Is there a right and wrong? Most of the time, I think so. The problems arise when you really analyze a problem, or an issue. When you take the bloody time to attempt an understanding of what you are talking about.

When you stand back from a large picture or painting, everything seems clear. There are recognizable patterns. But when you get closer and closer to the picture you begin to recognize less and less. Take the same picture and 'blow it up' and it is harder and harder to discern a recognizable pattern. After the third or fourth or fifteenth 'blow up' of the same picture, you behold only dots or I guess 'pixels'.  Nothingness.

Take the death penalty as an issue. For me anyway, the death penalty sucks. The reason for my dismay over this issue is that I have lost. My side has lost. We kill people,  that is our government kills people every day.  And it is the MANNER in which we choose those who are going to die that is the issue for me.

I know there are people who feel that morally, a people should not kill a prisoner. I am not one of those although I respect the position.

But when I read about someone who has raped and killed a child...well, you lost me there. I mean, kill him.  When he has accomplished the deed two, three times, kill him two or three times. Do not wait for ten years of appeals. Try him. Put the case on 'speed-up' through the appellate process, and kill him. It is purely an emotional reaction for me.

But I just told you that I am against the death penalty. Well, it is not some moral precipice upon which I make my stand.  No, I am against the death penalty for the manner in which it is enforced. 

Geographically, we kill more people in the South.  And we kill more black people and more Hispanics. And we kill more poor people. And, well, it just looks bad when you stand back and behold the entire picture.

If I am rich, I can hire experts with monies not available to the poor or even the middle class defendants. I can have an attorney cross examine a DNA expert for days and days about a 'finding' in a report that initially convicts me, until a jury is so confused that it cannot possibly ignore a 'reasonable doubt' standard. 

Or I can hire three doctors to testify in my behalf as to the real cause of the death of the victim.

This entire rant can be followed with a discussion concerning the two and a half million American Citizens are in jail or prison right now. Or triple that figure for the number of American Citizens who are on probation or parole right now.  And feel free to check the demographics on this mess!!!

Then contemplate this issue. Almost all employment applications ask you this question:

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ARRESTED?

First, most people do not know what this question means. I used to get people calling me about this question and most of the time I just told the caller 'no' answer 'no'.  A traffic citation is not an arrest under your local state statute.  Or if there is some problem with your juvey record, answer no because the juvey record is usually sealed.

But that is really not the issue with the question. The real answer to the question is:

NONE OF YOUR GODDAMNABLE BUSINESS (blesses himself)

If you are innocent until proven guilty, what the hell does an arrest mean?

On every legal drama on TV a cop will 'pull up' some suspects file, and it will be of the utmost importance to the plot that the cop has found a history of previous arrests; EVEN WHEN THERE HAVE BEEN NO CONVICTIONS.

You really think that you are 'innocent' until proven guilty. HA!!!

But there are government job applications or even applications for employment issued by government contractors. And there are laws on the books that provide criminal penalties for lying on a job application. So if you answer that you have not ever been arrested, and you were in fact previously arrested, you could be subject to criminal prosecution.

Life is complicated. No wonder many people just give up.

I say I do not like to beat dead horses, but I really do like to beat dead horses. At least those horses who appear to be dead but are not only breathing but surviving quite well.

Joe Scarborough is attempting to some up with a new general argument for why you should be a repub even though there were so many problems surrounding the previous repub administration and it kind of goes like this.

We are all responsible for the felonies committed during the previous administration, we are all responsible for the financial breakdown that occurred during the previous administration; therefore there is no reason to blame the rich, the managerial class, or the repubs. Ipse dixit. Res ipsa loquitor.

Or as I like to say:

WHAT THE F...IS THAT ALL ABOUT. ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND?

Clinton received a little oral love in the oval office. Then as Chris Rock once put it:

He did the right thing and lied about it.

Scarborough voted for Clinton's impeachment for that error in judgment. 

