I saw the new Star Trek movie last night. I really enjoyed it. It was a lot of fun.

But …

I have been a Trekkie for my whole life, like alot of people out there.  There are all kinds of spin offs, cannon and non-cannon material out there. Some is pretty good but some of it just keeps missing the mark.

One of the things that always bothered me about the novels was this idea that the original Enterprise crew was not representative of the rest of Starfleet but somehow better then everyone else. I mean I understand that they were the focus of the show but it’s like having a modern military show where everyone in all the other ships are the under achievers.  I didn’t get that impression from the TV show but every novel I read had them commonly showing up everyone else in starfleet. At least it wasn’t a part of the actual cannon show.

Then with the Next Generation we were given more of a sense of the rest of starfleet and that it was full of people with drive and intelligence. It was a sense that the future was bright for everyone again. With the other series we got a variety of versions of this but it was there.

We were also developing as a audience. We were more technically sophisticated so there were more important details scattered in the background to reward those who really paid attention.

So I went into the new Star Trek movie with that sense of wonder and paid attention to the details.

but… they weren’t there!

We have cell phones so I expected some sort of update to the communicator. I was even thinking it would be neat if they combined the communicator with the tricorder. Nope. They look mostly the same. My wife’s phone does more then their communicator. The tricorder was about the same as the old series and was used to record Kirk complaining. Couldn’t the communicator even communicate with a nearby starfleet base?

Okay, I’ll give you that the Bridge looked cool and updated. But Engineering was crap! It looked like they had an old power plant for the weekend! It was a bunch of pipes and tanks and looked stupid. There was even a part where Uhura was on station beside what looked like a bunch of milk tanks!I couldn’t really tell the difference between the set for the Vulcan moon base that Scotty was on (which didn’t make much sense either) and the engineering of a Enterprise. I didn’t even get the feeling that it was in a ship. It just looked like another building.

The shuttle craft bay is good but there is this non-sense plastic sheet hanging between the sections for no reason. They sure had a lot of shuttles though!

The space combat was nice and I’m glad that they got it right that there is no sound in space but apparently there are no force fields anymore either. They talked about shields but they didn’t show them even flickering.

Now the plot had some problems for me. One of which is why did they go from what was basically an emergency cadet cruise to suddenly have their own ship and skip every rank from cadet to whatever they settled at. That’s a pretty bizarre jump. Basically the movie was saying that they had killed off everyone else or that everyone else was busy and only the cadets could do it!

That’s lazy writing. That’s all that is. You don’t have to make your crew great at their jobs and come up with a logical progression of other ships and situations. You jump to the finished version all at once. I thought that these people were good because they were seasoned and experienced crew of a large organization devoted to the highest ideals of humanity. Nope – they were just the people that showed up to the shuttle for starfleet academy that day. I can’t wait to see what the next year’s class does!

So overall I loved it as a movie. However it didn’t seem to have anyone on the set who actually knew the science fiction aspect of it. Maybe by creating a new continuity they can leave  a lot of these questions behind but it seems that while the new movie will undoubtedly be able to entertain it is missing something that made Star Trek something more – Intelligent Science Fiction that can Inspire!

I’m am starting to think that maybe McCain has PTSD. He talks about his time as a POW any time people want to talk about things he doesn’t want to discuss. He says it like he is confused by the question! He wants to start new wars to the point that he wants a new draft. He won’t talk to other world leaders that he might be in conflict with. I am guessing that he has gotten over the fear of loud noises by now.

This is a pdf of my new game system

players-guide

and

nexus-character-sheet

Okay I am not a scientist. I don’t focus on science. I understand the basics and I understand the scientific method.

I have no problem with a personal relationship with the Divine. I am a polytheist myself. I believe that there is a spark of the Divine in all things. I’m not sure if that Divine is a guiding force or a just a part of the universe.

I believe strongly in the principles that this country was founded on. We have a country that is based on several freedoms and I think that alone makes this country one of the best in the world. The more we dedicate this country to those principles instead of push them aside when they become inconvenient the stronger and better this country will be.

