Q. How do you know when Bush is lying? A. His mouth is open!!

Watch this video

For the record, politicians don't have as much power as we'd love them to have in order to positively affect the world we live in locally and abroad. However, what they do have is the power to hinder mankind's natural progression through the passing of irrelevant laws made to solve posing problems that can be solved naturally in a sense; all which essentially play one part in a big cycle that is keeping all of us from living the lives that we deserve to live. Living freely, not slaving for money at our jobs nor being indentured servants to banks and creditors.

The media, our politicians, and the economy are all playing a part in creating false scarcity and unnecessary fears in our world perpetuating the inevitable, which is complete and utter failure of our long praised and upheld system.

I agree with the creators of Zeitgeist.

Take a look at their 1st film as well as their 2nd, Addendum (embedded below):

[googlevideo=http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912]

Visit Zeitgeist Movie to view both the 1st film and the 2nd for free. *Check out The Zeitgeist Movement to get on board with changing the world.

What are your views on this?

Daily Times Monitor

KARACHI: “Despite the shortage of funds, the City District Government Karachi (CDGK) has completed Karachi’s mega project, Signal-Free Corridor-II, without politicizing the issue,” said City Nazim Mustafa Kamal during his exclusive interview with Jasmeen Manzoor of Business Plus.

Kamal said that the funds for two bridges, the Nagan Chowrangi and Gulshan-e-Iqbal Flyovers, were allotted according to the agreement but the federal government stopped allocating funds without giving reasons. “However, we considered it a challenge and stopped upcoming projects to complete Signal-Free Corridor-II,” claimed Kamal.

Kamal said that development work in the city is treated like a war and completed on a priority basis. Karachi is an international city that contributes 66 percent of the federal revenue so we cannot ignore development work. “We brought the concept of the signal free corridor for first time in Pakistan,” added Kamal.

Signal-Free Corridor-II was built on international standards. The corridor has been opened for traffic and this mega project will lessen traveling time and will definitely minimize the frustration of the citizens, said Kamal. He said that former President Musharraf inaugurated the ground breaking ceremony a year ago. “Musharraf was supportive of projects of this kind,” said Kamal.

He said that all ministers and MPAs were invited for the opening ceremony of Signal-Free Corridor-II but most seats were vacant for one reason or another. The federal and provincial governments should own the project. We want to convey a message to the world that such developments are being done even when suicide bombings are part of our daily lives. Whatever we are doing here is for the entire country and it should not be considered a political threat requested Kamal.

Kamal told Manzoor that almost 99 percent of his vision has been realized. “We want this government to be successful because if this government is successful, our country will be successful,” said Kamal.

Signal-Free Corridor-II is about 19.5 km long with five overpasses and an underpass catering to eight towns.

MQM’s coordination committee hails completion of signal free corridor-II: The Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) coordination committee congratulated City Nazim Mustafa Kamal on the completion of Signal-free Corridor-II from Shahrah-e-Faisal to Surjani Town.

In a press release issued on Saturday, the committee said that flyovers, underpasses, wide roads, scenic bus stops, schools and colleges completed under the leadership of the city nazim and city naib nazim have made the city beautiful.

The committee termed the completion of a 19-kilometer long corridor, costing Rs 3 billion, as a gift to the Karachiites saving their time and fuel.

Here is an excerpt found at the end of the piece;

But perhaps the most revealing of McCain's flip-flops was his promise, made at the beginning of the year, that he would "raise the level of political dialogue in America." McCain pledged he would "treat my opponents with respect and demand that they treat me with respect." Instead, with Rove protégé Steve Schmidt at the helm, McCain has turned the campaign into a torrent of debasing negativity, misrepresenting Barack Obama's positions on everything from sex education for kindergarteners to middle-class taxes. In September, in one of his most blatant embraces of Rove-like tactics, McCain hired Tucker Eskew — one of Rove's campaign operatives who smeared the senator and his family during the 2000 campaign in South Carolina.

Throughout the campaign this year, McCain has tried to make the contest about honor and character. His own writing gives us the standard by which he should be judged. "Always telling the truth in a political campaign," he writes in Worth the Fighting For, "is a great test of character." He adds: "Patriotism that only serves and never risks one's self-interest isn't patriotism at all. It's selfishness. That's a lesson worth relearning from time to time." It's a lesson, it would appear, that the candidate himself could stand to relearn.

