Entries from blogs tagged with “The Sciences”
During the last week talk show host David Letterman has been calling undecided voters "idiots" because they are still undecided. If he actually knew anything about the candidates he would understand that the undecided voters may be the smart ones.
For those who don't watch Dave, it has been evident for a long time that he's an Obamista. He believes whatever Obama says and ignores criticism of Obama. He frequently criticized Mitt Romney for not releasing his tax returns while saying Obama could keep all his records secret.
Many undecided voters may be waiting to see if secret documents are released. Perhaps undecided voters are more likely to recognize that politicians that attempt to keep documents secret are usually covering up something.
Typically undecided voters in an election involving an incumbent have decided they would rather replace him, but aren't sure of the possible replacement.
President Barack Obama is clearly an ineffective president. He seems unable to comprehend the fact that the al Qaeda attack on the American consulate in Libya indicates the organization may be getting stronger, not weaker. He brags about the drop in unemployment while ignoring the fact the drop is due largely to people becoming so discouraged they have stopped looking for work. A half million have dropped out during the last couple of months.
Obama is the worst president since Gerald Ford. I've been reluctant to compare him to pre-Depression presidents because the office has changed so much since the Depression. However, Obama's recent suggestion that the navy has declined in importance like bayonets and horses, indicates he is out of touch with reality. He may be the on the way to becoming the most irrelevant president since Millard Fillmore.
The challenger Mitt Romney has thus far been uninspiring. Undecided voters want to watch him a little longer to make sure Romney doesn't self destruct.
The undecided voters are attempting to send the major parties a message. They want better quality presidential candidates from the major parties. They want candidates they can have confidence in. They want candidates they can commit to instead of having to decide which is the lesser of the two evils.
President Barack Obama made the most inane debate comment of the early 21st century in the October 22nd debate. http://www.npr.org/2012/10/22/163436694/transcript-3rd-obama-romney-presidential-debate
"But I think Governor Romney maybe hasn't spent enough time looking at how our military works. You — you mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets — (laughter) — because the nature of our military's[sic] changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."
We may not need as many horses and bayonets as we did in 1916, but we need more ships than the peace time navy of 1916 did. In 1916 the United States didn't think it needed a big navy because it wasn't involved in World War 1 and still expected the British Navy to control the seas. The United States Navy has inherited the commerce protecting and peace keeping role the British Navy played a century ago. However, the U.S. cannot perform that role with only 114 ships of 287 total ships deployed over 139 million square miles of ocean. http://www.navy.mil/navydata/nav_legacy.asp?id=146
The United States should have an aircraft carrier based group with rescue helicopters and Marines off the coast of Libya and other hot spots where embassies are close enough to the sea for sea based rescues. The capital of Iran was too far from the sea for a sea based rescue during the Carter administration. Diplomatic facilities in Libya and some other trouble spots can be reached from ships.
It may come as a surprise to Obama, but the main reason we ended up in WWI was because the United States didn't have enough ships to protect its merchant ships from German submarines called U-boats. Nuclear power for submarines may have come long after WWI but "ships that go underwater" were a major German weapon in that war. The first submarine was built in the 17th Century and the first submarine attack was an unsuccessful attempt to attach a bomb to a British ship during the American Revolution. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/worlds-first-submarine-attack
It is unlikely that Japan would have attacked the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor in 1941 if the United States had had more than one fleet in the Pacific. Japan thought that knocking out the only American fleet in the Pacific would allow it to take control of the Pacific before the United States could build a replacement fleet.
This year begins the 200th anniversary of the first major war fought by the United States, the War of 1812. The United States wouldn't have felt a need to enter that war if it had had a big enough navy to discourage the British navy from kidnapping sailors from American merchant ships and even naval ships.
Peace provides the best environment for the international trade the U.S. economy has always depended upon. The United States first foreign "war" was an attack on pirates on the North African coast. The U.S. needs a big enough navy to permanently station ships in shipping lanes plagued by pirates.
The Navy provides the best option for protecting the peace. Moving ships to a trouble spot doesn't require construction of large bases first. Personnel can be stationed near a trouble spot without the complications involved with stationing troops among the local population. We may not need as many horses and bayonets as were needed in 1916, but ships are even more necessary.
Four years ago Democrats criticized Gov. Sarah Palin for her statement "I can see Russia from my house". Compare that to Obama's statements: "We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines." Obama apparently thinks he's speaking to children, or maybe he just has a simple mind.
Obama's statements that al Qaeda is weak ignores the implications of the attack on the Libyan consulate. Al Qaeda may be weaker in Afghanistan, but it is growing elsewhere. It is not going away any time soon. Obama is underestimating the strength of al Qaeda much like the Johnson administration underestimated the strength of the Viet Cong before the 1968 Tet offensive.
Gov. Mitt Romney missed a couple of major opportunities to score on President Barack Obama in the 2nd debate. Romney should have pointed out that Obama continued Bush's economic policies. Romney should so have pointed out that various states are investigating Planned Parenthood for fraud.
Romney should have suggested that the question about President George W. Bush's economic policies should have been directed to Obama because Obama had continued Bush's policies. The bailouts of the banks and the automakers began with Bush. Obama merely continued that policy. Obama also copied Bush's stimulus policy and the use of tax cuts. Bush had large deficits and Obama expanded those deficits. Romney should ask at soz3me point why Obama continued Bush's policies if Obama though Bush was wrong.
At some point Romney needs to point out that unemployment under Bush was less than 5% before the 9/11 Attack and only went up to 6.3% (June, 2003) after the attack. It then fell back below 6% in November, 2003, and remained below 6% until August, 2008, when it began increasing again. It might be argued that the increase in unemployment in the summer of 2008 was due in part to a lack of confidence in the two presidential candidates with the drop after the election being due to a lack of confidence in Obama.
Romney should have pointed out that Obama's support for Planned Parenthood means he supports the idea of substandard Jim Crow quality health care for inner city minority women. Romney should have asked why Obama allows Planned Parenthood to operate an unlicensed medical facility in his hometown of Chicago. The 14th Amendment requires states to guarantee equal protection of the laws which means health care facilities that provide medical services to inner city minority women should have to meet the same high standards as facilities that provide health care to white men and women. Romney should promise that if elected he will enforce the 14th Amendment and force facilities that serve minority women to comply with the same standard as facilities that serve white men.
