Hayden's Harangues

2011-11-11T08:15:00.005-07:00

The Penn State Board of Trustees did the right thing with respect to Coach Paterno. The way this thing has exploded due to his seemingly-calculated inaction there is just no way that he should be permitted to continue to lead this team. There may be a lot more to come but right now the best thing to do is get him and all of the others involved out of the public eye and away from the school while they begin to address the huge storm ahead.

While I am glad that he has been removed I do not revel in this shame and disgrace that has befallen the school or football program. I am quite disappointed that school officials have not been more forthcoming with proactive statements or actions related to the victims, but recognize that there is a fine legal line in place that they must maintain and probably cannot get into that stuff, at least not yet.

I am certainly very disappointed with Paterno's involvement and inaction with this situation. It has diminished my respect for him to the lowest possible level. I will never be able to hear his name and not immediately think of the damage that his inaction has done to a bunch of kids, the exact number of which we may never know. But just like O.J. I will always admire what he was able to accomplish in football, on and off the field:

He created one of the most storied college football programs in the history of the sport
He stressed academics and graduated a lot of players
He didn't cash in by leaving for more money
He knew the value of branding and didn't succumb to the lure of big money to change that brand.
He gave back millions to the university
He won a lot of games, bowl games, and a couple of national championships

This is the stuff that those who continue to support him remember while not considering that character trumps all of that. They are people whose values are misplaced, either permanently or due to their emotions temporarily clouding their better judgment. Those in the latter category will come around, while just like with O.J. there will be those who will support Coach Paterno to the end of their days.

My primary thoughts are with the victims of Jerry Sandusky and hope that they find a way to find some way to heal and put this behind them. I know that is a tall order. Just like we cannot un-ring a bell, there is not much that can be done to erase these acts from their memories and lives. Still I hope that he has not ruined these people in such a way that they cannot follow their dreams.

In Thursday, November 10, 2011 Neil Rudel of the Altoona Mirror wrote:

Wednesday night, while attempting to take the first step toward rebuilding its reputation and re-shaping its future, Penn State finally sent the message that the institution cannot take orders from the football coach.

From: http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/555303/End-of-lion-won-t-overshadow-greatest-tenure.html?nav=805

On the margins of this mess another subject needs discussed, that being the stranglehold that college sports and sports in general have on our society. Had events like this been related to faculty members associated with the school's orchestra would the school attempt to cover it up? I don't think so, but there is no potentially-huge financial loss associated with the school's orchestra.

We live in a world where a school will pay millions of dollars for the right to play football in a different conference. We don't blink an eye when we see that West Virginia University will pay $5 million to leave the Big East. FIVE MILLION DOLLARS! For an extracurricular activity? Coaches are paid enormous sums and these programs generate boat loads of revenue. Is it any wonder that these guys would want to protect that? While the end certainly does not justify the means in this case, I will suggest that we, our collective society, should also be ashamed that we have created this monster that would make some intelligent men make horrible decisions that hurt children all for the sake of what is supposed to be a diversion for students in pursuit of higher education.

GOP Blows It, Again

2011-10-24T07:01:00.005-06:00

Does everyone remember the GOP going on and on about the solution to health care in the US is letting it sort itself out in the free market and introducing more competition by permitting the sale of health insurance across state lines? Well they had an opportunity to put their votes where their mouths are last week and failed miserably.

A Senate bill was shot down by the Republicans that would have permitted American consumers to buy US-made pharmaceuticals from Canadian vendors over the Internet, by mail order, or in person. This applied only to individuals, not wholesalers, who would be obtaining FDA-approved drugs for their personal use.

Just think, an opportunity to lower the prices of drugs in this country, something that would have given a whole lot of people some additional discretionary income to pump into the economy. But it would have taken some of the profits away from big pharma and the Republicans could have none of that.

For those of you who kneel at the altar of the GOP every November keep in mind that:

Nobody will ever force you or any of your loved ones to have an abortion.
Nobody will ever force you or any of your loved ones to marry someone of the same sex.
Nobody will ever take your guns away from you.

How about throwing all of your bums out and voting in Senators and Representatives who will do something to help everyone and not just the rich and powerful? Just try this so that we can get everything on the right track and then you can go back to your single-issue, narrow-minded, God, Gays, and Guns voting habits.

Where do they get this stuff?

2011-09-28T07:45:00.002-06:00

Did anyone notice that the sun continues to rise and everyone's lives have been unaffected by the official elimination of the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy in the military?

On a related note, check out this exchange that took place at a recent Republican debate:

Quote

KELLY: Senator Santorum, this question stirred up a whole lot of controversy online, and it comes from Stephen Hill, who is a soldier serving in Iraq.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: In 2010, when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was, because I'm a gay soldier, and I didn't want to lose my job.
My question is, under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress that's been made for gay and lesbian soldiers in the military?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BOOING)
SANTORUM: Yeah, I -- I would say, any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military. And the fact that they're making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to -- to -- and removing "don't ask/don't tell" I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military's job is to do one thing, and that is to defend our country.
We need to give the military, which is all-volunteer, the ability to do so in a way that is most efficient at protecting our men and women in uniform.

So, let me get this straight, permitting anyone to serve in the military is injecting social policy and Don't Ask Don't Tell is not? If someone can explain this, please take a shot.

Perry? Say it ain't so!

2011-08-15T08:20:00.004-06:00

For over a decade, we Texans have witnessed firsthand what Perry's done to our state. And it's not a pretty picture. We've watched him threaten secession and rail against Washington while using federal stimulus money to cover up his own billion dollar budget shortfall.

Perry bragged to the national media about shooting a coyote, but we watched him do more lasting damage to public education by shortchanging schools, knocking 100,000 kids out of full-day Pre-Kindergarten, and crowding more kids into classrooms. He brags about the Texas economy, but his budget proposal would have destroyed hundreds of thousands of Texas jobs from both the public and private sectors.

During any debates that he may choose to participate in (remember that he refused to attend any debates during his last run for governor) pay close attention to his attack on the new health care act, specifically the provision that mandates that everyone have coverage. He really cannot criticize this provision without being beat down by the opposition because as govenor he mandated that:

All Texas girls receive a vaccine against the human papillomavirus before entering the sixth grade. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4521884.html
All women undergo an ultrasound, hear a detailed description of the fetus and then wait a full 24 hours before receiving abortion care.http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7572639.html

The first one had to involve some kind of payoff from Merck to him or his family. The second one was just playing to the base, of course.

If he ends up being the nominee I would certainly hope that smart Republicans will write in a better choice for president.

Absentee Governor

2011-08-12T07:48:00.003-06:00

Go into your boss’s office and tell them that from now until late November, 2012 you will:

Work many fewer hours per week.
Not be at work as much, many weeks not at all.
Be spending your time trying to obtain a new job.
Be coming back and resuming a normal work schedule if you do not obtain the new job.

How do you think that would go over? Probably not very well. However this is precisely what Governor Rick Perry is doing now that he has thrown his hat into the ring for the Republican presidential nomination.

Governor Perry was elected to direct the activities of the state, not to spend a year or more running for president. Seems like we need an amendment to the Texas State Constitution that either prohibits this practice or requires that elected officials resign if they want to seek a higher office.

Better yet, this should be a federal law, which would help to implement term limits on these do-nothing career politicians.

Perry vetoes texting while driving bill

2011-06-21T06:43:00.004-06:00

During the coverage of the US Open a commercial was aired multiple times that showed a number of parents making sure that their kids were safe, e.g., wearing safety gear while biking, floaties when taking a bath, etc. One of these parents was shown buckling her child into a car seat and checking it. Then it cuts to her driving while texting, with her child securely buckled in the car seat in the back seat. Suddenly, as she is not paying attention she runs an intersection and is hit broadside. The commercial illustrated that one should be mindful of all risks to the safety of their children and should not be texting while driving. This was definitely a good and effective way to drive home this message.

