Saturday, May 2, 2009

And the Lions Draft...2 Offensive players in the first round!???

It's been a week since the Lions draft QB Matthew Stafford (#1, rd 1); TE Brandon Pettigrew (#@20, rd 1) and some safely with the last name of Delmas out of Western Michigan University with the first pick of round 2, and even though my anger has subsided somewhat, I still find myself scratching my head over their entire draft. According to their new coach and GM, they said they weren't going to draft on need, but be looking to draft talent. But, I have to ask: what good is talent if you don't have a system in place for which it fits into? It seems to me that Schwartz and Mayhew really have no clue what they are doing at this point, and that is sad, because I really happen to have liked the Schwartz hiring-at first anyways. Now, I'm not so sure. For one, BOTH of the Lions 2 first round picks had their pathetic owners imprint all over them; 2. They had much MUCH greater "needs" which they could have addressed with their 2nd pick of that first round (like Offensive and defensive lines) and yet they take a Tight End. Unreal! At first, I was so pissed off that they had drafted this way that I was very out spoken about having NO interest at all in watching or following the Lions this year-they are going to be pathetic again anyways so why bother. But, the more that I have thought about it, the more interesting they have become to me-if for no other reason than to be the proverbial "circus freak side show" within the NFL-and now I find myself unable to not look every single day for news on how these new draft picks are doing as they begin mini camps and practice sessions in Detriot...Ah well, I suppose such is my fate as the Lions are concerned, it's just a good thing that since I've moved to Florida I have become a fan of the New England Patriots much more so than the Detroit Lions. I only wish I could "shake the disease" (as one of my favorite bands used to sing) of being a Lions fan.

The Individualist Party

A few years ago, I found myself in a conundrum of sorts politically. Officially, I am a registered Independent, but politically I am anything but. Independents have no real platform which they would like to see a president run on and many of them are considered to be "moderates"-in the middle on most issues and simply understanding the importance of voting each election but torn between voting for the "lessor of 2 evils". I, on the other hand, know exactly what platform I would like to see a President run on, or a political party establish themselves on, and to that end I created the Individualist Party...Recently I came into contact with a local gentleman by the name of Jack Tymann. Mr. Tymann is a retired CEO and president of Westinghouse International and is a writer as well as a speaker at business and political functions locally and nationwide. One day I heard Mr. Tymann discussing Individualism and being an "Individualist" on a local morning radio show and called in to say that that not only had I been referring to myself as such for nearly the last 5 years, but had also written down a platform for the formation of a "political party" which I now choose to belong too. Mr. Tymann asked me to email him the document I had written defining this new party's platform, and, after some editing from him I am posting my final version of it here for all to see....

Individualism--


  • An Individualist believes that the powers of the Federal Government should be limited to those specifically defined in the US Constitution. Any powers not specifically given to it by the Constitution be retained by the States, as per this Constitution.
  • An Individualist believes in the absolute rights of freedom of choice for all individuals, with no hindrance of this freedom from the Federal Government.
  • An Individualist supports the complete overall and/or abolishment of: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, the IRS, the Department of Education, and any/all government funding of primary educational systems.
  • An Individualist recognizes that state and local governments, in accord with State Constitutions, will establish policies and take actions as necessary to maintain an ordered society (criminal law, community ordinances, local socialized medical and educational institutions).
  • An Individualist understands and supports federal actions taken to defend or better the nation as a whole (the most obvious being a strong military and when necessary - war).
  • An Individualist believes in the sovereignty of our nations borders, and recognizes that formal citizenship is required to legally enjoy the rights and freedoms granted by our Constitution.
  • An Individualist believes in a Federal Government as defined by our Founding Fathers -- with limited powers to regulate those industries whose impacts on society could easily be manipulated at consumer expense and endangerment.
  • An Individualist recognizes that Free Market Capitalism is the best avenue for pursuit of individual goals and should be left unencumbered by Federal Government restrictions (taxes and regulations).
  • An Individualist believes that in Free Market Capitalism the consumer is the ultimate judge of the success or failure of a company/corporation.
  • An Individualist lives by the moral code “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and understands the importance of all individuals within a society living peacefully with others.
  • An Individualist believes in every person's freedom of choice on all matters, so long as that individual's choice doesn’t endanger the public at large.
  • An Individualist recognizes that other individuals may choose a different lifestyle and/or hold different beliefs, and respects each individual's exercising of their freedom of choice.
  • An Individualist recognizes the importance of free elections, and participates in local and national elections.
  • An Individualist believes it is their responsibility (not the government's) to provide for their family and their own future needs.
  • An Individualist recognizes that every individual has the right to work hard, benefit from the fruits of this labor, and succeed or fail with an absolute of no Federal Government involvement or intervention.
  • An Individualist recognizes that limited Federal Programs are appropriate to assist other individuals who are in need and/or otherwise are unable to fend for themselves.
  • An Individualist recognizes that rules (laws) should be adaptable and fluid to apply to those cases where imprisonment or fines would be detrimental to both society and the Individual in question.
  • Finally, an Individualist recognizes the delicate balance of the ecology of our planet, and our impacts on it. To that end, the Individualist always continues to seek out better and more efficient uses of our natural resources so as to preserve our planet for our future generations.

Personally…



I believe that the most sacred right gifted to us by our "Creator", and guaranteed by the US Constitution, is the right of every individual to make his/her own choices and decisions.

Issues such as a person’s right to die and abortion fall into this category. Such issues that should not be judged by Federal or State Governments. Where necessary, they should be ruled on at the most local levels of government.

