dsullivan's Xanga

Just thinking.

Tue, 17 Jun 2008 14:21:03 GMT

Right after the invasion of Iraq, President Bush declared, "Mission accomplished." At that point, why didn't the president declare victory and bring the troops home? We wouldn't be in this mess.

With friends like Pakistan, we don't need enemies.

Something to think about: Iran is a bigger threat to us than Saddam ever was. When Saddam was in power, he kept Iran in check.

The U.S. actually aided Saddam in his wars against Iran.

Bush, Cheney, and now McCain have said that the Iraq war keeps the terrorists from our shores. They've never explained how it does that. But somebody should tell those three that the terrorists are already here--and have been for a long time.

Cheney stated that our mideast policies (Iraq war) are working because we haven't had any more terrorist activity since 9/11. But I wonder if our homeland security policies, especially airport security, has anything to do with it.

Bush's father had a similar situation in the Gulf war. After invading Iraq, the elder Bush stopped short of going after Saddam. Instead, he proclaimed victory and we came home. Some criticized him for not going after Saddam. But the elder Bush replied that Saddam kept the balance of power in that region. The younger Bush proved that his father was right.

In WWII, every soldier was taught to follow the rules of The Geneva Convention in the handling of prisoners. Regardless of the brutality of the Nazis and Imperial Japanese, we treated prisoners humanely. Our great leaders of the time, such as President Roosevelt and General MacArthur, NEVER authorized torture of prisoners. Quite the opposite.

Speaking of getting POWs to reveal secrets: The foot soldiers and lower ranking prisoners don't know any secrets worth hearing. When a higher ranking soldier or official is captured, his superiors immediately change plans, so that anything he knows becomes worthless.

We keep hearing that it's the militant Muslims that are involved in terrorist activities, not the moderates. My only concern about that, is that the moderates seem to be remaining silent and letting the militants run the show.

My novella, THE PSIONIC MAN is available for purchase at Lulu Publishing. The paperback can be purchased at Lulu, and a free download of The Psionic Man is also available at Lulu.

TO KILL A PUPPY

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 01:26:33 GMT

Recently a United States Marine committed the sickening, loathsome act of throwing a helpless puppy over a cliff--and videotaped the foul deed. The marines, to their credit, kicked this sadistic bast--d out of The Corps.

This goes to show you that our service personnel are just like the rest of us. There are decent people in the services and there are bad people. After all, they are a product of our society. Unfortunately, there just isn't any way to effectively screen out the bad apples in the military. Batteries of psychiatric exams might catch some, but it won't stop them all.

It's well documented that the warped people who mistreat animals will also mistreat humans, and the services don't need this type. While serving in Vietnam with the U.S. Army, I heard a good number of troops openly boasting of how they tortured Viet Cong prisoners. One of their favorite ways was to use a field telephone, which can generate an electrical current by cranking. The wire leads of the phone were attached to the POW's privates.

It wasn't to make him talk, it was done to gratify the sadistic desires of the brutes. Berating those who boasted of such acts was useless. They'd merely laugh.

When I joined the army, there were still a lot of WWII vets still serving. To a man, they condemned such sadistic acts. I'm sure there were some incidents of mistreating German or Japanese prisoners, but from what I gather such incidents were isolated.

Have we changed that much since The Greatest Generation? In WWII, and as far as I know, in Korea, we treated our POWs humanely. In Vietnam there was a tendency to brutalize prisoners. And now, even our highest officials condone brutality (shades of Nazi officials!!) Can you imagine Roosevelt, Truman, MacArthur, or Eisenhower condoning such vile acts? No way.

Even some of our high officials claim that torture of enemy prisoners is justified in American lives saved. In my honest opinion, I think that's nothing more than crap. Anyway, the vast majority of these "detainees" have been imprisoned for years. Any secret plans they knew of would have been changed by their superiors right after capture. They're not dumb.

In WWII, our troops (mostly draftees) were the good guys wearing the white hats. It's proven that the Nazis and Japanese brutalized prisoners as well as civilians. By this reasoning, our enemies in WWII would have had a tremendous advantage over us because we didn't condone torture. And yet, we won.

My novella, THE PSIONIC MAN is available for purchase at Lulu Publishing. The paperback can be purchased at Lulu, and a free download of The Psionic Man is also available at Lulu.

Poison tomatoes

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:57:34 GMT

Of all years not to have tomatoes growing! We like tomatoes in our house. BLTs, salads, in nearly all our sandwiches, and sometimes just sliced and served with our meals. Normally we'd have several tomato plants growing in our garden, but this year we haven't gotten around to planting any yet.

Well, we'll just buy tomatoes from the local supermarket, right? Yeah. Except that now they tell us that tomatoes are contaminated with salmonella. So today we're gonna get some plants from Lowe's, and maybe in a couple of months we can enjoy some fresh tomatoes.

Ya know who I thank for all this food poisoning? Our "servants" in the congress, that's who. And our "servant" in the White House. The tightest of laws should govern the food supply of the American people. We are very lax compared to some other nations. I read an article about such laws in Japan.

