Conservative Definition of Wall Street

WALL STREET, n., Financial center where criminal behavior goes unpunished in order to support banks “too big to fail”and therefore  prop up the free enterprise system which makes Americans moral and are essential to our core values.   e.g., executives who committed financial fraud which blew up the U.S. economy were given get-out-of-jail cards by the Justice Department so that they could be job creators and thus promote American prosperity and values.

Conservative Definition of Democracy

DEMOCRACY, n.  A political system where the Koch Brothers – worth 100  billion dollars –are prepared to spend more money in the next elections than either if the two major political parties thus giving American voters more choices when they vote.

Conservative Definition Of Waterboarding

WATERBOARDING, n.   An enhanced interrigation tehnique.  An unpleasant experience causing temporary discomfort, often confused with torture by the left.

Conservative Definition of Patriotism

PATRIOTISM, n.  Love of the nation state.  Also, the elevation of martial virtues in a country to allow young men to prove their valor in unnecessary wars and thereby achieve heroic status by dying, being maimed, coming and/or  returning to The  Homeland with PTSD,

 Many veterans are able to further prove their courage by dealing with the visitudes of homelessness,drug addiction,  and dealing with the incompetent Veteran’s Administration.  Some cynics wrongly accuse politicians using love of country as political cover for the selfish interests of the ruling oligarchy using young men and women as cannon fodder in wars for oil and mineral resources.  

Football Makes A Man Out Of 9-Year-Olds

n

Written by Keith Shirey

 

Thank you for your rating,

Your vote has been counted and is reflected above.

 

   

Topics: Football (American), NFL, Kids, Texas, football head injuries

Thursday, 29 January 2015

GOES ALONG WITH YOUTH CONCUSSIONS

The NFL runs "Moms Clinics" through an operation called "USA Football." It targets moms who determine which sport their kids will play. It is an effort to show that children's football is safe. But kid football isn't safe. As background, Pop Warner Little Scholars Inc., is open to children as young as 5 years old and as light as 35 pounds and thousands of children play in "pee wee" leagues with boys whose ages vary from 5 to 14 plays.

They are part of youth-football-industrial complex-3 million players and tens of millions of dollars in revenue, backed by the NFL, college football, equipment manufacturers, and other sports businesses.

Research shows that boys repeatedly being hit in the head through tackle football during a time of brain development, under the age of 12, have poor cognition.

But "The concussions, the violence on the field, and the manic parents and coaches who push children as young as 6 to play a dangerous game are part of the sport," says Brian Morgan, who co-founded the Texas Football League.

"In Texas, all football is next to the Bible and the Flag in importance," said Morgan. " My 9-year-old TFL football kid is a true miniature man who loves God, guts and glory.
"My child will be able to defend American values when we invade countries like Iraq.

My kid will make a better soldier than a child who has never had concussions like he has. That makes him tough to fight for American ideals and the military-industrial-complex," said Morgan.

Make Keith Shirey's day - give this story five thumbs-up (there's no need to register, the thumbs are just down there!)

The story above is a satire or parody. It is entirely fictitious.

Consumed by Fear and Dysfunction: A Great Nation is Losing Influence and Credibility

During the fifty years following the end of World War 2, the United States was unquestionably the leader of the free world. Both diplomatically and militarily, the rest of the free world looked up to us, depended on our leadership, respected our values and our form of government. The foreign policy mistakes we made during this period of time, and they were considerable, were readily placed in a context that allowed their being passed over as no nation is perfect, even great ones error, and  positive qualities far outweigh the negative.  Something drastic has happened to the international standing and regard for the United States since then, and while our military power is still supreme, our world leadership on the diplomatic front has suffered a number of major self-inflicted wounds, and is now but a shell of what it was 15 years ago.  Our government still talks and acts as if it were the world leader, but when it looks behind, very few other nations are following.

