Jul 18, 2005

Spitting Against the Wind: Not Advised! Why Do They Do It?

Remnant of people past
Much of the political talk these days is about whether Rover pissed on the carpet, and whether his owner will take him to the pound if it is determined that Rover's action was illegal, that is, a violation of the White House lease. So, they tell us that the determinant factor in one's behavior is not a tad above what the law prescribes [how convenient!]. OK, I can live with that, but I expect more from those in the highest echelons of our government. I expect that they have acquired the notion of what's right! [read: correct] Competence would be nice too. Avoiding petty vindictiveness would also be very nice. Admitting mistakes, learning from them, and changing one's ways would definitely be welcome. Not rewarding failures by giving presidential medals and promotions would show that serving the country well is above allegiance to Caesar. While Bush keeps raising the tolerance bar in order to keep his elephants around him, they're getting bigger by the day, bloating from their own air of arrogance! Some special counsel Fitzgerald, I heard, is running around with a prick in his hands looking for trouble. He's talked about "the crime being committed," and, "the plot against Wilson." We shall see.

By the way, Rover had been known to be a carpet pisser many times before the latest leak. For a dog, he's a natural. Bush 41 kicked him out of the house, but junior was all to happy to see his pitbull mortally wounding McCain in South Carolina in 2000. The stench coming from this one-party government is now becoming overwhelming. We better open the windows and let some fresh air in. We'll have a chance to do just that in 2006 and again in 2008. Otherwise, our old trusted friends won't be visiting again and we may find that our only choice would be shady characters who lurk in dark alleys. We've associated with them before, and it was a bad experience; let's hope they're a thing of the past.

Speaking of fresh air, I came across Jared Diamond's Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. [read a recent interview
here] The author examines past civilizations [like the Aztec and the Maya, the Greenland Norse, and the inhabitants of Easter Island] and the underlying reasons for their extinction. Obviously, there are many causes for a civilization's collapse, but the environment is of utmost importance. It plays a great role in fostering a civilization or eventually dooming it! Invariably, the losers had made the decision to destroy their immediate environment. Today, we are doing it in a much greater scale and the results are evident already! The scientific community is in agreement about global warming. Granted, the earth may be going through temperature cycles, but no scientist (except those who work for the fossil fuel industry) refutes that human activities are affecting the planet's climate on a grand scale.

I don't know about you, but I like fresh air, clean environment, and the thought that future generations will have a nice place to live in. Our best tool of understanding--science--tells us that we've been very careless in the last 100 years. The 1990s were the hottest on average in the last 1,000 years. The oceans are absorbing huge amounts of carbon (the result of burning coal and oil) which has been altering the water's acidity, influencing water temperatures, current flows, intensity and frequency of hurricanes, etc. The negative effects of environmental deterioration would be felt most severely by the poorest people on our planet. So, if we are to promote a culture of life, shouldn't we care about the conditions under which people live and try to improve those conditions when it makes a difference?


There are those who are adverse to science, either because they "don't get it," or, because it makes them uncomfortable by revealing truths they don't like. The Bush administration has been actively distorting scientific data. The NOAA scientists report political interference with scientific determinations. The government-funded agency is directed to keep silent if the facts don't fit the White House policy. Morale is low, and funding is cut. In other words, the conservatives are not for conservation and long-term stewardship of our common treasures like the environment.

I learned, very early, to appreciate the natural beauty and the great outdoors as it was introduced to me by my father. He taught me to respect and protect our environment so my children and future generations would also marvel at this unique and beautiful world of ours. He also told me that we humans are part of this ecosystem--which in essence gave birth to us--so we should be grateful and become good housekeepers. We shouldn't pollute and destroy our only house! Stupid behavior is not advised, just like spitting against the wind. Personally, I wouldn't mind if some ignoramus got his face soiled from feeling the effects of his stupid actions, but this is our house too; we must protect it and keep it clean.

