Why Me?

This post is not going to be a very intellectual, political, or deeply thought out post that I've been staving off for a time when I run out of ideas. That said, however, this post does come a little late. In the MLB off-season, the GM's (general managers), Owners, and sometimes even Managers gather in Las Vegas where they will be dealing trades, deals, and talk about how to improve the MLB and their profits in the upcoming season. The Cubs, however, driven by their 100 year championship drought, fought bitterly, only to fall 150 miles short of receiving Cy Young award winner, Jake Peavy. I don't know why I'm even upset right now. What should I expect? I believe in a team that you can count on not coming through when the time demands it. O.K., we did get Joey Gathright, a speedy left-handed hitting outfielder from Kansas City which, because he played for Kansas City, leads me to believe that no one either: A. Knew about him because the Royals secretly genetically engineered him in an underground laboratory under their stadium, or more likely B. He's no damn good. I will give the Royals this, they weren't the worst team in the league for the 1st time in a few years so congratu-freakin'-lations! I still remain a Cub fan, I just got to see how this one will pan out for the Cubs.

The Ultimate Economy Stimulus

War in the past, believe it or not, has saved the world. In the great depression, what got the world out of a depression? War. Currently, we need something to get our economy going again. We need to get the people excited about something. What took our minds off the near apocalypse of the Cold War? The great Space Race. Right now, if were to go to the Moon, people might get excited for that, but we'd need something bigger. We could go to Mars and find bacteria that was once living and revive them back here on Earth. There are plenty of people who'd be willing to give up their lives for a type of discovery such as this. There is overwhelming evidence that there was once live on Mars. To what extent? Not the large scale Ecosystem that Earth owns, but a much more premature Ecosystem, a more basic Ecosystem. Later, we could see what these organisms would evolve into. Yes, it would be costly and risky, but if we find out that we're not alone, people would get excited instantly and get everything going again. In the end, I go back to my original point which was that we just need something to get excited about.

Who Do You Trust More AMERICA????

O.K., You are a witness in a crime and you're called up to the stand. You are asked to take standard oath where you are asked: "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" Nothing out of the ordinary, standard procedure. However, while you are taking the oath, the standard is that you'd have your hand on a Bible if you didn't ask for anything special. If you lie at this point, you cold be convicted of 'perjury.' Here's the question- why the Bible? I know for a fact, because I'm more of an Agnostic, I wouldn't feel that bad if I lied. However, if I was to swear on a copy of the Constitution, that would be meaningful. Now if I lied, I would feel as though I betrayed my country. I don't think I could live with that. After all, the Constitution is more than a series of pages that holds the outline of our government and our way of life, but what our Founding Fathers fought and died for. How can anyone let George Washington, our first and greatest president down? Today, everyone talks about what is "American" and "un-American." I believe that putting down the Constitution is the most un-American thing anyone could do to this nation. Therefore, I strongly support the idea that when someone is called up to the stand and is asked to take an oath of truth, they swear on a copy of the American Constitution. I believe that it comes down to this- Do you love your religion more than your country?

The Secret Police

This new assignment got me thinking- when would I, if ever, limit free speech? At first I couldn't ever come up with a situation of why it would be necessary, but when I talked to my parents about this, I realized that there are a couple of cases where I would limit free speech. To me, it depends on what type of war we fight. Three out of the last four wars we have fought (Terrorism, Vietnam, Korea) we have fought against ideals, governments, and rebellions, but no clear-cut country. In the Gulf War, we clearly fought against Iraq and pushed them out of Kuwait. When we have fought against a clear-cut country, we (the people of the U.S.) have come together and rarely spoke directly against the war at hand, but when we fought against an organization or a government (Communism), we have spoken out against out government's actions with impunity. I agree with the majority of the U.S. citizens on this matter. I believe that if I was president and we got in a war with an actual country, I'd put limits on our civil liberties so that our morale could be helped and so that we could focus on the war. However, if I was in this type of "Ghost Hunt" war where we are fighting an organization, I wouldn't limit civil liberties, unless the public, congress, and the Supreme Court thought that it would be in this county's best interest to do so. However, in the end, I believe that governments take turns being legitimately free, and then being a police state. Look at Russia, for example, the Czar system, though a hard system, was decently free. However, when it was taken over and turned Communist, a police state took over, until 1991 when a free government took over Russia again.