There are currently three major world trouble spots that give stark examples of the US's policy being out of sync with the policies of most of our would-be allies.  In the open warfare in the Middle East, most of our allies among the western, NATO nations recognize that if  a western nation is taking the lead in fighting ISIS and other terrorist groups on their home terrain, we are inviting continuing failure, with results no better than with our prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even King Hussein of Jordan recognizes it has to be Muslim nations and forces that coalesce and defeat ISIS and terrorist groups on their land.  It is folly for non-Muslim nations, especially ex-colonial powers, to take the lead. Most European nations now recognize this, and are focusing their efforts on securing their homeland and protecting against terrorist attacks there.  They no longer feel compelled to blindly follow the dictates of US desires.  With the US willing to play the major role in fighting terrorists in the Middle East, most Muslim nations with much more at stake than us are willing to stay in the background, and let us fight their battle. Its not working, we can provide strong support to Muslim nations as they take up the fight, but it has to become their battle, not ours.  The Europeans have gotten the message, but there are still major Neocon voices is our government that are constantly pressing us to make it our battle.

The Ukraine is the second region where our policy is currently diverging from that of many of our major allies.  When the Soviet Union collapsed and the Ukraine became an independent nation, it was informally agreed among leaders of European nations, the US, and Russia, that the Ukraine would best remain a neutral, non-aligned nation, providing a buffer area between east and west.  This was allowed to be the case for years, with elected governments shifting their leaning periodically between east and west, until last year, when the Maidan revolution in Kiev overthrew a Russian-leaning leader and installed a pro-western one desiring affiliation with the EU and potentially NATO.  Sensing the danger to its naval base in Crimea and the extensive Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine, Russia acted immediately to annex Crimea, and support the Russian population near its border. The US State Department officials responsible for Eastern European affairs played a covert role in encouraging and supporting the governmental change, and our policy is leaning towards offering military support to the Kiev government to defeat the eastern Ukraine separatists. Neocons again are pressing for more military involvement on our part, while the major European nations, especially Germany and France, are backing a negotiated settlement keeping the Ukraine intact but granting considerable regional autonomy and independence to the Russian-speaking areas. Again, few are following our lead.

The third area of major foreign policy divergence concerns our policy with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  As the West Bank area designated to become an independent home state for the Palestinians continues to be occupied by Israel, and Israeli settlements continue to expand, even after over 60 years of unsuccessful attempts at resolution, an increasing number of western nations, and the general sense of the UN, is that it is time to recognize Palestine's right to exist and grant it's government full recognition. US policy is increasingly standing alone in its inability to meaningfully fault Israel for continuing its settlement policy and in not placing more pressure on Israel to promote a means of resolution that would leave Palestine a viable, independent, self-sustaining nation.  Our government's attempts to promote a resolution lack having any real effect on securing an equitable settlement, and we remain Israel's main supporter in the conflict.

There are various reasons why our foreign policy has been loosing influence and credibility, and why few other major nations now readily follow our lead.  Political dysfunction at home is certainly among them, as is our over-reliance on military power and control when conflict and danger trigger fear which encroaches on our nation's well-being.  Foreign nations have been watching as our government came to a virtual standstill for 6 months over Clinton's impeachment trial. They were watching when a contested presidential election was arbitrarily decided by the Supreme Court. They were watching when our leaders fabricated evidence to begin a war against a nation that was not involved in terrorist attacks against us. They have been watching the governmental gridlock that has stymied effective action on numerous pressing issues, as the party in control of Congress refuses to compromise on policy choices with an elected president. They were watching when our financial institutions developed practices which led to a major world economic downturn, from which only the wealthy have fully recovered. They have been watching our income inequity mushroom to the highest levels in our history, and the government unwilling to take major steps to reverse the trend. They know we are launching lethal drone raids in sovereign nations, killing innocent civilians and terrorists alike. They know the NSA and the CIA are violating their privacy rights, as well as the privacy rights of its own citizens, in indiscriminate ways. And they read about many of our respected political leaders arguing that we should be fighting and supporting more wars in other lands, not, of course, on our own terrain.  In this context, it shouldn't be surprising that our world influence and credibility are taking a hit. The real question is, why are we, the citizens responsible for our nations policies and actions, not demanding much, much better of our government, and doing more to ensure it?

