Blogcritics Author: Matt Finley

Announcement: Short-content feeds

Phillip Winn — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT

Sunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding.

If You Support Bush, You Must Not Buy Gas or Know Anyone Over in Iraq

Matt Finley — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:23:08 EDT

I get so tired of hearing this. For the last time, let me explain it to you.GasHow funny. I buy lots of gas and drive a great big 3/4 ton four-wheel drive pickup truck with a 6.6 liter engine that gets 16 miles per gallon when I (occasionally) drive it easy (12 when I'm pulling my trailer full of gas-guzzling, air polluting toys). I have 43 cylinders in my yard right now. I buy lots of gas.And I live where it's some of the most expensive in the states. It's going up. Again.Just out of curiosity, how is gas pricing Bush's fault? Oh, yeah, that's right -- he gave tax breaks to big oil companies because they're his buddies. But wait. He gave tax breaks to ALL companies. They didn't tell you that, did they?IraqI have two friends in Iraq right now, for their second and third tours. They're very proud to be there and they know full well why we're there, regardless of what you think we're there for. A good friend/ex co-worker's son just joined (the Marines) last year and is headed over there soon. Another (very good) friend who I see frequently was shot there a while ago by snipers, and went back.Iraq was planned well before Bush got into office and had almost full support from around the world to go there. Don't let the lies from the extreme left detract from the FACTS that have been proven (and ignored) over and over.Of course, we all know the reason we're there now is not the same reason we went in the first place. Unless you believe the government knew how deeply Iran was/is involved over there when we went in.Other Things That Bush Really Is Responsible ForIllegal Aliens. Bush really falls on his face here. Close the ****ing border, fine and jail employers hiring illegals, and get them the **** out of here! Don't forcibly go after them and remove them at our expense, just make it so they have no reason to be here and leave on their own. Easier than rounding them all up, don't you think?Science. This is misleading the way I understand it, because Bush doesn't want to mandate government involvement in stem cell research. He's not prohibiting it in the private sector, he's just not going to have the government do it. Fair enough. Perhaps he could find some funds for it though, as a subsidy. My next door neighbor has MS, so this is a hot topic in my neighborhood.Economy. Tough one. Yeah, Clinton left a "surplus" He also left a rapidly deteriorating economy that basically crashed 3 months after he left office. Bush brought it back in the face of war and adiversity. He built the military back up, which Clinton all but dismantled to get the "surplus". He kept us out of a recession, improved the economy with tax breaks FOR EVERYBODY, not just the rich. (Another lie told by the extreme left). The catch is that he's printing more money than we can back up. That could be a big problem if the deficit doesn't keep coming down and we don't improve our dollar's attractiveness overseas.The Clinton SituationAll in all, Bush is seemingly better than Clinton was (in my opinion, of course). And looking at what Hillary is saying -- universal health care, shared wealth, etc. -- scares me just a bit. I mean, look at Canada's health system. Yikes. I was up there visiting friends a few years ago and I got to tell you, it's tough to get seen, let alone treated.They tax me bad enough already, but Clinton will at the very least tax me more, and also wants to take money from the entire working and upper class and spread it out evenly among everybody. That happens and I guarantee me and millions of other hard working Americans will quit our jobs and live off the system, instead of working hard to pay for others to do it that don't want to work in the system we have now.What Do I Want?I want to hear intelligence. Reason. Cogent thought. But most of all, I want to hear INFORMED opinions. Not name calling. Not speculation. Not lies. Not the old and busted, run of the mill talking points that have been going around for years yet have almost all been completely debunked. Just let it go, man. Let it go.The problem with many opinions is that people often do nothing to verify what's told to them. Therefore they're often ignorant. I check my sources. I usually try to at least quickly verify what's told to me. I rarely take anyone's word for it. If I just listened to the same old rhetorical hate Bush gibberish day in and day out, I'd be just as ignorant as the guy blaming global warming on Bush when the US is actually LOWERING its CO2 output. Did you know Bush turned the White House green when he moved in? Solar panels, you know, eco-friendly stuff. Gore was there for eight years, what did he do to make the White House use less energy? I have stacks of pages of stuff. Empty pages. He didn't do squat. Then compare Bush and Gore's homes. Bush is green, Gore is, well, how shall we say? Not.Nope, I don't just listen to the hate and lies of one side. I look at both sides and make my own opinions.By the way, I'm NOT a Republican. I don't like Bush just as much as the next guy, for the reasons I stated above. But I recognize that everything he does is not bad and evil and I know he doesn't do things just done to ruin this country. He does some good things, he does some bad things. Just like you. Just like me.

