Ontario, Canada town threatens to evict disabled boy’s pony

"The town of Caledon may force a three-year-old boy with cerebral palsy to give up his miniature pony after a neighbour complained about the smell.
Sam Spiteri’s grandfather gave him the pony, Emily, after he was diagnosed with spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy shortly after birth. The boy can’t walk or crawl, and Emily is part of his therapy regime.
“When we take him off the pony he cries. Even if he’s tired he doesn’t want to leave her,’’ his mother, Antonia Spiteri, said today."

Full story, National Post

Sam Spiteri Facebook group

Mayor:
Mayor Marolyn Morrison

Town of Caledon
6311 Old Church Road, Caledon ON L7C 1J6
Office: (905) 584-2272
Fax: (905) 584-4325

marolyn.morrison@caledon.ca

Caledon bylaw enforcement manager:
Glenn Blakely - glenn.blakely@caledon.ca

Marriage

I think we can all agree, whatever side we come at the discussion from, that homosexual rights, particularly marriage, is one of the biggest issues facing this nation.

I'm going to break some things down within this discussion, and see where it goes.

California's prop 8, among others, this election cycle, seems to have brought the discussion to the forefront nationwide. I'm going to make my answer quite simple and easy, and then dig into it a bit. Here we go...both sides are wrong. To all reading, check fire until you actually finish reading please.

First, lets look into the history of marraige itself. It is an institution that seems ingrained into history, but until recent times, no outside recognition was really required, if a man and a woman said they were married, they were married, each culture handled the actual social ceremony different, but essentially, that was that. For the purposes of this blog, I'm going to focus primarily on European history, simply because it is from that history that much of our culture is derived.

As far as the Catholic Church went, for centuries, if you said you were married, you were. In 1215, it was declared that a "licit" marriage must occur in a Church, but other marriages were still recognized, and still considered marriages, just not "licit"

There was no state or civil involvement until the 16th century, when some European states began to require approval, primarily to prevent marriages that families did not approve of, ie rich and poor or what have you...

In the US, the idea of marriage licenses is relatively new, George Washington, for instance, was married without a license, it wasn't even thought of. The concept of marriage licenses in the US began popping up in the early 1900's, for the main purpose of prohibiting inter-racial marriage. Read that again: Marriage licenses had thier origin to block inter-racial marriage! Before that idea, it was unheard of to ask the state for the "right" to marry, it was not in the States domain to make the call one way or the other!

So, the two historical origins of marriage licenses, or state involvement, in marriage, were to prevent inter-racial or inter-class marriages. Nowdays, it's normal, expected, to obtain a marriage license, ie, permission, from the state before tieing the knot, but why? Why has this tradition continued? I don't know that answer, except to say that once some control is ceded to the state, it grows and grows, the state (by state I mean of course government in general) simply cannot be trusted without an ever vigilant and educated populace to prevent abuse.

So, essentially, from where I'm looking at things, historically, Biblically, and, constitutionally, there is no legal reason for government to be involved on any level in marriage, it simply isn't the business of the state. So, where exactly do I stand on the homosexual marriage issue? Personally, I'm opposed, I am a Christian, and I firmly believe that the Bible is clear on the morality of the matter. I am also firmly opposed to government overstepping it's bounds, and so, both sides are wrong.

I will say this thought, the Church should be ashamed of itself, not for prop 8 or similar issues, but for rolling over and turning the decision of marriage over to the state. For declaring the sanctity of marriage while divorce rates within the "sacred" institution of marriage skyrocket within the Church. For leaders who adamantly oppose homosexual marriage while cheating on thier spouse. No one is perfect, all are human, but if you are going to use the sanctity of marriage argument, which I do agree with and consider a valid argument, I expect you to listen to yourself. If marriage is sacred, treat it as such. Show me a valid reason for divorce, with the exception of adultery and abuse, I know of none.

If we, as a Church, expect to be able to stand for the institution of marriage, we must indeed stand for it! This means not only declaring it to be Biblically between a man and a woman, but Biblically forever, before God, till death do you part.

So, to those screaming for the state to give marriage rights to homosexuals, good job, your supporting a tradition of racism and classism, hope your proud.

To those against, you either oppose it within the Church, and from a pure perspective of marriage, or you are just as wrong. If you support divorce outside of adultery or abuse, shut your mouth.

