Coming to America

"Hi everybody! I am get to come to your country this weekend and to tell your UN that I will keep enriching uranium for my bombs until Israel is no more my neighbor. I am so happy to be in New York where I can enjoy your freedoms for which I support your demise as the sinful scourge of the earth."

Ok, so I took a little liberty in paraphrasing there, but come on, you know it's not far from the truth. Anyway, he will be in the Big Apple this weekend to tell us all where we can stick his missiles... that Israel is the great satan... and how he loves the UN for not helping the US, England, and othersin ending the Islamic tidal wave of terror.

Just for a test sometime.. go to Google News  and type in any religion you know.  Buddhist, Mormon, Catholic, Christian, any religion except Islam.  What did you get?  Now cross reference them with eachother (still exempt islam or muslim)?  Everything going well?  You don't have to read the entire articles (you can if you like, but for this little sampling, we're concentrating on headlines and the first sentance.)

Now, take any of those religions and cross reference with islam, islamic, or muslim.

Notice a change in the demeanor of the articles?  Who's covering what aspects?  What is the bias or slant?

Give it a try, draw your own conclusions, let me know in comments.

Book update

Closed Somebody's gotta say it (enjoyed it) and opened The FairTax Book by the same author (I know, not diverse, but he's coming to town and I figured I'd get him to sign both.)

And I'm yawning through The "Truth" About Hillary (Ok, I added the quotation marks, but they should be there.) I just don't understand why somebody thinks they have to do "creative editing" and conjecture when you're dealing with such an obviouly corrupt family. Perhaps he thought the controversy would sell more books?

What I'm reading now...

I don't know... do people really post about what they're reading?  Oh well.. here goes:

Somebody's Gotta Say It by Neal Boortz (and yes, I'm going on the 28th to see if I can get it signed when he comes to DC)

• Really good book.  I'm a chapter or two from the end and will probably finish it before most people read this (an easy statement for me to say after looking at the traffic on this site since "most people" don't come here.)  But if you listen to his program and read his show notes, the stuff he has to say in the book isn't anything new.  I guess when your time is consumed by writing a book, it is inevitable that you are going to talk about the same matters the next day on the air.  Regardless, it is a very good read.
  

and

The Truth About Hillary by Edward Klein

• I just picked this one up and am only to the second chapter, but honestly, I'm not sure how far into it I'll wade.  I'm sure people have heard the reviews (like this one from mediamatters.com) where even the washed up Al Franken made the author look like... well he made the author look like Al Franken looks whenever HE normally opens his mouth.  But it's on CD and I have a drive in the mornings and how can you tell about a book without reading it yourself? (And, yes, I have watched {read:  suffered through} Michael Moore's and Al Gore's (as well as others) movies and have Al Jazeera linked from this page too.  I filter through BS from all sides equally looking for nuggets of logic and truth or at least a rationalle for their fatuous behavior... wait, if there were logic, reason, and rationalle behind it, would it still be inane?  I guess, if the logic (etc) were flawed or misguided, it would still be logic... but I digress)
  

Ok, so that's what I'm reading.  Two books meant to have taken up a line or two now blown up to an entire post which. if you're reading this sentance, you've now read in its entirety.  Aren't you blessed.

Tim on "honor students"

Saw this on the web today and had a little chuckle.

And this for my brother:

Have a good day.

No I didn't come up with it... but I like it

I guess I could just as easily link to it, but I'm gonna cut and paste here to save you some surfing time.

If you do take the time to even glance over the following... go ahead and post a comment with how many you were actually able to answer from the second set of questions.  I'm interested to know.  (And yeah, you can leave it annonymous if you're embarrassed about your results.)

This first list is from The Asheville Citizen-Times (NC that is) when it ran an article asking "How patriotic are you?" which included the following questions:

1. What is the date that the Declaration of Independence was signed?
   
2. What document is the legal framework of the United States?
   
3. Who wrote the words to the "Star Spangled Banner"?
   
4. What is the Pledge of Allegiance?
   
5. Where was the Declaration of Independence signed?
   
6. What is the number of original Colonies?
   
7. Who was the first president of the United States?
   
8. What is the minimum voting age in the United States?
   
9. Who is the current governor of North Carolina?
   
10. What is the motto of North Carolina?
    

The response was this:

1. Forget when the Declaration of Independence was signed (Hint:  It was not the 4th of July); tell me why it was signed? What were the signers trying to accomplish?
   