Romney should have mentioned that several states are investigating Planned Parenthood for Medicaid fraud and the federal government should also investigate the organization because it operates in multiple states and receives federal funds which provide an opportunity for similar fraud.
Romney should have asked if Obama has ordered a federal investigation into the death of Tonya Reaves who died after being treated at Planned Parenthood's unlicensed Chicago clinic. Reaves continued to bleed after her abortion and wasn't sent to a hospital for several hours. When she went to the hospital the clinic didn't bother to send information about her condition to give the hospital an idea of what might be wrong. Romney should announce that he will order a federal investigation into Reaves' death to determine if anyone at the clinic broke federal laws.
Was President Barack Obama under the influence of alcohol during the debate in Denver? Could alcohol consumption combined with the high altitude explain his poor performance?
I'm not suggesting that Obama was drunk. It's not necessary for someone to be noticeably drunk for alcohol to adversely affect performance.
If Obama had a few drinks before the debate it's probably a normal part of his preparation for public appearances. If he did drink, he was probably unaware that the alcohol combined with the altitude could affect his performance.
The old belief that altitude can cause someone to become drunk faster appears to be a myth. However, alcohol can impair judgment and perception as well as depressing respiration. The reduced oxygen availability in the mile high city could have further slowed Obama's brain and reduced his ability to process information The U.S. Army Public Health Command recommends against alcohol consumption at higher altitudes for this reason .
Altitude alone could not explain Obama's behavior because it would have affected him and Mitt Romney the same.
There's a strong possibility that Obama is an alcoholic like his father Barack Obama, Sr., and his half brother George Obama. Susceptibility to alcoholism is hereditary. As a nephew of a few alcoholics, I know that the only way alcoholics can avoid the negative affects of alcoholism is to not drink alcohol. Moderate use is not an option for alcoholics.
Obama admitted in his autobiography that he drank heavily when he was young. Such drinking could have helped him develop a high tolerance for alcohol so he could drink significant amounts without it having a noticeable affect. Union General Ulysses S. Grant won the Civil War even though he was a very heavy drinker.
Obama could be a "high functioning alcoholic" (HFA). They usually don't give obvious signs of being affected by alcohol and can function without those around them noticing any adverse affects on judgment or behavior. The fact that those around Obama praise everything he does would reinforce any feelings Obama has that his drinking isn't adversely affecting him. Their tendency to idolize him would blind them to any indications he had a problem with alcohol
Two years ago "White House physician, Navy Capt Jeffrey Kuhlman, said Obama should stick with 'moderation in alcohol intake' and ‘smoking cessation efforts’, the use of nicotine gum, and come back in August 2011 after he turns 50."
Some suggest that the recommendation for "moderation in alcohol intake" is some type of standard recommendation. Others such as the writer of Mountain Republic, who has a family history of alcoholism, believes that the doctor wouldn't have brought the subject up unless he detected a possible alcohol related problem. The writer suggests that the beer summit involving Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates and Cambridge police Sergeant Jim Crowley provides an example of how alcoholics think alcohol is a solution to problems.
The beer summit isn't the only time Obama has invited someone to the White House for a drink.
Sandra Rose believes that alcoholism would be consistent with Obama's narcissist personality. She agrees that a recommendation of moderation wouldn't be needed if a patient was already drinking in moderation.
A doctor would have to be careful about recommending moderation in alcohol consumption. Some patients who drink in moderation might complain because they think the recommendation means they are drinking too much. An alcoholic might interpret the statement about "continued moderation" as an indication that his consumption is within acceptable limits.
At a time when the nation faces significant economic and foreign problems, would any president who wasn't an alcoholic brag about setting up his own brewery? Obama's decision to brew his own beer indicates alcohol plays a major role in his life. Working class individuals might brew their own beer because they don't get a feeling of personal accomplishment from their jobs. Obama is President of the United States. He shouldn't need to brew his own beer to feel he's accomplishing anything.
Maybe events in Libya would have been different if Obama had been taking care of presidential business instead of brewing beer.
I've been watching presidents speak for decades. I know I'm being subjective, but something about Obama's facial expressions have looked a little off, particularly a tendency to smile or almost smile at inappropriate times. I had thought this was an example of the way liars smile when they think they are getting away with a lie. However, his expressions could also indicate he is being affected by alcohol.
An alcoholic Obama could appear to be functioning normally.but still have impaired judgment that would affect decision making. He might fail to recognize a threat such as happened in Libya. He could also exhibit paranoid tendencies. He might treat normal criticism as a major attack on him. He might overestimate the threat to the United States from some foreign event.
A Duke University study lists President Richard Nixon as one of our previous alcoholic presidents. He was forced to resign from office because of poor decisions associated with the Watergate scandal. President Ulysses S.Grant who was an alcoholic is considered to have had one of the most corrupt administrations.
Vice President Joe Biden was busy being good natured Old Uncle Joe in the debate. He spent much of his time trying to keep young Rep. Paul Ryan from talking. You know Uncle Joe. He's always interrupting everyone at the family gatherings. He wants to remind everyone his mouth still works even though he might be moving kind of slow. He smiles a lot to show he's enjoying the attention.
One of the problems some of us old guys have is wanting to remain the center of attention. I believe a lot of this practice comes from fear of being displaced by the younger guys. We want to remind the younger generation we are still around.
I don't expect much substance from the debate because two minutes per question is insufficient time to do much more than to allow the two parties to say "did so" / "did not" much like Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck saying "duck season" / "rabbit season" in the old Warner Brothers Looney Tunes.
Biden is out of touch with the situation in the Middle East. He seems to think we are winning in spite of the fact that al Qaeda recently destroyed our consulate in Libya.
Biden doesn't understand that withdrawal from Afghanistan will be portrayed by al Qaeda as victory over the United States like their victory over the old Soviet Union. Osama bin Laden wanted us to invade Afghanistan because he believed the United States didn't have the willingness to go the distance.
He knew he couldn't defeat the United States. He believed he, or his successor, could get the United States to tire of the war and leave our allies behind without support like the Soviets did and like we did in Vietnam. The recent attacks on American forces by local Afghan forces are because they think the Americans are deserting them like bin Laden said we would. Afghan forces believe if we withdraw our troops we will eventually end support in the form of providing war supplies like we did in Vietnam. Many Afghans may believe the situation will be like the conflict with the Soviet Union when the Taliban took advantage of the chaos that followed the Soviet withdrawal to take over the country.
