The Apple Falls from the Tree

Like most of you, when I read this story I had a fit of rage, let's call it, indignation. "What happened to legal tender for all debts public and private?" I sputtered. However, I am always one to get to the heart of a matter, so I went right to the source, the US Department of the Treasury.

"The pertinent portion of law that applies to your question is the Coinage Act of 1965, specifically Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," which states: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues."
This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy."

I think it is wrong of Apple, actually, rather stupid of them, not to take cash. They have an air of liberal elite about them anyway, this just makes it deeper. What, my money not good enough for you? I guess not...

Apple imposes new limits on iPhone sales

It's about (frightening) the Children

U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.

6 Pounds 7 Ounces of Cure

This ad illustrates an earlier point I made; by showing a baby, tagged as a homosexual and laying in the hospital, it brings to mind that it's there for treatment to cure it of the defect written on the wrist band.

Ad showing 'homosexual' newborn causes stir in Italy

Dog Days of Reporting

There is so much wrong with this story.

“Creationism is the belief that all living organisms were created according to Genesis in six days by ‘intelligent design’ and rejects the scientific theories of natural selection and evolution."

Actually, creationism is the belief that God created everything. Intelligent design is the belief that some intelligence guided creation. Intelligent design allows for evolution as long as it was genetic manipulation by this intelligence. While there are some who like to think ID is just veiled creationism, any good creationist will tell you, "that ain't my God"...

“But this research once again demonstrates how selection – whether natural or, in this case, artificially influenced by man – is the fundamental driving force behind the evolution of life on the planet.”

The St. Bernard was manipulated by man. That's not evolution, that's intelligent design.

"The team, led by Dr Chris Klingenberg in the Faculty of Life Sciences, examined the skulls of 47 St Bernards spanning 120 years, from modern examples to those of dogs dating back to the time when the breed standard was first defined."

Hold on, what happened to millions of years?

Technology Blog Posts Powered by BlogBurst Technology News Reuters.com

Bloody Big Nutshell

"Like the panics of bygone eras, this one has the aspect of yet another re-enactment of the Big Con. The huckster arrives in town, tells all the rubes that disaster impends for them and their families, but says there may be one last chance they can be saved – but it will take a lot of money. And the folks should go about collecting it, right now. "

That is the most correct description of this global warming hoax I have yet to read.

WorldNetDaily: The global-warming hucksters

Take Your Nobel Prize and Shut Up

Scientists are not unbiased. They have no desire to even hear his view point because of political correctness. This view is in keeping with the theory of evolution, yet they want nothing to do with it.

If you want to be a real scientist you have to take your lumps and take the good with the bad. Science has always had unpopular ideas. Some of those ideas have resulted in the scientist being burned at the stake. It is obvious that modern scientists do not have the strength of conviction that their predecessors did. They are not ruled by the facts of imperial data but are blown by the winds of popular opinion and consensus.

Of course, as I stated in the last post, he's wrong, but that's not the point. The point is, they, like the news media, claim to be unbiased, pristine wielders of pure truth, but that's a lie. They have to know it and be willingly living by it.

Controversial DNA pioneer's talk halted

There are still Knuckle Draggers

First off, I don't agree with the premise of this story. However, I find a terrible double standard that some feel our genes can make one a homosexual, but not effect intelligence. Evolution is supposed to control everything isn't it? Survival of the fittest and all that. Yet when it comes down to it, they are afraid to even say this is scientifically possible. Take evolution at face value and this story is exactly what you get.

As you know, I don't think genes cause homosexual tendencies and now you know I don't think they cause some races to be smarter.

Will people on the other side of this issue realize their inconsistency?

Fury at DNA pioneer's theory: Africans are less intelligent than Westerners

Did He Say What I Think He Said?

As you know I love Peggy Noonan. Her style and intelligence is unmatched as is her ability to get to the point in a rational and understanding way. That's really what this article is about. We have gotten to a point in the US, with ourselves and outsiders, where talking isn't done. I think it is a result of the Jerry Springer generation. We see that show as such a den of trash that we don't want to see ourselves that way. That's for some, for others I think it is a result of the political correctness movement. Perhaps the majority subscribe to the latter.

Speaking of a certain historic event with a shoe, Miss Noonan writes:

"Khrushchev's trip and Castro's were all about propaganda, all about sticking it to Uncle Sam. And here's what happened: Nothing. Their presence hurt our country exactly zero percent. In fact it raised us high, reminding the world we are the confident nation that lets its foes speak uncensored. As an adult nation would."

I agree. If enemies can't talk, then they will always be enemies.

I am anti-war, because it is a terrible thing. We should publish peace. On this I am a pragmatist though, because war is sometimes needed for the protection of our way of life.

I also think we should start talking and talk more, before the bombs start to fall. We are headed into a war with Iran. Sadly enough, we most likely will go there having never talked to them about why and without every having given them a chance to make it good. North and South Korea are talking. Why can't America and Iran?

OpinionJournal - Peggy Noonan