2. What happened to the men who signed the Declaration? Did they go on to be heroes and live happily ever after?
   
3. What does the Declaration of Independence say the people can do when a government becomes destructive to the ends of liberty?
4. Are we about there?
   
5. What would happen to anyone who tried today to alter or abolish our government if it became destructive to idea that government derives its powers from the consent of the governed?
   
6. Which articles of the Constitution grant specific powers to the federal government?
   
7. Which article of the Constitution restricts the powers of the government to only those specifically set forth in the Constitution?
8. Which article of the Constitution do you imagine is the one most often ignored by the Congress of the United States?
   
9. Describe the circumstances under which Francis Scott Key wrote the words to the Star Spangled Banner?
   
10. Do you believe people living in a free country ought to be compelled to recite a pledge of allegiance to that country? Why?
11. If you are required to recite the pledge of allegiance, are you really free?
    
12. Was the Revolutionary War supported by a majority of the Colonists?
13. Should Washington have developed an "exit strategy" before he ever led his troops into battle during the Revolutionary War?
    
14. Where in our Constitution is it stated that anyone has a right to vote for the office of President of the United States?
    
15. How did our original Constitution provide for the appointment of Senators?
    
16. Most foreign countries appoint an ambassador to be their official representative before the government of the United States. Who officially represents the 50 state governments before the government of the United States?
    
17. Explain the difference between a rule of law and the rule of man.
    
18. Explain the difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic.
    
19. Was our country founded to be a country of majority rule?
    
20. Can you imagine what our country would be like today if the majority did rule?
    
21. Aren't you glad the majority doesn't rule?
22. If two wolves and one sheep vote on what they're going to have for dinner, what do you think the menu will look like?
    
23. Why does it matter in the grand scheme of things who the governor of North Carolina is?
    
24. Isn't a governor something you put on a state to keep it from moving ahead very fast?
    
25. What possible benefit could you gain by memorizing the motto of the State of North Carolina, or any other state for that matter?
    
26. How many times is the word "democracy" found in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution?
    
27. How many times is the word "democracy" found in the constitutions of any of the 50 states?
    
28. What does this tell you?
    
29. Define "civil war."
    
30. Was the war between the northern and southern states in the mid-1800s a civil war?
    
31. Who is third in the line of succession to the presidency?
    
32. Based on your answer to the foregoing question, would you demand that George Bush and Dick Cheney never eat from the same container of potato salad now that the Democrats have control of the House of Representatives?
    
33. How did the political class manage to fool the people of the United States into supporting a Constitutional Amendment creating an income tax?
    
34. How do most people get their news on a daily bass?
    
35. Does the "freedom of press" clause in the First Amendment apply to the broadcast media?
    
36. So, do most people get their news from agencies licensed to operate by the federal government?
    
37. Why were the words "under God" placed into the Pledge of Allegiance?
    
38. Do you think that it is proper for the federal government to compel students attending government schools under compulsory attendance laws to acknowledge the role of God in the formation of our country? Would this constitute "effecting an establishment of religion?" If not, why not?
    
39. Do Americans derive their basic rights from the Constitution?
    
40. If we don't derive our rights from the Constitution, just why was the Bill of Rights added anyway?
    
41. Define a system of government where the means of production are owned and controlled privately.
    
42. Define a system of government where the means of production are privately owned but controlled by government.
    
43. Define a system of government where the means of production are owned and controlled by the government.
44. Why do liberals have such a tough time answering number 42?
    
45. What percentage of total income is earned by the top one percent of income earners.
    
46. What percentage of total income taxes collected by the federal government is paid by the top one percent of income earners.
    
47. Where in our Constitution does it specifically state that only U.S. citizens may vote for the office of President of the United States? (Caution: Trick question.)
    
48. Name one right that a state government can exercise without interference from the federal level.
    
49. Where in our Constitution does it specifically state that only U.S. citizens may vote for members of the House of Representatives?
    
50. Look at the Bill of Rights. List any Amendments in the Bill of Rights that were ratified for the purpose of limiting the powers of the government.
    
51. If our Constitution provides for equal protection under the law, why, then, does the Voting Rights Act only apply to certain states who were held in political disfavor in the 70's?
    