I have no problem with people saying what they believe. I think that everyone should have the right to any opinion that they want. They can have some facts wrong and some people confuse the right to your own opinion to the right to say anything and claim it as a fact. Your beliefs about the Divine are your opinions because we have no way of proving anything about them. Your favorite color is an opinion. Basic facts about the world are not opinions.

Now people come up with various theories about the mechanisms that the world functions under. One person may have one idea and another has a different theory.

Now we get into a problem when laymen confuse this with the idea that these are different opinions in the favorite color sense. I think that the fault is just a simple confusion in communication. We have words that mean different things in different contexts and it is easy to get confused and think one thing is being said when something else is.

So anyway we have Scientists who’s job is to study and figure out things from the Natural World. They are supposed to follow the scientific method.

Physics is basically math in a bunch of word problems. It’s the idea that if we can figure out how to put things into these word problems then we can get a useful answer. Unlike High School math you don’t always know the formulas ahead of time. Sometimes you have inputs and outputs and you are trying to figure out what formula would make that work. Different people have different ideas for what formula would fit there.

Then somebody comes along and starts writing “god” as the formula.

How is that useful to anybody?

Then other people come into the room, that they were not invited into in the first place and start praising this. Great! they say, this solves it all. The scientists point out that this makes no sense and doesn’t help. The people say that the scientist are persecuting them for their beliefs and they take their hero of the day on their shoulders and say that they are going to found their own labs to study this new theory.

Ok, what ever, the scientists say to get them to go away and erase the “god” formula. They get back to work. They can write formulas that allow for all the technology and medicine that we have today, trillions of provable results are generated. All of western civilization is based on this.

Then those people come back in and say that their “scientist” deserves equal time. They say that their opinions are just as valid. They say that they have the religious right to dictate to them.

The scientists try and explain that opinion and theory are not the same thing. A theory has to accept a lot of givens and be able to predict something in the world.  Their scientist is ignoring all the givens and not predicting anything. Therefore no science is occuring.

They say that both of these have to given equal weight in schools.

Why? the scientists say, isn’t there History, Philosophy, and Sociology classes. Can’t you teach a Religion class and leave it out of Science where it doesn’t belong?

No, the people say. The polls say you have to teach by mass agreement.

So you have people that learn some science. They pretend to understand the scientific method. Then they come along and say that they believe in Science AND in God!

OK I say, so you believe that science is true but God is the prime mover?

Yes they say. God controlled the situation through science.

OK, I have no problem with that.

Then they say that God has been steering things in many ways.

Ok but at what point did God stir?

If you believe in science and that God set it in motion then we need to figure out at what point did God change the laws of Physics to cause certain things that wouldn’t have occured to actually occur. Then we can give up on figuring out anything before that. Since the universe became untrackable at that point we need to know it.

I’ll give you another example that is simpler. Say you are doing a mathematical proof and someone came along and changed the equation in mid solution. What happens?

We have a way of modeling Astrophysics and we are learning enormous amounts. IF it behaves in a logical manner then we HAVE to assume that it occured out of rational events. So did God stir before that?

I’ve heard that a GaTech teacher was actually teaching that Evolution was impossible because of the Law of Entropy. That is interesting when Evolution is an example of Entropy, two different actions of it in fact!

Entropy causes disorder in a system. This is reflected by the amount of mutations that occur in the biological systems. Diversity is an example of entropy.

The problem is that the universe is not a nice place. Most things are not successful and die out. IN fact 99.9% of all life dies out. It’s an extremely rare thing that can be in the right place with the right traits to survive. The entropy of the system destroys most of the system.

These two examples of entropy mean that only the most perfectly narrow chance exists for anything. It’s really hard out there.

So Entropy is the driving force behind Evolution. The system has no plans ahead of time. It’s a shotgun approach. SOMETHING is got to catch!

So when someone comes up to a scientist and tries to put an opinion in the middle of formulas, I give that scientist permission to laugh at him and call him names. When that scientist beats that person down for irritating him I will call it aggravated assault. However until all the scientists of the country get together and work on killing people with the stupid gene then I will not believe them when they scream that they are being oppressed for their beliefs.