NYS 23rd Congressional district

So, along with the Presidential election coming up, one can't forget the other races. I announced after the bailout bill and John McHugh voting for both versions that he had lost my vote. Well, it seems I have the following options, all of which, to me, are not options:

1) Vote against John McHugh, ie vote for Mike Oot

After having a look around his website (which, on a side note, gave me a headache to navigate) and reading what I could find on him, I'm hesitant to vote for him. First of all, he says that he would have supported the initially bailout bill, but is angry about the second. Well, I suppose thats better than McHugh, who voted for both versions, but not much. Also, one of the main issues he mentions on his home page is "quality, affordable health care" and on his (poorly designed) issues page "The availability of adequate healthcare for every American should be a National Priority. I am for Universal Healthcare"

Oh, and he's endorsed by WF(Working Families) which, in and of itself makes me think twice before voting for this guy, protest vote against McHugh or not

Also, I'm surprised (maybe I just couldn't find it, did i mention his website was designed by a poorly trained monkey?) that, him being from Munnsville, NY (practically my nieghbor) in a heavily rural area, makes almost no mention of farms, agriculture, or Upstate NY getting the short end of the economic stick. Actually, his site gives me the impression that he's running on healthcare (not a national concern) and the Iraq war, with the bailout as an afterthought.

I see no good reason to vote for this guy, except perhaps to spite McHugh, but It's not good enough, I'll pass on option 1.

2)Vote for McHugh anyways.

This options annoys me to no end. McHugh has held the seat for a while now, and hasn't done much that I've seen. Actually, I don't think he much cares about anything outside of Jefferson County, frankly, it is my impression that he's gotten overconfident and comfortable, seeing as every election has been a cakewalk, easily crushing any opposition, the district has been solid GOP since the 1800's, and he's the GOP man, who's gonna challenge him?
I'll pass on option 2, he lost my vote when he sold the American taxpayer down the river on both Bailout votes

3)Don't vote
not gonna happen

4)Write in
Apparently my only option, and, seeing as I've voted libertarian in every presidential election I could vote in, I'm kinda resighned to my vote being nothing more than a protest vote. The problem is, who to write in? Should I go for the classic sarcastic mickey mouse or donald duck? Perhaps write in Golisano just for giggles? I couldn't find any, but are any third party candidates running who perhaps haven't discovered the internet? I've basically decided, as both candidates on the ballot suck, to vote for niether, but that only shows if I vote for someone else, if I don't vote, it accomplishes nothing, not even a protest vote. So, fellow Upstate NY'ers, for whom shall I vote?

Obama the Socialist

I find it distressingly amusing how the mainstream media goes after Sarah Palin's husband for his ties to a seperationist party in Alaska, but are blatantly ignoring Obama starting his career as a member of the NP (New Party) in Illinois. Most evidence of this has been scrubbed, and Obama denies his affiliation, but heres the wonder of the internet, nothing goes away. Thanks to the Wayback Machine we can see the truth.

"Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)." October 1996 NP Update archived link, emphasis added

From the Progessive Populist, 11/96:
"New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. "


From the Chicago DSA (Democratic Socialists of America), July-August 1996

"New Party Update

by Bruce Bentley

The Chicago New Party is increasely becoming a viable political organization that can make a different in Chicago politics. It is crucial for a political organization to have a solid infrastructure and visible results in its political program. The New Party has continued to solidify this base.

First, in relation to its infrastructure, the NP's membership has increased since January '95 from 225 to 440. National membership has increased from 5700 in December '95 to 7000. Currently the NP's fiscal balance is $7,000 and receives an average of $450/month is sustainer donations.

Secondly, the NP's '96 Political Program has been enormously successful with 3 of 4 endorsed candidates winning electoral primaries. All four candidates attended the NP membership meeting on April 11th to express their gratitude. Danny Davis, winner in the 7th Congressional District, invited NPers to join his Campaign Steering Committee. Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in 7th Subcircuit Court, explained that due to the NP she was able to network and get experienced advice from progressives like Davis. Barack Obama, victor in the 13th State Senate District, encouraged NPers to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration. The lone loser was Willie Delgado, in the 3rd Illinois House District. Although Delgado received 45% of the vote, he lost by only 800 votes. Delgado commented that it was due to the NP volunteers that he carried the 32nd Ward. Delgado emphasized that he will remain a visible community activist in Humbolt Park. He will conduct four Immigration workshops and encouraged NP activists to get involved.