52. List any Amendments in the Bill of Rights that were ratified for the purpose of limiting the rights of individuals.
    
53. If the Bill of Rights was written to limit the rights of government and to guarantee certain rights in the individual, try to explain why so many people seem to think that the 2nd Amendment was written to limit the rights of individuals and guarantee the rights of government?
    
54. Does the First Amendment protect speech that some people might find offensive?
    
55. Explain how our Republic was threatened when Janet Jackson showed the world that she likes to wear a Japanese throwing star on the nipple of her left breast.
    
56. What is the one exclusive power our government has that no individual or business can legally exercise?
57. If we were playing Rock Paper Scissors... and "treaties with foreign nations duly ratified by our Senate" is paper... would the Constitution be the Rock or the Scissors?
58. Do you have the right to use force to take money from a stranger if you are going to give that money to someone in need?
59. Explain the concept of our government deriving its powers from the concent of the governed.
60. Now explain how you can tell the government to do something for you that, if you did it, would be a crime.
61. Should the government make something you might do a crime if that action does not violate another person's right to life, liberty, or property through force or fraud?
62. How many votes must you have in the Senate to be assured that a piece of legislation will pass?
63. Do you have a choice as to whether or not you pay Social Security taxes?
64. Why, then, do they call Social Security taxes "contributions"?
65. What is the average age of a country or society based on the rule of law and guaranteeing freedom, individual rights, and economic liberty?
66. Has the United States outlived its life expectancy?

Yes, this list is from Neal Boortz.  Give credit where credit is due, right?

To make up for missed posts...

In case you've been asleep for a while... or in case you'd like to see a cute little children's play about the year 2006 in review (watch for mild language kiddies) I found this whilst in my surfing.

Nuckin' Futs! The JibJab Year in Review

Nonconformity Linked To Peer Pressure

(this from THE ONION)

ATHENS, GA—According to a study released Tuesday by the University of Georgia's Institute For Social Research, a strong link exists between nonconformity and peer pressure among teenagers and young adults.
Commissioned in 1995 to examine the growing trend of nonconformity among 13- to 21-year-olds, the three-year study found that 85 percent of U.S. youths actively defy standard societal norms—adopting "alternative" modes of language, behavior and dress—as a means of winning the acceptance and approval of their peers.

"Kids today are told, over and over, by their classmates, their siblings, and images on TV and in magazines, that normal, mainstream behavior isn't 'cool,'" institute director and study co-chair Iris Evantine said. "The message these kids are receiving is: 'C'mon, don't you want to be different like us?' Sadly, kids who resist these pressures to be different are usually ostracized. For the average teenager these days, the pressure not to do what everyone else does is enormous, and often unbearable."

"I'd really like to be normal and conform, because, at heart, I'm not a risk-taker at all," said Grand Rapids, MI, high-school sophomore Christine Kornowicz. "But if I want to fit in, I have to be different. If you don't stick out, everyone at school makes fun of you."

"I've started wearing all black, painting my nails, and shaving my head, just to fit in," said Jonathan Auger, a Binghamton, NY, high-school junior. "You can't understand how hard it is for a young person not to make waves these days."

The trend of nonconformity—which soared to mass popularity in the late 1960s before eventually tapering off in the '80s—has experienced a resurgence in popularity since 1991, when Nirvana's Nevermind album generated nationwide interest in the nonconformist Seattle "grunge-music scene" and its surrounding alternative culture. In the years since, those who have chosen to remain within mainstream society have become virtual pariahs.

"Today, nonconformity is everywhere," Evantine said. "From the Piercing Hut in the suburban mall to the fast-growing, 'radical,' multi million-dollar business of snowboarding, all of America is not going along with the crowd."

While nonconformity is most prevalent among youths, the trend has spilled over into older groups, as well.

"We are finding a shockingly high rate of nonconformity across virtually all age groups, particularly the 40- to 55-year-old middle-class white-male demographic," Evantine said.

According to Institute For Social Research statistics, 38 percent of middle-aged males are defying society's rule that men be prohibited from wearing ponytails; 51 percent regularly wear denim or leather garments, long regarded by the mainstream as bold and unconventional; and 73 percent listen to such nonconformist alternative-rock groups as The Wallflowers, Counting Crows and Oasis.

Additionally, the defiant, iconoclastic fashion statement of earrings has now reached an epidemic level of 89 percent among 40- to 55-year-old men.

Evantine noted that, due to the boom in nonconformity, the percentage of Americans who currently make up the "mainstream" stands at an alarmingly low 7 percent.