The War on Terror is an endurance contest like the Cold War was. The United States has to continue the effort if it wants to outlast the enemy. We still have forces in Germany even though we won that war almost 70 years ago. and we have had casualties there because of terrorist activity. We need to let the enemy know we will keep forces in Afghanistan for a similar period of time if we want to outlast them. Al Qaeda will use early withdrawal as a recruiting tool by claiming they have proved they can defeat the United States with terrorism.
Writers throughout the state of Kansas converged in Salina this past weekend for the yearly Kansas Authors Club convention and presentation of awards.
The convention was hosted by District Four under the leadership of President William Karnowski.
Key note speaker was Caryn Mirriam Goldberg. Goldberg is state of Kansas Poet Laureate.
Winners for the state poetry contest (open to the general public and members), are as follows:
Haiku: Judge Irma Hudson First - Box Turtle- Yvonne Green, D1 Second - Snow Drifts from the Sky - Barbara Brady, D1 Third - Moonlit Cottonwoods , Roy Beckemeyer, D5 First honorable mention- Flurry of Feathers - Diane Palka, D2 Second honorable mention - Coolness in the Fall -Annabelle Corrick Beach, D1
Theme: Judge Timothy Pettet First - Brushing Away my Fears - Judy Hatteberg, D5 Second, Such Power, Yvonne Green, D1 Third - It Takes Two To Tango, Jane Bandy, D7 First honorable, Hope, Roy Beckemeyer, D5 Second honorable, Encouraging Words, Barbara Brady, D1 Tied for second honorable mention, As a River Runs, Laura Patterson,
Lyrics: Judge Barry Barnes First - Shipwrecked Love - Roy Beckemeyer, D5 Second - Saturday Night Dreams - Audrey Collins, D6 Third - Editor's Lament, Annabelle Corrick Beach, D1 First Honorable Mention - Courtin' Country - Kay Towle, D6 Second honorable mention, Tall-grass Spring, Theodore Farmer, D5 Classic Forms : Judge Timothy Pettet First - Roy Beckemeyer - Winter's Weft, D5 Second - Prairie Fire Pantoum - Roy Beckemeyer, D5 Third - Half Joy Wing, Kristine Polansky, D4 First honorable - Molds - Dennis Etzel Second Honorable He Drinks Again - Pat Bonine, D1
Poets Choice: Judge Timothy Pettet TORNADO WARNINGS - Roy Beckemeyer, D5 Second Place, Wedding Picture, Diane Wahto, D5 Third place - May Morning - Diane Wahto, D5 First Honorable Mention - Sharing a Drink - Sarah Langley Second honorable mention - Grease - Dennis Etzel
Free Verse: Judge Paul Goldman First - East off Highway 77, Dusk - Kevin Rabas, D2 Second - Somewhere in the Water - Duane Johnson, D1 Third - City People - Judy Hatteberg, D5 First honorable mention - The Yellow Cat Naps - Roy Beckemeyer, D5 Second honorable - Curry's " Prelude to Tragedy": John Brown - Marilyn Page
Narrative: Judge Carolyn Hall First - Sweat For Sale - Diane Palka, D2 Second - Second Year Blues - Ronda Miller, D2 Third - Where the High Plains Meet Heaven - Ronda Miller, D2 First honorable mention - If Not for Tears - Ronda Miller, D2 Second honorable mention - That Time Again - Jean Jackson, D2
Whimsy: Judge Carolyn Hall First - For Women Only - Audrey Collins, D6 Second - DFTT - Kristine Polansky, D4 Third - The Handyman - Paulette Mattingly, D5 First honorable mention - Evaporating Issues - Annabelle Corrick Beach, D1 Second honorable mention - The Awful Truth - Yvonne Green, D1
Additional information about the club and how to become a Kansas Authors Ckub member may be found on-line. Kansasauthorsclub.com. (D stands for one of the seven districts that the club is divided in throughout the state)
President Barack Obama's obsession with a mythical Mitt Romney $5 trillion tax cut raises serious questions about Obama's mental health.
The federal government only receives about $1.2 trillion in total income taxes per year. There is no way a $5 trillion tax cut would be possible in the short term.
Congress would have to almost eliminate the income tax to produce a $5 trillion cut in 5 years. Cutting $500 billion a year would take 10 years to produce a $5 trillion cut. Cutting $250 billion a year would take 20 years to produce $5 trillion in cuts.
I considered the possibility Obama was deliberately lying, but why would an intelligent rational person use a lie that would be so easily exposed as a lie? Besides, Voice Analysis Technology used its audio technology to check the level of stress in the statements of both candidates and determined that both believed they were telling the truth.
The presidency is a high pressure job that can potentially destroy people. Many historians believe that the stress of heading an administration tainted by corruption killed President Warren G. Harding. Obama's obsession with an obviously non-existent tax cut proposal indicates he has apparently cracked under the pressure.
If Obama isn't living in the real world, he may not be able to respond appropriately in crisis situations.
With the recent Middle East crisis and the state of the world economy, we would expect our president to use the opening of the new session of the United Nations to meet with other world leaders. Instead, Obama decided to appear on "The View" talk show. He apparently is unaware that news stories about him meeting with world leaders would do more to help his presidential campaign than appearance on a talk show, even a talk show like "The View".
His most important recent accomplishment seems to be establishing a brewery in the White House. While he was showing off his brewery, he failed to check to see if American diplomatic facilities in the Middle East were prepared for possible 9/11 anniversary attacks. The result was a disastrous attack on the American consulate in Libya. Obama brewed beer while the Middle East burned.
Obama's separation from the real world may not be recent. Mark Bowden claims in his new book "The Finish" that in the event Osama bin Laden had been taken alive, Obama wanted him to be tried in American civil courts to demonstrate American due process. Shouldn't a Harvard Law School graduate have been aware that if that had been done, the first thing bin Laden's attorneys would have done would have been to request bin Laden's release on the grounds that his "arrest" without a judge authorized search warrant was illegal, particularly considering that the SEALs had entered Pakistan without permission of the Pakistani government? We should be doubly glad that the SEALs killed bin Laden instead of merely capturing him. If he had been captured the courts might have released him.