"I'm sure John McCain loves his country," says Richard Clarke, the former counterterrorism czar under Bush. "But loving your country and lying to the American people are apparently not inconsistent in his view."

Also watch this video , Tim Dickinson gaves a quick overview of the Top 5 myths about John McCain, amazing, absolutely amazing.

Source: digg.com

1) Lehman's debt sold at auction on Friday for below 9 cents on the dollar; meaning the owners of the CDS contracts that insure these securities will have to pay more that 91 cents on the dollar to fulfill their commitment. There is speculation that the figure to do so might run as high as $400 billion. Somebody owes a lot of money that they probably don't have. (This defines the credit crunch in a nutshell.)

2) In a related story, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs both appear to be on the ropes. From CNBC:

“I don't wish to spread alarm on the line people but the big issue confronting the market is I'm afraid the health and sustainability of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs" Hugh Hendry, Partner and CIO at Eclectica, told CNBC early Friday. "It is unimaginable that they can be allowed to go, I suspect that they will be nationalized at some point today or over the weekend," he add.

Not much else to say, is there?

fence up with a gate in the last side. The  pigs that are used to the free corn start to come through the gate  to eat,  and then you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd.
Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the  woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.
The  young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening
to  America. The government keeps pushing  us toward socialism and keeps
spreading the free corn out in the form of  programs such as supplemental income,
tax credit for unearned income, tobacco  subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP),    welfare,  medicine, drugs, etc, etc, etc. While we continue to lose our freedoms just  a little at a time.
One should always remember: There is no such thing as  a free lunch! Also, a
politician will never provide a service for you cheaper  than you can do it  yourself.
So, if you see that all of this wonderful  government 'help' is a problem
confronting the future of democracy in  America, you might want to spread
this  message on  to your friends. If you think the free ride is essential to your way of
life  then you will probably disregard this message. In this 'very important' election year, listen closely to  what the candidates are promising you – just maybe, you will be able to tell who  is  about to
slam the gate on America.  This is just as valid  with our upcoming
elections in  Canada.
'A  government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to
take  away everything you have.'
Thomas  Jefferson

The Federal Trade Commission urges caution against e-mails that look like they are coming from a financial institution that recently acquired a customer's bank, savings and loan, or mortgage.  These messages may come from "phishers" who are looking for personal information to run up bills or commit crimes in a consumer's name.

A US State Department official said the deal was reached after North Korea agreed to provide full access to its controversial nuclear programme.

It probably doesn't mean much because I think most Americans still consider North Korea as part of the "axis of evil."

I was interviewed today, by the Pakistani Spectator, who has dedicated a section of their blog to up and coming political bloggers. Read it at your leisure : )

The Pakistani Spectator, for those of you who are curious, is a moderate blog which hails, as it's name suggests, from Pakistan. They blog both in English and in Urdu about a variety of different situations that can range from political to entertaining. The Pakistani Spectator, which calls itself "a candid blog" is interested in initiating dialogue with people all over the world about Pakistan, for Pakistan. Men and women with a wide range of opinions on Middle Eastern politics speak their mind on this blog, saying what they feel is true- without spin, without pretensions. These sensible bloggers take on tough issues, such as terrorism within Pakistan, the war, civil rights, and more.

I highly recommend it for any and every American, as these people are the voice of Pakistan- a people who want to work in concert with the US, and the rest of the world, not a nation or a people that we should consider attacking, as Obama has suggested.

Thanks to all of the writers at TPS for having such a fantastic publication!

Everyone say it together now: The legislative branch is the branch that passes laws and makes changes. The judicial branch is only supposed to interpret existing law.

Folks, don't try to look for hidden meaning in the words.  Don't stand behind an official determination that nothing illegal was done.  Don't spout that the governor has the right to fire staff members.

Plain and simple: Sarah Palin abused her power as governor when she attempted to influence a member of her staff for personal reasons.  Whether that was illegal or not isn't the issue; it was wrong.

If you were teaching an ethics class, you would not hesitate to brand such behavior as official misconduct.  If you were painting a picture of an ideal national leader, you would not even consider such a person.