On Friday, June 17, Texas Governor Rick “I wanna be president” Perry vetoed a bill that would have made texting while driving illegal. He did so because he views it as "a government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults." He recognizes that "texting while driving is reckless and irresponsible”, but prefers information and education campaigns to dissuade drivers of all ages from texting while driving.

So OK, that is understandable, especially when considering the governor’s hard right leaning political posture, one that he moved to after previously being a Democrat. (He no doubt changed parties because he saw no future in politics as a Democrat in Texas, but I digress.) However, he is currently flying all over the place to address various groups of conservatives, testing the waters for a presidential run, and repeating his anti-abortion stance.

Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this? He vetoes a bill that may save real, living and breathing lives because he does not want “to micromanage the behavior of adults”, yet he wants “to micromanage the behavior of adults” by outlawing abortion. What about an “information and education campaign” to dissuade folks of all ages to avoid unwanted pregnancies? Plus doesn’t “pro-life” include all lives? Apparently not to our governor.

This is just one of many examples of why this guy should never be president. C'mon Republicans, you have to have someone better than this guy. If you don't, then there is no hope for your party and our great country.

The Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference

2011-06-06T12:55:00.003-06:00

Yesterday I watched a number of presentations that were made at last week’s Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference on C-SPAN. Here are a few observations:

1. Faith only refers to Christians, so this group should be renamed Christianity and Freedom Coalition.

2. This coalition appears to be predominately and almost exclusively old and white.

3. The Republican presidential field for the 2012 nomination is very weak.

4. They should draft Ken Cuccinelli, the AG from Virginia to at least run in the primary. He made a fairly good presentation without falling back on the fire and brimstone religious stuff to get applause.

5. They seem to be reigniting the social issues, hoping to get some of these on state and local ballots in 2012 in order to draw conservatives to the polls. One of the guys said that they need to make sure that the homosexuals do not take marriage away from the heterosexuals, to which he received applause, of course. However, I did not realize that this had become an either-or issue, i.e., if homosexuals are permitted to marry, then heterosexuals will be denied that right. Overall I have never understood why this is an issue to anybody. I think the wedding industry in Iowa, a very red state, is as strong as ever after passing a law to permit same-sex marriage.

Here we go again

2011-05-18T07:30:00.001-06:00

The Texas legislature is about to introduce an amendment that would drain billions of dollars from public schools to subsidize tuition at private and religious schools across the state. The proposed amendment to important fiscal legislation in the Texas House of Representatives would allow the state to give "Taxpayer Savings" grants – vouchers – to families that send their children to private or religious schools. The money would come directly from tax dollars originally intended for public education – even if recipients of these vouchers had never set foot in a public school.

So while we have a budget crisis here, one that will result in the reduction of funding to public schools, they are going to try to push through more giveaways to the rich and take even more from our public schools?

There are no accurate words to describe the people who are doing this.

Where did our government go?

2011-03-22T07:08:00.000-06:00

Yesterday Tim Pawlenty announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president. In a very slick video announcement he stated "We, the people of the United States, will take back our government." I have some questions about this statement:

Where did our government go?
How long has it been gone?
Is it at least enjoying itself?
When it comes back will it be refreshed and better than ever?
Will we really want it back?
If we don't like it when it comes back can we send it away again?

Seriously, I am tired of hearing politicians making this kind of statement, especially when they make a sweeping generalization that starts with "‘We, the people of the United States, ..." This guy doesn't speak for everyone. There are a lot of people out there that like the current government very much. Just ask those who received a giant tax break in January just because they have a lot of money. Or ask those who are successfully preventing Wall Street and the banks from being properly regulated. Or how about the the military industrial complex. And don't forget the oil companies. All of these people love their government.

The amusing thing is that Mr. Pawlenty wants to be the nominee from the party that includes all of these people and others who think the government is just hunky dory. So just who are these "‘We, the people of the United States, ..." that he is talking about?

What is an "entitlement"?

2011-02-17T07:51:00.000-07:00

I know that this may sound like a silly question but this word, “entitlement”, confuses me, especially in the current parlance surrounding the debate over budget cuts in Washington.
Merriam-Webster offers three definitions of the word:

1. a : the state or condition of being entitled : right
b : a right to benefits specified especially by law or contract
2: a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group; also : funds supporting or distributed by such a program
3: belief that one is deserving of or entitled to certain privileges

Based on these definitions we can eliminate #3, as what Congress is doing has nothing to do with anyone’s beliefs, with the exception of those who try to ram Christian-centric laws through without considering their consequences on everyone else, but I digress.

We can also eliminate #1a, for a similar reason, i.e., it is focused on a “state or condition”.
This leaves us with #s 1.b and 2, both of which cover benefits and programs. But exactly what is considered a benefit or a program? Is the safety and security provided to us by the Department of Defense an entitlement? It is certainly a benefit “specified especially by law or contract”, i.e., the Constitution.

Are the trials provided by the judicial system an entitlement? They is certainly a benefit “specified especially by law or contract”, i.e., the Constitution.

There are many more examples, but I think that you get the point here. We never hear about this kind of stuff when the politicians quack about cutting entitlements. It is always things that involve the direct payout of funds to the populace that are intended to maintain or improve their quality of life, e.g., welfare, food stamps, Social Security, unemployment, Medicare, etc. And what do all of these have in common? They help the least among us, a Jesus thing. Sorry for reverting back to that topic.

The point of all of this rambling is that everything that the government does is actually an “entitlement”. Let’s stop using this word as code for “something that someone else gets that I don’t, so it has to be a waste of money”.

If it Ain't Broke, ...

2011-02-16T06:38:00.001-07:00

Congress continues to quack about “fixing” Social Security. Most people who have studied this agree that it isn’t broken, i.e., doesn’t need “fixed”, but it could use some tweaking to keep it solvent well into the latter part of this century. So everything that they are proposing right now is really political posturing and nothing more.

The latest is the idea that they raise the minimum retirement age, which is currently set at 62. This doesn’t sound like a drastic measure until you consider that 70% of Social Security recipients opt to begin receiving benefits at 62. It is believed that the majority of these people either are on the lower end of the socio-economic ladder and need the money or they have worked in manual labor jobs which have reduced their life expectancy. In both cases these are not society’s upper echelon, you know, those who popped the champagne bottles when the Bush tax cuts were extended.

So the bottom line on this proposal is “let’s stick it to the poor while the fat cats sit back and cash their checks, and oh, by the way, they will continue to send us contributions.”

If they really wanted to do something it would be to take steps to replenish the Social Security trust fund and make the rich pay their fair share, i.e., pay the 6+% on all of their earnings, not just the first $106k. While they are at it how about introducing means testing? Do Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Ross Perot, Jack Welch, etc., really need to receive a Social Security check?

GOP says no to healthcare AND maternity coverage

2011-01-21T12:12:00.002-07:00

Here we go ...

From today's paper and I paraphrase: After voting for a repeal of the health care law the GOP signed on to a new bill to permit interstate sales of health insurance, with a goal of lowering premiums by avoiding the requirements to cover certain services such as maternity care, cancer screenings, and mastectomies.

Later in the same article: At the same time, GOP lawmakers introduced introduced new legislation to place more restrictions on federal funding for abortion services, including a new ban that would make insurance plans that cover abortions ineligible for standard tax exemptions. Speaker of the House John Boehner called the bill "one of our highest legislative priorities."

So let me get this straight, Boehner wants more restriction on abortions and supports a law that will result in not providing maternity coverage to those who can afford health insurance.

