Life is a Highway

Life is a Highway

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Larry Bird ESPN SportsCentury: The Legend that never died

Larry Legend
Imagine an NBA Basketball Player from the 1980s who wasn't fast or couldn't jump very high. Who wasn't a very good individual defender and he's a good ole boy from Rural Indiana. Just based on those factors alone, how well do you think a player like that would do. How long would he even play or better yet be in the league, would he play at all. Would he even get drafted but thats only part of Larry Bird's characteristics.

Larry Legend Bird's career wasn't about Athletic Ability. The closest thing to Athletic Ability that Legend had, was his Hand Eye Coordination, the best we've ever seen in Pro Basketball. And Larry's 6'9 225 pound frame, he could play both forward positions, because of his ability to rebound, shoot, pass and handle ball. All relating to his Hand Eye Coordination not his ability to run or jump. Larry was too big for almost any Small Forward that tried to cover him, other then James Worthy or Domique Wilkins in his era.

Because he could shoot right over you and back most Small Forwards down in the post. And Larry was too quick for most Power Forwards to cover him, Larry wasn't fast obviously but quick. With excellent footwork and always knew where he was going. Larry Bird was one of if not the smartest basketball players the game has ever seen. Not a genius off the court but brilliant on the court and that was the secret to Larry Bird. To go with his Hand Eye Coordination.

Larry Bird with his brilliance and Hand Eye Coordination could see things happen before they did. And thats what made him better then everyone else, because he always knew where to be and where to go. Because he always knew where they play was going to be, where he had to be to make the play. He saw things that his coaches or even Point Guard couldn't see and being the Leader of the Boston Celtics. On the floor, he took it upon himself to always make sure he was in the right place to make the play.

Thats why he was such a great rebounder, because he always knew where the ball was going to bounce. Based on the guy shooting the ball and based on his own shots, he knew when he missed the shot. And where to go based on how he missed it and when he made the shot.. This is also why he was such a great passer, because he saw openings for his teammates. In where to go to receive the ball and would pass the ball there. Even if his teammate isn't there yet and his teammate would go to that spot. And generally be wide open for a layup or a jump shot.

The Celtics always knew they had to get the ball to Larry. At least once on every possession, because he would either get his own shot. Or set up one of his teammates. The reason why Larry Bird was such a great Leader, because he was team first and team last and everything else in between. How many games would it take to win, in order to have the best playoff position possible. To get to and win the NBA Finals, which is how he and the Celtics judged their success. In the 1980s and the Celtics knew to get on Legend's back and he would show them the way. And take them to the Promise Land.

Friday, February 10, 2012

The Master Illusion: Real Time With Bill Maher- New Rules- Occupy Wall Street

Source: Real Time With Bill Maher-
Source: The Master Illusion: Real Time With Bill Maher- New Rules- Occupy Wall Street

The 1960s Hippie movement not that I'm from that generation or even old enough to remember it happening, even though I wouldn't of mind living through it and even being part of it, marching for civil rights, marching against the Vietnam War, marching against the War on Drugs, which the Federal Government officially launched in 1971, perhaps President Nixon was high himself when he declared that War, which would explain a lot of strange decisions he made as President, but thats a different blog. The Hippie movement of the Boomer Generation, was about individual liberty basically. There was nothing socialist about it, sorry today's so-called Progressives, but thats what it was. The ability for free adults to live their own lives and be individuals. Again as long as they aren't hurting others with what they are doing. All things that make Rick Santorum (excuse my French) shit in his pants when he thinks of it. He's still having nightmares about college students having sex on campus, women actually defending their country in combat. But again thats another blog, just throwing a few ideas out there off the top of my head.

The Hippie movement of the 1960s and early 70s, was of course not perfect and they made their mistakes like a lot of others. The Manson Crime Family comes to mind, the whole notion of free love, which of course is bogus. Because babies get made out of free love, consequences come from it. There's nothing free about it, but the broader point had to do with again free adults being able to make those decisions for themselves. Gay and women's rights was part of the Hippie movement. Interracial dating and marriage didn't seem strange anymore. The President of the United States is a product of this. This is a movement that Liberals and Libertarians should love, because it was about individuals being able to live their own lives. And they didn't like the establishment and didn't feel they fit into it and wanted to live their own lives and be individuals. Whether the establishment and even their parents approved of their lifestyles or not and is something that Religious and Neoconservatives hate. Makes them want to get plastered and high themselves, just thinking about it.

Because of the individualism in it and the fact that people wanted to live their own lives, what we have now is a modern Hippie movement, which isn't a liberal movement. Not fighting for individual liberty, but a movement that wants to dramatically change the economic, as well as government  system in America to put in their own agenda and make America less individualist or more collectivist like Europe. The Generation X and Y Hippies resemble the Boomer Hippies, in a few senses. They like sleeping in tents, they like pot, they hate the War on Drugs, they hate bigotry (at least for most people) and they hate are current military operations. But ideologically they are a lot different. It's great to see especially with young people, people getting behind a cause and organizing behind a broader movement. Especially with all of the modern distractions we have today, with New Technology and everything else.