And maybe, just maybe I will have a harsh word with those scientists.

Anyone who looks at my blog can tell that I’m for Obama. I think that he is one of the best candidates we have had in a long time. I really hope that he gets it.

One of the questions that they have been asking him over and over is who is your running mate. He hasn’t answered and I think this is a good thing. It is not really the time to deal with that part of the game. He needs to get Clinton off his back and get the Democrat Nomination first before he does that. That is a part of the Presidential race and it will involve picking a running mate that will cover his bases with voter groups.

I was stumbling across the internet and I came across this video. It discusses the idea of using Goggle Trends as a way of figuring out interest in a subject graphed over time. You can even graph it against media attention on that subject as well to compare them and see if the media is reporting based on what people are actually interested in. It helps to tell if a story is being hyped or buried.

The gist of the video is that the Media apparently has decided to ignore Ron Paul as a candidate in this election. The internet activity suggests that there is a lot of interest in him, maybe even support.

Well I decided to look up this guy, check out his main page here and a wiki article on him here.

Ok so we have a Republican that is nearly a Libertarian that did place in the 1988 election though not by much. He is a principled man of his standards that focuses on the Constitution above all. He is well respected and articulate.
So what would happen if Barack Obama chose him for his running mate!

It would show that he really is about change and listening to the Republican side of things. It would be an amazing signal to many out there. They are both principled idealists. I’m sure that they would clash over some things but I think that it would make for an incredible ticket! Most of the time the VP is some guy I never heard of and is there to get some money for the campaign (that’s the only explanation I can think of for Quayle). He would get more Republicans as well as Independants behind him. It would also add an interesting voice to his cabinet.

What if?

I was just thinking about this new Web OS stuff. I like the idea but I keep running into worries about it. I outlined them already earlier.

Anyway it gave me an idea that maybe have a remote home folder for live CDs. Basically a live CD gives your the OS and some common apps. How about have it so that you can get online, once you are up and running, and have the home folder on server somewhere. That way you have access to your stuff anywhere but you don’t have to wait for everything to load remotely back and forth. You can still access what you want, use nearly any existing distro and even package it the way you want it instead of having to accept someone else’s apps and such.

You wouldn’t have to carry around those thumbdrives, just the live CD.

Hillary is simply not electable by the republicans. The problem is that even if she gets elected then the republicans will win. Repeatedly the republicans have said that they could deal with Obama. We can get a Democrat into the White House if and only if we get a candidate that the republicans will accept.

Plus she looks to much like Carrie Weaver from ER.

Creepy.

Go and read the whole thing here, but I wanted to show this section for those who seem to think that he has no foreign policy plan.

“It is time to turn the page. When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world’s most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.

The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I introduced a plan in January that would have already started bringing our troops out of Iraq, with a goal of removing all combat brigades by March 31, 2008. If the President continues to veto this plan, then ending this war will be my first priority when I take office.

There is no military solution in Iraq. Only Iraq’s leaders can settle the grievances at the heart of Iraq’s civil war. We must apply pressure on them to act, and our best leverage is reducing our troop presence. And we must also do the hard and sustained diplomatic work in the region on behalf of peace and stability.

In ending the war, we must act with more wisdom than we started it. That is why my plan would maintain sufficient forces in the region to target al Qaeda within Iraq. But we must recognize that al Qaeda is not the primary source of violence in Iraq, and has little support — not from Shia and Kurds who al Qaeda has targeted, or Sunni tribes hostile to foreigners. On the contrary, al Qaeda’s appeal within Iraq is enhanced by our troop presence.

Ending the war will help isolate al Qaeda and give Iraqis the incentive and opportunity to take them out. It will also allow us to direct badly needed resources to Afghanistan. Our troops have fought valiantly there, but Iraq has deprived them of the support they need—and deserve. As a result, parts of Afghanistan are falling into the hands of the Taliban, and a mix of terrorism, drugs, and corruption threatens to overwhelm the country.