I don't use this acronym very often here but WTF?

Celebrating Nothing

2009-10-13T15:43:00.002-06:00

For a long time I have thought that participation trophies for kids who play sports, or anything else that involves winning and losing, are sending the wrong message. Kids are being rewarded for just being there, instead of learning that being part of a team has its rewards that go way beyond a hunk of plastic mounted on another hunk of plastic. As a result they do not experience the satisfaction of working hard to achieve a goal, unless you call having your mom drop you off once or twice a week so that you can stand around all season in order to be rewarded the obligatory hunks of plastic.

This seems to go all the way up to major league baseball. I rarely, if ever, pay attention to baseball anymore for reasons too numerous to discuss here. But once in awhile I will see clips on the news and the other night I saw a clubhouse celebration, complete with champagne (the adult version of hunks of plastic) after the Dodgers beat the Cardinals in their best-of-five division playoff series. Here are grown me celebrating like they had won it all. Sure they should have been happy that they won, but all this means is that they get to move on to the next round, which still isn't the "World" Series ("World" is a misnomer because this championship only includes teams from across the US and a tiny bit of Canada, hence the added quotation marks.) Did they really need to break out the bubbly for this? I don't think so, because I believe that this is just another example of a participation trophy. Sure they won something but, did they really? At the end of the seemingly endless playoffs, that will end just in time for us to watch Thanksgiving Day throwball (football) games, no one will remember or care who did what during this first round of playoffs. C'mon Dodgers. Act like grownups, smile, pat each other on the back for making it to the next round and save the champagne celebration for winning the big one.

In the paper - 01.11.09

2009-01-12T07:59:00.000-07:00

In the Sunday Outlook section of the Houston Chronicle was an op-ed from Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. His subject was health care reform, where he tried to make a case against federal controls. He made six distinct points, each of which tries to frighten the reader into concluding that the government cannot do anything to improve the current health care mess. Here they are with my take on each:

You could lose your current insurance - This is a fact of life every time one changes or loses their job. Health insurance is not portable for those lucky enough to have a job and insurance. Plus would losing your current insurance be such a bad thing if the insurance you currently have is crap? And what about the millions of folks without insurance? What would they be losing?

You could lose the power for you and your doctor to decide what retention will receive - Guess what? You and your doctor do not have the power to make treatment decisions now. These are made by the suits in the insurance companies. Perhaps taking these guys out of the equation would give you and your doctor more power.

You could lose the ability to spend your own money for the health care you want - This is just a plain crap. Nothing that the government does can prohibit one from traveling to another country to acquire better health care. You may have trouble getting into the country based on their entry requirements, but unless Bush has taken away more rights from us than I am aware of we are free to travel to obtain health care at our own risk and on our own dime, for those fortunate enough to have their own dime.

You could lose your current doctor - Guess what? Anytime that you change insurance, and this has become more frequent as employers shop companies to get the best rate, you can be told that your doctor does not accept the new insurance. Of course, there are provisions for you to pay through the nose for your now “out of network” doctor, which is more crap to generate more revenue for the insurance companies.

You could lose access to the latest drugs and medical advancements - Do you really think that you have this access now?. These decisions are currently being made by the insurance suits, who current limit your access to the latest drugs and medical advancements, unless you want to pay for these “out of plan” costs.

And, of course, higher taxes - This is the only point that he presents as a definite, i.e., it is not prefaced by the words “you could”. When all else fails tell them that they will pay higher taxes. How did that work out for McCain? The only reason that we would pay higher taxes for health care reform would be if the executive and legislative branches did not try to find a way to fund this with cuts elsewhere. This may be a pipe ream but even so, why should we be concerned that we will pay higher taxes for something that is truly needed? Plus isn’t it interesting that we can find a trillion dollars to invade and occupy Iraq but we do not have the money to ensure that the least among us have health care? Where are our priorities Mr. Tanner?

In the paper - 12.25.08

2009-01-04T17:48:00.003-07:00

The one or two of you who read this blog probably already know this but just in case you do not - I can be placed in the “old school” bucket for nearly everything. This includes preferring to read the paper every morning rather than doing the online thing to find out what is going on in the world. This certainly has its disadvantages, the most noteworthy of which is that I receive a single view of the world because I only subscribe to a single newspaper, the Houston Chronicle. However, the Chronicle is a fairly decent paper that offers a good mix of conservative and progressive viewpoints. If the Chronicle were anything like the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review or Washington Times I would probably not subscribe and join the masses online.

Everyday the Chronicle has one or more stories that either puzzle or infuriate me. I intend to start relaying some of them here when I have the time. To begin let’s look at two “nuggets” that were in the Christmas Day edition.

On the front page was a nice article about a pastor who gave $100 to anyone who would use the money to help the less fortunate among us. The article went into the whole sermon part of his message more than I will relay here but let’s just leave it as a church leader trying to encourage members of his congregation to get out there and do some good. (Just a small aside – I was not particularly pleased to see this article on the front page of a Thursday edition of the paper. The Chronicle has a special Religion section that they include every Saturday, where this article should have been placed. But being Christmas I give them a pass on this.) 55 members of his congregation accepted the offer and the article went on to describe some examples of the great things that these folks did. One woman turned the $100 into $36,000 by obtaining donations to help provide clothing for folks in Galveston who lost everything during Hurricane Ike. Others did equally impressive things to make their $100 do a lot more than some of us could imagine.

So, these folks, and all churches who do great things to help the least among us should be commended for their good work. But as I read this article I couldn’t help wondering about the magnitude of assistance that could have been provided to needy folks if churches would have spent the tens of millions that they raised to fight gay marriage on more meaningful projects. Plus the result if the investment would have immediate returns, rather than the intangible and discriminatory "benefits" from preventing two people from making a legal commitment to each other.

The other article was buried on an inside page. This one covered the pardons that Bush has begun to issue. This is a practice that has been going on for a long time and has never passed the smell test for me. But the activities surrounding a specific pardon particularly caught my eye.

On December 23 Bush pardoned a guy who was convicted of illegal storage and disposal of hazardous waste without a permit. But after being provided additional information Bush rescinded the pardon the following day. The article did not editorialize but I am sure that there are people all over the country lauding Bush for reversing his decision once he had more information. My thoughts did not go there, but rather the opposite direction as in “Then why in the hell did he not pull our troops out of Iraq when he learned there were no weapons of mass destruction?” So my takeaway from that article is that Bush has the capacity to do the right thing, (the rescinded pardon) but not always the will (Iraq).

Who will vote for McCain-Palin?

2008-10-29T15:03:00.001-06:00

Have you noticed that the current message from Republican candidates for president and vice president is filled with total crap? Specifically:

Obama wants to impose socialistic values on the US - Well, I hate to break it to you two, but the US is already supported by socialistic values as in, the minimum wage, fair labor practices, Social Security, Medicare, Chrysler bailout, AIG bailout, agriculture subsidies, oil subsidies, etc.

Obama wants to redistribute wealth - Again, this is already in place in the form of taxes. Every time that Congress spends a single dollar they are redistributing our wealth. The most recent example is the $700 bailout of the financial industry.

Obama wants to give a tax break to people who do not pay taxes - Please show me who these people are. Everyone, I repeat, and a bit louder this time, EVERYONE pays taxes, with the only exception being someone who never participates in any form of commerce where money is exchanged for goods and services, i.e. people who live in the wilderness who would not be able to cash a tax refund check anyway.

I guess there must be a large group of people out there who just cannot think for themselves and will believe this stuff. Otherwise why would McCain, Palin, and their surrogates continue to spew this nonsense?

How can anyone vote for these two? I believe that a person who votes for McCain-Palin is either greedy, ignorant, or just not paying attention.

