "The best defense is a good offense"...that phrase belongs on the football field, not in the State Department.

If libertarians had an "isolationist" policy, we would be against trade with other nations, which would contradict our pro-free market economy positions. Again, we believe in a non-interventionist approach when the military might of the US is concerned. The cost and unintended consequences of U.S. meddling in the middle east has been staggering. A non-interventionist approach would have saved us trillions, not to mention the lives that would NOT have been destroyed as a direct result of said meddling.

Anyway, the NeoCon mentioned above tried to rationalize the mugging of Iraq and preemptive mugging in general by comparing the baddies of the world to a hypothetical meth lab two doors down from your house. The meth lab, like Saddam, is a threat to your life and that of...wait for it...the chilllldren.

First of all, there wouldn't even BE a meth lab two doors down from you, much less one that would be a threat, if we would end this ridiculous and costly "War on Drugs"...but don't get me started on that...I'll save it for another post. Second, this guy's analogy is flawed beyond repair. In his world, it is the responsibily of the Arkansas State Police to eliminate the meth lab next door...you know, the one next door in...BOSTON (go Red Sox!). Which leads to, lastly, IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE U.S. MILITARY TO POLICE THE FKING WORLD AND "SPREAD DEMOCRACY".

"But Saddam wanted to destroy us!"

Well, so does North Korea, Venezuela, and countless other nations around the world...so why aren't we in North Korea and Venezuela? North Korea has nukes and Kim Jong Il's horrible fashion sense, while Venezuela has the noxious fumes emitted from Hugo's armpits. Said NeoCon didn't have an answer to either one.

"But all the Kurds slaughtered by Saddam...how do we just let that happen?"

The same way we let millions die at the hands of warlords in Africa, gawd knows how many under Kim Jong Il, and countless others killed under the rule of other despots around the globe. The U.S. is not the world police, nor did the founders intend for us to be:

"...it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."
-- Thomas Jefferson, from his 1801 inagural address.

...THAT dear readers, is the heart and soul of a non-interventionist foreign policy.

The U.S. would be MUCH better off if we'd keep our noses out of other nations affairs. The cost and unintended consequences just aren't worth the price.

So...What the Hell is a "Browncoat"?

I often (well, once or twice) get asked this question by my vast army of loyal readers (one or two), so I'm finally going to 'splain: Simply put, a "Browncoat" is a rabid fan of the late, great, shortlived television show "Firefly" and the movie "Serenity". A Browncoat will tell you without hesitation that Firefly was the greatest TV show...ever. Period.

The show premiered in the Fall of 2002, and died in December 2002 after the knucklehead executives at FOX Television (who didn't like the show in the first place) sabotaged and sunk the show before it had a chance to take flight.

In a nutshell, the show was about nine people aboard a transport spaceship named "Serenity". The setting of the show takes place 500 yrs in the future where we've terraformed and colonized planets and moons in a distant solar system. The central planets are very modernized and "futuristic", while the outer planets are much like the American wild-west of the 19th century. The outer planets had no desire to be under the thumb of "The Alliance", the governing body of the central planets, so there was a war of independence pitting the Alliance against the outer planets, a.k.a. "The Independents", a.k.a. "The Browncoats". Needless to say, the Browncoats were on the losing end of the war. The show picks up six years after the war, following the lives of a former Independent Sergeant named Malcolm Reynolds (played most excellently by Nathan Fillion) and his crew.

But it's not the sci-fi setting that makes the show so wonderful, it's the characters on Serenity, their interactions with each other, and the snarcky dialog... you immediately bond with the characters and feel like "part of the crew".

Anyway, I won't ramble on about the show, here's a link to the Firefly Wiki page if you want to learn more:

http://www.fireflywiki.org/


Needless to say, I highly recommend this series...it's fun, entertaining, and leans very libertarian. You can purchase the complete series and movie "Serenity" on DVD from Amazon.com.



I must warn you though: once you finish the series and movie, you will definitely be craving more and, well, there ain't. (Note: be sure to watch 'em in DVD order, not the screwed up order they were aired by FOX).

Oh, and did I mention: Nathan Fillion f'n rocks. Be sure to watch him Mondays on ABC starring in the new show "Castle"...he's ruttin' hi-larious!

Random Rant: Madonna's Elbonian Kids, "Political" Science, etc.

So I'm persusing CNN.com and notice their latest poll: "Should Madonna be allowed to adopt another Elbonian child?". Now, personally, I think the Madonnas and Brangelinas of the entertainment industry adopt children because it's some kind of weird Hollywood trend...the poor kids are more for show as fashion accessories than anything. I'm willing to bet all of the chidlins will likely end up being raised by an army of nannies once the fad dies out and/or the Mabrangelinas decide to move on to The Next Big Ego Stroking Cause.

All that to say I personally don't like the Elbonian adoption fad, however (back to the CNN poll), I checked "Yes" on the poll. I may not LIKE what Madonna is doing, but she has every RIGHT to adopt as many Elbonians as she pleases. What stunned me was the results of the poll which, at the time, were neck and neck! Roughly 40 something percent of people taking the poll think Madonna should not be allowed to adopt more Elbonian human accessories! ALLOWED?!? Allowed by whom? Why, Big Government, of course. Do these folks really want the Obamessiah & co. dictating whether or not they can adopt? Don't answer that...