The Chicago NP will hire a second organizer and an intern, preferably Spanish speaking, to work in the 35th Ward. Upcoming events include a 70's Retro Dance Party on Friday, July 12th, and Post Labor Day Picnic on September 7th." (Emphasis added)


So, who is Obama really? We hear all about Sarah Palin's husbands ties to the Alaskan Independence Party, but strangely nothing about Obama's roots. I wonder why the media is sweeping this information about the "Chosen One" away from public scrutiny?

House passes second attempt at bailout bill

Well, the House of Representatives has buckled and passed the new attempt of a bailout bill, after a refusal on Monday to steal from main street to fund wal streets greed. So now not only will we feel the repurcussions from unwise lending practices and overspending, but we'll be paying to keep those who made those mistakes in business. Me and my dad run a small family business, an organic dairy farm to be exact. If we were to overspend or make unwise business moves, we would go out of business, that's capitalism, but it seems that failure in business gets rewarded with money so long as it's a failure on an epic scale.

I understand the complexity of the situation and the brink our economy is on, but it's been coming for a while. our economy has relied on prices going up and up and up, anyone with any understanding of history or economics can tell you that bubbles pop, yet for some reason noone deemed it cause for alarm that our entire economic system is based on bubbles not popping. Rep Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) sums it up pretty well, "How can we have capitalism on the way up and socialism on the way down,".

The bill passed the Senate 74-25, the House 263-171, and has already been signed by President Bush, and so, once again, the American people are betrayed. Oh, and by the way, a tax cut was attached to the bill, because apparently our national debt wasn't big enough, let's just throw money at everything. Money, according to the federal government, is like duct tape, it fixes everything, nobody has explained to me what the plan is when the duct tape doesn't stick. Maybe we'll ask Iraq for a loan? After all, we've poured so much money into them they've been giving it away in the streets.

Main street robbery halted by the House of Representatives

The bailout plan (H.R. 3997) was voted on in the House today, and it did not pass, 228 representatives (95 Democrats, 133 Republicans) voted nay, refusing to steal out of the American taxpayers pocket to prop up the greed of Wal Street big shots. Sadly, my Representative, John McHugh, was not among those who stood against this bill, I'm questioning why I voted for him, and am uncertain if I can do so again, I will be watching him closely. I am not a one issue voter, but this is a biggie, he's lost my trust today, even as the House overall gave me a ray of hope that maybe there is a smattering of common sense left on Capital Hill.

House vote on HR 3997

May God bless you..with discomfort

From a Franciscan Benediction I happened to stumble across:

"May God bless you with discomfort at easy answers, half truths, and superficial relationships, so that you may live deep within your heart.

May God bless you with anger at injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people, so that you may work for justice, freedom and peace.

May God bless you with tears to shed for those who suffer from pain, rejection, starvation, and war, so that you may reach out your hand to comfort them and to turn their pain in to joy.

And may God bless you with enough foolishness to believe that you can make a difference in this world, so that you can do what others claim cannot be done. "

I'll let you chew on that for a bit, I know I certainly am...kinda makes you go "wow"

Who is Sarah Palin?

It's the question everyone is still trying to answer, who is this dark horse McCain picked for his VP? I watched her speech at the GOP convention, and my immediate reaction was "Can I vote for her without McCain?" So, I've decided to do some digging about, and found plenty of this and that, some of it reliable, some of it nothing more than small town rumors.

The Basic Facts:

Wasilla, Alaska City Counsil, 1992-96
Mayor of Wasilla, 96-2002
Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commissioner, 2003-06
Governor of Alaska, 06-present

Her Record:

Staunchly Pro-Life

believes “marriage should only be between a man and a woman.”