The Greed Group- I can understand that someone making more that $250,000 per year would not want to pay more taxes, and repealing the Bush tax cuts for the rich would certainly make the folks in this group pay more. This group has more basis for their vote than the other two groups and their vote is understandable. But nearly all of these folks are fairly intelligent and should be able to see that continuing the current administration policies is not good for anyone and in the long term will hurt even these greedy bastards.

The Ignorant Group - Where do I start? I have always thought that single-issue voters are stupid. So this includes those whose vote is based on god, gays, guns, etc. Also in this group are all flavors of racists, from those who will not vote for a black person and are not afraid to say so to those who mask it by using such marvelous excuses as not wearing a flag pin, a middle name, inaccurate religious labeling, casual or tangential associations, etc. Then there are those who will just believe anything that McCain or Palin say, like the stuff that I led off this blog post with. Nuff said about that. An finally, the group that pulls the lever, clicks the box, punches the card, etc. in the place for a straight party vote. This is only available in 17 states but it is still a sign of ignorance when a voter chooses this option rather than making a real decision to vote for an actual person.

The Oblivious Group - This is the worst group of all. These people just are not paying attention to what is going on around them. If they were they would see right through McCain’s tactics. They would understand that he is not a person of high character and solid judgment (adulterer, Keating 5, Iraq vote). The whole prisoner of war thing does not make him anymore qualified to lead out military than someone without that experience. As for experience, which he touts as his advantage over Obama, experience in what? With all of that experience in the Senate why did he not ask the questions necessary to make the right vote on Iraq? And the topper is his choice of a running mate. Palin? Palin? Really? Why?

There may be a few folks out there who vote for McCain-Palin that may have legitimate, well-founded reasoning to back up their vote, but I doubt it. Although they would never admit it, nor could I prove it, but I believe that under it all these folks would fall into one of the three groups above.

So, next week, there will be a whole lot of people who vote for McCain-Palin. Even if Obama wins, can we really be that satisfied or energized when we know that there is an enormous number of people in this country who are greedy, ignorant, or oblivious, and are satisfied with themselves? It is not likely that he, or anyone, will be able to get through to these folks.

The positive to come out of all of this? At least the election will be over.

The Conversation III

2008-10-24T08:02:00.002-06:00

Riiiiinng.
Riiiiinng.
Riiiiinng.
Riiiiinng.

W: Hello?

McC: Good morning Mr. President, did I catch you at a bad time?

W: No, not at all. I am just working on my legacy.

McC: How is that going?

W: It is kind of iffy right now, but I am just getting started.

McC: What does it look like so far?

W: Well, here is what I got. I began with a plain sheet of paper, drew a line down the middle to start listing Pros and Cons. So far I have more Cons than Pros.

McC: What is on your lists?

W: On the Pro side I have only one thing, “Got reelected”. On the Con side I have “Iraq, ignored pre-9/11 intelligence report, lied about nation building, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, torture, etc., Halliburton and Blackwater, axis of evil, wouldn’t support Kyoto Treaty, tax cuts to the rich, no energy policy, “Brownie” and Katrina, squandered the surplus, ran up the national debt and the federal deficit, ignored a culture of corruption among GOP (Delay, Abramnoff, etc.), lost respect and support for US from global community, No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug bill, illegal wiretapping, outing Valerie Plame, refusing to fund stem cell research, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, Ridge, Scooter, and numerous other incompetent crony appointees. And that is just on the first page.

McC: Wow, you have a lot of work to do to get some of those into the other column.

W: I have some time left, plus what else do I have to do except watch you and Obama go at it?

McC: That is why I am calling, I need some help with that.

W: Sure John, just tell me where you want me to be and I will get out there and work my magic. Plus I would like to spend some time with that cutie running mate of yours. She really speaks to me.

McC: No, no, that isn’t what I need right now.

W: Then, what can it be? I already got Karl out there with you. He is such a master at the making the frivolous, nonsense seem so important. He even makes some stuff up. Remember South Carolina in 2000?

McC: [sighs] Yes I remember, and because of that I think that you owe me a couple of favors.

W: Sure John. What can I do?

McC: First could you please contact bin Laden and ask him to put out another one of his tapes, this time telling everyone that if Obama is elected that he will attack the US with even greater force than he did in 2001?

W: [laughing uncontrollably]

W: [still laughing]

McC: What was that noise?

W: [still laughing]

W: [finally gaining control] That was me falling out of my chair. I couldn’t help it, I was laughing so hard.

McC: Why?

W: Because you think that I can call bin Laden to make a tape.

McC: Why is that funny? Everyone knows that you were behind the tape that was released right before the election in 2004.

W: Yes, I was. But I don’t have call bin Laden to get a tape. We have a couple of guys that we brought up from Gitmo in the basement of the Pentagon who make all of those tapes.

McC: Really?

W: Oh, c’mon John. Didn’t you know that?

McC: I guess not. So can you get those guys to make a tape?

W: Sure, when do you want it?

McC: NOW! I am dying out here.

W: OK, I will get my guys working on that. You said that you needed two things. What is the other one?

McC: Right. I need you to call that voting machine guy.

W: Consider it done. See you in January.

McC: Thank you Mr. President.

Palin's 3 AM phone call

2008-10-01T04:51:00.004-06:00

Riiiiinng.

Riiiiinng.

Riiiiinng.

Riiiiinng.

[answers, yelling]

"Can't you see that I am breastfeeding here?

[pause, listening]

"No, not Trig, but Bristol 's out-of-wedlock brat, Trojan."

[pause, listening]

"Because she had to go on an overnight field trip with her gun safety class. She could have said 'no' to that, but that word doesn't seem to be in her 17-year old vocabulary. Abstinence, schmabstinence. What are schools teaching these kids nowadays, anyway?"

[pause, listening]

“Oh. That’s right. I just followed the party line to keep winning elections. Maybe we should have been teaching sex education in our schools. Heaven knows I could have used it.

[pause, listening]

“Trojan? Yes, it is an unusual name, like all of my children. Palins have always given their kids names that have personal meaning, like my Track, who is in Iraq, who was born during track season.”

[pause, listening]

“Trojan? Because it will be a daily reminder to her that she not to do it again without one.”

[pause, listening]

“Levi? that slacker. I don’t know where he is. He promised to marry her and disappeared into the North Country. What kind of name is Levi? Did they leave their jeans on?”

[pause, listening, still laughing]

“No, leave him alone. He probably wouldn’t be a good influence on Trojan anyway. Say, what did you want?

[pause, listening]

“Where?

[pause, listening, looking confused]

“Never heard of it. Have I ever been there?”

[pause, listening, getting hot]

“Listen smartass. I have too much to do with four kids running around here to be gallivanting around the world talking to people that I can't understand."

[pause, listening]

“I know it’s my job but I am a mother first. This other stuff will have to wait a few years, until I get a few more of them into the Army.”

[pause, listening]

“Hell no, they aren’t smart enough to go to college. I just barely got through myself after finding the “right” school, if you know what I mean, and have you ever seen their father? Listen we need to wrap this up. I need to shift Trojan to the other nipple. So what did Crapistan do?”

[pause, listening, then hot again]

“Don’t correct me. I’m the president. You guys didn’t correct W all of the time did you?”

[pause, listening, then in a sing-song mocking tone, repeating the answer]

“’At least he knew the name of foreign countries’. Well big deal. Could he see one of these ‘foreign countries’ from Texas?”

[pause, listening]

“Mexico doesn’t count. They have never been a threat to us.”

[pause, listening]

“They were? A war? When?

[pause, listening]

“Hmmm. I didn’t know that. Let’s get back to now.

