What's Up With This "Simplicity" ?

You know, I'll be the first to admit that I am technologically an idiot- I come from the generation that thought that typewriters were the ultimate in writing style. Then came word processors, and the morphing began.
It has not been without growing pains, however-( at least on my part), I guess I am asking too much of some of the people who design these things.
Everytime that Windows decides in its infinite wisdom that this computer needs an upgrade, all our stuff gets mangled, resulting in my wife spending hours reconfiguring, and myself threatening to take my pistol to this seed of satan.
These are not good times, what with new passwords and all- I have an idea, boys- Why don't you get me a fingerprint pad as recognition hardware. That way my thumbprint could be my password, and I would not have to remember WHAT THE DAMN WORD IS- I would thumb my way onto the info highway. OR IS THAT TOO SIMPLE A CONCEPT?
Too many people working on these software concepts truly and mistakenly believe that the more complex, the better. Not neccessarily- While a nailgun may do the job, sometimes the situation calls for a hammer, that is all. KISS- Keep It Simple, Stupid.

I am tired, I admit. Part of it is being ill- noone is at their best if they aren't a hundred percent physically, and as we say in Texas, I have been rode hard and put up wet a time or two. Part of it is that I am tired of these hacks that think they are politicians screwing up the political landscape with their diatribes. They would be dismissively amusing if they were not screwing around with our country. The truly scary ones wish you to believe that they are sincere- has anyone else seen the insane look that is in Nancy Pelosi's eyes? Whoa. Breed her with Howard Dean, and you would have the liberal version of Damien, spawn of Satan.
Ok, ok- the Right has their True Believers also, and they can be just as spooky. What happened to people who believed in serving the people of this country, not just the special interests,( and by special interests, I mean the NAACPs, the Planned Parenthoods, and the other allegedly do-gooder groups, not just the evil wicked corporations that actually give jobs to people).
I tell you where we went wrong- a person should have a job if he or she wants to vote. They SHOULD NOT be felons, or illegal immigrants. If someone is voting on what to do with tax money, they should have a stake in the decision. You wouldn't let someone into your poker game if they could not ante up, would you? The same rules should apply here. You pay to play, plain and simple.
Next, we really do need stringent ethics laws, and the people, not congress should vote on the rules. Why put the fox in charge of the henhouse. If someone is found guilty, they should be stripped of their pension, and any other perks they maay have accumulated.
And we really, really do need to remind these lawmakers that they work for us, and we need to set their pay scale, not have them vote themselves a raise everytime they feel the need. Would voting yourself a raise work in the real world? I think not.
One way or another, we need to impress upon these people that they are playing with our money, and what they do not NEED to govern, should be sent back to us in the form of a rebate.
IT IS NOT YOUR MONEY!
Perhaps there should be a new, required position that every lawmaker should have on their staff, that being one person whose duties are solely that of slapping said lawmaker on the back of the head every few minutes. Perhaps then they might pay attention to their duties, and not their pleasure.

Senselessness and sensibility

Let's talk about the Democrats for a minute. Another election season is upon us, and they want our votes, but they have a fundamental problem- they act insane. I am probably what you might describe as right of center, but I live in what used to be one of the Democratic stronghold of the south, Texas.
At least, up until Ann Richards. I am not saying that she was the female equivalent of Jimmy Carter, but she was not far off. Personally, I liked her as an energetic, true Texas character, one that we were better off knowing. However, as we might say down here, that doesn't feed the bulldog. She was like other democrats in that she thought she knew what was best for the people, but she, like other democrats, only talked to her core constituents, and not so much the rest of us. This is a problem that exists in both parties, in that if you only hear from the most vocal in the crowd, you will inevitably veer from what the true majority would want.
The state of Texas was, up until Ann Richards, a true democratic bastion- we had not had a republican in office since the 1880s- and would have stayed that way if the democratic party had not been hijacked by the ultra left wing of the party. The secularists, extreme environmentalists, and the people who believe that America is everything bad, were just too much to swallow. Why, down here, we beat those people within an inch of their life, because we do not think this is a message that should get out into the public- like a virus or a rabid dog, it needs to be put down. The message the democrats wish to send is not conducive to real life, and down here we kinda resent being told that others know what is best for us.
This is also true of the national scene, and this behavior and minutest on the part of the dems also breeds the same mindset on the other side- so extremism prevails, and the welfare of the people are lost in the hubbub of shouts by both sides. What a pity, as it seems that what we, as a people need right now, is coherent dialogue from both parties, and compromise is not a dirty word- indeed, the country was run by compromise for two hundred years, and sadly, it is probably more due to the ignorance of history in our schools that we have the intolerence of opinion that we now have.
Still, the Democratic party seems to really have a bug up its ass, perhaps that is still an over-reaction to Bill Clinton's trials, and the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994. The Republicans were over the top, although I still cannot forgive Clinton for lying- it was just too trivial, and he, like any one of us in a court setting, had SWORN to tell the truth- it , like pulling an infected tooth, have been over with quickly. Instead, he had to have this dirty matter dragged slowly under our noses. That was a truly bad decision, and in light of that one, all the rest of his decisions came into question. Whether that was fair or not was not a factor in the reality of the situation.
So you could say that Clinton's decisions played a factor in this clusterfuck we now have that passes for politics. What a shame- we are attempting to teach the rest of the emerging world of the benefits of Democracy, and this is how we do it? Compromise is key, and while it might seem admirable to stand on ones principles, the art of politics IS the art of compromise.
You just have to begin by assuming that the other side wants a country WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF, not just the fringe elements.

