How small are we?

My mind is drifting again. It happens more and more as I get older. I'm not high. I'm not drunk. It's drifting all on its own. This happens whether I welcome it or not, so I've learned to just go with it.

I'm another one of those who likes to sit outside and look up at the night sky. I love to look at the stars and try to think about how far away and how very huge they really are. Scientists tell me that many of these stars are sometimes thousands and thousands of times the size of our Sun. And even it could hold a million of our planets within it.

So, how tiny is our world? How tiny are we?

I look up at those stars, so many times larger than our Sun, and even being so unimaginably huge, they're so far away, they appear to be smaller than well-lit specks of dust showing themselves in a sunbeam on a bright morning through a window.

So, how tiny are we?

This perception of something so big, seeming so small, is merely the way it looks from my perspective, sitting on my back porch. Imagining how small we are from a galactic perspective takes us down to smaller than a bacterium, in relation. And here I sit on my back porch.

How tiny are we? How tiny, indeed?

As if considering our size in relation to the galaxy were bad enough, imagine how small our entire world is in comparison to the group of nearby galaxies, then compared to the Universe. In comparison to the whole of the Cosmos, we'd make that aforementioned dust speck seem impossibly colossal in comparison. In relation to the whole of the Universe, our world is smaller than any bacteria. We're smaller than a molecule. We're smaller than an atom. Perhaps, in comparison to our Universe, we might compete with something on the quantum level. But I'd also wager we may yet only be some sort of a particle within that quantum structure– in comparison.

Perhaps, in the much grander scheme of things, the entirety of our known Universe is also but an atom, in some other unimaginably vast plane of existence. We could be a component of a cell in some other living thing, perhaps some part of some giant creature's ass. Perhaps we're just a part of more dark matter itself, a bubble of space gas somewhere, serving no definite purpose at all.

How tiny are we, and yet here I sit considering it. And how very, very vain of us to believe in some creator having made us, just to worship him.

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Can you see it? ISS crosses full moon

I don't really have anything I can say in light of this.

Credit: Watchonepiecepoint.com

Come visit me on DonPennington.info

Sharing: What does the Internet weigh?

One email weighs about 2/10,000th of a quadrillionth of an ounce. There's a good start. Enjoy this video.

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Tired of excessive bank fees? Here's an option.

I was once like you. I found myself tired of the treatment by local banks in regards to the different fees, as well as how snotty a few tellers could be when I had questions. It struck me as odd how a customer could be spoken to in such a condescending tone of voice, on so many occasions.

I was also more than a bit annoyed how, if my account didn't have enough money in it to cover a transaction, they'd let it go through, only to catch me with an overdraft fee of $30 plus. Admittedly, those instances were my fault for not keeping better track of my own money, still, why did they keep letting them go through? Obviously, because the overdraft/insufficient funds fees they charged are all profit for them.

I don't believe in trying to insist a bank change their policies just because I wasn't keeping track of my own funds correctly. I'm a firm believer in taking my business elsewhere, if I'm not happy. But all banks were ever so glad to let an overdraft transaction occur. Of course they were. It's where a big chunk of their earnings came from. I understand. I just really hated how all banks were the same about it. There seemed to be no bank which would decline a transaction for insufficient funds which didn't also charge a fee for that, too. Then, along came the Internet, and with it, some real competition.

Not only does the bank I use now not play that silly game of letting me hose myself by spending more than I have, they don't charge any fee other than their standard $9.95 per month – flat. No overdraft fees. No insufficient funds charges. No hidden fees. Plain and simple.

If I do happen to use an ATM which isn't part of their network, there is a fee for doing so, and it's based on what the owner of that terminal sets. But that's easily avoided by doing cash back with merchants, instead. At least I get something for what I spend to do cash back that way. AccountNow not only treats me better than any other bank I've ever used, their employees are actually courteous and friendly. That's always a nice treat.

