ladykatza

i went to my county’s Democratic Comittee meeting on saturday morning. i’ve been bemoaning the fact that something needs to be done, something HAS to be done to keep all my freedoms from slipping away. its also obvious (to me) that its almost impossible to effect anything on a large scale without starting small. i realized that if i want the right to bitch, i better be exercising my right to vote.

i mentioned this to those that came over saturday night, and steve (the eternal pessimist) said “vote your conscious but i’m going to tell you that they aren’t doing anything to help what is going on”

so here’s my rant.

i’m not exactly a democrat, but i’m definately not a republican. since going out on my own and starting a revolution is not an option for me, i’ll join the opposite side. its THE most organized group (which isn’t always saying much) opposing what i don’t like in my local government and its a place to start. nothing gets done by sitting around and bitching about it.

“but if you speak up and write letters they are going to notice you and come after you!”

i want them to notice me. i’m not doing anything wrong, so its not a problem for me. i am a voting member of my party and my taxes pay their salary.* big corporations can lobby for policies, but on a local level, in the long run, my vote counts. THE MAN has too many other things on its plate to come after me.

“you’re wrong! they will come for you eventually”

and if they do, at least i can say i tried. if, in the unlikely event i become worth the time, effort, and money, to single me out i will make sure that its big, ugly, and noisy. but its unlikely because again, i’m not doing anything that’s “against the law” and i don’t have anything of monetary value worth taking.

“and that’s exactly why they won’t pay any attention to you”

please see above paragraph marked with a *

write your representatives, pay attention to local elections and get involved. if you don’t do these things and suddenly you are faced with a law that you don’t like then i’m going to say; sit down and shut the fuck up you pansy ass whiner. you didn’t try to do a damn thing beforehand, so you have no right to bitch now.

and that is all i have to say about that.

Current Mood:  determined

This comes from Neil Gaiman’s blog, and the word is to spread the word. Sixteen authors are auctioning off a nameplace in their books and all proceeds will go to benefit The First Amendment Project.

Even if you don’t have a great sum of money to use for the auction, you can still donate to the cause.

Wikipedia has the following information on John G Roberts. One might find this rather interesting.

Current Mood:  nerdy

The Supreme Court ruled today that private property may be absconded by the State for development reasons. Even if you do NOT live in a blighted area.

Article here

On a paticular message board I frequent, the following was said, and I find it highly insightful.

The nub of this problem is actually here:

“Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random,” O’Connor wrote. “The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms.”

No-one should have disproportionate influence and power in the political process - To acknowledge that a disproportion exists is to acknowledge that the political system is broken.

So. What are we going to do about this?

Current Mood:  aggravated

if you look up “pundit” in the dictionary, or in this case www.m-w.com, you get the following:

One entry found for pundit.
Main Entry: pun·dit
Pronunciation: ‘p&n-d&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Hindi pandit, from Sanskrit pandita, from pandita learned
1 : PANDIT
2 : a learned man : TEACHER
3 : one who gives opinions in an authoritative manner : CRITIC
- pun·dit·ry /-d&-trE/ noun

and if you look up philosopher you get this:

Main Entry: phi·los·o·pher
Pronunciation: f&-’lä-s(&-)f&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, modification of Middle French philosophe, from Latin philosophus, from Greek philosophos, from phil- + sophia wisdom, from sophos wise
1 a : a person who seeks wisdom or enlightenment : SCHOLAR, THINKER b : a student of philosophy
2 a : a person whose philosophical perspective makes meeting trouble with equanimity easier b : an expounder of a theory in a particular area of experience c : one who philosophizes

which i find interesting, because if you look up the first definition of pundit, its pandit, and that gets you this:

Entry: pan·dit
Pronunciation: ‘pan-d&t, ‘p&n-
Function: noun
Etymology: Hindi pandit, from Sanskrit pandita
: a wise or learned man in India — often used as an honorary title

i will now ask you to take the time to annalyze similarities (and differences) here.

to explain where this came from, i have to backtrack and little and explain how some of my brain software works. i have, and always will be, a multitasker. i’ve always wanted to know something about everything, and i am constantly skimming all forms of media for more information. the internet was invented by people like me. while this has its drawbacks (mistaken for having ADD as a child), i’ve found that it serves very well in being able to get a mental relief map of how the world is working. sometimes, as for a writing such as this, i take a closer look at the terrain. but i digress…

one of the things that i hear and read in my skimming is the term “pundit” and “talking heads” or “the experts say”. certain bytes come up and say that policy is being shaped by these pundits for things such as global warming and genetic research. we have “economic pundits” and “ecological pundits” and “political pundits” and “business pundits” and “religious pundits” and.. hold on, rewind that.

did i just say religious pundits? aren’t those suppose to be philosphers? when did we get “experts” pontificating (i’m liking this word today. PONTIFICATING! its what i’m doing right now… hey… I’M a pundit) on religion? aren’t those kinds of people suppose to be philosophers and stay in the realm of clergy and acedemecia?

i seem to remember that in human history, philosophers helped shape the landscape of societal structure by speaking at length on their thoughts and epiphanies. many of them were persecuted for speaking their mind, and while that’s not a practice of the times, one can certainly see the debates that arise from what our “pundits” have to say. i can’t see them as philosphers. those have been filed away with antiquity for they don’t translate into soundbytes very well (”soundbyte” is a word that has been invented in my lifetime).

hmm… i should say here that religion and philosphy does not always go hand in hand, but usually they do. both spring from ideals that the human mind has created. they both are things purely cerebral, and have little to do with measuring, mixing, stirring, or computing in scientific manner.

pundits always seem to allude to this fact or another, in interest of science and all. to me, however, they all seem to be doing the same thing, espousing purely cerebral opinion. they use the same logic that i’m using to draw a connection.

that is to say… none.

oh.. and one other thing. anyone who has studied statistics knows that they can be manipulated to say anything you want. much like corporate accounting.

Current Mood:  thoughtful

Current Music: Bjork -Human Behavior

With Republicans holding power the White House and Congress, conservatives see the Supreme Court as the final obstacle to control of all branches of the federal government.

so, its been said, outright and by the associated press. if we lose our system of checks and balances, then i’d suggest you start practicing your goose-stepping.

rest of the article here

Current Mood:  anxious

Current Music: apoptygma berzerk - non-stop violence

plans to limit judicial power in a bill that i haven’t decided is good or bad as of yet. the wording is very strange.

Current Mood: disturbed

something REALLY BAD is about to happen in congress.

no, i mean really.

here’s hoping that there are enough republicans left with some semblance of sanity to not do this. it seems to be getting a view of “but the democrats are getting veto power!” when the republicans did this to a great number of the judge appointees during the Clinton administration.

the one big reason that i didn’t want Bush Jr. in power is because i forsaw this happening. stack all three branches of power in your favor, and VIOLA! oh look, the conservatives just ruined our checks and balances system. it reminds me of any time someone at AIT would use something in the rules to their advantage to piss off the story tellers, the ST’s said “fuck you, we’ll change the rules” (from my husband’s point of view, this was a win). sometimes the rule was broken and needed to be changed. sometimes it was truly their way of tit for tat.

petty, stupid, and it sucks because they can get away with it.

“beating will continue until morale improves”

Current Mood:  aggravated

Recently, there was an editorial that was posted in USA Today. You can read it HERE if you are so inclined.

Please write to your representatives and urge them not to renew the Patriot Act. There are too many things in that bill that are harmful to our freedom of speech and expression.

Current Mood: concerned