Thursday, August 9, 2007

God’s Making Headlines

A response to my peer Kara’s blog titled “Bite Size Bible?” (

The idea of putting Bibles inside newspapers is practical, and apparently, Christian leaders decided to go the way of Internet service providers since America Online had the same idea a few years back. To build a successful and dominate religion, one must think like an Internet service provider. All AOL needed to do was put their software discs in 17 billion newspapers that are widely distributed. If it worked for the largest Internet provider at the time, the same reasoning should be useful for the world’s major religions.

All religions could eventually campaign by purchasing pages next to each other; perhaps, this section could follow the horoscopes. It would not take long for this section to appear much like the current advertisements, and both could be separated into the middle, disregarded, and recycled by those who are bright enough to look beyond a newspaper for spiritual guidance. The less fortunate can continue to buy into whatever Wal-Mart and Christianity happen to have on sale that week. This strategy should convert and save the heathens while they save on some “rollback” prices.

Thanks for the post.

Friday, August 3, 2007

Breathing Verses Bullets

It is impossible for the United States to conclude a two-thousand year old religious war in the Middle East, but that does not stop trillions of tax dollars from attempting to solve the problems. Therefore, it seems like it would be worth allocating a few billion dollars to improve, if only slightly, the air quality and health of the citizen’s of the United States. Americans seem completely obsessed with keeping evils away from their hallowed soil, but these same politicians and citizens can easily live with the consuming miasma of their own pollution. A strict plan posed by the Environmental Protection Agency is being considered. Their goal is to instate measures that would lower the levels of ozone in the air, but those opposing do so simply because the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan seems unlikely to succeed.
The largest obstacle impeding the progress of cleaner air quality is the cost involved in producing results. According to Scott Streater of the Star Telegram (‑, “A cost-benefit analysis of this proposal indicates that it will cost Texas billions of dollars to try to comply with the proposed standards, but that Tarrant, Dallas, Denton, Collin, Ellis, Johnson, Parker and Rockwall counties could not meet the proposed regulations,” and that is apparently enough of a reason to not even make an attempt. The Environmental Protection Agency has a specific goal in mind; Streater cites that their goal is to lower the federally mandated pollution standards from an average of 85 parts ozone per billion during an eight hour period to somewhere between 70 and 75 parts per billion. However, since this objective has been deemed impossible for some cities, the opposing politicians seem to believe that no one should even be bothered; it would cost too much. Any improvement, regardless of the amount, will yield healthier lives for everyone in the area.
An attempt must be made. This proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency would undoubtedly be expensive; however, there is plenty to gain that would more than justify the monetary investments. Streater explains that an analysis done by the Environmental Protection Agency concluded that “lowering ozone would prevent hundreds of premature deaths a year nationwide, and eliminate as much as $33 billion a year in healthcare costs associated with respiratory disease, heart attacks and emergency room visits associated with air pollution.” These increased standards for air quality are not just something to simply consider; lowering the amount of pollution is a fight for the same young and elderly being protected during times of war. Their protection from harming themselves is just as crucial of a battle as the fight to keep them safe from outside evils, and there is a $33 billion savings as an additional bonus to those keeping score with money.The United States believes that the trillions of dollars spent funding wars overseas are to protect its citizens at home; that is a valid reason for war, especially in this current state of turmoil. However, the safety inside the United States must be prioritized. If there is not enough money to sustain a decent quality of life, then there are few problems beyond America’s borders worth pursuing.

Friday, July 27, 2007

Homeland Security Outtakes

Homeland Security has been reduced to buzzword status, and Governor Rick Perry’s ideas for a larger border security budget make for a sick joke. Securing the people of The United States by adding protective measures along the country’s border with Mexico seems logical. Stop the problem before it reaches American soil. That is simply brilliant. In pursuit of making Texas a safer state, Perry has signed a bill increasing the border security budget; the extra money is additional state funding beyond the more than $100 million dollars dedicated to Texas Homeland Security. According to an article by Lynn Brezosky of the Austin American Statesman (, the supplementary funding will pay for “a Border Security Council appointed by the governor to assist in allocating homeland security money, establishes a system for mutual aid during emergencies and expands law enforcement agencies' ability to use wiretapping.” This strategy would seem like an effective measure if the agenda in Texas did not also include a 1,200 foot hole in its border with Mexico.
This gap in the Texas-Mexico border will come in the form of a quarter-mile wide superhighway, known in Texas as the Trans-Texas Corridor. It would connect the landlocked cities in central Mexico, through Texas, and eventually to a hub in Kansas City. Hypocritically enough, proposals exist that would allow illegal immigrants to travel into Kansas City, apparently promoting trade. Trade goods, such as drugs and people, are sure to be some of the more lucrative sellers. Furthermore, this highway is a poor solution to anyone sinking more money into Homeland Security issues in Texas. In addition to the highway, the Trans-Texas Corridor will also include railcars, oil, gas, and water pipelines; the costs of protecting this enormous project would be staggering, if not impossible. Border security and the Trans-Texas Corridor existing simultaneously is a joke, and Texas cannot support both.

Friday, July 20, 2007

The Texas Health Care Catastrophe

No pun intended, but the lack of health care in Texas is sickening. Health insurance provides for one of the most crucial of basic human needs. Medicine, as a necessity, closely follows air, water, and food, and its importance should be obvious and beyond question to anyone. However, according to statistics released by Centers for Disease Control (, Texas has had the largest percentage of uninsured citizens for more than a decade. Ten years of being dead last, and proposals to begin mending this statewide atrocity continually fall short.
President Bush is threatening to veto a bill that would grant health insurance to an extra three million children from low-income families stating, “If Congress continues to insist upon expanding health care through the SCHIP [State Children's Health Insurance Program] program — which, by the way, would entail a huge tax increase for the American people — I'll veto the bill.” With the majority of American’s currently against funding the Iraqi conflict, it seems reasonable that taxes could simply be more appropriately allocated without being increased. Furthermore, in an article in the Austin American Statesman (, author April Castro explains that the additional health care funding would increase preventative care measures. Castro quotes Nancy Seale, chairwoman of the department of pediatric dentistry at the Baylor College of Dentistry in Dallas, who said “we would expect there to be a decrease in occurrences and severity (of preventable dental disease), so we would have less children who are in pain, less children who have to go to the operating room under general anesthesia, and that would save a lot of money.” The health and monetary advantages of preventative medicine are not being questioned, and for those reasons, this bill should not be in question.