Rants

Thats what's wrong with politics today, everyone is scared to take a stand, their scared to stand up for what they truley beleive in. Instead we get a bunch of worthless do nothings who spend all their time trying not to offend but instead to make everyone happy. Stop the bullshit, speak your mind. This is why I liked Jesse Ventura

it doesn't matter what Lott said because he most likely did not mean it. Yes he said he supported Strom Thurman, but he never directly said that he was pro-segregation because he is too good of a politician to say something that stupid. What actually happened is that he didn't think of all the ramifications of him saying he wished Thurman would have been president could have. So really what he said is a mute point. But here is where Jesse is wrong (and I am going to contradict myself fromt my last post because I didn't have all the facts and I didn't have all the facts correct). Al Gore is not saying that Lott has to apologize, but he is saying that what Lott should do is retract the statement and apologize for the possible interprerations that his stamement might have. Thus Gore is saying if Lott doesn't repeal his statement than he should resign from being the future majory leader in the Senate. Which, in reality, is quite reasonable and quite intelligent for Lott to do because if Lott doesn't retract his statement he will loose all of his black supporters as well as most of his minority supporters and many of his white supporters so Gore's advice is going to benefit Lott himself more than anyone else. So therefore, Jesse your comment that you made about Gore being in his own private wonder world is guite unfounded because what he said to Lott was very practical and futhermore I would much rather have Al Gore as our current president rather than "Shoot 'em up W."

Your information is a bit flawed, Donat. During the celebration Lott did not just say "he is a good man", he said that if Thurman had been elected president when he ran, we would not have all the problems the United States has been through since then. Now...when Thurman was running for president...he was pro-segregation. So yes, when Lott said that his state was proud of voting for him back then, it could seem a bit racist. Especially that "all the problems" part. Heh.

I got the names screwed up and I thought Trent Lott was just a saying, like thats a whole trent lott. Well maybe its just me. Alright, well yea... Franson is a lazy bastard

First who the hell is Trent Lock and do you mean Trent Lott the (to be) majority leader of the senate. But besides that little point I agree with you a lot, so many politicians try and attack inconsequential matters of other politicians lives to discredit them and good God is it annoying. And to be supprised that Gore did something stupid and feebish is no suprise to anyone, he needs what ever angle he can get to have people start respected him again and not as the robot man.

During the celebration of Strum Thurman's 100th birthday, Trent Lock gave a speech in which he called Strum Thurman a good man. Now all gore is calling Trent Lock racist and wants an apology from Trent because Strum Thurman back in 1948 is said to have said racist remarks against African Americans. Honestly, how old was Trent Lock when this was going on, I'm sure he was speaking of Strom Thurman as he is today and not as he was fifty years ago. It is my belief that Al Gore actually lives in his own little world of nonsense where as he invented the internet.

I dont' think many people are going to be able to understand anything that I am writing unless you are Catholic, but whatever. The Catholic Church of Rome is out of touch with the American church and the hierarchy is starting to fall apart. The communication is breaking down and thus we have the new reforms taking place during a time of a lot of dissent of the church. The church is trying to push the dogma more and more while people are recoiling after the exposure to much of the church scandal. I wonder how much the scandal actually affected the Vactican because the way they are dealing with the American church would make me believe that it is not a big deal. I am not mocking Rome because I think we have one the most scholary and intelligent popes we have had in awhile even more so that Pope Paul 23. So in essense I believe the Catholic Church needs more communication and more understading of the American Church or it will not continue to have a strong influence here. To branch from my post I would also like readers who are Catholic to note as the reason their is the dissent between the Vatican and the American Church is that there is a difference between the two churches. A lot of protestants try to classify American Catholics by the dogma of the faith and also the Vatican which is obviosly not true. :Side Note Ended: We need the Church to start listening to the will of the American and creating reforms that appreciate that will.

According to an article I just read, the Department of Homeland Security considers Wi-Fi 802.11 wireless access points a terrorist threat and is threatening to regulate their use. This could potentially be an extremely annoying invasion of privacy for personal users like myself, unless the Department commissioned experienced IT people to assist in developing standards. Essentially, the Department is creating positions with the authority to regulate vulnerable wireless networks. I can see the importance of securing corporate information assets accessible by Wi-Fi, but standardizing the use of personal wireless networks seems a bit unrealistic and far fetched. The problem with standardizing Wi-Fi security is that there is no "best" way to do it, and certain forms of encryption, such as WEP, remain completely crackable. For such a standardization to be successful, a simple, efficient way of encrypting 802.11 signals must be developed that can be implemented into hardware or at least be packaged as software with the devices. Also, I think the feds are overreacting slightly. Yes, wireless vulnerabilities exist, but are terrorists actually exploiting them in order to gain valuable information? Probably not. Is a terrorist going to cruise through the suburbs and find some juicy tidbit of information on a personal wireless network? Again, probably not. I think the Homeland Security people should look at the situation realistically and focus on patching corporate security holes not just to avoid leaking information to terrorists, but also to stop curious American hackers who commonly break into these networks (trust me). This should happen only with the help and advice of experienced IT security professionals. As for personal Wi-Fi use, security should remain the user's problem not the government's. Thoughts?

Andrew, stop whining. I'll try to keep my posts more relevant from now on. I simply thought other writers would find the story amusing.

Mike I know for a fact that Dan and I both dislike poltical parties and Jesse and Franson can sometimes be enravelled in the republican rhetoric they still are not mindless followers of the party. So for you to say that you are a "new" addition to the times with your "radical" view points is quite incorrect. You should try raising an issue or even mocking one of us directly instead of generalizing all of the times. And lastly how dare you call me a GOPer, I may agree with them on several issues, but at the same time I agree with the democrats on some issues, I call myself an extreme moderate or a libertarian (lower case because I don't neccessarly agree with the party due to the fact i dislike parties) and in no way am I a "dirty republican."