Not only these things, but if you do give AccountNow a try, they'll send you a $10 bonus with the first funding of your account. (Wait until you see what they offer for setting up direct deposit.) You can do that with direct deposit, PayPal and even one of those “GreenDot” cards. Very user-friendly. You won't even go through a ChexSystems screening. They're also major sponsors of this blog. If you're not happy with your current banking relationship, I hope you give them a try.

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Anti-Semitism, Socialism and Delusion Within the Occupy Movement

My view of the Occupy Bowel Movement

COMMENTARY | Does my sub-title give it away too soon? Will those who come to this page even bother to read further? Or, will they respond in the comments to the title alone? I ask this because, from what I've seen so far, these Occupy protesters seem to only be able to see the surface of things in life - appearances - and lack the capacity to find the devil-in-the-details of anything. Don't get me wrong, I support the right to protest. I do it myself, all the time. I just disagree with the reasons behind the protests, as of late.

When I see young folks in their Che Guevara t-shirts, I want to ask them if he is the only mass murderer they adore, or have they also come to passionately worship Ted Bundy too? Maybe John Wayne Gacy is more their flavor. Would Pol Pot register as a hero to them? Or might they at least take the time to do a Yahoo search on the name first? Who knows, really?

All this bunch has to do is have their ears tickled and their emotions stimulated, and poof goes the critical thinking and desire for analysis. No need for real thought when feelings are so strong. Real thought is hard work, after all. That's why so few do it, according to Henry Ford.

On the topic of the obvious anti-semitism (For the occupiers, that means "hatred of Jews," simply put) displayed in this example and also this one right here, all I can really say is shame on all of them for that. Have the Jewish people not been through enough already? How can anyone with such a deep and pervasive delusion as racism (of any flavor) ever be reached?

I encountered this same mentality (or lack thereof) when I was caught up in the "9/11 Truther Movement," and I'm just glad I escaped the cult. I hope at least some other folks can find their way back out too. I'm grateful to everyone who ever challenged my delusion, and for a father who taught me the courage to be honest, even if only with myself.

Let's also look at the demands for Socialism from the people at these Occupy protests. There is a fundamental difference between free-market Capitalism and crony Capitalism of America's central banking system (There's four words that should never be used together). At least some of the original Occupy protesters primary statement was a stand against the busybody nature of government interfering with free-market Capitalism, for the sake of protecting their pet boot-lickers, and other business quislings, from natural competition in a free market.

Those ideas are ones which I still support. But then once the news began paying attention to the crowd, along come the Socialists, Communists and union thugs, to change the message from its original theme to one of absurdity the very moment they saw an opportunity for free media coverage.

Look. I don't really expect anyone in the MTV generation to believe me about how terrible Socialism is. How about hearing from someone who has lived under it? (Language warning for the easily offended) The protesters might be deceived into thinking they'll all get an "equal piece of the pie," but all they'll be doing is feeding the parasitic leaders, who will dominate every aspect of their lives. These are the very same sorts of people, who have brought about the problems the protesters claim to be concerned with, in the first place.

If someone wants to give away every single value in their lives to others, that's their right. But to even attempt to have everyone else forced to do so as well, through gun-backed laws (which really means "under a death threat") is blatantly immoral. Perhaps Socialism is the refuge of the lazy, the bitter, the ignorant, and the confused, after all.


Originally published on Yahoo.

Gotta love SNL! - The Love Boat: The Next Generation

SNL: Love Boat: The Next Generation Skit - View more free videos

Google+ is Already Being Ruined by Multi-Level-Marketing Scams

It didn't take long for what I knew wouldn't be any surprise. In fact, I was waiting for it any day now. They have arrived – the Multi-Level-Marketing fraudsters on Google+. I'm not saying Google is pulling anything. It's those suckers who have some “Wonderful New Exciting Business Opportunity Never Seen Before All Over Again,” bullsh*t to push.

These folks all but ruined MySpace. They've added significantly to the annoyance factor on Facebook. Now, before it even really takes off, they're waiting like hungry vultures on Google+ already. Dammit. People like these folks who head these rip-off operations make a mockery of real business and they murder dreams for those who would like to build their own financial freedom.