Matt is a recovering Democrat who narrowly escaped being scooped up by the Republicans. By day he's a CNC programmer. By night he's a freelance writer/photographer.

You Can't Create Fact From Fiction

Matt Finley — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:52:13 EDT

You can debate whether we should have gone to Iraq or not, that’s what free speech allows (for those of us who are lucky enough to still enjoy it).You can be committed to your side of the debate, I have no issue with passion.What you can’t do (even though thousands try) is to create fact from fiction.Facts that are known:Highpoints of Islamic Terrorism against the West in the last 3 decades:1979 Fifty two US citizens held hostage in Iran by radicals1983 US Embassy in Beirut bombed 63 people killed including 17 US citizens1983 Marine Barracks bombed 241 US marines killed1983 American Embassy in Kuwait bombed 6 killed1984 US Embassy annex bombed, 24 killed 2 US1984-1985 Flight 221 Kuwait Airways, TWA 847, Achille Lauro1986- Bombing of La Belle Discotheque1988- Bombing of Pan Am Flight 1031993 – 1st World Trade Center bombing1996 Khobar Towers Bombing1998 Africa US Embassy bombing2000 US Cole Bombing2001 WTC attacked over 3000 civilians killed199X Clinton administration thought Saddam had WMD’sPresident Clinton on CNNMadalin Albright on CNNSandy Burger in USA TodayWhat Today’s critics were saying back a few yearson freedomagenda.comUS HOUSE and Senate approval of war on IraqAuthorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502) passed by the House and Senate in October 2002UN on IRAQPrior to 2002 the UN had passed 16 resolutions on Iraq to cease WMD development and comply with inspections, including 1441, all of which Saddam basically ignored.Iraqi Involvement with TerrorismIraq provided bases to the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), and the Abu Nidal organization (ANO). Following the invasion in 2k3, U.S. sanctions applicable to state sponsors of terrorism against Iraq were suspended and President Bush announced the removal of Iraq from the list on 25 September 2004.Some people think Saddam's payments of $25k (US equivalent) to the families of suicide bombers was humanitarian aid, not a subsidy or reward that could have been considered supporting terrorism. Afghanistan and Al QaedaThe Taliban had given safe haven to Al Qaeda to train and plot logistics attacks based from Afganistan. These actions are well documented.Afganistan1. Al Qaeda and radical Islam recruited, trained and developed plans to attack US interests and civilians.2. Afghanistan was a safe haven for Al Qaeda to carry out training, logistics and development of attacks on US civilians.1 + 2 justify Afghanistan invasion to protect US civilians.Iraq3. Saddam was a renegade leader with a history of WMD possession and usage on his own people.4. Saddam defied UN resolutions.5. World leaders thought Saddam had WMD’s in the late 90’s thru 2003.6. The US Senate and House voted to authorize war on Iraq.7. UN Resolution 1441 declares IRAQ in material breach or previous resolutions and this was their final opportunity for compliance, Saddam didn’t.3+4+5+6+7 equals Bush wasn’t on his own and the war is legitimate and legal and was supported by 70 percent of the US Congress.And if that isn’t enough add these: Saddam took Oil for Food money and fraudulently used it to his own gain and not the UN’s mandate. Saddam was responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of his own countrymen leaving mass graves all over Iraq. Bottom line:Pacifism as a response to Radical Islamic Muslims didn’t work leading up to 2001 and it won't work now.I can accept opinions. We all have them. But so much of the anti war rhetoric today is emotion and has nothing to do with facts.I don’t like war, nobody does. I don’t like the fact that over 3000 US soldiers have died. An argument can be made that we’ve tried to make war too humane with high accuracy bombs and ridiculously stringent rules of engagement minimizing collateral damage. Maybe we should have used B52’s and kept our military men and women safer.The simple fact is the news media could care less about truth and fact, and too many people don’t spend the time to find the truth. They just believe their bias.