[pause, listening]

"Aw, fuck ‘em, nuke the bastards, I'm going to be saved because of that rapture stuff that I signed up for at church. See you in the morning, and don't call here again unless it's REALLY important!"

[slams phone down on the night stand, Trojan starts crying.]

"Shhhhh, don't cry. Grandma has to run the country once in a while."

I Want a Voice Part 7 – The Texas Primary Lessons Learned

2008-08-21T16:07:00.002-06:00

Looking back on the whole thing I have to say that I am glad to have taken part in the process. I am still not sure what part, if any that I played in the whole Texas Two Step, as our primary process has been dubbed. What I know is this:

· The method by which Texas selects the delegates it sends to the national conventions is extremely flawed and not at all democratic. The one person one vote idea does not exist and while folks will parrot the party line that everyone has equal access to the primary and caucus, they certainly do not.

· I have no idea how any of the calculations are made to determine the number of delegates that each candidate is awarded as a result of the voting and caucusing. I am sure that somebody somewhere knows but even after being through the process all the way up to the state convention it is not clear how the numbers that are eventually derived for delegate assignment to the national convention are determined. Although I have no proof and everything may be easily explained by someone “in the know”, I suspect that this process is intentionally vague to permit the party leadership to do just about anything that they wish, regardless of the outcome of the primary/caucus voting.

· Delegates to the state convention are assured repeatedly that they have an important role to play and must make every effort to attend the convention. Aside from showing up and being counted as having been there I had no discernable impact on anything. Plus I do not think that my showing up was really that significant.

· My guess is that the Democratic leaders wanted everyone there for fundraising. Attendance at all of the “can’t miss” receptions, dinners, and events always required a fairly expensive donation disguised as a cover charge or fee.

· All of the events, from the caucus through the state convention were very poorly managed. Very little advanced thought or preparation appeared to go into any of these disasters. The worst was the state convention. There is absolutely no excuse for any of this. Except for the caucus they knew in advance the number of attendees and still did not spend the time or effort to prepare. They also do not get a totally free pass on the caucus because the large turnout during the early voting should have been a clue that there would be larger than normal numbers at the caucuses. The Democrats need to spend some of those donations on a professional conference organizer who can manage large groups of people.

· After the state convention I received a number of email messages asking me to for donations that would be used to send the alternate delegate from our district to the national convention. We were told at the meetings before the national convention that the estimated cost to attend the national convention was between $3,500 and $6,000. I am not sure why this is so steep but numerous officials assured us that this was an accurate estimate. I found these multiple requests for donations extremely annoying. Anyone who could not afford to either foot this bill or take out a loan to do so should not have run for this position. Needless to say I did not send her a donation.

· This experience reinforced my lifelong commitment to maintaining independence from any political party. The Democratic Party is an extremely disorganized and dysfunctional group of people. After taking a peek on the inside of their act I want nothing to do with anything remotely associated with them. I tire quickly and easily of their “we-they” rhetoric that is spewed constantly. They seem no better than the Republicans in this regard. Their processes seem only to be designed to get Democrats elected and not to make anything better for the people of this country. I guess we will have to live with this until the country wises up and eliminates the stranglehold that the two parties have on politics in this country. Based on how they have stacked the deck against third parties I do not see this changing in my lifetime. Hopefully future generations will wise up and change this system.

So, OK, I am still an Obama supporter. But my enthusiasm is dwindling as we get closer and closer to Election Day. His changing position on various issues is making him appear to be just like another politician. I am losing confidence that anything will change if he is elected. We all know that McCain will be four more years of what we have now so I cannot vote for him. So I guess it is Obama, for now.

I Want a Voice Part 6 – The Texas State Democratic Convention

2008-08-21T15:49:00.002-06:00

The big day arrived and I opted to get up early a drive to Austin to get there well before the registration began so that I could secure a parking place near the convention center. We were told that parking would be extremely limited on the first day of the convention because it fell on a work day. I left at 3:00 AM, took my time and arrived a little before 6:00 AM. I had breakfast at the Marriott where I talked to four delegates from a district that spans from San Antonio to El Paso. They told me that they attended the $50 reception the previous night and were extremely disappointed. There was no food other than horrible little appetizers and they offered a cash bar. Out of the each delegate's $50 the party probably pocketed $49.50.

I arrived at the convention center a little before 7:00 AM and there were extremely long lines waiting to get into the ballrooms where the credentials were distributed. Once in the ballroom things move fairly quickly. I found our senate district booth and registered. I was told that we would need photo ID but no one asked me for it. Things there seemed very disorganized with some folks not listed on their rosters. They seemed to be able to resolve this somehow, legitimately I hope, because otherwise anyone could have walked in there and become a delegate.

At that point there was nothing to do until 9:00 AM when the individual sessions began except to walk around the exhibit floor. In this area there were booths set up just like you would see at a trade show but most not more than a table with folks standing behind them. There I found a bunch of vendors selling a lot of worthless junk like pins, t-shirts, and other paraphernalia. There were also booths there from special interests. A few energy companies were there giving away those new efficient light bulbs. I picked up some of these, had my picture taken with a cardboard cutout of Obama, and received a free t-shirt with a picture of Tom Delay behind bars on the back with the caption “Put the Hammer in the Slammer”. I also purchased a deck of playing cards for $5.00 from a couple of enterprising young men who had created the deck called Gay, Really Straight, Republican Hypocrites Playing Cards. For the most part this area of the convention was a waste of time.

The Obama campaign had a presence on the exhibit floor giving away buttons and bumper stickers, only one to each person. The Clinton campaign elected to set up shop outside across the street from the convention center under a large tent. I did not wander over there but assumed that they were selling stuff there. I am not sure why they were not inside other than out of courtesy to Obama, since she had dropped out of the race a few days before. Given the personality of the candidate I do not think this is a likely explanation, but I have no other and I did not think about asking, because I really didn’t care.

After my visit to the exhibits I perused the schedule of sessions to determine which ones to attend. Wow, what a selection, and also what a mess. There were 45 sessions. Here is a partial list to give you an idea of what they offered:

· Gun Owners Caucus
· Progressive Hispanic Caucus
· Texas Military Veterans
· Black Caucus
· Pro-Choice, Pro-Prevention
· UAW caucus
· Motorcycle Caucus
· Texas Muslim Democratic Caucus

These were scheduled from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM, with varying lengths from one hour to two and one half hours. The schedule looked like it was established by that room of 100 typing monkeys. It was impossible for a delegate to attend more than a few events because these session overlapped and where there was not overlap there was no break between sessions to permit one to get to sessions on time. This extensive lineup of sessions should have been offered over a two to three day duration with some sessions duplicated across that time to permit more delegates to attend the more popular ones.

I decided to attend the following sessions:

· Single Payer Universal Healthcare – 9:00 AM to 11:00 AM
· Challenging the Religious Right: Restoring Faith in Texas – 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM
· Democrats Against the Death Penalty – 12:00 PM to 1:30 PM

I expected to miss some of the second and third sessions due to no break between them but I expected to make it to the first one on time. My expectations were soon revised as I could not find the room for the Single Payer Universal Healthcare session. It was listed as being in a room on Level 3 of the convention center. So I took the escalator from the first to the second level, got on the next escalator that took me to the fourth level. I look around and down and verify that there is indeed a third level but cannot determine how to get there. I check the convention brochure, which lists the floor plans for the first, second, and fourth levels. There is no mention of reference to a third level except in the session schedule.

I went back down to the first level and found a convention center employee and asked for directions. He asked why I need to go to that level, I told him, and he said that the third level is normally used for storage so the general public access is very limited. The only way to get there is by going all the around the convention center to the back set of stairs, or take the elevator located near there.

