This morning CNN continued with the sexual exploits of Rep. Wiener on the Internet. Other than the details, CNN raise an interesting question, "Is Tweeting cheating?"
Several people had opinions. All of them started from the position of the "absolute". That is, they gave their personal opinions without reference to any base. In actual fact those opinions were based on their previous training, their desires, their judgment, and the environment in which they find themselves. This is a very variable base on which to operate, especially from the present environment. For example, people from San Francisco and New York City have a completely different sexual philosophy than persons from small Midwest towns.
Because of the variability of "absolute" base, it may be more productive to think in terms of previously established rules. Such rules can change with changes in technology. For example, Jews and Muslims were denied eating pork for thousands of years. This was based upon the that pigs were generally infected with trichinosis, which wrecked havoc when transmitted to the human body . New technology has cleaned up the trichinosis problem, and we now have "clean" pork for human consumption. The fact that many segments of society retain the old restrictions is not especially relevant.
Conversely while technology can lead to a justifiable change in rules concerning physical situations, there is no technological change for psychological and theoretical considerations. The use of condoms, birth control pills, and medications to cure physical sexual diseases are now available, which allows more freedom in sexual practices with less physical risk. However, these mechanisms have no effect on the psychological aspects of guilt, lying, and the need for continued personal relationships on a broader "love" basis.
Jesus addressed these problems more than 2000 years ago. Many who read the first word of the sentence will be turned off for various reasons. Two of these are negative feelings from early childhood and present restrictions on personal liberty.
However those who can think more objectively, may wish to consider that humanity in general has agreed to Jesus' philosophy, as indicated by his sayings, some of which can be interpreted as "rules". Many do not accept this philosophy, usually for reasons specified above. But, the majority of society considers that this philosophy is still of value.
With respect to sex, I paraphrase Jesus saying that if a man looks at a woman with lust in his heart, he has already committed infidelity. This may sound a little harsh, if we gloss over the word "lust". For example if a man is thinking of having this woman in his bed for sexual intercourse, that is lust, and he is obviously infringing the rule. On the other hand, if he looks at a woman with appreciation of her stature and beauty, he is not lusting and is not infringing the rule. In essence, a man has control of his thoughts. As he wanders into the area of infidelity, he has the responsibility to correct that himself.
How is this related to Rep. Wiener's exploits on the Internet? We have no way of knowing what is in a man's mind. We only have an inkling, when we hear what he says verbally or see what he writes. These two give at least a hazy picture of his total philosophy and related aspects. The more he talks and the more he writes, the more we know. The details of Rep. Wiener's e-mails clearly indicate that he was thinking about physical sexual encounter with the recipients. Therefore, he has betrayed the 2000-year-old rule of sexual morality. He then must live with the consequences of societal judgment. If his party members and his constituents support his sexual immorality, then they also are contributing to further destruction of the 2000 year-old rule.
The question may then be raised as to whether the 2000 year-old rule is the same as the restriction against eating pork, and should be eliminated based upon new aspects of the society. However before scuttling the rule, consider first the aspects on which it was probably based. There are some key points. Man is attracted to women for sexual intercourse to reproduce humanity. In the reproduction aspect, certain emotional factors prevail such that man and woman stay together to raise the progeny. While socialistic governments work against this, man is imbued with this requirement. Man also requires a close companion for his emotional satisfaction, other than sex. Women fits this bill through her feminine emotional makeup, which involves love, caring, stability and all those other things which most of us appreciate as part of a satisfactory family life.
The fundamental question is then whether "family life" and all of its manifestations are worth continuing? Some may say that we can have both. That is, we can have a stable family life and complete sexual freedom in all of its forms. That approach is idealistic and impractical, since at least one primary member in every family has a desire for family life continuity. US society in general thinks the same or Rep. Wiener would not be on the pan for so-called rule infractions.
The bottom line is that Rep. Wiener must be relieved of his responsibilities. As a Representative, he is a leader in society. He has the power to lead either positively or negatively. A negative approach would be a further destruction of family values.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Open Letter to Rep. Neugebauer
Randy,
I just read your newsletter.
There two primary considerations in agricultural bills. One consideration is to be sure that we are not hamstringing food production which might lead to famine in times of unusual weather. The other consideration is to look at agricultural commodities, such as cotton, as equivalent to other commodities, such as oil, copper, etc. The food products are necessary to sustain life in the US. The commodity products are equivalent to manufactured goods and generate revenue from the global economy.