A NATION IN SEARCH OF ITS 'MORAL COMPASS'

Our nation seems to be seriously adrift, and our chosen governmental leaders are proving to be inadequate to the task of correcting the downward course it has been on in recent years. A senior Air Force Intelligence Officer, in commenting on the two government-employed psychologists who created and oversaw the interrogation program of suspected al Qaeda terrorists, a program since labeled as illegal torture, stated very perceptively, "somewhere along the way they lost sight of their moral compass". That statement could well be applied to much of what has transpired within the political, economic, and diplomatic leadership and direction of the United States within the past 35 years. The results are all too obvious.  Endless wars in the Middle East, with resentment, hatred, and hostility against the US, its policies, and its allies only growing as a result of our actions. The UN and many of its member nations  diverting from US positions and attempting to take the lead in movements directed towards development, peace, and human right, a role we previously held but have seemed to abdicate. Our overpowering military dominance leading us to rely on military solutions, war as an early option, rather than as a final resort when other means fail, in situations when confronted with foreign conflict. Our domestic economic policies clearly favoring the wealthy since the onset of "Reaganomics", resulting in a major shrinkage in the size and well-being of our middle class, and the greatest rapid increase in wealth inequity and disparity in our history.  A major lessening in long-established corporation and financial institution regulations, setting up the economic collapse of 2008, from which only the wealthy and Wall Street corporations have fully recovered.  Political gridlock and stalemate blocking needed corrective action on numerous key issues, with Washington DC seemingly controlled by the most powerful moneyed groups, with their needs and demands trumping those of the population at large. The prime arbiter of justice in our land, the Supreme Court, clearly favoring the rights of vested interests and the wealthy, as in the Citizens United case, and even arbitrarily deciding a close presidential election, actions which set a precedent for lower legal officials to be biased and prejudicial in their determination of "justice". Voting rights being threatened and restricted in many states by local election boards, with policies becoming controlled by factions who can gain by limiting ready voting to those who tend to support their positions, rather than facilitating voting by all eligible voters. Fewer available societal resources, paired with increased societal and financial stresses, leading to more domestic violence, crime, and mental breakdown. Increased poverty, including among our military veterans, leading to a multiplying of those homeless, and an absence of available resources to assist them in regaining their feet.  The list could go on, the downward cycle we are on seems far too apparent, with no relief in sight.

While many are aware of these painful realities, and much has been written concerning them, little has been done to reverse the trends.  Where is the "exceptionalism",  the land of fair play, equal rights, justice? Our system has always had faults, but even our pretense of "doing the right thing" seems diminished. What has happened to our "moral compass"? Obama came in with hope and promises, but has not been able to achieve his desired ends, and has often capitulated to old economic policies, military solutions, and expectations that his political opponents will somehow relent and agree to reasonable compromise, which they typically have failed to do. Most elected officials are so dependent on their major political donors that they are beholden to vested interests, not the interests of the majority of citizens. People can march in the streets, write letters, cheer the few truly independent national politicians like Bernie Stevens and Elizabeth Warren, but their causes are blocked by the power structure in Wash. DC on the major political and economic issues of the day. Success has been achieved on some significant social and domestic human rights issues, and these are to be applauded, and can be taken as a forerunner of what can be achieved through concerted, collective assertion of people power.  But the downward trend, the absence of a "moral compass" that activates the majority of our citizens to demand far better from our elected leaders is all too evident, the casualties are far too frequent and tragic. The course must be reversed, but will the momentum and the leadership somehow arise?  Our future, and the future we leave to our inheritors, depends on the answer.