Perhaps the report and investigation were politically motivated.  So what?  If you plan to be on the political stage, you'd better be prepared to explain and justify as proper your actions, past and present.  You signed up for that inspection by choosing to enter politics.

And frankly, I think Alaskans and Americans have a right to expect conduct from their leaders that is above reproach -- not merely legal.

October 4, 2008

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

Excerpted from the article:

“To how utterly chilling this new US law for the American people, titled the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008”, Russian legal experts point out in these reports that:

“Section 101 (a)(1) establishes what is termed the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to which substantial portions of what the American people currently owe to their banks and financial institutions is to be turned over the US Government for redistribution to foreign banks.

Section 101(c)(3) Designates for the first time in American history these foreign banks as financial agents of Federal Government with full law enforcement authority over the citizens in the US.

Section 3 (b) allows the US Secretary of the Treasury to put any kind of debt, including credit card, home loans, personal loans, automobile loans, etc., into the TARP programme.

Section 112 allows the US Secretary of the Treasury to astoundingly extend financing to foreign banks to purchase the debt of the American people.

Section 112 (1)(a) allows the US Government to hold stocks in companies for the first time in their history and which completely destroys the capitalist economy of their Nation.

Section 119 (2)(a) gives the US Secretary of the Treasury dictatorial powers not reviewable by courts making this position the most powerful one in America.

Section 122 increases the US public debt to the incredible amount of $11,315,000,000,000 (Trillion)

Section 204 puts the United States under emergency economic rule and states, "all provisions of this Act are designated as an emergency requirement and necessary to meet emergency needs”.

But, these reports warn, the two most chilling measures put into this new law are titled “Section 511 "Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008” and “TITLE II-SPECIAL PROJECTS ON FEDERAL LAND Section 201”.

The new mental health provisions contained in these new laws allows the United States to label dissident citizens as being ‘mentally ill’, and the ‘Special Projects’ section allows for the reimbursement to US cities and counties for the building of concentration camps for these mentally ill dissidents. (red print and emphasis, mine)

The fear of the United States Government against their dissidents is becoming more evident as many of them are beginning to sound the alarm of events to come, and as we can see evidenced by one such report from the SteveQuale.Com website:”

Read full article here:

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1149.htm

Inaugural Address
West Front of the U.S. Capitol, January 20, 1981

Shop for great Reagan-themed gifts...
t-shirts, bumper stickers, mugs, baby items

I just ran across a fascinating article over at americanthinker.com.  If you've never visited, you'd be wise to.  What you'll find is meticulously researched editorials by extremely smart people who actually back up their words with facts.   I've been frustrated lately with the fact that Obama--with all his socialist rhetoric and all his socialist friends--seems to want to end America's great success story by re-creating it according to Communistic principles.  If you only listen closely to the words he says, his intentions become readily apparent.  Notice how often he incites class warfare, talks about "workers," and uses the word "system" when talking about government.  Actually, when Obama says government, I see him saying it with a capital G.  Government, under an Obama presidency, would be the new god, make no mistake. 

Back to the article I just read:  It was written by Paul Kengor, a professor whose specialty is the Cold War and Communism.  He teaches at Grove City College and lectures all over the country, and has written several books on the subject as well.  He flatly states that in researching for his latest book about the Cold War, he (ironically) came across Marxist characters who mentored and allied with...Barack Obama. 

We cannot expect to hear much about this from the media.  And the painful truth, according to Kengor, is that many Americans---especially those in the 20-35 age range who seem to have a particular liking for Obama--are simply ignorant of history, and of the horrifying nature of Communism.  We have simply been failed by educators, especially those at the college level, who ignore it. 

Kengor writes:

"Of all the lectures that I do around the country, none seem to rivet the audience as much as my discourse on the horrors of communism. In these lectures, which are usually connected to my books on Ronald Reagan, I do a 10-15 minute backgrounder on the crimes of communists-from their militant attacks on private property, on members of all religious faiths, and on basic civil liberties, to their total death toll of over 100 million bloodied, emaciated corpses in the 20^th century."