Lifetime member of the NRA, supports gun safety programs for "Alaska's youth"

"Bridge to Nowhere" initially supported the idea, now against it

more info on where she stands, no reason for me to reinvent the wheel:
ontheissues.org


Controversy:
One of the biggest questions surrounding Palin is the abuse of power investigation. It seems that Palin's sisters ex husband is a moron and, also went through a rather nasty divorce and custody battle with Palin's sister. Now, the scandal here isn't over the stupidity of the trooper in question, seems everyone, including himself, agrees he's a bit of an idiot. No, the scandal here is whether Palin and friends pressured then Public Safety Commissioner Monegan to fire the state trooper in question. Monegan refused, and was canned himself, hence the investigation

Getting Real About Palin


Theres a few others, her 17 year old daughter being pregnant for instance, that I frankly don't understand why they are at all a public issue, sure I guess if you wanted to you could take from it arguments over abortion and sex ed, but only if you're a dirtbag who doesn't mind using a teenager for political hay, so other than that opinionated statement, I'm going to leave the family "scandal" alone, if you want to delve into that one, theres always Google...

Now, since lots have been asking me, what do I think?

I think that, on the surface, I like Palin, she gave an excellent speech at the convention, she comes off as a small town/rural person, hardcore conservative. I like that. But, she supports John McCain, I don't like that. I'm still not voting for McCain, her speech swayed me a little, but I'm still gonna be a good political cynic and vote 3rd party. The abuse of power allegations also give me pause, I've seen enough of that from Bush-Cheney.

She seems all to eager to toss about how she told congress "thanks but no thanks" on the bridge to nowhere, but doesnt mention that she was one of the ones who pushed for it, and then when she realized it wasn't politically feasable, decided to oppose it, but kept the money for other things, boy, thats just stellar, She's looking more and more like a run of the mill GOPper

She has no, repeat no foriegn policy experience at all, but she seems to be parroting McCain's stance on Iraq and Iran, now, I will admit, things are looking alot better in Iraq, but I would argue thats due mostly in part to the Iraqi government finally growing a pair than anything else, and if we would just stop poking Iran with a stick everynow and then...well, the only thing the Iranian people hate more than thier current government is US, so, if we'd just ignore them, they would literally go away, we need to stop meddling in the affairs of other countries, not threaten more countries

The last thing that worries me is her strong stance on abortion and gay marriage. Some of you are scratching your heads and going "wha-?" If she can keep her views out of federal policy, great, but if she decides to champion any sort of federal legislation regarding either, she's in violation of the 10th amendment, and gets added to the list of politicians who think the constitution is just a piece of paper

So, to sum up my thoughts, of the 4 figures on the "main" national stage, I dislike her the least, and if McCain wasn't on the ticket, I might even consider voting for her, with 1 or 2 strong reservations, but there are some questions that need to be answered, and McCain is on the ticket, so, although she made my mind go "hmmm" she hasn't changed it, the Republicans are still not getting my vote this election

Obama and the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

I'm not going to go into deep detail here on my views on abortion, thats another blog for another time, so I'll simply say this: I'm personally and morally opposed to abortion, but I believe that constituionally it is a state issue the federal government has no place in. However, this specific bill was 1) a state bill when Obama was a state Senator and 2) a bill to ensure that aborted infants that survived the "procedure" (born alive..) recieved care rather than being tossed away, ie, being treated as humans...whether you believe life begins at conception or first breath or sometime in between, in any view, these are living, human babies, and Obama voted and argued against a bill protecting them...at the risk of blatantly showing my bias (which, for any newcomers, is unashamedly against both Obama and McCain, once again, another post for another time..) Now, I know that I often argue that I generally ignore the abortion issue on a federal level, as any action in any direction regarding abortion on a federal level is a violation of the 10th amendment, and as such, unconstitutional and illegal, this matter goes beyond that. This is not abortion, this is not an argument over whether it's a living baby or a "fetus" these are (were?) babies, that lived despite the efforts of thier mothers and abortionists, took thier first breath, only to be discarded as unwanted trash. This is a character issue, a moral issue, and a legal issue. Inarguably, no matter your stance on abortion, once a baby is born and breathing, it is alive, it is human, and to kill it is murder, neglecting and refusing proper care to the living baby is essentially the same thing, and in my mind, heartless. To oppose such a bill because it may "inconvience doctors" is utterly despicable, and is something one must consider when considering Obama as the "savior of America" sure, he charmingly promises change, but, is it change you can accept? Know who you're hiring for the next president

