Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Everything is Political

I've been involved with alternative party politics for many years now -- I'm currently the State Treasurer of the Green Party of Washington State and used to serve in this same capacity for Oregon's Green Party. It always amazes me how far too many people believe they can divorce themselves from the realm of politics.

For them, "politics" is something that is external from themselves. It's the bastion of government and government officials. And, even more amazing, they genuinely believe politics has little, if any, influence on their daily lives.

Politics is nothing more than the set of power relationships that govern social interaction. There is political intrigue in every marriage or partnership. Children campaign their parents for reduced sanctions or increased privileges. Almost every job a person holds throughout their life involves political negotiations with their co-workers, bosses and competitors.

Even for the Taoist, politics intersects in our relationships with the Tao and nature. Every step we take to try to achieve balance involves relinquishing power or taking power. And that, my friends, is the very definition of politics.

The politics that involves governance is merely personal politics elevated to a larger scale. Because it affects masses of people, it dictates who controls of what kinds of decisions and this affects how we each view ourselves and how we routinely live.

Right now, the United States (most other nations too) govern in a very non-Taoist way. We are headed down a non-sustainable path and the notion of balance is nowhere to be found. I am both a political activist and Taoist because I want to see society move in a different direction -- one that honors our seventh generation as much as we value our own.

Friday, May 26, 2006

The Realities of War

As we inch toward the mid-term election season, the Democratic Party is trying to market itself as the quasi anti-war party. With Dubya's approval rating plummeting toward the Mendoza Line and support for the war following suit, the Dems are starting to believe they have a legitimate chance to pick up several seats in both houses of Congress.

There's just one problem here -- The Dems are about as hawkish as the Republicans!! From Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) to Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Dems voted en masse to support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many, such as Hillary Clinton & Cantwell, seem hell bent on supporting a similar incursion into Iran.

In fact, if you look at the history of the US, the art of invading foreign countries has been perpetrated by Presidents on both sides of the aisle. We entered WWI under President Woodrow Wilson. WWII came about on FDR's watch. Nuclear bombs were dropped on Japan under Harry Truman's watchful eyes. We became bogged down in Vietnam under the Kennedy and Johnson administrations.

All of the aforementioned US presidents were Democrats!!

More importantly, most of the wars the US becomes involved (ensnared?) in have little to do with specific military objectives. While our invasion of Iraq offers a current example, a recent revelation shows that the war against North Vietnam fits the same bill.

According to Canada.com,
Former U.S. secretary of state Henry Kissinger quietly acknowledged to China in 1972 that Washington could accept a communist takeover of South Vietnam if that evolved after a withdrawal of U.S. troops - even as the war to drive back the Communists dragged on with mounting deaths.

The late U.S. president Richard Nixon's envoy told Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai: "If we can live with a communist government in China, we ought to be able to accept it in Indochina."
Of course, such a statement seems to fly in the face of the "we need to protect the world against Communism" argument foisted time and again on the American public. If we could accept a Communist government in Vietnam, then why in the hell were we there in the first place?

The sad answer to that question is that imperialistic powers -- and the US certainly fits the definition -- need to have an enemy. Enemies allow the hegemonic powers to funnel millions and billions of dollars to the military-industrial complex which, in turn, funnel money back to insure those same political leaders stay in power. Enemies also divert public attention away from all the shortcomings of any given administration -- things like poverty, woeful health care, the theft of basic civil rights and lackadaisical education.

It turns out that Vietnam, like Iraq, wasn't anything like our leaders told us it was. So, if you think electing a slew of Democrats this November will change the tenor and direction of this nation, you haven't been paying close attention to history.

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

A Swede-Heart of a Deal

We Americans like to think we are the leaders in innovative thinking and ingenuity. It's part and parcel of our national mentality (psychosis?). Yet, now that we are faced with rising gas prices and peak oil on the near horizon, what are we doing to remedy the situation? Not a hell of a lot!

Vehicle fuel efficiency standards have remained stagnant for a decade or more. Funding for alternative sources of power/fuel is meager, at best. And we're engaged in a senseless war so that we can control the ever-decreasing flow of crude. So much for innovative thinking and ingenuity!