As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations and support NATO’s efforts against the Taliban. As we step up our commitment, our European friends must do the same, and without the burdensome restrictions that have hampered NATO’s efforts. We must also put more of an Afghan face on security by improving the training and equipping of the Afghan Army and Police, and including Afghan soldiers in U.S. and NATO operations.

We must not, however, repeat the mistakes of Iraq. The solution in Afghanistan is not just military — it is political and economic. As President, I would increase our non-military aid by $1 billion. These resources should fund projects at the local level to impact ordinary Afghans, including the development of alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers. And we must seek better performance from the Afghan government, and support that performance through tough anti-corruption safeguards on aid, and increased international support to develop the rule of law across the country.

Above all, I will send a clear message: we will not repeat the mistake of the past, when we turned our back on Afghanistan following Soviet withdrawal. As 9/11 showed us, the security of Afghanistan and America is shared. And today, that security is most threatened by the al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuary in the tribal regions of northwest Pakistan.

Al Qaeda terrorists train, travel, and maintain global communications in this safe-haven. The Taliban pursues a hit and run strategy, striking in Afghanistan, then skulking across the border to safety.

This is the wild frontier of our globalized world. There are wind-swept deserts and cave-dotted mountains. There are tribes that see borders as nothing more than lines on a map, and governments as forces that come and go. There are blood ties deeper than alliances of convenience, and pockets of extremism that follow religion to violence. It’s a tough place.

But that is no excuse. There must be no safe-haven for terrorists who threaten America. We cannot fail to act because action is hard.

As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.

And Pakistan needs more than F-16s to combat extremism. As the Pakistani government increases investment in secular education to counter radical madrasas, my Administration will increase America’s commitment. We must help Pakistan invest in the provinces along the Afghan border, so that the extremists’ program of hate is met with one of hope. And we must not turn a blind eye to elections that are neither free nor fair — our goal is not simply an ally in Pakistan, it is a democratic ally.

Beyond Pakistan, there is a core of terrorists — probably in the tens of thousands — who have made their choice to attack America. So the second step in my strategy will be to build our capacity and our partnerships to track down, capture or kill terrorists around the world, and to deny them the world’s most dangerous weapons.

I will not hesitate to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America. This requires a broader set of capabilities, as outlined in the Army and Marine Corps’s new counter-insurgency manual. I will ensure that our military becomes more stealth, agile, and lethal in its ability to capture or kill terrorists. We need to recruit, train, and equip our armed forces to better target terrorists, and to help foreign militaries to do the same. This must include a program to bolster our ability to speak different languages, understand different cultures, and coordinate complex missions with our civilian agencies.

To succeed, we must improve our civilian capacity. The finest military in the world is adapting to the challenges of the 21st century. But it cannot counter insurgent and terrorist threats without civilian counterparts who can carry out economic and political reconstruction missions — sometimes in dangerous places. As President, I will strengthen these civilian capacities, recruiting our best and brightest to take on this challenge. I will increase both the numbers and capabilities of our diplomats, development experts, and other civilians who can work alongside our military. We can’t just say there is no military solution to these problems. We need to integrate all aspects of American might.

One component of this integrated approach will be new Mobile Development Teams that bring together personnel from the State Department, the Pentagon, and USAID. These teams will work with civil society and local governments to make an immediate impact in peoples’ lives, and to turn the tide against extremism. Where people are most vulnerable, where the light of hope has grown dark, and where we are in a position to make a real difference in advancing security and opportunity — that is where these teams will go.

I will also strengthen our intelligence. This is about more than an organizational chart. We need leadership that forces our agencies to share information, and leadership that never — ever — twists the facts to support bad policies. But we must also build our capacity to better collect and analyze information, and to carry out operations to disrupt terrorist plots and break up terrorist networks.

This cannot just be an American mission. Al Qaeda and its allies operate in nearly 100 countries. The United States cannot steal every secret, penetrate every cell, act on every tip, or track down every terrorist — nor should we have to do this alone. This is not just about our security. It is about the common security of all the world.

