Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Returning from Hiatus

So as my 1 reader may have noticed I have been negligent in my blogging for a while.  Well I am planning on returning at least until the election with more political feelings and leanings.

As it turns out the spy cam footage of the now confirmed GOP candidate at a fundraiser has piqued my interest, as it turns out Mister Romney while answering a question gave an honest answer (ZOMG I know) and that honest answer seems to have touched off a firestorm.  Personally I don't see what the issue about what he is saying really is.

Not to mention that the video, and audio as admitted by the eavesdropper is missing at least a minute of Mitt Romney's answer.  So how does one respond to this fact.  Well easily I think that what Mitt Romney is talking about are those that game the system, those that don't work because they have found it easier to just sit at home and be on the government take.

He was not talking about those that put in the effort and either succeed or fail in finding a job that may eventually supplant their dependency on the government.  Though what he did say within this video is that 47% of the voter base has a built in interest in voting for mister Obama over either himself or Gary Johnson, and that is that 47% of the voters want the status quo when it comes to their taxes.  Though that isn't to say there aren't those in the 47% including some green soldiers who can see that our President isn't actually looking out for them.  But none-the-less Mitt Romney is not saying that he wants to beat the poor into a pulp.  And, as far as I can tell never has, but is merely asking for the other side of the everyone should pay their fair share.  If, as the left loves to crow, that the 1% should pay their fair share of income taxes (and another question what is their fair share is it 40%, 60%, 80%, the left never cares to answer this question), Then why is it so terrible and so wrong to ask that the 47% put some of their skin in the game.  Currently they don't, at least on the federal level.

Why is it so wrong for we as the 53% ask for the 47% to be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Just 2 cents for a return starter,

The Answerer

Monday, May 21, 2012

On Minorities (and other topics)

Yup my FBFeed gave me a reason to rant again, apparently I have A LOT of liberal friends.  Today's rant is sponsored by the internet meme Gobstoppers (shown in context above).

Can I start by mentioning that no I am not afraid of being a minority.  I am saddened that it has come to this.  The only reason that minorities are 'second class citizens' is because people still perpetuate that they will be treated different.

In jobs, education, etc etc, these 'minorities' feel the need to identify themselves as minorities, and the institutions cow tow to it to ensure 'social justice', to open their doors first to these individuals regardless of merit or suitability to the job or as another example the quality of income in circumstances of loaning money.

No, I'm not worried that if a white person is now considered a minority.  Infact the issue that I have is that while the 'whites' will be treated as the majority even still.  We won't be afforded the same 'rights' as those that have for decades or centuries been given the ability to come up with exclusive organizations because they were a minority, no it will still be seen by those groups as their right alone.

Though of course this isn't all groups.  Hell look at the Asians do they have a group like La Rasa, or the Black Panthers.  No, they do not, they melted into this country.  Yes I understand that there was a time not too long ago that the African-Americans were a seperate class but that is no more.  The only laws that are out there, the only difference in the rights of the African-Americans and the other Americans are the senses of entitlement and their ability to have organizations that are solely focused on themselves and not get called racists for it.  Can you imagine if, within the next 20 years Caucasian-Americans decided that since they were now the minority in the country that they wanted to start up an organization called the NAAWP.  The shit storm that would be unleashed would be immense to say the least.

Can you imagine if after a crime was committed that an organization called the Snow Leopards (or some equally 'white' militant establishment) called for people to be murdered in the streets just for being of a different race.  Yes I know there was once a group of people who did things like that, and for those of us who were sane individuals, we denounced them does the name KKK ring a bell, or how about the Aryan Brotherhood, how many Caucasian-Americans were actually members of this.  Yet every time that there is some incident where a non-colored man, attacks or defends themselves do you hear coming from important individuals in the African-American society go off like it's the end of the world.  Treat the crime as the crime and take race out of it.  That is what I say, for everything race should not be a part of it.

Instead of a Job/Education application that looks similar to this


()White ()Black ()Asian ()Native-American ()Hispanic ()Other____

Why do our Job/Education Applications look like this?