It should not be the taxpayers responsibility to subsidize agriculture, except for famine insurance purposes on food products. All other agricultural products should be able to stand on their own feet economically.
I suggest you spend little time in kissing babies. You need to do some of that to maintain a voting base, but you know what the country needs. Let's get on with the main problems.
I cannot congratulate you on spending $40.85 billion in funding the Department of Homeland Security for the 2012 fiscal year. We don't measure program effectiveness on how much money we spend, but on the accomplishments. How much did we spend last year? Was it more or less than $40.85 billion? We seem pretty secure. The FBI seems to be doing its job. Maybe we are spending too much on homeland security.
Don't worry about shutting parts of the government down because of lack of an overall spending bill. Do it piecemeal. You will probably save money that way.
You are lamenting about the employment situation, but you don't say what you are doing about it.
With respect to Libya, it would be ridiculous to be sending US troops there. Furthermore, it doesn't make any difference what the President says with respect to justification, the House has the power to shut down spending for that operation, and it should immediately do so.
I just read your newsletter.
There two primary considerations in agricultural bills. One consideration is to be sure that we are not hamstringing food production which might lead to famine in times of unusual weather. The other consideration is to look at agricultural commodities, such as cotton, as equivalent to other commodities, such as oil, copper, etc. The food products are necessary to sustain life in the US. The commodity products are equivalent to manufactured goods and generate revenue from the global economy.
It should not be the taxpayers responsibility to subsidize agriculture, except for famine insurance purposes on food products. All other agricultural products should be able to stand on their own feet economically.
I suggest you spend little time in kissing babies. You need to do some of that to maintain a voting base, but you know what the country needs. Let's get on with the main problems.
I cannot congratulate you on spending $40.85 billion in funding the Department of Homeland Security for the 2012 fiscal year. We don't measure program effectiveness on how much money we spend, but on the accomplishments. How much did we spend last year? Was it more or less than $40.85 billion? We seem pretty secure. The FBI seems to be doing its job. Maybe we are spending too much on homeland security.
Don't worry about shutting parts of the government down because of lack of an overall spending bill. Do it piecemeal. You will probably save money that way.
You are lamenting about the employment situation, but you don't say what you are doing about it.
With respect to Libya, it would be ridiculous to be sending US troops there. Furthermore, it doesn't make any difference what the President says with respect to justification, the House has the power to shut down spending for that operation, and it should immediately do so.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
There Has Been No Recession
There has been no recession. There has been no recovery. It is all a matter of perspective.
When the second President Bush was in office, he inadvertently accentuated a program, which had been started many years before by Presidents Roosevelt, Carter, and Johnson, and which will ultimately lead to a complete restructure of the economy and social culture of the US.
We then elected Pres. Obama on the basis of a promise of "change". The content of "change" was unspecified, nor was a specification necessary at the time. After all, campaigner Obama was a wonderful speaker, excellent appearance, and was able to make emotional promises which we easily believed. We did not know at the time that Pres. Obama's "change" interpretation meant a headlong acceleration to socialism. We now have that.
From that perspective, we are only now in the intermediate phases of change. The standard of living of the American people has not been growing. It is controversial as to whether it is declining, but it eventually will, as American wealth is redistributed to others of the world, who have been less fortunate. Perhaps this is as it should be, since we are a compassionate people.
We are also only in an intermediate phase of unemployment, which presently stands at 9%. In fact, this will decrease to zero. All citizens of the previous Soviet Union previously had complete employment, as do the present citizens of Cuba, and North Korea. The Soviets all did and the others still work for their governments.
Pres. Obama does not completely specify this program. Perhaps because he doesn't quite understand it himself, but more likely because there is still a broad segment of the US population, who believes in private enterprise. He doesn't want to get them aroused, although he has so far been unable to control talk radio which is mostly against his programs. Perhaps he considers talk radio unimportant or has not yet figured out how to exercise control. There has already been talk in the Congress of shutting down talk radio.
All told, we are moving nicely in the direction of autocratic socialism. There had been and will remain a few bumps and hazards along the way, such as high unemployment, high gas prices, massive national debt, the prospect of higher interest rates and inflation, etc. But in the long run, we will all be happy and content in our autocratic socialistic lives. Government will handle all of our responsibilities, which we have had previous difficulty in resolving.
When the second President Bush was in office, he inadvertently accentuated a program, which had been started many years before by Presidents Roosevelt, Carter, and Johnson, and which will ultimately lead to a complete restructure of the economy and social culture of the US.