Before I get too far into this post, I want to point out that I'm not anti-business. I'm anti-scam. Having been burned more times than I can count with false promises and pie-in-the-sky garbage, all for a paltry monthly fee, I was really hoping to just avoid these morons. Please go peddle your crap somewhere else besides Google+.

To be clear: When it comes to folks working with a legitimate business,I'm cool with that. One of my friends makes her own all-natural lotions and soaps. She's welcome. I do support small business. I even support big business. If you're hoping to promote your website, I'm all yours. If you're just wanting to spread the word letting folks know you've some ad-space for sell in your on-or-offline publication, then be my guest. My wall/home-page/circle is yours.

But those of you in Amway, Melaleuca, Herbalife or any other of the hundreds and hundreds of parasite con artist businesses out there, I don't care if your MLM vitamins, lotions or potions are supposed to be the niftiest thing since the discovery of cheese and wine. It doesn't matter to me if your 1000-level-payout-double-helix-forced-binary-matrix online advertising “business” is ran by an expert team of industry experts (translation: Ballsy con artists from Russia) who've been around since before the Internet was even a glimmer in DARPA's eye.

Your name is not “I've Been Paid Twice Already.” Nor is it “The Amazing Tripler.” If all you're about is your so-called “income opportunity,” and you don't even have the good sense or the decency to at least use a human name – hell a dog name would be better – please, please, please just go straight to hell. Don't add me to your circles on Google+. I didn't welcome your junk on MySpace. I've vehemently reported you for spam on Facebook. You're not going to enjoy any more progress with me on Google+, @$$holes. I will be the worst prospect you've ever come across. Also, dear readers, feel free to share your story of how you've been burned by rip-offs.
Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

States Have Priorities Other Than Selling Booze; The Argument for Privatization

COMMENTARY | Here in America, where a free market and Capitalism has resulted in an unprecedented level of prosperity for even the poorest among us compared to the rest of the world, a debate rages in multiple states over whether liquor stores should be ran by private businesses or the government. In a press release issued today by Teamster's General President James P Hoffa, a specious charge is laid of how Washington State getting out of the liquor business will do more harm than good. Ultimately, the issue of liquor store privatization isn't really about liquor, but about smarter uses of government resources.

Alcohol should be regulated, sure. That's reasonable. It's dangerous stuff.

And, as pointed out by the YES on 1183 Coalition, concerned parents can rest assured knowing that Washington's Proposition 1183 doubles the fines for selling alcohol to minors. No business is interested in losing that kind of money. There are other advantages to liquor store privatization. Among these benefits is the one-time influx of cash into financially-burdened state and local governments. Others include a percentage of the liquor sales ensuring continued revenue for the state. And, for those teetotalers who are offended by the very sight of alcohol, Proposition 1183 has built-in restrictions requiring hard liquor to only be sold in retail businesses which meet certain size requirements, thereby preventing liquor from being sold by just any retailer.

Pennsylvania is also considering the option of liquor store privatization.

All the way East across the continent, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is also in a heated debate on the topic. This isn't the first time it has come up, either. Former Governors Dick Thornburgh (1979 to 1987) and Tom Ridge (1995 to 2001) also dealt with the same battle during their terms. Last March Governor Tom Corbett was quoted as saying "Government should no more run the liquor stores than it should run pharmacies and gas stations. This isn't about the money. It's about the principle." For those who will claim privatization will lead to underage drinking, even while liquor stores are ran by the state, Pennsylvania ranks in the middle of the pack as it is. So it would seem to be a moot point, within the big picture. If state control were truly a determining factor in preventing underage drinking, the Commonwealth should be somewhere in the top three positions.

How has liquor store privatization worked for other states?

