Observation. Anything new or innovative that gives the good guys an advantage over the bad guys is short-term. In a short time, the bad guys will come up with a way to overcome or get around anything the good guys may devise to stop them. The good guys usually rely on technology and massive amounts of manpower and material in their efforts to beat the bad guys; and their solutions are usually expensive, require much training, and take a long time to create and implement. The good guy philosophy is “might makes right;” that massive amounts of money, material, training, and manpower is the way to overcome an enemy.

The good guys believe in fighting a “clean” fight. They believe a good fight is one in which neither side suffers any loss of life, which usually means they will die while trying not to kill a good guy. The good guys go so far as trying not to offend the bad guys who are trying to kill them.

On the other hand, bad guys rely on simple methods that are cheap, use readily available materials, and may be used by anyone. They believe in winning at any cost, even if it means dying. When you are willing to die for a cause, you have an edge as long as you have plenty of people who will take the place of the dead ones. The bad guys have one goal, the annihilation of the good guys in any way possible at any cost.

So far, the good guys are winning, but the gap is narrowing as the bad guys have adopted some good guy technology. Instead of trying to come up with even more technology to stop this, the good guys have got to start adopting some of the bad guy methods.

Some say that if we lower our standards, we are no better than the bad guys. Some say that when we lower our standards, they will just keep getting lower. Some say our standards are more important than winning.

I say, even if all this were true, what good is it if we are all dead. Our standards not at some ideal point that has never been reached before. If the standards are lowered, they can be raised again. However, if we are all dead, there will be no standards to maintain, lower, or raise.

We can maintain our holy-than-thou high moral standards and die, or we can lower our standards, and possibly offended some group or people, and live. Which is more important to you?

Comments. None.

Observation. People seem to think they are special. They understand that people can get sick, accidents can happen, nature can turn deadly, and that there people in the world who do evil things, but they seem to think that they are special and that none of these things should ever happen to them. Then, when it does happen to them, they think that it must be someone’s fault and that they are owed something because it happened to them and they are special.

Comments. None.

Observation. At some point in our lives, we have all done something foolish or ignorant. However, since most of us are neither foolish nor ignorant, at some point we realize we did something foolish or ignorant, and we strive to never do it again. However, there are many among us who never realize when they have done something foolish or ignorant—these are the fools and the ignorant. Fools and the ignorant always do foolish and ignorant things, and, since they are foolish or ignorant, they never realize it.

Our society has decided that it is its responsibility to help the foolish and ignorant when they do foolish and ignorant things, and to protect and support them so they may propagate and give birth to even more foolish and ignorant children. At some point, the foolish or ignorant will outnumber us and we will not be able to support them any longer. Since they are foolish and ignorant, they will foolishly and ignorantly revolt against their protectors, and society as we know it will crease to exist.

Since they are foolish and ignorant, they will not be able to exist on their own, so they will eventually fade away. Our only hope is that some of us will survive this apocalypse and will be able to repopulate the earth as the foolish and ignorant become extinct. Hopefully, this new society will not repeat our society’s most foolish and ignorant error—the protecting of the fools and the ignorant and helping them survive.

Comments. None.

Observation. Ever notice that when Democrats loose elections they say it was because of Republican corruption and voting fraud and that, to win again, they must work hard to fight the corruption, but, when they win, they say that it was because the people wanted a change. As Democrat Representative Polosi said just before the November 2006 elections, “If they win, it will be because the people want a change, but, if they lose, it will be because of voting fraud.” Apparently, as Democrats see it, when they win, it must have been because the Republicans did not work hard enough to rig the elections.

Ever notice that when Republicans loose elections they say it was because they lost the faith of the people and they must work hard to earn back the faith if they want to win again.

Some people are poor losers, and some are even poorer winners.

Comments. None.

Observation. When you see photographs in a martial art instructor’s office, or anyone else’s office for that matter, that show him or her beside celebrities, dignitaries, politicians, or other famous people, ask yourself, “Is this a photo of the instructor beside a famous person, or is it a photo of a famous person beside the instructor?”  Famous people will permit practically anyone beside them for a photograph, but they are much choosier about who they are beside for a photograph. The former shows the famous person doesn’t mind being in a photograph beside the instructor, while the latter shows the famous person wants to be photographed beside the instructor. Don’t confuse the two types of photographs. The former is the same as any tourist photo; the latter indicates the famous person’s respect for the instructor.

Comments. None.

Observation. Why is it that people who have done something bad in their past want you to forget what they did in their past and only consider the good they have done in the present; however, when these same people do something bad in the present, they want you to remember and consider any good they may have done in their past? Life does not work that way! When people consider your character, they must examine your entire life—the good, the bad, and the ugly If you do consider the bad in a person’s past, you are condemned for not showing forgiveness and for dwelling in the past. If you do not consider the good in a person’s past, you are condemned for only considering the present and not considering all the good the person has done in the past. Either way, you end up being the bad person.

Comments. None.

Observation. Follow this logic:

• Cocaine is a problem in United States.

• Cocaine is an illegal drug.

• Cocaine is originally produced in powered form; however it may be made into crack, an easier to handle form that may be smoked to get it into the system quicker.

• Since crack is a more potent and more dangerous form of cocaine, the punishment for its possession, sell, and/or use is greater.

Therefore, crack users receive greater punishment than users of the powdered form.

• More people in the lower-class use illegal drugs than do people in the upper-class.

