Dog Chapman, the bounty hunter of European-American ancestry, had a problem with his son dating an African-American woman.
This is what he said
http://starbulletin.com/2007/11/01/news/story01.html
Chapman: Don't care if she's a Mexican, a whore, whatever. It's not 'cause she's black. It's because we use the word "n_____" sometimes here. I'm not going to take a chance ever in life by losing everything I've worked for for 30 years for some f____ n_____ heard us say "n_____" and turned us in to the Enquirer magazine -- our career is over. I'm not taking that chance at all, never in life, never. Never. ... If Lyssa was dating a n_____, we would all say f___ you. And you know that. If Lyssa brought a black guy home ... It's not that they're black. It's none of that. It's that we use the word "n____." We don't mean "you f___ scum n_____ without a soul." We don't mean that s___, but America would think we're meaning that. And we're not taking a chance and losing everything we've got over a racial slur. Because our son goes with a girl like that, I can't do that, Tucker, you can't expect Garry, Bonnie, Cecily, all them young kids ... 'cause I'm in love for seven months, I ... f___ that. ... So I'll help you get another job, but you cannot work here unless you break up with her and she's out of your life. I can't handle that s___. I've got 'em in the parking lot trying to record us. I've got that girl saying she's going to wear a recorder. ...
Dog Chapman needs to be a mature adult already! He should've stop saying the word n----- a long time ago!
And anyone who is against any inter-racial dating is NOT a mature person!
People say "this is just a private conversation". I say "Anything you say CAN and WILL be used against you".
This incident is a reminder to all of us to be mature in everything we say AT ALL TIMES! If you still use racist words in private conversations, you better stop NOW because others will eventually find out! NOTHING is secret anymore!
---
This is what Charles Memminger said about Chapman's racist rants.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/11/04/features/memminger.html
"We use the word n---- here," Chapman says on the tape. The "we" part is rather alarming. Like it's just part of a day in the life with the Chapmans: "We do the laundry. We eat lunch. We use the word n----. We vacuum." He tells his son on the tape he doesn't want to see the fact that "we" use that word end up in the Enquirer and then see his career go down the toilet. The I-word -- irony -- doesn't quite capture the fact that that is exactly what is happening.
Cathy Wi said the following idiotic statements
http://starbulletin.com/2007/11/11/editorial/letters.html (scroll to 3rd letter from the top)
I am so sick and tired of how thin-skinned this world has become! So "Dog" Chapman made those remarks. So what? He was in the privacy of his own home. How is this any different from using slurs for any other ethnic group? It seems that whenever the N-word is spoken, we are suppose to cringe and say, "Shame on you racist," yet it's OK to call everyone else names. No, I don't buy that. Why should Dog apologize? Apologize to whom? He's being treated too harshly. There are far worse things one could do.
Cathy Wi
Honolulu
Anytime I hear crap like that, I know that person is a hardcore racist! Cathy Wi is using coded words to express "how dare black people ask for respect".
I'm assuming from her last name that Wi is an Asian person. It's easy for Cathy Wi complain about others being "thin-skinned" because she's in a mostly Asian-American environment. She takes her majority status for granted!
If Cathy Wi is that insensitive towards African-Americans, then I wonder how she feels about Polynesians, Micronesians, Arabs, Mexicans, Russians, etc?
If Cathy Wi was growing up in communities in which Asians were less than 1% of the population, she would be mocked endlessly. People would tell her to "go back to China". They would go up to her face and yell at her in a fake Asian accent. They would call her "slant eyes", "chow fun" and other racist insults! This would happen EVERYDAY! I wonder how thick-skinned will she be then!
2) Even with all the controversies of Dog Chapman's statements, the brutal beating of a European-American couple in Waikele, and the murder of a European-American student in Nanakuli earlier this year, I still thought the most under-reported racial story in Hawaii was the persecution of immigrants.
When a European-American or African-American faces discrimination, they know how to contact the media or sympathetic organizations. However, when an immigrant from Micronesia or Asia faces discrimination, they are reluctant to speak to anyone due to a language barrier. So it gets under-reported!
However, recent articles in the Star Bulletin and Honolulu Advertiser reported on this issue!
The following article report on the return of gang warfare in Hawaii.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/28/news/story01.html
State law enforcement, education and human service officials say they offer enough services to stop children from entering gangs, disband current groups and avoid chaos. Although public school fights are up, officials argue they are not as violent or as frequent as in the late 1980s and early '90s.
Deborah Spencer-Chun, who heads Adult Friends for Youth, said employees build relationships with gang leaders to learn about brewing fights. But, she said, they are increasingly unable to answer campus disturbances on time.
"Sometimes it takes a real crisis before anybody responds to it," she said. "People don't want to believe there are gangs in those neighborhoods just like people don't want to say there are gangs in Hawaii. This is paradise, this is where most of our economy comes from tourism."
The following day, the Star Bulletin had another article on the gang issue. This articles mentions more about the alienation some immigrant teens feel in Hawaii schools.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/29/news/story01.html
Neglected by parents who work multiple jobs, students from poor families often join gangs because they feel inferior and see no future in education, said Sid Rosen, who retired this year as head of Adult Friends for Youth, a nonprofit that works with gangs in Hawaii. Gangs are formed along ethnic lines but also by students who share housing projects or street blocks, he said.
"They are living essentially in what is an urban ghetto. If you live in Kalihi, you see yourself as being different than someone who lives in Hawaii Kai," Rosen explained. "The rich haoles live in Hawaii Kai and Kahala, and us poor Filipinos live in Kalihi and us poor Samoans live in Kuhio Park Terrace. ... These boundaries get established."
In the past four years, the Susannah Wesley center has seen about 200 student dropouts, most of them immigrants from outlying islands of Micronesia, the Philippines, Samoa or Tonga, said Stanley Inkyo, the center's youth services administrator.
Families bring their children to Hawaii for a better education, but many parents get stuck with low-paying jobs or end up living in the street and unable to help their kids adjust to the new school setting, Inkyo said.
Aggravating the issue is an influx of Micronesian students in Hawaii's public schools which has nearly doubled in the past five years to 2,558, according to the state Department of Education. The department held a conference for 1,000 educators during the summer to help teachers understand and work better with those students.
"One of the things you'll notice here, and I don't think anybody wants to say it publicly, there's a lot of the racial differences, or the ethnic differences that tend to magnify" the gang issue, Inkyo said, saying Filipino students often clash with those from Micronesia. "There's that kind of uneasiness."
---
I once mentioned that the most under-reported issue in Hawaii was the conflict between Asian immigrants (many from China, Vietnam and Phillipines) and Polynesians. Since then, I've noticed that Micronesians were having conflicts with Polynesians and Asians.
