Summary
According to a story on MSNBC , an officer in Philadelphia Pennyslvania was pulled of his beat and put on desk duty for having 'corn rows' in his hair. The officer served in Iraq, survived two different explosions when his Hummer hit roadside bombs, he comes from a long line of police officers in his family. According to his coworkers, he is the kind of guy you'd want by your side if something bad going down. The one and only reason this officer was penalized was for wearing his hair in corn rows. Thomas strain is the officer referenced in this story, according to others questioned in his precinct, there are atleast a dozen other officers in that precinct with corn rows, so what is it that makes Thomas Strain stand out from the other corn rolled officers? Thomas Strain is the only one of them that is white.
Response
I think that this is something that is becoming more and more common in this country. I think that in trying to develop an ethnic sensativity to compensate for the sins of our fore fathers, we have actually only accomplished reversing racism in this country rather than abolishing it. I think the whole idea of socially acceptable hair and clothing styles differing based on race or color is completely and totally one hundred percent an example of racism. I personally think that in many businesses and industry's attempts at ethnic sensativity, they are being unfair to one(or more) race and insulting one(or more) in the process. Equality is really quite self explanitory. Anything that singles out a race whether it's beneficial or harmful for that race, the fact that there is a singling out based on race, makes it wrong. I believe that our nation has come along way towards equality in the last sixty years and definately in the last one hundred and fifty years, but I think that we have gotten down a wrong path in our good intentions, and we still have away to go in creating an atmosphere of equality for all.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Per ounce tax on sugary beverages
Summary
In a story on MSNBC , it tells of a proposed tax per ounce on sugary beverages such as soda pop. It claims that the tax revenue would help offset some of the cost of the proposed healthcare reforms, and at the same time deter americans from drinking sugary beverages that may adversely affect their health. The story goes on to say that it was not passed at this time, because of the hard time the democrat administration is having trying to pass their proposed healthcare bill, President Obama thought it would be a bad time to make an enemy of the beverage industry. Researches stated that the average obese american would lose two pounds per year as a result of the tax, had it been passed.
Response
I can see the benefit of deterring people from drinking sugary benefits, but I don't think that singling out beverages and not the candy makers, snack cake makers, and cookie makers, etc. would be like trying to put a bandaid on a bullet wound. It does not in any way shape or form fix the obesity problem in america, and is more a way to impose more taxes without appearing to raise taxes. Two pounds a year weight loss for someone extremely obese might actually help them ten years after their dead at that snail paced weightloss. I really liked the way the FDA cracked down on trans fat, and I think there should be tighter restrictions on the amounts of sugars that companies are allowed to put in their products. That would be an actual attempt at making americans healthier. As a parent and a consumer, I have noticed that healthier foods actually cost more than unhealthy foods, and is a big contributer to the unhealthiness and obesity in this country. If anything, the government should offer tax breaks for food companies that would adhere to strict healthy guidlines while maintaining a cost effective price for the consumers.
In a story on MSNBC , it tells of a proposed tax per ounce on sugary beverages such as soda pop. It claims that the tax revenue would help offset some of the cost of the proposed healthcare reforms, and at the same time deter americans from drinking sugary beverages that may adversely affect their health. The story goes on to say that it was not passed at this time, because of the hard time the democrat administration is having trying to pass their proposed healthcare bill, President Obama thought it would be a bad time to make an enemy of the beverage industry. Researches stated that the average obese american would lose two pounds per year as a result of the tax, had it been passed.
Response
I can see the benefit of deterring people from drinking sugary benefits, but I don't think that singling out beverages and not the candy makers, snack cake makers, and cookie makers, etc. would be like trying to put a bandaid on a bullet wound. It does not in any way shape or form fix the obesity problem in america, and is more a way to impose more taxes without appearing to raise taxes. Two pounds a year weight loss for someone extremely obese might actually help them ten years after their dead at that snail paced weightloss. I really liked the way the FDA cracked down on trans fat, and I think there should be tighter restrictions on the amounts of sugars that companies are allowed to put in their products. That would be an actual attempt at making americans healthier. As a parent and a consumer, I have noticed that healthier foods actually cost more than unhealthy foods, and is a big contributer to the unhealthiness and obesity in this country. If anything, the government should offer tax breaks for food companies that would adhere to strict healthy guidlines while maintaining a cost effective price for the consumers.
It must be a full moon out?
Summary
In a story on MSNBC , it proposes the question " Does the moon affect our health and mental well being here on earth". It gives alot of good examples of how that could be possible. Some of which include bright lighting from the moon causing sleep deprivation, and also the idea that because our bodies are made up of seventy percent water, that possibly the gravitaional tugging back and fourth between the earth and the moon could be causing mini tides within our bodies. According to the story though, all these things have not been proved, and every testing has turned up no link between a full moon and human health or behaviors.