Single Payer Universal Healthcare

I arrive late for this session but so did a whole lot of other delegates. I was glad that I made the effort to attend this session because I knew nothing about single-payer healthcare and what I learned opened my eyes. This appears to be the only sensible solution to our healthcare problem in America. Many other countries have employed this approach with very successful results. For example the costs to insure everyone in this country can be reduced dramatically under this system because the overhead to manage the plan drops from 27% to 3%. None of the myths about the government choosing your doctors, or not being able to receive timely care are true. The key component is the elimination of the monolithic insurance companies and centralizing all payments under a single, non-profit entity. There is a lot more to this than that and too much to recount here. The bottom line is that there are enormous out-of-pocket savings to both the employees and employers and we should be moving very quickly to adopt this system.

Challenging the Religious Right: Restoring Faith in Texas

I made it to this session late and was able to sneak in to the back row next to the wall with an empty seat beside me to stow my stuff. It was hot in this room and I immediately added my sport jacket to the pile of stuff on the seat beside me.
As good as the previous session was, this one was bad. There were two speakers, unrecognizable state or US congressmen. Both of these guys spent their time talking about themselves and telling unfunny jokes. At no time during the forty or so minutes that I suffered through did they once mention the topic, even though the moderator had assured us that they were there to provide insight on what they have been doing to stop the religious right from taking over the government.
I had had about enough when someone taps me on the shoulder and asks if anyone is sitting in the seat beside me. This seat is piled up with computer bag, a bag full of worthless stuff given to candidates, a book, and my sport jacket. I look at her like she is crazy, mentally noting the clusters of the empty seats around the room. She persists so I gather all of my stuff, step over the back of the seat while muttering profanities, loud enough for her to hear but not disruptive to the room.

Democrats Against the Death Penalty

Because I extracted myself early from the previous, worthless session I was able to make it to this one on time. Good thing too, because this was standing room only a full ten minutes before it started. I have always been anti death penalty and this session reinforced my stance.
The first speaker was a chaplain who spent a lot of years in Huntsville where all of the “legal” murders take place in Texas. His change from being a death penalty facilitator to being totally opposed to it is recounted in a book and documentary film. He shared some of this transformation with us.
The next speaker was a mother of a death penalty victim who after being killed in Huntsville was cleared of guilt. This was an extremely emotional presentation. She is now devoting her life to educating people about the horrors of this barbaric ritual of ours.

At 1:30 PM I was free until 3:00 PM when the senate district caucus convened. There was nothing provided at any time in the form of food or drink. The only thing that I purchased in the convention center was a cup of tea before the Single Payer Universal Healthcare session for $3.00. I cannot remember ever paying that much anywhere for a single cup of tea. From that I surmised that everything sold inside the convention center was overly inflated, so I looked for a place to eat outside.

One good thing about the location of the convention center is the abundance of restaurants nearby. I chose Pei Wei and as expected it was extremely crowded. As I was giving the hostess my name two people were being led to their table. The hostess was apologizing that it was a table for six to which they replied that they would be OK if they seated others there. I immediately spoke up and said that I would eat with them if they did not mind and as a result was able to jump ahead of the crowd and be seated immediately. These folks were great company. They recently retired and moved to the “hill country” to be near their grandchildren. They had some fascinating stories and I would have liked to spend more time with them

I returned to the convention center to attend my senate district caucus. When I arrived at the designated room I found the place in a state of semi-managed chaos. This was a very large ballroom that had two distinct groups huddling on opposite sides of the room. I was soon to learn that there were two different senate districts in the room and that they were trying to determine the number of delegates who had not shown up in order to promote alternates to the open positions. As usual there seemed to be no organization or process. A whole lot of people were crowded around the ones who seemed to be in charge of this. They spent a long time doing trying to sort out this mess, a task that should have been completed before anyone arrived. When they finally finished out the circus began.

Both senate district groups tried to conduct business simultaneously. The other group gained control of the single microphone so they had an easier time of getting things going. After several minutes of our guys trying to shout over the other group’s leadership they had a pow-wow and agreed that they would share the microphone and the business of the groups would be conducted alternately, i.e., the first group would elect their chairperson, then the second group would elect theirs, back and forth until all elections were completed.

The process followed Roberts Rules of Order, I think, whereby the floor was opened for nominees, delegates were nominated, each nominee was given an opportunity to introduce themselves, and nominations were closed. The delegates voted by raising their badge when each name was called. When the votes were too close to visually determine a winner the procedure was repeated only this time the badges were held up until a couple of the alternates walked around counting the raised badges. As they counted they either pointed at you or touched you which was the signal that you were to lower your badge. There were several instances on both sides of the room when this “verification” was necessary.

During this process I could not help to think that here we are, selecting leadership positions and, eventually, delegates to the national convention. These folks will make a contribution to either how the party operates or who the party formally nominates as a candidate for president. And here we are with these goofballs running around counting raised badges. There were no checks and balances to determine if anyone voted twice, or if everyone who was voting was indeed eligible to vote. It was a process that was hard to take seriously, no matter how hard that I tried.

I didn’t know any of the people who were “running” for all of these official positions. We were not given any information about them other than their 10-second introductions after they were nominated. So how was one supposed to be able to make an informed choice? After about five of these votes I just stopped raising my badge and sat back and watched this “democratic” fiasco. A few of us got a lot of laughs about how seriously some of these folks were taking such a ridiculous process. A quick aside – CSPAN recently asked callers to respond to the question, “Should the media provide more or less convention coverage?” Now they were referring to the national conventions, but I after what I went through in Austin I have no confidence that the national convention is run any differently than this one. So for all of those folks who responded that they want to see everything that goes on at a national convention, trust me, you really do not. Any confidence that you may have in the democratic process would be lost and you would be hitting the remote to look for anything except the convention coverage.

The most humorous item to note during this mess was the “election” of a position, the title of which I do not remember. It was obvious from the start that everyone who was elected to any position, committee, etc., would be Obama delegates, due to the two to one delegate advantage that they had over the Clinton delegates in our state senate district. One of the Clinton delegates was nominated and when it was her turn to address the group she made a passionate plea. She stated that all of the preceding positions were filled with Obama delegates and that we should show the world that the party is ready to come together. To demonstrate this we should elect a Clinton delegate, her, to this position. There were a lot of snickers in the crowd. She received about five votes. When she saw this she stormed off the stage like a little girl, before the vote was completed, and without congratulating the winner, an Obama delegate, of course.

It was nearing 6:00 PM and we were not even close to completing the business of our district. We were going to have to come back after the general session to finish things. After all that I had seen during that day, I decided that I really had no purpose there. I wasn’t voting for anyone and the only votes that I really wanted to cast were for two people that I wanted to see elected as delegates to the national convention. There was nothing to gain from the general session either on Friday or Saturday, so I decided that I would not be staying the night and called the hotel to cancel my reservation.

After we adjourned we all went downstairs to attend the general session. Each district was assigned a seating area and ours was decently placed, in the middle of the room and not too far back. I went to that area to sit with my fellow delegates and these folks were too goofy for me to put up with, i.e., they were whooping it up, waving signs, and doing the stuff that you would expect after seeing the same kind of thing on TV during the national convention. I just did not have the patience for this so I opted to sit way back where anyone from the general public was assigned seating. There was absolutely no one in these sections aside from a few delegates like me who did not want to put up with the nonsense in the front of the hall.

Sitting next to me was a guy reading the book “The Last Lecture”. I asked him if he was enjoying the book and he said yes. He went on to tell me that the book had added significance because he had been diagnosed that week with an untreatable form of cancer. I felt my body go limp as I searched for something to say. He noticed my discomfort and assured me that all is well. He had had a good life up to then and had no complaints. He was resigned to live out his few remaining months in a positive fashion and no one should feel sorry for him.