The Honolulu Advertiser had an article about Micronesians facing discrimination when looking for a place to live
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Nov/12/ln/hawaii711120352.html
They say blatant as well as subtle housing discrimination against new Micronesian immigrants and longtime residents alike continues to go largely unchecked. They also say it goes largely unreported because of fears about coming forward, language barriers and a lack of services to address the need."
It seems to be getting worse," added Maria Narruhn, a founding member of Micronesians United, which has been trying to address housing discrimination, but whose resources are limited.
Narruhn said she knows 10 families who have been turned away from rentals on the market in the last year, and were likely discriminated against. Some of the cases involved the landlord actually saying Micronesians weren't welcome.
She believes two of her own family members were also victims of housing discrimination, including her son-in-law, who inquired about a one-bedroom for $995 and was told, when he looked at the unit, that the rent had jumped to $1,020.
(skipped paragraphs)
The first lawsuit Kokua Legal Services filed as part of the project involved a landlord, who was advertising a two-bedroom unit in 'Aiea. According to court documents, a Micronesian tester at Kokua Legal Services called the 'Aiea landlord to inquire about the apartment and was told it was not available. The landlord also told the caller that he had no other units available, the documents allege.
Fifteen minutes later, a Caucasian tester at Kokua Legal Service called the landlord to inquire about the apartment and was told it was available. The landlord also allegedly told the tester he had other rentals that were empty.
(skipped paragraphs)
Kokua Legal Services filed its second lawsuit as part of the project in September, alleging that two landlords who were renting a North King Street unit for $2,000 a month discriminated against a Micronesian tester, then offered the unit to a Caucasian caller.
-------
BUSTED! Those landlords need to be publicly humiliated! Those landlords need to grow up, start being more mature, learn to accept diversity, modernity & globalization!
Sunday, November 18, 2007
I graduated from a "dropout factory"?
Researchers from Johns Hopkins University researched the graduation rates of various high schools in the U.S.
Those whose graduation rates were less than 60% were labeled "dropout factories".
My high school, McKinley High School was one of them.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/30/news/story01.html
--------
Going to a school labeled a "dropout factory" DOES NOT mean you're "dumb". It just means too many of your classmates aren't graduating.
1) My alma mater McKinley has a lot of high achievers. There are students who excel in math meets, science fairs, robotics, and other academic areas. Many go on to colleges with great reputations.
However, at the same time, there are other students at the school who are gang-affiliated, as well as wanabee thugs, and other non-achievers. What I mean by non-achievers is those students who don't even try to reach their potential in academics.
I remembered when I attended that school, there were students who were freshmen the same year I was, but by the start of my senior year, a lot of those students were gone! The overwhelming # of those students were non-achievers, so it was obvious that they dropped out of school.
Some of them were already falling behind in middle school. For some reason, they were academically promoted to high school, which tends to grade a lot harder than middle school. So some of them gave up!
2) some have questioned the formula used by the Johns Hopkins researchers to determine what school is a "dropout factory"
Here is a commentary from a teacher at Kaimuki High School (also labeled a "dropout factory")
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/31/editorial/letters.html (scroll down to the 2nd letter from top)
Kaimuki High has similar demographics to McKinley (Lot of immigrants, mostly Asians, also has many Polynesians and Micronesians), though Kaimuki High has more European-Americans than McKinley. McKinley has more Filipinos than Kaimuki High Other than that, both schools are almost alike.
--
And here are commentaries from the principals of Waipahu & Farrington High Schools (also labeled "dropout factories"). Both schools are majority Filipino, with some Samoans and Micronesians. Many of them are immigrants, and many are from low-income households.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/11/04/editorial/commentary.html
(skipped paragraphs)
So, based on what the school officials from Kaimuki, Waipahu and Farrington said, Johns Hopkins researchers didn't take into account 1) the large # of students who move in & out of the school districts, 2) the large amount of students who take longer than 4 years to earn their diplomas, 3) the large amount of students who are recent immigrants who trying to learn high school material in a new language.
3) Even with the flaws of the Johns Hopkins research, the good thing about it is that it brings awareness of the problem of students who aren't living up to their academic potential, and awareness of which schools are facing more problems than others.
I work in the educational field to help students live up to their potential. I don't take the Johns Hopkins report personally, it shall motivate and remind me of what I need to do to help our students achieve.
Those whose graduation rates were less than 60% were labeled "dropout factories".
My high school, McKinley High School was one of them.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/30/news/story01.html
A national report is labeling seven Oahu public high schools as "dropout factories," meaning that no more than 60 percent of freshmen make it to their senior year.
Hawaii ranked 11th among the states reporting the most dropout factories in an analysis of Education Department data conducted by Johns Hopkins University for the Associated Press.
The state Education Department disputed the findings, noting that Hawaii ninth-graders tend to fall behind and inflate freshman enrollment. So comparing the number of freshman and seniors at any given year to determine dropout and graduation rates is misleading, said Education Department spokesman Greg Knudsen.
The percentage of isle freshmen who move on to their senior year at the schools highlighted in the report ranged from 45 percent at Nanakuli High and Intermediate to 60 percent at Kailua High. The other schools facing dropout problems include Farrington, Kaimuki, McKinley, Waianae and Waipahu, according to the study released yesterday. Those schools all have a large number of minority and low-income students.
--------
Going to a school labeled a "dropout factory" DOES NOT mean you're "dumb". It just means too many of your classmates aren't graduating.
1) My alma mater McKinley has a lot of high achievers. There are students who excel in math meets, science fairs, robotics, and other academic areas. Many go on to colleges with great reputations.
However, at the same time, there are other students at the school who are gang-affiliated, as well as wanabee thugs, and other non-achievers. What I mean by non-achievers is those students who don't even try to reach their potential in academics.
I remembered when I attended that school, there were students who were freshmen the same year I was, but by the start of my senior year, a lot of those students were gone! The overwhelming # of those students were non-achievers, so it was obvious that they dropped out of school.
Some of them were already falling behind in middle school. For some reason, they were academically promoted to high school, which tends to grade a lot harder than middle school. So some of them gave up!
2) some have questioned the formula used by the Johns Hopkins researchers to determine what school is a "dropout factory"
Here is a commentary from a teacher at Kaimuki High School (also labeled a "dropout factory")
http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/31/editorial/letters.html (scroll down to the 2nd letter from top)
I am appalled that you published findings from a John Hopkins University report labeling seven Hawaii high schools as "dropout factories" (Star-Bulletin, Oct. 30). If you did your homework, you would have found out that the study assumes that any student who does not graduate from the same high school he or she enters into as a freshman is a dropout. This is so far from the truth. I am a teacher at Kaimuki High School, and we have an extremely transient population. Many students enter as freshmen but later move to the mainland or back to their home country and graduate there. They should not be labeled as dropouts.