Why it pays to be on time

After twenty-five years in the same parish, Father O'Malley was saying his farewells at his retirement dinner. An eminent member of the congregation - a leading politician - had been asked to make a presentation and a short speech, but was late arriving. So the priest took it upon himself to fill the time, and stood up to the microphone:

"I remember the first confession I heard here twenty-five years ago and it worried me as to what sort of place I'd come to... That first confession remains the worst I've ever heard. The chap confessed that he'd stolen a TV set from a neighbor and lied to the police when questioned, successfully blaming it on a local scallywag. He said that he'd stolen money from his parents and from his employer; that he'd had affairs with several of his friends' wives; that he'd taken hard drugs, and had slept with another woman and given her a disease.

You can imagine what I thought... However I'm pleased to say that as the days passed I soon realized that this sad fellow was a frightful exception and that this parish was indeed a wonderful place full of kind and decent people..."

At this point the politician arrived and apologized for being late, and keen to take the stage, he immediately stepped up to the microphone and pulled his speech from his pocket: "I'll always remember when Father O'Malley first came to our parish," said the politician, "In fact, I'm pretty certain that I was the first person in the parish that he heard in confession....."

McCain and Wikipedia

So, apparently McCain is using the interweb now, as his campaign decided to show off thier web prowess by... directly quoting Wikipedia in a statement on the Georgia Russia blowup..I know I'm a few days behind the pitch on this one, but I can't let it go, I mean, basically this means our two "major" options for president are a guy who uses Wikipedia for information on a foriegn affair (couldn't they have been a little classier at least in choosing someone to plagerize and used..say, the CIA factbook? wouldn't that be ironic...) and a guy who doesn't even know we have 50 states...really? Isn't there at least a GED requirement for this job?

Why I rarely bother to argue on the internet..

I recently noticed that one of my earlier blogs was posted on Liberty Post and initially thought to myself "cool, lets read through the comments and see what folks had to say" to my chagrin, and sadly, complete lack of surprise, I saw in most of the comments, not much intelligent debate, mostly the tossing around of insults that most wouldn't have the balls to say to anyone's face, and frankly, complete and total disrespect for the opinions of others. No matter who you support, I may disagree with you, I may even become frustrated by your perspective, but if you've done your homework and from that arrived at your viewpoint, that alone is respectable, it's far beyond what most Americans bother to do these days. This is a classic example of why I generally get annoyed and fed up with internet "debates" as they aren't debates at all. "Sling mud and all you do is lose ground" and "arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded" come to mind. Responses like many seen on the Liberty Post are part of the reason I've become so cynical about political debate. Show me an intelligent argument, even if I disagree with it, I'll consider it ("It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle) toss around insults, and you become nothing but another troll to ignore, bringing nothing of merit to the discussion. Sadly, most discussion one encounters online has eventually devolved into nothing more than showing who can mock the other, rather than an intelligent, respectful, grownup exchange of facts that pertain to the matter at hand, proving my earlier piont to the hilt. When did political debate devolve into "My daddy can whoop your daddy"??
/rant

pic of the day

Gestapo alive and well in Maryland

Prince George's raid prompts call for probe

According to the above, police raided the mayors house because someone mailed a package of marijuina there, apparently without his or any of his family's knowledge. So the police kick in his door, shoot his dog's, and then realize they are...retarded. but, not even an "oops" or "sorry" from the county sherrif's dept, and it would seem that these sort of SS tactics are not unique, this one simply got media attention because they strongarmed a mayor. The police in the raid were apparently not in any sort of uniform, masked, etc. Now, to me, that sounds like...I dunno, breaking and entering, assault with a deadly weapon, wrongful detainment, and a good way to get shot for trespassing. Normally I'm not a big fan of lawsuits, but I hope this guy sues the livin daylights out of all officer's involved, and out of the county sherrif. Furthermore, the Sherrif, being ultimately responsible for the actions of his department, should resign his post. These actions are simply unamerican, unconstitutional, and bring shame to law enforcement

Why the Ron Paul movement stumbled

Whether you liked him or not, the Ron Paul campaign made a splash in the GOP primary, but why only a splash and not a tidal wave? He had a large, vocal, supportive base. He raised record amounts of campaign funding, and he had a solid message, reduce the bloated federal government, reduce federal spending, and return to the constitution. He supported gun rights, he was pro life, he opposed government spying on it's own citizens. So, what happened?