"We should all be grateful to the precious few who have stuck to their guns and conformed, even at the cost of exclusion from the vast majority," Evantine said. "And we must pray that they continue to conform, for without this tiny group of people, there would be no one to rebel against."

The institute's report, which has been condemned as "subversive" by such powerful nonconformist institutions as MTV, Pepsico, Urban Outfitters and 1-800-COLLECT, concluded with a call for increased public willingness to rebel against rebelliousness.

"Now, more than ever, we must have the courage to stand up and embrace the norm, no matter how marginalized we may become in doing so," the report read. "We must be brave enough to walk the road less travelled and conform."

Must see video

This little cartoon made my day.  I hope you enjoy it.

 

Protest on the Mall

I was actually there for this thing. Neato.

The news had an interesting clip on the event. Picture a mob of people marching down the street taking the whole width and stretching back as far as the camera'll shoot. Banner across the front, signs waving in protest.

Leader on Megaphone: WHAT DO WE WANT?!?

Mob: DEMOCRACY!

Leader: WHEN DO WE WANT IT?!?

Mob: NOW!!

I love irony. If we give democracy, that's just how it'll be. Sheeple with a loud voice.

An old quotation sums it up for me, "Beware of stupid people in large numbers."

As referenced in CSMDAD

As I said, I have further comment on the Al Gore bit from my other blog.  Well, here goes.

Just so you know I'm not making it up (because you can believe everything you read on the internet):
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/061213_solar_storm.html

http://www.mounteverest.net/news.php?news=15400

Last month (13Dec2006), there was a solar flare which hurled radiation in our direction.  Astronauts were ordered into the central confines of the spacestation or the shuttle to avoid radiation poisoning.  I mean this was a rather big mamma-jamma.

Why was this ill-reported here on earth?
Well, luckily for you and me, this type of solar activity has no effect on us here on earth as we are protected by magic fairy dust sprinkled on the clouds (which nasty capitalists are destroying) and this wave of solar radiation will simply go around us.

This being so, how can we possibly blame anyone other than man (fossil fuel burning schmuck) for the increased warm weather here on Earth?

Is it warm out?  Yes.
Is it our fault?  I'd venture to guess no.  I kinda think that if our source for heat and light is getting hotter and is sending more heat our way, then we might just get a little warmer right along with it.

But then, I'm not a scientist.

A Tale Of Two (albeit gay) Penguins

There's been quite a bit of hubub going on over this little story of two penguins who see an abandoned egg and take care of it until it hatches. Of course you know the problem... they are both boy penguins. So what exactly is the controversy? We're INDOCTRINATING the children to accept an alternative lifestyle which we don't feel is appropriate.

I'm sorry guys, but that's a load of penguin bolongna!

First off... it's a true story. If you don't like how it turned out, talk to the big guy upstairs, he's the one running the show in that department. Unless you're going to tell me that these two male penguins just happened to watch too much Will and Grace and turned gay all of a sudden. Wait, I mean "chose" to be gay, because being gay HAS to be choice, right? I know I remember the day when I chose to be straight. You know, you reach a certain age and you are faced with a decision, things start moving and shaking down there and you have to decide if you are going to sexually prefer men or women... just like that whole left or right handed decision you made when you were a kid... "well... the desks are already made for right-handed people", you thought to yourself, or perhaps, everyone else is right-handed, I'm gonna pick left.

Inside joke time, sorry --- "Like we need your support" --- ok, inside joke is over. You may continue reading.

Secondly, why stop here? There must be HUNDREDS of books we can ban right along with this one. I mean as long as we're talking objectionable, let's go ahead and ban that horrible OTHELLO from our kid's libraries. I mean a MOOR (be he black, arab, both, or simply a gutter dwelling urban outdoorsman) cavorting with a pure white upper-crust woman?!? The nerve. What on earth was this Will Shakespere guy thinking? How DARE he try to make us accept cross-nationality relationships? And don't get me started with OEDIPUS. Now I know, a tale of two penguins (or perhaps three penguins in the end) is hardly up there with either of these two works, but in light of them, and the emphasis we place on them in SPITE of their "objectionable" material why should we care about a true story of love, partnership, caring, and nurturing? Because they are of the same sex?