Kaimuki High has similar demographics to McKinley (Lot of immigrants, mostly Asians, also has many Polynesians and Micronesians), though Kaimuki High has more European-Americans than McKinley. McKinley has more Filipinos than Kaimuki High Other than that, both schools are almost alike.
--
And here are commentaries from the principals of Waipahu & Farrington High Schools (also labeled "dropout factories"). Both schools are majority Filipino, with some Samoans and Micronesians. Many of them are immigrants, and many are from low-income households.
http://starbulletin.com/2007/11/04/editorial/commentary.html
Farrington and Waipahu each enrolls more than 2,500 young people. Our students come from diverse cultural and language backgrounds. Approximately 20 percent of our students are learning to speak English while simultaneously endeavoring to meet challenging graduation requirements. Both of our schools receive federal funds because 48 percent to 60 percent of our families have incomes low enough to qualify for government assistance. The Johns Hopkins researchers should be familiar with the multitude of studies that link family income to student achievement. Many of our students face overwhelming personal challenges, yet they persist in working toward a future that will be better than their present lives.
Because so many students enter our campuses with academic deficits, we have developed a number of different paths that support the goal of a high school diploma. We have alternative programs within our schools and off-campus partnerships with others in the community. Some students take more than four years to earn their diplomas, but we do not consider them dropouts. Other students who must spend most of their time with us learning English are not able to complete the traditional high school diploma requirements. However, we work with the Community Schools for Adults that are on our campuses to transition these students to the adult diploma programs. They are not dropouts -- they are overcoming great odds to persist in reaching their goal.
(skipped paragraphs)
As the standards for a diploma continue to move more toward requiring all students to be prepared for entry to a four-year college, we can expect to see an increasing need for alternatives for many of our students. Those who take alternative paths are not dropouts and the schools that support them are not "dropout factories." When we consider those who complete their requirements in more than four years, or who transition to the Community Schools and earn a diploma, our completion rates are higher.
So, based on what the school officials from Kaimuki, Waipahu and Farrington said, Johns Hopkins researchers didn't take into account 1) the large # of students who move in & out of the school districts, 2) the large amount of students who take longer than 4 years to earn their diplomas, 3) the large amount of students who are recent immigrants who trying to learn high school material in a new language.
3) Even with the flaws of the Johns Hopkins research, the good thing about it is that it brings awareness of the problem of students who aren't living up to their academic potential, and awareness of which schools are facing more problems than others.
I work in the educational field to help students live up to their potential. I don't take the Johns Hopkins report personally, it shall motivate and remind me of what I need to do to help our students achieve.
Friday, October 26, 2007
The Lameness of Anti-Immigration Fascists
At a bookstore, I was looking at Laura Ingraham's book, and it said the usual non-sense of "illegal aliens committing crimes, illegal aliens driving drunk, and if you don't hate illegal aliens, its because you lived in a luxury community with private security guards"
Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Debbie Schlussel, Neal Boortz, Thomas Sowell all say the same B.S. that David Duke says! The only difference between David Duke and those other pundits is their opinion on Israel. Duke thinks "Israel can do nothing right", the others think "Israel can do nothing wrong!"
But my topic of today isn't Israel, it's immigration.
Another right-wing anti-immigration fascist wrote a silly editorial. His name is Mark W. Hendrickson.You can read his garbage here http://tinyurl.com/39mays
---
Here is Stuart Hayashi's response to Hendrickson's nonsense.
-------
Conservative Mark W. Hendrickson writes, "Illegal immigration is one of our country's most divisive, intractable issues."
http://tinyurl. com/39mays
I wish that were true. It isn't. It is one of the most uncontroversial issues, because the vast majority of people scoff at the right to migrate without a visa.Who supports open immigration? Prof. Schoolland, Pablo Wegesend,Sean Brunett, Jeff Olstad, and me. And Harry Binswanger of the AynRand Institute, and Robert W. Tracinski. That's the end of it.
Who opposes your right to migrate without a visa? Ron Paul, the Libertarian Party, and almost everybody else. Most of the demonstrators in favor of Bush's quasi-amnesty plan were concerned about their own families; they weren't overtly ideological. The left-wingers there who were ideological blathered about issues other than open immigration, such as "corporate imperialism. " And the Mexican government certainly doesn't favor open immigration. If a South American tries to sneak into Mexico, the Mexican government will shoot him.
Hendrickson writes sarcastically, "But we should at least stop rewarding illegals with the ultimate prize: automatic U.S. citizenship for their children born here. This is absurd: 'Congratulations, Ms.Gonzalez! You have broken our laws, entered our country illegally, evaded the immigration service, and now your son has all the rights ofU.S. citizenship. ' It is time to amend the Constitution so that the precious gift of citizenship is awarded only to babies born here of parents who are in the country legally."
Here is what's wrong with Hendrickson' s argument. By his logic, the British government should not have let Thomas Jefferson get away with committing treason. Jefferson and the U.S. Founding Fathers broke the law of their own country; they were all traitors. They were guilty of legal sedition. And the British government is to give them amnesty for that? For shame! What sort of example will that set?
Furthermore, what about all of the Northerners who violated the federal Fugitive Slave Law by participating in the underground railroad? What about all of the people who participated in forms of civil disobedience and, in defiance of the law, disobeyed state segregation laws? Charlton Heston himself committed civil disobedience against segregation laws. So shouldn't all of these people have been prosecuted even after the law was changed? The law is the law, and we have to follow the law!
And what about the re-legalization of alcohol? Alcohol was decriminalized precisely *because* of the abundance of Americans flouting that regulation. Do you want to reward those lawbreakers by changing the law for them? Do you want to reward their lawbreaking,which amounted to a huge TANTRUM? And wasn't it wrong that, following Prohibition' s repeal, so many drinkers and bootleggers received*de-facto* clemency, in the sense that officers didn't prosecute them anymore?
Conservatives keep assuming that the law is the word of God. They evade that the law is not an end in itself; it is a means to the higher end that is the protection of Lockean individual rights. When the law itself becomes destructive of Lockean rights, the law morally invalidates itself.
Finally, Hendrickson writes: "Fourth, let's make the US A monolingual by law. Certainly everyone may speak and write whatever language they prefer, but when it comes to things like official business, this should be an English-only country."
Here's what's wrong with what he said. "Monolingual" is a grammatically incorrect neologism. If you know two languages, you're "bilingual." If you know multiple languages, you're "multilingual. "
So if you know one language, then the correct term should be "unilingual, " not"monolingual. " "Monolingual" would be the correct word if the term for someone who knew two languages or multiple languages was,respectively, "duolingual" and "polylingual. "
People like Hendrickson, who use such a grammatically incorrect word as "monolingual, " do not seem to understand Latin-based English. Hendrickson does not know proper English, so, by his own standards, heis worthy of deportation.