I was stunned and paid little attention to the goings on during the beginning of the general session. Had we not been required to stand I probably would not have noticed the ridiculous benediction that was given by some female pastor. Yes I would because of all of the noise that this generated. She was raising her voice in prayer and praise while many of those in the congregation shouted hallelujahs and amens. This was truly not the time or place for this but I guess we should expect more and more of this as we permit our leaders to tear down the church/state wall.

the brief conversation with the guy reading "The Last Lecture" was quite sobering and led me to the conclusion that I had to get away from the nonsense going on in the convention hall.

After the obligatory stuff was over it was announced that a certain committee must meet immediately to transact business. I do not remember the name of this committee, but it was one for which we had just elected a representative. The speaker asked that everyone who was a member of the committee to leave the hall immediately and proceed to a specific location. I recognized this as my chance to make a quick and graceful exit. No one would know that I was not a member of this committee and I could be on my way home to Houston before the first speaker had completed his remarks. So I was gone.

As it turns out I didn’t miss a thing, except voting for the national convention delegates. The two people that I wanted to vote for won anyway, so my vote was not missed. I missed a bunch of rah-rah Democrat stuff and an appearance by Chelsea Clinton. Really. Chelsea was there, for what purpose I do not know. I cannot believe that a person with such insignificance was given the time to talk. These guys must have been desperate for a name because Hillary and Barack, though invited, did not attend either day of the convention.

So what looked like a 3-4 day affair turned into one very long day.

I Want a Voice Part 5 – Preparing for the Texas State Democratic Convention

2008-08-21T15:37:00.002-06:00

A few weeks after the state senatorial district convention I attended a general meeting for the delegates from our district. This was to be an organizational meeting to familiarize us with what to expect at the state convention and make the necessary logistical preparations to attend. At this meeting we were told that most of the hotel rooms were already booked and that they would be working to secure alternate lodging. This did not affect me because the day after agreeing to go to the state convention I booked a room for four days, June 5-8. I was all set.

The process for applying to be a delegate for the national convention was presented. Anyone wishing to be considered must complete a form, have it notarized, and mail it to the state committee by May 21. I was considering doing this because I figured I had come this far in the process so why not. And, to be perfectly honest, I did not mind doing any of this, aside from being extremely annoyed at the total disorganization throughout, because I wanted to see how all of this worked and possibly be a part of a fairly historic event.

We were told that our district would receive a total of four delegates, two for each candidate, and a single alternate for the national convention. The delegates would be split evenly, two for each candidate. This didn’t seem correct because coming out of our district convention Obama had roughly twice as many delegates than Clinton. When questioned about this we were told that this factored in the primary votes, that two-thirds thing that I mentioned earlier. So what this really meant was that it did not matter how many delegates showed up at the district convention, the number that was going to be sent to the national convention was already set. It makes sense that the split would come out that way if there were a lot of other precincts that encountered the same Clinton no-showitis as ours. As it turned out the only impact any of this had was on the voting for district party positions, which, I think, went all to Obama supporters, but I am getting ahead of myself.

We were still confused about where the other delegates that were going to the state convention were. You know, the ones represented by the primary vote. We were told that there were no other delegates. All of the delegates that go to the state convention are chosen by the delegates that attend the district conventions. Because they factor their votes into the national convention delegate split it all comes out in the wash, so to speak. I am still a bit confused by all of this, but the system seems to be designed to give a small group of party members all of the power while giving the entire party the illusion that they have some input in the process. The bottom line is that if you do not attend a precinct caucus and get involved in the process as a delegate you never see any of this and have no idea how all of this works. Heck, I did get involved and it is still murky.

So I am sitting there considering my chances of landing one of spots that would permit me to attend the national convention in Denver. My chances are dwindling because two of the five must go to a Clinton supporter. Then they tell us that the delegates must have equal gender distribution and that a coin flip determined that the alternate spot must be female. There is a single position available to all of the male Obama delegates. I determine that I have about as much chance of being elected to that spot as being struck by lightening. All of the Obama delegates want to go to the national convention, I am sure. I opt not to file any paperwork for a national convention delegate candidacy.

The other information that we received was about the convention schedule. The event was to kick off at a reception on the evening of Thursday, June 6. This event limited the number of who could attend and would cost $50.00. This seemed strange. Here are people spending their own time and money to attend this convention and not only do they charge for the welcoming reception, they limit the number of attendees that can participate. I crossed this off this list, thereby saving me an unnecessary night in the hotel on Wednesday. Because they said at the district convention that the state convention would be held June 6-8, I assumed that it would start the morning of June 6 and it would be necessary to be there the night before, but it turns out that it was not.

The first mandatory activity that we had to attend was the sign-in to pick up our credentials. This was to begin at 7:00 or 7:30 AM, this was never really clear. We were all very hopeful that it was not managed the same way as at the district convention.

The next thing discussed was the Blue-Star Breakfast, another limited seating event that cost $35.00 to attend. I considered this for awhile until they told us it was sold out. They wasted our time telling us all about this because these are political wonks who eat this stuff up and believe that we all want to be sniffing around at these events like they do. This appeared to be a waste so I mentally opted out of this.

A list of special interest caucuses, meetings, and presentations was discussed. These were to begin at 9:00 AM and run until 1:30 PM. You could pick any or none of these sessions to attend. But it was essential that we attend the 3:00 PM district caucus. That is where all of the elections would take place for committees, officers, and national convention delegates.

So, looking at all of this I really did not have to be there until sometime before 3:00 PM on Friday to register and get to the district caucus. I could get there earlier to do some stuff but had nothing requiring me to do so.

A general session is to follow the district caucus and again on Saturday morning.

After a bunch of rah-rah-let’s-put-Democrats-in-power antics they opened it up for questions. I asked if any of the expenses that we incur to attend the state convention are tax deductible. No they are not. Hmmm. All of these people from all walks of life spend their time and resources to move candidates through the process and do it all on their own dime. Yet huge companies through their PACs and executive donors can contribute large sums of money that is tax deductible. What’s wrong with this picture?

So I analyzed the situation and determined that I could really get away with only spending one night in Austin if I drive back after the convention ends on Saturday. When I got home I changed my reservation to a one-night stay on Friday night.

After that, two meetings were scheduled for the Obama delegates from my state senate district. The first one I was unable to attend, but I was able to make it to the second one. This was another waste of time, at least for me it was. The meeting started 30 minutes late and was marred with unnecessary minutia like what color the dots would be on the credential badges that would distinguish a Clinton delegate from an Obama delegate. There may have been meaningful business transacted or valuable information shared after I left at the scheduled end time. They did not appear even close to finishing anytime soon so I decided to make better use of my time.

During the time leading up to the state convention I received numerous emails and phone calls asking me if I would be attending the convention. Each time I answered in the affirmative and expected that after the second or third one these calls and messages would stop. But they just kept coming. I wrote this off as yet another example of the party’s total disorganization.

At some point during this period I was asked to be the Democratic chairman for my precinct. I explained that I was not currently a Democrat and would not be the best person for this job. I left the door open by telling them that I would consider it if they could not find anyone else to do the job. I was nearly ready to “drink their Kool-aid”.

I Want a Voice Part 4 – The Texas State Senatorial District Convention

2008-07-11T09:57:00.000-06:00

At the conclusion of our caucus the delegates and alternates were told that they would receive information about the time and location of the state senatorial district convention, to be held on March 29. Two weeks went by and I received nothing. I contacted the caucus secretary who was to receive all of this information from the caucus chairperson. No information was received from the chairperson. Voice mail and email messages received no return calls or messages. So, all information that we received was after contacting the Texas state party office directly. We were told the location and that registration for credentials would begin at 7:00 AM. No other details were provided.

