No TV - 10 Years and Counting

Why Cable and Dish TV Cannot Pay Us to Watch TV

It has now been over 10 years since my family and I have gone "cold turkey" on giving up network, cable and paid TV (HBO, Showtime, Stars, etc.). Honestly, it was not as difficult to go without TV as we initially thought it would be. For the first couple of weeks, there were comments about missing favorite shows, how quiet the house was without TV, and discussions about how habitual it was to turn on the TV when we were tired, bored, angry, frustrated, or just "stressed out." However, those comments and conversations quickly faded as we found more creative and satisfying ways to fill our time. Today, we still have a television in our house, but it is used to watch movies that we rent through Netflix. When we first gave up network, cable and paid television, our family and friends gave us funny looks and asked us "How did you do it?" - like we had switched from oil to wind energy. However, today, many of our friends are doing the same thing. When we talk to them, we find that they came to the same conclusions about television that we did.

• Lack of Intelligence - From the "reality shows" to the comedies, the level of intelligence in the plots, points and writing is below average to shows that were available 50 years ago. That is just sad.
• Lack of Creativity - It seems to me that writers have run out of ideas when it comes to new shows. The conversations are empty, repetitive and simply boring.
• Lack of Morality - Yes, we are a Christian family. I make no apologies for it. However, I cannot see how even an atheist family can appreciate the moral decline in today's television shows - singles sleeping with people outside of committed relationships, friends betraying friends, lies being told for the sake of convenience, greed as the motivating factor for almost every action.

TV? No thanks - I don't see the point. If there is a show worth watching, it is probably online - making it much easier to monitor and control what my children watch.

Republicans Playing Election Year Games

Seen these headlines?

• White House Threatens Housing Veto
• Paulson: Wall Street Needs Stronger Oversight By Fed
• Bush Blames Democrats For High Gasoline Prices
• Fraudulent Mortgage Crackdown

This is such a joke. Let's take a look at each story.

The White House is threatening to veto a bill designed to slow down the spiraling rate of foreclosures saying that it needs to see how large mortgage lenders would benefit from the legislation. WHAT?!? What about the Medicare Pharmaceuticals Bill? How much investigation was done into how the largest pharmaceutical companies would benefit from the bill? Answer: None. The same goes for all of the Energy Bills passed during the past 8 years. Who investigated the benefits that would be reaped by Big Oil? Nobody. This is a farce.

And how about this one?

"Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson urged quick action to give the Federal Reserve explicit authority to step in to protect the financial system if its stability is threatened."

QUICK ACTION? Who are they kidding? This administration has caused the current economic conditions. They have had almost a decade to dig this hole and now they want "quick action" and "explicit authority" to save our financial institutions. Sorry, but this is sounding too much like the rhetoric we heard after 9/11.

"Bush Blames Democrats For High Gasoline Prices" - This is probably the most ridiculous headline I have read recently. Bush is more to blame than any other single individual for the rise in gasoline prices. From the lies told post 9/11 goading us into war to the energy bills he has signed into law, President Bush has loaded the pockets of his bedroom buddies in Big Oil who have caused the precipitous rise in gasoline prices.

Finally, the "Fraudulent Mortgage Crackdown" - can you say "too little too late"? What will happen to those who are convicted or make plea deals? Fines - maybe at best. The HUGE majority of them will WALK. Mark my words.

And all of this is just an orchestrated effort by the medical/financial/military-industrial complex - a.k.a. the Republicans - to defame the Democrats in the run-up to the presidential election.

War in Iraq - Clock

1913 Days since the start of the War in Iraq

U.S. Military Casualties since the start of the War in Iraq

(Includes casualties from fighting in Afghanistan)

Deaths - 4622

Wounded - 30333

Visit Anti-War.com

War in Iraq - Clock

1911 Days since the start of the War in Iraq

U.S. Military Casualties since the start of the War in Iraq

(Includes casualties from fighting in Afghanistan)

Deaths - 4620

Wounded - 30333

Visit Anti-War.com

War in Iraq - Clock

1909 Days since the start of the War in Iraq

U.S. Military Casualties since the start of the War in Iraq

(Includes casualties from fighting in Afghanistan)

Deaths - 4616

Wounded - 30333

Visit Anti-War.com

Ron Paul's "Campaign for Liberty" - Why?

