apple juice

Apparently our President has said that “both sides ought to be properly taught” in the “debate” about evolution. I put debate in quotes, because as far as scientists are concerned, there isn’t a debate. The debate has already happened.

More importantly, two really interesting, and hypocritical things are wrapped up in that statement.

• This is the President who would like us all to believe that there is no grey area, and that you are either “with us or against us”, black and white, good and evil. But in this case, he is simply looking to create grey area, create confusion and doubt.
• Secondly, (as was recently just said to me), isn’t this like saying we should teach kids racial profiling, so they can understand both sides of the debate? Or we should teach kids to hit each other when they are trying to solve differences (so they can see how that works compared to talking it out). It’s a pretty slippery slope… and it’s the polar opposite position that Bush has taken on every other debate, that it’s his way or the highway. (as they say)

Read the whole article here at the NYTimes: Bush Remarks Roil Debate on Teaching of Evolution

Also, don’t forget about Karl Rove (oh, wait, I guess he never existed (thanks eric)), and his lovely dealings with Robert Novak, and the fact that Bush sidestepped the Senate in appointed John Bolton as our UN Ambassador. Or the new energy bill handout to big Gas and Oil companies. Wouldn’t want to divert your attention. (Ah, dang it! I fell in to their trap! I diverted your attention from real issues!)

Many juvenile crimes ‚Äî such as the carjacking that is so central to “Grand Theft Auto” ‚Äî are conventionally described as “thrill-seeking” crimes. Isn’t it possible that kids no longer need real-world environments to get those thrills, now that the games simulate them so vividly? The national carjacking rate has dropped substantially since “Grand Theft Auto” came out. Isn’t it conceivable that the would-be carjackers are now getting their thrills on the screen instead of the street?

The author makes some pretty good points. I hate to see gov’t getting into regulating what goes into video games. I’m perfectly fine with ratings, and as far as I’m concerned, GTA should’ve been MA all along. We can’t have gov’t policing everything. Parents need to understand what’s going on in the games their kids are playing, the stores need to not sell explicit games to kids, and the kids need to be educated about what’s right, what’s wrong, and everything in between.

Anyways, good article, check it: Hillary vs. the Xbox

Sorry, I know I’m on a bit of a tangent with the administration right now. But if I could provide one little example of how warped the people leading our country are:

Perhaps you heard that the Prime Minister of India was in town to discuss freedom and democracy? It says right here at the White House website: President, Prime Minister of India Discuss Freedom and Democracy

When I sit around and discuss Freedom and Democracy, I usually talk about why it’s nice to live in a country where I can speak my mind freely. I talk about the right to vote. I talk about our system of government.

One thing that doesn’t enter the conversation, when speaking of Freedom and Democracy, is Nuclear Weapons.

Call me old fashioned if you like, (really, there is a comments section) but I just don’t believe that more nuclear weapons are what we need in the world. In fact, I think we need far far less of them. We should work every diplomatic angle to prevent other countries from getting them. We should then be working to reduce the numbers that we and other countries possess.

So back to our little Freedom and Democracy chat with the Prime Minister of India. Apparently in the bizzaro White House world, Freedom and Democracy is code for “sell them Nuclear technology”.

Quoting Slate‘s 19th of July Today’s Papers here:

The Journal says the Indian nukes deal “rocks the decades-old” non-proliferation system in which countries were allowed to buy nuclear technology only if they forswore trying to develop nukes. “If you open the door for India, a lot of other countries are likely to step through it,” said one non-proliferation expert, in what seems be a widely held opinion.

Now I realize that this agreement is for civilian nuclear energy technology, but as noted in many articles today, the key is that there is no agreement not to use the technology we sell them to develop nuclear weapons.

I’m all for Nuclear energy. Seriously. I think it could safely supply us with a huge portion of our energy needs, but if we’re selling this to other countries, we’d better be sure they aren’t turning around and making weapons. That should be in the contract: No nuclear weapons. Apparently they left that line out this time.

Oh wait, I see, you meant any criminals…. not someone involved, who is a criminal, but actual people that are convicted of crimes.

Because, I guess, if you had to fire anyone involved in criminal activity, you’d probably have to fire half the administration.

A Sidestep and a Backtrack

Is Rove a Criminal?

Perfectly Stated: Rove Isn’t the Real Outrage

Washington is electrified with the abundant energy of buzz from a scandal — speculation about Rove, about Bush, about Cheney’s aide, Scooter Libby. Who leaked? Who may have lied? How did Novak slip the noose? But the real scandal is the ongoing mess in Iraq, the murder just the other day of innocent children (is there any other kind?) and the false notion that, somehow, taking out Hussein would make us all safer. London gives the lie to that.

A little Sunday reading for everyone:

If It’s a Muslim Problem, It Needs a Muslim Solution

it is essential that the Muslim world wake up to the fact that it has a jihadist death cult in its midst. If it does not fight that death cult, that cancer, within its own body politic, it is going to infect Muslim-Western relations everywhere. Only the Muslim world can root out that death cult. It takes a village.

and…

We’re Not in Watergate Anymore

The pettiness of this retribution shows just how successfully Mr. Wilson hit the administration’s jugular: his revelation threatened the legitimacy of the war on which both the president’s reputation and re-election campaign had been staked.

Both articles will shed some light for you…

I think the terrorists are going to be their own demise.

I don’t think they realize that these attacks unite the civilized world, and do not divde it as I assume they hope.

Sure, it creates impassioned discussions, and differences of opinion on how to deal with their threats, but that is the beauty of a democracy. If one administration goes to far (Patriot Act), or pursues the wrong goals (Iraq), they are checked. In the end, through freedom of expression, the press, and our governmental process, the better solutions are found. This is true of all of the democracies of the world.