Election Issues Today

What a popular topic today, the 40th anniversary of the first moon landing, July 20, 1969.

Like so many other space travel enthusiasts around the World, along with science fictions crazies, we thought a new age had dawned and that space travel was just a few years away for the rest of us.

Such was not to be. Not only is space travel not available to any but the very richest individuals in the World, a Russian Soyuz trip is about the only way to get into space. A trip to the International Space Station for ten or twenty million dollars is not what we had in mind for the masses.

Space travel is very limited even for the few countries who have engineered a vehicle capable of reaching orbit and returning. In fact, AFFORDING a national space program has become a real question of priorities in virtually every country, including the USA.

Back in 1969, NASA officials probably thought they would be engineering trips to MARS by the beginning of the 21st Century. So did I.

Now, however, even a return trip to the Moon is being re-tooled to do it on the cheap. Forget about Mars; the economy is so bad and the NASA budget so tenuous, that the “return to the Moon” plans are becoming doubtful.

For the population at large, the exploration of space, and manned space travel in particular, has lost the romance it once had. We need to feed our people, educate them, provide for their health and for their old age, not spend billions to put a man on the Moon. BEEN THERE; DONE THAT!

This is a Photo of an Official Invitation to the Presidential Inauguration on January 20, 2009.

I am posting this here because I have never seen one before, and I think it is kind of interesting.

(The Associated Press credits this picture to Photographer Susan Walsh)

This is nice; it is just a little piece of American history.  I wonder how many were printed up?  I wonder if it looks more “dignified” in the “sepia” kind of way that adds “officialness” to the document, or if the lack of color will aid in preserving the documents for many more years.

I note that the photo of Barack Obama features a little American flag on his lapel.  In an ironic sort of way, this is symbolic of the struggles he engaged in during the campaign to satisfy the critics that he was “patriotic” and American “through and through.”

Are you going?  You may take your camera, but no camera bag or tripod.  Cell phone?  Okay, but turn it off.  It probably won’t work anyway, due to special “security” measures in effect for electromagnetic emissions.  What a MESS!

Here is a list of Prohibited Items from the Joint Congressional Inaugural Committee:

* Firearms and ammunition (either real or simulated)
* Explosives of any kind (including fireworks)
* Knives, blades, or sharp objects (of any length)
* Mace and/or pepper spray
* Sticks or poles
* Pocket or hand tools, such as “Leatherman”
* Packages
* Backpacks
* Large bags
* Duffel bags
* Suitcases
* Thermoses
* Coolers
* Strollers
* Umbrellas
* Laser pointers
* Signs
* Posters
* Animals (other than service animals)
* Alcoholic beverages
* Other items that may pose a threat to the security of the event as determined by and at the discretion of the security screeners

Frankly, you could not convince me to go within 100 miles of this event, no matter what enticement you offered. Heck, I even stay away from shopping malls during “sidewalk sales,” and avoid restaurants on “family night” just because of the numbers of people.

People?  They expect THREE MILLION PEOPLE!

I will be recording the event on a DVR so I can watch it later and “fast forward” through all the “boring” parts….ha ha ha….just think about that.

Here it is, Thanksgiving, and I am again so thankful for the END to POLITICAL Messages.

It is this way every year, but particularly so every two years during the off-year federal elections, with many state and local election candidates vying for air time with the congressmen and senators.  It is especially so during presidential election years, and this past YEAR has been the worst, with the heaviest advertising load that I can recall.

Not only was it heavy during the weeks and days leading up to the primary and then the general election, but the entire YEAR was devoted to presidential political “messages.”   Never before has a candidate had so much money to spend, and it went on and on and on.    If you live in a “battleground” state, you were probably ready to puke by election day.

In fact, it got SO BAD here that my wife and I purchased a DVR and thereafter watched virtually every program in delay…fast forwarding through up to TWELVE commercial announcements between program segments.

There was one good thing to come out of all this:  I learned that I can “fast forward” through football games from the end of one play to the “snap” of the next play.  The number of seconds that the DVR advanced coincides perfectly with time between plays–unless the team goes “no huddle” and that messes everything up, but still, I can skip the half-time chatter…that’s all it amounts to…chatter between commercials…and watch an entire football game in about a hour. AN HOUR! 

That’s like reviewing game films in the locker room…without the damn coach!  

California Prop 8 Ignores Civil Contract Law

Marriage is a civil contract, sanctioned by the State, recognized by other States, and by other nations of the World.

Couples do not enter into a contract with God; they enter into a contract with each other.  God doesn’t “join” any persons together.  Priests and ministers are allowed to “officiate” in the United States because of traditions developed hundreds of years ago, when churches and synagogues ruled the daily affairs of the masses.

The various States of the United States issue marriage “licenses” to couples who are entering into a “contract” by which they agree to accept responsibilities and debts of the other party, agree to share assets and liabilities, acknowledge rights of each party to inherit and act in the other party’s interest.

The contract is executed upon the marriage license document by affixing of signatures by the contracting parties and witnesses who attest to the identities of the signatories.  In some States, the equivalent of a notary public is required, e.g, a judge or elected official.  In some States, a minister, by statute or constitution, is authorized to officiate.  Even then, witnesses are required to attest to the identity of the parties.  In some States, the parties to the marriage contract merely have to sign the license in front of a witness, who can be anybody.  The marriage contract is legalized by the signatures of the parties involved.   There need be no judge, minister or any other “officiating” person or ceremony.  That is how the Montana Constitution reads. (Montana Codes Annotated 40-1-301 “if no individual acting alone solemnized the marriage, a party to the marriage shall complete the marriage certificate form and forward it to the clerk of the district court. “)

The marriage contract is a civil right.  There should be no rights of religious groups or beliefs that override the rights of individuals to enter into a marriage contract.  For voters to impose their own religious beliefs upon the civil rights of any individual citizen of the United States should be illegal and therefore the results of Proposition 8 should be promptly overturned by the California Court System.

The United States seems to be divided into two strong factions.

On the one hand are those who refer to themselves as “progressive,” and their political opinions frequently mimic their social opinions as well. This faction endorses interracial marriages and equal rights for all, regardless of race, national origin, gender, or sexual orientation.

The other faction uses religious and faith-based values to determine their political and social stances, and also seeks to impose those values or beliefs on the “progressive” faction.

Now tell me, does not the religious right, the ultra-conservative Christian and Jewish factions, use the same arguments as the Islamic mullahs who would impose “Sharia*” upon their populations?   Why do the most conservative of the Christian and Jewish faiths not see that they have much in common with the Islamic mullahs?  Why do they not see that what they seek to impose on others is a violation of the tenets of our Constitutional guarantees of “separation of church and state”?

*Sharia law is the instrument by which Political Islam seeks to control the Muslim world. The Sharia should be opposed for its imposition of theocracy over democracy, its abuse of human rights, its institutionalized discrimination, its denial of human dignity and individual autonomy, its punishment of alternative lifestyle choices, and for the severity of its punishments.

Our own freedom to practice what we believe is limited to the point at which they impair the exercise of that same freedom by others. I am so disappointed in the otherwise progressive voters of California.