Man dies, presumably from blood loss, after getting bitten by a shark. Another sad case of an unsuspecting diver/swimmer being attacked by unmerciful, godless sharks? Think again. The diver, Marcus Groh, was sharing the water with bloody chum, used to bait sharks and give divers a ‘face to face’ experience. From that one dude, who tried to kiss the shark and got his face knawed off to the guy who thought bears would see him as anything more than deli meat wrapped in a leather jacket, this is yet another indication that mother nature is not to be fucked with. Proceed with caution.
The Times released an article on John McCain’s contradictory stance on ethics and his general imprudence, under a thinly veiled accusation of infidelity. McCain quickly denounced the article, claiming that many of the sources came from under the obscure moniker of ‘former associates.’ Even lefting leaning, albeit perennially bi-polar, Slate criticized the Times for this amalgam of redemption, honor, repeated occurances of poor judgement, and scandal.
But my issue, isn’t with the article itself, but what the article, and perhaps the media, has failed to address as an admission of underhandedness.
After the potentially career destroying Keating Five debacle, McCain sought to redeem himself, going after pork barreling politicians and earmarked, pet projects. But as soon as he stepped onto the national stage as a presidential candidate he has softened his stance on campaign finance reform because of its unpopularity within the Republican party. Former presidential contender, Republican Mitt Romney went as far as using McCain’s (former) stance on reform to attack McCain.
We can all agree on money’s ability to corrupt. And while the Democratic front-runner is running a campaign on lobbyist-free money, the Republican party has all but acknowledged that they’re party cannot survive without special interest groups. Following a year of continual GOP miscues, a failed Republican executive, and a party divided by McCain’s nomination, has the stage been set to bring a Dem back into the Oval Office?
The Humane Society of the United States recently distributed a video from an undercover investigation at the Hallmark Meat Company in California. Let me first say that I am a meat eater. I do not agree with the guerrilla tactics of radical organizations such as PETA. And I am content with the idea of raising and farming of animals for consumption. But after watching this video, I will certainly think twice the next time I purchase red meat.
While this new footage may be news to some, the inhumane practices of the meat and dairy industry they have been long documented by the HSUS and even popularized by films such as The Corporation. Sadly, videos like these are rarely covered in mainstream media. Furthermore, unlike the HSUS, organizations like PETA have been hurting the cruelty awareness campaign, making a very serious problem seem fringe-fanatical. This video, alone, would have drawn minimal press coverage and has only been brought to light because it led to the largest beef recall in history.
While the publics moral acumen towards these atrocities may be stunted, we are understandably alert to its potential danger to the consumer. Many of the cows in the video are classified as “downer cows” and are banned from consumption because of their links to mad cow disease. The video shows several of these cows being prodded, electrocuted and dragged in order to pass USDA inspections. It is clear that this industry is willing to take inconceivable measures to get their products approved and shipped to the market.
Some say that a large scale boycott would cause the meat industry to perform even more egregious offenses to hold onto already razor sharp margins. Perhaps the best way to address this issue is to take a look at the energy and petrol industries. I recently spoke to a friend about my experience designing an white paper environmentally friendly jet. The premise of the operation was that passengers would happily pay a duty or premium knowing that their environmental footprint would be reduced compared to conventional air travel. What seemed like a financially laughable plan a year ago now begets a new industry founded on this principle. People care about their image. And these days, environmentally aware is synonymous with conscientious, educated, and affluent. It is therefore no surprise that the Prius is one of Toyota’s best selling cars.
Organic, hormone-free, free range chicken and cattle have been on the market for years, but are noticeably more expensive than your average Safeway fare. And it seems unlikely that such a mundane product would compel the consumer to vie for a product that they can’t be seen driving in. While I try not to make this a habit, I, again, advocate governmental support/regulation. Subsidize these safe-practice companies so that they can compete with the likes of Hallmark. Even the burgeoning alternative energy industry is getting help from the government in terms of rebates and funding. The one thing more important to people than their image is their health. Whats preventing us from doing the same thing for the food industry?
Another appalling school shooting inside this country and as the article above touches on, yet another reason why there should be stricter gun control laws. The author posits the counter-argument that if gun control laws were looser, someone inside the classroom would have been armed and could have shot back at the aggressor.
Are you fucking kidding me? I am no gun control expert. I’m not aware of the rules and regulations of applying for or owning a gun. For all intents and purposes, I’m a normal guy with no police record and could probably walk down to the local Walmart with my driver’s license and pick up a rifle. And yet I have absolutely no urge to do so. Why? Because I dont want a fucking gun. Gun control laws could be repealed tomorrow and it wouldnt make a difference to me. Would it have made a difference to the victims in Dekalb? Possibly. But ask yourself, would you buy a gun if you could pick one up at the local convenient store? Would you then also bring this gun to class?
And who are these people who pugilistically defend the right to bear arms? The majority are the so called “social conservatives,” who want to minimize the controls the government imposes on the governed, but demand to be told what to watch and who they can marry. Another case of the pick and choose crowd, who interprets federal jurisdiction, when its convenient for them. These luddites fiercely hold onto a piece of legislation that is deemed antiquated by the rest of the modern world.
Leaders who attempt to strengthen gun control are lambasted by the conservative media, often citing that these laws only prevent law abiding citizens from obtaining firearms. True. But would the thought of confronting a lecture hall full of armed students have stopped this maniacal killer today? He was a man who clearly valued his life, who, after killing five and injuring sixteen, proceeded to take his own life.
The point is, there is little, if any, good reason against imposing stricter, if not altogether banning, the sell of firearms to the public. The victims today are not limited to the students of NIU, and the responsible party is not limited to the gunman. To be sure, the abolishment of the second amendment isnt going to make arms related crime disappear, but its a start.