Matt is a recovering Democrat who narrowly escaped being scooped up by the Republicans. By day he's a CNC programmer. By night he's a freelance writer/photographer.

U.S. Preparing To Attack Iran - Says Russian Intelligence

Matt Finley — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 07:50:42 EDT

Not since 2003 has the U.S. military engaged in such a high level of buildup and readiness in the Persian Gulf. Could this be an indication that America is planning to attack Iran?A top Russian security source thinks so. He claims the U.S. has built up forces at the border and they are becoming much more "active", stating that the U.S. is planning both air and ground attacks against Iran.Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov of Moscow's Academy of Geopolitical Sciences said that the U.S. is planning a large scale air strike on Iran's military infrastructure shortly. The USS John C. Stennis, accompanied by eight support ships and four nuclear submarines, is heading for the Gulf. The USS Dwight D. Eisenhower has been there with similar support for over three months. The U.S. is also sending Patriot anti-missile systems to the Persian Gulf region.The United Arab Emirates have stated that they will not allow their territory to be used in any assault or reconnaissance against Iran, while recently urging the West to continue using a "diplomatic" approach to the growing threat from Iran.Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, told the West recently that it would "respond" to any further pressure connected to its nuclear development, and reiterated the claim that Iranian nuclear development is strictly for "peaceful" purposes. "We have acted according to international norms [in the nuclear sphere] until recently, but if they [the West] take illegal measures, we will have a commensurate response," Khamenei said.Meanwhile, the UN Security Council is drafting a new resolution incorporating more sanctions against Iran because it refuses to abide by previous resolutions.

Matt is a recovering Democrat who narrowly escaped being scooped up by the Republicans. By day he's a CNC programmer. By night he's a freelance writer/photographer.

Iraq: A War to Win

Matt Finley — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:57:27 EDT

In 1996 President Bill Clinton defined terrorism as “the enemy of our generation.” He stated that “America must act and lead against terrorism.” He also stated that “This will be a long, hard struggle.”In 1999, before he became President, George W. Bush spoke about foreign policy and national security. His message basically had four points:1. Freedom is the precondition of peace2. Peace is democratic3. Make the military more effective and efficient4. Fight the war on terrorism at home and abroadMr. Bush held fast to this plan, both before and after the attacks on the U.S. by terrorists on September 11. In his first term, President Bush actively and successfully prevented terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq from creating or maintaining bases of operation. He effectively destroyed the Taliban movement and removed the ruthless dictator in Iraq, Saddam Hussein.Afterwards, in each country, free elections were held successfully, which proved that democracy and freedom could be reasonable policies against terrorism.Many people question the role of the U.S. in Iraq, but it is very clear to me: To spread democracy and freedom.Terrorists in Iraq are trying to stop democracy from taking hold. Iran in particular is seemingly in Iraq to prolong the U.S. military presence. Iranian leadership rejects a secular and democratic Iraq, but from their perspective it serves their best interest to promote terrorism there, which is why Iran is supporting terrorism inside Iraq, attempting to control the Iraqi Shi'its both politically and financially, and also maintaining pressure on Iraq's neighbors by using other terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hesbolla outside Iraq.I am certain most Arab countries in that region want stability, but Iran's actions are clear indications that its policy of promoting terrorism in and around Iraq are detrimental to stability. What's more, Iran's constant military buildup and pursuit of nuclear weapons threatens any hope for peace or stability there and elsewhere in the world.A stable, terrorist-free Iraq is key to the protection and survival of Western civilization. Since the U.S. took the war to our enemy after 9/11, after over 30 years of sitting idly by doing little or nothing about the growing problem, almost all terrorist activity has occurred in Muslim countries like Iraq, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and some in places like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia.Iranian-backed Shias have joined the Radical Islamic Muslims to try to control Iraq after the ouster of dictator Saddam Hussein, as they battle the Al Qaeda-backed Sunnis in an effort to establish a worldwide caliphate (Islam rules the planet) centered in Iraq. Al Quada, ruled by Shia clergy for 20 years, wants the Shia to lead the caliphate, and Iran, (a mostly Shia nation ruled by the Sunnis for centuries) want a Sunni-led caliphate.When you look at the violence and death in Iraq, it has much less to do with the United States, and much more to do with two terrorist entities battling for control of a land from which to establish the caliphate.If the US backs out of Iraq and allows the two factions to continue their fight for the control of Iraq, it will be a losing situation for Western civilization no matter who wins. Iraq has the resources and geography to fund the caliphate, and according to Osama bin Laden, Iraq will be the center of that caliphate. Iran seems to agree with Al Queda, at least with that.

