Obama receives the Nobel Peace Prize

Obama receives the Nobel Peace Prize

Barrack Obama received the Noble Peace Prize this morning for his commitment to inspiring a brighter future through cooperation and his work in trying to reduce nukes.

What it funny about this is the critics, and how fast they are in their response, republicans claim that it is his 'star power' (the CHAIRMAN of the republican party stated this rather sore-loser line) and that he has not actually 'done anything'.

Where is the "good job"? Our nation's leader gets a highly coveted award, and the best they can do is criticize both the organization, and Obama?

Sigg, BPA , and typical corporate behavior

Sigg and BPA.
Sigg and Bpa.
So, it comes out that Sigg and their water battles had BPA in them all along. After the huge BPA scare 2-3 years ago, and everyone left nalgene, it is any wonder that as they flocked to Sigg they remained quiet about their own BPA, even going to far as to lie about their bottles were safe from BPA?

It is insanely messed up that a corporation can tell all these 'half lies' and essentially not get punished for what it is going. That gets into the vast legalese of our system that because they did 'nothing' wrong the only thing that will punish them is the market. What a joke. Slap them with a multi-million fine, and watch other corporations tow a very tight line after that.

Headshot! Pirates killed. 'Victory'

Well, in case you haven't heard, earlier today was a 'great' day for America as some Seal snipers killed three pirates holding the captain, ending the standoff.

Capt. Richard Phillips was on the lifeboat, then the Navy seals sniper shot 'headshots'/'killshots' before everyone was dead and the Captain could be saved.

I use the ' ' because of the fact on the news they said again and again how 'great' of a day this was etc. It was a good day, but do good days have to come at the death of others. Look, these pirates definitely deserved it. A lot of people deserve it. I just ask every time someone cheers a death, think about what you are actually doing.

Ecotopia back up. Let's talk about Violence

After a long abandonment, I have decided to not let the Ecotopia die just yet. So I'm back.

Today's topic is going to focus on violence. Particularly, the darker side of violence, a side we too-oft ignore. Anyone who knows me, or has read this, knows that I believe that weapons are fine to carry around. I say 'weapons' instead of guns, because I think that other weapons should be legalized. I will cover that later, but for now, the side we often ignore.

Pro-gun people seem to advocate that by merely having a gun in a women's purse, or in your truck is enough to stop a violent crime. Crime is violent, fast, brutal and efficient. A mugger is going to come out of the shadows and have a knife to your throat before you know what is going on. You can be attacked long before you process where your gun even is, much less go through the long process of preparing to fire it.

Are you really going to have time to unzip that purse, dig around for it, pull the slide back, and aim accurately? Oh... wait, you forgot to make sure the safety is off, that woman just got knifed and killed. It is foolish to think that this process is in anyway 'easy' or 100% success rate of warding off crime.

Police can't even do this, the average statistic for hitting a target within 5 feet are at least 70% missing/striking a different object. The New York Times carried an article about 13% hit rate. If police do this bad, how well is someone on the street, unready for a sudden, bloody assault going to be?

I have guns. I am 'pro' gun as most would consider it. But I am under no delusions about what having a gun for self-defense is about. It is about killing someone without a second thought, because that 'second' thought could get you killed. Ask yourself, how many of your guns( if you are 'pro-gun') are locked in a safe? How useful is that really if a criminal is standing over your bed with a gun pointing at your face?

Are you ready to keep a gun - without the safety on - loaded, and ready to go within arms reach of your bed? If you are serious about self-defense, this is exactly what you have to do, anything else is foolish, dangerous, and self-deceiving. Are you ready to TRY to shoot someone, probably miss, and possibly been immediately shot in return? Its a bloody truth a lot of people never consider.


For the second part of this special two-parter, is about melee weapons.

It seems rather stupid that people can carry guns around, yet knives 'over 3 inches' are somehow the target of vehement hate? A lot of pro-gun people advocate everyone packing guns around and that 'there would be no crime!' this may or may not be true, but to these people, I ask, "would everyone also having swords change anything?" Take this point seriously, for a gun can make even the weakest, oldest person in our society a criminal. This weak, decrepit person can easily go on a killing spree with only a semi-auto pistol. Excluding the odds against actually hitting people, a standard clip could easily end the life of 12 people with only twelve twitchs of the fingers. If that is not a MASSIVE PERVERSION of the natural order, I don't know what is.

But consider if we all had swords and guns. Not only would crime probably drop (unfortunately through the principle of 'mutually assured destruction' more then anything...) but imagine the massive calming effect of having your own destiny in your hands. Would someone decide it was a good idea to go mug someone who had a gun and a sword?