We should look to Sweden for a better way to tackle the problem. According to a report in Yes! Magazine, Sweden has decided to go oil-free.
Sweden has announced plans to be the first oil-free country in the world by 2020. Plans call for renewables -- including biofuels, wind, and wave power -- to replace fossil fuels. The country has already committed itself to phasing out nuclear energy.
Some of you cynics will say this is just political grandstanding. You will note that there is no penalty for missing the target date. While both of these assertions may indeed be true, the article notes that Sweden has already converted over 25% of its energy usage to renewable sources.

By setting a national goal, Sweden will definitely be far along the path toward being oil-free by 2020. Even if compliance is not at the 100% level, chances are they will be at the 50 - 80% level. And that's truly impressive!!

Compare that to U.S. goals. It's a hard comparison because we don't really have any.

Monday, May 15, 2006

A New Recruitment Strategy?

I must be a glutton for punishment. For reasons unknown, my wife & I decided to watch to the [p]Resident speak to the nation tonight about his proposed immigration policy. Aside from his usual smirking face, his little address wasn’t altogether that remarkable as he made sure to mention the words “national security” several times. However, it is something he made reference to indirectly that caught my wife’s attention.

Dubya was talking about a wounded GI who happened to be an illegal immigrant from down south. (Interestingly enough, we didn’t hear any reference to illegals from any other direction…hmm.) Dubya lauded this soldier for his service to the United States Armed Forces and suggested that, because of his service, his application for citizenship would be expedited.

Though not stated directly, my wife immediately caught his drift. It goes something like this:
Ladies & Gentlemen, we’re having a great deal of difficulty recruiting Americans into our perpetual military machine. Because of this sad fact, I can’t wage war against made-up enemies who had nothing to do with 9/11. We need to increase our troop numbers. So, I’ve come up with a great new plan.

Since we already (wink, wink) allow those brown skinners from south of the border to do the kind of crappy jobs that no self-respecting American would want to do, why don’t we recruit them to fight our wars for us too? We can wave the carrot stick of “expedited citizenship” in their faces and many will jump at the chance to be slaughtered for it.

This great new plan of mine will serve several purposes: 1) I can continue to wage endless war and reward the military-industrial complex with rich deals funded by YOUR taxpayer dollars; 2) You can be patriotic and support my wars WITHOUT having to send YOUR sons and daughters to die on distant battlefields; and 3) It’s a great way (snicker, snicker) to get people off our welfare rolls.

So, how ‘bout it America? You with me? (To aides, thinking he’s off camera, “Who the hell cares what these yo-yo’s think? I’m king of this country and I can do whatever I damn well want.)

Letting Go of a Dream

My younger brother recently began a program to earn a certificate as a paralegal. His first love is doing public and/or community radio, both announcing and the development angle. Unfortunately, unless you land a job in one of the major markets, radio barely pays enough to make ends meet. He should know; he's tried to make it work for years!

While I'm certainly pleased that Sean is working toward a career that will allow him to get a better economic footing in today's world, I also lament that he has had to choose to let go of his passion. He is a damn good DJ. He also has a marvelous talent that allows him to be a good volunteer coordinator and to develop fundraising programs that are both successful and creative.

None of these talents will be needed in paralegal work. In that sense, it's a crying shame!

We live in the kind of world that too often squelches people's true talents -- turns them into wage slaves. If a person isn't driven to smash and step on others on their way to the top, the only option available is to become the fodder for others who have no problem whatsoever with smashing and stepping. There seems to be no place for those of us not driven to grab for the almighty gods of capital and power.

While I believe my brother will develop in to a quality paralegal, I bemoan the fact that the world around us would be better served if he could follow his passion AND survive while doing it.

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Forests, Trees & Thuds

If a tree falls in a forest, but no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? This is the kind of philosophical question my younger brother and I often discuss in our phone conversations. While there are many ways to ponder and answer this question, my brother Sean & I have come up with an even more thought-provoking one:

If you are alone in a forest -- totally preoccupied and completely oblivious to your surroundings -- and a tree suddenly falls on you (thereby smashing you to bits and leaving you quite dead), does it make a sound?

Friday, May 12, 2006

Stand Tall for What You Believe In

In my book, one way I judge if a person genuinely believes that what they do and say is in the right is how they do or say it. My criteria is universal -- it doesn't matter what side of the political aisle a person chooses to stand on. It doesn't matter what religious or philosophical belief a person calls their own. It doesn't matter if your name is George Bush, Saddam Hussein or Mother Teresa.