-------
What's with all this hysteria about children born to illegal aliens born in the US having US citizenship.
The David Dukes, Thomas Sowells and Ann Coulters think those children should be punished for having the "wrong parents".
So what, should we deprive all descendants of British conquerors of having US citizenship? That might mean the David Dukes, Ann Coulters, Laura Ingrahams, etc might all get deported!
Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Debbie Schlussel, Neal Boortz, Thomas Sowell all say the same B.S. that David Duke says! The only difference between David Duke and those other pundits is their opinion on Israel. Duke thinks "Israel can do nothing right", the others think "Israel can do nothing wrong!"
But my topic of today isn't Israel, it's immigration.
Another right-wing anti-immigration fascist wrote a silly editorial. His name is Mark W. Hendrickson.You can read his garbage here http://tinyurl.com/39mays
---
Here is Stuart Hayashi's response to Hendrickson's nonsense.
-------
Conservative Mark W. Hendrickson writes, "Illegal immigration is one of our country's most divisive, intractable issues."
http://tinyurl. com/39mays
I wish that were true. It isn't. It is one of the most uncontroversial issues, because the vast majority of people scoff at the right to migrate without a visa.Who supports open immigration? Prof. Schoolland, Pablo Wegesend,Sean Brunett, Jeff Olstad, and me. And Harry Binswanger of the AynRand Institute, and Robert W. Tracinski. That's the end of it.
Who opposes your right to migrate without a visa? Ron Paul, the Libertarian Party, and almost everybody else. Most of the demonstrators in favor of Bush's quasi-amnesty plan were concerned about their own families; they weren't overtly ideological. The left-wingers there who were ideological blathered about issues other than open immigration, such as "corporate imperialism. " And the Mexican government certainly doesn't favor open immigration. If a South American tries to sneak into Mexico, the Mexican government will shoot him.
Hendrickson writes sarcastically, "But we should at least stop rewarding illegals with the ultimate prize: automatic U.S. citizenship for their children born here. This is absurd: 'Congratulations, Ms.Gonzalez! You have broken our laws, entered our country illegally, evaded the immigration service, and now your son has all the rights ofU.S. citizenship. ' It is time to amend the Constitution so that the precious gift of citizenship is awarded only to babies born here of parents who are in the country legally."
Here is what's wrong with Hendrickson' s argument. By his logic, the British government should not have let Thomas Jefferson get away with committing treason. Jefferson and the U.S. Founding Fathers broke the law of their own country; they were all traitors. They were guilty of legal sedition. And the British government is to give them amnesty for that? For shame! What sort of example will that set?
Furthermore, what about all of the Northerners who violated the federal Fugitive Slave Law by participating in the underground railroad? What about all of the people who participated in forms of civil disobedience and, in defiance of the law, disobeyed state segregation laws? Charlton Heston himself committed civil disobedience against segregation laws. So shouldn't all of these people have been prosecuted even after the law was changed? The law is the law, and we have to follow the law!
And what about the re-legalization of alcohol? Alcohol was decriminalized precisely *because* of the abundance of Americans flouting that regulation. Do you want to reward those lawbreakers by changing the law for them? Do you want to reward their lawbreaking,which amounted to a huge TANTRUM? And wasn't it wrong that, following Prohibition' s repeal, so many drinkers and bootleggers received*de-facto* clemency, in the sense that officers didn't prosecute them anymore?
Conservatives keep assuming that the law is the word of God. They evade that the law is not an end in itself; it is a means to the higher end that is the protection of Lockean individual rights. When the law itself becomes destructive of Lockean rights, the law morally invalidates itself.
Finally, Hendrickson writes: "Fourth, let's make the US A monolingual by law. Certainly everyone may speak and write whatever language they prefer, but when it comes to things like official business, this should be an English-only country."
Here's what's wrong with what he said. "Monolingual" is a grammatically incorrect neologism. If you know two languages, you're "bilingual." If you know multiple languages, you're "multilingual. "
So if you know one language, then the correct term should be "unilingual, " not"monolingual. " "Monolingual" would be the correct word if the term for someone who knew two languages or multiple languages was,respectively, "duolingual" and "polylingual. "
People like Hendrickson, who use such a grammatically incorrect word as "monolingual, " do not seem to understand Latin-based English. Hendrickson does not know proper English, so, by his own standards, heis worthy of deportation.
-------
What's with all this hysteria about children born to illegal aliens born in the US having US citizenship.
The David Dukes, Thomas Sowells and Ann Coulters think those children should be punished for having the "wrong parents".
So what, should we deprive all descendants of British conquerors of having US citizenship? That might mean the David Dukes, Ann Coulters, Laura Ingrahams, etc might all get deported!
Libertarianism Today
I remember back when I was a freshmen in college (1999-2000), I was introduced to Libertarianism. (actually, I heard of it before, but I didn't pay attention to it).
I was politically homeless because the I didn't side with the Republican Party (with it's ties to the Religious Right) or the Democratic Party (which made Hawaii an over-taxed state with regulations that made it hard on entrepreneurs).
I also felt both parties pursue a misguided drug policy which over-reacted to marijuana use (which has some side effects but has helped others deal with illness).
As for foreign policy, while I admire the heroics of the US troops who defeated Hitler & Tojo, I was also suspicious of US support of fascist dictators during the Cold War just because they claimed to be anti-communists.
So when I learned more about the Libertarian Party, more I felt allied with them.
After 9/11, I felt the US troops should be fighting Al Quaida in Afghanistan. However, too many Libertarians thought America should back down because "it was America's fault". While the US had some foreign policy blunders before, Al Quaida were NOT liberators, they were fascist terrorists who want to kill anyone who didn't submit to their Ultra-Conservative strain of Islam.
At the time, I wrote editorials arguing against the Radical Left and their Blame-America-First ideology. For that, I was called a "right-wing Republican" by radical left-wing lunatic Tobin Jones. Nevermind that I NEVER agreed with the right-wing Republicans on issues like abortion, sex ed, prostitution or other related issues.
Jones said my political views matches what was popular in Mississippi! Actually, my poltical views is a better match with Arizona or Nevada, and I want Hawaii be a tropical version of those 2 states.
so why am I bringing all this up.
There's an editorial by Stephen Green that I could relate to
http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/10/i_was_a_cardcarrying_libertari.php
Here's a few excerpts
Being a Libertarian was hard work, but I set right at it. I even went so far as to read the entire party platform. Pro-choice? Right on! Free trade? Hell, yes! Privatize all the schools? Start with mine! Abolish that Social Security Ponzi scheme? I was never going to see a dime, anyway! Bring all our troops home from Europe and Japan and South Korea and everywhere else and close half our embassies and cut defense spending at least in half and forget about enforcing freedom of the seas? Whoa, Nelly! “But,” I rationalized, “they don’t really mean all that stuff. A Libertarian president wouldn’t be that naive.”