The war in Iraq was based upon one lie after another. There were no WMD's. There were no links between Saddam and 9/11/01. There were no nuclear weapons, no nuclear materials for the making of methods and no nuclear program.

And w and his cohorts desired to go into Iraq many months, nay years, before 9/11/01.

Did Scarborough call for the impeachment of w?

Of course not. Scarborough has argued that some Dems were privy to security sensitive data at the relevant times; and the Dems went along with the invasion of Iraq.

So the Dems and repubs were responsible for an unnecessary war.

If the Dems were upset about the intelligence data, WHY DID THEY NOT SAY SOMETHING AT THE TIME AND VOTE AGAINST THE RESOLUTION SENDING OUR TROOPS INTO THAT HELL HOLE.

Well the answer is simple. If those Dems, like Rockefeller had said something, they would have been in violation of certain National Security Laws and would be subject to discharge from Congress and criminal and civil sanctions. They gave their word they would not repeat anything learned at these security sessions before they heard one word concerning these security matters.

AND THEY WERE LIED TO.

Did Scarborough call for impeachment upon learning this. No.

Did Scarborough call for charges to be brought against administration officials who lied about national security matters. No.

Look forward, not backwards. We are all responsible.

Take another issue. The economic collapse.

People signed up for mortgages that they could not afford. People signed up for and used credit cards they could not afford.

When these idiot people could not make the payments they had promised to pay, the system collapsed.

To blame the managerial class for the collapse is fool hardy.  Sure there were a few bad apples, but there will always be bad apples.

Sure there should have been better regulatory oversight. But we all make mistakes.

WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS ECONOMIC COLLAPSE SO WHY BLAME REPUBLICANS?

Torture was a necessary evil. If it means saving this country, protecting our citizenry, we must torture. So jughead says.

Oh and certain Dems were briefed about all this torture business in security sessions, so its all good.

WE ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR TORTURE SO WHY BLAME THE REPUBLICANS.

Oh, and of course we must recognize that this country is really center-right anyway, SO ITS ALL GOOD.

And I swear, on Grandma Charlotte's grave, that all these arguments have been made, EVERY DAY, on morning joke with jughead. And Barnacle and others just sit and nod.

See, besides 'blowing up' a picture so that it is ultimately unrecognizable, you can just spray paint the goddamn thing. (blesses himself)

So sometimes I like to get back to right and wrong.

Media Matters reports:

Drowning under massive debt and desperate to cut more costs, Clear Channel took an ax to its payroll -- again -- and hacked hundreds of radio pros out the door. Program directors, morning show hosts, production pros, news anchors -- all of them tossed over the side. A "bloodbath," one newspaper called it. (In Albany, New York, the entire on-air staff at a Clear Channel music station was sacked; same with a radio outpost in Exeter, New Hampshire)

The most recent blizzard of pink slips (one industry report pegged it at "nearly 1,000") came in the wake of a January purge, in which 1,850 Clear Channel employees were let go. So already this year the company has shed nearly 3,000 employees, or 12 percent of its workforce. Also, last week, Clear Channel's parent company announced it was suspending its matching contributions to employee 401(k) retirement programs.

And the amount they needed to cut? The exact amount they are paying rush.

3,000 people are out of work. Those remaining get reduced benefits.

ALL BECAUSE OF RUSH.

So rush is giving a speech yesterday and they play snips of it on cable yesterday.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/30609201#30609201

Rush is announcing that there is no recession. It is all a bunch of hooey. Besides, he just signed for another 400 million dollars. His company is doing fine.

What is all this crap about a recession anyway?

3,000 people out of work. Most of them RIGHT WINGERS. Most of them rush's COMPATRIOTS. The people who CHEER THE RUSH.

HA

But at least, rush is not mincing words. He just lies straight out. He laughs straight out at the 'losers' in this society.

WITH RUSH, I CAN AT LEAST SEE THE PICTURE, THE ENTIRE PICTURE.