For starters, Rover has to go. His master and the rest of the cohorting clique should follow soon because they've been partying too much at our expense, damaging the reputation of our house, while running up huge bills for us to pay. I've already picked up my broom and can't wait to use it.

14 comments:

Samantha said...

Very interesting take/analogies. Kudos to Andros for seeing the connections! However, my experience with dogs tells me that much of their behavior problems are attributed to their owners. My "Rover" doesn't piss inside the house, he's not mean but sweet and friendly... and not just to other dogs, but to cats too!

Andros said...

Many years ago, I watched James Burke's Connections on PBS. He was a genious at finding "connections" between seemingly unrelated subjects.

Burke is also the author (and host of the old series) The Day The Universe Changed.

I'd definitely recommend his books. Not just for trivial knowledge (actually they're good for learning history in a fan way), but also for a sense that we need to look under the surface to discover the connections and, thus, gain a greater understanding of seemingly unrelated events.

Derek said...

Rove was fired by Bush 1 in 1992 for slandering another Republican operative.

Truth or Dare said...

Actually, Rove has been the force behind the slandering campaign against the then Democratic governor Ann Richards (whom Bush defeated).

Rove also killed McCaine's run in South Carolina in 2000 by using sleezy tactics, and thus ensuring Bush the nomination.

Andros said...

I included this information in my original draft, but I edited it out to shorten the post. I'll include a couple links though. Besides, Rove should go not because of his past behavior but because of his recent misconduct.

In Texas, he was behind "push polling" in which the caller asks the potential voter hypothetical questions, like, "if you knew gov. Richard's staff was dominated by lesbians, would you vote for her?"!!!!

Also, questions based on lies... like, "If you knew Senator McCain had fathered an illegitimate child with a black woman, and that his wife is a drug addict, would you be more or less likely to vote for him?"!!!!

Unfortunately, in certain states, race, and sexual orientation are major concerns to the voters there....

Geeshus said...

That's right, McCain was coming off a great victory against Bush in New Hampshire and Rove knew that McCain had to be stopped at any price in South Carolina. The Republicans who voted in that primary were the most conservative, backward, gullible, biased bigots you'd ever find in this country. Of course, they went for Bush.

Kris said...

If you believe that we're living the end of times, no need to worry about the environment. Or, if you believe that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, then obviously you're not scientifically inclined!

Anderson said...

I always wondered why those people who don't care about the environment do so? Don't they have children? Then I thought that their benefit from "unbridled capitalism" is so great that they believe they and their descendants will always have options!

Andros said...

They will have more options for sure. But, they're short-sighted, greedy, and don't really care that billions of people, mostly the poorest, will suffer first and foremost. This explains their version of "culture of life" that they talk big about, but do little to promote & enhance life in the span between birth and death--when it clearly matters!

Anonymous said...

I don't know if I can be optimistic about overturning the Republican tide next year and in 2008. This country is conservative by and large. Besides, the mid-term Congressional elections draw so few people... (what, like 25%?)

L8 said...

Bush is polling very low, but both parties get low marks by the electorate. Don't understand why the Dems who don't control anything have such low numbers too!

Tuli said...

This is a wonderful post. Again you have connected the dots.

Thanks, Tuli

Green said...

Don't leave out the EPA. Once an agency active in safeguarding the environment, it has lost lot of respect because it has been gutted and de-clawed.

click here

Daedalus said...

EPA- Environmental Propaganda Agency, spitting out your tax dollars on television commercials that mislead the ignorant masses.

We can sit back and say, "2008, we're not going to win it, because the country's too conservative," or we can start working now and get a headstart. I'm not sure the country is as conservative as everyone says. Most people don't really care as long as they aren't affected personally by a policy. That's not conservativism, that's apathy. What we can do now is change the apathy into concern, but we sure aren't going to do it by posting comments like they do over there at Democratic Underground. No love will be won with hatred.