But come election day, I held my nose, covered my eyes and pulled the lever for George HW Bush — no easy feat with only two hands. There was still a Cold War to be won. I could be a real Libertarian — we all would be! — once the Soviets caved in.
Almost exactly a year later, that’s exactly what happened. On November 9, 1989, the people of East Berlin took hammers and chisels and even their bare hands to that Wall. Soon, the governments of East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland, and even Romania had fallen — mostly peacefully. The peoples of Eastern Europe had liberated themselves from Communist oppression, and at long last I was free to throw off the last shackles of my Republican heritage.
I changed my party affiliation to Libertarian, smiling all the way back from the voter registrar’s office.
---- (paragraphs skipped)
Then we all woke up one morning to learn that airliners had crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and into the wooded hills of Pennsylvania. “Well, here’s a war even a good Libertarian like me can support.” We’d been attacked, directly, and we knew who the culprits were and where their protectors and sponsors were. We would go after them with such righteous fury that no one would dare strike New York City ever again.
Boy, was I wrong.
The angry folks at Liberty were mad at most everybody but Islamic terrorists. One even went so far as to denounce the Afghan War as “racist.” It was all imperialism this, and blowback that, and without a care in the world for protecting American lives, commerce, or, well, liberty.
---- (skipped paragraphs)
I stopped voting Libertarian for local candidates, leaving lots of blanks on my ballot. Next year, I’m not sure which party I’ll support for President, much less which candidate. From here, it looks as if the Republicans have become wrong and corrupt, the Democrats are stupid and corrupt, and the Libertarians have gone plain crazy.
It was easy tearing up my LP membership card. It’s quite a bit harder to find something to replace it. But I know this much: There’s no going back. Maybe there’s just too little room for principle in such a violent world.
---
Actually, there's room for principle in a violent world --- defeating the Islamic Fascists who want to kill everyone who doesn't want to submit to their ultra-conservative version of Islam!
I was politically homeless because the I didn't side with the Republican Party (with it's ties to the Religious Right) or the Democratic Party (which made Hawaii an over-taxed state with regulations that made it hard on entrepreneurs).
I also felt both parties pursue a misguided drug policy which over-reacted to marijuana use (which has some side effects but has helped others deal with illness).
As for foreign policy, while I admire the heroics of the US troops who defeated Hitler & Tojo, I was also suspicious of US support of fascist dictators during the Cold War just because they claimed to be anti-communists.
So when I learned more about the Libertarian Party, more I felt allied with them.
After 9/11, I felt the US troops should be fighting Al Quaida in Afghanistan. However, too many Libertarians thought America should back down because "it was America's fault". While the US had some foreign policy blunders before, Al Quaida were NOT liberators, they were fascist terrorists who want to kill anyone who didn't submit to their Ultra-Conservative strain of Islam.
At the time, I wrote editorials arguing against the Radical Left and their Blame-America-First ideology. For that, I was called a "right-wing Republican" by radical left-wing lunatic Tobin Jones. Nevermind that I NEVER agreed with the right-wing Republicans on issues like abortion, sex ed, prostitution or other related issues.
Jones said my political views matches what was popular in Mississippi! Actually, my poltical views is a better match with Arizona or Nevada, and I want Hawaii be a tropical version of those 2 states.
so why am I bringing all this up.
There's an editorial by Stephen Green that I could relate to
http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/10/i_was_a_cardcarrying_libertari.php
Here's a few excerpts
Being a Libertarian was hard work, but I set right at it. I even went so far as to read the entire party platform. Pro-choice? Right on! Free trade? Hell, yes! Privatize all the schools? Start with mine! Abolish that Social Security Ponzi scheme? I was never going to see a dime, anyway! Bring all our troops home from Europe and Japan and South Korea and everywhere else and close half our embassies and cut defense spending at least in half and forget about enforcing freedom of the seas? Whoa, Nelly! “But,” I rationalized, “they don’t really mean all that stuff. A Libertarian president wouldn’t be that naive.”
But come election day, I held my nose, covered my eyes and pulled the lever for George HW Bush — no easy feat with only two hands. There was still a Cold War to be won. I could be a real Libertarian — we all would be! — once the Soviets caved in.
Almost exactly a year later, that’s exactly what happened. On November 9, 1989, the people of East Berlin took hammers and chisels and even their bare hands to that Wall. Soon, the governments of East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Poland, and even Romania had fallen — mostly peacefully. The peoples of Eastern Europe had liberated themselves from Communist oppression, and at long last I was free to throw off the last shackles of my Republican heritage.
I changed my party affiliation to Libertarian, smiling all the way back from the voter registrar’s office.
---- (paragraphs skipped)
Then we all woke up one morning to learn that airliners had crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and into the wooded hills of Pennsylvania. “Well, here’s a war even a good Libertarian like me can support.” We’d been attacked, directly, and we knew who the culprits were and where their protectors and sponsors were. We would go after them with such righteous fury that no one would dare strike New York City ever again.
Boy, was I wrong.
The angry folks at Liberty were mad at most everybody but Islamic terrorists. One even went so far as to denounce the Afghan War as “racist.” It was all imperialism this, and blowback that, and without a care in the world for protecting American lives, commerce, or, well, liberty.
---- (skipped paragraphs)
I stopped voting Libertarian for local candidates, leaving lots of blanks on my ballot. Next year, I’m not sure which party I’ll support for President, much less which candidate. From here, it looks as if the Republicans have become wrong and corrupt, the Democrats are stupid and corrupt, and the Libertarians have gone plain crazy.
It was easy tearing up my LP membership card. It’s quite a bit harder to find something to replace it. But I know this much: There’s no going back. Maybe there’s just too little room for principle in such a violent world.
---
Actually, there's room for principle in a violent world --- defeating the Islamic Fascists who want to kill everyone who doesn't want to submit to their ultra-conservative version of Islam!
Monday, October 15, 2007
My 27th birthday
Today, I became 27 years old.
I kept thinking myself as 27 years old a few months earlier.
It's so odd, because during my early 20's, I always felt a few years younger than I really was.
Anyways, this is a milestone into adulthood. I feel more adult than I was a few years back. I've been out of school for almost 3 years (I graduated from UH in December 2004).
In the last 2.5 years, I've been working either as a substitute teacher or a summer group leader, which comes with a lot of responsibility. It also forced me to mature real fast. Being a role model means not doing certain things I could've gotten away with when I was younger.
