Major League Baseball Greed

Trademark licensing, are they kidding? Major League Baseball, MLB, has now decided to license their logos to the little leaguers. According to the MLB, those little league teams that copy the logos of their favorite big league team for their uniforms somehow violates their trademark. In true corporate greedy fashion, the MLB now wants to charge the little guys a trademark license fee of $3.00 per head to wear those uniforms.

What is the point? The courts have ruled in past decisions that unless trademarks remain protected, that the trademark owners stand a chance of losing those trademarks. In other words, protect your trademark or lose it. So to insure that established trademarks remain uniquely to a particular team, then anyone who uses that trademark must be licensed to do so.

I have no kick in trademark protection, especially when it pertains to commercial concerns that like to use the popularity of a franchise to sell goods with unlicensed trademarks. But who in their right mind ever thought that this frenzy of greed and protection would reach out to our kids in the little league. Theirs is not a commercial enterprise. In fact other than the parents of these kids, not many come to see them play, and they are not out there marketing trademarked goods that are not related to their particular team.

The MLB could have allowed the licensing to the little leaguers for a nominal fee, say a nickel per player, or free even. But no, they insist on receiving $3.00 per person for their share. I'm sure that the MLB is licking its chops over the extra millions that they will rake in from the little-leagues.

The little leaguers do have the option of not naming their teams after a MLB team, but that would take something from the thrill of playing. What would a kid rather say? That he plays for the Gophers or that he plays for the Red Sox.

Shame on MLB for this outrage. These teams have not stolen a trademark in the last fifty years, so why does the MLB think that they are owed now. Does corporate greed come to mind?

Cheers,

-Robert-

Leadership Woes

I admit it, but you had to make me say it, I supported Bush in two elections. But disappointment in George's leadership has me in a quandary. On the one hand, I think George W. Bush is one of the most decent people to ever live in the Whitehouse. On the other hand, his failure to lead this country has left Republicans behind the eight-ball.

Compassionate Conservatism: What a joke! The only thing I see is appeasement to the Democrats. George Bush has went out of the way to cater to the Democrats hoping for their support, and in the process, made himself their target and alienated those who supported him. Coaxing the Democrats into supporting him may have sounded like a good idea, but when he saw that it wasn't going to work, he should have abandoned the effort. Instead, he allowed the Democrats to Demagogue every issue and turn public opinion against him. He failed to recognize that appeasing the Democrats was not going to help, and stubbornly refused to listen to his supporters.

Leadership or Stubborn: Early on in the Iraq War, with Bush's belief about all people yearning to be free, he failed to take decisive action when order collapsed in Iraq. Bush held nobody responsible for for the collapse of law and order in Iraq. Somebody should have been held responsible for dismal planning. He stubbornly clung to the idea that these people would 'just do the right thing' simply because he removed Saddam Hussein.

Appeasement Problems: Everything that this administration has touched has been a disaster. Katrina had the Democrats scrambling because New Orleans and Louisiana were totally Democratic. Yet Bush allowed himself to be the fall guy for problems that were mostly State issues. He wanted to be a good guy for the Democrats. They have castigated him for Katrina ever since.

Big Spender: He refused to veto those huge spending bills that allowed the Democrats (and Republicans) to earmark all kinds of goodies back to their home states. No leadership at all in guiding the budget process; it has to be categorized as 'stubbornly clasping the idea of making nice' that enabled such a drain on the treasury.

Other Issues:

1.) Failure to prosecute the leakers of national security issues.

2.) Prosecuted 2 Border Agents for doing their jobs.

3.) Refuses to enforce our border laws.

4.) Refuses to pardon Scooter Libby for the high crime of nothing.

5.) Allowed himself to be boxed in over the U.S. Attorney firings. (Lack of Leadership)

6.) Bush demonstrated a general weakness about Constitutional Issues of Executive vs. Legislative. Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria left the world wondering who was in charge of foreign policy. The trip left Bush looking irrelevant.

Not Enough Space: I could detail an entire page of the leadership failures of this President. But history will be kinder to George than I will. George Bush remains one of the most decent men on the planet. If there was ever a contest for being 'well intentioned', George Bush wins, hands down.


Cheers,
-Robert-

McCain's Vision

May 27, 2008 Today John McCain laid out his vision of what foreign policy would look like in the event he is elected.

Global Warming: McCain left no doubt that he has swallowed the hoax of manmade Global Warming.

Cancel Rock Penetrating Nuclear Weapon: Decrying that such a weapon is not necessary for either policy or military, he would cancel its development.