Choices

" The end cannot justify the means, for the simple reason that the means determine the nature of the ends produced." -----Aldous Huxley (1937)

Ah, morality- it seems so hard to live by a code these days. Everybody from Freud to Dr. Spock has alibied the lack of a moral code. Secularists ridicule the 10 commandments as so intrinsically religious that they must, by that definition, be outmoded and worthless. We have a president (now ex- president) defending his behavior by attempting to parse the word "is". Really, is this the behavior anyone really wants their children to learn?
If you can truthfully answer this question yes, you too have lost your way in the murky world of moralless behavior.
This is a predicament that runs through out our society at all levels. The CEO who wants to increase the profits at his company, so he does away with the pensions that were promised to his workers is lacking morals, as his company PROMISED those things to the workers. Backing out of a promise to people just for an increase of monetary gain is a lack of morals.
The Geneva Convention accords are a moral statement. Anyone who does not abide by them could be considered to be lacking morals.
The ten commandments are a moral code, and a good one. These are what our society is based on, and for atheists to deny this jusst because the commandments came from the bible, shows the lack of morality that they possess. I shall deem them to be irrelevent until they can come up with a moral code that is at least as good as the one they wish to tear down.
The serial killer who decides that it would be kinda fun to filet someone might be lacking a moral code.
The pedophile who sexually abuses and kills young children has no morals.
What are we supposed to do? Even if you ascribe to no religion in particular, you must has a code to live by, or you tend to go in whatever direction the prevailing current wishes to push you.
This is no way to live a life. If you think that there is truly no God, and we are just protoplasm randomly put together, what is the point to life?
If it is just senseless pleasure, you will get bored- there must be an end that you work toward, whether it be eternal life, or the betterment of mankind, or just your personal satisfaction in a job or life well done, and the best way to do this is to develop a moral code, a line in the moral sand that you will not cross, and hold to these beliefs.
Beliefs, you see, are not just for religion anymore- indeed, they have never been exclusively religion's domain, but people who do not like beliefs would like to make it all about the religion. These are people who have no rudder but hate, and that will always steer you wrong.

Bill Clinton and Islamo-Facism

I have to shake my head at most of the people who seek to be President- I sure wouldn't- because these people, by and large, are seriously flawed. I am secure in my manhood, so I guess that I wouldn't qualify or care enough to subject either my family or myself to the endless probing the press would do in hunting the one scintilla of information to bring me down, because that is what the press do. I will do a column on the press in the future- I have plenty on my plate just talking about the fallibility of the types of people who wish to be president.
It seems to me, from the observations I have made over the years, that there are two basic types of politicians in this world. There is the business politician, who knows that the economy flows smother when you say one thing, and do that one thing. Perhaps he is wrong, but at least he keeps his word, and the economy keeps going. Maybe it goes slower, if the policies aren't right, but everybody knows that it IS going.
Then there is the Idealist politician, who can ( and often does) go in whatever direction seems expedient to his or her advantage. Beware of this one however, as they will take you in any direction, indeed switch directions at the drop of a hat, just to make themselves seem good. The classic example of this is Jimmy Carter, a president whose failed economic policies were SO disastrous that words had to be invented to even begin to describe this mess. Does anybody remember " Stagflation"? I am not saying that he wasn't well-intentioned, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and we were well on the way there. Luckily, we were rescued by an ACTOR An actor, for God's sake.
I like Ronald Reagan for what he did, which was made us feel better about ourselves. It was a balm we sorely needed afteer Nixon, Ford, and then Carter. I mean, God bless him for the fall of the Wall, and of communism, but the most important thing he gave us was a small shot of self confidence.
George Bush is someone I have respect for, even if I at times disagree with some of his policies. He didn't ask for 9/11, and he has dealt with it as best as he could, given the fragmented state of our intel community. That is where I find fault, for if a President acts because of intel that is not timely and accurate, it is not his fault, it is the bureaucracy that provides that intel.
The problem I have with Clinton was not the blow jobs he got- it was the lies and obfuscations he made about it. We are the American people, not his wife, and if he is in front of a grand jury, we expect him to tell the truth, just as we (the People) are supposed to. If he had, he might have weathered this much better. Now, he is a joke, no matter what else he does( see Jimmy Carter).
The problem as I see it, is that Clinton was slow to act when he had the chance to kill bin laden, so the terrorist got away. He, like so many liberals, still think that this terrorist problem is a law-enforcement problem. Nothing could be further from the truth. The plain fact is that this is a war problem, and when terrorists are found, they need to be shot and left where they lie. They do not need to be given a forum in which they can rant about their twisted, perverted, heathen faith( for it IS heathen if it seeks to kill innocent women and children, plain and simple.) Just KILL them. How hard can that be? If you kill enough of them, they WILL get the message.
I know, we are supposed to be a nation of compassion, but you give compassion where it should be given, and that is NOT for people who want you, your family, and your country DEAD. These people have lost their right to live, and they are a danger to all, including their own people.
Much as you would do to a rabid dog, you shoot these people, and go on with your life, secure in the knowledge that you have done mankind a service, and saved countless others who ARE deserving of life.
It is not a law-enforcement problem, it is an animal- control problem, and we must solve it soon.