Students are fascinated, appalled, and want to know more.  Contrast this with the reactions of other professors in the audience:

"As the young people in my audience are fully engaged, hands in the air with question after question -- obviously hearing all of these things for the first time in their lives, from K-12 to college, as they are eager to inform me after my talk -- the professors often stare at me with contempt. In one case, a British professor, who could not stop sighing, squirming, and rolling her eyes as I quoted the most heinous assessments of religion by Marx and Lenin, got up and stormed out of the room.

These professors glare at me as if the ghost of Joe McCarthy has flown into the room and leapt inside of my body. In fact, that's the essence of their criticism:  It is not so much that these professors approve of communism as much as they disapprove of -- actually, utterly despise -- anti-communism. They are anti-anti-communist more so than pro-communist."

Read more of Kengor's analysis (my emphasis):

What's more, aside from failing to instruct their students in the crass facts about communism's unprecedented destruction -- its purges, mass famines, show trials, killing fields, concentration camps -- these educators are negligent in failing to teach the essential, non-emotional, but crucial Econ 101 basics that contrast capitalism and communism and, thus, that get at the heart of how and why command economies simply do not work.  Each semester in my Comparative Politics course at Grove City College, it takes no more than 50 minutes to matter-of-factly lay out the rudimentary differences. Whereas capitalist systems are based on the market forces of supply and demand, which dictate prices and production levels and targets, communist systems are based on central planning, by which a government bureau attempts to manage such things.  Capitalism is based on private ownership; communism on public ownership.  Capitalism thrives on small government and taxes; communism on large government and taxes, typically progressive income-tax rates and estate taxes -- both advocated explicitly by Marx -- and much more.

This stuff isn't rocket science. It is easy to teach, if the professor desires. The problem is that it isn't being taught. Consequently, Americans today do not know why communism is such a devastating ideology, at both the level of plain economic theory and in actual historical practice. It is a remarkably hateful system, based on literal hatred and targeted annihilation of entire classes and groups of people. (Nazism sought genocide based on ethnicity; communism sought genocide based on class.)"

I highly recomment reading the full piece:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/why_obamas_communist_connectio.html

People talk about the supposed "rage" being shown at McCain rallies.  If you ignore the negative media portrayal, and listen to the words that these enraged people are saying, it's rage at the increasingly socialist bent of this country.  These people--including myself--are enraged because we are seeing the great success story of America being flushed down the toilet; we're hearing nothing but class-warfare rhetoric and socialist-speak from Obama; we're watching Washington nationalize lending institutions and banks.  We're watching the America that our founding fathers envisioned eroded to the point of complete destruction.  And we're surrounded by nincompoops---who either haven't learned from history or who haven't been taught it---blindly singing the praises of a man who essentially got into politics to trample on the great vision of our founders and turn us all into "good little workers."  THAT is why we're angry.

Kengor: 

"What does it all mean for November 2008? It means that millions of modern Americans, when they hear that Barack Obama has deep roots with communist radicals like Bill Ayers and Frank Marshall Davis, don't care; they don't get it.  Moreover, the leftist establishment -- from academia to media to Hollywood -- will not help them get it.  To the contrary, the left responds to these accusations by not only downplaying or dismissing them but by ridiculing or even vilifying them, given the left's reflexive anti-anti-communism.  The left will create bad guys out of the anti-communists who are legitimately blowing the whistle on the real bad guys.

Moderates especially need to be informed that Barack Obama is not your typical liberal:  he is the most hard-left Democrat that his party has ever nominated for the presidency.  It is absolutely not a coincidence that the man with these far-left associations just so happens to be ranked -- quantifiably, objectively, by non-partisan, respected sources like National Journal -- the most far-left member of the U.S. Senate, which is no small thing given the leftward drift of the modern Democratic Party.  In other words, Obama's extremist associations matter; they are fully revealing, illustrative of the political-ideological realities that the pro-Obama media will not expose. His voting record bears this out."

"To Tell The Truth.  Make It A Habit."
Image courtesy of http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/3140/totellthetruth.html.

But instead, these questions have Obama hiding behind his attorneys refusing to answer. 

From Page 5 -18 in lawsuit Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15-2 Filed 10/06/2008 by Philip J. Berg in Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania. 