Whether I agree with what they are trying to do or not, which I don't as far as what they would do instead, but to compare both Hippie movements as if they are similar, is a stretch. Yes they are both made of young people. (Who else would they be made up of), senior citizens living in nursing homes) and yes they both sleep outside like homeless people, but do it by choice. They both smoke pot and are both anti-war. But they are different in what they were organizing for. And based on what the modern Hippies would like to do instead, if they came to power, perhaps less pot in the future and do your policy planing with more sober minds. I think Hipster would be a more accurate term for the so-called modern Hippie. People who'll do anything to seem hip and have a far-left bent in their politics. Because Hippie means someone who is very free-thinking and non-establishment and collectivist. Who doesn't fall for whatever the current fad is. And is able to think for them self even if the so-called popular will disagrees. 

Thursday, February 9, 2012

Meso Steros: Real Time With Bill Maher- Bill Maher on Education

Source: Real Time With Bill Maher-
Source: Meso Steros: Real Time With Bill Maher- Bill Maher on Education

Twenty years ago the United States was somewhere in the top 10 in education. I really should look up exactly where, but thats about right, today according to the United Nations and I believe the World Bank. Today we are 39th, despite having the largest economy in the world and being the most powerful and important. The Daily Caller reported in a study today 30% of South Carolinians can't name the current Vice President of the United States. But probably 99% of them know who Steve Suprrier and if you're not a college football fan, too bad for you. Now I realize that South Carolina is not known for producing genius's, if you can read, write, add and subtract in either English or Redneck, you're considered educated there. But still when 3-10 people in any state can't name who the Vice President of the United States, the First Officer of the Executive Branch, but can tell you what Kim Kardashian had for lunch today, or what are her favorite shoes, but don't know where the Pacific Ocean is, even if they live in Hawaii, you have a low-educated public.

These are excellent clues on how far America has been dumbed down and what a lot of Americans see as important and not important. If its something they enjoy doing and is cool, its important, but if its something that makes them think and requires more than a sound bite answer to answer the question or be intelligent, then its not important. And thats where we are as a country and why are kids aren't learning, because a lot of them don't consider education important enough to actually get one. Because it takes time away from their activities that they enjoy doing. I'm not a parent and glad not to be, but as Bill Maher another man without kids said he cares about our kids not being well-educated for selfish reasons, because their stupidity effects us. For example some dumbass kid crashing into you, because he was texting while driving. That one message that he or she had to deliver at that exact moment, was more important to them, than paying attention to what they were doing.

Our educators are partially at fault for the lack of educated workers we've produced the last ten years. And why we are importing people to take the jobs, that not enough Americans are qualified for. But a lot of our educators are working in a bad system that rewards seniority over work product. And the parents have a role in this as well, devoting more effort in keeping their kids busy and entertained. So they aren't bothering them with whatever they have to do. And that gets to things like entertainment centers, i-phones, ipads, laptops, etc, things that use to be gifts and rewards for good behavior. Like turning in a good report card, but now they are seen as needs to get kids your kids to do something, they are like bribes now. Because the kids are in charged and their parents are worried about losing them. I'm all for new technology and entertainment and everything else and generally those are positive things. Until they take the place of things that are more important. Like making sure you get a good education so you can be productive in society. And not have to live on public assistance for most of your life. Because you didn't get yourself the skills that you need in order to take care of yourself. Getting a good job and paying your own bills.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Matthew Ives: Real Time With Bill Maher- The Hypocrisy of Evangelical Christians

Source: Real Time With Bill Maher-
Source: Matthew Ives: Real Time With Bill Maher- The Hypocrisy of Evangelical Christians

The more and more I see "Conservative Christians", the more I believe they don't understand what Christianity is about. Or understand Jesus Christ and have ever even read the Bible or the 10 Commandments. Because Christianity is supposed to be about love, treating people the way you want to be treated, love vi neighbor and all of that, do on to others what you would want done to you. Its supposed to the opposite of hate. And the more I see "Conservative Christians", the more I believe these aren't religious organizations, but more like religious cults. People who are completely warped out like PCP addicts. Who don't understand the world for what it is. And a religion they are supposed to be love and try to convert people to their religion. Even as going as far to the Middle East to covert people to their Religion. These aren't religious groups, but political groups, trying to get into power to pass their political agenda.

