This blog is dedicated to logical Reasoning, political consciousness, religious dialogue, intelligent thoughts, uncommon wisdom, current events, and humor.
By now, everyone in both UK and US knows about Susan Boyle and her recent performance on Britain’s Got Talent.
Good for her! I’m truly happy for her. She obviously has a talent that has unfortunately gone untapped for decades. I don’t intent to take the glory of her performance from her. But I’m completely skeptical of the order of events and the judges’ reactions. It was all staged – all except for her singing. I’m convinced of that. Here’s why (watch the video on YouTube and fact-check my points):
First, she was too over-confident for the setting. She walked on the stage as though she owned the place. Surely, she was aware of the prominence of the venue. She even conversed with Simon in a sassy fashion that seemed out of place.
Second, just prior to the start of music, she was able to demonstrate an unbelievable presence of mind by giving a confident thumbs up and a comfortable smile to the two jokers backstage. She should be nervous as heck at this point. By the way, who the hell are those two guys backstage anyway and what function do the serve?
Third, notice she gave a big smile just as the music commenced right before she started singing as though the outcome was certain.
Fourth, the judges’ reactions were perfectly timed, and the cameras were zooming-in on their faces in a perfectly choreographed way. Think about it. Susan start singing, and the first immediate shot is of Simon’s face with a look of disbelief. Seconds later, the camera focuses on Amanda’s face and then on Piers’ face a few seconds after that. Seriously? Wouldn’t one logically expect that all three judges demonstrate their disbelief and pleasure at about the same time? I’m not buying it.
Fifth, Susan finished her piece, threw a kiss to the audience and proceeded to walk away as though the outcome was a foregone conclusion. Too obvious!
Finally, the judges gave her three yeses. Susan seemed shocked as each judge gave her a ‘yes’ of approval. For someone who was so confident from the moment she walked on that stage, this shocked reaction seemed simulated.
Still, she’s a phenomenal singer, and I wish her every bit of luck. But something tells me she doesn’t need it. It’s all staged.
Every once in a while, even Glenn Beck conducts a brilliant interview. This video is kind of long – 10 minutes. But it’s absolutely brilliant.
Glenn is interviewing Connecticut State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.The premise of the interview is very simple. Glenn is asking Blumenthal what law AIG executives broke when they dished out those bonuses. Irrespective of your outrage over bonuses, the right answer is none. And Blumenthal is not prepared for that.
Clearly Glenn Beck is capable of conducting a great interview, just not every day . . . or week . . . or month . . .
Glenn Beck seems to be rising to the top of Fox News lineup. He may be hard-lined, but he’s such a sensitive, fluffy big loveable bear that you just want to hug. NOT!
Watch this video of Joe Scarborough on his MSNBC show, Morning Joe. He cannot control his laughter as he shows various clips of Glenn Beck showing his sensitive side. Crying always scores big! And gets even bigger laughs from other men.
I haven’t been blogging too much recently because there’s just nothing good to blog about.
The recent crash of space satellites, however, has precipitated a deluge of conspiracy theories. Anyone who knows me is well aware that I’m not a conspiracy nut, but this is just too good. I’ve been skimming the blogs and here’s what I’ve been able to piece together from the collective.
By now, we have all heard about the space collision of two satellites on Tuesday, 2/10/09. An American communications satellite and a defunct Russian cosmos orbiter collided over northern Siberia causing over 1,200 new pieces of space junk. The Russian orbitor was presumably not maneuverable. The American satellite was apparently fully functional and able to execute evasive maneuvers, thus avoiding a collision if warned in advance.
The Russians blamed NASA for failing to warn of the impending collision, and NASA in turn put the blame on the Air Force. On the surface, this incident appears to be a case of error – human or computerized warning systems. But consider the following theory.
First, the Russian government has not stated anything specific about the state of its orbitor. All citations of defunct status of that orbitor have originated from the news media.
