Just Blowing Smoke on Facebook

My good friend, Tim Higgins, wrote a piece in regards to Facebook. I need to tell ya that Tim is "Just Blowing Smoke..." That aside, I gotta say that mi amigo, Tim, has eloquently (or not) written that which also reflects my own views exactly. Tim Higgins is right on target.

Please take a look and read Getting Too Much Facetime.

American Democracy Threatened

Back on March 2, 2007, I wrote a Roland's Ramblings (my other blog) in which I stated: "we in the United States of America are in jeopardy of having our representative democracy form of government destroyed."

I was not making a reference to any threats from terrorists. I was not alluding to a rebellion, civil war, uprising, people's revolt, or anything like that. I was not speaking of an economic crisis bringing about the demise of our nation. I was not even making reference to the Tea Party Movement or extremists from either the left or the right of the political spectrum.

No, indeed; none of those.

That which I believe is the biggest threat to our American government, our representative democracy, is "We The People" or more specifically the fact that very few Americans actually vote in our elections along with the ignorance of the American electorate as a whole.

I realize many people will take offense to my remarks, However, to be honest, I really do not think many people will read my comments. Even if the whole American population were to read my views on the matter, it makes no difference to me if some one should take offense. I stand by my views on the matter as I have expressed them

Then, I suppose there are the people who may take exception to my perception and opinion that the vast majority of Americans, especially American voters, are ignorant. Well, golly gee, people! I am not alone in my thinking and there are, indeed, some scholarly writings that tend to affirm my own thinking on the matter. For instance, take a look and read:
Somin, Ilya, When Ignorance Isn't Bliss: How Political Ignorance Threatens Democracy, Policy Analysis, No. 525, September 22, 2004.

Cross reference: Cato Institute 'lead' article.

So, what I want to shout out is this:
Do your homework, people! Read up, study, and learn about the issues and candidates for the upcoming elections; then, go out and vote with an informed mind!

Holocaust: Hoax or Real?

There are those who believe the Holocaust is a hoax: these adherents of "Holocaust Denial" do not believe there is sufficient evidence to substantiate that six million Jews were killed under Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany regime.

Then, there are others who believe the Holocaust is real; they believe there is sufficient evidence to prove their case as was presented in the Nuremberg trials as documented in "The Nuremberg Scripts."

Hmmm, I do believe I saw some of those "Holocaust Denial" adherents at a recent Tea Party.

Fred LeFebvre of WSPD: Rude and Crude are his True Colors

Approximately four years ago, I wrote a Roland Hansen Commentary about Fred LeFebvre, a radio show guy on Radio Station 1370 WSPD-AM Radio in Toledo, Ohio. I am surprised that Fred LeFebvre is still employed at WSPD; and quite frankly, after what transpired tonight, I call for his resignation. If Fred LeFebvre does not resign from his duties at WSPD, then Clear Channel Communications, Inc., the owners of WSPD, should fire him. Fred LeFebvre, as a public representative of his employer has demonstrated that he is totally irresponsible and reckless in his dealings with the public, service consumers, and potential audience of WSPD.

Oh! You are probably wondering what this is all about. Okay, I will let you in on it. Well, you see, earlier this evening, I had a chance encounter with Fred LeFebvre on the Facebook wall of Mark Dansack. It turned out to be very interesting, indeed. It started when Mark Dansack wrote an "update status" as to what was on his mind making a comment about tax cuts for the wealthy. In what followed, Fred LeFebvre of 1370 WSPD-AM Radio showed his true colors of RUDE and CRUDE.

Tell you what, rather than try to summarize what transpired, you can read it yourself. I have copied the Facebook exchange between Mark Dansack, Fred LeFebvre, and me word for word, and I pasted it below:

Mark Dansack Tax cuts for all the wealthy. They're bound to create jobs for all of us ! Hasn't this been tried for the last 10 years ? The only jobs being created are out of the country. The definition of insanity is to keep trying the same thing and expecting different results.