Response
I find this story quite interesting. It really makes you think about the actual possibility of such a thing. I've always heard the phrase "Must be a full moon out", but I had really never given any thought to it's origin. I have somewhat of a flair for sci fi, and the whole magnetic disturbance on our body's water angle, really make my imagine go wild with the whole werewolf myth. Possibly a genetic deformity, a shapeshifter chromasone that is triggered by this gravitational diturbance within the body caused by the full moon. Possibly an idea for a book? I don't know about the whole sleep deprivation angle. I have a hard time believing that the light of the full moon would cause that much difference in our sleep patterns. I am also quite curious about the testing methods used to disprove the idea that there are differences when there is a full moon. Surely with such a common phrase, there must be some actual basis for it. I will definately be paying close attention whenever there is a full moon, to see for myself if there is any notable differences.
In a story on MSNBC , it proposes the question " Does the moon affect our health and mental well being here on earth". It gives alot of good examples of how that could be possible. Some of which include bright lighting from the moon causing sleep deprivation, and also the idea that because our bodies are made up of seventy percent water, that possibly the gravitaional tugging back and fourth between the earth and the moon could be causing mini tides within our bodies. According to the story though, all these things have not been proved, and every testing has turned up no link between a full moon and human health or behaviors.
Response
I find this story quite interesting. It really makes you think about the actual possibility of such a thing. I've always heard the phrase "Must be a full moon out", but I had really never given any thought to it's origin. I have somewhat of a flair for sci fi, and the whole magnetic disturbance on our body's water angle, really make my imagine go wild with the whole werewolf myth. Possibly a genetic deformity, a shapeshifter chromasone that is triggered by this gravitational diturbance within the body caused by the full moon. Possibly an idea for a book? I don't know about the whole sleep deprivation angle. I have a hard time believing that the light of the full moon would cause that much difference in our sleep patterns. I am also quite curious about the testing methods used to disprove the idea that there are differences when there is a full moon. Surely with such a common phrase, there must be some actual basis for it. I will definately be paying close attention whenever there is a full moon, to see for myself if there is any notable differences.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Four more of the same?
Summary
According to a story on msnbc , President Obama has ordered twenty one thousand more troops into Afgahnastan, bringing the total number of troops up to sixty eight thousand troops. When interveiwed, the president would not give a deadline for withdrawl of troops from Afgahnastan. Much like his predecessor, President Obama stated he would not base any war decisions on the polotics of the moment. According to polls, the american public, along with members of his own part and many others, all are very doubtful of a resurgent of the Taliban, they are doubtful of Afgahn leadership, and they are doubtful of the neccessity for american involvement in Afgahnastan.
Response
I find it somewhat ironic, that during his presidential campaign, President Obama repetedly attacked the Bush administration for not having a timeline to bring home the troops from Iraq. Obama's campaign platform claimed that his opponent John McCain, shared the Bush administrations veiw on the war in Iraq, and that if elected Obama said that he would create a defenite timeline to 'bring the troops home. Since being elected, the troops have not come home. All the president has done, was reduce the troops in Iraq and increase the number in Afgahnastan to the point where additional troops, over and above what had already been deployed, were 'neccessary'. President Obama repeatedly slandered John McCain, claiming that four years of a McCain presidency would be like four more years of the Bush presidency. In addition to no definate timeline to bring home the troops, Obama fiscal irresponsibility and bloated government spending has far overshadowed any single year spending of George Bush, or any other president for that matter. At the rate He is going, four more of the same might have been alot better for america than what he is unleashing. The taxes will inevitably have to increase to pay for this higher fiscal budget, which means less money to support our family's with. If the Obama national healthcare plan ever goes through, we most likely see 65% income taxes. That's what Britian sees with their national healthcare. Alot of people think that the nationalized healthcare is to help the people, but really it goes to help the medical industry. Working class people, which is most of us, will pay twice as much in taxes, which would be alot more expensive than their current healthcare insurance. So, the people aren't benefiting, but the medical industry, rather than having to reform their lofty expensive pricing, will instead have a government guarantee of payment. I personally couldn't live off 30 - 35% less income than I make now. I think there are very few of us who can.
According to a story on msnbc , President Obama has ordered twenty one thousand more troops into Afgahnastan, bringing the total number of troops up to sixty eight thousand troops. When interveiwed, the president would not give a deadline for withdrawl of troops from Afgahnastan. Much like his predecessor, President Obama stated he would not base any war decisions on the polotics of the moment. According to polls, the american public, along with members of his own part and many others, all are very doubtful of a resurgent of the Taliban, they are doubtful of Afgahn leadership, and they are doubtful of the neccessity for american involvement in Afgahnastan.