• For whatever reason, the lower-class has adopted crack cocaine as the form of cocaine they prefer to use, while the upper-class has adopted the powdered form as their preference.

Therefore, lower-class crack cocaine users receive more punishment than upper-class powdered cocaine users, and since they have more drug users in general, more of them are arrested and convicted.

• The lower-class contains more minority races than does the upper-class.

Therefore, minority races receive more and greater punishments for cocaine possession, sell, and use than do the majority races.

From these facts, logical, or illological, thinking liberal minds have deduced that the justice system is unfair because it punishes minority races more for the use of cocaine than it does the majority races.

Any unbalance by the criminal use of cocaine is caused by the people who choose to use it, not by a racially prejudiced justice system. If lower-class minority criminals do not want to receive greater punishment for the possession, sell, and use of crack cocaine, they should switch to using powdered cocaine or, even better, stop using illegal drugs, and become productive, law-abiding, upper-class, minority citizens.

Comments. PR200639 says: last time i checked breaking the law is breaking the law. regardless of what ethnic group gets caught doing it, the same punishment should apply for everyone. (TKDTutor says: Yes, it should, that is why the punishment for the use of cocaine is the same for all ethnics groups.)

law abiding and upper-class don't go hand in hand. "upper-class" white people get to draw the social lines and decide who's accepted as being "decent" in society (even when they're not decent themselves). (TKDTutor says: It is true that lower-class people are also law-abiding; in all classes of our society, there are more law-abiding citizens than there are criminals. If that were not so, we would have anarchy, and, since there are so many more lower and middle-class citizens than there are upper-class citizens, there are many, many more law-abiding people in these groups.

In any society, the upper-class usually decides what is decent; primarily because they are usually overrepresented in the groups that get to make those decisions. In most cases, the law-abiding lower-class agrees, and when it disagrees, it is usually because it thinks the standard of decency is too low, not too high. Most crime committed upon lower-class people is committed by other lower-class people. Upper-class criminals tend to go where the most money is, in the upper and middle-classes. Therefore, most lower-class people want tough laws that are strictly enforced, not lighter laws and punishments.

Laws are made by elected officials, who are elected by the public. Through their voting, the public expresses its opinion to elected officials as to what is decent. If this opinion is not supported by the officials, the public votes new officials into office. Is there hypocrisy in the public? Sure there is! But that does that make all people hypocrites. You cannot judge all by the actions of a few. Should you be judged by the bad done by your second cousin just because he is a part of your family?)

So who's decent? There's Bob the white middle class construction worker. Sure he works hard all week, society see's him as a stand up guy with a family. After work ties one on with the guys, occasionally messes with street drugs. He drives home drunk and high out of his skull. He endangers himself, his family, and others on the road. He gets pulled on his way home, gets charged with a dui and posession.

Should he get a lighter sentence than the black guy cause society see's him as a "decent", working, middle-class white man? (TKDTutor says: Who says Bob’s drunken behavior is decent? No one but another alcoholic would consider his behavior as okay. Bob does not get a lighter sentence because he considered decent, he gets a lighter sentence because our society has decided that alcohol abuse is not as bad a crime as is the use of cocaine. Which would you rather have happen, that alcohol abuses get more punishment or that cocaine users get less punishment?)

I won't even get into the white collar crimes. (TKDTutor says: White-collar crimes are indeed another subject, one that has been argued for decades. Since white-collar crime is mostly an upper-class crime, committed against the upper and middle-classes, the lower-class does not really care about it.)

(Include your email address if you want to communicate directly.)

Observation. After each election for at least the last 16 years, the Democrats have claimed rampant election fraud, no proof just claims. In fact, just before the November 2006 elections, Representative Pelosi stated numerous times that, if the Democrats loose in the elections, it would be because of voting fraud. The Republicans say all the elections have been fair.

Democrats won the November 2006 elections, so their deduction is that the elections must have been fair. The Republicans also say the elections were fair.

Let’s analyze the situation. When Republicans win, they it was a fair election and the Democrats say it was fraudulent. When the Democrats win, they say it was a fair election and the Republicans agree. Apparently, Democrats think that if they loose an election, it must have been because of fraud, while Republicans just accept a loss as a loss. This says a lot about the basic philosophies of the two parties.

Comments. None.

Observation. The entertainment industry claims that television shows, movies, and video games that last for hours do not influence children or adults to commit crime or take part in any illegal activity. And yet, advertisers pay millions of dollars to the entertainment industry to play ads that only last a few seconds. These advertisers are not paying to entertain viewers, they are paying to influence viewers to buy their products. The entertainment industry claims its products have no influence on behavior and yet it charges others for the opportunity to run ads on its products in an effort to influence behavior.

Comments. None.

Observation. Having morals is now considered a fault. If you have moral convictions and stand by them, you are wrong.

While your convictions may not be what is “in” at the time or they may not be with the majority or while they may even be evil, at least when you have moral convictions, those around your know where you stand and have some reasonable expectation as to what you will say or do in a given situation.

People criticize President Bush for his convictions. Love him or hate him, at least you know where he stands. The same cannot be said for Presidents Clinton, Carter, or Nixon. They said and did what was politically expedient at the time. If I know where you stand, then I can deal with you. If you have no stance, I never know what you will do so I cannot trust you.

Take a stance and stick to it. If it is proven wrong, change it. If it is right, defend it. Just do not “go with the flow” and do what everyone else does just because it is the easiest or most advantageous thing to do at the moment.

Comments. None.