As President, I will create a Shared Security Partnership Program to forge an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to take down terrorist networks from the remote islands of Indonesia, to the sprawling cities of Africa. This program will provide $5 billion over three years for counter-terrorism cooperation with countries around the world, including information sharing, funding for training, operations, border security, anti-corruption programs, technology, and targeting terrorist financing. And this effort will focus on helping our partners succeed without repressive tactics, because brutality breeds terror, it does not defeat it.

We must also do more to safeguard the world’s most dangerous weapons. We know al Qaeda seeks a nuclear weapon. We know they would not hesitate to use one. Yet there is still about 50 tons of highly enriched uranium, some of it poorly secured, at civilian nuclear facilities in over forty countries. There are still about 15,000 to 16,00 nuclear weapons and stockpiles of uranium and plutonium scattered across 11 time zones in the former Soviet Union.

That is why I worked in the Senate with Dick Lugar to pass a law that would help the United States and our allies detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. That is why I am introducing a bill with Chuck Hagel that seeks to prevent nuclear terrorism, reduce global nuclear arsenals, and stop the spread of nuclear weapons. And that is why, as President, I will lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons and material at vulnerable sites within four years. While we work to secure existing stockpiles, we should also negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material.

And I won’t hesitate to use the power of American diplomacy to stop countries from obtaining these weapons or sponsoring terror. The lesson of the Bush years is that not talking does not work. Go down the list of countries we’ve ignored and see how successful that strategy has been. We haven’t talked to Iran, and they continue to build their nuclear program. We haven’t talked to Syria, and they continue support for terror. We tried not talking to North Korea, and they now have enough material for 6 to 8 more nuclear weapons.

It’s time to turn the page on the diplomacy of tough talk and no action. It’s time to turn the page on Washington’s conventional wisdom that agreement must be reached before you meet, that talking to other countries is some kind of reward, and that Presidents can only meet with people who will tell them what they want to hear.

President Kennedy said it best: “Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate.” Only by knowing your adversary can you defeat them or drive wedges between them. As President, I will work with our friend and allies, but I won’t outsource our diplomacy in Tehran to the Europeans, or our diplomacy in Pyongyang to the Chinese. I will do the careful preparation needed, and let these countries know where America stands. They will no longer have the excuse of American intransigence. They will have our terms: no support for terror and no nuclear weapons.

But America must be about more than taking out terrorists and locking up weapons, or else new terrorists will rise up to take the place of every one we capture or kill. That is why the third step in my strategy will be drying up the rising well of support for extremism.

When you travel to the world’s trouble spots as a United States Senator, much of what you see is from a helicopter. So you look out, with the buzz of the rotor in your ear, maybe a door gunner nearby, and you see the refugee camp in Darfur, the flood near Djibouti, the bombed out block in Baghdad. You see thousands of desperate faces.

Al Qaeda’s new recruits come from Africa and Asia, the Middle East and Europe. Many come from disaffected communities and disconnected corners of our interconnected world. And it makes you stop and wonder: when those faces look up at an American helicopter, do they feel hope, or do they feel hate?

We know where extremists thrive. In conflict zones that are incubators of resentment and anarchy. In weak states that cannot control their borders or territory, or meet the basic needs of their people. From Africa to central Asia to the Pacific Rim — nearly 60 countries stand on the brink of conflict or collapse. The extremists encourage the exploitation of these hopeless places on their hate-filled websites.

And we know what the extremists say about us. America is just an occupying Army in Muslim lands, the shadow of a shrouded figure standing on a box at Abu Ghraib, the power behind the throne of a repressive leader. They say we are at war with Islam. That is the whispered line of the extremist who has nothing to offer in this battle of ideas but blame — blame America, blame progress, blame Jews. And often he offers something along with the hate. A sense of empowerment. Maybe an education at a madrasa, some charity for your family, some basic services in the neighborhood. And then: a mission and a gun.