Second, the American communications satellite belongs to the Iridium Corporation. Remember them? In the 90s, they had a good idea, but a bad product. Their plan was to introduce a ’satellite’ mobile phone that would work anyplace on earth. They launched a number of satellites into orbit to service the phones. But when they introduced the actual phone unit, they attracted no ’sane’ buyers. For the phones to properly communicate with satellites, they had to engage an antenna that resembled a fishing rod. Not practical.
Third, the Iridium Corporation has leased their satellites, in part, to the U.S. Department of Defense. In fact, Iridium executive board includes Tom Ridge, former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security.
Fourth, Iridium communication satellites are capable of altering course in order to avoid collision with other space objects. In fact, they have performed evasive maneuvers (by some accounts) 7 times in the past 10 or so years.
So. consider this. It is not too far-fetched to think that the Russian orbitor, rather than being defunct, was in fact a fully operational spy satellite. The U.S. Department of Defense, through its connection with Iridium Corporation via Tom Ridge, decided to take out the Russian spy orbitor. Of course, the Russians had no choice but to helplessly watch their spy satellite break into pieces because a “defunct’ satellite is not maneuverable.
I like it. If this is true, score one for the Americans.
I have not cited any sources here. I got this information from many different news articles and blogs. Google it!
We have certainly kicked off the new year with a wave of Op-Ed articles that have completely different tones than in the past 8 years.
On January 4, the New York Times published an Op-Ed article written by John Bolton (former ambassador to the UN) and John Yoo (law professor and former deputy assistant attorney general) titled “Restore the Senate’s Treaty Power”. In it, they argued that the Senate must exercise its constitutional power to prevent the President from taking unilateral international actions. Mr. Bolton and Mr. Yoo are worried that President Obama will push through a Kyoto style treaty agenda.
Like past presidents, Mr. Obama will likely be tempted to avoid the requirement that treaties must be approved by two-thirds of the Senate. The usual methods around this constitutional constraint are executive agreements or a majority vote in the House and Senate to pass a treaty as a simple law (known as a Congressional-executive agreement).
No kidding? How convenient! Now that a Democrat is about to become President, it is apparently of the utmost importance to ensure that Congress’ power is in place. The Constitution has been around for a couple of hundred years. Where the hell were you guys in the past 8 years? Oh, that’s right! With a conservative administration in power, there was no Constitution to worry about, was there?
The article went on:
The framers of the Constitution designed the treaty process with a bias against “entangling alliances,” as Thomas Jefferson described them in his first inaugural address. They designated the Senate as the body responsible to protect the interests of the states from being bargained away by the president in deals with foreign nations. The framers required a supermajority to ensure that treaties would reflect a broad consensus and careful, mature decision-making.
What is truly sad about all this is that I completely agree with the Op-Ed. Senate’s treaty power must be enacted and exercised. But it should have been enacted 8 years ago. I ask again, where the hell were you gentlemen during Bush’s Presidency? Was your computer broken? Could you not have written this Op-Ed 8 years ago?
Even by their own admission, Mr. Bolton and Mr. Yoo conceded that President Bush did not seek a supermajority in the Senate during his years in office.
President George W. Bush resisted many efforts at global governance. But his administration still sometimes fell into the temptation to flout the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds majority in the Senate.
You guys (Bolton & Yoo) are pathetic. You are correct in your view, but pathetic in your timing and execution. Don’t you know that until you demonstrate you are willing to drink your own Kool-aid, no one other than members of your own base will hold you and your opinions in high regard?
This is why journalists to go Journalism school. This is why plumbers are not journalists.
Did you catch that? Joe said “I don’t think journalists should be anywhere allowed war.” Aside from the obvious fact that Joe is unable to put a coherent sentence together, he’s forgetting why he’s in Israel . . . as a journalist. Oh, excuse me! He’s there as a war correspondent.
I just discovered this story. It’s a bit late, but I like it nevertheless.
