Reparations- A Great Idea

There is a growing movement according to the news to grant reparations to African Americans for slavery suffered by their ancestors up until about 140 years ago. At first, I resisted the idea, but then I got to thinking about it and now I think it has some real possiblilites. My family is Scottish in origin, a border clan to be specific, and King James I of England threw my family off their land in the 1600's. As a matter of fact, the English threw us off our land a second time in Ireland in the 1700's. It seems to me that I should be owed reparations. I believe the Queen of England is one of the richest people in the world, so she should be able to compensate me and never miss it. Now that I think about it, there are others that should be chipping in also. The Angles, the Saxons, and the Jutes invaded England starting in about 300 AD. Certainly they dispossed my family of its lands also. The Normans invaded in 1056, and I am sure they are culpable also. I should be able to wring a little money out of the Norsemen too. They were mostly Norwegians and Danes. Why should they get off just because they are nice people now. I know what you're thinking. You think that all that stuff happened a long time ago and probably should be forgotten at this point. I disagree. My claims only go back about a thousand years. Piffle! The Jews are claiming Israe because they occupied the land two thousand years ago before the Diaspora. If it is good enough for the Jews, the it is good enough for me. TheJews probably should be able to get all of Europe and America to kick in for past injustice. They're going to need it considering what they are doing to the Palestineians right now. The Armenians have one hell of a claim against the Turks. The third world has a pretty good claim considering the mess that the colonial powers made in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and the 19th centuries. The Shiites have a marvelous claim against the Sunni, the Irish should be able to get something from England, and consider the claims that will come out of eastern Europe against the Russians. Here in the US, the Indians probably have an excellent claim against whites and blacks. I am sure that the Indians remember the buffalo soldiers with great fondness. For my part, I'm forming a group called SAR's (Scots Asking for Reparations). I'll let you know how it goes.

More Energy for Energy Policy

Crude oil prices have topped $75 per barrel and appear to be going up from there. I am surprized that there isn't more energy being put into energy policy in Washington. You almost get the impression that the administration likes the way things are. Could it be their strong ties to the oil industry? That's the part that I find just a little disturbing. Our lack of self sufficiency in energy makes us accountable in our foreign policy to all sorts of interesting governments. We are in the same position as your average junkie pleading with his supplier. Saudi Arabia and Nigeria are two nations that come to mind. Either could grind the U S economy to a halt by cutting the flow of crude oil. In addition, crude oil reserves can be the only sane reason that we are in Iraq, but that is a whole different discussion. So where are the true conservatives on this issue? You would expect them to be screaming about how we need to be truly independent so that their conservative philosophy can be implemented. Instead there is silence. I suspect the reason is that in order to solve our crude oil addiction, it would require someone with enough courage to raise the taxes on a gallon of gas. This is precisely the kind of problem that needs big government if there is to be a solution. Imagine a scenario where gas is raised to $5 per gallon with the tax going to energy saving solutions like light rail for the metroplexes, atomic power, and biofuel development and infrastructure. It would be possible over a five year period to actually reduce our dependence on foreign oil. In the short term, it would surely reduce consumption also. It would spur energy development in this country by keeping money in this country rather than just bailing up our money and shipping it offshore in container ships. I could actually see a national effort similar to our program in the 60's to put a man on the moon. Imagine what would happen if we put that much energy into solving our energy problems. The government hasn't done a thing about improving the energy situation in the U S for the last 6 years and I do not anticipate anything happening for at least two more years. Things will change during this administration only if there is a crisis. I really do not want a crisis. People freeze to death if there is a crisis, real estate values plummet, and the little people, you and I, suffer.

Where's the FDA?

A headline today is that acetomenaphen may cause liver damage. It should not be news to most people. There have been rumblings for a long time. Tylenol has even tried to be proactive by getting out commercials that basically say "We don't want you as a customer if you can't use the stuff correctly." So far everyone seems to be acting honorably in this situation. The one question that I do have is where is the FDA? Aren't they the guys who should be jumping on this situation like a bum on a baloney sandwich? Shouldn't they be talking with the manufacturers about warnings on the bottles, and alterations to the packaging? Aren't they the group that is supposed to be looking out for the little guy? I find their absence from the discussion a little disquieting, but not totally surprising. Basically, the Bush administration turned the FDA from an industry watchdog into a drug product expediter charged with getting drugs onto the market in a timely fashion. Drug efficacy or safety should not stand in the way of making billions. That has been proved a couple of times in the last few years. It would have been nice if they would have said at that point that the FDA was as useful as a toothless watchdog, but they didn't. Apparently FDA approved still means something to the unaware. Who do you turn to for advice on drugs then? I am going to listen to what the EU or the Canadians say. Both groups seem to be more concerned with protecting the public. Eventually though, the USDA needs to be rebuilt and made much more independent from politics.

Homosexuality, Arkansas' Governor, and Foster Kids

I am glad to see that the governer of Arkansas has demonstrated that Kansas isn't the only state where stupid people can get elected to public office. In Kansas they get elected to the state school board and throw out 100 years of evolution science in favor of chapter 1 of Genesis. In Arkansas the governor came out in favor of not allowing gay couples to be foster parents.

Basically, I think he is saying that it is better for an abused or abandoned child to live in a state institution than it is for that child to live in a house with two mommies or two daddies. I wonder if he has consulted with the kids about this. I would think that the sexual orientation of their foster parents would be rather low on their list of considerations. You would think that they would rate a nice house, and good food and people that do not hit you or sexually abuse you as much more important.

Sex probably occupies 1% of most people's time. That assumes that you spend 1 and a half hours per week making love. This is probably a stretch for most people, but I'm trying to make a point here. The rest of the time people are just----people. They go about their business being people with very little sex involved. I do not think it matters if you are gay, or hetero or French.

I think this is probably true for most everyone except conservative Christians and Republicans who seem to spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about sex. Specifically, they must be thinking a great deal about who is doing what to whom and how they are doing it. They must be the most sexually obsessed people in the world. Sex is just a small part of life for everyone else once they get beyond their teen years.

I'm digressing here. I suspect for most abandoned and abused kids in Arkansas the fact that someone is there in the middle of the night when they have a bad dream is far more important to them than if Daddy is sleeping with a Mommy or another Daddy. Social psychological research backs this up. I find it strange that the governor does not feel that science applies to the state of Arkansas.

There are some strange people in this world. I guess the governor of Arkansas is just a little stranger than most.