We know we are not who they say we are. America is at war with terrorists who killed on our soil. We are not at war with Islam. America is a compassionate nation that wants a better future for all people. The vast majority of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims have no use for bin Ladin or his bankrupt ideas. But too often since 9/11, the extremists have defined us, not the other way around.

When I am President, that will change. We will author our own story.

We do need to stand for democracy. And I will. But democracy is about more than a ballot box. America must show — through deeds as well as words — that we stand with those who seek a better life. That child looking up at the helicopter must see America and feel hope.

As President, I will make it a focus of my foreign policy to roll back the tide of hopelessness that gives rise to hate. Freedom must mean freedom from fear, not the freedom of anarchy. I will never shrug my shoulders and say — as Secretary Rumsfeld did — “Freedom is untidy.” I will focus our support on helping nations build independent judicial systems, honest police forces, and financial systems that are transparent and accountable. Freedom must also mean freedom from want, not freedom lost to an empty stomach. So I will make poverty reduction a key part of helping other nations reduce anarchy.

I will double our annual investments to meet these challenges to $50 billion by 2012. And I will support a $2 billion Global Education Fund to counter the radical madrasas — often funded by money from within Saudi Arabia — that have filled young minds with messages of hate. We must work for a world where every child, everywhere, is taught to build and not to destroy. And as we lead we will ask for more from our friends in Europe and Asia as well — more support for our diplomacy, more support for multilateral peacekeeping, and more support to rebuild societies ravaged by conflict.

I will also launch a program of public diplomacy that is a coordinated effort across my Administration, not a small group of political officials at the State Department explaining a misguided war. We will open “America Houses” in cities across the Islamic world, with Internet, libraries, English lessons, stories of America’s Muslims and the strength they add to our country, and vocational programs. Through a new ” America’s Voice Corps” we will recruit, train, and send out into the field talented young Americans who can speak with — and listen to — the people who today hear about us only from our enemies.

As President, I will lead this effort. In the first 100 days of my Administration, I will travel to a major Islamic forum and deliver an address to redefine our struggle. I will make clear that we are not at war with Islam, that we will stand with those who are willing to stand up for their future, and that we need their effort to defeat the prophets of hate and violence. I will speak directly to that child who looks up at that helicopter, and my message will be clear: “You matter to us. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.”

This brings me to the fourth step in my strategy: I will make clear that the days of compromising our values are over.

Major General Paul Eaton had a long and distinguished career serving this country. It included training the Iraqi Army. After Abu Ghraib, his senior Iraqi advisor came into his office and said: “You have no idea how this will play out on the streets of Baghdad and the rest of the Arab world. How can this be?” This was not the America he had looked up to.

As the counter-insurgency manual reminds us, we cannot win a war unless we maintain the high ground and keep the people on our side. But because the Administration decided to take the low road, our troops have more enemies. Because the Administration cast aside international norms that reflect American values, we are less able to promote our values. When I am President, America will reject torture without exception. America is the country that stood against that kind of behavior, and we will do so again.

I also will reject a legal framework that does not work. There has been only one conviction at Guantanamo. It was for a guilty plea on material support for terrorism. The sentence was 9 months. There has not been one conviction of a terrorist act. I have faith in America’s courts, and I have faith in our JAGs. As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists.

This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.

That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.  ”

How about that for a foreign policy?

The more I read about Obama, the more impressed I am. It amazes me how intelligent and articulate this man is. I had about given up hope for this country because of the current criminals in office.

Some people seem to think that he doesn’t have any record to speak of.

Here is his record as a Senator so far:

His record suggests several priorities and the bills he supports address many of our most pressing problems.

Most of his legislative effort has been in the area of Energy Efficiency and Climate Change (25 bills), health care (21 bills) and public health (20 bills), consumer protection/labor (14 bills), the needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces (13 bills), Congressional Ethics and Accountability (12 bills), Foreign Policy (10 bills) Voting and Elections (9 bills), Education (7 bills), Hurricane Katrina Relief (6), the Environment (5 bills), Homeland Security (4 bills), and discrimination (4 bills).

