Friday, June 26, 2009

Maybe it's time to join the Amish.


Shown above is the latest ad from Burger King. The ad is currently only running in Singapore, but how long before ads such as this start appearing in BK joints in America.
Vulgar ads are nothing new, but fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and Burger King have built a reputation on kid friendly/family friendly establishments. Though this is a Burger King ad, it sullies the reputation of all such restaurants in my opinion.
Christian parents can limit their children's exposure to such trash by limiting their kid's computer access, doing without television etc., but it's getting to the point that you cannot leave the house and go anywhere to get a reprieve from trash like this. While this ad may be suitable for placement in Hustler magazine, it has no place in kid-friendly restaurants.
Evangelicals who are so inclined may contact:
Burger King
Consumer Relations - 305-378-3535
Corporate Headquarters - 305-378-3000

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Michael and Elvis: Nowhere else to go.

Michael Jackson began his career around the age of 11. Elvis Presley began his career at roughly 18. One a child and the other a young adult, but both young.

Both performers were immensely talented. Elvis was the King of rock and Roll and Jackson was the King of Pop.

I suppose as a conservative Christian I could make the statement that both men lived sinful, unrepentant lives and were called home earlier than one would expect due to judgement being rendered on them, but there is another issue.

Michael Jackson produced some of the world's most popular records and so did Elvis Presley. Both men were and are idolized. Both men were pioneering entertainers and there were times when both men lived fast, hard lives.

Elvis Presley died from a drug overdose and so, it appears did Michael Jackson. (It looks like both had overdosed on Demerol) Elvis had been making something of a comeback and Jackson had planned to return to live performances.

The bottom line is both men had to die when they did. Though they were on the comeback trail, they were simply not the men they were at their peak. There were the drug and scandal issues and could anyone really have wanted to see these two men continue a performance slide into their seventies or later?

No, Michael Jackson and Elvis Presley had to die when they did because they had nowhere else to go.

Monday, June 22, 2009

China's need for "living space."

In a previous post I mentioned a speech by the then Vice-Chairman of China's Military Commission, Chi Haotian (http://www.rense.com/general85/China'sPlanToConquer.htm ) to top officers and generals in which Chi opined:
" The first pressing issue facing us is living space. This is the biggest focus of the revitalization of the Chinese race. In my last speech, I said that the fight over basic living resources (including land and ocean) is the source of the vast majority of wars in history. This may change in the information age, but not fundamentally. Our per capita resources are much less than those of Germany's back then. In addition, economic development in the last twenty-plus years had a negative impact, and climates are rapidly changing for the worse. Our resources are in very short supply. The environment is severely polluted, especially that of soil, water, and air. Not only our ability to sustain and develop our race, but even its survival is gravely threatened, to a degree much greater than faced Germany back then Anybody who has been to Western countries knows that their living space is much better than ours. They have forests alongside the highways, while we hardly have any trees by our streets. Their sky is often blue with white clouds, while our sky is covered with a layer of dark haze. Their tap water is clean enough for drinking, while even our ground water is so polluted that it can't be drunk without filtering."
===================

Now we have an excellent article by Paul Goble on his windowoneurasia blog (http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/2009/06/window-on-eurasia-chinese-bestseller.html )
about a Chinese bestselling book that suggests China will attempt to dominate the Russian Far East. The article is reprinted below:


Paul GobleVienna, June 20

A new Chinese bestselling book suggesting that Beijing will dominate the Russian Far East in the coming decades has raised questions among Russian experts not only about how much this book reflects official thinking in China but also about what the Russian government can and should consider doing to counter such an outcome.The book entitled “China Gets Angry” has sold some 700,000 copies since its release three months ago, “Komsomolskaya Pravda” reports today. Written by five Chinese intellectuals, the book’s basic message is that China is destined be the leader of the world and does not need to kowtow to anyone.

(www.kp.ru/daily/24313/506551/).In discussing Russia, the book talks about it as “a living space” for the still growing Chinese people, and it pointedly suggests that “sober-thinking Chinese need to get rid of any doubt on this point: sooner or later we will be” in Siberia and the Russian Far East developing the vast areas that Moscow has not.To assess this book, its implications of its argument for Russia, and whether Moscow has the time necessary to change course, “Komsomolskaya Pravda” turned to Vil’ Gel’bras, a longtime and internationally recognized Russian specialist on China who works at Moscow State University’s Institute of Asian and African countries.Gel’bras, for his part, said Beijing’s interest in Russian territories east of the Urals was hardly surprising given the imbalance of population and agricultural land in China. For the 900 million peasants of China, there are only about 120 million hectares of land, approximately 0.13 per agricultural laborer. In Russia, on the other hand, there are 2.5 hectares per rural worker.

In addition to that reason to look north, Chinese demographic policy also is playing a role. Because of Beijing’s one child policy and the preference Chinese parents have for boys, the Russian sinologist says, the number of Chinese men will be 30 million greater than the number of Chinese women by 2015.

Asked by the paper where they will look for mates, Gel’bras responded with a question of his own “Haven’t you guessed already?”All of this is a matter of concern, Gel’bras says. But he says that he “does not believe that [the Chinese] at the official level are thinking up any serious actions against [Russians].” They have “more than sufficient internal problems” – including unemployment – to occupy themselves at the present time.But the Moscow China specialist continues, “the powers that be in China are not going to interview with the development of nationalist ideas like those contained in the book.” Indeed, he says, they have every reason to do so at the present time: such ideas expressed so bluntly “distract the people from the crisis.”In response to a query as to how far the book expresses the views of officials, Gel’bras says that on the one hand, the book could not have been published if the authorities did not have a certain sympathy for its ideas. And on the other, he quotes Dun Tsin, the editor of “Jenmin Jibao,” as having expressed similar views.

In a recent article, Dun wrote that “in the final analysis, China apparently is preparing to subject the Russian Far East to its fundamental influence but in such a way that it will not cause Moscow nervousness. This influence will be based not on the enormous influx of Chinese settlers but on the not foreseen before ‘sinification’ of Russians.”And the Chinese editor continued, “one fine day a serious crisis will arise, and in the face of the weakening political and military influence of Moscow, these Russians possibly will prefer to make the choice in favor of Beijing and not of their own government.

In such a hypothetical situation, the Russian Far Eastern region possibly will become a province of China.”According to Gel’bras, the Chinese are working in this direction already, offering Russian specialists “favorable conditions to acquire residences,” to study the Chinese language, and to work normally. And he adds, “many Far Easterners, cut off from Moscow, already are adapting themselves to these programs.”Beijing’s approach which also involves the construction of highways and other infrastructure up to the Russian border and into Central Asia, something the Russian government has not done on its side of the line. And as a result, the Chinese are simply exploiting Moscow’s failures in this and other areas.

Looking out five to ten years, Gel’bras sees little reason for optimism from a Russian perspective, although he suggests “it is possible that [Russians] will yet change their approach … if of course [they] do not want to lose a sixth of the area of the country” through the quiet expansion of China that the bestselling book there suggests.The Russian military has often played up the Chinese threat as have some Russian nationalists and residents of the Far East seeking investment from the center, but the statement of Gel’bras is more disturbing than any of their writings precisely because it is so calm and matter of fact about something that most Russians and many others would see as a huge tragedy.
=====================

Very interesting article and perspective on this issue.