Response
I find it somewhat ironic, that during his presidential campaign, President Obama repetedly attacked the Bush administration for not having a timeline to bring home the troops from Iraq. Obama's campaign platform claimed that his opponent John McCain, shared the Bush administrations veiw on the war in Iraq, and that if elected Obama said that he would create a defenite timeline to 'bring the troops home. Since being elected, the troops have not come home. All the president has done, was reduce the troops in Iraq and increase the number in Afgahnastan to the point where additional troops, over and above what had already been deployed, were 'neccessary'. President Obama repeatedly slandered John McCain, claiming that four years of a McCain presidency would be like four more years of the Bush presidency. In addition to no definate timeline to bring home the troops, Obama fiscal irresponsibility and bloated government spending has far overshadowed any single year spending of George Bush, or any other president for that matter. At the rate He is going, four more of the same might have been alot better for america than what he is unleashing. The taxes will inevitably have to increase to pay for this higher fiscal budget, which means less money to support our family's with. If the Obama national healthcare plan ever goes through, we most likely see 65% income taxes. That's what Britian sees with their national healthcare. Alot of people think that the nationalized healthcare is to help the people, but really it goes to help the medical industry. Working class people, which is most of us, will pay twice as much in taxes, which would be alot more expensive than their current healthcare insurance. So, the people aren't benefiting, but the medical industry, rather than having to reform their lofty expensive pricing, will instead have a government guarantee of payment. I personally couldn't live off 30 - 35% less income than I make now. I think there are very few of us who can.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Could technology be making us rude?
Summary
According to a story on msnbc , there are some fingers pointed at technology, primarily the internet, as the blame for the increased rudeness in society. The author of the article was actually mocking the idea, and portraying the idea as ridiculous. The article poses the idea that the rudeness of society is actually a natural fluctuation of society. It gives examples of what was acceptable in medevil times, and insinuates that socially acceptable rudeness has just come back in style. The article mentions the famed social networks, facebook & twitter. It also uses Kenye West's interruption of the Video Music Awards as an example of today's level of rudeness.
Response
I have to agree with those doing the finger pointing and not the author of this article. I am all for technology, but I do have to admit that people can be too connected electronically, and detached from the physical world. I see so many people walking through grocery stores, and the mall, texting or talking on their cell phones, totally oblivious of everyone around them. People are so amused with how they portray themselves on various social networks, that they're not so concerned how they come off in the real world. I personally have witnessed the jet setted world of dating compliments of the internet. Visiting clubs? A thing of the past. Meeting people in person before you agree to go out? A thing of the past. Everything is faster and easier now days. People are so used to getting everything fast, that some of our slower (non electrical) members of society, such as conveinence store clerks, wind up getting verbally abused in peoples fits of inpatient rage. I personal am a fan of the philosphy 'all things in moderation', but I worry that society is actually taking our global connectiveness to an unhealthy level.
According to a story on msnbc , there are some fingers pointed at technology, primarily the internet, as the blame for the increased rudeness in society. The author of the article was actually mocking the idea, and portraying the idea as ridiculous. The article poses the idea that the rudeness of society is actually a natural fluctuation of society. It gives examples of what was acceptable in medevil times, and insinuates that socially acceptable rudeness has just come back in style. The article mentions the famed social networks, facebook & twitter. It also uses Kenye West's interruption of the Video Music Awards as an example of today's level of rudeness.
Response
I have to agree with those doing the finger pointing and not the author of this article. I am all for technology, but I do have to admit that people can be too connected electronically, and detached from the physical world. I see so many people walking through grocery stores, and the mall, texting or talking on their cell phones, totally oblivious of everyone around them. People are so amused with how they portray themselves on various social networks, that they're not so concerned how they come off in the real world. I personally have witnessed the jet setted world of dating compliments of the internet. Visiting clubs? A thing of the past. Meeting people in person before you agree to go out? A thing of the past. Everything is faster and easier now days. People are so used to getting everything fast, that some of our slower (non electrical) members of society, such as conveinence store clerks, wind up getting verbally abused in peoples fits of inpatient rage. I personal am a fan of the philosphy 'all things in moderation', but I worry that society is actually taking our global connectiveness to an unhealthy level.
Friday, September 4, 2009
Absolutely rediculous!
Summary
According to a story on MSNBC , a police officer in Bozeman, MT was forced to resign over a facebook post he made on his personal account. The post read "I wish we were allowed to arrest people for being stupid". The posting came to light when a Bozeman man filed a lawsuit against the city, this officer, and a couple others; claiming that he was wrongfully arrested. The man claimed that this officers facebook posting indicates a lack of respect for citizens rights, and a willingness to abuse his position of power.