Matt is a recovering Democrat who narrowly escaped being scooped up by the Republicans. By day he's a CNC programmer. By night he's a freelance writer/photographer.

What's Really Wrong with Radical Islamic Muslims?

Matt Finley — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:27:56 EDT

I’ve been reading a lot of the views and interacting with some of those supporting radical Islam, trying to figure out where all the hate and discontent is coming from.I see a huge amount of denial (or possibly ignorance) when it comes to Arabs' (and/or their supporters') views of what’s going on in the Middle East concerning Israel and Western Civilization. In seeing that denial, I have to ask myself; as a staunch supporter of Israel’s right to exist and the continuation of Western Civilization, am I missing something? Am I the ignorant one in denial?The Arabs are pissed, obviously. But why? They say they want their land back. And they say (repeatedly) that they want Israel “wiped off the map.” The land was taken (again) from the Arabs over a half a century ago by the Jews. That same land was supposedly promised to the Jews in the Bible by God. Biblical entries show that King David brought the Jewish people together around 1000 B.C., in the land that is currently (still) being contested in the Middle East.But it goes beyond just wanting their land back. I used to believe that radical Islamics hated Western Civilization because of the freedom of religion and civil rights we exalt and cherish and much to do with the US policy in the ME, and that the recent attacks on Israel were simply a by-product of that hatred, coupled with the land dispute that’s been going on for so long.But what if the main cause of violence and hatred was much more simplistic that that?I’ve looked at both sides over the last few months, and in my opinion, the Arabs are completely dysfunctional. Dysfunctional in every sense of the word. So dysfunctional that it makes them inutile, counterproductive, and dangerous to their neighbors.I don’t think it would matter if Israel submitted to the demands of Radical Islamic Muslims. I don’t think it wouldn’t matter if Arabs had controlled that land for the last 50 years and the Jews never raised arms against them. It just wouldn’t matter.Here’s why…The Arabs have roughly 3,000,000 people in over 20 countries, and more oil than they can shake a stick at. Oil is not their only game, either. They have other natural resources. But for all the wealth possessed by the Arab League, the gap between the rich Arabs and poor Arabs is astronomical. You’ve (hopefully) seen what effect this can have on a country (Mexico), and what it can do to that country’s people and the neighboring countries.Yet that, in and of itself, is still not entirely the problem.The biggest problem is that most of the rich in the Arab League did not get rich by being good, honest businessmen. They got rich by dishonesty, exploitation, extortion, murder, and venality. That dishonesty is viewed as normal behavior to Arabs, and removes much of the respect for life that should be present in humans naturally. Something most of Western Civilization cherishes.Also, many in the Arab League are dead set against human rights, especially for women. They have no issue with treating women like animals or even property. They have no issue with torture, rape, murder, and other numerous atrocities which the civilized world has condemned in the last 150 years and more. This is proven over and over again by the constant targeting of women and children, and the persistence in hiding amongst civilians, in schools, churches etc by radical Islam in its quest to ‘rid the world of the Zionists’.The Arabs have failed to rise up from savagery, barbarism, and hatred. They refuse to move into a reasonable state of modern development and civility like most of the rest of the world has done over the centuries. At the same time they want to move towards a global Islamic Rule. And to be honest, I don’t think they intend to do it peacefully.