The Federal Government's role should be limited to disputes and relationships between its member states and international relations. Monetary reparations for natural disasters deemed ‘catastrophic’; maintaining national military forces; final oversight-but privatization-of our national airspace, waterways, and radio frequencies should also start with the Federal Government.

Social Security, Medicare and Welfare programs at the federal level-should be abolished. If local communities wish to levy taxes for these programs, so be it. However, we as a society must learn to take care of ourselves and our families first, and stop relying on the federal government to ‘take care of us’ when we reach a certain age.

People should get involved by voting; our tax system should be completely restructured so as to eliminate the need for the IRS.

The prohibition of Marijuana and hemp should come to an end.

Foreign policy should be based from a globalization perspective, relative to our importance in the global economy. Preparation for the inevitable contact with other species should begin, but only as a ‘background’ social program.

Funding for the research and development of future technologies and the cultivation of interstellar resources should also be top foreign policy priorities.

The Swine Flu farce

It's hard sometimes for me to admit to being a member of the media. Although I'm not what some would call a "formal" member of the media, I am still, technically, part of the media. After this last week of the mass media giving us an overdose helping of the "Swine Flu epidemic" it has become even more embarrassing for me to admit to being "in the media". This is a joke right? The "swine flu"? Come on!!! I mean, OK, its "a" flu, but the media has made this thing out to be the next black plague for crying out loud! What is stupid is that this particular strain of the flu appears to be LESS pervasive than the strains of flu we currently are aware of. I'm not arrogant enough to quote exact numbers on this stupid media fabrication of a major event, but, to date, there have been LESS official cases of the "swine flu" over the last month, than there have been cases of the common flu. Even funnier is that nearly 100 people die EVERY DAY in America due to regular influenza and this particular strain has yet to kill ONE American citizen domestically. So what is the big deal here? Why did the WHO and CDC come out and declare the "swine flu" to be at near pandemic levels and raised their alert status accordingly? And why did the media jump all over this as if it were the next Anthrax scare? I just don't get it, all the statistical data on this virus proves that it (apparently) is less dangerous than the other strains of influenza which we inoculate for ever year, and yet schools are closing nationwide and people are wearing breathing masks as precautions-even USF in Tampa Bay prohibited their graduating class this year from shaking hands with the dean of the school because of fears of the "swine flu". PUH LEEZE!!!! Are you kidding me???? Over 35,000 people a year DIE in our country from the regular flu and you don't see schools closing and people being scared to shake hands during the "flu season"! So, that leads me to a natural conclusion: what the fuck is really going on? What is it that the media has been distracting us from? What is it that the WHO and CDC are trying to cover up or hide in the back pages of the press that we should be paying attention too? Is this a "man made" disease by a terrorist group? Is there something else going on out there in the world that our Federal Government is trying to keep us from paying attention too? Or, is this just further proof that 1. the mass media are not just in love with O'Bama but have also completely lost it, and 2. our Federal Govermental agencies which oversee these diseases (the CDC) just completely clueless and out of touch with reality? What ever it may be, something doesn't sit right with me about all the over blown coverage of the "swine flu".

I'm Back: O'bama's first 100 days.

After taking a month off to collect my thoughts and handling some personal issues in my life, I am now ready to get back to what I do best: calling it as I see it!

Mr. O'Bama had his 100 day anniversary this week...For starters, I refuse to address him as President because he acts more like a dictator or King, and since, as of now, our political system prohibits such titles for our nation's leader, I will refer to him as "Mr". Let's get on with it...So, what have we learned about O'Bama through his first 100 days? Well, I suppose that depends on your perspective of the man. If the change you were wanting was one that was a distinct slant towards socialistic policy, then you should be happy. However, if the change you wanted was for a departure from partisan politics, small Federal budget expenditures and some sign that Mr. O'Bama was going to buck the way politics is currently done in our nation's capitol, then you, like me, are not only disappointed and pissed off, but also fearful of what is too come.

It's amazing what our "President" has managed to accomplish in just 100 or so days. In this short period of time he has not only managed to triple our nations debt and taken control of several large corporate entities through thinly veiled "government bailouts", but he has also made us the laughing stock of every one of our enemies through his ridiculous appearances at various foreign functions and gatherings, providing photo op after photo op, shaking hands, smiling, and telling the leaders of those various nations around the globe who have sworn death upon us that "we are your friend". This ludicrous reaching out to these leaders who have said themselves that they are our sworn enemy is scary. It seems that Mr. O'Bama really believes that these leaders WANT to be our friend and that he is totally deaf to their declarations against us-that or he is just plain ignorant.
Now, I don't believe that O'Bama is ignorant-he did manage to weasel his way into becoming the first "Black" President of our nation after all-but I can't help get the feeling that either he has no real clue what he is doing as far as foreign policy is concerned or that he has some grander plan in store for how he wants to "shape" our nation while he is "President".
That being said, his domestic policies definity point to the later.
Anyone who questions that Mr. O'Bama is NOT a socialist has either drank way too much from the Liberal Kool Aid fountain or simply has no idea what the words "socialism" and "socialist" means. For reference (taken from dictionary.com): (noun) 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole; 2. (in marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. A Socialist is one who practices these principles.
Now, I don't know about you, but O'Bama's current economic policies fit both of those definitions to a "T", and if you aren't scared yet then you should be, because (particilarly) his economic policies are 100% contradictory to everything which America stands for and was built on and if this doesn't scare you shitless-as it does me-then you have more problems than even Dr. Phil could help you with.

Mr. O'Bama has been in office for just 100 days, and if he continues on the path he has started, I'm not sure just how much of the "America" that I grew up in, and love, will be left for my kids and grand kids to appreciate and if I were one of those who were to grade his first 100 days in office he would get an F: for failure to understand what America was built on and what being an American means.