That's a fair question. To answer it, let's look at the results in the State of West Virginia. In a state which finally recognizes the value of abandoning outdated, 148-year-old Puritan ideals, tax revenues have increased along with the immediate increase in immediate revenues from investors. The state even enjoys the revenue from cross-border sales to Virginians tired of the hum-drum ABC stores of Virginia. With the increase in sales enjoyed by businesses, those businesses earn more profit, which means more capacity to hire and certainly more tax revenues for the state. Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Three good reasons to fear no evil

Just because I cannot reconcile my understanding of the world around me with a belief in any sort of a deity, it doesn't mean I deny the existence of evil. What I see as evil might not be things like particular words or what consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedrooms, but I certainly see evil in those actions which cause unnecessary harm to others. Evil exists in a variety of forms, and even with no God to point the way, walking knee-deep in its flood is perhaps the most natural thing in life.

Both we non-believers and believers alike must deal with the various forms of evil. Whether a person responds to it by turning inward and praying or whether a person responds by turning inward and rationalizing, the net result is the same. It's still there. The existence of evil by the hands of others is one of those immutable facts of life. Denial will not make it go away and it feeds on our fear.

There are three reasons I will not live my life in fear of the harm some might wish on others. There may be more, but for now, I'm only able to identify these three. Maybe, just maybe, one of them could prove key in helping a reader cope with something they're going through. I sure hope so. That person – whomever they are – is the reason I share this today.

Reason number one to fear no evil: I give as good as I get, maybe better. I'm not a big guy, compared to what most consider big guys. I try not to be loud. I try not to impose on others. So, win or lose, anyone who tries to hurt me, mine or anyone in my company will – at the very least – be left with a scar they can brag about later. I won't lie and claim to have won every challenge in my life. I've lost plenty of encounters (physical or otherwise) but no enemy has ever forgotten me.

Reason number two to fear no evil: I could be wrong. In cases where dealing with a harmful person isn't so much a case of a direct conflict, it could be nothing more than a case of different perspectives. I used to think my ex was evil. I now realize hers was a case of someone doing what they felt they had to do. I used to use the figure-of-speech in that sometimes what appears to be a demon is just an angel with a job to do. For example; a burglar might “think” of the police as the enemy. But all of the rest of society knows the cops are just protecting lives and property. In this case, it's the burglar who would be wise to seek a new line of work. Having done so, he may find those officers to be some great allies. (This is merely for illustrative purposes. I'm neither a burglar nor a cop. Please keep the rumors to yourself.)

Reason number three to fear no evil: Evil people eat their own. This is my primary reason for living my life boldly, even in the face of the most vicious and unnecessarily harmful. Ultimately, even in cases where I might lose a challenge and even in those cases where it's not so much a matter of perspective, evil eventually destroys itself. The burglar has to, at some point, transport their loot in a suspicious manner and the law-of-averages will eventually catch up to them with an officer on patrol. Perhaps they'll break into the home of a well-armed and protective homeowner.

Those in power who would oppress their subjects eventually accumulate too many enemies. Liars and false accusers over-speak their case, eventually giving away a key detail and trip themselves up. Murderers live with the memories of their victims. This list could go on forever. One day, in some way and at the most inconvenient time, evil people do themselves in. I may not get to witness it myself, but I know it happens this way. I've seen it happen enough times to take confidence in my walk through this world. I hope you do too.
Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Before we go celebrating Obama's 'Big Success' in Iraq

Don't get me wrong. I'm happy as heck to hear our troops are finally, after nine long years, getting to come home. But the way the end of activities in Iraq are presented, it's as if some in the media want us to all think it's some kind of a rabbit President Obama managed to pull out of his ass. Not quite.

In a non-American news source we all know and love as “The Guardian” it's reported the real reason our troops finally get to come home is merely the Iraqis no longer want us there. It seems we've done a good enough of a job, and now the Iraqi government wants to do it on their own.

It's not so much that Obama even “did” anything, not even as a ploy to get re-elected. It's just a simple matter of our time there is over. Nothing more.

We'll still keep an embassy presence in Baghdad, and the required troops to make that work. But sadly for our current president, this one isn't really so much a “feather in his cap.” I'm glad they all get to come home, really. I'm one of those who feels perhaps we've been there a little too long as it is. And knowing all those families will be reunited fills me with joy. But this isn't one Obama gets credit for from anyone other than the incredibly gullible.