Fred Lefebvre: It appears that you are calling Pres. Obama insane.

Roland Hansen: Why was it necessary or appropriate as a follow up to the initial comment for Fred Lefebvre to make that snide comment about the President? Does he always have to just be one of the low denizens of Obama Bashers? Bash, bash, bash - it gets tiring, boring, and humdrum. The bottom line is that the historical evidence has demonstrated tax cuts for the richest of the richest has not spurred any jobs - period - none. nada, zilch. If I am mistaken, please cite the raw data (not opinion) proving a positive correlation between tax cuts and job creation.

Mark Dansack: Fred's a one trick pony re: Obama. Barack could cure cancer and Fred would complaiin he didn't do it fast enough. Something tells me that Fred doesn't like Obama.

Fred Lefebvre: Did I bash the POTUS? I simply commented on mark's observation about insanity being doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Fred Lefebvre: If you two don't like the posts you can always go somewhere else. I believe we've raised taxes a number of times over the years also and without the attendant job growth.

Mark Dansack: At least you can't hang up on me on Facebook, Fred.

Fred Lefebvre: i wouldn't hang up on you on air either mark if you had the balls to call

Mark Dansack: I try to call when you guys have a guest on, and am told to call back after the guests off the air. That doesn't really give us a chance to challenge what your guest is saying, does it ?

Fred Lefebvre: no it doesn't. the guest isn't there to answer your questions, he's there to answer mine.

Mark Dansack: no one has all the questions or all the answers.

Roland Hansen: Re: Fred Lefebvre - http://rolandhansencommentary.blogspot.com/2007/08/fred-lefebvre-disappearing-act.html Roland Hansen Commentary: Fred LeFebvre: The Disappearing Act

Mark Dansack: sometimes a discussion on certain programs closely resembles a diatribe ?

Fred Lefebvre: oh my god roland you are going back years for that one aren't you? you were as unimportant to me then as you are now

Roland Hansen: ‎@ Fred - ROTFLMAO

Fred Lefebvre: i guess the real question is not should we raise taxes then, but how much should the government be allowed to take from the people who work for it.

Roland Hansen: ‎@ Fred - DUH

Fred Lefebvre: and how much is that mark and roland? how much of my money as a percentage should the government be allowed to take?

Roland Hansen: ‎@ Fred - Yahn!

Mark Dansack: I'd rather have middle class Americans have more $$ in their pockets. At least they might spend a little to spur the economy, although so many products are made outside the country, I'm not sure we would see any job growth beyond retail jobs.

Roland Hansen: Oh, jeesh, my "Yahn" comment up there was really a "yawn." In my humble opinion, Fred Lefebvre sure has demonstrated a true lack of professionalism and a total lack of civility. His comments here directed at me in a belittling manner are reprehensible, but do indeed show his true character -- you know - the one he tried to cover up in his entry on that blog entry to which I linked. Go ahead, take a look at it and you will see for yourself that I write the truth.

 *** UPDATE AS SEPTEMBER 20, 2011:
Apparently I wrote and published this blog entry a little bit too early because there was more. Here is what was posted on that same exchange after that last comment above:

Fred Lefebvre: Roland you are the Ed Emery of Facebook. You really think anyone cares whether or not I returned a call to some self important blogger 4 years ago? Isn't there a link to something your wife wrote that we could be pointed to also.

Mark Dansack: My page is not to be used for personal insults. I welcome a healthy discussion of the issues at hand and honest respectful disagreement. It's what has made our country great. Thanks

Judy Rosenberg Hansen: "Do tell Fred, what was it I wrote about that you are referring to?"

Dave Westrick: "Wow, bringing a guys' wife into it, how low can you go, Oh never mind it's Fred. Trollin along Bottom feeding fred."