1. Admit you were born in Kenya.

2. Admit you are a Kenya "natural born" citizen.

3. Admit your foreign birth was registered in the State of Hawaii,

4. Admit your father, Barrack Hussein Obama, Sr. admitted Paternity of you.

5. Admit your mother gave birth to you in Mombosa, Kenya

6. Admit your mother's maiden name is Stanley Ann Dunham a/k/a Ann Dunham.

7. Admit the COLB [Certification of Live Birth] posted on the website "Fightthesmears.com" is a forgery.

8. Admit you were adopted by a Foreign Citizen.

9. Admit you were adopted by Lob Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia.

10. Admit you were not born in Hawaii.

11. Admit you were not born at the Queens Medical Center in Hawaii.

12. Admit you were not born at Kapi'oiani Medical Center for Women and Children in Hawaii.

13. Admit you were not born in a Hospital in Hawaii.

14. Admit you are a citizen of Indonesia.

15. Admit you never took the "Oath of Allegiance" to regain your U.S. Citizenship status.

16. Admit you are not a "natural born" United States citizen.

17. Admit your date of birth is August 4, 1961.

18. Admit you traveled to Pakistan in 1981 with your Pakistan friends.

19. Admit in 1981 you went to Indonesia on your way to Pakistan.

20. Admit Pakistan was a no travel zone in 1981 for American Citizens.

21. Admit in 1981 Pakistan was not allowing American Citizens to enter their Country.

22. Admit you traveled on your Indonesian Passport to Pakistan.

23. Admit you renewed your Indonesian Passport on your way to Pakistan.

24. Admit your senior campaign staff is aware you are not a "natural born" United States Citizen.

25. Admit you are proud of your Kenya Heritage.

26. Admit your relatives have requested changes to the portion of your birth certificate that identifies your first name.

27. Admit your relatives have requested changes to the portion of your birth certificate that identifies your last name.

28. Admit your relatives have requested changes to the portion of your birth certificate that identifies your place of birth.

29. Admit you have requested changes to the portion of your birth certificate that identifies your first name.

30. Admit you have requested changes to the portion of your birth certificate that identifies your last name.

31. Admit you have requested changes to the portion of your birth certificate that identifies your place of birth.

32. Admit that the document identified as your Indonesian School record from Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", is genuine.

33. Admit you went to a Judge in Hawaii to have your name changed.

34. Admit you went to a Senator and/or Congressman or other public official in Hawaii to have your name changed.

35. Admit you have had a passport issued to you from the Government of Indonesia.

36. Admit the United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a "natural born" United States citizen.

37. Admit you are ineligible pursuant to the United States Constitution to serve as President and/or Vice President of the United State.

38. Admit you have never renounced your citizenship as it relates to your citizenship to the country of Indonesia.

39. Admit you have never renounced your citizenship as it relates to your citizenship to the country of Kenya.

40. Admit you are an Attorney who specializes in Constitutional Law.

41. Admit Kenya was a part of the British Colonies at the time of your birth.

42. Admit Kenya did not become its own Republic until 1963.

43. Admit you are not a "Naturalized" United States Citizen.

44. Admit you have obtained $200 Million dollars in campaign funds by fraudulent means.

45. Admit you cannot produce a "vault" (original) long version of a birth certificate showing your birth in Hawaii.

46. Admit your "vault" (original) long version birth - certificate shows your birth in Kenya.

47. Admit the only time you have been to a Hospital in Hawaii was for check-ups or medical treatments for illnesses.

48. Admit Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii do not have any record of your mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to you.

49. Admit Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii do not have any record of your mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) giving birth to you.

50. Admit you were born in the Coast Province Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

51. Admit you represented on your State Bar application in Illinois you have never used any other name other than Barack Hussein Obama.

52. Admit you went by the name Barry Soetoro in Indonesia.

53. Admit your Indonesian school records are under the name of Barry Soetoro.

54. Admit you took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when admitted to the State Bar of Illinois to practice Law.

55. Admit you took an Oath to uphold the United States Constitution when you were Sworn into your United States Senate Office.

56. Admit you hold dual citizenship with at least one other Country besides the United States of America.

Berg's media release statement goes on to say,

Berg is "Outraged" that Obama & DNC Hide Again Behind Legal Issues as their attorney files a Motion for Protective Order to "not" Answer Admissions & Production of Documents while Betraying Public in not Producing Documents proving Obama is "qualified" to be a candidate for President.