If believe something to be true, stand tall in your belief. State up front why you believe your opinion is the right thing to do or way to act. By standing tall, you prove your belief or opinion is real -- not necessarily correct -- but what you truly believe in.

The recent revelations that [p]Resident Bush has signed over 750 Signing Statements which quietly announce his intentions to subvert federal law are a prime example of NOT standing tall. In public, Dubya says one thing; in private he often does the exact opposite!

According to an April 30 article in The Boston Globe,
Bush is the first president in modern history who has never vetoed a bill, giving Congress no chance to override his judgments. Instead, he has signed every bill that reached his desk, often inviting the legislation's sponsors to signing ceremonies at which he lavishes praise upon their work.

Then, after the media and the lawmakers have left the White House, Bush quietly files ''signing statements" -- official documents in which a president lays out his legal interpretation of a bill for the federal bureaucracy to follow when implementing the new law. The statements are recorded in the federal register.

In his signing statements, Bush has repeatedly asserted that the Constitution gives him the right to ignore numerous sections of the bills -- sometimes including provisions that were the subject of negotiations with Congress in order to get lawmakers to pass the bill. He has appended such statements to more than one of every 10 bills he has signed.

''He agrees to a compromise with members of Congress, and all of them are there for a public bill-signing ceremony, but then he takes back those compromises -- and more often than not, without the Congress or the press or the public knowing what has happened," said Christopher Kelley, a Miami University of Ohio political science professor who studies executive power.
What this tells me is that Dubya KNOWS what he's doing ain't right. He doesn't have the balls to do it in the light of day; he does what he does under the cover of darkness.

In essence, we have a coward in the White House!

Thursday, May 11, 2006

George & Tom -- A Striking Similarity

He came. He entertained. The town went wild. He left. This represents the briefest of descriptions of Tom Cruise's visit to the Harbor. As I had predicted, there was a front page story in The Daily World about Tom Cruise for 8 consecutive days! In the nearly 6 months my wife & I have lived in Aberdeen, no other story -- no matter how important -- has dominated the news like Tom Cruise.

One sentence in the "Tommie was here" recap article caught my eye. It reminded me of the many articles I've read over the past 5 years in which Dubya was the central character. It was mentioned that, amongst the thousands upon thousands of fans, there was ONE protestor. An unidentified woman brought a sign which condemned Cruise's belief in Scientology.

It seems that she was not allowed to stay for very long. Security personnel removed her from the area long before Mr. Cruise and his fiancee made their appearance at the South Shore Mall. Consequently, just like the many appearances of Dubya, free speech was suspended.

What is our world coming to when any person is not allowed to express their opinion openly?

Sunday, May 7, 2006

Cruise 'N the Harbor

One of the big differences between living in a small town versus a small city (Salem) or a large metropolis like Chicago or New York City can be found on the front pages of the area newspaper. (Of course, another difference is the number of newspapers itself.)

The big story in Aberdeen's The Daily World is of no international or national significance. It isn't political or scientific. No, the BIG story that has predominated our front page for the past 5 days and will continue to show up there until, at least, Wednesday is that movie actor Tom Cruise is coming to Aberdeen.

It seems a local man won some on line contest in which he will get to see a private screening of the latest Mission Impossible flick with the star himself. The screening will take place at our half-dead South Shore Mall on Tuesday. People from as far away as Portland and Seattle plan to descend on our area to catch a glimpse of this so-called sex symbol.

I suppose the excitement is understandable. Towns like Aberdeen -- far off the beaten path -- aren't used to feting movie stars and the like. Heck, it's a big deal when the governor or a member of the Seattle Mariners comes to town. Still, Tom Cruise is just a guy who acts in movies. It's not like he's an important role model or world leader.

It amazes me what seems to excite people. I know I certainly won't alter my general routine come Tuesday night.

Saturday, April 29, 2006

Oils Well that End Swell

In a categorically unsurprising manner, [p]Resident Bush Rejects Tax on Oil Companies' Profits.
President Bush on Friday rejected calls by some lawmakers for a tax on oil company windfall profits, saying the industry should reinvest its recent gains into finding and producing more energy.

"The temptation in Washington is to tax everything," Bush said in an exchange with reporters in the White House Rose Garden. "The answer is for there to be strong reinvestment to make this country more secure from an energy perspective."