I like being charge of younger people. Though at times, being around younger people makes me feel like I wish I was back in time, so I could take more advantage of opportunities reserved for younger people.
I like being a substitute, but I hate unpaid vacation time that subs have to put up with. Vacations are dangerous to a substitute's financial health. Which is the main reason why I am working to switch to a teaching assistant position.
Some ask why I don't become a full-time teacher. That would require going back to school (which cost $$$$ and time) to get a teaching certificate. Also, at this point, I don't feel ready to take on the added responsibilities.
---
The great thing about being an adult is being able to live by myself. I hope I will be able to do so for a long time.
The hard thing is just making sure all the bills are paid. We can't take anything for granted!
-----
I once thought of making music and having a talk show. That's been put on the side for a while, though I hope I can get back to it in the future.
----
My birthday tradition was to have breakfast with my parents and grandma at Kapiolani Coffee Shop inside Kam Bowl's. However, Kam Bowl has closed down. Luckily, the folks at Kapiolani Coffee Shop found another location, so I was able to have my fried rice & scrambled eggs :)
I kept thinking myself as 27 years old a few months earlier.
It's so odd, because during my early 20's, I always felt a few years younger than I really was.
Anyways, this is a milestone into adulthood. I feel more adult than I was a few years back. I've been out of school for almost 3 years (I graduated from UH in December 2004).
In the last 2.5 years, I've been working either as a substitute teacher or a summer group leader, which comes with a lot of responsibility. It also forced me to mature real fast. Being a role model means not doing certain things I could've gotten away with when I was younger.
I like being charge of younger people. Though at times, being around younger people makes me feel like I wish I was back in time, so I could take more advantage of opportunities reserved for younger people.
I like being a substitute, but I hate unpaid vacation time that subs have to put up with. Vacations are dangerous to a substitute's financial health. Which is the main reason why I am working to switch to a teaching assistant position.
Some ask why I don't become a full-time teacher. That would require going back to school (which cost $$$$ and time) to get a teaching certificate. Also, at this point, I don't feel ready to take on the added responsibilities.
---
The great thing about being an adult is being able to live by myself. I hope I will be able to do so for a long time.
The hard thing is just making sure all the bills are paid. We can't take anything for granted!
-----
I once thought of making music and having a talk show. That's been put on the side for a while, though I hope I can get back to it in the future.
----
My birthday tradition was to have breakfast with my parents and grandma at Kapiolani Coffee Shop inside Kam Bowl's. However, Kam Bowl has closed down. Luckily, the folks at Kapiolani Coffee Shop found another location, so I was able to have my fried rice & scrambled eggs :)
Friday, September 28, 2007
The SuperFerry
I have so busy this past month, that only I'm able to blog about the biggest controversy in Hawaii --- The SuperFerry.
The SuperFerry is a group of boats that transports people between the different islands of Hawaii. This is something that should've done a long time ago. That way, we're not over-reliant on airplanes to visit the other islands.
However, some on Kauai don't want any visitors! They're angry that the SuperFerry will give Oahu residents another way to (gasp) visit their island. They want Kauai to be same way it was when they were growing up! (Nevermind that NO PLACE IN THE WORLD hasn't experienced change in the last 20 years)
These anti-SuperFerry fanatics believe that their utopia island would be ruined by Oahu people who would clog their highways, shopping centers, and commit crime, etc, etc, etc.
These anti-SuperFerry were so pissed off about it, that when the SuperFerry made it's 1st attempt to travel from Oahu to Kauai, some came on their surfboards to block the SuperFerry, they yelled threats, and vandalized cars!
Let's call those punks what they are --- Nostalgia Fascists! They're so set on keeping their island 100% the same as was in the past, that they'll use violent tactics against any change, no matter how minor!
If that's how they're gonna be, this is how we ought to deal with them
1) No Kauai Nostalgia Fascist would be allowed recieve non-Kauai assistance if their homes were damage by hurricanes, tsunamis, etc.
Those ingrates took advantage of all the help Oahu residents gave when their island was ruined by Hurricane Iniki in 1992. Many Oahu carpenters (my dad included) helped in renovating homes, airports, businesses, etc in Kauai after Hurricane Iniki. Those Nostalgia Fascists ought to be ashamed of themselves!
2) No Kauai Nostalgia Fascist would be allowed to visit anywhere outside Kauai!
Any of them want to visit Las Vegas? (most popular tourist destination for Hawaii residents)TOO BAD!
Any of them want to watch their young relatives on Kauai high school teams playing a game on Oahu? TOO BAD!
Any of them want to visit a long-time friend who moved to Maui? TOO BAD!
Any of them want to visit the volcanoes on the Big Island? TOO BAD!
Any of them have a curiosity of what it's like in foreign lands? TOO BAD! That's what they get for being rude to those who were curious of what it's like on Kauai!
=====
Meanwhile, some said the SuperFerry would help disabled people visit other islands, and give high school sports team a cheaper way to travel to the other islands to play in tournaments!
These people are the ones most hurt by those Nostalgia Fascists!
====
Imagine if I had a boat of foreign immigrants headed to Kauai. (It could be from anywhere -- Asia, Micronesia, Mexico, Middle East, etc) Imagine if it was on the news before the boat arrived.
If those Nostalgia Fascists reacted to the boat's arrival the same way they reacted to the SuperFerry, Hawaii's image as a multi-racial utopia would be further damaged! Those Nostalgia Fascists would make Hawaii look like Alabama or Mississippi of the 1950's/1960's.
The SuperFerry is a group of boats that transports people between the different islands of Hawaii. This is something that should've done a long time ago. That way, we're not over-reliant on airplanes to visit the other islands.
However, some on Kauai don't want any visitors! They're angry that the SuperFerry will give Oahu residents another way to (gasp) visit their island. They want Kauai to be same way it was when they were growing up! (Nevermind that NO PLACE IN THE WORLD hasn't experienced change in the last 20 years)
These anti-SuperFerry fanatics believe that their utopia island would be ruined by Oahu people who would clog their highways, shopping centers, and commit crime, etc, etc, etc.
These anti-SuperFerry were so pissed off about it, that when the SuperFerry made it's 1st attempt to travel from Oahu to Kauai, some came on their surfboards to block the SuperFerry, they yelled threats, and vandalized cars!
Let's call those punks what they are --- Nostalgia Fascists! They're so set on keeping their island 100% the same as was in the past, that they'll use violent tactics against any change, no matter how minor!
If that's how they're gonna be, this is how we ought to deal with them
1) No Kauai Nostalgia Fascist would be allowed recieve non-Kauai assistance if their homes were damage by hurricanes, tsunamis, etc.