()American ()Work/Student Visa# _____

And again thanks for letting me answer another Rhetorical Question *§*

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

58 BILLION dollars... (or On Deficits Surpluses and falsehoods)

So is it just me or does this dis-ingenuousness of the federal government make you sick.  It's not just on one side its on both, but as it stands the federal government or more appropriately the house and senate have not passed a budget in OVER 3 years.  Now that's all well and good I guess as it means all funding has stayed at the same levels as three years ago but my problem with this is that now there are those Obama supporters out there touting the newest fiscal surplus as this great achievement.

Can we all just be honest here, if the Democrats and/or Republicans could have pushed through any budget we would be sitting here complaining about and looking at yet another month of budget deficits.  Could we also look at where the cuts that allowed this surplus to appear are at.  Can the fiscal conservatives be more inept at pushing their message...  If you really want to put the screws to the spenders on both sides point out that the reason there is a surplus right now is massive losses to the benefits paid to those on Medicare.  Could we also push the fact that the majority of this current surplus is due to so many dropping off the unemployment rolls...

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Education and you

Wow FaceySpace lately has been a great place to find topics to rant on... This picture just came across my feed and my jaw just dropped to the ground when I read some of the comments.  So instead of getting into an argument with the 'sharer' of this photo I figured I would make a post with all my thoughts in it at once.

So lets start with my obvious question.  If you want free tuition, then who is to stop companies from requiring you to go to college to get your lowest level entry job, to REQUIRE a college degree.  This is my first issue with 'free' college, note the '' around it, cause those who have any idea about these things realize that it would not be free it would be saddled with money from the job creators, referenced in my previous post and those job creators would then require you to have used the education they are providing to get even a mop jockey job, at least this is where I see it leading.

Now lets move onto what I feel is a real solution.  Let's fix the lower education (Grade-, Middle-, High-School) so that you can come out of school with the equivalent of a degree in the arts, history, a trade etc.  Hell if you ask me coming out of High-School you should be able to fill an IT Help Desk position, and then the company you are with can offer or allow you to go back to school to get the more interesting degrees.

Some of my own thoughts on Education are as follows

Not all teachers deserve to have tenure.  Unions do as much or more harm to the education system than good.  The current set up of education in this country is broken, not because of what or how the teachers teach but because of when they teach, and how students are just pushed along from one grade to the next, yes some will always rise and some will fall based on their abilities, but we shouldn't just shove the students through.  Testing of various sorts should show that a student is ready to advance, not the factory line like atmosphere just to get a graduation rate.

Arts should be used as a tool rather than looked at as the Red Headed step child of the educational process, the arts provide a person with the ability to think outside of the box, to get creative with their mind and give them the ability to critically think.  Cutting these programs is at the expense of our students not to the benefit of the schools.  As many studies have proved music and math are very much tied to one another for example.  Students who learn to play an instrument, be it piano, drums, trumpet, or flute, skew higher in math and science than those who do not.

So in short I think that we truly need to look at our lower educational institutions the ones that are already free and get them working properly and leave the college education, to the topics that need college educations...

Sunday, May 13, 2012

"Tax the Rich" -- Yeah just saw this

And I quote " Tax the rich. Contrary to popular belief they do not create jobs."

And then in response,

"I would like that etched in stone somewhere so people never forget it. Perhaps on a national monument: "Rich people do not create jobs." People that want to become rich do."

Could I have this explained to me as to how this makes any sense at all, I mean honestly this is like saying that once you get rich you don't want to stay rich, right.

Tax the rich as they create no jobs, so what you are telling me then is this, right, That S. Robson Walton, Andrew J McKenna & Don Thompson, William Clay Ford, Gregg Steinhafel, and Bill Gates create NO JOBS right, they are rich and they run fortune 500 companies but they create no jobs at all...  If you believe this you are DELUSIONAL that is all.

Thanks for coming to listen to my rants again listeners...