Of the 15 bills Senator Obama sponsored or co-sponsored in 2005-7 that became law:

Two addressed foreign policy:
Promote relief, security and democracy in the Congo (2125)
Develop democratic institutions in areas under Palestinian control (2370).

Three addressed public health:
Improve mine safety (2803)
Increased breast cancer funding (597)
Reduce preterm delivery and complications, reduce infant mortality (707).

Two addressed openness and accountability in government:
Strengthening the Freedom of Information Act (2488)
Full disclosure of all entities receiving federal funds (2590)

Two addressed national security
Extend Terrorist Risk Insurance (467)
Amend the Patriot Act (2167)

One addressed the needs of the Armed Forces
Wave passport fees to visit graves, attend memorials/funerals of veterans abroad (1184).

Of the 570 bills Senator Obama introduced into the Senate during the 109th and 110th Congress  (Senate Bill numbers are in parentheses), they can be summarized as follows:

25 addressed Energy Efficiency and Climate Change
Suspend royalty relief for oil and gas (115)
Reduce dependence on oil; use of alternative energy sources (133)
Increase fuel economy standards for cars (767, 768)
Auto industry incentives for fuel efficient vehicles (1151)
Reduce green house gas emissions (1324)
Establish at NSF a climate change education program (1389)
Increase renewable content of gasoline (2202)
Energy emergency relief for small businesses and farms (269)
Strategic gasoline and fuel reserves (1794)
Alternative diesel standards (3554)
Coal to liquid fuel promotion (3623)
Renewable diesel standards (1920)
Reducing global warming pollution from vehicles (2555)
Fuel security and consumer choice (1994, 2025)
Alternative energy refueling system (2614)
Climate change education (1389)
Low income energy assistance (2405)
Oil savings targets (339)
Fuel economy reform (3694)
Plug-in electric drive vehicles (1617)
Nuclear release notice (2348)
Passenger rail investment (294)
Energy relief for low income families (2405)

21 addressed Health Care
Drug re-importation (334)
Health information technology (1262, 1418)
Discount drug prices (2347)
Health care associated infections (2278)
Hospital quality report cards (692, 1824)
Medical error disclosure and compensation (1784)
Emergency medical care and response (1873)
Stem cell research (5)
Medical Malpractice insurance (1525)
Health centers renewal (901, 3771)
Children’s health insurance (401)
Home health care (2061)
Medicare independent living (2103)
Microbicides for HIV/AIDS (823)
Ovarian cancer biomarker research (2569)
Gynological cancers (1172)
Access to personalized medicine through use of human genome (976)
Paralysis research and care (1183)

20 addressed Public Health:
Violence against women (1197)
Biodefense and pandemic preparedness and response (1821, 1880)
Viral influenza control (969)
End homelessness (1518)
Reduce STDs/unintended pregnancy (1790)
Smoking prevention and tobacco control (625)
Minority health improvement and disparity elimination (4024)
Nutrition and physical education in schools (2066)
Health impact assessments (1067, 2506)
Healthy communities (1068)
Combat methamphetamines (2071)
Paid sick leave (910)
Prohibit mercury sales (833, 1818)
Prohibit sale of lead products (1306, 2132)
Lead exposure in children (1811, 2132)

14 address Consumer Protection/Labor
Stop unfair labor practices (842)
Fair minimum wage (2, 1062, 2725, 3829)
Internet freedom (2917)
Credit card safety (2411)
Media ownership (2332)
Protecting taxpayer privacy (2484)
Working family child assistance (218)
Habeus Corpus Restoration (185)
Bankruptcy protection for employees and retirees (2092)
FAA fair labor management dispute resolution (2201)
Working families flexibility (2419).

