Phil Fragasso's Blog: Blogs, Insights & Rants, page 7

YOWO – You Only Write Once

As a writer I’ve been fascinated by the controversy regarding the discrepancies and potential falsehoods in Ben Carson’s biographical writings and speeches. Dr. Carson is hardly the first politician to embellish, misrepresent or fabricate the “truth.” What fascinates me is the increasingly common and truly shameless audacity of denying what one has previously stated – regardless of whether it was in writing, presented orally, or captured on video. These are not anecdotal, he-said/she-said dif...

Renoir: Chick-Lit Writer Extraordinaire

If we classified artists as we do writers, it might look something like this:

Rembrandt – Biographer Dali – Sci-Fi/Paranormal Michelangelo – Poet Munch – Suspense/Thriller Botticelli – Literary Picasso – Experimental Hopper – Noir/Mystery Renoir – Chick-Lit

These categories are based on each artist’s body of work; but in the case of Renoir’s “chick-lit” classification, the reasoning includes his writings on art and beauty. I would argue that chick-lit writers are romantic-idealists. They de...

When Is a Writer a Writer?

We live in a society where people are known by their titles. Ask someone what he or she does and the response will be something along the lines of I’m a…doctor, teacher or engineer. We become our functions, and our functional titles derive from educational degrees, employers, and paychecks.

My career has spanned over 40 years and I’ve never had an issue with explaining what I do. My responses have been as varied as my experience – most recently marketing executive, investment advisor, and adj...

Who Writes This Chick-Lit Crap?

If you’re anything like me, I’ll bet the romantic drivel that drives the chick-lit genre makes you want to puke your guts out. Crap like this: “I kissed her neck and shoulders. I felt faint with loving her so much.” Think about it. This dude actually got freakin’ faint from a kiss to the neck? What kind of man would (#1) get faint and (#2) admit it? I’ll tell you what kind – a pantywaisted wuss who’s never bagged a deer or belched in church.

Sad to say this candy-ass writer didn’t stop there....

Who Writes This Chick-Lit BS?

If you’re anything like me, I’ll bet the romantic drivel that drives the chick-lit genre makes you want to puke your guts out. Crap like this: “I kissed her neck and shoulders. I felt faint with loving her so much.” Think about it. This dude actually got freakin’ faint from a kiss to the neck? What kind of man would (#1) get faint and (#2) admit it? I’ll tell you what kind – a pantywaisted wuss who’s never bagged a deer or belched in church.

Sad to say this candy-ass writer didn’t stop there....

Santorum Perpetuates Global Warming Hoax with Un-Godly Hot Air

This is what what Rick Santorum says about global warming; "We were put on this Earth as creatures of God to have dominion over the Earth, to use it wisely and steward it wisely, but for our benefit not for the Earth's benefit." So he appears to be advocating the belief that it's okay to harm and/or destroy the Earth's ecosystem if it serves man's benefit. And his focus is solely on the present. It's hard to argue that drilling for oil in national parks and offshore waters and fracking for natural gas is not beneficial for today's generation. But if we are truly God's stewards, shouldn't we be concerned about future generations?

And if global warming is indeed part of the natural cycle of things rather than being caused by man, what's the harm in reducing our dependence on carbon-based energy? Air pollution would certainly be reduced, and I've yet to hear even the most vocal global warming critics suggest that man is not polluting our air and waters.

Why do so many intelligent people feel the need to deny science in favor of political beliefs? Why would it be impossible for a legitimate Republican candidate to suggest we need to reduce our burning of fossil fuels? Why would it be impossible for a Republican candidate to endorse the same kind of healthcare option advocated by Richard Nixon? Why can't facts win out over belief and ideology?

Another OMG LOL WTF GOP Debate

[image error] They want to privatize the TSA. Should we also privatize the CIA, the armed forces, and local police forces? Yes, TSA airport security is expensive -- but private security will not be free. And is there anyone on earth who finds mall rent-a-cops preferable to a public police force?

How come no one talks about securing the Canadian border? Oh yeah, Canadians are white.

Why is everyone except for Ron Paul in favor of increased political and military pressure on Iran and Syria -- yet criticize Obama for supporting the Libyan insurgents?

When these folks talk about deporting illegal immigrants, they never discuss how that would happen. Would a special police force be created and storm homes at night? Would suspect -- i.e., Hispanic looking -- individuals be stopped and interrogated on the street, at work or in school? What would this cost? Would it involve the use of deadly force? Would there be a judicial review or would "illegals" be deemed guilty until proven innocent?

Iran has been a problem for four decades -- under Reagan and both Bushes. Why do the candidates act like Obama is solely responsible for Iran's irresponsibility?

How can the profiling of any socio-economic, ethnic or racial group be considered an appropriate policy for America?