Friday, May 11, 2012

Updates: Constitutional Study and onto something more fun, well maybe

So as you all saw in my previous post Politicing from the keyboard, I am sure that you will all remember I was going over the constitution, while I think I did a fair job representing myself on the finer points of the pre-amble I think I have come across a snag, and haven't realized it until I actually started writing my post about Article I.  There are actually some interesting things inside of this document that no one seems to remember or pay attention to so with that said I am putting my review of the constitution on hold for a while, so that I can do some proper research on the subject and will come back to this at a later date.

As for more fun endeavours I think I am going to start going back through my games catalog again and putting up a review or two.  Yes this blog is about more than just politics, it's about my other past time and that's Gaming.  So since I started playing back through it and while it is approximately 8 years past it's prime I am going to start by reviewing in my own terms Doom 3.  From my objective standpoint.

I am about half way through this play through and will start writing sometime after Mothers Day.

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Homosexual Marriage (on the right for homosexuals to experience the joys of matrimony)

Alright so in my personal view I can't say that I promote or am actively trying to get Same-Sex Marriage legalized anywhere, but at the same time I can't say that I see the issue with it as it is being presented.  On a Federal level you have the Protection of Marriage Act, which basically defines the term marriage on a national level, why this ever needed to be made I do not understand.  Why those who have an interest in this didn't go with the easiest such way around it which was to call it civil unions and then have the federal government just up and say, civil unions must be recognized nationwide I do not at all understand.  But call it what you will same-sex relationships hold all the candles of a standard marriage save the one that truly matters.  A child cannot naturally be produced within said relationship.  Do I think a child who grows up as a child in this type of family will not be well adjusted or will be tainted.

No I actually have a cousin who falls into this category, and while in natural cousin manner I think he's a nut-case (luv ya cuz), that is in no way a reflection on his up-bringing.  So, back on task here, I personally feel that same-sex couples are very much entitled to be bound contractually to one another and all the rights that go with said contract, but by defining same-sex marriage in the same way as the definition of a traditional opposite-sex marriage I think that the federal and any local government is going to, in my cynical opinion, open itself to having to rule on a religious issue at some point (Which as we know is NOT ALLOWED via the constitution, in the free practice clause).

This is going to open up some church in the future, mark my words (05/10/2012), to a lawsuit initiated by the ACLU or some similar group, due to the fact that their religion does not allow same sex marriage and thusly will not marry some couple in their chapel.  This will end in either the church and it's congregation having to fold, or a fight will be taken all the way to the supreme court and a ruling will be needed by the courts.  Now again maybe this is my cynical mind working but even as I sit here typing I see this as an opportunity for some enterprising homosexual couple to make A LOT of money if I am a lawyer.  But of course I could never in a million years imagine a lawyer advising one of their friends to pull this stunt EVER.

Sorry if I offend but just like the first guy to purposely step out in front of a car barreling down the road suing them, I can just see it coming to pass...

-- The Answerer

Edit: 10/19/2014 (Removed mention of race in final comment)

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Politicing from the Keyboard

So after months of thinking of starting a blog I finally decided it was time, what does this mean to me, well it means an outlet for some frustrations of seeing friends post what to me, (and maybe I'm just an unthinking shill),  seem poorly thought rants on society.  I won't point anything out directly at this point as I'm just not that kinda guy but I'm sure in the future you will see some post by me that will have a direct relation to a friends comment, and this would be my response, if I didn't want to lose that friend.

So this being my first post of consequence I am going to start out by going over my feelings on the founding document of the great country of yours and mine.  The United States Constitution, over the next few weeks/months (depending on how often that I decide to write here, and interspersed with other topics) I will be going over the entire document.  Thus touching on something that I feel is sorely lacking in today's schools, a firm understanding of the way our nation was founded.  So lets start at the beginning folks:


(All wording herein is directly from the Federal Archive)

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America


So here it is, the basic tenants of the United States of America, it starts off easily enough, "We the People of the United States"  There it is the 39 signers of this document, having been selected by their many peers to represent the states and people of those states drafted a document that would create the foundation of a powerful and free nation.

Those men risked all their rights, lands, titles, families, everything on the basis that they would create a free and elected government one that would protect it's people and it's land from the harms that could and would come to the shores of the country.  These men getting together as often as possible in a time far before the internet or even the US Postal Service came together to draft a document to...