13 addressed the Needs of Veterans and the Armed Forces:
Improve Benefits (117)
Suicide prevention (479)
Needs of homeless veterans (1180)
Homes for veterans (1084)
GI Bill enhancement (43)
Military job protection
Dignity in care for wounded vets (713)
Housing assistance for low income veterans (1084)
Military children in public schools (2151)
Military eye injury research and care (1999)
Research physical/mental health needs from Iraq War (1271)
Proper administration of discharge for personality disorder (1817, 1885)
Security of personal data of veterans (3592)

12 addressed Congressional Ethics and Accountability
Lobbying and ethics reform (230)
Stop fraud (2280)
Legislative transparency and accountability (525)
Open government (2180, 2488)
Restoring fiscal discipline (10)
Transparency and integrity in earmarks (2261)
Accountability of conference committee deliberations and reports (2179)
Federal funding accountability and transparency (2590)
Accountability and oversight for private security functions under Federal
contract (674)
Accountability for contractors and personnel under federal contracts
(2147) Resctrictions awarding government contracts (2519)

10 addressed Foreign Policy:
Iraq war de-escalation (313)
US policy for Iraq (433),
Divestiture from Iran (1430)
Sudan divestment authorization (831)
Millennium Development Goals (2433)
Multilateral debt relief (1320)
Development bank reform (1129)
Nuclear nonproliferation (3131,977,2224).

9 address Voting/Elections
Prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections (453)
Voter access to polls and services in Federal elections (737)
Voter intimidation and deceptive practices (1975)
Senate campaign disclosure parity (185)
Require reporting for bundled campaign contributions (2030)
Election jamming prevention (4102)
Campaign disclosure parity (223)
Presidential funding (2412)
Integrity of electronic voting systems (1487)

11 addressed Education
Increase access of low income African Americans to higher education (1513)
Establish teaching residency programs (1574)
Increase early intervention services (2111)
Middle school curriculum improvements (2227)
Public database of scholarships, fellowships and financial aid (2428)
Summer learning programs (116)
TANF financial education promotion (924)
Higher education (1642)
Build capacity at community colleges (379)
Campus law enforcement in emergencies (1228)
Support for teachers (2060).

6 addressed Hurrican Katrina
Hurricane Katrina recovery (2319)
Emergency relief (1637)
Bankruptcy relief and community protection (1647)
Working family tax relief (2257)
Fair wages for recovery workers (1749)
Gulf coast infrastructure redevelopment (1836)

5 addressed the Environment
Drinking water security (218, 1426)
Water resources development (728)
Waste water treatment (1995)
Combat illegal logging (1930)
Spent nuclear fuel tracking and Acountability (1194)
Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act (Introduced in Senate)[S.726.IS ]

4 addressed Discrimination
Claims for  civil class action based on discrimination (1989)
Domestic partnership benefits (2521)
Unresolved civil rights crimes (535)
Equality or two parent families (2286)

4 addressed Homeland Security
Judicial review of FISA orders (2369)
National emergency family locator (1630)
Amend US Patriot Act (2167)
Chemical security and safety (2486)

That was collected here.

What is interesting to me about the Christians is that they were aggressive hypocrites from the very start. Most people think that they do this as a reaction to something but they were doing this from day one.
When the religion of christianity first became distinct from judaism in the middle east it was under the control of the Romans. The Romans understood that there was a religious ban on paying respects the the Gods of any other religion for the Jews so they were given a special dispensation to not have to make the signs of respect or tithes to the state temples. Then the christians popped up and said that they were not going to pay or make respect to the state gods either.
At the time this was seen sort of as a cross between a loyalty oath and a part of a bargain between the state and the Gods so not doing this was considered to cause disruption between them. But the Romans were extremely practical people so they could work out a compromise if they needed to.
So the Romans said to the christians that they get this tax brake because they were a part of an existing tax break for the Jews. The christians refused. THey said they would not pay respect or taxes and would not allow themselves to be given a tax break either.
The Romans at the time lamented in letters that they were very tired of the chrisitians trying to force the Romans to kill them. They causes so many problems that they became declared as state terrorists.
Most people believe that the Romans persecuted them for not being pagan and hated them. The Romans were one of the most religiously tolerant peoples in history.
Another thing that people believe is that christianity used to be nice but it became distorted and corrupted over the years through bad translation.
Nope. Christians are the world’s first and largest Hate Group!
Nothing more and nothing less.