It is believed Obama is an "illegal alien."

Would not be hard to answer unless you have something to hide.  The American people await your response, Senator Obama.  The truth, that is.

Image courtesy of http://www.sodahead.com/question/82099/.

 Video at Hillbuzz puts it in perspective.

I Invented The Internet (Ep. 6: October Surprise). 

October 10, 2008 

American Thinker believes This could be the game changer.

See:

• http://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/1-main/29-berg-outraged-obama-a-dnc-file-motion-to-prevent-concurrent-discovery
• http://www.obamacrimes.com/attachments/029_Obama,%20Defense%20request%20for%20Protective%20Order%20re%20Discovery.pdf
• http://hillbuzz.wordpress.com/2008/10/11/the-question-of-the-birth-certificate/
• http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/this_could_be_the_game_changer.html

Should we have bailed out the few who don’t deserve it which will only help those same people?  Or, should we have bailed out the many; the people who drive the economy helping everyone from one end to the other?  Neither scenario is realistic, which may be why so many of us find ourselves stunned by the unconscionable lack of judgment in congress. 

Do you wonder what might have happened if our congress had acted in our best interest rather than that of Wall Street?  What if that 850 billion they are borrowing, which is likely to balloon to trillions was instead equally distributed among all legal households in the US?

• Most mortgages could have been paid off even those which are fraudulently inflated.
• Every credit card in the country could have been paid off except those held by the upper 3% which have no limits.
• Every car loan could have been paid and new vehicles purchased.
• Every school loan could have been paid and education paid for in cash.
• Nearly every medical bill could have been paid.
• Social programs based on income would be virtually non-existent.
• New businesses hiring new employees could be started.
• Existing small businesses could have been expanded and a new manufacturing base could have been started here at home.

If congress and this president were so eager to stabilize the economy and believed they could borrow us out of debt…..why didn’t they spend it where it would have mattered?  Why didn’t they spend that money in a way that would have caused an immediate expansion of our economic base and benefited millions instead of just a few?

Here’s why:  In every situation listed above, it would have meant smaller government, less taxes, less unemployment, and expansion of the business base and less government intervention and intrusion into our lives. 

We have been duped into thinking that for some reason we should be using credit and that this artificial number used to define us by credit reporting agencies is in some way significant.  It isn’t.  And the reason I know it isn’t is that our government is in the process of delivering a few trillion dollars to agencies and institutions whose credit ratings have to be in the toilet.  Your credit rating is simply a number generated by the same people who ran their businesses into the ground.  Do as our government did and just disregard it. 

What we have witnessed in the last two weeks is the greatest redistribution of wealth…redistributed to those already obscenely wealthy… ever witnessed at one time in our history.  The corporation operating as the UNITED STATES government just came out of the closet and established itself not as a constitutional government of the people, but rather, as the corporate entity as it has been since 1871. 

It is only going to go downhill from here. 

© Marti Oakley

Oh, just some browsing through the net and as for the recent F1 race in Singapore, everything went on fine except for the the Singtel Grid girls. They received tons of criticisms regarding their looks. Tons of harsh, crude, and cynical remarks were thrown at them just because... they look like your great-grandmother trying to put some make up on. Words like "aunty", "ugly", "saggy", and more were also included within the list. Now you tell me, why are Singaporeans so cynical? Is this the best we can do by simply being a worshipper of foreign gods except for own minions? I just don't understand. Perhaps we're a young country - young and dumb. And that it will take us about 500 more years for a certain culture to take its root in Singapore. In fact, Singapore is a light-year far from being civilised or cultured... may I be ashamed to say so. I think there are many things we can do to make this country a better place for all yet-to-be-proud citizens, but not without the support of its own, and I mean OWN people.