I am putting it out there, and I dare you to prove me wrong, with a five second warning, a sword is vastly more useful to prevent a mugging then fumbling for your pistol.

And if the criminal has a gun?
No problem, you have one too.

Obama Wins = The environment wins

Well, Obama is now our president. (Yes I know it hasn't been official yet) Honestly, this is a relief.

This may seem counter-intuitive to some of the views espoused on this site, but there are a few reasons I am glad this happened. Namely, the environment is far and away the key issue of my views, and of this blog.

When looking at this election through the lens of the environment, the choice is painfully obvious. Republicans chant the so-foolish "drill baby drill" as if the small increase years later will do anything to alleviate our environmental concerns. The democrats are far better then republicans for the environment, plain and simple. Democrats favor regulation, endangered species act, environmental protection etc. Look at Bush, who on his waning time as president still assaults the endangered species act.

Further, the next most important issue our society faces is science. This includes space exploration, stem cell research, renewable technology, etc. Republicans do not favor this, there is basically no easier way to say this. Constantly, and regrettably, successfully, Republicans have convinced the populace that stem cell research is some sort of evil. How can we progress in technology when we are told they are evil and not given funding? Genetic engineering? Not a chance. These technologies offer so much for society, yet are black sheep.

Nothing is perfect. It is regrettable we have a pro-abortion position with democrats, likewise, a weak on crime stance. These things aren't good; but I will trade those things for the environment and genetic engineering any day.

Vice President Debate

Well, this debate just concluded. It was a lot better then the first pres debate. It wasn't too heated, they were both rather controlled in their words. Palin did better then i suspected at first, i thought for sure she would freeze/break down. Biden was rather controlled and polite, never directly attacking her once.

Notably, he had a firm grasp of facts and numbers, often countering with specifics. Palin only danced around the questions, never really answering anything.

Musings on libertarianism

I recently had a conversation with my ever-liberal friend and former teacher that revolved around many concepts, one today which I will speak about is libertarianism.

He started with the I was part of 'mountain libertarianism' a brand he says runs deep in the area around me. I wondered, was this true? Without immediately responding with something smart, I thought about it for a while, and am still unsure. Ask my friends, and they will (probably only half-jokingly!) say 'fascist'.

I don't know though, I'll put my thoughts down here and see what sorts of comments it might generate. First, I do belive that people should be given chances to prove themselves, or maybe I should rephrase that. People are more or less innocent, until the blow the chance society has given them. More like until the betray society.

But regardless, as you may know, I have very little sympathy for criminals. Making them fight on desert prison planets for entertainment is not only funny to me, but actually if it were possible, would seem like a good idea. But that being said, am I libertarian because I am ok with people going on their own, until they screw up? I'm unsure pure Libt. doctrine, but when an individual screws up, do you keep giving them chances?

I don't know. I just know, when you screw up, based on the serverity of your crime or mistake, approraite intervention should be taken. Prison time should only be used to scare the weakest of our ilk. Labor, or forced (yes FORCED) rehabilition should be ok. Anyone read Clockwork Orange? That was a good idea, it was susposed to be a warning novel, but did a poor job. Kind of like how Brave New World actually was a pretty good idea too. But, I digress. After all, like they said in Startrek, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"...or the one.

I also surpport a lot government action in the face of a lot of things. That is one failing of libt. in my mind, is indivduals running around cannot solve a lot of collective problems. How are roads going to upkept unless we have tolls booths every side street? Want to see proof of libt. influnence cuasing what will be a big problem in the future? Take a look at our energy grid. No one owns in (read government doesn't own it) thus no one has the incentive to pay for upkeep. What happens as it decays in the massive blackouts we have seen the last few years.

Realistically, a collective is so much better then a 'collection of individuals'. Ever try pushing a car single handedly? Hard to impossible based on the slope. But only a few people working together (often not by 'choice', but forced by circumstance) it is do-able.

So maybe what I prefer is a collective we are all part of, and in general will leave you alone (you can have your guns, whatever) but when you are called by society, you are there. When you blow soceity's blessings, you pay the price.

Can pure libertarians win a soccer game? Everyone acting in their own selfish desires, without a larger, overaching autrihorty? Probably not. But what about the team, where they are bound by a higher force together. When it is immaterial for you to being doing anything you are free to flirt with the girls on the side lines, but when you are called to press that attack, clear the ball, pass etc, you had better be on point. Punishment works, as does reward. Ice cream or push ups, it doesn't much matter. Soon these 'motivators' won't even be neccessary, for you don't want to fail, not for yourself, but you don't want to fail for you team. That's how soceity should be run.