I'm so sick and tired of people trying to say that same sex couples are the scourge of our society. I can name oodles more relationships carried on by us "heteros" which are not ideal for childrearing, nor for loving environments to use as examples for others. Where is the outrage over the dime-a-dozen marriages in Hollywood? Where are the shouts of SIN and the need to change ways when adult film stars get married and have children? Are these more acceptable homes for the upbringing of children than that of two loving peaceful people who happen to have the same sexual organs as one another? Or, (and I hesitate to even get started on this one. I will save the bulk of it for another time.) what of the total lack of fathers in modern advertising and children's books?!? Is a single parent household where mommy's trying to hold down two or more jobs while someone else is raising HER children while her sexual partner goes unnamed, unknown, or unloved.. is this more acceptable than a household with two loving people of the same sex?

Who cares if Heather has two Mommies? Where's the important line of questions concerning this household?

• Do they love one another?
• Do they love Heather?
• Do they support Heather?
• Are they raising Heather to be a responsible adult?
• Is there peace in the home?

Who cares if Tango's gay penguin daddies are limp flippered?

• Do they love Tango?
• Will they teach him to fish?
• Will they teach him to care for others?
• Will they teach him to be a good father (or mother)?

People complain about the wrong things. Go ahead gay penguin daddies. Hatch those abandoned eggs. Where are the worthless hetero penguins who abandoned it to begin with? Are we supposed to think they're the role models we are supposed to emulate?

Now... you show me a bunch of gay penguins taking advantage of young alterboy penguins and I'll be right there ready to release the sealions. But until that day comes, leave the gay penguin daddies alone.

 

I heard it was true (urban myth)

The Queen of England decides she wants a Kentucky thoroughbred in the royal stable, so she calls President Reagan, who decides to meet her in Lexington, Kentucky.

When they get there, they decide to go for a ride. They're just pulling out of the barn when the Queen's horse's tail goes up and "Lbbttt!" - out comes a monstrous fart.

The Queen says, "I'm so embarrassed!"

Reagan says, "You shouldn't be! I thought it was the horse!"

I actually heard someone on FoxNews pass this off as fact, but with Reagan visiting the Queen in England and riding the grounds instead of her coming over here looking for a horse.

After a little looking around (yeah, I thought it was humerous) it turns out that in the 1972 Patrick O'Brian novel Post Captain, there's a drunk guy named Babbington driving a lady in the back of a horse-drawn cart:

-  The horse slowed to a walk - the bean-fed horse, as it proved by a thunderous, long, long fart.

-  "I beg your pardon," said the midshipman in silence.

-  "Oh, that's all right," said Diana coldly. "I thought it was the horse."

Perpetuation of self

"Do we really think that a government-dominated education is going to produce citizens capable of dominating their government, as the education of a truly vigilant self-governing people requires?"

-Alan Keyes

 

Just found this too and thought it interesting

It would appear that more and more of our fair and balanced news sources are trying to downplay the fiasco with missed references to the controversy behind Kerry's remarks:

New York Times: "As Vote Nears, Stances on War Set Off Sparks."

Washington Post: "Bush Calls Kerry Remarks Insulting to U.S. Troops."
- (The Post wins some sort of prize for partisanship. Kerry's on A-8. On page one, the big headline is "Campaigner in Chief Has Limited Reach: An Unpopular President Avoids Many Key Races.")

USA Today: "Kerry, White House exchange words over Iraq 'bad joke'."

Chicago Tribune: "It's Kerry vs. Bush once again: Senator's remark on Iraq war sparks coast-to-coast clash."

The Boston Globe wins a point or two for actually getting a bit quote-specific: "Kerry's 'stuck in Iraq' remark ignites firefight with Bush, GOP."

And from our friendly BBC chaps: "Embattled Kerry seeks low profile"

Since last time...

 jeez... we've had a month of news since my last blog here.  Where do I begin?  Let's see, we've had:

• The whole Foley thing (not that I'm brushing it off, but what's left to say about it?  The guy's creepy and should have gone a while ago, as should anyone who hid it {to include those who knew from the other side of the aisle and hid it until it was beneficial to their party to release the tid-bit to the press.})
• Alaska turning down Chavez (Really cool {pardon the pun})
• NJ courts made their ruling on gay marriage. (yawn... I'll still be just as married to my wife either way.)
• Kerry goofed... now this one's a little newer and targeted/construed to include me
• I saw/heard/read the speech as given.  I read excerpts of the speech as written.  It was less of an attack on troops and more of an open palmed slap at the President.  It still wasn't funny.  However, the way it was delivered did leave free interpretation open as an attack on the military and who (what with Kerry's background of support for American troops {rapists, murderers... army of Genghis Khan... terrorizing children, babies, women in the dark of night.})  can blame those who took it as an insult?  He said what he said and his Pope-ish apology isn't cutting it.
• For a reference to the "Pope-ish apology" comment, (CHECK THIS OUT) 
• And, something I think is not getting enough press time, Guatemala and Venezuela have agreed to pull out of the race for UN Security council and to support Panama for the position.  Hmmm... I wonder what concessions had to be made there.