With gasoline at over $3 a gallon in some areas, Bush said there was "no evidence" of price-gouging of consumers.
Price-gouging? Why would ANYONE think that? Could it be because the petroleum industry is reporting not only record earnings but records profits?

Basic economics dictates that, if the wholesale price goes up, then the cost of the product will rise too. Basic economics also informs us that, if a company maintains its market share, then rising prices will mean higher earnings.

However, in a situation such as this, higher earnings don't USUALLY mean higher profits. To be sure, you are bringing in more dollars BUT you concurrently are incurring more costs to produce your product.

OBVIOUSLY, the oil industry isn't being completely honest. It's readily apparent that they're charging more than the increased cost. Just like the Robber Barons of old! (Sort of brings sentimental tears to your eyes, doesn't it?)

Thursday, April 27, 2006

Why Mr. or Mrs. Smith Won't Go to Washington

In the 1939 Capra film, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, an idealistic Jefferson Smith (played by James Stewart) is sent to the nation's capitol and runs headlong into the corruption and "good 'ol boy network" of the US Senate. He stands tall and fights for what is right.

In present times, voters often decry professional politicians who live and breathe inside the beltway. One often hears the sentiment that more average citizens should run for elective office because they would be more likely to serve the interests of common citizens, not corporations.

As State Treasurer of a small political party, I can well tell you WHY Mr. or Mrs. Smith have no interest at all in going to Washington. The rules one must navigate to put together a campaign committee are ten times worse than anything a taxpayer faces on April 15!! How many average people have the knowledge of a lawyer, an accountant and a marketing guru all wrapped into one brain?

This situation is far worse for political party committees. Not only do we have to deal with our state elections office but we concurrently have to to navigate the rules and procedures of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It would be one thing if the rules between states and the feds were congruent, but, sadly, they aren't.

And this offers an apt explanation of why I've been blogging only sporadically as of late. I'm having to learn a new set of state rules (having moved to Washington from Oregon) concerning political party activity, while refreshing my knowledge of ever-changing FEC rules and policies.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

The Managed Forest

Today, while my wife & I drove our dogs toward a needed run on the beach, I passed a sign that read, "Managed Forest". It got me to thinking, "How does one MANAGE a forest?" Forests seem to manage themselves quite nicely...without any assistance nor hindrance from human beings. In fact, if we left them alone, I'm sure they can manage rings around us.

According to the Wikipedia,
"Management" (from Old French menagement "the art of conducting, directing", from Latin manu agere "to lead by the hand") characterises the process of leading and directing all or part of an organization, often a business, through the deployment and manipulation of resources (human, financial, material, intellectual or intangible). Early twentieth-century management writer Mary Parker Follett defined management as "the art of getting things done through people."

One can also think of management functionally, as the action of measuring a quantity on a regular basis and of adjusting some initial plan, and as the actions taken to reach one's intended goal. This applies even in situations where planning does not take place. From this perspective, there are five management functions: Planning, Organizing, Leading, Co-ordinating and Controlling.

Management is also called "Business Administration", and schools that teach management are usually called "Business Schools". The term "management" may also be used to describe the slate of managers of an organization, for example of a corporation. A governing body is a term used to describe a group formed to manage an organization, such as a sports league.
A forest is merely one facet of a complex and interdependent ecosystem. In fact, ecosystems are so complex that we mere humans seem wholly incapable of understanding them. Therefore, if we don't truly understand them, what business do we have EVEN imagining that we could manage them?

We should learn from them. They can teach us what it is to be part of the one reality.

Saturday, April 15, 2006

What's in a Name?

The other day -- while labeling a slew of postcards for a GPoWS mailing -- I happened to be watching the 'ol boob tube. Amongst the gazillions of tv commercials was one that actually got me to thinking -- not about the product, mind you -- but about something altogether different.

The particular ad concerned a car or truck, I don't remember which one. It was one of the newer models and its name was derived from a city. I soon realized that a great many models of various types of vehicles are named after geographical locations. Here are a few that came to mind.
Chevy
Tahoe (NV)
Cheyenne (WY)
Mailbu (CA)
Bel Air (CA)

Dodge
Aspen (CO)
Daytona (FL)
Durango (Mexico)
Monaco (Country)

Cadillac
Seville (Spain)
Eldorado (KS or AR)

Pontiac
Catalina (CA)
Le Mans (France)

GMC
Yukon (Canada)

Toyota
Tacoma (WA)
Anyhow, I got to thinking about which towns will never, ever have a vehicle model named after them; the kind of towns with a weird name that doesn't conjure up the kind of imagery that, say, Malibu or Seville does.