As someone who vocally supported Ron Paul, I'll give you my perspective, the 9/11 "truth" movement.
These nutjobs, yes, nutjobs, sidelined the libertarians and constitutionalists such as myself supporting Ron Paul's message of reduced federal government, reduced spending, and returning power to the people, and used the Ron Paul campaign as a bullhorn to further spout their misguided rantings. They, in turn, associated Ron Paul's campaign with their silly notions. I've watched their "truth" videos, read the articles, and am only convinced that, while perhaps mistakes were made, the greatest mistake is giving "truthers" any sort of attention.

They turned the Ron Paul campaign from a viable movement protesting an overgrown and overreaching big brother government into a CT mockery. It got to the point where anyone I attempted to talk to about Ron Paul who didn't already understand his positions immediately associated him with the tin hat crowd and wanted nothing to do with him.

Ron Paul never encouraged the "truthers" message, in fact, his position outright defied it "blowback anyone?" but they kept screaming on, refusing to cloud the issue with facts, and turned off people such as myself, their quest for "truth" in spite of facts derailed a message of actual truth, and now we are, once more, stuck with politics as usual, with a democrat and a republican who are both worthless, both advocating increased government, or voting third party.

The Ron Paul message of freedom was hijacked and sidelined by the "prison planet" extremist crowd, and I believe our nation is worse off for it.

I haven't decided yet if I'm voting for Bob Barr (L), Chuck Baldwin (C), writing in Ron Paul, or maybe I'll vote for mickey mouse, but I know this, the 9/11 "truth" movement has weakened my belief in the intelligence of the individual

my computers

So, I decided to rearrange my desk, and that started some craziness. After physically moving my desk and computers, I decided to change some things on my computers themselves. I have three computers going currently, 2 desktops and a laptop.

Desktop 1, main computer

Debian, kde. I just recently switched over to kde, I've been using enlightenment for a while, and fvwm-chrystal before that, but I decided to give it a try, so far I like it. I use this computer for general web browsing, open office, and as my media server (mpd, ushare, samba) and such



I like my desktops pretty simple, no icons, in this case an autohide taskbar, and my app and window menus on left and right click on the desktop. the background is setup with Xplanet



theres my kde taskbar, set to autohide and transparent so it only gets in my way when I want it to (usually :-D )



and some random programs, well, in this case a terminal window and sonata, one of mpd clients






Desktop 2

Debian, gnome. I don't really actively use this computer much, it is more an in the background machine, It's my main samba server, as well as serving a few other server functions.



nothing fancy, I don't even remember why I bothered to install X on this machine, but it's there and I'm to lazy to take it off, no harm done really




the laptop
just that, my laptop, a Dell Inspiron 1521 it's my other general use computer when I don't feel like sitting at my desk, and the reason I love mpd. I can have music playing on my main computer through my stereo system and easily change it from the other room on my laptop. anyways, this was a pain to get running to a point where I was happy with it, I tried debian and perhaps I was impatient, but it didn't work very well on the laptop. In a moment of temporary insanity I tried ubuntu, and hated every minute of it...finally I decided to give Mandrivia a try, I really don't even know why, I haven't touched anything not debian or debian derived in forever, but I did cut my teeth on Red Hat back in the days of RH 7.0 so I figured I'd give it a go. The install was quick, and, well, wireless didn't work right away, but it was a quick fix with ndiswrapper, and I was up and running in no time, everything just works

computer issues

currently battling through some computer issues, hope to be back up and running soon!

Pic of the day

found here

"The remarkable neo-gothic Sanctuary of the Virgin in a gorge near Ipiales, close to Colombia's border with Ecuador."

Amazing picture, I'd love to see this place in person...simply stunning!

Pic of the day

Found this here


"Royal Naval College, Greenwich

by Steve Charles

The painted Hall at the Royal Naval College, Greenwich, incorporating the reflection of a mirror-topped table. Single exposure (not HDR)."

One girl, one ride

One Girl One ride
This girl is 12 years old, but she has an amazing vision, she's riding across the state of Minnesota on horseback with her family and supporters to raise money to build a ranch where wounded servicemen can relax and recover, free of cost. I stumbled across this website and was simply amazed. It gave me hope for the future, that a 12 year old girl would have such an amazing idea, and act on it. So, E'leese, keep up the good work and never lose sight of your dreams, and a big Hoorah! from this prior service Marine.