They keep track of everything. If there is an outbreak of food poisoning in Japan (which is almost nonexistent) , they can track it to its source effortlessly. But in the U.S. it seems like the people in congress are more interested in trashing the other party or trashing sports stars than looking out for the people.

They focus on mostly worthless pork projects to make themselves look good at home. They work hard for special interests. Unlike in Japan, regulating our food supply is way down on the list.

Food growers and processors are interested only in profit. That's fine, but don't put profit ahead of the purity of our food. When the processors and wholesalers have to destroy tons of beef, spinach, or tomatoes because of contamination, are they worried about losing profits? Nope, they simply raise prices to compensate for their losses. So you and me lose.

Now excuse me. I gotta go plant some tomatoes.

Take #2 on normal.

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:28:38 GMT

Normal doesn't have to be boring. Normal doesn't have to be routine. Normal doesn't have to be conformity.

A few examples to make my point:

For a cop, dealing with drug dealers, murderers, and other criminals is normal.

For a circus performer, high wires and trapezes are normal.

For a clown (circus or otherwise), outrageous antics are normal.

For a soldier, facing the enemy in battle is normal.

When an unruly child throws a fit, we say, "Well, he's just being normal."

For an eccentric person, doing weird things is normal.

And I could name many more examples.

What is normal varies from group to group, but it's not necessarily boring.

Normal, I guess, is just acting as expected, be it good, bad, or indifferent.

Featured Grownups

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:02:13 GMT

This topic comes to us from SekhmetDreaming

My suggestion is this: "what is normal?" Now, I DON'T mean what is the definition of the word normal, rather, I want to know what people consider to be "normal". Now, people can come up with fun answers if they wish, but you see, lately, I've been having issues both with the staff here in my building and with people in general, seeming to think that just because my legs don't work, neither does my brain, so I would really like to make people think with this question and see what kind of answers we get.

Sekhmet Dreaming poses a very interesting question. In the above paragraph, when I read "people in general, seeming to think that just because my legs don't work, neither does my brain," the first person I thought of was Stephen Hawkings. Not only does his legs not work, but neither does much of anything else, and even his voice is going.

At first glance one might think Mr. Hawkings was an idiot. He has a kind of goofy, uncoordinated "Jerry Louis" appearance. But he is a genius. Hawkings is a British physicist who has contributed much to science. There is not room here to list his accomplishments. He is especially noted for his work in the area of black holes.

Unfortunately, people seem to relate physical handicaps with intelligence. The deaf, the blind, those bound to wheelchairs, and others are considered to be lacking in intelligence.

Foreigners who have trouble with English are considered by some to be dimwitted. Among some groups, a southern accent immediately brands you as being a red neck ignoramus.

As to the question "what is normal," it's my belief that normal is subjective. In other words, what is normal to one group may be abnormal to another. While in the army, I transferred from unit to unit, and I found that the people of one unit might shun a certain personality type that would be very popular in another unit.

Humans are strange people.

Land of the not-so-free

Sun, 18 May 2008 00:07:35 GMT

Recently the local newspaper published a piece by columnist Leonard Pitts asserting that the U.S., in spite of all the ballyhoo about freedom, was slowly becoming an oppressed society. While we were once a beacon of liberty to the world, and are still regarded as such by many, we are slowly letting our freedoms erode.

Pitts, of The Miami Herald, had dinner with a friend and his fiancée, Anna, who is visiting from Estonia.   She was in Estonia when it was a totalitarian state under the oppressive rule of the former USSR.   She made no formal complaints about the U.S., it was just conversation over dinner.

Pitts had heard many complaints about our country from foreigners before, but never from one who lived under communism. That got his attention.

Some of the reasons the woman gave for her complaints were eye openers. We are far and away the most litigious society in the world. We can lose our life savings or be ruined due to frivolous lawsuits. Even if you are careful not to insult or injure people, it probably won't help much.

Example:   You dig a hole in your yard to plant shrubbery, the phone rings and you run inside. While you're on the phone, a salesman trips in the hole and, at the urging of a greedy, unethical lawyer, claims spine injury and disability for life.    You're ruined, the lawyer gets richer, and the salesman goes back to work when all blows over. Far fetched?   Lawsuits like this are so common it isn't even newsworthy anymore.

Ah yes, greedy lawyers and mindless juries--juries who ironically could get sued themselves someday. Poetic justice.

Another reason the woman gave was political correctness. We're in a straitjacket with PC limiting our speech. It seems that everyone fears the ACLU, even the U.S. Congress. If we displease the PC crowd, we can lose our jobs or get sued.

Businesses have to be very careful these days. They stand at risk every time they fire an employee. Even if They are justified in the firing, sometimes they must go through costly lawsuits. This drives up the cost of their products.

Businesses also have to take ridiculous precautions, with warnings like, "Coffee is hot," or "Food will be hot when removed from oven."   According to Anna, when she tells people in Estonia and shows pictures of some of these ridiculous signs, they either laugh or shake their heads in disbelief.