We then elected Pres. Obama on the basis of a promise of "change". The content of "change" was unspecified, nor was a specification necessary at the time. After all, campaigner Obama was a wonderful speaker, excellent appearance, and was able to make emotional promises which we easily believed. We did not know at the time that Pres. Obama's "change" interpretation meant a headlong acceleration to socialism. We now have that.
From that perspective, we are only now in the intermediate phases of change. The standard of living of the American people has not been growing. It is controversial as to whether it is declining, but it eventually will, as American wealth is redistributed to others of the world, who have been less fortunate. Perhaps this is as it should be, since we are a compassionate people.
We are also only in an intermediate phase of unemployment, which presently stands at 9%. In fact, this will decrease to zero. All citizens of the previous Soviet Union previously had complete employment, as do the present citizens of Cuba, and North Korea. The Soviets all did and the others still work for their governments.
Pres. Obama does not completely specify this program. Perhaps because he doesn't quite understand it himself, but more likely because there is still a broad segment of the US population, who believes in private enterprise. He doesn't want to get them aroused, although he has so far been unable to control talk radio which is mostly against his programs. Perhaps he considers talk radio unimportant or has not yet figured out how to exercise control. There has already been talk in the Congress of shutting down talk radio.
All told, we are moving nicely in the direction of autocratic socialism. There had been and will remain a few bumps and hazards along the way, such as high unemployment, high gas prices, massive national debt, the prospect of higher interest rates and inflation, etc. But in the long run, we will all be happy and content in our autocratic socialistic lives. Government will handle all of our responsibilities, which we have had previous difficulty in resolving.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Another War for the US in Yemen?
EIN News says, "Yemen Fighting Halts Flights, U.S. Sends Envoy to Region
Overnight clashes in the Yemeni capital killed dozens more people and grounded flights as a U.S. envoy arrived in the region to press President Ali Abdullah Saleh to step down and prevent his country imploding. (reuters.com)".
We don't care about flights being halted. We have compassion for the dozens of people being killed, but is not our responsibility to protect them. Bloodshed is traditionally involved as people and governments struggle for a new order.
I concentrate on the fact that the US has sent an envoy to the region. An absolutely stupid move! How many envoys have been sent from Italy, Japan, Russia, China, Germany, etc.? The problem with sending an envoy is that such action makes us immediately involved. What does Congress plan to do as Obama is starting to take on another war?
Overnight clashes in the Yemeni capital killed dozens more people and grounded flights as a U.S. envoy arrived in the region to press President Ali Abdullah Saleh to step down and prevent his country imploding. (reuters.com)".
We don't care about flights being halted. We have compassion for the dozens of people being killed, but is not our responsibility to protect them. Bloodshed is traditionally involved as people and governments struggle for a new order.
I concentrate on the fact that the US has sent an envoy to the region. An absolutely stupid move! How many envoys have been sent from Italy, Japan, Russia, China, Germany, etc.? The problem with sending an envoy is that such action makes us immediately involved. What does Congress plan to do as Obama is starting to take on another war?
Osama bin Laden - A One Act Play
Location: Oval Office of the White House
Time: A few weeks ago
Scene: Pres. Obama meeting with his CIA Director
CIA Dir.: "Mr. President, we have finally located Osama bin Laden. Should we kill him?"
Pres. Obama: "Where is he located and what are the risks".
CIA Dir.: "He is in Pakistan. We would have to do an aerial assault on his residence. If we do this by bombing, or missile attack, we will not be sure whether we got him. The most certain way is a manned attack from helicopters. There is a possibility it could go wrong, but I'll give it a 90% chance of success. Even if it goes wrong, the Pakistani government is favorable to us. We give them a lot of money".
Pres. Obama [thinking]: Bush set this up a few years ago, and he didn't get any negative reaction at that time. This is somewhat different than the Carter attempt in Iran many years ago, which turned out to be a complete disaster. The Iranian government at that time was the enemy. If this operation fails or becomes publicly known, we might at least get an E. for effort. However, we can keep it quiet until hopefully favorable results are in. If successful, this ought to be good for many votes in my reelection.
Pres. Obama: "After due consideration and in the interest of humanity, I am forced to say we should make every effort to capture, or if necessary, kill him".
Time: A few weeks ago
Scene: Pres. Obama meeting with his CIA Director
CIA Dir.: "Mr. President, we have finally located Osama bin Laden. Should we kill him?"