Hugo Chavez and Social Responsibility

Ah, Hugo Chavez- What can one say about the Clown of Venezuela? Whatever one might say becomes understated by his own words and antics. A Statesman? No, an uneducated buffoon, with an overrated sense of his self- worth.
He became what he is by promising poor people that he would take care of them, and to a certain extent, he has done that, but in doing so, he has alienated most, if not all the business interests that might, in other circumstances, have sided with him. In the long term, this is not good for Hugo's country, but then I don't get the sense that he really cares about his country, only about his continued rule. The thing is, when the poor people find out that his policies have ruined the country, ( and more to the point, as regards their continued feed at the country's trough), that the end for them is near, Chavez will have to resort to force to keep them in line. This has been the story for the last hundred years at least, when it comes to dictatorships- first the carrot, then the stick.
There is a true difference between the United States and the rest of the world, and it seems that the more money one makes in this country, the more angst one feels regarding the money one has.
That might be OK, but for the rest of us, who actually DO work in this country, we haven't the luxury of doubting our self- worth. We are too busy feeding and clothing our family- we have no nanny to do things for us, leaving us with idle time to ponder just how unjust this country is that gives us the opportunity to be free, and strive to be better than we were yesterday. Can Chavez's country really say that? Can many other countries say that?
I always thought it funny that people here protest here, no matter what their cause. Could it be because they really are gutless wonders who know that if they protested in Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Chana, or many, if not all the troubled areas in the world today, they would be killed? Or maybe they are just scared to get too far from their TIVO, lest they miss out on their favorite shows.
Social Responsibility begins at home, a lesson that Chavez missed out on. Indeed, the lesson is lost on a lot of people here. All those who say that they do not mind taking government money, because " we paid it, so we should get it back", has completely missed the point here. Taxes, and other forms of payment to the government are paid to keep the infrastructure of the country going. Highways, military, water treatment, law enforcement, and other infrastructures must be maintained.

In addition, the welfare and social services end of government must be funded. The trouble comes when people believe that they " deserve" this money. This money is not a lottery winning, andf a person should not get this for life, except in the most dire of circumstances. It is meant to be an interim cushion, until one can get back on one's feet again, and while it is there to help, it is not necessarily something to brag about. I have never taken government money, and I hope I never have to, thus saving it for someone who truly needs it. If I had to, to keep my family going, I would, but believe you me, I would be looking for an end to this, so I could earn my own way.
Free money is never valued like money one has had to work for. Don't believe me? Just look at the majority of lottery winners. Many are now broke, addicted, and unhappier than before they had won that money, and yet, if they had earned that money, they would possibly be more well adjusted than otherwise.
What is needed in this country are more people who truly understand that this life, as it pertains to this country that gives them the freedom to be whatever they can dream to be, is not sstrictly all about them, but also about the other three hundred million of us that live here.
No grandstanding about how socially pious one might wish to appear to be, no selfish me, me, me cries while you eat bon bons and watch your programs. If yo want to talk the talk, then walk the walk, bitch- if not, you are irrelevant, and need to step aside before you get stepped on. This country needs people who understand that this country needs to come first, and all else can then proceed.

" Republic- I like the sound of that word. It means people can live free, talk free. Go or come, buy or sell, be drunk or sober, however they choose.
Some words give you a feeling, the same feeling you get when your boy first shaves, or makes his first sound like a man. Republic is one of those words."
John Wayne as Davy Crockett
in the movie
THE ALAMO