Demonstrate Nicety: His policy would have the United States prove their peaceful intentions by taking the lead in nuclear stockpiles reduction. Establish a nuclear fuel pool for those countries wanting to have peaceful nuclear energy.

Scary Proposals: The proposals he made were downright scary. I think he was just pandering for Liberal votes, but nonetheless he has to be taken seriously. His cumbiya vision at the very best is sophomoric.

Man made Global Warming is a myth! He would saddle this nation with carbon offsets that would handcuff this nation economically. I know he is smarter than that, but where is the real McCain?

The penetrator weapon's sole reason to exist is to destroy deep underground nefarious facilities should the need arise. (Such as in Iran's underground nuclear development.)

McCain's vision is like that of a child's. He sees fields of sweet clover and rainbows. Or, has his age so softened his outlook that he would render us feckless in the face of tyranny? He has not confronted the issues of our times such as the energy problem. His vision of going nuclear would only help - a long way down the road. He offers no solution for the present. We need refineries but see no leadership getting us there. We need to use our present day resources like clean coal and oil that we have in abundance.

But the milk-toast McCain does not have what it takes to lead on these issues. He has to pick pie in the sky crap and call it leadership.

But a vote for Obama would be worse. What a dilemma! There is no hope
-sigh- .

Cheers,

-Robert-

Curiosity

I Can't Find the Answers: Basically this commentary is about questions that I have about several subjects. It seems as though unbiased and accurate answers are in short supply. The best explanations I have come across for the following questions are agenda driven theories. The problem with the theoretical answers is that you have to choose the one you like, because for every theory about a subject, there are counter-theories. Hard definitive answers may be locked up in a theory, but in which? The theories source cannot be ignored when searching for answers. Egos are often obstacles that get in the way of objectivity, as well as the quest for research funds. Political goals also play an important part in obfuscating poor science. So I present my questions. I hope that some of you share my concerns.

Sun's Origin: Obviously, the Sun coalesced from a pool of hydrogen that just "happened" to be in the neighborhood. My question is about all of the other stuff that is in the Sun's sphere of influence. It wasn't the fusion activity of the Sun that created all of the matter that surrounds the Sun. If fusion created all of the elements of the periodic chart, then there had to be other stars that were created and died before our Sun was created. So, do we know how many other Stars had to come and go before our Sun came to life? Have we got the total age of the Universe all wrong, as well as the process of Galaxy formation?

Evolution: I don't question the fact of the biomass evolving, but I don't see any evidence that what has evolved was just a "chance" occurrence. My question is how is it that the changes that occurred were always just what was needed for a particular species to survive? How is it that the Make up of our D.N.A. is programmable? Biologists have been 'gene-splicing' for years to change the inherent programming of bacteria. Some are reprogrammed to do toxic waste cleanup among a other customized tasks.

What is God? One argument is that God is omnipotent and can just go "poof" and things miraculously happen. Others, myself included, believe that God has to manage his 'miracles' within the bounds of the possible. For instance, if God creates something, there has to be a vehicle of possibility for it to happen. Whenever we discover how something works, that doesn't preclude God from having used that same method for some of his accomplishments. No magician, just super smart. The difference between God and man is a wide gulf of knowledge about how things work, both physical and biological. What is your opinion of God?

What's Heating the Oceans? That' a fair question. Of course, over a thousand sub-sea volcanoes and the Sun can't be the explanation. When you listen to Al Gore, you have to believe that CO2 that makes up only 00.54% of the atmosphere is creating the entire problem. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is so small it is measured in parts per million rather than as a percentage. Never mind that CO2 is a very minor greenhouse gas, very small in comparison to water vapor. Are politics and ulterior motives driving this scam about CO2? Who stands to benefit from this swindle?

Enough Already: Okay, I'll Stop. You get the idea though. We are force fed a lot of hooey in the media that is designed only for either political or monetary gains. This message is meant to encourage you to be skeptical and try and find the truth about the things you are told. There is no excuse in not looking at all sides of any issue now that the Internet is up and running. True, there is a lot of bogus information, but if you check the bibliography of what you read, and research the stuff that isn't well documented, you can have an informed opinion. Being informed isn't a bad thing, it is a good thing.

Cheers,
-Robert-

What Obama is Missing

At first blush, Obama looks and sounds like any other young liberal. But the elements missing from his resume disqualifies him from being President.