The British tabloids reported two years ago that Obama's doctor had recently told him he should cut down on his excessive drinking as well as his cigarette smoking. If President Obama is drinking excessively he is almost certainly an alcoholic, particularly considering that his father Barack Obama, Sr., was an alcoholic and his half brother George is an alcoholic. Alcoholism often has a connection to certain genes, especially the "risk taker" gene. If Obama is an alcoholic, he won't be able to simply cut back on alcohol consumption. His only option is to stop drinking completely.
Alcoholics often have trouble relating to the real world, but I'm doubtful that alcohol alone could explain such an obviously mythical claim that Mitt Romney wants a $5 trillion tax cut. Alcohol consumption might explain unwillingness to drop the tax cut subject and other aspects of his demeanor in the first debate, but probably not the development of the tax cut idea itself.
Megyn Kelly on Fox made an interesting observation on the first debate. Mitt Romney would watch Barack Obama during the debate while Obama tended to look at Jim Lehrer or the cameras. I had halfway noticed this situation during the debate but didn't really consider the implications until she commented.
I went back and fast forwarded through the debate. Romney would look at Obama for significant periods, but Obama only occasionally glanced at Romney before looking away or looking down.
An obvious explanation for Obama not looking at Romney is that Obama felt intimidated by Romney. The debates cannot resolve differences on issues because the responses are too short. Romney apparently recognizes that the debates allow a candidate to show who has the strongest personality and would be best able to stand up to the leaders of other countries, the leaders of special interest groups and congressional opponents.
Watching one's opponent is important in verbal combat as well as in physical combat. A boxer watches his opponent to look for an opening for a punch or an indication of what type of punch the opponent may throw. A verbal combatant watches body language and facial expression for signs of weakness.
I was a boxing fan when Mohammad Ali was the champ. I still recall him trying to stare down opponents to try to shake their self confidence. Romney at times seemed to be trying to stare down Obama who occasionally glanced at Romney and then quickly looked away.
Romney obviously understands personal conflicts in a political, or business, situation and how to appear to be a tough opponent. Obama does not.
The 1962 Cuban missile crisis occurred because Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev felt American President John F. Kennedy could be intimidated. The recent attack on the American consulate in Libya may have occurred because al Qaeda believes Obama can be intimidated.
Before the debate I was planning to vote for Romney only as a means of getting Obama out of the White House. Now I will vote for Romney the Intimidator to be our leader in foreign affairs.
President Barack Obama made a major gaffe when he recently said that we are owned, or "belong to", government. In the United States the government is supposed to "belong to" the people instead of the other way around as he suggests.
We the people are supposed to own the government and tell it what to do. Obama and other elitists believe that government exists to control our personal lives and even tell us how much we can eat or drink.
Some government controls are necessary to prevent people from harming others. Government needs to restrict sale of some substances that can adversely affect physical or mental health or can cause people to harm others. However, there is no reason for government to regulate the size of soft drinks or treat all school children as if they had the same nutritional needs. Active children need more calories than those who spend all their time playing video games.
Too many officials at all levels of government think they are better than the rest of us and have some special right or knowledge to make decisions for us. Government officials who believe themselves superior will sometimes say "if you only knew what we know" when they really mean "if you knew only what we know."
One of my favorite movie quotes is by Glenn Ford's character in "Teahouse of the August Moon". Ford plays an American military officer helping the Japanese develop democratic government after World War II. He tells them: "Democracy is where the people have the right to make the wrong decisions."
All humans can make mistakes. I read a book review several years ago about some incredibly stupid things done by the high IQ members of Mensa. During President Lyndon Johnson's administration men who were considered to be the best and the brightest put half a million of us in Vietnam for no apparent reason other than that they didn't want to lose the war before the next election. They had no idea what victory meant and thus didn't know how to win.
President Thomas Jefferson once said: "I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion."
"It is the duty of the Patriot to protect his country from its Government."- Thomas Paine
National Custodial Worker's Day will be observed on Tuesday October 2nd. http://www.examiner.com/holidays-in-national/national-custodial-workers-recognition-day The holiday recognizes those who clean and maintain buildings that others work in. http://amarillo.com/stories/2002/10/02/fri_fn100202-8.shtml
Unfortunately. many organizations seem unaware of the holiday. I didn't find out about it until after I retired after 23 years of custodial work.
I haven't been able to determine exactly when it was established, but some web sites indicate that public school systems may have originated the day to recognize their cleaning and maintenance workers. I haven't discovered any formal designation of the day. http://www.bostonpublicschools.org/node/3684
Custodians deserve the same recognition as secretaries (sometimes called administrative professionals although most aren't paid consistent with the new term) and bosses.
As Rodney Dangerfield might have observed cleaning and maintenance workers often don't get no respect. Custodians often are only noticed when they don't do their jobs, like forgetting to empty a trash can.
Maintenance workers sometimes have the difficult task of keeping old plumbing or worn out heating/cooling systems working until the money can be found to replace the equipment. Cleaning workers may have to clean up "flood" waters or other storm related damages.
My first boss at the courthouse where I used to work, Rick Juarez, had a sign on his wall that was written about those who maintain trains. I don't know who wrote it, but here is one version that the text editor should accept.
It's not my place to run the train The whistle I can't blow. It's not my place to say how far The train's allowed to go. It's not my place to shoot off steam Nor even clang the bell. But let the dang thing jump the track And see who catches heck.
Custodial workers who have bad days might want to the humor at this site. http://custodian.info/custhumor.html
Based on comments I received on a previous post about same sex marriage I've concluded homosexuals don't understand sex. They don't understand marriage. They don't understand why they are sexually confused. Thus, they don't realize corrective surgery is available.
Various studies in the last decade by Dr. Ivanka Savic of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, indicate that people who consider themselves homosexuals actually have the body of one sex and the brain of the other which is the definition of transsexuals. http://ki.se/ki/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=40365&l=en
The only difference between homosexuals and transsexuals is that transsexuals are perceptive enough to understand their situation. Homosexuals apparently don't understand that the brain, rather than the body, determines human sexuality. The brain is the most important human sex organ. Male bodies aren't attracted to female bodies. Male brains are. Female brains are attracted to male bodies. If the brain of a person with a male body is attracted to male bodies it's because the brain is female.
Sexual chemicals called pheromones control the sexual behavior of other animals. Genetic programming may control how or when an animal responds sexually. A male dog who smells a female dog in heat will try to get to her.