So... now that I've caught up with the times again, I'll try to stay up here with you guys in the present.  Wow, the future looks a lot nearer and brighter from here... did you guys polish it while I was back there in the past??

"I apologize to no one for my criticism of the president and of his broken policy."
- John Kerry
"Conceit is God's gift to little men."
- Bruce Barton

And away we go...

First up is this news story...  7-11 to drop CITGO gasolines 

• Good.  What more can I say?  I just liked this story and I think Hugo is a putz.  Let him find another country with the capabilities to process his oil into a useable resource.  Meanwhile, I am sorry for those who have to live under this insufferable joke/jerk in the interim.  Good thing there's another election coming up in December for these guys, maybe they'll vote him out this time (well, maybe he won't go tampering with the polls to keep himself in power.
  

Next on the parade, and last for this particular post, we have...  Chris Wallace

• So we have this interview gone awry with a certain former president, right?  We've got people out there saying how out of line Wallace was and wanting to spin the debate back to George Bush.  GEORGE BUSH WAS NOT THE TOPIC OF DISCUSSION FOR THIS INTERVIEW.  The person facing Wallace was former president Bill Clinton who was asked to answer questions concerning shortfalls made during HIS administration.  When Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice was on, he hardly held back on her (Check it out here)  asking pointed questions concerning allegations of the Bush administration concerning the current state of affairs in the Iraqi insurgency.  He was equally rough on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld during his interview.  
  
• Here’s what Wallace asked Clinton:
  -Hindsight is 20 20 . . . but the question is why didn’t you do more, connect the dots and put them out of business?
• And here is what Wallace asked Donald Rumsfeld on the March 28, 2004 episode of Fox News Sunday:
  -I understand this is 20/20 hindsight, it’s more than an individual manhunt. I mean — what you ended up doing in the end was going after al Qaeda where it lived. . . . pre-9/11 should you have been thinking more about that?
  -What do you make of his [Richard Clarke’s] basic charge that pre-9/11 that this government, the Bush administration largely ignored the threat from al Qaeda?
  -Mr. Secretary, it sure sounds like fighting terrorism was not a top priority.
  
• Did Donald Rumsfeld go on a tirade?  Did Ms. Rice?  No.  Were they asked questions about how much more Clinton could have done to prevent this?  No.  It was not an interview about Clinton.  These were interviews about THEM and THEIR (in)actions... and rightfully so.
• So here we have the leftist demagogues and want to be pundits calling Wallace a hack (along with quite a lot of other names) for doing his job.  Now I know a lot of people (including myself mind you) who can see the bias from biased commentators as well as from the occasional reporter (yes there is a difference), but Wallace handled this as a reporter.  He asked justified questions which he would have asked of anyone else sitting in the other chair and on this particular occasion, that person simply couldn't handle it.  Too bad for him.  He should be prepared to admit to and justify his shortcomings without turning tyrant.

Not too bad for a first try, if I do say so myself (which I just did.)
Until next time,
tim

Welcome to the World According to Tim

So here I am... I can' t even keep up with one blog and now I go and start 
another.  Let me explain why.

I work in a job field where I HAVE to watch the news constantly.  I have 
to know what's going on in the international arena because it determines 
where I go and what I will be doing next.  Furthermore, I am then able to 
prep the family about why I'm going to be there.

This being the case, I'm apt to form my own opinion on a good number of things and I can't always hold my tongue about it.  Well, I can't really post these ideas on my regular blog, there are friends and family who do not really agree politically with me who only really keep up by my blog and I want them to keep up with that.

So, I have now created a blog for nothing but my geopolitical rantings where I can post without worry that I might talk a family member away from reading my regular blog because I keep putting my personal political outtakes into my postings.

And with no further introduction and much ado... here it is.  Enjoy or don't.
tim