Passing a bunch of new laws and limiting the freedom and rights of people that they don't like, just because they don't like them. Its really as simple as that. The same-sex marriage debate, perfect example of that. It wouldn't surprise me if they have at least one lawyer, whose not high or drunk. Actually has a few brain cells left and has told these groups, "look, we don't have a legal case here, if these cases are decided in court. We are going to lose, we can't pass laws restricting people in how they live, because you don't like them." There are probably some sober lawyers working for the Christian-Right telling their clients that because of the U.S. Constitution, they simply don't have the facts on their side. And their best chance to passing all of these restrictions on people, is through the ballot box. And hope it doesn't get overturn in court, that there's a judge who doesn't understand the Constitution.

The Christian-Right in America is the largest religious cult and even though they aren't very large in numbers, maybe 10-15% of the American electorate, almost all of them living in the Bible Belt, they are still very powerful, because they have one major political party in their back pocket. The Christian-Right is so excuse the expression), far up the GOPs ass, that if the Republican Party couldn't get rid of them (even (by taking a huge shit) they need each other for their survival. It comes down to that. Without the Republican Party, the Christian-Right is a third-party in American Politics. Well maybe a major party in Alabama or Mississippi. And without the Christian-Right and the Republican Party appealing to other voters, lets say Independents and Libertarians to replace the Christian-Right, the GOP would become a third-party as well or maybe still a major party. But the Democratic Party would have most of the power across the country. Except in the Bible Belt and we would essentially become a one-party state. Like Mexico 15-20 years ago, which isn't good for any liberal democracy.

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

"Andrew Sullivan Is Wrong About President Obama's Progressive Critics": Progressive need to Grow Up about Barack Obama

If your a Progressive Democrat and may only be a Democrat because you believe Socialist Third Parties can't get elected in America. And you want a Presidential Candidate to Nationalize the Healthcare System. Nationalize Big Banks, the American Auto Industry. Create a 21st Century New Deal which would be the Fair Deal. That would essentially double the size of the Federal Government and what the Average American would be paying in taxes. Reverse the Bush Tax Cuts for everyone and go back to the Eisenhower Tax Rates that ranged from 25-90%. To invest in all of these new Federal Agency's, gut the Defense Department. All these things that Progressive have been wanting to do, basically since the New Deal and Great Society. And I didn't even mention the things that have to do with rewriting the US Constitution, basically so a Progressive Government. Would have the authority to do these things, as well as repeal the 2nd Amendment and probably the 10th Amendment. That limits the authority of the Federal Government and perhaps even amend the 1st Amendment. As it relates to Freedom of Religion and Hate Speech. Then these are the type of politicians you should be backing and trying to get elected. Good luck getting any of those people elected by the way, you would probably be better off with praying and hoping for miracles. Perhaps finding religion, because these things aint happening. You don't race a mule in a Nascar Race and you don't hire a Liberal to do the work of a Socialist.

Is Barack Obama perfect, of course not, do I have disappointments with him, of course I do. Which mainly relate to the War on Drugs, Patriot Act, Indefinite Detention and until recently. Perhaps being the worst negotiator we've at least seen in a long time. As far as how he deals with an Opposition Party, who believes they have all the power. And not very familiar with the Separation Clause of the US Constitution. But I don't see President Obama as the devil or a traitor or a Democrat in disguise as a Moderate Republican. As Progressive Democrats do, some of these Progressives are so far to the left. That they can't see the center with a telescope and because of this, everyone who doesn't think like them. Is either a Conservative or a Libertarian, both things I've been accused of myself. And I'm a Liberal Democrat, I'm Pro Choice but not just on Reproductive Rights. But a lot of other issues that I see as Freedom of Choice issues, like Prostitution, Gambling, Marijuana, Same Sex Marriage, Doctor Assisted Suicide, Gay Adoption. But also support pulling our troops out of Developed Nations in Europe, Saudi Arabia, Japan and Korea. I would like to see the Defense Budget cut but 200-300B$ a year. I support the Public Option in Healthcare Reform just not Medicare For All. Leaving the Public Option out of the Affordable Care Act is one of the disappointments that I have with the President.

Barack Obama is the guy that Progressive Democrats other then the Nader Raiders and the Kucinich Supporters backed in 2007-08. And had they've done their research and given how Tech Savvy most of these people are. It would've been nothing more then a Homework Assignment for them. They would've seen that Barack Obama is not Ralph Nader or Bernie Sanders, two Progressives they love. Thats why the Nader and Kucinich Supporters didn't support Barack Obama. They saw him as another New Democrat in the mold of Bill Clinton or Jack Kennedy.