Humans respond to visual and audio cues which are compared in the brain to what the individual considers sexaully attractive. Some humans are primarily interested in physical characteristics. Others may be more interested in intelligence or having similar interests in music or food. What is considered attractive varies from one person to another. For example, some men like slender women. Other men prefer women who are extra large.
Scientists have known for many years that men's and women's brains have different structures and deal with some situations differently. A growing body of research indicates that homosexuals have a brain of one sex and a body of the other. http://www.mastersofhealthcare.com/blog/2009/10-big-differences-between-mens-and-womens-brains/
Chemicals called pheromones govern the sexual behavior of most animals. Pheromones may be necessary for some animals to know when to have sex and which other members of their species are the opposite sex. The existence of these chemicals in humans has been a controversial subject for years. Humans don't need pheromones to activate their sexual programming. Humans can learn about sex and be sexually aroused by reading books or watching tv. Even if humans don't need pheromones they could be affected by them.
One study that tracked blood flow in the brain indicates that two suspected human pheromones have a different impact on the brain activity of men and women and there is a difference between the way heterosexual and homosexual men respond. Scientists say that a stimulus "lights up" the area of the brain responds to the stimulus. The study indicated that an estrogen like chemical from women's urine lighted up an area of hypothalamus in heterosexual men, but lighted up the general smell interpreting regions of the brains of women and homosexual men. http://www.naturalattraction.com/research/nytimes_2.html
A testosterone derivative from men's sweat had the opposite effect. It lighted up the hypothalamus in women and homosexual men, but the smell related region of heterosexual men A subsequent study of homosexual woman indicated their responses measured by PET scans were similar, but not identical to heterosexual men. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9125-clue-to-sexual-attraction-found-in-lesbian-brain.html
A study of the structure of brains using PET scans and MRI's indicated the brains of heterosexual women were the same as those of homosexual men. The brains of homosexual women and heterosexual men were the same. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080617151845.htm
Most of us were told in school that if a baby gets a "Y" chromosome from its father it will develop as a male. If the baby gets an "X" chromosome from its father it will develop as a female.
However, reality isn't that simple. In about 1 in 30,000 births a baby with an "XY" combination of chromosomes will develop a female anatomy in what is called Swyer syndrome. Individuals with this condition have external female genitalia along with a normal uterus and Fallopian tubes, but lack functional gonads (ovaries or testes). They cannot produce eggs, but may become pregnant with an implanted embryo. The development occurs because a defective gene fails to produce a functioning version of the protein that is needed for development of male characteristics http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/swyer-syndrome
In about 1 in 20,000 - 25,000 births a baby with an "XX" combination will develop a male anatomy. Individuals with this condition can have normal sexual relations, but do not produce viable sperm.
The genes that control the development of the brain differ from the genes that control the development of other parts of the body. It shouldn't be surprising that a defect in one or more genes that affect development of the brain could cause the brain to develop according to a different sexual "blueprint" from the one that controls development of the body.
Scientific research indicates that the sexual differentiation of the brain begins before sex hormones play a role in development. A rare naturally occurring zebra finch is half male and half female. One side of the body has male plumage, sex organs and brains and the other has female plumage sex organs and brains. This dual development cannot be explained by sex hormones. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6973/full/427390a.html
Sexual development isn't as simple as many people believe. Genetic defects can affect development of all parts of the body. Some genetic defects may cause a baby to be stillborn or have little chance of survival after birth. Other defects can cause brain malfunctions such as those that limit normal brain development.
It shouldn't be surprising that genetic defects could affect the sexual development of the body and the brain.
Doctors don't know how to change the sexual functioning of the brain, but they can change anatomical sex characteristics. Currently the operation to transform a man into a woman is more effective than the operation to change a woman into a man. Most homosexuals would need some counciling because they don't understand they are transsexuals.
The recent violence in the Middle East indicates Obama is losing the war on terror. If Walter Cronkite were alive and doing the evening news he might have said the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya meant the U.S. could not win the war. The attack was more successful than the attack on the U.S. embassy in Saigon in the 1968 Tet Offensive.
If President Barack Obama really believes that the attacks are a "speed bump" he may be dangerously out of touch with reality. The 9/11 attack was preceded by attacks on American embassies in Africa. The new attacks may give al Qaeda confidence that it can pull off an attack on America or American interests.
The most disturbing thing about the Libyan attack is that the Obama administration should have been prepared for it. The continued instability resulting from the U.S. led overthrow of the Libyan government reduces the ability of Libyan authorities to deal with terrorists. The situation is comparable to the situation that existed after the fall of the Shah of Iran. The primary difference is that the people who attacked in Libya weren't interested in taking prisoners.
Al Qaeda operative Abdul-Hakim al-Hasadi was involved at the start in the attempt to overthrow Muammar Qaddafi. Al Qaeda has now "rewarded" Obama for his assistance in helping them get established in Libya.
There are conflicting reports about whether the White House received specific warnings about possible embassy attacks. The White House and embassy officials shouldn't have needed warnings about the danger of an attack on or about the anniversary of the 9/11 attack. Whether or not attacks occur on specific targets on 9/11 of any given year may depend in large part on how prepared American facilities appear to be. Terrorists are more likely to attack sites that appear to be unprepared. If the White House didn't have intelligence that attacks could occur, it's because the White House doesn't have intelligence.
Egypt is another country that is still unstable after the fall of the old regime and thus vulnerable to terrorist actions.
The Obama administration has encouraged mass demonstrations, some of which turned violent, in the Middle East over the last few years. The success of such demonstrations in changing governments has encouraged residents of the region to believe demonstrations might help achieve other goals including changing U.S. policies.
A recent anti-Muslim film in the U.S. was used by activists to get people to conduct demonstrations in several countries. Sony corporation is planning to release a movie about the killing of Osama bin Laden. We might consider bin Laden to have been public enemy number 1 at the time, but many Muslims might view the killing of Muslims by Americans in a different context. They may ignore the reason the U.S. wanted to kill bin Laden and just view it as another anti-Muslim action by the U.S. They may even decide that the mass murdering bin Laden is a martyr. In war the actions of our forces that we regard as heroic may be regarded as murder by those on the other side and vice versa. For example, Libyans welcomed the may responsible for bombing a plane over Lockerbie, Scotland as a hero after he was released for medical reasons. Obama needs to use all his persuasive abilities to discourage the release of this film.
