GOP's Re-branding (of DNC)?!

Google Search: "rnc to re-brand democrats"

So, the republicans' plan to win the public support again is not to actually try to get better, or be constructive, but to call democrats names like "socialists".
How idiotoc that "plan" is?! It sounds like it comes from a script for a bad high school rivalry movie.

Is that the result of combined hundreds of yeas of expensive education and unlimited access to wealth?! Calling names?! Really?!

This would have been hilarious if it was not so disgusting.

Is that the GOP way of making the country better?! By slander?! How honorable[sarcasm]!

Where are the decent, honest, and bright people in GOP? What kind of twisted moral degenerates are running the party?!!!

Enforcing the Law by Breaking the Law?!

The story is that this guy led the Birmingham, AL police (and few other depts.) on a chase, endangering the lives of many people in a wide area. No doubt the police did their job and chased the criminal until they caught him. So far so good - he is a dangerous criminal and must be stopped. That's why we have police force, gladly pay for it, and proudly support it.

The second part of this story, which can't seem to find common sense reception in people's minds is that when finally the police ran the criminal off the road and he was thrown out of his van and laying motionless and obviously unconscious on the ground, all present officers started beating the unconscious body for about 10 seconds.
Now, I'll admit that I felt some primal satisfaction that the criminal got to suffer a violent apprehension and if he died while being thrown out of the van or got shot by an officer trying to stop him, I'd probably say that he deserved it, but I also think that beating him while unconscious would have been more appropriate if not the police but a lawless street gang was chasing and caught him.

But what I think does not matter here. What matters is what the Law says. In different commentaries of this story a lot of people are angry with the Birmingham, AL police chief for firing the officers who took part in the beating. I understand the anger, after all those police officers risked their lives and one almost got killed during the chase. What no one of those folks is saying is how exactly the police chief should handle something like this - he is in charge of enforcing the Law and those officers broke the Law. At least for now righteous anger does not legally justify breaking the Law by anyone, let alone by a Law enforcement officer.

For those who are angry about the fired officers - they were not fired for being mean to the criminal, they were fired for breaking the Law. Why is this so difficult to understand for so many people?! The only conclusion I came to is this one:

the years of intentional politicising of the public opinion make a lot of people see the situation as cops being unjustly fired for beating a black criminal, who is being helped by slick lawyers and out of control human rights activists.

Some people say things like "in other countries" the cops would have shot him dead right away. I agree. Also, in other countries, where there is no Law and professional police training to get in the way of rightfull anger, the cops could have decapitate him on the spot, impale his body, rape his wife, kill the rest of his family and burn his house to the ground, if they felt like it...

Thank God The United States of America is NOT one of those countries.

The Importance Of Diversity

Story: Gallup Poll: Diversity not a priority for Supreme Court - Los Angeles Times

Perhaps is time to revisit the meaning of diversity in public life and in the society at large. It's unfeasible, and counter-productive to continue approaching this issue as goal to achieve mandatory quota or a balanced mix of race and ethnicity.
Let's stick with the original goal of giving everyone equal access to public office, regardless of sex, race, and origin. Regardless should mean making those classifications irrelevant, not mandating that all groups are represented. This not only does not help but it becomes a serious obstacle for building a truly inclusive and tolerant society.
If the goal is to eliminate gender and ethnicity as qualifiers for eligibility (it does not matter for what), we should focus on the qualifications, and fitness of the candidates for the position, not if they are the "right" gender or ethnicity. That's discriminatory by definition.

It's Only Common Sense

It's official - Dick Cheney has more respect and admiration for Rush Limbaugh than for Colin Powell. This weekend on CBS he stated that if he had to pick between Colin Powell and Limbaugh, he'd choose Rush.

Like an addict in denial, the Republican party has been struggling to identify the reasons why people are growing increasingly hesitant to side with them on elections. They have been tirelessly working on the "new face" and the "new message" of the party, and still can't quite understand how to make the conservative agenda more appealing to moderate voters.


Walt Handelsman, copyright 2009 Tribune Media Services



Here are a few hints, coming from a non-partisan perspective:

1. Don't publicly insult a decorated general of the United States Arm Forces, by putting him second to an out-of-control drug addicted shock-jock, who makes living by deliberately antagonizing the public.
2. If you are trying to reach moderate voters, tone down (best - get rid of) the radicalism.
3. Try being constructive and positive. Talk is cheap - any fool can sit on the sidelines and yell insults. People follow leaders who roll up sleeves to build something of value instead of endlessly complaining.

To paraphrase the former vice-president: If I'd have to choose a leader I'd have to go with Sanity and Moderation.

Tony Auth, copyright 2009 Universal Press Syndicate

Comercial-Free?!?

Using advertisement for advertisement-free online video to adverise.

Just like ... s**t-free poop of a crap. It's not waste - it's bi-product, and "bi" means we are getting double the value and that's good, right?

My $0.02: Please, just advertise. Stop trying to trick us - we live in the same world and we know what you are up to. If you are going to annoy us, please have the courtesy not to try to make it sound like it's for our benefit. Just show your banners and promos as usual. Don't try to sneak up on us, trying to catch us off-guard. That only works once. With TV there was not much choice - you see an annoying ad popping up in unusual spot - you flip around the channels and if there is nothing else better than what you were watching you eventually come back to it.

Internet offers a lot more choices. Like for example now - I see this clever turd (see the picture) pushed at me while watching something online, and I leave immediately to blog about what I think of it. While I do that, I carefully make sure to hide all the brands, I personally make point not to watch at the advertised time, and I also tell everyone I know not to do it. Unlike with TV - you can't count on me to come back for lack of better things to do online - there is always something else interesting on the Internet. Always! And with the short attention span, well cultivated by years of watching TV, cluttered with obtrysive adverisement, chances are I won't even think for going back at least for couple of days. Or ever.

Now, what was it you were selling?

Extra Delivery Charges

Last night, we ordered a pizza. When the pizza got delivered, the Domino's delivery guy unilaterally decided to increase the price because he "drove 10 miles to get here" and he will be "loosing money" if he does not charge extra for the delivery. This came totally unexpected. Usually we pay whatever the price is and give tip on top of that. Keep in mind that there is an explicit delivery charge over the price of the order, which is charged at the time of ordering and the delivery guy's "charge" came on top of that and before of course his tip...
The fact that it was Domino's is irrelevant in this situation, although they could benefit from not annoying their customers so soon after the bad publicity they got just few days ago.
I understand the delivery guy's desire to make more money but the way he chose to do that I find absolutely inappropriate not to mention that this guy had caused Domino's to loose us as customers. We wanted to give them a break, after the YouTube video with Domino's employees grossly mishandling food came out, but we draw the line above paying phony charges.
So, next time you order a pizza, make sure you ask about any additional charges that might be imposed by the delivery person. It will save you few dollars but most impotantly, the annoying feeling that you are being taken.