Though certainly not an exhaustive list, here's what I came up with. Please feel free to add to the list.
Toad Suck (AR)
Humptulips (WA)
Tittybong (Australia)
Bumpass (VA)
Dogpatch (AR)
Knob Noster (MO)
Chugwater (WY)

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Split Personality

In a manner of speaking, we all suffer from schizophrenia. Our personalities fragment into different people going different directions, often simultaneously! One moment we're a lover, the next the employee or employer. Amidst all this we are also the brother/sister, mother/father, child, and all other assorted roles and persons.

For much of the past year, I've been the blogger, The Rambling Taoist. Almost every day, I would spend at least 2-3 hours in this role, both reading blogs and writing here. It was the predominant part of my personality.

This has changed somewhat. This past weekend I was named the State Treasurer of the Green Party of Washington State. I'm also in negotiations with Oregon's Pacific Green Party to serve as their Interim Fundraising Coordinator (a position I've held twice before). Consequently, I've had less time to function in my role as a blogger.

For the next few weeks, I may not post as "religiously" as before. I need to spend time boning up on Washington's various laws and regulations pertaining to political parties. If I am selected to fundraise for Oregon's party, that will occupy a good portion of my time too.

Besides, I tend to write in spurts. There are weeks and months that I don't need to think much about what to write on any given day; the ideas spurt up on their own! At other times, the ideas seem to be on holiday. I'm learning to let the ideas themselves control when I write and when I don't.

As a Taoist, this is called going with the flow. Don't force the process through a manner of will. Practice wu wei and things will take care of themselves.

Friday, April 7, 2006

A Most "Lovely" Day at the Beach

One of the great perks about living in Aberdeen, Washington is that we're only 18 miles or so from miles of beaches on the Pacific Ocean. During the work week in Spring, you can go down to the beach and see few, if any, other people. In other words, it's sort of like having the whole beach to yourself!

Today my wife & I loaded our 3 dogs in the pickup and headed to Twin Harbors State Park Beach Access outside of the tiny hamlet of Westport. We drove down onto the beach and saw only 1 or 2 other folks. Our dogs ran around like they were in their own private paradise. Della & I collected interesting looking rocks and just gazed out at the roaring ocean. We had a great time until...

We began the quest to head home. We got stuck in the sand! However, after about an hour of digging ourselves out, we started to make some progress. It began to look like we were going to get out of our predicament until...

The truck, all of a sudden, wouldn't start. We had a mechanical problem with our truck earlier in the week. We suspected the problem was with our starter. We had the truck towed to a highly-recommended local repair shop. After testing the starter, they informed us the problem was merely some wire coming off the battery. They fixed it and sent us on our way.

For two days, we encountered no problems. No, the problem didn't reappear until we were stuck in the sand on the beach.

I had to hike out 2 miles to get to the nearest phone -- a two mile walk is a loooong way for a person with Mixed Connective Tissue Disease. To make this long story short, the repair shop owner drove from Aberdeen to Westport and got us, the dogs and the truck back home without charge.

His technicians then determined the problem was indeed the starter and replaced it. That part did cost money, but the price was fair.

I'd write more, but I now need to go recover from our most "lovely" day at the beach. I think I'll be recovering for many days.

Thursday, April 6, 2006

We're Becoming Little Glow Wormz

Here are two disturbing articles about the dangers of nuclear power. As I've stated in this space before, I am categorically opposed to nuclear power. It creates byproducts that are extremely lethal and NO ONE has yet to figure out how to store said byproducts safely. The continued use of all things nuclear poses one of the greatest dangers to life on planet earth.
Uranium bombing in Iraq contaminates Europe
San Francisco Bay View
by Bob Nichols

Nine days after the start of the American president's 2003 "shock and awe" uranium bombing campaign in Baghdad, an invisible radioactive uranium oxide gas cloud swept through Britain's towns and countryside and throughout Europe.

Respected scientists reported on the unrevealed gas cloud after conducting research on specialized high volume air filters in England. Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan stunned Europe in a Sunday Times of London article on Feb. 19, 2006. Their scientific paper, released March 1st, 2006, proved the event. With all the vigor of delusional drunkards, British nuclear and military spokesmen predictably denied the reality of an invisible radioactive cloud.