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Atheist Blog: Real Time With Bill Maher- If Jesus Ran The Republican Nomination

Source: Atheist Blog: Real Time With Bill Maher- If Jesus Ran The Republican Nomination

There's new evidence that the Christian-Right and I need to think twice about using that term, because Theocratic-Right or Theocratic-Cult, may be a more accurate way to describe Religious Conservatism in America, because these people don't represent Christianity the way it actually is. But having said that, the Religious-Right in America might not have complete control of the GOP nomination process. Why, because a Mormon is there frontrunner and unless he ends his presidential campaign prematurely, or suddenly dies or something, or for whatever reason can't continue his campaign before the presidential election, Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee for President in about four months in Tampa, Florida. The reason why I say that, is because Religious Theocrats or as I prefer to call them American Theocrats, that would like to see the United States governed by their interpretation of the Bible, consider Mormonism a religious cult. Which is funny because I consider Religious Conservatism to be a religious cult.

If Religious Conservatives were in charge of the Republican presidential process, Rick Santorum would be the Republican frontrunner. Because Rick fits this religious cult like Karl Malone fit John Stocton with the Utah Jazz. (Remember the phrase Stocton to Malone?) He fits their religious ideology perfectly other than being a Catholic and not an Evangelical. Rick believes that pornography, heavy metal music, condoms, should all be illegal. He supports a constitutional amendment to allow the Federal Government to takeover marriage. But then has the balls to speak out against Big Government. Which is like Jim Morrison speaking out against the dangers of alcoholism. Assuming Jesus Christ is as swell of a guy that his followers claim he his, Ron Reagan or Barry Goldwater would be the Republican Frontrunner today. And he would've brought one of those guys back to life.

Some might say Abraham Lincoln is the best Republican the Republican Party has ever produced. Pretty damn close, its hard to find a better one and even though he freed the African slaves and saved the United States, he was essentially a racist. He believes Africans weren't equal to Caucasians. But didn't believe they should be the property of anyone. And assuming he had those beliefs today, wouldn't fit in very well in American politics today. Someone like Ike Eisenhower, Gerry Ford, Barry Goldwater or Ron Reagan, all these guys are people the GOP should be looking up to today. Not Rush Limbaugh or any other Neoconservative or Tea Party Nationalist. 

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Michael Savage: Glenn Beck- 'When You Lose Jon Stewart on ObamaCare, You're Done'

Source: Michael Savage- Jon Stewart & Glenn Beck-
Source: Michael Savage: Glenn Beck- 'When You Lose Jon Stewart on ObamaCare, You're Done'

If you take Glen Beck seriously especially when it comes to politics and current affairs and use him as a news source and get a lot of your news from The Becker, then I have real news for you. Listen up because you might actually learn something, I hope that hasn't scared anyone away. If this is the case then your one ignorant person, you're one of the biggest dumbass's in the world. Your ass is so big and dumb, you can't name what state Florida is in. Or what county Los Angeles is in or you can't find the Pacific Ocean from a San Diego beach even with eyesight and a map. And someone giving you directions in your first language. And also this is even worse, you probably watch a lot of Fox News. And take them as a serious news source, when I and I'm sure a lot of other people take Fox News as seriously as Onion News or the AlterNet.  A Far-Left publication that promotes conspiracy theories.

Glen Beck is a not a news reporter or a news anchor, he's barely an editorialist. He's a comedian an entertainer and a lot of times even entertaining, as well as Libertarian. Who uses his comedy to make his arguments and points. But a lot of the things he says, just isn't true and he knows it, he uses humor to make his real points. And if you listen to him often enough, you might actually learn something. Because he does throw in facts from time to time and even makes good points. But he shouldn't be taken as a serious news anchor, because he isn't. Watching Glen Beck is not like watching ABC Nightline, which is hard news and very informative. Watching Glen Beck is like watching the Daily Show, but not as entertaining.

Glen Beck one of the so-called progressive ( socialists and communist, in actuality ) movement's biggest whipping boys, for a few reasons.

For one he's a Libertarian who believes in limited government. That there's a limit to what the Federal Government should be doing in people's lives. That we should be free to live our own lives, as long as we are not hurting others with what we are doing. Thats scares the hell out of so-called Progressives that live in the world of big government not very progressivism, where there's no such thing as a problem that the Federal Government can't solve and who are collectivists that believe we should all be the same. No better or worse but the same that we should be a community not individuals.

Another thing that not very Progressives don't like about Glen Beck is that he doesn't live in their world of political correctness, Beck is not a bigot but he's not afraid to offend people which really pisses off lack of Progressives. Who like to label anyone a bigot that offends people they like or says something they disagree with. I'll give not very Progressive commentator Larry O'Donnell ( as I call ) him from MSNBC The Last Word credit. Because he knows what Glen Beck is and understands his whole act. Doesn't agree with him on anything probably, even the price of gas. But sees Beck as an entertainer and actually finds him funny.

Glen Beck is clearly an easy target that can be made fun of, kinda like throwing rocks at the ocean. Because he does at times seems like he went to outer space and never made it back. My whole point about The Becker, is when he does his editorials, don't take anymore seriously then when you're looking at political satire. Take as the act that is and even listen closely if you like him. Because from time to time you might learn something.