He'll try though. All politicians do. We should've never been there in the first place. I'd like to see an American politician admit to that.
Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Well there goes any hope for women's rights in Libya

Please see the update at the bottom of this entry. Well now, Gadhafi's dead and Libya's free, eh? Think again! In a report from Yahoo News, it's revealed the foundation of new legislation in the country is...wait for it...Sharia Law! The very idea of freedom has effectively been thrown out the window already.

This has to be a record somewhere. Gadhafi was killed just a few days back, and already the entire nation is heading for a future of female genital mutilation, honor killings, women being stoned to death for the “crime” of being a rape victim and denied an education. The speed at which Libya has denied themselves a chance at real peace, prosperity or even something so basic as liberty is amazing.

In the above-referenced news topic it reads “The transitional government leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil set out a vision for the post-Gadhafi future with an Islamist tint, saying that Islamic Sharia law would be the 'basic source' of legislation in the country and that existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified. In a gesture that showed his own piety, he urged Libyans not to express their joy by firing in the air, but rather to chant 'Allahu Akbar,' or God is Great. He then stepped aside and knelt to offer a brief prayer of thanks.” Wow! You can lead a nation to opportunity, but you can't make them think. What a waste.

I suppose folks just can't find the courage within themselves to live their lives without having to rely on superstition, mythology and fairy tales. Sadly, it will be the women and children of a very rich nation who will pay the price for the intellectual laziness of their leaders. It's a sad day when people behave in such a way to lead folks like me to believe Glenn Beck might have been correct after all.

UPDATE! According to the following video, we Americans had the wrong idea about Libya under Gadhafi. We've heard all sorts of horrible things over the years, but check out the following video:


His death may be even worse than I thought. F*ck Islamofascism.
Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

Responding to Pastor Mark Driscoll; Methinks he doth protest too much

If you're easily offended, go away now. I'm going to speak on a topic which is a bit “adult” in nature, and frankly, I've no time to respond to idiocy. With that being said...

Dear Pastor Mark Driscoll.

I read with some interest the article titled “Christian Right Wing Pastor Mark Driscoll Says Masturbation Is Form Of Homosexuality” by Stephen D. Foster posted on October 19th, 2011. In the article, it's alleged you said that, for men anyway, masturbation is a form of homosexuality.

You're quoted as having said: “First, masturbation can be a form of homosexuality because it is a sexual act that does not involve a woman. If a man were to masturbate while engaged in other forms of sexual intimacy with his wife then he would not be doing so in a homosexual way. However, any man who does so without his wife in the room is bordering on homosexual activity, particularly if he’s watching himself in a mirror and being turned on by his own male body.”

Wow! Just...WOW! Perhaps you sir, are the guy who's masturbating to a mirror, and not fantasizing about some memory of a sexual experience you've had with a woman. If you are, that's okay. Heck guy, a few of my friends are gay and it's really not my business. So, if you are gay, I'm cool with it.

But to make such a sweeping statement about all men, that's just plain, old-fashioned idiotic. Each time I've ever masturbated in my life, it's involved a fantasy of a woman or two. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but an idiotic remark like yours is kind of begging for a response. I know there'll be a few readers who go and scrub their eyes with bleach to get the image out of their head. But, there it is.



I do believe the term is “projection,” when you ascribe to the world around you, those qualities you find within yourself. Again, if you're turned on by your own body, or if you're fantasizing about other men, I'm not judging you. Your sexuality is absolutely none of my business. What does concern me, however, is your teaching illogical, ridiculous garbage like this to other people – especially the youth within your church. How many young people who look up to you as a guide and a role model are now incorrectly confused about their own sexuality, because of your thoughtless words?

I'm shocked that you are so ignorant of life and it's details, you would make such a statement to your followers, just to keep them “guilty” enough, in order to keep the tithes coming in. Is it a degree in theology which gives you such amazing insight? Or, did you just hallucinate the discussion of the topic with the voices in your head?