The military claimed that a Chernobyl-like event in the area was probably responsible, but no explosive meltdowns of operating reactor cores have been reported or observed in 2006 anywhere in the world. Evidence of the truth of the gas cloud panicked the military into frantic, irrational, ludicrous denials. The military spin was later refined and the new Chernobyl claim quietly dropped...read the rest of the article.

Radiation Found To Be Harmful in Any Amount
United for Peace of Pierce County
By John LaForge

More news arrives daily of the ever-deadlier damage to the body by exposure to allowable “low doses” of radiation from nuclear reactors and radioactive waste. The findings -- if widely recognized -- could provoke a rewrite of guidelines for “allowable” exposures and bring an end to reactor operations in the U.S: Operating them so their emissions didn’t kill anyone would be too expensive. This is why critical scientists are pushed out of academia and industry and their studies ignored or suppressed.

In 2003, a dissenting group of British scientific experts found that internal exposure to plutonium is 100 to 1,000 times more dangerous than officially estimated (See p. 5). Their finding was cut from the official record and had to be published independently.

The National Research Council reaffirmed last summer their position that all radiation exposure carries the risk of cancer. The Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII (BEIR VII) report explicitly refuted the “hormesis” theory -- propounded by professors Todd Allen and Paul Wilson of the Department of Engineering Physics at the University of Wisconsin -- that a little radiation is good for you. “The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of exposure below which low levels of ionizing radiation can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial,” said BEIR committee chair Richard Monson of Harvard.

This November, a study published in Radiation Research by U.S. and Russian scientists blamed excess cancers in the Ural Mountains in central Russia on chronic exposures to low doses of radioactivity leaked from a weapons factory 50 years ago. Science magazine calls the new report -- along with a large scale study revealing an elevated cancer risk in nuclear industry workers around the world -- “the strongest direct evidence yet of chronic, low-dose health effects.”

In 2002, British researchers also published in Science their finding that low level radiation from Soviet bomb test fallout caused genetic mutations in families living nearby, mutations that can be passed to future generations. The rate of mutation was found to be 80 percent higher than in the corresponding generation in the control group.

In 2001 the National Cancer Institute was forced to reveal its finding that atomic bomb testing in Nevada, which spread radioactive fallout across every state in the union, has caused at least 15,000 cancer deaths and up to 212,000 nonfatal thyroidcancers. The 67 bomb tests blown off between 1946 and 1958 were said at the time to be safe.

A two-year government study in 1990 found a marked increase in leukemia deaths among people living near the Prairie Island nuclear power reactor in SE Minnesota. The “significantly high” risk of leukemia death appeared among residents between the ages of 40 and 59, the National Cancer Institute said. Northern States Power, now Excel Energy, which runs the reactors, said, “Power plants have releases that are so low that one would not expect to see any health effects at all.” That was then.

The journal Environmental Epidemiology and Toxicology reported in 2000 that infant mortality rates around five U.S. nuclear reactors dropped almost immediately after the reactors closed. In areas surrounding five reactors shut down between 1987 and 1995 (Genoa, in Wisconsin; Rancho Seco in California; Ft. St. Vrain in Colorado; Trojan in Oregon; and Millstone in Connecticut), infant death rates dropped an average of 18 percent in the first two years. The average drop elsewhere in the U.S. was 6.4 percent...read the rest of the article.

[Note: Article originally published by NukeWatch. You can download of a pdf of the article here.]
Addendum: Just after finishing this post, I received the following article from TruthOut. Talk about serendipity!
The Bush administration on Wednesday unveiled a blueprint for rebuilding the United States' decrepit nuclear weapons complex, including restoration of a large-scale bomb manufacturing capacity.

The plan calls for the most sweeping realignment and modernization of the nation's massive system of laboratories and factories for nuclear bombs since the end of the Cold War.

Until now, the nation has depended on carefully maintaining aging bombs produced during the Cold War arms race, some several decades old. The administration, however, wants the capability to turn out 125 new nuclear bombs per year by 2022, as the Pentagon retires older bombs that it claims will no longer be reliable or safe.

Under the plan, all of the nation's plutonium would be consolidated into a single facility that could be more effectively and cheaply defended against possible terrorist attacks. The plan would remove the plutonium now kept at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory by 2014, though transfers of the material could start sooner. In recent years, concern has sharply grown that Livermore, surrounded by residential neighborhoods, could not repel a terrorist attack.

