Opinari.net
Opinari - Latin term for Opinion. Opinari.net is just what it seems: a cornucopia of rants, raves and poignant soliloquy. |
Monday, January 31, 2005
Douglas Kern on the prospect of private Social Security investment accounts:
We have devised campaigns to make people drink crappy beer, eat awful food, sign up to die in foreign lands, and vote for Jimmy Carter. By God, if we can make dumb America enjoy professional wrestling, we can find a way to make dumb America like responsible investing. The sky's the limit: catchy slogans ('The Freshmaker -- Mentos Brand Debentures!"), celebrity endorsements ("Can you smell the interest that The Rock's CDs are earning?"), infomercials ("Gosh, Cher, my rate of return really is increasing!"), giveaways ("Select the Freedom Index 500 fund today, and receive this thirteen-piece knife set absolutely free!) -- you name it.
Right on. At some point, Americans have to concede that responsibility is essential to a free, productive society, and they have to allow others to take that responsibility. I, for one, am tired of being lumped into the "dumb" American category. I want the right to invest my money into something that will actually yield a return. As Mr. Kern rightfully says:
No investment could be worse than the investment we are all compelled to make into Social Security as it is. Just think: even as your money earns a negligible rate of return, it underwrites the wildly irresponsible spending of the federal government! And what's more, you may never see that money at all! Any private investment choice is better than this mess. It's better to moron-proof Social Security than to keep pumping our money into an archaic system of "savings" that no country in the world would recreate if given the means to do so. Indeed, in a system of free choice, the only person who would invest in today's Social Security system would be -- a moron. Who needs more proof?
It's all about choice, and taking responsibility for one's choices. That's all I ask for myself and my family.Labels: Archives_2005
.: posted by
Dave
12:18 AM
Sunday, January 30, 2005
Death Penalty and Connecticut:
Here in the Nutmeg State, we have the possibility of executing a death row prisoner for the first time in 45 years. This story has been covered by the local media here ad nauseum, so I won't go into many of the details. What we have though is a man, Michael Ross, who murdered 8 women in the 80s, and is now faced with the prospect of finally paying his penance for his brutality. Ross has been incarcerated for 17 years awaiting this moment, but only recently has he resolved to expedite the execution himself. Mr. Ross, it seems, has made the choice to die.
Most of us up here agree with his decision, especially the families of the victims. However, the ultra-liberal legal establishment does not. For the past many weeks, we have heard the same group of activist litigators and judges explain to the public how the conditions at Northern Correctional are deplorable, and how such conditions have led Mr. Ross down the path of insanity (they call it "death row syndrome"). This insanity, of course, means that Mr. Ross cannot possibly make a rational decision to end the appelate process, and seek to end his own life.
This is the same group of individuals that would have you believe that ending the life of an unborn fetus is an acceptable means of birth control, and ending the life of a terminally ill individual is equally acceptable, but terminating the life of a serial murderer is far too egregious to consider, especially if the inmate has himself decided that he no longer has the desire or will to fight the inevitable. This is to say that killing the innocent has a place in society, whereas killing the guilty as punishment does not.
The public has grown weary of such moral equivalence. Aside from his own desires, Mr. Ross committed heinous crimes. Multiple heinous crimes. The fact that he has lived in relative comfort (compare his "living conditions" with the deaths of his victims, and you will see why I use the word comfort) for 17 years is bad enough. To draw this ordeal out further while the families of the dead have to relive this trauma over and over again just makes it worse. It's time for the state to do what's right. End this situation once and for all. Put Mr. Ross to death.
MORE: I find Chief U.S. District Judge Robert N. Chatigny's conduct in this case appalling, and I don't understand why there is such an absence of public outrage on the matter. Read the excerpts of a conference call between Chatigny and T. R. Paulding, the lawyer for Michael Ross:
"(L)ooking at the record in a light most favorable to Ross, he should never have been convicted. Or, if convicted, he should never have been sentenced to death because his sexual sadism, which has been found by every single person who looked at him, is clearly a mitigating factor. Again, we're looking at a record in a light most favorable to him.
{...}
I suggest to you that Michael Ross may the least culpable, the least, of the people on death row.
The least culpable? Are you out of your mind, Judge? Have you read the police reports of the crimes committed by this man? What if it was your daughter that was raped and murdered? Would you then say "Well, he's sick. It was his illness that caused this to happen? Would you? I doubt it.
If ANYONE has a conflict of interest in this case, it is you, Judge. You are the anti-death penalty advocate who will stop at nothing to ensure that an execution does not happen on your watch, so you might as well start by threatening an officer of the court.
Pray, sir, that this never happens to someone you love. For your sake, I hope it doesn't.Labels: Archives_2005
.: posted by
Dave
9:54 AM
On the Iraqi Elections:
Early numbers show a 72% voter turnout, astounding for a "quagmire" such as Iraq. Imagine a 72% voter turnout in America... the MSM would be rambling about how remarkable such a thing was. But 72% in Iraq? So far, I've heard CNN mention the number, but mostly, I've heard the chirping of crickets, which is what I expected. And the MSM wonders why people are flocking away from them in droves?
I haven't seen much written today in the liberal side of the blogosphere regarding the Iraqi elections either, except for statements about how "draconian" the security tactics are. Is it really such an awful idea to ban driving when one of the insurgents most lethal weapons has been car bombing? Somehow, I don't think 72% of Iraqis think so.
All in all, it's a good day for the people in Iraq. I think, once a government driven by the "consent of the governed" instead of by totalitarian regimes takes hold (and, like it or not MSM, it will), American policy regarding Iraq will be seen as the salvation of the region, and history will look back on the role of the media as one of propagandous annoyance instead of informative relevance.
Labels: Archives_2005
.: posted by
Dave
9:32 AM
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Stupid Disclaimer of the Year:
OK, so Apple has the new iPod Shuffle, a low end music player that holds 512 MB worth of songs. Good idea by them, I think. However, this post is not to glorify their new products, but to villify their geniuses in legal and marketing. Check out the following disclaimers on the iPod Shuffle product page:
- Music capacity is based on 4 minutes per song and 128Kbps AAC encoding.
- Do not eat iPod shuffle.
- Rechargeable batteries have a limited number of charge cycles and may eventually need to be replaced. Battery life and number of charge cycles vary by use and settings. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information.
- Some computers require either the optional iPod shuffle Dock or a USB cable extender (sold separately).
See the bold faced one? That's right, folks. Just in case you feel really hungry, Apple is warning you now... you had better find a Snickers or some Doritos, because the iPod Shuffle just isn't edible. Thank you, Apple, for the helpful advice. Labels: Archives_2005
.: posted by
Dave
9:13 AM
| |
Recommended Reading
|