Being a believer in the principles and liberties on which the nation was founded, I have been supporting and following the Ron Paul campaign. Because I am on their mailing list, today I received a "Letter from Ron Paul" stating that he has now begun a "Campaign for Liberty" with it's own website, blog, and apparently - funding. I have read through the "Mission" page on the campaign's website. The principles and strategies laid out there seem to me to be strikingly similar to those of the Libertarian Party. Therefore, my question is "Why?" Why do we need another campaign for liberty? It would appear that we already have one that is organized with a presence in all 50 states and has even nominated its own candidates for President and Vice President of the United States, not to mention has won many local races in many states for county and state offices. My guess is that Congressman Paul has seen the decline in support and unity within the Libertarian Party and is determined to find another way to advance the ideals and principles of that party. Even with a former U.S. Senator as their candidate, the Libertarians are only polling 2%-7% of the vote. I believe that Dr. Paul is very aware of this and knows that he must grow a libertarian base within the Republican Party to effect real change in Washington, D.C. He knows that the chance of a Libertarian candidate ever being elected President are almost nil, but that there is a real possibility in pulling the Republican Party back to its platform. Only time will tell, but if Paul can succeed in helping more "libertarian" Republicans get elected to local, state, and national offices, he might see his very own R3volution realized.

Why The Media Pressure On Obama?

The "Liberal Media Bias" is a complete myth. Case in point: the media's over-analysis of Barack Obama's choice for a Vice Presidential running mate. Where are all the questions about McCain's choice for Vice President? Faux News pounces at every opportunity upon the people chosen to help Mr. Obama select the best candidate for Vice President. The news networks have barely mentioned (if at all) the people helping McCain at the highest levels of his campaign staff. At least we know who is on Mr. Obama's team. Apparently, Mr. McCain is hiding his key staff. Republicans are showing themselves to be cowards. They are afraid to run on the issues. It is all about character assassination and innuendo. This may have been successful in the past, but this year it will not be a winning strategy. Try to "Swiftboat" Mr. Obama, and the Republicans will be rewarded with the loss of the Presidency and more seats in Congress. Honestly, that would not please me. I prefer to see a divided government - one party in control of Congress and another in the White House. It creates more accountability on both sides. However, if the Republicans keep using the methods of avoidance and character assassination, the Democrats will have a very good election year.

Why "It's All Good" for the Oil Companies

A friend of mine (who has very different political views than my own) and I had a rather profound and lengthy discussion recently about the price of oil, it's relation to the economy, and why neither good nor bad economic news seems to slow its ascent. For example, my friend was rather baffled why higher unemployment and a weaker dollar would cause the USO (Oil Exchange Traded Fund) to climb even higher. After all, he reasoned, wouldn't that mean that people would be buying less and that despite the declining purchasing power, companies would have a difficult lowering prices until the price of oil (needed to produce and transport goods) came down? Hmmm.... it would seem so, would it not? However, despite the facts that my friend stated, there are other facts still pushing oil higher. Although higher unemployment would seemingly push oil prices lower, 5.5% unemployment is not enough to frighten oil companies into believing that consumption will slow dramatically. In addition, China's economy continues to boom spurring an increasing demand for more oil causing even more hardship on the average American by pushing gasoline and heating oil prices ever higher while their wages are able to purchase less than they did last year or last month. These hardships do not matter to the oil companies. Consumption has not dropped enough to make a difference to their bottom line, and they have not found the breaking point at which the consumer will rebel. Therefore, their profits continue to grow. So, until things get "bad enough" to cause the U.S. consumer to stop purchasing, oil companies will continue to push prices higher, soaking the consumer for every penny possible.

And, if the U.S. economy were to turn around and begin booming... well, it's like I said in the title. It's all good for the oil companies.

War in Iraq - Clock

1904 Days since the start of the War in Iraq

U.S. Military Casualties since the start of the War in Iraq

(Includes casualties from fighting in Afghanistan)

Deaths - 4611

Wounded - 30333

Visit Anti-War.com

Carrey & McCarthy on Autism

Jim Carrey and Jenny McCarthy are doing a great service to the cause of preventing autism. I am sure that they will be slandered by many in the Medical-Industrial Complex for things they have said and done to increase awareness about the possibility of a connection between vaccinations and autism. However, the questions that they and the host of other families affected by autism raise about the link between vaccines and autism are completely valid. Some of the questions being asked are:

• Why are children being vaccinated even when they are ill? And, why is there no research being done comparing children who have been vaccinated when healthy versus children who were vaccinated when ill?
• Why are doctors continuing to give children multiple vaccinations during one visit when there has been no research into possible adverse interactions between the vaccinations being given?
• Why are the CDC, FDA and the rest of the medical community so reluctant to demand that more testing be done and that more precautions be taken until questions like those listed above are answered?

These are just a few of the questions that parents and other family members are asking when it comes to the pharmaceutical companies and children's health and safety. They are not unreasonable questions. They are not "radical" ideas. The pharmaceutical companies have a responsibility to their consumers to answer questions like those above and many others being asked by families who are trying to deal with physical and mental health problems like autism. Even more, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FDA have been charged with the responsibility to hold doctors and pharmaceutical companies accountable to the public whom they serve. If you know someone with autism (most likely you do), please contact the CDC, the FDA, and the Surgeon General's office to request that they demand further vaccination testing and to implement more stringent rules concerning how vaccines are administered at least until further research has been completed. Thank you.