Matt is a recovering Democrat who narrowly escaped being scooped up by the Republicans. By day he's a CNC programmer. By night he's a freelance writer/photographer.

The Setup

Matt Finley — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 04:58:09 EDT

How many kids and parents love water guns and water balloons? My wife is an expert when it comes to them. She's also an instigator. She's highly tactful, well armed, sneaky, and very persuasive. All the kids (and most adults) want to be on her team. She taught other people's kids (and in many cases their parents) very well over the years.What I'm about to tell you is something so devious it can't be taught at an early age; it has to be inherited. It's bred in. It's instinct. It's profound.My neighbor, my eldest son, and myself were on the back deck enjoying the day, playing with water guns and drinking from our sippy cups. I had gone in the house briefly for something, and when I returned, Cz was standing by the table with his water gun in hand and another one on the edge of table next to him where I was about to sit down.As I approached the table, he looked me square in the eye and said very calmly and matter-of-factly, "I'm going to shoot you, Daddy."The way he said it was creepy and gave me a chill, but I couldn't quite figure out why. If I had really needed to defend myself, there was another gun on the table within easy reach, but he wouldn't dare shoot me. He knows what will happen if he does, and I know he knew that other gun was on the table. He saw me looking at it and I saw him looking at it.I slowly picked up the gun, put it to my side, and asked "Are you sure you want to shoot me?""Yes, Daddy. I'm going to shoot you.""Are you positive?" I asked, now waving the gun in front of him and glaring hard at him with one eyebrow raised. At this time I realized my gun was empty, but figured I could bluff my way out of it. He couldn't have known it was empty. He was probably shaking in his boots by then. "Yep." he said with an evil, yet familiar grin.As you can imagine I started to get nervous. "He shouldn't be so calm," I thought. "He knows I'd soak him from head to tow if he shot me, and he still doesn't know my gun's empty, so why is he smiling at me like that?" I started shaking the gun slightly in the hopes of getting just a small splash or two into the tube so I could try to discourage him from shooting me."Are you ready, Daddy?""Bring it on!" I said flatly as I pointed the gun right at his face. He hates being squirted in the face, so I figured this would turn him back and convince him that shooting me was a big mistake.Wrong.He moved his face about three inches closer to the gun as if to challenge me to shoot him. After a moment of silence he raised his gun slowly and without another word he started shooting me in the stomach and the groin.In a frenzy I tried to shoot back with my empty gun, shaking it violently, hoping to get something to come out. I have no idea why, but I'm still under the impression that I can scare him off, so I wasn't backing down. It wasn't working, and I started feeling the water thru my clothes. I finally gave up and tossed the gun back on the table and sat down in the chair.Wet. Confused. Defeated.I didn't realize at first what had just happened, but my neighbor did. He was laughing uncontrollably at my demise. Then it dawned on me: Cz set me up! He put that empty gun on the table knowing full well I'd try to use it against him but couldn't. He made sure his gun was full and mine was empty - then he called me out and I foolishly took the bait: hook, line, and sinker. He planned this thing from the start knowing exactly how I'd react and that there'd be nothing I could do.He pulled it off brilliantly from start to finish. I would have never thought a three-year-old would be able to plan something so devious, so completely, and actually have everything go according to plan. I won't underestimate him again.I put the blame squarely on my wife.

Matt is a recovering Democrat who narrowly escaped being scooped up by the Republicans. By day he's a CNC programmer. By night he's a freelance writer/photographer.