Those ingrates took advantage of all the help Oahu residents gave when their island was ruined by Hurricane Iniki in 1992. Many Oahu carpenters (my dad included) helped in renovating homes, airports, businesses, etc in Kauai after Hurricane Iniki. Those Nostalgia Fascists ought to be ashamed of themselves!
2) No Kauai Nostalgia Fascist would be allowed to visit anywhere outside Kauai!
Any of them want to visit Las Vegas? (most popular tourist destination for Hawaii residents)TOO BAD!
Any of them want to watch their young relatives on Kauai high school teams playing a game on Oahu? TOO BAD!
Any of them want to visit a long-time friend who moved to Maui? TOO BAD!
Any of them want to visit the volcanoes on the Big Island? TOO BAD!
Any of them have a curiosity of what it's like in foreign lands? TOO BAD! That's what they get for being rude to those who were curious of what it's like on Kauai!
=====
Meanwhile, some said the SuperFerry would help disabled people visit other islands, and give high school sports team a cheaper way to travel to the other islands to play in tournaments!
These people are the ones most hurt by those Nostalgia Fascists!
====
Imagine if I had a boat of foreign immigrants headed to Kauai. (It could be from anywhere -- Asia, Micronesia, Mexico, Middle East, etc) Imagine if it was on the news before the boat arrived.
If those Nostalgia Fascists reacted to the boat's arrival the same way they reacted to the SuperFerry, Hawaii's image as a multi-racial utopia would be further damaged! Those Nostalgia Fascists would make Hawaii look like Alabama or Mississippi of the 1950's/1960's.
Friday, August 31, 2007
More on Michael Vick
There's so many issues connected to Michael Vick dog-fighting controversy.
1) Because Vick is African-American, many feel that he's being picked on due to his race.
Just because someone criticizes Vick, that doesn't always mean they're racist.
Animal rights advocates criticizes anyone involved in dog-fighting or other animal abuse, no matter their race.
Many African-Americans are embarrased by Vick's involvement in dog-fighting including but not limited to liberal editorialists like editorialist Derrick Jackson, Jonathan Capehart, Cynthia Tucker and Leonard Pitts.
However, there are some right-wing editorialists whose criticism of Vick seem very suspicious. (ie. Michelle Malkin, Debbie Schlussel, Neal Boortz)
Many right-wing editorialists make fun of animal rights advocates as "peace pansy hippies"
But all of sudden, they're outraged that Vick is involved in dog-fighting.
I wonder if those same right-wingers would be outraged if a European-American NFL player is involved in dog-fighting. Especially if that white guy is from the rural areas of the South, Great Plains or the Rocky Mountains. I dont think so. That white NFL dog-fighting would be portrayed as a "hero fighting political correctness" by the same right-wingers who hate Micheal Vick.
To those right-wingers, Vick isn't just any African-American athlete. He's an African-American from the ghetto, who had braids, and is part of the hip-hop generation. That terrifies them a lot more than the cruelty of dog-fighting.
It reminds me of this NewsMax (right-wing website) article that portrayed rock-star Ted Nugent as a hero.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/20/113405.shtml?s=rss
Nugent is a hunter (ie. someone who irritates the same animal rights adovates angered by Micheal Vick), against gun-control laws (I agree with Nugent on that) and thinks immigrants should learn English (I think Nugent should lighten up on that issue and mind his own business)
That NewsMax article mentions Nugent's use of profanity and sexual innuendo in his songs, but they mention in a tone of "but he's still a good guy" But rappers who use profanity, carry guns, and have strippers in videos? The typical right-wing reaction is "Oh my god, they're so vulgar".
This past weekend, rapper DMX was busted for animal cruelty and possessing unliscensed assault weapons. Would the Ted Nugent defenders @ NewsMax defend DMX? Or is DMX too black for them?
2) Rush Limbaugh ( conservative radio host who once had controversy over his criticism of African-American quarterback Donovan McNabb) had some criticism of Vick's involvement in dog-fighting but also had an interesting big-picture perspective.
May we get serious here for just a second? Whatever Vick's accused of doing -- and, remember, these are just accusations so far. We've been here with the Duke lacrosse kids -- this amazes me -- and I have warned people, all of these indictments, these charges that come down from prosecutors, I have told you, we are inclined as human beings to believe what law enforcement says.
(skip paragraphs)
But to say that this is bigger than Ray Lewis, where a guy died -- two people might have been stabbed in that incident. These were dogs in Vick's case. Here's another one. Brian Maloof, the proprietor at Manuel's Tavern, "This is embarrassing to the city. It sure lets us know about Vick's character. The wrestler? (Chris Benoit) That's nothing." That's in print and it's in Sports Illustrated. He killed his son; he killed his wife; then he hung himself. He said, "It sure lets us know about Vick's character. The wrestler, that's nothing. Don't get me wrong; that's not really nothing. There was obviously some mental illness there -- the depression -- that that man had to suffer from to take your own life, and your wife's and child's lives. Even with steroids. But this is almost like some sick Roman bloodsport. It's just horrible."
(skip paragraphs)
So you have two instances here, the Ray Lewis situation where a murder took place, and I don't think we know who actually committed the murder in that situation, but Lewis was in the bar when it happened. It was very controversial, but a human being died. The Chris Benoit situation where three people died, one of the three killed the other two. The story in Sports Illustrated says, "Well, the Vick thing is far worse. It's just far worse." Now, can you come up, ladies and gentlemen, in your own minds with a reason why people are thinking this way?
In other words, Limbaugh is saying are people getting more worked up over dogs being killed than real humans being killed!
Limbaugh is right on that one
3) Should there even be laws against dog-fighting.
Here's Stuart Hayashi's take on that issue!
Upon first hearing about what Michael Vick was accused of, my personal reaction was: "What? He had dogs fight each other soviciously for his own entertainment? Ewwwwwww!! That's inhumane."
So I am free to avoid associating with anybody who performs actions upon animals that I do not approve of. If I don't like peoplewho arrange cockfights, then I don't have to deal with them.
Does my disapproval of dogfighting or cockfighting make it okay for me to demand that the government threaten violence against Michael Vick for doing what he wants with his own private property, without actually hurting any sapient being that is functionally *capable* ofadhering to other organisms' rights? Bear in mind that your pet cat can't even respect the "rights" of mice not to be "murdered." Ifanimals have "rights," then your cat should go to prison for all of the mice that it "murdered."
My answer is no, it's not right for the State to threaten violence against Michael Vick for exercising his property rights in amanner that I don't approve of.
4) My take on the issue?
I'm not big fan of dogs. I'm the type that don't want to have pets. I get annoyed when animals want to sniff me. And big dogs make me real nervous!
I think it's ridiculous that Hawaii bans chicken-fights! Legalize it!