Pic of the day

found this onZullo photagraphy
He's got a great collection of shots from the American southwest, very enjoyable site

Bob Barr, Libertarian for president

June 06 interview with Glenn Beck



Bob Barr for president campaign site

Bob Barr, Civil Libertarian

Pic of the day

nice sunset picture taken by my good friend Jean out in the Rochester area

Davy Crockett on government spending

thanks to Mover Mike for the following quote, to bad our modern politicians have forgotten the importance and meaning of their duty to the people:

In the early 1800’s Congress was considering a bill to appropriate tax dollars for the widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in support of this bill. It seemed that everyone in the House favored it. The Speaker of the House was just about to put the question to a vote, when Davy Crockett, famous frontiersman and then Congressman from Tennessee, rose to his feet.

“Mr. Speaker, I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity, but as members of Congress we have no right to so appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Sir, this is no debt. We cannot without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

There was silence on the floor of the House as Crockett took his seat. When the bill was put to a vote, instead of passing unanimously as had been expected, it received only a few votes. The next day a friend approached Crockett and asked why he spoken against a bill for such a worthy cause. In reply, Crockett related the following story:

Just a few years before, he had voted to spend $20,000.00 of public money to help the victims of a terrible fire in Georgetown. When the legislative session was over, Crockett made a trip back home to do some campaigning for his re-election. In his travels he encountered one of his constituents, a man by the name of Horatio Bunce. Mr. Bunce bluntly informed Crockett, “I voted for you the last time. I shall not vote for you again.”

Crockett, feeling he had served his constituents well, was stunned. He inquired as to what he had done to so offend Mr. Bunce. Bunce replied, “You gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. The Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions.” “I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000.00 to some sufferers by a fire. Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away public money in charity? No Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose.”

“The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution. You have violated the Constitution in what I consider to be a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the People.”

“I could not answer him,” said Crockett. “I was so fully convinced that he was right.” I said to him, “Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. If you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another nconstitutional law, I wish I may be shot.”

After finishing the story, Crockett said, “Now sir, you know why I made that speech yesterday. There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a weeks pay? There are in that House many very wealthy men, men who think nothing of spending a weeks pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of these same men made beautiful speeches upon the debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased, yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it.”

British Satire, a welcome breath of fresh air from obamaphiles

He ventured forth to bring light to the world

I don't care where on the political spectrum you call home, you must admit, thats funny stuff

Pic of the day

stumbled onto this and many other awesome pics at http://www.extremeinstability.com/ check this ite out, I doubt you will regret it!

Obama defaces Judiasm's holiest site with campaign ads?

Obama camp plasters posters at Western Wall

I'd like to say I'm shocked by his arrogance, but this is really nothing more than more of his rockstar "look at how awesome I am" attitude. Furthermore, he shows up in a yamika? Ok, I guess I can understand perhaps trying to respect where he's at, but he rather failed that attempt when his campaign plastered his face all over...when are the media and people in general going to stop fawning over how awesome this guy appears to be and dig beneath the pretty speeches about change and hope and look at who he really is?

Pic of the day

I wish I knew where this picture came from, I stumbled across it today, just a random image on image shack, it's an amazing picture

*Edit July 26 12:23* so I found out the origins of this pic, and am happy to give proper credit to the original photographer. Ironically, I found this out by stumbleing the web, same as i found the pic

"This awesome picture was taken in Bitterroot National Forest in Montana on August 6, 2000.
The photographer, John McColgan, is a fire behavior analyst from Fairbanks, Alaska. He took the picture
with a digital camera. Because he was working at the time he took the picture he cannot profit from it;
however, we feel the picture is a once-in-a-lifetime shot and should be shared."
http://www.stambaughfamily.com/bitterroot.html

*edit*

Pic of the day

TSA gone mad?

You know the drill, you go to the airport, check in, get your ticket, drop off your luggage, tell them that yes indeed you packed it all yourself, no you don't have any weapons...you go through security, yes, your bag has been in your possession the entire time, no some random stranger didn't ask you to carry it through for them, take your shoes, belt, etc off, walk through the metal detector, and hope to high heaven you don't have a penny in your pocket you missed.