But the administration blueprint is facing sharp criticism, both from those who say it does not move fast enough to consolidate plutonium stores and from those who say restarting bomb production will encourage aspiring nuclear powers across the globe to develop weapons...read the rest of the article.

Tuesday, April 4, 2006

Free Speech Not Always Popular

Here are some excerpts from an article in tonight's edition of Aberdeen's newspaper, The Daily World:
A Grays Harbor College student senator who voted against the charter for a new gay-straight student alliance is being ridiculed on the college’s Internet message board. Members of the student body said today she should be censured or lose her senate seat because she believes being gay is “bad behavior.”

Plumb, a 17-year-old Running Start student from Hoquiam High School, voted against a measure that would have established a club for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender and straight students last month because of her religious beliefs. Even so, the new club’s charter was approved on an 8-4 vote.

Other members of the senate who voted against the club haven’t stated their reasons publicly.

During last month’s student government meeting at GHC, no one explained their votes. But later, on an Internet message board sponsored by the college, the sparks started to fly.

“I simply don’t agree with homosexuality, and I am not going to support a club that does,” Plumb wrote when her vote was questioned. “It is my personal belief that homosexuality is a sin, and I am not going to support a bad behavior in any way.”

“I am extremely appalled that some of these people are representing my student government,” wrote Jen Anderson, a student who says that not all Christians are against homosexuals.
Needless to say, I don't share Plumb's "opinion" in the least. Still, while I disagree with her stance on morality, I support her right of free speech!

And we certainly need to applaud her for one thing -- she stated WHY she voted against the application. Three other students senators joined her in dissent, but have been silent as to why. Most likely, it's for the same reason.

As I've written on RT before, the greatest value of free speech is in understanding that some of the people who freely exercise it will voice an opinion that is unpopular or, at least, an opinion that you or I don't share. If we believe in this right, then we must defend its application for those who are like-minded OR those who state things we abhor. To do otherwise is to negate the very thing we say we believe in.

Monday, April 3, 2006

Utter Impotence

We humans like to think that we control a great deal. If the truth be known, it's a horrendous lie! While it is certainly true we have the ability to control people and the distribution of resources, we are bumbling fools when it comes to holding dominion over the weather and other facets of Mother Nature.

I was reminded of this point today as I watched a History Channel program on the great plague of medieval times. The "Black Death" killed between one-third to one-half of Europe's population during the 14th century. It changed the course of human history.

While the bubonic plague would not cause this type of devastation in human populations today, there literally are millions of microbes out there which could wreak this kind of carnage. This very point is underscored in an excellent book I read a few years ago, The Coming Plague by Laurie Garrett.

Scientists constantly are scanning the world trying to prevent the next pandemic. Unfortunately, as one of the scientists stated in today's documentary, we realistically may not fair much better than our 14th century brethren.

So, while we humans like to think we are the center of the universe, God's chosen entities and mighty intellectual beings, we aren't even the kings or queens of earthly existence. Many of these microbes we rightly fear have been around a lot longer than our species. And, despite our many efforts to wipe them out, they continue to live AND thrive.

What's even worse is that if you or I had to go up against one of these virulent microbes -- mano a mano -- guess who has the best chance of winning? If you need a hint, just let me say, don't bet the house on the human!

Consequently, while we humans spend inordinate amounts of time arguing and warring with each other over oil, water, gold, territory and religious convictions, who knows what these microbes are plotting? They could very easily conquer the winners AND losers of our silly wars and go laughing all the way to the microbe bank!!

Sunday, April 2, 2006

What Time Isn't it?

In a linear conception of the universe, time matters. It offers a clear chronology between yesterday, today and tomorrow. It's always moving forward; a steady progression. It interfaces with all things and provides the context for all interactions. Life equals time.

Time, an aspect of numbers, helps us to separate distinct and unique entities from others. It serves as a mechanism to compartmentalize our relations with all things inside and outside of our realm of consciousness. Put another way, each unit of time is one of the tools we use to show how nothing is connected -- each millisecond is a unique property unto itself.

Scientists will tell us they can map time. They utilize complex mathematical formulae to show the ignorant amongst us that time itself is more than an abstract concept. It IS something, though one certainly can't keep time in a bottle or hold it in one's hands. According to this view, you can't just chuck time out the window because it exists independent of human understanding. It is real.