Recent attacks on Allied personnel by Afghan forces indicates Obama is mishandling the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Withdrawing troops from a combat zone can cause host country forces that are remaining to feel the withdrawing troops are deserting and should be punished. Obama needs to delay withdrawal until he can convince local forces that American forces are withdrawing because they are no longer needed. He needs to convince Afghan forces that they can handle the situation. His job will be more difficult because of the American failure to provide any type of assistance, including military supplies, to our former South Vietnamese allies when North Vietnamese forces invaded in 1975.
The War on Terror is more like the Cold War than past shooting wars. The WOT is an endurance contest testing who has the most will to continue the fight. Afghanistan is a major battlefield of that war rather than being the war itself. Withdrawal from Afghanistan would merely shift the fighting to some other location. Withdrawal from Afghanistan could provide al Qaeda with a major propaganda victory. If the withdrawal isn't done properly, al Qaeda could use it to claim that terrorism can defeat the U.S. and use it to recruit more terrorists.
The 1968 Vietnam Tet Offensive failed to achieve its goal of provoking a general uprising against the United States. Muslim terrorists have the same goal of provoking a general uprising against the United States. They don't have an army to launch attacks, but they can use provocations by Americans which could include any "accidental killing" of civilians in Pakistan. Obama needs to suspend all operations in Pakistan until the situation cools down.
I realize allowing terrorists to use Pakistan as a sanctuary could increase the risk to American forces in Afghanistan. I was in a similar situation in Vietnam. Communist forces were able to use Cambodia as a sanctuary. The Nixon administration held off going into Cambodia until the Cambodian government requested our help to keep Cambodia from asking for Chinese assistance against the U.S. Attacking sanctuaries in Pakistan could create pressure by Pakistanis to force their government to turn against the U.S. Civilian causalities in Pakistan at the present time could be used by terrorist agitators in other countries to spark anti-U.S. demonstrations throughout the Middle East. Recent anti-American demonstrations in Pakistan could intensify if American forces conduct operations in Pakistan or if the movie about the killing of bin Laden is released.
World Net Daily http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/did-obama-send-a-gay-ambassador-to-libya/ is reporting a rumor that Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens was homosexual. Regardless of whether the rumor is true or not, if Libyan terrorists believed the rumor it might explain the brutality of his murder including his rape. http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/mideast-media-say-amb-christopher-stevens-was-raped-before-killed/ The assignment of a suspected homosexual ambassador would have been particularly provocative when it coincided with the release of the movie "Innocence of Muslims" which portrays Muhammad as a homosexual pedophile.
I don't know what the intent behind the anti-Muhammad movie was, but the Obama administration needs to investigate the possibility that a person behind the movie, although probably not all of those involved, could have been an al Qaeda undercover agent. It wouldn't be the first time someone produced a fictional movie to inflame passions. Hitler produced a phony atrocity film in World War II. Nearly a century ago in the U.S. the movie "Birth of a Nation" falsely portrayed the Reconstruction era in a way that inflamed whites against blacks.
I'm tired of homosexuals trying to coerce people into accepting their ignorant view of sexual reality. Their attacks on the Chick-Fil-A chain simply because the CEO says homosexual marriage is wrong. is unjustified bullying.
Homosexuals need to accept the fact that many people believe what they do is immoral and that same sex marriage is wrong. Most of us do things that some people believe are morally wrong.
A billion people believe that what I do for breakfast every day is wrong. Muslims and Jews as well as members of some other religions believe eating pork is morally wrong. Some individuals believe eating any meat is wrong.
Muslims and many Christian denominations believe drinking alcohol is wrong. Jews as well as Roman Catholics and some other Christian groups believe drinking alcohol in moderation is acceptable.
Religious groups usually believe the moral values they support benefit society. For example, those groups that oppose alcohol consumption do so because those who consume excess alcohol can become violent. Thousands of years of human history demonstrate the value of basing a society on marriage between a man and a woman. Religious groups understandably are concerned that same sex unions could have a negative impact on society.
In the sixties some people, including members of some religious groups, believed that those of us who served in Vietnam were doing something wrong. I didn't advocate punishing anti-war protesters for their beliefs even though I disagreed with them.
One of my favorite television show quotes is from "The Winds of War". Robert Mitchum's character, an American naval officer, tells a German military attache that he believes one of Hitler's actions was morally wrong. The German replies, "it was worse than wrong. It was a mistake."
In other words the action in question would have been a bad idea even if there weren't any moral objections.
Same sex marriage is worse than wrong. It's absurd. Same sex marriage is an oxymoron. Marriage unites the two different types of humans into a unit that contains the characteristics of both sexes. Marriage is a salt shaker and a pepper shaker. A same sex union is two salt shakers or two pepper shakers.
I strongly suspect homosexuals so desperately want people to believe what they are doing is all right because these homosexuals have doubts about the morality of what they are doing. They want others to reassure them that they aren't acting immorally.
Those who really believe what they are doing is morally ok don't care if others think the activity is wrong.
It never bothered me that anti-war protesters believed my participation in Vietnam was wrong. Their statements didn't upset me because I didn't think I was doing anything wrong. I may have had doubts about whether the people in charge knew what they were doing, but I didn't believe what we were doing was wrong.
I feel sorry for homosexuals. They are born with an affliction most of them don't understand. They are born with the body of one sex and the brain of the other. However, that affliction doesn't justify trying to coerce others into accepting their beliefs. Instead of trying to pretend they are heterosexuals by calling a relationship with someone just like them a marriage, they should be attempting to raise money for sex change operations that would allow them to have a body that is the same sex as their brains.
Homosexuals have trouble relating to the real world. They like to make believe such as by putting on black leather jackets and pretending they are "macho macho men". They have their silly little parades where they dress up in outlandish costumes much like children putting on their parents clothes. Pretending that a relationship with someone who is the same as them is a "marriage" is another one of those games.
How can a Republican ignore the fact that there are many more federal taxes than just the federal income tax? Republicans have long reminded people that businesses don't pay taxes, their customers do. Normally, I would expect Democrats to try to con lower income groups into believing that the fact they don't pay the federal income tax means they are not being forced to pay for extravagant federal programs.
Workers making the minimum wage pay the Social Security and Medicare taxes based on their income. Winos pay federal liquor taxes on their cheap booze. The whiskey tax was one of first federal taxes. The federal government taxes shoes, phone calls, tobacco and the gasoline used in cars among other things.