We've all heard the TSA stories that make us wonder just exactly where they get these "agents" from?
The latest to make you just scratch your head and go "huh!?" TSA Agents Forced Woman To Remove Nipple Rings, Pulled Pants Off Disabled Man


Really? I'd have trouble believing this, but, I've seen and heard these insanities before. A friend of mine I was flying with a few months back nearly had his electronic toothbrush confiscated because "a metallic cylinder" appeared in the handle. My friend attempted to explain that the toothbrush, being electronic, contains a battery. After much hassle and a supervisor, they determined that it was indeed, a toothbrush...I could go on and on, but heres the point I'm getting to:

At what point have we overreacted? At what point do we decide that maybe, just maybe, a 71 year old man in a wheel chair is most likely not a terrorist, and perhaps the real threat to our safety and security is an overconfident undertrained nutjob on a power trip? ("At that point, Perry was standing in his underwear in public view. He asked to see a supervisor. That made things worse.

"She was yelling 'I have power, I have power, I have power," Perry said. The power to stop him from flying to Florida with his wife that day to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary.") Are we really better off? I mean I certainly feel better knowing that nipple rings, wheelchairs, toothbrushes, and old mens underwear are being closely scrutinized by knowing individuals capable of asserting their power by throwing a temper tantrum if their authority is questioned...yep, we are certainly much safer and freer now thanks to these brave men and women who got fired from McDonalds...

Dark Knight

So I just got back from seeing Dark Knight in theatres, awesome movie, well worth watching, was a bit intense at times, but had some funny moments to. Heath Ledger (RIP) did an excellent job playing the joker, and the others also did excellent. It did have some incredibly sad moments, I won't spoil them for any who have yet to see it...but, yea, overall well worth watching, you'll laugh, you'll flinch, you may even get misty eyed here and there, and this is easily one of those movies you'll walk out of the theatre glad you came

Pic of Day(ish)

So I've decided to do the whole pic of the day thing, enjoy!







found this pic from Bin's Corner

Dobson's political shift

So, it seems Dobson has flip flopped rethought his position on John McCain: Dobson shifts

This is a big 180 from his statement in February that if McCain is the GOP nominee against Obama (or the other possibility at the time, Clinton) he would "not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life"

Now, here's where I take issue, besides the complete change despite any apparent change from McCain. Both times, Dobson implies, in the latest statement outright states, that besides the Democrats and Republicans, there are no alternatives. I realize third parties are a bit of a long shot, but I've been saying since I was old enough to be into politics that third parties are a long shot not because people don't agree with, or want to vote for a parties candidate more than a so called "major" candidate, but because they don't want to "waste their vote".

I am a registered Republican, I have been since I was old enough to vote, but only for local politics. Nationally, I have never voted major party, not for president, not for senate, the national GOP has become no better than the democrats. Do I waste my vote? Some would say yes, but let me ask you this:

Should you vote on the basis of fearing "the alternative" or agreeing with what you vote for? The "lesser of two evils" argument has grown old to me, as far as I see it, you're still voting for an "evil"

Dobson willfully adds to the political ignorance of the American public, and to the impression that all of the conservative "religious right" are a fickle, fearful bunch blindly following the GOP to protect them from the boogeyman. I don't like Obama at all, but I also dislike McCain. So, logically, being a sane person, I will pick a choice I do like, rather than hiding my head under the blankets and hoping that the monsters don't get me, as Dobson is apparently doing

First post

yep, but there will be more! here basically where I see this blog going, I'm into a bit of everything, I'm a linux geek, all three of my computers run on linux (2 desktops, Debian, 1 laptop, Ubuntu) I'm currently running a small organic dairy farm with my dad, I'm obsessed with politics and history, as well as mythology and religion/theology. I've got this and that going on, who knows what the future holds. I'm thinking for blog constants we'll go with a pic/website/news story of the week, on say..Friday? sure..friday, and a thought for the week on...oh let's say Sunday, and intersperse that with my in between hamster musings as the hamster deems to do so. for the moment, go on and leave any ideas you might have, nifty ideas you may have, food for the hamster, etc etc...I'll be back shortly