Michele Bachmann and the Two Sides of Every Argument

Let's start with something positive. Michele Bachman, as opposed to Romney, Pawlenty, and Palin, actually stands for something. She truly believes what she says and does not back down. Unfortunately, she is also appears to be a hypocrite – but here's an opportunity to prove otherwise.
On Friday June 16, Bachmann stated that, "I support intelligent design. What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don't think it's a good idea for government to come down on one side of scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides."
If Bachmann truly believes that government should not take sides, then she should make these additional proclamations:
"I believe that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being beginning at the moment of fertilization. However, because I understand that my belief is religion-based and unsupported by scientific evidence, I believe the benefits of ending unwanted pregnancies via abortion should be introduced to all men and women and allow them to make the decision appropriate to their situation."
"While I firmly believe and have previously stated that the gay and lesbian lifestyle constitutes a form of bondage that leads to personal despair and personal enslavement, I realize that my views are influenced by my fundamentalist Christian beliefs. So, rather than ignoring or condemning homosexuality, our school children should be taught that love between any two people is something to be honored and cherished."
"I have stated that Planned Parenthood is a corrupt criminal organization and I believe that premarital sex is evil and abstinence is the only appropriate form of birth control. Nonetheless, because I am relying on faith as opposed to science or empirical information for my position, I believe people should have access to all the facts. Young people should be fully educated about the pros and cons of various contraceptive methods and allowed to make a personal choice about something as personal as sex."
These three statements would corroborate Bachmann's premise that the government should not intrude into the private lives and beliefs of the American citizenry. She can't have it both ways only when it suits her beliefs.

Gay Marriage and the Unconstitutional Constitutionalists

[image error] In last night's NH debate among the Republican presidential candidates, half of the candidates expressed support for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and woman. The only basis for such a recommendation is religious doctrine — i.e., the belief that the Bible and/or God forbids homosexuality. Leaving aside the fact that the Bible unequivocally condones genocide and human sacrifice (which fundamentalists conveniently ignore when they tout that the Bible is God's literal word), marriage — whether homo-, hetero-, or a-sexual — is a personal contract between two people. As such, marriage should be handled and viewed — by state and federal government — as a legal contract with zero consideration being given to religious zealotry.


The US Constitution never once mentions God, a supreme being, Christianity or any other religious belief. The Constitution, however, makes it quite clear that religion should have no part in the governance of the country. Indeed, one could make a strong argument that many of the founding fathers were agnostics if not atheists. The US was not founded as a Christian nation and should not be taken over today by fundamentalist Christians.

If Bachmann, Pawlenty, etc. feel compelled to define marriage as the union of man and woman — they should do so within the confines of their own churches.

It's very odd that the staunchest supporters of "small government" and "individual rights" and are also the most virulent advocates of government intrusion in the home.

Article first published as The Un-Constitutional Constitutionalists on Technorati.

"Accidental" Gold Discovery Is 24-Carat Scam

You can imagine my excitement when I received the envelope with 24-point type telling me that an "Accidental Gold Discovery in Arizona Baffles Top Geologists." But even better, the stock being promoted — Gunpowder Gold — was anticipated to surge 369% in the next 3 weeks, "with potential gains as high as 1,333% to follow." I was a little taken aback that Tim Cole, the editor of Secret Gold Stocks, had made the rookie mistake of naming the stock on the outside of the envelope so anyone could share in this unprecedented opportunity. But, hey, the guy is an investment genius not a marketing genius.

[image error]
Inside, the 16-page newsletter was jam-packed with tidbits that would help me "lock in massive potential profits" with "one of the most spectacular American gold plays that ANYONE has seen in more than 14 years" and I was urged to avoid "one of the biggest mistakes inexperienced investors make [by] acting too late."

I was so excited about the opportunity that my fingers were too nervous and jittery to even place the online trade order — at which point I feared that Mr. Cole was correct. I had delayed too long and lost my chance to party like a gazillionaire. But I still had an opportunity to subscribe to Mr. Cole's newsletter for only $949 per year. That was about $949 more than I felt it was worth, so I passed on that as well.

Fast forward to today, three months later. Gunpowder Gold, which had been trading at $1.05 when the envelope arrived, is now at 0.48. The good news is that now I can buy twice as much for the same price. The bad news for Mr. Cole is that I read the fine print. I learned that parties affiliated with Gunpowder Gold paid Mr. Cole $600,000 to tout the stock. Mr. Cole stresses that "this inherently makes the report biased" and his publication "is not, and should not be construed to be, an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security."

Inside, the 16-page newsletter was jam-packed with tidbits that would help me "lock in massive potential profits" with "one of the most spectacular American gold plays that ANYONE has seen in more than 14 years" and I was urged to avoid "one of the biggest mistakes inexperienced investors make [by] acting too late."

I was so excited about the opportunity that my fingers were too nervous and jittery to even place the online trade order — at which point I feared that Mr. Cole was correct. I had delayed too long and lost my chance to party like a gazillionaire. But I still had an opportunity to subscribe to Mr. Cole's newsletter for only $949 per year. That was about $949 more than I felt it was worth, so I passed on that as well.

Fast forward to today, three months later. Gunpowder Gold, which had been trading at $1.05 when the envelope arrived, is now at 0.48. The good news is that now I can buy twice as much for the same price. The bad news for Mr. Cole is that I read the fine print. I learned that parties affiliated with Gunpowder Gold paid Mr. Cole $600,000 to tout the stock. Mr. Cole stresses that "this inherently makes the report biased" and his publication "is not, and should not be construed to be, an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security."

Article first published as "Accidental" Gold Discovery Is 24-Carat Scam on Technorati.
MSKYF6FAHV7Z