Response
I personally think that this story is ridiculous beyond comprehension. What person has not complained about there job, or fantasized about having more power to increase the enjoyability of their job? How many waitress wish they had the power to tell an unruly customer to take a hike? How many teachers wish they had the authority to give the troublemakers in their class, the 'boot'? I personally am an avid facebook "venter", and I would hope that most half way intelligent people could tell the difference between fact and 'venting'. If anything, this man filing the lawsuit, is claiming that he falls into the stupid category and that he was discriminated against for being stupid. The shear idea of the lawsuit, in my book, makes a pretty convincing argument for that man's stupidity. Sometimes I feel that our system has become more a game of who can manipulate the facts more to their benefit, rather than upholding the laws of the land. It truly disappoints my faith in society when I see or hear of such things happening
According to a story on MSNBC , a police officer in Bozeman, MT was forced to resign over a facebook post he made on his personal account. The post read "I wish we were allowed to arrest people for being stupid". The posting came to light when a Bozeman man filed a lawsuit against the city, this officer, and a couple others; claiming that he was wrongfully arrested. The man claimed that this officers facebook posting indicates a lack of respect for citizens rights, and a willingness to abuse his position of power.
Response
I personally think that this story is ridiculous beyond comprehension. What person has not complained about there job, or fantasized about having more power to increase the enjoyability of their job? How many waitress wish they had the power to tell an unruly customer to take a hike? How many teachers wish they had the authority to give the troublemakers in their class, the 'boot'? I personally am an avid facebook "venter", and I would hope that most half way intelligent people could tell the difference between fact and 'venting'. If anything, this man filing the lawsuit, is claiming that he falls into the stupid category and that he was discriminated against for being stupid. The shear idea of the lawsuit, in my book, makes a pretty convincing argument for that man's stupidity. Sometimes I feel that our system has become more a game of who can manipulate the facts more to their benefit, rather than upholding the laws of the land. It truly disappoints my faith in society when I see or hear of such things happening
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Natural "High"
Summary
What is the latest alternative to harmful addictive drugs? According to a story on MSNBC , it is the endorphins and dopamine released from intense excercise. The story stated that excercise can be as addictive as heroine. Doctors, according to the story, are beginning to research intense workout schedules as a way of recoverying from drug addictions. Apparently the chemicals released by excercising are comparable to that from drugs, and provides a "natural high". Even though the story claims that excercising can be addictive, it also clarifies that as long as it's not interfering with other aspects of a persons life, than it is a non-harmful alternative to a drug induced high.
Response
As someone who is an avid excerciser, and has been for over twenty years, I agree totally that excercising is addictive. The natural high that I obtain after an intense weightlifting workout, or after running a few miles on the treadmill, is greater than any high I may have experimented with at a younger age. Alot of people claim that they donot have enough energy to workout, but the more you workout, the more energy you have to do your workouts. Also, alot of people I talk to, say they don't have time to workout, but I work full-time, go to school full-time, and I have six children. I get up at five in the morning just to go workout before I have to go to work, and instead of making me tired like you think it would, it leaves me energized to accomplish the rest of my tasks throughout the day. I am glad to see researchers coming to the same conclusion that I arrived at along time ago. Working out is the only "high" worth seeking after.
What is the latest alternative to harmful addictive drugs? According to a story on MSNBC , it is the endorphins and dopamine released from intense excercise. The story stated that excercise can be as addictive as heroine. Doctors, according to the story, are beginning to research intense workout schedules as a way of recoverying from drug addictions. Apparently the chemicals released by excercising are comparable to that from drugs, and provides a "natural high". Even though the story claims that excercising can be addictive, it also clarifies that as long as it's not interfering with other aspects of a persons life, than it is a non-harmful alternative to a drug induced high.
Response
As someone who is an avid excerciser, and has been for over twenty years, I agree totally that excercising is addictive. The natural high that I obtain after an intense weightlifting workout, or after running a few miles on the treadmill, is greater than any high I may have experimented with at a younger age. Alot of people claim that they donot have enough energy to workout, but the more you workout, the more energy you have to do your workouts. Also, alot of people I talk to, say they don't have time to workout, but I work full-time, go to school full-time, and I have six children. I get up at five in the morning just to go workout before I have to go to work, and instead of making me tired like you think it would, it leaves me energized to accomplish the rest of my tasks throughout the day. I am glad to see researchers coming to the same conclusion that I arrived at along time ago. Working out is the only "high" worth seeking after.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