Pres. Obama: "Where is he located and what are the risks".
CIA Dir.: "He is in Pakistan. We would have to do an aerial assault on his residence. If we do this by bombing, or missile attack, we will not be sure whether we got him. The most certain way is a manned attack from helicopters. There is a possibility it could go wrong, but I'll give it a 90% chance of success. Even if it goes wrong, the Pakistani government is favorable to us. We give them a lot of money".
Pres. Obama [thinking]: Bush set this up a few years ago, and he didn't get any negative reaction at that time. This is somewhat different than the Carter attempt in Iran many years ago, which turned out to be a complete disaster. The Iranian government at that time was the enemy. If this operation fails or becomes publicly known, we might at least get an E. for effort. However, we can keep it quiet until hopefully favorable results are in. If successful, this ought to be good for many votes in my reelection.
Pres. Obama: "After due consideration and in the interest of humanity, I am forced to say we should make every effort to capture, or if necessary, kill him".
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Hands off Syria
EIN News says, "EU Draft UN Resolution on Syria Could Hurt Stability, China Says China warned that a European draft resolution asking the UN Security Council to condemn Syria would not defuse tension in the region, suggesting Beijing could block it if it is submitted for a vote. (reuters.com)".
Although this is an EU draft to the United Nations, it affects us because we will be expected to vote on it and also be expected to support the EU.
The Syrians have every right to determine their own government, without interference from the outside. If the Syrian people don't like the present government, it is their sole responsibility to change it, not ours. I generally support the Chinese position on the situation.
If it comes to a vote in the UN, I strongly suggest that the US vote against it or at least abstain. Any vote to the contrary will lead to a Syrian government censure, which will result in military support for the rebels, and we will have another great US cost, in the same manner as we have just experienced in Libya, and our long-term problems in both Afghanistan and Iraq. We can't afford to continue this attitude of trying to change the world to match that perceived by the Obama Administration.
I call on the U.S. Congress to bring a sense of reality to all of these international nation building problems.
Although this is an EU draft to the United Nations, it affects us because we will be expected to vote on it and also be expected to support the EU.
The Syrians have every right to determine their own government, without interference from the outside. If the Syrian people don't like the present government, it is their sole responsibility to change it, not ours. I generally support the Chinese position on the situation.
If it comes to a vote in the UN, I strongly suggest that the US vote against it or at least abstain. Any vote to the contrary will lead to a Syrian government censure, which will result in military support for the rebels, and we will have another great US cost, in the same manner as we have just experienced in Libya, and our long-term problems in both Afghanistan and Iraq. We can't afford to continue this attitude of trying to change the world to match that perceived by the Obama Administration.
I call on the U.S. Congress to bring a sense of reality to all of these international nation building problems.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Obama Quotes on the American Flag & the National Anthem
The following quotes by Pres. Obama were made some time ago, and it is barely possible that he may have changed his mind since then. However, adults usually don't do a complete about-face on political and moral principles.
Here is what he said at a Meet the Press interview in 2008:
"As I've said about the flag pin [usually worn on the lapel], I don't want to be perceived as taking sides".. "There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression.." "The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing."
"The National Anthem should be 'swapped' for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing'. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as 'redesign' our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It's my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of warring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails - - - perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments ...."
When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past".
"Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country's First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America".
The above are naive ideologies of an immature man. He apparently had no idea of world realities, nor even an understanding of basic diverse motivations of human beings. It appears that we have elected a teen-age mentality adult as US President. W are now forced to live with it another 2 years.. Meanwhile, other teen-age mentality ideologists will support the Obama program to the continuing destruction of the US economy and military power. This will result in a reduction in our standard of living.
It is customary to take the President of the US at his word.
Here is what he said at a Meet the Press interview in 2008:
"As I've said about the flag pin [usually worn on the lapel], I don't want to be perceived as taking sides".. "There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression.." "The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing."
"The National Anthem should be 'swapped' for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing'. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as 'redesign' our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It's my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of warring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails - - - perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments ...."
When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past".
"Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country's First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America".
The above are naive ideologies of an immature man. He apparently had no idea of world realities, nor even an understanding of basic diverse motivations of human beings. It appears that we have elected a teen-age mentality adult as US President. W are now forced to live with it another 2 years.. Meanwhile, other teen-age mentality ideologists will support the Obama program to the continuing destruction of the US economy and military power. This will result in a reduction in our standard of living.
It is customary to take the President of the US at his word.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