As for dog-fights, I 've heard that dogs that were bred for fighting are so aggressive, that they're not allowed to be adopted as pets.
If someone next door is having dog-fights, I'll be very nervous about one of those dogs escaping! I might even snitch on that neighbor to protect myself from getting bitten by those dogs. (this, even though I agree with Stuart Hayashi's statements posted earlier this blog post)
As for Vick being involved in killing dogs that suck at fighting, he would've better off putting them up for adoption. Vick's killing dogs that "suck at fighting" is what really getting controversy! It's why some might never forgive him!
If the accusations were true, I think Vick took it too far by killing dogs who "suck at fighting". After all, he wasn't killed for screwing up games. However, I think Vick should get a 2nd chance!
After all, athletes busted for drunk driving, domestic violence, sexual harrasment, etc. have been getting 2nd chances!
1) Because Vick is African-American, many feel that he's being picked on due to his race.
Just because someone criticizes Vick, that doesn't always mean they're racist.
Animal rights advocates criticizes anyone involved in dog-fighting or other animal abuse, no matter their race.
Many African-Americans are embarrased by Vick's involvement in dog-fighting including but not limited to liberal editorialists like editorialist Derrick Jackson, Jonathan Capehart, Cynthia Tucker and Leonard Pitts.
However, there are some right-wing editorialists whose criticism of Vick seem very suspicious. (ie. Michelle Malkin, Debbie Schlussel, Neal Boortz)
Many right-wing editorialists make fun of animal rights advocates as "peace pansy hippies"
But all of sudden, they're outraged that Vick is involved in dog-fighting.
I wonder if those same right-wingers would be outraged if a European-American NFL player is involved in dog-fighting. Especially if that white guy is from the rural areas of the South, Great Plains or the Rocky Mountains. I dont think so. That white NFL dog-fighting would be portrayed as a "hero fighting political correctness" by the same right-wingers who hate Micheal Vick.
To those right-wingers, Vick isn't just any African-American athlete. He's an African-American from the ghetto, who had braids, and is part of the hip-hop generation. That terrifies them a lot more than the cruelty of dog-fighting.
It reminds me of this NewsMax (right-wing website) article that portrayed rock-star Ted Nugent as a hero.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/8/20/113405.shtml?s=rss
Nugent is a hunter (ie. someone who irritates the same animal rights adovates angered by Micheal Vick), against gun-control laws (I agree with Nugent on that) and thinks immigrants should learn English (I think Nugent should lighten up on that issue and mind his own business)
That NewsMax article mentions Nugent's use of profanity and sexual innuendo in his songs, but they mention in a tone of "but he's still a good guy" But rappers who use profanity, carry guns, and have strippers in videos? The typical right-wing reaction is "Oh my god, they're so vulgar".
This past weekend, rapper DMX was busted for animal cruelty and possessing unliscensed assault weapons. Would the Ted Nugent defenders @ NewsMax defend DMX? Or is DMX too black for them?
2) Rush Limbaugh ( conservative radio host who once had controversy over his criticism of African-American quarterback Donovan McNabb) had some criticism of Vick's involvement in dog-fighting but also had an interesting big-picture perspective.
May we get serious here for just a second? Whatever Vick's accused of doing -- and, remember, these are just accusations so far. We've been here with the Duke lacrosse kids -- this amazes me -- and I have warned people, all of these indictments, these charges that come down from prosecutors, I have told you, we are inclined as human beings to believe what law enforcement says.
(skip paragraphs)
But to say that this is bigger than Ray Lewis, where a guy died -- two people might have been stabbed in that incident. These were dogs in Vick's case. Here's another one. Brian Maloof, the proprietor at Manuel's Tavern, "This is embarrassing to the city. It sure lets us know about Vick's character. The wrestler? (Chris Benoit) That's nothing." That's in print and it's in Sports Illustrated. He killed his son; he killed his wife; then he hung himself. He said, "It sure lets us know about Vick's character. The wrestler, that's nothing. Don't get me wrong; that's not really nothing. There was obviously some mental illness there -- the depression -- that that man had to suffer from to take your own life, and your wife's and child's lives. Even with steroids. But this is almost like some sick Roman bloodsport. It's just horrible."
(skip paragraphs)
So you have two instances here, the Ray Lewis situation where a murder took place, and I don't think we know who actually committed the murder in that situation, but Lewis was in the bar when it happened. It was very controversial, but a human being died. The Chris Benoit situation where three people died, one of the three killed the other two. The story in Sports Illustrated says, "Well, the Vick thing is far worse. It's just far worse." Now, can you come up, ladies and gentlemen, in your own minds with a reason why people are thinking this way?
In other words, Limbaugh is saying are people getting more worked up over dogs being killed than real humans being killed!
Limbaugh is right on that one
3) Should there even be laws against dog-fighting.
Here's Stuart Hayashi's take on that issue!
Upon first hearing about what Michael Vick was accused of, my personal reaction was: "What? He had dogs fight each other soviciously for his own entertainment? Ewwwwwww!! That's inhumane."
So I am free to avoid associating with anybody who performs actions upon animals that I do not approve of. If I don't like peoplewho arrange cockfights, then I don't have to deal with them.
Does my disapproval of dogfighting or cockfighting make it okay for me to demand that the government threaten violence against Michael Vick for doing what he wants with his own private property, without actually hurting any sapient being that is functionally *capable* ofadhering to other organisms' rights? Bear in mind that your pet cat can't even respect the "rights" of mice not to be "murdered." Ifanimals have "rights," then your cat should go to prison for all of the mice that it "murdered."
My answer is no, it's not right for the State to threaten violence against Michael Vick for exercising his property rights in amanner that I don't approve of.
4) My take on the issue?
I'm not big fan of dogs. I'm the type that don't want to have pets. I get annoyed when animals want to sniff me. And big dogs make me real nervous!
I think it's ridiculous that Hawaii bans chicken-fights! Legalize it!
As for dog-fights, I 've heard that dogs that were bred for fighting are so aggressive, that they're not allowed to be adopted as pets.
If someone next door is having dog-fights, I'll be very nervous about one of those dogs escaping! I might even snitch on that neighbor to protect myself from getting bitten by those dogs. (this, even though I agree with Stuart Hayashi's statements posted earlier this blog post)
As for Vick being involved in killing dogs that suck at fighting, he would've better off putting them up for adoption. Vick's killing dogs that "suck at fighting" is what really getting controversy! It's why some might never forgive him!
If the accusations were true, I think Vick took it too far by killing dogs who "suck at fighting". After all, he wasn't killed for screwing up games. However, I think Vick should get a 2nd chance!
After all, athletes busted for drunk driving, domestic violence, sexual harrasment, etc. have been getting 2nd chances!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)