What do you think? Are the words and actions of Fred LeFebvre an appropriate display for a person holding an on-the-air employment position with 1370 WSPD-AM Radio?
***Incidentally, there was no further dialogue on that message thread because Fred LeFebvre chose to unfriend (defriend) me (and Mark Dansack) on FaceBook.

Postscript: There are some very interesting, if not intelligent, comments over on the SwampBubbles message thread "Who Is Fred LeFebvre, Anyway?" - take a look, it is funny stuff in its own sick convoluted way.

Chili Dog, Public Lands, and the Public Good

It's been awhile since my last entry here on Roland Hansen Commentary.

-- Whatever. --

I just do not have an overwhelming desire nor do I have a compelling need to write my opinions just to for the sake of writing. At any rate, I had decided earlier to write a commentary about a certain topic here and was just preparing to do so, but upon going through my google reader first, I came across an entry on Chili Dog Blog that I read thoroughly.

I was, and am, so impressed by its commentary and perspective on the very important issue of public lands as it relates to private ownership of land and the overall public good that I decided to link to that Chili Dog Blog entry here instead. In my own opinion, it is indeed very much on target and very well stated.

Please take the time to click on over to read:
Political No Man’s Land as posted by Chili Dog on September 14, 2011.

Republicans Use Glock To Take Aim At Congresswoman

Back on January 8, 2011, Jared Lee Loughner took aim with his Glock in his attempt to assassinate Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle "Gabby" Giffords. Loughner's attempt to kill Representative Giffords failed; however, Giffords suffered an extremely serious head wound. Loughner also shot 19 other people in his Glock shooting spree murdering six of those people in cold blood.

The local Republican Party has since also taken aim with a Glock pistol at Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who just happens to be a Democrat, a woman, Jewish, and the wife of Astronaut Mark Kelly.

Yes, indeed, in all its wisdom, the Pima County GOP, the local Republican Party in Representative Gabrielle Giffords' Arizona's 8th congressional district, is raffling off a Glock handgun to raise money in its get-out-the-vote efforts in the district to defeat her and other Democrats in future elections.

Read about it yourself in the article from Politico: Ariz.GOP raffling off Glock gun.

Just remember: Guns don't kill people; people kill people; guns with bullets just make it easier for people to kill people.

Americans Lack Outrage

In spite of cries from a very few people in the United States of America, there is really no outrage coming from the everyday, common American citizen. The majority of Americans have no clue of what is going on in the world. The majority of Americans have no idea of how national, state, or local government works in America. The majority of Americans do not vote in elections. Even when the "truth" is known, the majority of Americans just plain do not care. There is very little, if any, outrage in America. The bottom line is:

Americans Lack Outrage.

For an extremely interesting perspective on this subject, I strongly encourage you to read Where's the Outrage? by Daniel Wagner.

Boxers or Briefs? Cloth or Paper with Plastic?

While raising my children, we used cotton cloth diapers while the children were in their infancy. We did so even though disposable diapers had already been in wide use. We also home laundered those cloth diapers rather than using a diaper service.

Nowadays, it seems to me as though most parents just seem to be too darn lazy to use cloth diapers that in my opinion are not only financially prudent but are also environmentally safe. Instead modern parents seem to take a much, much more expensive route, even though they may be strapped financially, in their use of disposable diapers which in my opinion not only clutter the environment but are also hazardous to the environment.

Let us briefly look at the history of the diaper from Wikipedia:
...Wrapping children not yet toilet trained, in some absorbent barrier, is as old as human history...
In the 19th century, the modern diaper/ nappy began to take shape and mothers in many parts of the world used cotton material, held in place with a fastening - eventually the safety pin. Cloth diapers in the United States were first mass produced in 1887 by Maria Allen.
...In 1956, Procter & Gamble began researching disposable diapers. ... invented what would be trademarked "Pampers". ... Although Pampers were conceptualized in 1959, the diapers themselves were not launched into the market until 1961. ...
Read the entire Wikipedia Diaper article; just click on its title.