Poppycock! I think the rock group Chicago said it best,
Does anybody really know what time it is
(I Don't)
Does anybody really care
(care)
If so I can't imagine why
(about time)
We've all got time enough to die
I began thinking about this topic during the "no" time this morning. Here, in most of the US, we shifted onto daylight savings time (dst) at 2:00 a.m. Consequently, the physical properties of time were tweaked; we went from 2:00 a.m. to 3:01 a.m. in the course of 60 seconds.

If time is real and not a human construct, what happened to 2:01 a.m. and its fellow 58 minutes? Did they get sucked into a black hole or are they out there somewhere? While I do realize that dst is a mere human convention, it still begs the question: How can humankind remove genuine tangible properties from their universe?

From a Taoist perspective, this question has no meaning. Rather than viewing life and existence as billions upon billions of distinct and separate occurrences, we recognize that we are all part of one whole. The distinctions we see around us -- time being but one -- are illusions.

Over at The Useless Tree, Sam deals with a similiar point in this manner:
For philosophical Taoists, the meaningfulness of death is to be found in its meaninglessness. That is, the death of one individual is no more and no less than the death of any other individual. Just as in life all things move as "one and the same," so, too, in death. In this, then, we are all one. We are all part of the totality of Way. We each have our place not only in life but also in death. Each death is simultaneously unique and the same. Each person, each thing, moves through his or her own particular life's Way, but each Way ends and is absorbed into the vastness of all Way. In sameness is uniqueness, and in uniqueness sameness.
If we are all part of one great cosmic reality, then time has no absolute meaning. It is merely based on human perception. While it may seem logical to the dominant world view and it may prove necessary to everyday existence, it merely creates arbitrary distinctions where none truly exist.

Saturday, April 1, 2006

A Pale Imitation

As a vegetarian and organic food advocate, I'm always on the lookout for new brands to try. While I certainly agree that the best meals are those that are homemade, sometimes I'm just not up to the task of cutting and chopping (due to my disability). Therefore, it's nice to be able to open a can or pop a frozen dinner into the oven or microwave.

There are several companies that specialize in organic and/or natural foods that represent my favorite brands. I drink gallons of Eden Foods Soy Milk (EdenSoy Extra Vanilla). I almost exclusively use Muir Glen Organic's tomatoes in the many soups I make. When it comes to salsa, no other brand than Emerald Valley Kitchen Organic Foods will do.

And when I speak of canned soups or frozen dinners, I can think of no better company than Amy's Kitchen. This latter company markets a host of nutritious AND delicious foods.

With this in mind, I decided to try the new Organics brand being sold at my local Safeway. Since it's the brand of the supermarket chain itself, I was a bit wary. Big mainstream corporations don't have a great track record when trying to imitate the work of innovative artisans.

For my culinary experiment, I purchased a package of Organic Black Bean Enchiladas for a retail price of $2.99 -- a savings over the retail price of Amy's Black Bean Enchiladas which ranges from $3.69 - $4.00 here in Aberdeen.

The nutritional information provided on the box looked promising: 12 grams/fat (but no saturated or trans fat); 42 grams/carbohydrates; 23 grams/protein; 6 grams/fiber; and 0 grams/cholesterol.

My first bite was zesty. The enchiladas were encased in a hot sauce of tomatoes and jalapeno peppers. However, the more bites I took, the more I didn't like it. The tortillas were grainy, the tofu was dry and the vegetables were hard. My wife agreed with this assessment. We both came to realize that the hot sauce was so spicy simply to coverup for the fact that the overall meal wasn't that palatable. In other words, the purpose of the sauce was to mask the blandness of the product.

From my standpoint, the problem is that capitalism and natural foods aren't a good mix. The big food conglomerates tend to want to cut as many corners as possible and to cut down on costs to maximize profits. Consequently, the use of inferior ingredients and mass production produces an inferior product.

Most, if not all, of the organic food companies highlighted above use the finest ingredients and prepare their foods in small batches. Both of these variables increase production costs, but a better product is produced.

Needless to say, I don't think I'll be buying any more foods of the Organics label. I'll stick with Amy's. Yes, they do cost more, but, as Patrick Henry might have said, Give me flavorful quality or Give me Death!