What is missing? Barack is missing the inculcation of Americanism. Most of us who were born and raised in the United States wear the imprint of our country. Americanism is comprised of many things like reciting The Pledge of Allegiance in our formative years, learning how and why we came to be the Nation we are. It is very important to be a part of America while learning of the historical exploits of our forebears. Barack's view, jaded by the fact that he spent his formative years in schools that did not imprint what being an American means, leaves him crippled in understanding America. Simply put, he sees the United States through the eyes of a foreigner, and not through the eyes of one brought up in this country.

Why is this important? It is important for the very same reason that people see other people as other people. When we hear about some calamity with others, it does not have the same impact as a similar event happening to a family member. Americans brought up in this country tend to see other Americans as 'family'. Barack is missing that American imprint.

American Presidents need more than just spell binding rhetoric. You have to trust that his decisions are rooted in a passionate love for this country. With Obama, that love of and appreciation for this country is missing.

Cheers,

-Robert-

George W. Bush and the RNC

There is leadership, and then there is leadership. George Bush went for the gold ring but botched it for 3 years. For three years we saw and endless stream of death and destruction to the Allied forces and our Iraqi friends. It was maddening to see the horror of the roadside bombs and the suicide bombers taking such a grievous toll on the lives in Iraq. George Bush had to be beaten down politically before he finally made a change in the operation. Today, it looks like we are going to finally get a Government based on democratic principles in Iraq. But the cost has been horrific.

These have been my chief complaints against Bush. His failure to recognize that the war was going badly and doing zippo about it was maddening. It created a lot of animosity towards him. But these same attributes run in the Republican National Committee.

The RNC has not stood up for anything. I was once proud to be a donor to the RNC, but not anymore. I have this thing about throwing good money away. They stuff my mailbox with their requests, but I ignore them. My email is overflowing with RNC requests for support, but I ignore them. It gets tiresome to see unvetted candidates with all kinds of moral problems admitted into the system. Republicans do not lead by example, they try and demonstrate to the world a lesson in what not to do if elected. There were the disturbing episodes of Vitter, Tom Foley and the great bathroom stall incident. By themselves, these episodes were inconsequential. But if you are going to sell yourself as the party of decency, then you should behave like one.

The RNC is also not a fighter for the Republicans. They choose to not engage the Democrats on any level. It does not matter how egregious the Democrats behave, there is never a peep from the RNC. Phooey on any group that does not have the stomach to stand on their hind legs and be counted.

Lastly, there is no way to make a comment to these high and mighty leaders of the RNC. Their website does not have a method of contacting them (except for donations). Ditto for their emails that choke my inbox. This group just wants you to send money without any input from the donors. It will be even more painful when the next President becomes the beneficiary of a veto-proof Congress. Republicans are starving for leadership. But what did we get from the primaries? An old man who really does not have core beliefs nor does he have the stomach for standing up to the Liberal worm that is eating this country alive.

Cheers,
-Robert-

Pollution and Global Warming

Like most that grew up in the 50's and 60's, the images of "smog" were indelibly burned into our conscience. Everyone realized that this was a man made phenomenon. Compounding these images were our daily experiences of man's pollution.

Amoco Oil demonstrated the distasteful stuff coming out of our automobiles utilizing leaded fuel by attaching a large clear balloon to the tailpipe of an automobile. The balloon quickly filled up with black nasty gases, this was beside another automobile burning their new lead free fuel. These were eye opening demonstrations and paved the way for the acceptance of unleaded fuel.

Lastly if you ever traveled by bus, it is hard to forget the diesel exhaust that permeated those bus stations. You could hardly get your breath around those places.

Getting the public to accept a theory that blamed the activity of humans for global warming was relatively easy. The public already had experiences with man made pollution, so it was easy to accept that burning fossil fuels was causing global warming by the discharge of CO2. I also fell for the idea that man was responsible for the problem. I even wrote an article for 'Amazines.com' about the hazards of CO2.

I penned another article for my sister website robfg.com.
After a lot of research including the writings of a lot of the world's pre-eminent scientists and climatologists, that research prompted several articles on my websites about CO2, Venus, and Mars. There is only one conclusion a reasonable person can make. Global warming is not from any efforts of man. You can read my rewrite of the article of global warming here: robfg.com.

What I want you to understand is that smog and the effects of other pollutants were resolved by real science, not an emotional, nearly hysterical proclamation by those with ulterior motives. So look into the issue for yourself and don't allow this issue to steal your freedom. Be deliberate in your quest to find the truth.

http://www.nov55.com/index.html is a good place to start.

Cheers,
-Robert-