Saturday, January 29, 2011

A Bloodless Coup


Police and demonstrators continue to fight on the streets of Cairo in a fifth day of unprecedented protests by tens of thousands of Egyptians demanding an end to President Mubarak’s three decade rule. If this continues for too much longer we may well see a bloodless coup by the army. In fact I would argue that is a good thing for our interests and ultimately the Egyptians as well. We don’t need another Iran or Afghanistan in the Middle East. In both instances regime change resulted in overthrowing one tyranny for another tyranny.
The protests in Egypt create an environment for change to occur and the people with the most power tend to step in and act. That would be in Egypt the military who are the probable power brokers today. In fact, it’s probably the army keeping Mubarak away from the spotlight and in the background.
Before our present situation the military has been uncomfortable with the succession of power in Egypt anyway. The idea of his son taking power is distasteful to many insiders as well as the public. The military has not been confident the ruling party and the Mubaraks can keep the government on course. There are several candidates for the succession; intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, who is popular and not corrupt, Aviation Minister Ahmed Shafiq, a decorated war veteran, and Defense Minister Mohamed Tantawi, who is also commander of the armed forces. These men are the leading contenders to take over for President Mubarak and the best result for the nation and stability in the Middle East.
We need to hope that a bloodless coup can restore order to Egypt because some alternatives are inconceivable. One alternative seems to be the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood which is a Muslim extremist organization in the al Qaeda mold.
Contrary to the claims of the authorities in Egypt, we have yet to see any concrete evidence the Brotherhood is behind, the current unrest. That will change the longer this fighting drags out. They are beginning to jockey for position even now.
The ruling National Democratic Party is struggling with the military about how to proceed with the transition and we need a military led solution in Egypt. We are seeing pressure from the streets and the fear the military could actually align with the public. The concern is about replacing the ruling party and creating a new system.
A new system while bloodless at first could turn out to be not so bloodless. With a new system we most probably would not get a western styled democracy, in fact our choices practically are between traditional or Islamist dictatorships of some type. That’s why we need to have consensus among the potential assumptive leaders. We don’t need or want another potential Iran or Iraq in the Middle East. Currently the protesters do not seem to form a coherent political opposition and that’s a good thing. The voices of the people are being heard, but it’s in our interest for the right outcome and that outcome needs to happen sooner rather than later.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Castration and Sex Offenders


A Virginia legislator is proposing castrating violent sex offenders as an alternative to the increasing costs to detain and treat them after they've served their prison sentences. It will also prevent them from repeating their crimes in the future. I think that this makes a great deal of common sense. After all we’re talking about the most repetitive offenders in our society. The rate of repeat offense for violent sex offenders is higher than that of murderers or thieves. We could reduce the number of people incarcerated and treated for the problem over the long term through this process.
Virginia’s Republican Senator Emmett Hanger's bill would require the state to study the use of castration as an alternative to civil commitment for sexually violent predators. A similar proposal was vetoed four years ago. I think that it is time for this type of approach to violent sex offenders since the types of crimes they commit are so repugnant. The costs associated with civil commitment are rising drastically well over 1000% in the past six years alone.
The civil commitment program's budget in Virginia grew from $2.7 million in 2004 to $24 million this year. That’s almost a ten fold increase and it’s unacceptable that decent tax payers who don’t commit the crime end up paying for it. Gov. Bob McDonnell has proposed spending nearly $70 million over the next two years to meet the increasing demands. It seems like in the State of New York our costs are totally out of control as usual. New York’s costs for civil commitment grew from 4.2 million in 2004 to 40 million this year. This must end and we as citizens must demand that our government change our approach in dealing with these violent sex offenders.
Eight states allow for some form of castration for sex offenders, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Only Louisiana and Texas allow for physical castration. In those two states the rate of repeat offenders has begun to decrease. I think that we need to get out in front on this and urge our legislators to act on the castration of our most violent sex offenders. In that way perhaps they and the rest of society and be better served.
I truly believe that the average violent sex offender is remorseful and feels disgust in their uncontrollable need to promulgate their affliction. Castration would stop their need to offend and protect our citizens so that everyone can get on with leading fruitful and meaningful lives.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Sticks and Stones


The tragic shooting in Arizona proves that we are not in control of what happens around us. Senseless acts leave us feeling scared and vulnerable because of the sheer random occurrence of the acts themselves. It’s horrifying think that such evil exists and yet it too often does. The background of the person behind this despicable act of violence and what his motives are only that he is a disturbed individual, another example of a toxic society that has no moral foundation.
What we also know is that his actions had nothing to do with the political discourse in the country despite all that we’ve heard over the past few weeks. Regardless of the facts of the case the far left went right to work placing blame on Sarah Palin and the tea party movement. With complete disregard for the victims, even Jane Fonda got in on the act by tweeting just hours after the shooting that this was the fault of Sarah Palin. The lefty press has had a field day of blaming the right and chastising the use of words, like crosshairs, targets, firing, killing, words that are used sometimes as metaphors for political argument.
Are we so weak as a people that words mere words can do this kind of damage to us? I say that we should harken back to something our mothers told us when we were little kids. That is that sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you. We empower others when we imply that their mere use of a word or words will be a justifiable cause to any violent action such as the mass murder in Arizona.
In the spirit of not allowing a good crisis to go to waste, the lefties claim that those on the right have ratcheted up the political rhetoric in this country to a dangerous level, yet they use exaggerated claims to make their case. At the same time they ignore similar actions from the left.
Such as the President of the United States, who said, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl”. Following the far left’s logic, Barack Obama is thus responsible for every gun shot victim in Philadelphia. Ridiculous? Of course, just as it’s ridiculous to blame Sarah Palin for what happened in Arizona.
Yes, the political discourse in this country is high and that’s OK. It’s only dangerously high if we allow mere words to make us weary. Conservatives have grown tired of all the lies and half truths, the double standard in the media, where the burden of proof exists only on the right. Yet, none of this played a role in what took place in Arizona. Spirited political debate has always defined American politics and rarely does it lead to violence. We see a sense of desperation in the far left, they understand that they’re losing the war of ideas.
It’s no wonder with some of their chief operatives Chris Mathews and Keith Olberman. Tell me these guys aren’t the best gift to Conservatives all by themselves. The far left tried to wear out the tea party and then began attacking it with false charges of racism and violence.
Words are like poetry, simple tools to be crafted by people to achieve discourse. Let’s be sure that we don’t lose our right of free speech just to be more polite in our political discourse. Yes sometimes it will get messy and even a little ugly, but if we all realize that they’re just words we will all be the better for it.