Businesses set the prices of their goods to get the necessary money to pay various taxes including taxes on their incomes.
Instead, of criticizing those who don't make enough to pay federal income tax, Romney should be blaming Obama's unworkable economic program for forcing people to take jobs that don't provide them enough income to pay the income tax. Millions of those among the 47% who don't pay the income tax would love to pay it if they could only find jobs that pay enough for them to pay the income tax.
Romney should be reminding those who don't make enough to pay the federal income tax that they still pay other taxes which might be reduced if the federal government would cut its spending.
Romney should be criticizing Obama's welfare for the rich that allows them to spend their federal tax money on themselves. If the child of someone with low income wants federal assistance to attend college, the parents must fill out forms proving they lack income. The more income they have, the less assistance is available. Parents with high incomes can write out a check for the child's tuition and claim a federal tax credit. The more they make the more assistance they can provide.
High income homeowners who want federal assistance for certain home improvements can write out a check and claim the money spent as a tax credit. Low income homeowners must find a grant program in their community and compete with others for the funds.
Previous: IPS 6/24/2012
It is amazing I have the nerve to show my face around here, but I saw something worth a post, so it is below.
If you've seen it, and can identify it, you're welcome to do so in the comments. Otherwise I'll do so in a day or so. I was headed back from an auction this weekend and this subject caught my eye.
Democrats care so little about minority women that they allow unlicensed facilities to kill them. The old civil rights leaders will protest when someone shoots a black man but do nothing when a doctor in an unlicensed health facility kills a black woman. Nothing better demonstrates the hypocrisy of President Barack Obama than the fact that unlicensed medical facilities are allowed to [mis]treat women in his hometown of Chicago.
When a black man dies a violent death black leaders like Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton descend on the location and ask for an investigation while sometimes alleging that racism might be a factor.
On July 20 a 24-year-old black woman named Tonya Reaves bled to death http://www.lifenews.com/2012/08/03/planned-parenthood-never-called-911-for-abortion-victim/ after a botched abortion at an unlicensed Chicago Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic. I've checked Google and can find no indication that either Jackson or Sharpton have protested Reaves' death. Is it because she's a woman? Is it because she died from negligence rather than someone firing a gun? Or is it because they don't believe abortion providers need to be medically competent?
The 14th Amendment requires states to guarantee "equal protection of the laws" regardless of race or sex. Illinois allows facilities run by Planned Parenthood that only treat women to operate without the licensing requirements of facilities that treat men as well as women. Are Jackson and Sharpton ignoring this violation of the Constitution because the denial of equal protection is based on sex rather than race?
Tonya Reaves received a second trimester dilation and evacuation (D & E) abortion http://women.webmd.com/dilation-and-evacuation-de-for-abortion at 11 A.M. at Planned Parenthood's Chicago Loop Health Center. She began bleeding after the procedure, but for unexplained reasons wasn't treated until she was transferred to Northwestern Memorial Hospital by a fire department ambulance at 4:30 P.M. There is no record that the clinic called 911.
Hospital personnel had to start from scratch to examine her because they received no information about her treatment at Planned Parenthood. According to WBBM's Steve Miller http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/07/24/documents-shed-light-on-womans-death-after-abortion/ reporting on documents provided by Northwestern: “at 5:30 p.m., doctors performed an ultrasound, and another dilation and evacuation procedure – basically, another abortion – this time at Northwestern. But after that, there were then more problems, and pain. That warranted a new ultrasound, and a perforation was discovered. At 10:12 p.m., Reaves was taken back to surgery – and 'an uncontrollable bleed' was discovered.”
Reaves was pronounced dead an hour later.
Dr. James C. Anderson, M.D., a 30-year veteran emergency room doctor has complained that abortion clinics never informed him about their patients’ conditions. “I have always had to evaluate the situation, come to my own conclusions, and initiate what I thought was appropriate treatment. This definitely created some time delays that were not in the patient’s best interest,” stated Dr. Anderson. “These delays can have life-threatening implications when dealing with hemorrhage or infection.”
In a written statement, http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/07/24/documents-shed-light-on-womans-death-after-abortion/ Planned Parenthood of Illinois CEO Carole Brite said “We were shocked and saddened upon learning of a tragic development at a nearby hospital. Our hearts go out to the loved ones of this patient. While legal abortion services in the United States have a very high safety record, a tragedy such as this is devastating to loved ones and we offer our deepest sympathies. Planned Parenthood of Illinois cares deeply about the health and safety of each and every patient. We do not publicly discuss private patient matters and we follow HIPAA laws that forbid the disclosure of patient information.” The statement that Planned Parenthood cares about the health and safety of its patients is an obvious lie. If Planned Parenthood really cared about its patients' welfare it would subject its facilities to the same rigid licensing requirements of other health facilities. Its clinics would be prepared for the known complications of abortions and send patients to a nearby hospital if necessary. Patient privacy rules provide a convenient excuse for not releasing any potentially self incriminating information about how they mistreated Reaves.
Prominent civil rights leaders may have ignored Reaves death, but the daughter of Dr Martin Luther King, Jr.'s, brother Rev. A.D. King has spoken out. Dr. Alveda C. King has protested what she calls the "tragic slaughter of Tonya Reaves, a young woman, who was butchered in a Planned Parenthood abortion mill in Chicago?" http://www.priestsforlife.org/staff/alvedaking.htm
King goes on to say the people at Planned Parenthood "are going to a lot of trouble to make it seem that murders like Tonya’s are a fluke. Planned Parenthood promised Tonya a solution to her problems, and they killed her. Now, she is dead; a beautiful victim of the nefarious liars at Planned Parenthood. Yes friends, Tonya and her dead baby are victims. For those who want to point the finger at Tonya and say that nobody made her go to Planned Parenthood, think again. Planned Parenthood is a master of false advertising, and Tonya fell into their trap. They seduce vulnerable women into their web by promising that abortion and killer birth control drugs will solve all of life’s problems. They lie!"
She continued, " I was once a victim of the lies of Planned Parenthood". http://www.priestsforlife.org/africanamerican/howcandreamsurvive.htm
One of the arguments for legalizing abortion is that it supposedly would put unlicensed "back alley abortionists" out of business. That isn't the case in Illinois where unlicensed abortionists are able to ply their trade in visible locations. They may use sterilized instruments instead of rusty coat hangers, but patients can still die needlessly. Legalized abortion hasn't put "back alley abortionists" out of business. Legalized abortion merely allows the old back alley abortionists to operate legally.
