WWIII: Now?

Michael Goodwin is calling World War III to have already begun. And he has a point.

In fact, Goodwin’s overall piece betrays the small nuggets of the anti-Bushism present also. It’s not exactly too much to believe that with nuclear ambitions being passed around like party favors that we could be on the edge of something terrible.

But the funny part is that Mr. Goodwin’s intention of using fear-mongering to arouse public outrage with the President has a way of backfiring. On the contrary, if we are indeed on the brink of nuclear holocaust, preemption , which defines the Republicanparty, not the other one, will most certainly be necessary. In this way, if Mr. Goodwin’s WWIII prediction is correct, Mr. Bush will go down in history as the “Eleventh Hour Man;” the one who actually may have stalled the storm, despite the wishes of the liberal media.

 

The Fast and the furious

Cindy Sheehan and Susan Sarandon will fast for peace this July 4th holiday. The vitriolic anti-Bush personalities will go “hungry” (although I can’t imagine the same industry which puts millions of dollars on celeb baby pics producing celebs willing to starve themselves) in protest of the Bush administration’s Iraq policies.

Let me share a helpful revelation with my readers. The Leftist media does not admire Mrs. Sheehan because she is a brave, sacrificing war-time mother. There are plenty of other women like that. What makes her so photogenic is not her personal connections to the war but the fact that she is one of the few, the not-so-proud Bush bashers. THAT’S why the media drools over her.

An insult to the less protesting population of war moms? You call it.

 

The Rights Stuff

The Los Angeles Times believes that gays deserve rights. So do I.

The problem is that the LA Times is muddying the issue. The rights gays to practice homosexual behavior has not been in serious legal question for years. The rights of gays to vote or hold private property has never been questioned. So what rights are the Times referring to?

Answer: Gay marriage. Thus the LA Timesdeceivingly delivers same-sex marriage propaganda under a guise of rights enumeration. But the right of a very small minority to radically change the definition of a human institution which has possessed an intrinsic definition for thousands of years is not quite so black and white.

But for the Times, as it is for gay marriage enthusiasts in general, the significance of marriage compared with the significance of the absolute autonomy of the unbridled individual is minute at best.

 

MySpace=MY problem

Thefeverishly popular custom web page host MySpace.com is now facing a major lawsuit relating to an incident of assault that happened to a young female user of the site. From Agape Press:

The suit claims a 14-year-old girl from Austin, Texas, was contacted via MySpace by an adult male who allegedly pretended to be a high school student, gained her trust, lured her out to meet him, and then sexually assaulted her.

…according to Adam Loewy, the accuser’s attorney, this case is by no means an anomaly, and this is not the first time MySpace has been implicated in such a tragic set of circumstances.

“There’s a long part of our lawsuit where, unfortunately, we list up to 15 to 20 incidents in the past four or five months nationwide, all related to this site,” Loewy notes. “And that is not an exhaustive list; there are more incidents out there,” he says.

All right, without meaning anything but the utmost sympathies and good wishes for the girl and her family, this kind of thing is not the fault of MySpace. It’s a lack of involvement on the part of her parents, and it’s a lack of discernment on the part of the girl. The only party who is truly responsible for what happened is the boy, who should be locked for a very long time.

But please, folks, let’s not yet again cop-out of our responsibility to have some common sense. MySpace cannot infiltrate the life of everyone who’s approached by a would be molester. Parents, on the other hand, can.

 

France’s anti-capitalism

The French government has passed what is being dubbed the “Itunes Law.” The law, specifically targeting iTunes/iPod genius Apple, will force Apple to equip it’s iPod to play songs from rival song download companies, which it currently does not do. In addition, the law would force iTunes to change it’s format so that songs bought and purchased through the music service can be played on music devices other than iPod.

As a proud owner of an iPod and an avid iTunes fan, I am absolutely appalled at this ruling. I myself have been frustrated at times by the exclusivity of the iPod+iTunes  coupling, and have had to purchase an iPod (which was considerably more expensive than other devices I could have bought under France’s law) to play my iTunes songs.

However, the iPod/iTunes marketing is a brilliant display of ingenuity, consumer benefit, and entrepreneurship. The iTunes music store is the largest of it’s kind, and, unlike other music services, does not force me to pay for simply using the service. Therefore I pay for only what I download. This is a great service to music lovers. The fact that Apple conveniently equipped iTunes songs with iPod-exclusive downloading technology is their right to do. If I found a better service than iTunes, or a better device than iPod, I would switch. But I haven’t, and that’s why Apple has my double patronship.

France’s assault on capitalism and free-enterprise marketship will only harm her as a nation. Apple put out two fantastic products that have found their ways into millions of music lovers’ rooms. Apple’s genius helps consumers. Why can’t France see that?