"Political" Science
No, not the two courses you took in college. I'm talking about "Science" used to push political agendas. My opinions that second-hand smoke is harmless and that "climate change"(is that what we're calling it now?) is happening regardless of what we pesky humans do are often challenged by people sporting incredulous looks. "But aren't you a science-loving atheist?!?" Yes, as a rule, I put my trust in credible, non-politically motivated science. However, I do not trust politically motivated "science" whose results are exaggerated to the nth degree. The "dangers" of second-hand smoke are a prime example of hysterical, politically motivated "science". I've read some of these "studies" and the ludicrous conditions under which the hapless rats were exposed to. None of these conditions resemble anything close to reality, yet the "results" have worked their way into public opinion and your average schmo on the street will think you insane if said results are questioned.

We are truly a nation of sheep.

Newsflash: You ARE "The People"

So I just finished Fredric Bastiat's masterpiece of socialist repellent, "The Law", which, IMHO is probably the most brilliant treatise on the subject of liberty ever written. If you didn't know better, you'd swear you were reading the work of a 21st century author, not a 19th century economist/political philosopher.

One particular section really hit home with me where he writes about how the socialists of his time were either elitist snobs or contradictory knuckleheads. You see, I’ve had a few run-ins with 21st century socialists, a.k.a. Democrats, who really aren’t that different than their 19th century counterparts. Both share the same condescending attitude that “the people are not capable of governing themselves”. I’ve heard this pillar of socialist wisdom countless times in discussions and from local democratic congressional candidates.

After one of these recent discussions, I got to thinking, “so exactly WHO or WHAT is supposed to govern us then, HAL?” After all, aren’t politicians “people” too? Bastiat takes it a step further, basically saying: “If people aren’t capable of governing themselves, why in the world do people, a.k.a. YOU, person who believes people are incapable of governing themselves, have the right to VOTE”? After all, if you are incapable of governing yourself, why should you be entrusted with the awesome responsibility of electing your representatives?

Bastiat goes on to point out that those that espouse this condescending opinion of mankind naturally do not include themselves in the category of lowly incapables, proving his hypothesis that socialists, or rather, Democrats of both centuries are either elitist snobs or contradictory idiots.

So the next time one of your friendly neighborhood Democrats states that “people are too irresponsible or incapable of governing themselves”, when defending their socialist ideology, pull out your lighter and kindly ask them to hand over their voter registration cards for incineration.

[EDIT] Lest I be accused of being Pro-Anti-Democrat, I must give credit to the Democrats for being open about their elitist mentality. The GOP simply pays lip service to the concept of "government by the people"...they tell us what we want to hear during the elections and promptly start treating us like serfs once in office.

Back From the Abyss

Well I'm back from my interview at Grim Reaper, LLC. Looks like I didn't qualify for the position of Associate Casket Weight...oh well, maybe next time.

Anyway, thanks to everyone who visited the hospital, sent cards, thoughts, etc. my way, I deeply appreciate everything. I'm currently recouping at home and doing dialysis three times a week, hoping the kidneys come back...we shall see.

Once I'm caught up on everything, I shall return with more snarky commentary.

See ya soon,

Browncoat

Just Call Me "D-FENS"

Do you remember the 1993 Michael Douglas movie "Falling Down"? You know, the one where he plays a laid off defense contractor who's fed-up with the state of our country and his life, which leads him to ultimately lose it and go postal on a convenience store after the non-English speaking clerk won't give him change for the pay phone? Well, dear readers, according to my nephew(who is only 3 years my junior), I am that guy.

See, my nephew and I try to go out and have a beer every couple of weeks, just to keep up with each other, something we haven't done too well until last summer. Last week, we get on the subject of politics and the new anti-smoking legislation being proposed by the Republocrat nannies in Austin. Anyone who's been around me for more than five minutes knows this is a hot button for me. And it's not about the smoking(I'm a "small-s" smoker), it's about the loss of liberty and my frustration with the politically mindless proponents of the ever encroaching Nanny-State. I get worked up about our daily loss of liberty, and I'm passionate about the subject.

My nephew, an intelligent, successful guy, is one of these politically mindless proponents of the Nanny-State and Big Government. His attitudes towards liberty, voting, and the role of government in our lives encapsulate all that is wrong with today's voters. He doesn't understand, or, he even admitted, care, about the concept of "unintended consequences". Since HE doesn't like smoking, he's all for smoking bans. Even though I pointed out the endless potential unintended consequences of such bans, he flat out said he doesn't care. He'll "deal with it and adjust when and if he crosses that bridge." "When it comes to government, I'm only concerned with the here and now," says he.

Now, I'll admit, my nephew has a healthy attitude about change. When he has to wait five months for gall bladder surgery at the Clinton Memorial State Hospital, at least he'll have adjusted and accepted the excruciating healthcare delays. Assuming he survives the wait AND survives the surgery, he'll be much more mentally prepared to wait in the ten block long line to receive his monthly soylent green rations from the U.S. Department of Plenty. And admittedly, he'll fare much better than I when the Jefferson Memorial in D.C. is demolished and replaced with the Marx Memorial.

Me, I'll take the horn-rimmed glasses, the crew-cut, and the license plate that reads "D-FENS", thank you.