I have found a couple web pages on the cyber information highway that I suggest you read (click on their titles to do so):
The Great Disposable Diaper Debate from The Donella Meadows Archive, Voice of a Global Citizen
Diapers, Diapers & More Diapers, "Cloth vs. Disposable" from The New Parents Guide ™

I mean, what's it all about, Alfie?

If we aren't debating cloth or paper diapers we get into the Boxers versus Briefs question. There is a comparative essay by Bruce McBaxter entitled Boxers versus Briefs which leads the subject of tighty whities into another whole debate as we wonder What Does Your Underwear Say About You? and even as some people have the gall to question the President of the United States "Boxers or Briefs?" I guess it all depends. And that, then, gets us back to the question Boxers or Briefs? for later life. So, now, we are back to where we started.

Politicians and Government, A Facebook Dialogue

Prologue

I always find it interesting that some people like to think of themselves as experts in some field, e.g. politics, government, the English language, home repairs, health and fitness, religion, cultural beliefs, etc., and then attempt to pass that facade onto others who they may or may not know. I find it especially interesting when it comes to internet bulletin boards, social networks, blogs and the like. Somethings really grab my attention, like the subjects of government and politics. Generally, I take the approach of attempting to have an intelligent exchange, but some folks just hang on to their own misinformation in an attempt to justify their own beliefs; at times, during such situations, I may point out my background in those areas in order to indicate that I am not without some education and experience in the subject areas. I do so in the sincere attempt of establishing credibility; however, some folks are so insecure in their own credibility that they turn to attacking me personally when I have pointed out my "credentials" in the topics under discussion. One such incident just recently happened; and, I wish to share it with you.

This is a copy and paste job of a Facebook exchange I had over the past two days on the topics of Politicians and Government:

Deana Bloecher (via Daryl Hansen)
Here's something to think about. A politician sees his family everyday, a deployed SOLDIER once in 6 months. A politician flies 1st class; a SOLDIER flies in a C130. A politician's pension is not reduced; a SOLDIER'S is clawed 65%. A politician enjoys an expense account; a SOLDIER must justify extra rations. A politician vows to defend their country; a SOLDIER actually keeps that promise. REPOST IF YOU SUPPORT OUR TROOPS Thanks for sharing

Roland Hansen
I served many years as a politician and while doing so I did not get to see my family very much, I did not fly first class, I did not receive a pension from it, I did not have an expense account, and I served my country with sweat equity. To make broad generalized statements about politicians is a great disservice. Go to my information page and review my background; it speaks for itself.

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Depends on what kind of Politician..ie. local, state or Federal...most of what is talked about in the above has to do with Federal Politicians yes I also know they don't see their family everyday..but see them MORE that the Soldier...........

Roland Hansen
Why in the world would anyone paint all politicians with one broad brush? That is just like any other form of prejudice; like saying all Jews are ... or all Blacks are ... or all Polish people are ... or all blondes are ... or all Catholics are ... or all Mexicans are ... Get my drift???? Shame, shame, shame! A person can be an advocate for our troops without putting some one else down.

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Roland, in all my years I've seen more Politicians waste money, don't do what WE THE PEOPLE ask of them and think of just themselves. To me there are MORE like that than are not...They think that WE THE PEOPLE have pockets that just keep on filling up magically when they get empty just to cover what THEY (Politicians) miss spend & raise our taxes....Oh yeah while THEY give themselves pay raises...Yes my husband & I use to be in the middle income level both worked husband owned small business we lived below our means didn't OWN anyone any money...guess what we are in the low income level now...ONLY CHANGES CAME FROM OUR POLITICIANS & TAXES Oh yeah both of us are Veterans too...so it's really Shame Shame Shame on 90% of the Politicians..........