You may have noticed that some old pictures of Barack Obama have recently surfaced. These were taken when Barack was a student at Occidental College in California by a friend. Not surprisingly, Fox News could not wait to jump on this story.
On December 19 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Gretchen Carlson said:
“There are some very intriguing pictures of Barack Obama photos. Look at this one. This one has him smoking a cigarette which we have not seen. Would have served any purpose to release these photos before the election?” → source
Seriously Gretchen? You didn’t know that Obama smoked? Are you truly this uninformed? The rest of us who are not even journalists know that he quit smoking early during his Presidential campaign.
Another notable Fox News personality, Sean Hannity, said during his radio show: “Where were these pictures during the campaign? Just take a look at this. Barack Obama has a hat, you know, pulling a drag on a cigarette.”
Oh, yes, that’s right! Only if America knew about these pictures earlier . . . only if the American people knew that Obama used to smoke and that, at one point in his life, he owned a hat . . . only if we knew! We would have united as a nation in our opposition to “hat wearing smokers from Hawaii running for President” and had voted for the other guy. Only if we knew this prior to the election! That darn media kept these picture from the public until after the election. Gee, if this isn’t a media conspiracy, I don’t know what is.
According to the photographer, Lisa Jack, she had placed these photos in a safe deposit box until after the election. She was concerned that they may be used for “gotcha” purposes.
Grow up Sean. Grow up Gretchen. Move on Fox News. Give me news, not childish garbage. I turn on Fox News to learn, not to see you folks dwell over how the media might have won the election for Obama.
Oh, and apparently Obama’s past smoking (and hat wearing) is a much bigger sin than President Bush’s past drinking. Very fair and balanced, Fox News!
By the way, that thing Obama is smoking looks like a joint to me.
Watch this video. This is Sarah Palin’s policy statement on US budget.
For anyone who doesn’t know about genetics research, just google it and you’ll see a vast array of publications and discoveries about the topic. Fruit fly research is the standard by which many genetic and birth defects as well as molecular biology are studied today. In fact, fruit flies have been used for protein, cell and genetic research for around 100 years. It is precisely this type of research that brings hope to areas such as autism.
I concede that over 50% of US population is unaware of the importance of fruit fly research in the areas of genetics and molecular biology. As the mother of a Down Syndrome child, however, Sarah Palin sure doesn’t seem very educated about genetic defects and research. Doesn’t anyone fact-check her speeches? Anyone? It is clear that she’s been busy recently. She’s definitely sacrificing her family for her country – and I truly mean that in a positive and respectful way.
The Republican media machine jumped into action by saying that she was only speaking of fruit fly research as it applies to agricultural, not genetics. Please, don’t insult my intelligence! Watch the video again and listen to her words. Her condemnation of fruit fly research came in the following context: ”. . . sometimes these dollars go to projects having little or nothing to do with the public good.“
Oh, I know. Perhaps she was only objecting to fruit fly research in Paris, France. She would have no objections if it was conducted in the US. We hate the French . . . don’t we? I forget what our official policy on the French is these days. Do we like them or not? It’s so hard to keep track.
I have also read (on various blogs) that Palin does not believe in genetic research due to her religious views and, hence, her objection to it. I don’t believe that. She’s much more intelligent than many on the left portray her. I assume her children receive vaccinations which, after all, is a direct result of genetic and protein research.
I love this bit from Rachel Maddow. Both she and Keith Olbermann are a little too far to the left for my taste, but I enjoy Rachel’s funny and sometimes sassy remarks.
Here’s a good link to learn more about fruit fly research:
Posted by jmjorat 
Posted by jmjorat 
Posted by jmjorat 
By now, we have all heard about the space collision of two satellites on Tuesday, 2/10/09. An American communications satellite and a defunct Russian cosmos orbiter collided over northern Siberia causing over 1,200 new pieces of space junk. The Russian orbitor was presumably not maneuverable. The American satellite was apparently fully functional and able to execute evasive maneuvers, thus avoiding a collision if warned in advance.
RSS Feed This Blog