Let’s Keep Our Eye On The Ball


Inflammatory speech didn’t fuel Arizona rampage? Histrionic political discourse from talk radio, cable television and political leaders is not the real issue. The real issue isn't easy and neat, doesn't fall into the left vs. right argument that so many people love to drone over and over about.
The real issue is what are we supposed to do with someone who might be seriously mentally ill and prone to violence, especially in a society where weapons are so readily available? It's a question that gets asked a lot after many recent mass murders over the nation. The Virginia Tech massacre, Colombine shooting and others all cases in point. It's a question that's being asked again. When does our right to bear arms start and stop. No one has a right in my opinion to carry automatic clips of the size that were used in Arizona by the shooter. This was and never could be the intent of our founders and any claim that it was is baseless since they didn’t exist back then.
As many of us know mental illness has had a profound effect on our society. Schizophrenics who can’t be institutionalized and really helped against their will. This is ridiculous on it’s face because they can’t know whether it’s in fact in their interest to be hospitalized or not. Many of these people need to spend time in adult psychiatric hospitals and not on the street.
It's horrible when a society feels they have no control over a significant population of people who clearly need to at the very least get treatment and often need institutionalization. In many states laws often handcuff relatives and authorities, with the mentally ill held only for cursory examination periods. Sometimes they're returned to the streets with a prescription and little else. It's then up to the ones who are sick to realize they are sick and follow through with proper treatment, including taking medication.
The days of warehousing the mentally ill in long-term institutions have been phased out. I for one think that the pendulum has swung too far the other way. We can no longer let the patients determine their care. That is ridiculous on so many different levels. On rare occasions, those who do fall through the cracks can do something heinous.
Especially when they're able to get weapons legally and relatively easily, which is indeed another problem all together. We've seen the results again in Arizona and we realize that it’s simply not acceptable.
We also must pass laws that stop weapons whose only use is to kill other people. We must get rid off these instruments of death from our society. We also must make it just a little more difficult for people who are insane to get guns. One good way I think is to let local law enforcement issue gun permits. In that way our society and can better assured that reasonable people are getting fire arms.
All I know is that I’m sure we don’t want to be asking the same questions after the next horrible tragedy occurs somewhere. Please we must finally have a common sense approach to our treatment of the mentally ill and our use of firearms in America.

Friday, January 21, 2011

Enough Is Enough


Enough Is Enough



The program, Skins, is an in your face and very popular British series that depicted the interactions and relationships of high school kids. So are we a little more uptight about these things or is the show bordering on child pornography? Taco Bell pulled their sponsorship, and thousands of people have worked themselves up to a boil. Even executives at the network themselves are worried about the content, especially a scene in the upcoming third episode where a 17 year old is shown naked from behind while he runs down the street hiding his erection. Once we understand the real issues at play here it gets more disgusting and in my opinion is clearly a case of reckless child pornography. When MTV producers and directors put children under age 18 in sexually explicit situations for the express viewing of adults over age 18, that is almost the definition of child pornography. I have heard the argument that kids make mistakes and that art imitates life blah, blah, blah. I know that teenagers are going to have sex and that they’re going to make poor choices that will have profound effects on them in their lifetime.
The kids that are acting in Skins are not polished professional actors, they are high school kids themselves being used by TV executives targeting a show for adult viewers sick obsession with sex. Children engaged and glorifying sex and drug use is not appropriate material for either children or adults. It’s only material for sick adults who themselves engage in lascivious behavior.

Teenagers are going to have sex regardless of whether Skins is on the air. It’s been going on since forever, and it will continue happening forever. MTV has no bearing on the how’s and when’s of teenage sexual activity, but it does have a responsibility not to break the law in delivering a message. The network has a responsibility to show material realistically and tastefully. The program may have done a great job of developing honest characters, but are so are pornstars honest characters.
We need to hold the Network responsible for their choices in the chase of big bucks. We as a society must ask that the exploitation of our children end. Please don’t try to use the argument that we’re trying to teach life lessons to 15 and 16 year olds who make bad life choices. I mean the very fact that the show airs at 10pm pretty much says clearly that our audience is adults who want to watch children have sex and use drugs. At some point our toxic society must wake up and make some decisions about where we’re going as a society.MTV is without question exploiting teenage sexuality for ratings. They tried to do it with their last scripted series, and now they’re doing it again. We live in a society obsessed with sex and no matter how careful the producers might be, the teenagers shown in Skins will be sexualized. To what end? To prove that our society is a diseased, sick one that glorifies this kind of conduct. Well I say finally for the sake of common decency, enough is enough.