Yup form a MORE perfect union (my emphasis here), this to create a union of independent states whose entire existence was to be better than what they had lived in before, that being the general tyranny, or at the least perceived tyranny of the British Monarchy.  Now I am not yet getting into the topic of my preferred form of government that is best left for a post all itself but I am going on about the fact that the US was formed to create a better system of rule than that of the generally brutish one leader system.

Now that we have gotten through those two points we are left with the information that 'The People' wrote this document to 'Form a more perfect union' now what was that union to do well they were to...


Yup, that would be the justice that would be set forth in the many laws that this country has developed since, how they would go about doing this we can (and will) go over in my coming posts, but they wrote the document to provide justice to the people of the United States, and this they seem to have done.  What else were they tasked with, why to...


This is where at least to me the police force is 'created' this says to me, that the federal government is tasked with keeping the United States tranquil, or keeping every class, sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc etc at peace with one another, domestically.  This tenant I think is one of the most forgotten portions of the constitution oft looked over for other more hot button issues, speaking of this leads us to...


Providing for the common defence, this, being as it is written that the Federal Government has a duty to protect the country and it's citizens above all.  In which the government should provide protection how it sees fit, from all external threats, in other words, the government should keep a standing army, and provide that army with what is required to defend the country from external threats.


To Promote the General Welfare, well here we are at one of the most controversial potions of the preamble to the constitution, what I see in this and of course with no way of being able to read the minds of the founders I could be completely wrong, this is to say that the Federal Government is to set out on the ability to do the best that it can to the general population, working within it's restrictions, this does not say provide the general welfare but promote the general welfare.

This is where I feel that we need to look at the definition of the two words.  

To Promote:  Further the progress of, support or actively encourage.  
To Provide:  Make available for use; supply

So what's the difference one may ask well for one, to Promote does not mean to just give a person their own general welfare, as to Provide does, what this instructs is that the Federal Government, should make it easy for people to provide to their own welfare, not to give them everything.


And the final portion of the preambles declarations, is here, securing the BLESSINGS (zomg they were god fearing people get over it) of liberty for the nation's peoples and their descendants, in other words to secure the freedom of all people within the states.  While the country did for many years not ascribe this to all peoples it is now the right to all in the country.


And here the many represented by the few set forth that they certify that what they write in the coming document is what the people of the many states would want.  The constitution as first drafted combined Thirteen individual British Colonies into one Nation, who would one day grow to become one of the Worlds Super Power's and would be founded on the desire to be free in all ways, and pursuant to that would modify even this founding document to properly reflect that desire.


So with all that said, and I don't know how much of my own bias came out in the wash there but we have completed the preamble to the constitution of the United States of America.  My first blog post and hopefully I will gain some readers from my what I hope is common sense interpretation of each phrase of this portion of our founding document.

The Answerer

Welcome to my Blog, sure it's nothing to even sniff at right now but in the future I hope to become a stop for those of similar mind to myself.  My targets for what to talk about on this blog are Video Games, yeah I know isn't everyone doing that, and politics, again everyone is but this is my own personal take on each of these topics, and what I think of them.

I was driven here because well to be frank, I hate to troll... so instead of being the troll under the bridge arguing back and forth over the intar-tubes, I will instead make my thoughts known here and will stay out of the arguments that occur elsewhere.

As for the arguments here, well you may post, but I have final say of what is posted on MY blog, so if I don't like your comment... it's probably going to get deleted.  If it is something that makes me or others actually think.  Well then I will probably leave it, let my stewing anger vent a bit and then come back to it in another post.

What do I hope to accomplish here, well I plan on editorializing in general, that means that everything I say will be tinged by my personal opinions and feelings on topics.

Thank you for following and I hope that you enjoy what you find, or that if you don't that your vitriol doesn't hurt you too much because well like a duck it's water off my back.

Final note on comments...  Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated, if you attack me personally your comment will be deleted, and there is the possibility that I will just ignore future comments by you.  Lets keep it civil and thoughtful here guys thanks