According to her, we're not like the oppressive communist regime yet. But we definitely are losing our freedoms. Bit by bit by bit…

Friday, May 16, 2008

Fri, 16 May 2008 22:27:11 GMT

I plead guilty to swiping this idea from another blog. Guilty as charged.

The female that I swiped it from lamented that all men are boobs--oops--no, what she actually said was that all men are obsessed with boobs. She asked that men readers please explain why they sooooo like boobs.

Most of the replies were from women, and all agreed with her observation. Some went so far as to say that even gay men loved boobs. Also, some of the women stated that men who say they don't like boobs are fibbers.

I was one of a couple of men to reply. The other guy agreed, I disagreed.

Here's my take on it. (if you are among those women who think that any man who says he isn't infatuated with boobs is being untruthful, read no further.)

Not counting gays and undersexed men, I would say that about fifty percent of men are "boob men." Of the remaining fifty percent, most are either "butt men," or "leg men." A few might be found who get excited about various other body parts (there was a time in the past when men went bonkers over ankles, and women who flashed their ankles were naughty.)

In nineteenth century Japan, men got all revved up from a peek at the nape of a woman's neck. Kimono collars were tilted back to give the guys a thrill.

As some women wonder why men are so obsessed with boobs, I, in turn, wonder why women THINK that men are so obsessed. The only answer I can come up with is girlie magazines like Playboy. Hefner is obviously a boob man, and his magazine reflects this. It has become chic to ballyhoo boobs in movies and on TV.

But not all men focus on boobs; as I pointed out some prefer shapely butts or legs. And bye and bye, nearly all men go bonkers over a pretty face and well proportioned female figure. I base my observations on twenty years in the army, much of the time spent in barracks. In barracks, one of the main topics of conversation is...you guessed it...women.

So, in the final analysis, all men do like shapely boobs, all men do like shapely derrieres, and all men do like shapely legs, but each man has a preference for one of the three (except for the guys who like all three.)

Now my question of women. Do you think that women are overly concerned with boobs?

Friday, May 09, 2008

Fri, 09 May 2008 20:45:27 GMT

Featured Grownups presents the following Challenge:

Write a letter to your Mother. It doesn't matter if she is in heaven or on earth. Tell her what she means to you..

Dear Momma,

I can never thank you enough for all the TLC you gave to me as a baby, child, very troublesome teenager, and on into manhood. You're gone from this world now, but I look forward to meeting you on the other shore.

Your loving son always.

The Not-So-Solid-South

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:06:31 GMT

I just came across something on the internet about southern lingo. I've read many pieces about southern customs, southern cooking, southern this and that.

The South covers a vast area. From Key West to Richmond, from Charleston to El Paso. Every City in Old Dixie has its own flavor. No two are alike. Nashville. New Orleans. Tampa. Houston. Norfolk. Not only are the cities different from each other, but so are the states. And so are different regions within the states.

People are also different from each other. There are city people, country people, backwoods people, mountaineers, rich people, and poor people. Generally the people in these various groups have their own lingo, cooking, and customs.

Among occupations in The South there are farmers, fishermen, cowboys, shrimpers, loggers, merchants, and lawyers. All of these occupations have their own jargon. Fishermen and farmers generally don't have the same diet. Neither do loggers and cowboys.

I've lived in seven different southern states, and I've enjoyed local dishes unique to that locality. Collards are not eaten everywhere. Neither are fried green tomatoes, black eyed peas, hush puppies, and corn pone. There are big differences in preparing barbecue. I grew up eating corn dodgers, corn flitters, sausage perlo, dadil pepper relish, smother fried chicken, and other dishes that I haven't seen anywhere else.

About the only food I can think of common to all Southerners is grits. The only word I can think of that all Southerners use is y'all. (Contrary to what most Northerners think, "y'all" is not used to address one person--it's used to address two or more..) It's worth noting that there are a few localities in The South that use "ye'ns" instead of 'y'all."

Okay. Got that off my chest...

Note: Timtayshun, by the novelty tune artist Red Ingle to which I'm now listening, is a country music take off on Perry Como's Temptation. It's the only novelty tune, I believe, to ever make number one on the charts. Some country music fans who never heard Como's version, at first actually thought it was a regular country music recording--not a take off.

SPRING

Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:03:26 GMT

Featured Grownups poses this question:
Mother Nature is having a really hard time giving us the Spring season we are all so eager for ... what exactly is it we are eager for? Tell us what SPRING means to you... what is it you are waiting for, longing for, looking forward to?
Spring is and always has been my favorite time of the year. It's great to see the world spring back to life again after the bleak, dreary days of winter. Bright green leaves on the trees, colorful flowers, colorful birds, pleasant temperatures--not too hot or too cold.
Pretty girls look just a little prettier.
Soon I can start tilling the ground for planting vegetables that will be fresh on the table.
On the downside, pollen is in the air to aggravate the old allergies, and the pine pollen coats your car. and soon the lawn will need mowing. But the ups far outweigh the downs.