Or, perhaps, you're hoping to persuade every young male you can that, they too are at least as gay as you for having masturbated? Every male does the deed. Any one of them who states otherwise is lying, and both you and I know that to be true. So I can't help but think you're hoping more young men will be easier to confuse and exploit and you can enjoy a bit of a meat-fest before you're outed by the membership of your church. I'm inclined to believe every single guy in your church wondered the same thing the day you said what you did.

I personally don't believe homosexuality is a “choice” in 100% of the cases. We're wired how we're wired. But perhaps you're hoping to cast a net for new prospects as a gay man, yourself? I can only hope you're not after the underage guys within your congregation. I could care less what you and other consenting adults in your church do. Just leave the kids alone, Mr Driscoll. And I also hope you someday find the courage to be honest about your true nature. Good luck with that.
Come visit me on DonPennington.info.

So, exactly when has Mitt Romney been the front-runner? Comments please

I've been following the 2012 election campaign about as close as any other American in the general public. I'm struck by something. Although former Governor Mitt Romney has only won 4 (maybe 5 depending on perspective) out of the 33 straw polls held thus far, the media references him as the “front-runner.” This is odd to me.

On the other hand, I'm seeing two other candidates who seem to be somewhat mopping the floor with Mitt Romney's well-styled hairdo. The first is a guy who seems to come from out of nowhere and claims to espouse a “business-minded” style of managing government. His name is Herman Cain. With 12 straw poll wins under his belt, Cain still faces the challenge of his 9-9-9 plan. Even if you buy his 9.99 special, there are many misgivings among the ever-increasingly Libertarian party-influenced non-Democrats in the “right wing” voting segment of society.

Cain's recent pandering to the religious segment of society is sounding quite a lot like bigotry. (Gay people aren't seeking “gay rights.” They're interested in their “individual rights,” just like anyone else would be – regardless of religious beliefs.) Also, with an ever-increasing segment of society coming out into the light and declaring themselves as atheist or agnostic, the idea of another candidate who wants to inflict their god on the rest of America just seems so...Dominionist. We do not need an American Taliban.

Then there's the Congressman from Texas, Dr. Ron Paul. This is his third shot at the presidency. In spite of a State-influenced media working so hard at “ignoring” someone who they try to claim is irrelevant, he sure does seem to have a knack for garnering contributions, volunteers and passion in his supporters. Ron Paul is promoting a platform which consists of/includes elimination of the I.R.S. As well as the Federal Reserve, a return to basic Constitutional principles and a non-interventionist foreign policy. With 11 solid straw poll wins, one in debate from Arizona (supporters say the online votes should be counted too, giving the doctor a sweeping win), and another in dispute since CNN doesn't seem to want to include him as one of the options, Dr Ron Paul is showing quite well too.

I'd even go so far as to say these three men are running neck and neck. But in now way is Mitt Romney showing as the clear “front-runner” as is so often touted by the main stream press. I just don't see it, and that's not personal bias. It's just the numbers. His supporters may come along to this post and start in with their “but,” and “well I” and I still just can't see where Mitt Romney is the clear front-runner.

Besides, Paul's latest straw poll victory was in Ohio at an incredible 53% of the votes. How many times has it been said the presidency often comes down to who wins Ohio? Paul has an appealing quality of being a sincere, down-to-Earth, non-psychopath – unlike most other candidates. He's business-friendly (something which really upsets American Communists). And, he's no lawyer. For all of the talking heads who try to claim his being irrelevant, he sure was re-elected a lot of times from his district. So, he's also very experienced with how the U.S. Federal Government works.

Okay. That's enough of my horn-tooting for the good doctor. Back to the point, right? Can any of my readers please try to show me where Mitt Romney is actually the front-runner in anything? I'm willing to hear you out with an open mind. I promise to publish comments, even if you show me wrong. I'm not afraid to be wrong, when I am. Mitt Romney isn't the front-runner of Jack Squat.

Come visit me on DonPennington.info.