TheWorx

Of course, I'm guilty as much as the next guy--well, maybe not as much, I like to think. I know I succumb to the usual inadequacies of the mind. I know I am incapable of ascertaining the true prevalence of a group's supposed characteristic; and, statistical science offers no hope--perhaps rightfully so. But there is no reason why technology cannot assuage the prejudices of humans. In my last post I digressed and railed against the African-American Customer Service Representative at Geico. Regardless of motivations, technology can prevent misplaced ire (such disdain should be placed squarely on the policies of the corporation). The way to do this is to disguise the voice of the representative and that of the customer--the respective names should also be aliases (there is actually no reason why our name should be available to an employee--just the account number). That's right, I propose that all live customer representatives should have Siri's voice and we can have--I ...

Two gunmen shot dead at 'draw the prophet Muhammad' contest in Texas | US news | The Guardian I've had derogatory remarks aimed right at me. The worst was that of my father-in-law (I forgive him, he's Ukrainian) who once said that I was "the worst excuse for a human being he had ever seen." Ouch! I had moved his patch for growing tomatoes from the middle of the yard to the front. WTF was my only thought. However, my feeling is that of Patrick Henry, "I may not agree with what you say but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." The day we acquiesce to the Muslims' demands that we not draw the prophet Mohammad because it offends them, is day one of the American Caliphate. Charlie Hebdo tried to distance themselves from  the drawing contest saying that they do not target Islam directly. Really Charlie? Before you start down this holier-than-thou road, why don't you give them a chance to hold a Draw a Mexican; a Cuban, an Eth...

Chris Hedges sees terrorism--pointing to the recent Charlie Hebdo tragedy--as something that could easily be avoided if Muslims were not economically disadvantaged. This is my critique of his stand with my comments in orange. The original appears here. Begin: The terrorist attack in France that took place at the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo was not about free speech. It was not about radical Islam. It did not illustrate the fictitious clash of civilizations. It was a harbinger of an emerging dystopia where the wretched of the earth, deprived of resources to survive, devoid of hope, brutally controlled, belittled and mocked by the privileged who live in the splendor and indolence of the industrial West, lash out in nihilistic fury. Normally, I would agree that disparities are to blame for most of our problems and, certainly, the average Muslim in the Middle East and Africa are afflicted by it but the coin that he casts has a hidden side he refuses to acknowledge. We have eng...

The Supreme Court recently struck down laws that prevented corporations from campaigning for political candidates. That the Supreme Court can view corporations as citizens speaks of the blinders that too often guide these nine people down a road to ill-conceived or misguided justice. It is almost as if they were saying, "We are tired of your First Amendment lawsuits. We are going to take free speech and wrap you up in it so tightly that it will suffocate you." Now that corporations have freedom of speech, what else can we bestow on them? Shall we give corporations the right to vote? Shall we banish them to a desert in Arizona when they are found guilty of a crime? If a corporation is an entity with unalienable rights, what about other entities? Do we welcome the Vatican and the rich Muslims into our political arena? I can see why the justices are confused for we bail out and subsidize the corporations like they were relatives. We baptize them into being and dissolve them at ...