Roland Hansen
Jude: Ignorance is bliss, as is rationalization and denial. You speak of WE THE PEOPLE and yet fail to acknowledge that those politicians of which you speak were duly elected BY THE PEOPLE, i.e. by the majority of the electorate who are WE THE PEOPLE. Additionally, when those duly elected officials perform their duties on behalf of WE THE PEOPLE, they do so in their official capacity of Representatives OF THE PEOPLE. You, Jude, speak for yourself; you have not been elected BY THE PEOPLE to represent WE THE PEOPLE. Shame on you for demonstrating a lack of understanding and knowledge of the workings of a representative democracy form of government, i.e. a Republic. I award you an "F" in the subject of American Government. None-the-less, you are entitled to your opinion and our Constitution guarantees your right to express that opinion. Another aspect of our system of government is: Majority Rules and Minority Rights.

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Oh...but if you look at things how it has changed over the years you find that it's the Minority that Rules on a lot of things...ie. Pledge of allegiance out of most schools, Bible out of the schools, OK to burn the Flag as freedom of speech etc etc...Also if you look to see how the elections are won...I will use my home state Washington as an example....due to population 99% of the state can vote one way while the King/Kipsat county votes another...those counties wipe all the other votes out...just like New York City wipes out what the rest of the state votes for....there needs to be a change but I don't have the answer to that Can you come up with one??? So WE THE PEOPLE feel like we have a far shake at what is going on in OUR government???

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Oh yeah Roland...just so you know I'm an Conservative Independent who believe in our Constitution and think that Our government should go back to the way of Our Forefathers...go to Washington for 3 months GET THE JOB DONE and go back to their home state and work a Real job....

Roland Hansen
Jude, to use that old-fashioned Conservative phrase, "America, love it or leave it." Your display of "poor loser" syndrome is obvious. If you think you can do better, run for office yourself. Or, is it easier to sit back and play "pity me, I am so oppressed." Give me a break! Oh yeah Jude, just so you know, I just happen to be a retired person who taught American government at the University of Toledo and at Owens Community College. I was also inducted into Pi Sigma Alpha, the National Political Science Honor Society and into PI Alpha Alpha, the National Honor Society for Public Affairs and Administration. And you think you are the expert, eh? I am out of here. I see no use in wasting my time with a closed-minded person whose motto may as well be "Don't confuse me with the facts; my mind is made up."

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Roland...I'm not closed minded...like a good discussion so I can learn things...seems to me you are the 'closed minded person here'....you called me ignorant...but I know there are already federal laws on the books about balance budget & deficit reduction...too bad the elected Officials don't an thought there should be an amendment added to the Constitution just for that.....also you don't know if I was or am in politics...just grabbing at a straw there...My mind is never made up...But I can see learn & feel... That's what is GREAT about the US of A...........we have the freedom to speak our minds, learn & live....we also have the freedom to agree to disagree with knot heads.........

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Oh yeah it looks like you are too educated to think like a small time taxpayer....I never said I was 'an expert' but you seem to think you are due to all your education...tend to think it's funny when people have to through their education into a conversation........

Jude Cohoon Beretta Banks
Oh yeah it looks like you are too educated to think like a small time taxpayer...I never said I was 'an expert' but you seem to think you are due to ALL your education...tend to think it's funny when people have to throw their education into a conversation...I learned the more educated a person think they are they tend NOT to have any common sense...

Epilogue

I guess I showed my arrogance in that exchange. However, I just cannot stand it when someone makes broad generalized statements based on assumptions rather than fact, rationalizes his or her opinion regardless of the facts presented, and then attempts to circumvent the whole thing by switching the gears of the conversation into a tangential side attack to avoid the original topic.

Comments, anyone? Bring it on, people!

Guns and Killing

Pistols, rifles, firearms - they are all guns to me. Now that I have your attention, I have a brief, factual statement:

GUNS WERE INVENTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF KILLING!
Raising an eyebrow, are you?
Tell you what. Go ahead and read:
History of the firearm
The Invention of Guns

Now, I will sit back and await the response of gun-lovers who usually try to make my brief, factual statement into something other than what my explicitly concise factual statement is.