I do not think that Singaporean girls are ugly. In my opinion, I think quite a lot of them on the streets are pretty. Many of them are gorgeous. Some are hot. And some are above average, but still looking good. It is this media craze about perfectionism, that got all of us Singaporeans so cynical about our shape, our sizes, our dressing, and even the way we talk. The media is one hell of a place for depressed people, I must say, because nothing you do is going to be good or satisfactory. This is especially so when there are pageants or competitions, which require the participants to be women. And women in Singapore are facing quite a lot of pressure from local men and perhaps their own kind... just because of how they look. I noticed that everytime there is a competition involving women, criticisms from all around the island were flying through the cables of every Internet in every household. Not just that, every mouth condemns the looks of these brave ladies who took part in their own pursuit of their interest or dreams.

I admit that there are rooms for improvement, but I don't think that strong criticisms would work to bring in the talents. We, as a young nation, do not need to use strong or striden criticisms to improve our local talents. This will inevitably drive more talents away from our shores. Instead, we need to give support to those who are brave enough to face the harshness of some of you cynical people out there, who have nothing better to do than to hurl insults on others who dream of their own success.

Talking about being a gracious country. It is all "talk" and never the "walk". Singapore is not the land of opportunity for Singaporeans, other than mainly for the Bangalas, PRCs, Expats, and others (some of them would perhaps spit on our shoes once they've returned home to feed their family... they might be thinking, "Why the hell do I care about Singapore? It's the place where I could earn my cash and be a 'millionairre' back home!"). This is because of how cynical all of us are, especially to our very own people - those born in Singapore. Without support, Singapore will not have plenty of opportunities as expected by the masses and Singapore will not be united. Never is, never will, and never would be.

We are easily distracted away from better presidential measures: namely performance, or our estimation of potential for performance.  Some new tools (my favorite was this one by american public media) are availible that can quickly help one size up the candidate by the issues in stead of trying to wade through the rhetoric or media slant.  What does the media do to help us?  Not much.  When listening to anything political in nature (campaign adds, news coverage / commentary, people talking, etc.) one should ask: What does this have to do with their ability to do the job?  Pundits have failed to help viewers evaluate the merits of the candidates. They are supposed to help us dissect the hidden meaning, a vague promise, or a mistake of fact.

Just over a week ago I took part in a series of workshops, discussions and deliberations at the University of Edmonton in the province of Alberta, Canada. I was one of a handful of 'deliberation/participation people' who were there to have input into how the diverse group of Albertans present might best set up a successful, province-wide deliberative process on climate change issues.

The event was participated in by an impressively varied group of individuals - representing a significant range of viewpoints including;  energy industry representatives, radical environmentalists, political activists and government officials. The thing that all parties had in common was a genuine, and strong desire to move forward on the issue of climate change in Alberta. (They even gave up their weekend and worked 12hour days for free to be part of the deliberation - so I can testify to their commitment!)

So, what were we actually doing?

We wanted to put together a basis for how a public discussion on climate change in Alberta might best work - and help to move forward from polarised debate on climate change into more useful dialogue and action across the province.

Alberta is a focal point for climate change discussion as the Canadian economy has greatly benefited from the energy industry located there, including the booming Athabascan oil sands near Fort McMurray. This industry has been strongly criticised by environmental campaigners and scientists for its impact on the environment. Alberta embodies many of the environmental and economic debates taking place globally.

A key part of how myself and others present felt that progress could be made on these tough issues was through using deliberative techniques to bring people together in a more constructive and positive way than through debate and conflict.

How did you go about it?

Two main groups were involved in the design process over about four days:

One was a smaller group of around 15 and consisted  both of Albertans and of visitors interested in assisting with the deliberation and public participation aspects. This group was present throughout the entirety of the process every day.

The second group was a larger group of around 50 Albertans who were present at key points in the design process to act as a 'sounding board' for the ideas that the smaller group had been discussing and formulating together during the day.

This format worked well in that ownership of the process and its aims began to be built from the outset amongst a very varied group of individuals, and the rapid response and interaction between the smaller and larger group helped to refine ideas very quickly over a short period of time.

By the end of the five days we worked together to uncover the bare bones of a process that could work for Albertans, wandered across a suprising amount of common ground and found several leverage points for instigating action. As we walked out of the room on the final day, an interim steering group had been set in place and action points had been established for moving forward... so watch this space.

The experience made me feel very positive about what can be acheived through using more deliberative approach to difficult issues like action on climate change - not a form of consensus building, but rather a way of better understanding one another and identifying areas for beneficial progress.