New Picasa Web Albums Activity

Recent Uploads
michelle added 320 photos to iphone
Jan 15, 2010 5:29:01 PM

Unsubscribe from this user.
To share your photos or receive notification when your friends share photos, get your own free Picasa Web Albums account.


humane…sure, but only to nonhumans

humane treatment… a societal paradox that i do not understand.

we have the Humane Society, but only if you're an animal can you expect humane treatment.

an abused animal is taken from a person and never returned, an abused human child is returned to the abuser most often to be abused again.

a terminally ill animal is given a humane death… a terminally ill human is left to die, most often in excruciating pain and miserable circumstances.

to "pull the plug" allowing a dying person to suffocate, starve, drown in their own fluids… is that humane?

i recall the statement "a society should be judged on how it treats it's most helpless individuals."

we are a most pitiable lot, yet too arrogant to see our shame.

we, as a society, are inhumane to our young and our ailing. yet see no cause for mercy… unless you're an animal.


believe ya own hype?

watching an interview on the today show ... laurer was chatting with some guy from vanity ,named buzz re:tiger woods.

day'umn that kid is ripped!! (see the cover of vanity) but that aside... there are many who have ideas as to why he behaved the way he did, all have merit. only tiger will know the truth, and that will be revealed to him with lots of soul-searching.

now, brit hume believes he needs to change religion, pompous associty at it's finest. hume doesn't KNOW tiger.

tiger did not allow the public to see his inner turmoil, and that's how it should be.  his life is his to live, in the end, he answers to himself. whether he had a sex addiction, was trying to hide from the grieving process of the loss of his father, or any myriad of emotions that he has faced in his life... that is for tiger to work through, and he should be allowed to do that without constant speculation. no one knows the path that tiger has walked.

what i want to type about is the insulation of people. when we surround self with only "yes men" and what happens to the thought process.

i see people on social networks are doing that... just following and conversing with like minded people... and THAT is a dangerous path to walk.  a feeling of power and invincibility begins to develop in the mind... that everyone else is wrong!!  that invincible feeling nothing will be able to stop the IDEA of the insular group.

from observation, i feel tiger did that, he had his life compartmentalized.  people protecting him, handling him, isolating him to the point he may have felt his deeds were justified.   he began to believe his own hype, that actions would hold no consequences.

militant groups are guilty of this behavior. terrorists, religious leaders, politicians fall into the trap of believing that their idea is the only "right" idea and people will be subject to the idea or force will be used. why? "because i am right and know what is best for you."

all because the group is so focused on the idea that they fail to see the reality.
i have been told (more than once on twitter and facebook, concerning the current legislation on health care -- "just wait and see, the people will not allow this affront to the US Constitution, there will be trouble."
this article and quote highlight the break from reality that fellow citizens are suffering.  this is above all else, frightening.  not because of the threat, but because there are people that believe  they are correct in their views and no one else is allowed an opinion in a free-society:

Protesters cited a number of issues for the event, including the health care reform in Congress, taxes, gun rights, allegations that Obama is not an American citizen. One attendee cited his displeasure with what was described as an international police organization that will take control away from local police departments as a result of a recent Obama secret directive.
Those gathered to protest said they brought their guns because they wanted to draw more attention to the event, because they wanted to exercise their Constitutional Rights, to show responsible gun ownership. One protester threatened armed insurrection if steps are not taken to restore “Constitutional” governance.
people that believe the polls without questioning the pollsters. of all the questions asked on that link, only ONE proffered a question that did not provoke a knee-jerk response.

Ipsos/McClatchy  As of right now, do you favor or oppose the healthcare reform proposals presently being discussed?
ipsos kept out the words, "obama, legislation, congress, republican, democrat, etc" only ipsos was looking for a true response from the citizens. before you cite, believe a poll, look at the questions and the motives of the group paying for the poll. or you will fall victim to believing the hype. you will become one of those that cannot think, but must rely on others to do it for you, and may The Creator have mercy on our souls if people don't wake up and smell the money.

in a side note, there was a link posted on twitter ... Glenn Beck’s Gold Endorsement Goes Too Far For Fox . i commented that if beck truly believed his verbal diarrhea he would be telling people to buy lead, not gold. for if there is a true economic meltdown, do you really think gold will be a commodity? ya can't eat gold, and if people are in the direst of straits gold will not be valuable, only products necessary for survival will be traded. the response i received from a beck supporter "if everyone thought like you, beck would be broke." to which i replied, "keep buying gold, so beck can keep a life time supply of vick's vapor rub."

IF everyone would think and question the motives of these polls and the infotainment fundits, we would ALL be better off. instead, you believe the hype without question, just as those that followed hitler down that dark path not so long ago.


only athletes should wear athletic shoes

        Suppose that a study is done, showing that most muggers and rapists wear athletic shoes, while committing crimes. It is proposed that the wearing of such shoes permits these people to escape more quickly, and to be able to more easily climb fences, scale walls, and go through woods and parks. It is eventually determined, through police records, that over 70% of the perpetrators of these crimes wear athletic shoes during their commission. Now a reasonable person might decide that the one has nothing to do with the other, and that while it certainly makes sense to wear athletic shoes during the commission of these types of crimes, where a quick escape may be needed, the shoes have little to do with the means, or the motivation to commit such crimes. In addition, many people own and wear such shoes, and the vast majority commit no crimes at all. Finally, even were it impossible for such shoes to be obtained legally, it would make no difference. Criminals would either obtain them illegally, if they decided that they really needed them, or would simply commit their crimes wearing regular shoes. It is unlikely that the inability to acquire athletic shoes would prevent a criminal from committing a crime, even though the wearing of these shoes might be preferred to the wearing of regular shoes. A reasonable person would understand this - an ignorant, simplistic, self righteous type would not. This type of person might insist that such shoes should be banned, or at least greatly restricted. That only athletes involved in legitimate athletic events would have any need for such shoes. The claim would be made that since such shoes are worn during the commission of 70% of street crimes, this would reduce such crimes by 70% or perhaps more. It might also be suggested that a regular street cop, having to wear standard uniform dress shoes, would be at a huge disadvantage against criminals so shod. He would be, as it were out shoed.
        Now the previous might sound pretty silly, and it is pretty silly, yet the same argument is taken very seriously when used by liberals attempting to ban all guns, or certain classes of guns. The truth is, violent crime was a pretty popular pastime for hoodlums, low lives, and other useless types, long before the invention of firearms, and will continue to be so, even should all firearms be banned. Because of this foolishness, the Raven has the distinction of spawning a number of pieces of firearms legislation, and of being a poster child for gun control. This is a distinction it shares with the Thompson, AK-47, AR-15, 50 BMG, 50 S&W, and a number of other famous guns. Though Ravens may not be great guns, they are at least in good company.

excerpt from http://www.notpurfect.com/main/raven.html