Competent caring professional health care providers should have recognized that something had gone wrong with Tonya's operation and either provided her the help she needed or taken her to a facility that could help her.
Reaves death isn't anything new. Chicago Sun Times reporter Mary Mitchell recalled that when she was a teenager two of her friends had complications from abortions. They went home afterward, went to bed and bled to death. http://www.suntimes.com/news/mitchell/13957308-452/death-of-tonya-reaves-after-an-abortion-is-a-reminder-that-abortions-carry-risks.html
Removing any material from deep inside the body is major surgery and should not be taken lightly. Competent doctors recognize that mistakes can happen and things can go wrong for no apparent reason, They must be prepared to take immediate corrective action. Women who experience significant bleeding after an abortion should at the very least stay in a hospital for observation. Bleeding after an operation isn't necessarily the same as the bleeding associated with a woman's period. Bleeding after an operation can indicate a broken blood vessel that must be fixed.
Unlicensed medical facilities are what we might have expected to find serving black residents in southern cities like Birmingham, Alabama, or Philadelphia, Mississippi, during the Jim Crow era 60 years ago. There is no excuse for women of any color to have to rely on unlicensed medical facilities in major cities in the 21st Century.
Democrats falsely claim that by supporting abortion they are doing something to benefit women. The Democrats willingness to allow unlicensed and thus possibly incompetent personnel to provide abortion services that kill women indicates that Democrats don't care about women. If Democrats really cared about women they would have required states to provide women the same protection from poorly run health facilities that states provide men many years ago. If President Barack Obama cared about women he would have already closed down the unlicensed Planned Parenthood abortion mills in his home state instead of allowing them to kill black women.
Oprah earned $222,000,000 last year. She likely paid a lower percentage in taxes than you or I did. Do you hate her for being intelligent enough to become wealthy and give mega money to the charities of her choice (many of them are outside the United States) rather than the government?
Do you despise Romney or Brad Pitt for being wealthy and giving their money to the charities of their choice?
Do you feel people lose their common sense during the months prior to Presidential elections in political debate?
Those arguing over the constitutionality of Obamacare have consistently ignored the fact that Obamacare conflicts with the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade. The Court's decision to uphold Obamacare may provide statements that could be used to justify regulating and possibly even prohibiting abortion.
The Court wouldn't need to refer to Roe v. Wade to in effect overturn it. The justices could inadvertently overturn Roe v. Wade by making statements that conflict with it. Attorneys could use such conflicts to argue that Roe v. Wade is no longer consistent with the Court's interpretation of the Constitution.
I'm going to leave the tedious process of examining specific comments by the Justices to those who get paid to do such things. I'm more interested in the general theory involved.
There is a certain absurdity to the Roe v. Wade ruling. The ruling is based on a philosophy of limited government that is closer to the normal views of those called "conservatives" than to the views of those called "liberals". However, the conservatives have traditionally opposed the decision and the liberals have supported it.
The two groups also reverse their normal positions on regulation of abortion providers. Conservatives, who normally try to limit government regulations, favor strict regulation of abortion providers. Liberals, who normally favor strict regulation of health care providers, believe women who seek abortions don't deserve the same protective regulations of health care providers that protect those who visit facilities that treat both men and women.
The philosophy of Roe v. Wade is that health care decisions like abortion are a private matter and government has only limited authority to intervene in private health care decisions. Obamacare is based on a philosophy that there is no right to privacy in health care. Government can control what health care people can obtain by forcing them to purchase insurance that may not cover the type of health care they want or need.
For example, consider the case of a young transsexual who wants to save money he budgets for health care until he has enough money to pay for surgery to transform him into a woman. He might be unable to save his money for the operation if he had to first pay for insurance that would not cover the cost of the operation. Or, consider the case of a young woman who wants to fix what she considers flaws in her appearance, including paying for breast enhancement. Insurance companies wouldn't cover such procedures.
Congress can require people to purchase insurance that only covers conventional treatments that don't help them.. If they benefit from "experimental" treatments instead they must first pay for the type treatment that doesn't help them before they pay for the treatment that works.
Under Obamacare, wealthy members of Congress decide whether or not individuals can afford health insurance regardless of the needs and priorities of specific individuals. Under Obamacare there is no right to privacy in determining spending priorities. Government dictates what they must spend on the health care the government decides they can have.
The people who voted in Obamacare ignore the fact that a Republican president and Congress could make different decisions about health care than a Democratic president and Congress. For example, a Republican president might be able to sharply limit the medical procedures associated with abortion.
People should protest the showing of the movie "The Campaign" by staying away from the theater complexes that show it. Promos indicate the movie contains a totally unacceptable scene in which a man apparently hits a baby.
In the scene one man is shown starting to punch another man. The second man ducks resulting in the first man apparently hitting a baby in the face. The movie is being promoted as a comedy but there is no way an adult hitting a baby can be considered funny by any normal person. The movie doesn't show the punch actually hitting the baby. but the implication is that the baby was hit.
A man apparently hitting a baby isn't funny. When an adult hits a baby in the head sometimes the baby dies.
The standard comedy routine of a person being hit by mistake is for the person being hit to be a tough guy such as Sylvester Stallone. Having an adult hit a baby instead is sick, not funny. Only bullies hit those who are unable to protect themselves. Bullies are the ones most likely to be drawn to theaters to see an adult hit a baby.
The best way to protest this objectionable film would be to boycott the entire theater complex that is showing the movie rather than just boycotting the movie. Boycotting all movies at the complex will provide a greater incentive for the owner to replace the offensive film with another. If people only boycott the offensive film the owner only faces a loss on that film. If all films are boycotted he can't make up the loss with the other films.
At mall theaters, boycotters should consider staying away from the mall while the film is being shown.
Child abuse is a major national problem. The news media regularly carry stories about babies who have been beaten or shaken to death. Movie makers should not try to make the subject seem less serious by presenting child abuse as something to laugh at.
If you are up, one of the most important space exploration events is happening now through early Monday morning (August 6), the landing of Curiosity. Media coverage is pretty spotty. Fortunately there is NASA TV for us night owls. http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html
CNN is covering this at least on line but they are getting their feed from NASA, so go right to the source.
Update! Curiosity has landed..first photos.