I arrived shortly before seven and got in line. Ahead of me were at least 1,000 people, maybe more. People were milling around searching for other members of their precinct. Some precincts were more organized than others, having large signs made to gather all of their delegates in one place. Ours was not organized at all and it was only by luck that the five Obama delegates found each other. The caucus secretary made a small sign with our precinct number on it and walked the length of the line to find other delegates from our precinct. She returned with one person, a Clinton alternate.

The six of us stood there quite puzzled that there were not more delegates from our precinct there, especially me expecting a total of 39 delegates, there could have been 78 if all delegates and alternates showed up. I found out later that this convention was only for the caucus delegates, so the most that we could see there were 26 from our precinct, 13 delegates and 13 alternates. We figured that once we got inside the arena we would find the others.

Things seemed quite disorganized, as they were at the caucus. We stood in line outside for two hours, the line never moved. At 9:00 AM we were all moved inside and told to sit in the area marked with our precinct sign. Good, we thought, this will help us find the other delegates and alternates from our precinct. One of us walked up and down all of the bleacher steps and did not find our precinct sign. So we just found an empty place and sat down.

Nothing happened for quite awhile. I do not remember how long it was before they finally figured out how to get us registered. I was told much later that there was a lot of stupid stuff going on behind the scenes that contributed to this long delay. More on that later.

Finally, they carried in a number of long tables and placed them at each end of the floor, placing a number on each table. Someone explained that we would be called by precinct to a specific table to sign in and receive our credentials. At that time we figured we would be united with the other delegates from our precinct.

This was a long process. We waited for hours to be called and when our turn arrived we went to the table and signed in. This process was similar to the one at the caucus, except that our names were already on the sign-in sheet. All that we had to do was indicate our candidate preference and indicate if we were handicapped, under 35 years old, black, Hispanic, or homosexual. I asked the person behind the table if I had to answer these questions and she said no. Long pause and when I realized that she was not going to say anything else I asked her why they were collecting the information. The reason is for the party to ensure that all of these groups would be represented at the state convention. This seemed reasonable so I answered the questions.

When we were finished we went back to our spot in the bleachers. There were still only six of us. No additional delegates or alternates signed in. We speculated on what would be next an agreed that one or more of us would be voted to attend the state convention. Seeing that he was outnumbered the Clinton alternate decided that there was no reason to stay so he left. I am not sure that he would have had a vote anyway because he was not a delegate. He should have been elevated to delegate when no other Clinton delegates arrived, but this seemed to be missing from this process. Plus he would have left anyway.

So we sat there for awhile longer until a person on the loudspeaker asked us to identify ourselves so that one of our delegates could find us. This person, a Clinton delegate arrived extremely late, which was smart on her part because she did not miss anything.

Throughout all of this waiting we were treated to campaign speeches by numerous politicians, including Sheila Jackson Lee, a Clinton superdelegate, who was nearly booed out of the place. This went on and on, I guess to keep us somewhat entertained as they tried to complete the registration process.

Finally at 3:45 PM everyone was registered and they had determined how many delegates would need to be chosen for the state convention from each precinct. We were told that the delegate count for the entire senatorial district was split 1,101 for Obama and 445 for Clinton. A representative from each precinct was asked to come to a table set up in the middle of the floor to receive a packet of instructions. This turned out to be a free for all. There was no organization, naturally, and no thought put into this process because it about 45 minutes for our representative to retrieve our packet.

When she returned we learned that we needed to elect one delegate and one alternate to attend the state convention in Austin, to be held on June 5-7. No one stepped up to volunteer so I agreed to do it so that we could get out of there. It was going on 5:00 PM and it had been a long day. I was very hungry because the only thing available was a snack bar that served nachos and popcorn, for which I opted to pass. A person agreed to be the alternate, we filled out the necessary paperwork and we finally got out of there at a little past 5 o’clock.

To sum it up, I spent 10 hours on a beautiful Saturday to sign a registration form and fill in a delegate information form. The total time of actually participating in this process was no more than 10 minutes.

During the time leading up to the state convention I learned that some shenanigans were occurring that contributed to this long day. A person who is a real motivated IT person got involved to help automate the process for the state senatorial district convention. She entered all of the delegates and alternates that were elected at each precinct caucus to create the forms that we signed. On the day of our convention some persons associated with the party, I do not know what authority they had or if they were part of a committee or what, went through the lists and started crossing off names, indicating that they did not want certain people involved. The IT person stepped up and said that this was illegal and got party leadership to put a stop to this practice.

So the folks who tried to eliminate certain delegates decided that the sign-in sheets would be used as a reference document. Each delegate and alternate would have to write this same information on a separate piece of paper and place it in a ballot box type of container. This is what was happening at 7:00 AM. They were letting people into the arena a few at a time to do this. It was taking a long time and when party leadership determined that this was quite inefficient they scrapped it for the direct sign-in on the sign-in sheets. It turns out that the folks who implemented the separate page system were going to eliminate the same folks that they had crossed off the lists by tossing out the separate pages that contained these folks information. This does not give me a lot of confidence that any of this stuff is being executed using a fair and equitable process. I can’t say that I am at all surprised.

So, what happened to all of the Clinton delegates? After all, had they shown up there would have been Clinton delegate sent to the state convention from our precinct instead of one supporting Obama. Our caucus secretary was told that after only six of us signed in they somehow investigated and determined that the seven missing delegates were Republicans. How this was determined I do not know, but that is what they claimed. If this is really true then the Rush Limbaugh suggestion to Republicans to cross over and vote for Clinton did occur on our precinct. This seems plausible because I was totally shocked at the number of people who showed up for our caucus. My precinct is extremely blue, being predominately white, rich and old. Even though I possess two of those characteristics I continue to maintain independence from either party. However, by agreeing to be a delegate at the state Democratic convention I was teetering very close to losing my independence.

I Want a Voice Part 3 – The Texas Primary/Caucus

2008-07-07T13:57:00.000-06:00

It has been a long time since the second installment of this series where I try to describe ways to improve our “democratic” process to give everyone at least the feeling that they have a small voice in their government. This one was supposed to be about campaigns, but I am going to place that one on an indefinite hold and document my recent experience with the Texas primary/caucus process. The experience that voters receive here is certainly the poster child for a movement to standardize the nomination process for candidates running for national offices.

Where to start? OK, primary voting begins with early voting two weeks before the designated Tuesday for the general voting. Early voting is accommodated in a comparatively small number of locations. At any of these locations any registered voter, from any precinct, can vote provided that they provide proof of identification with a voter registration card or other accepted form that they can validate. This practice is in place for all primary elections and general elections. Voters who do not vote at one of the early voting locations must vote at their designated polling location on the scheduled Election Day.

Let’s stop there and examine this a bit. Early voting is a good idea and should be in place throughout the country. Is two weeks enough? In some cases probably not and I would suggest making it a full month. But two weeks is a whole lot better than nothing so if that became the standard everywhere it would be a major improvement, expanding the democratic process out to more people than it avails itself to now.

On Election Day, March 4 this year, a voter must vote at their designated precinct. Why? I suppose that there could be a good reason for this by those administering the process, but I see no need not to continue the process already established in the early voting locations. A person should be able to vote anywhere, thereby giving him or her added flexibility to make it to a polling station. This would permit one who leaves for work before the polls open and returns after they close to go out at lunch to the nearest polling location and vote. We have proven technology that is used for early voting that should be used on Election Day.

I voted early in the 2008 primary as I always do for general elections. I have never voted in a primary until this year, because I do not wish to be registered with either of the major parties. For the record I am still not registered in either party because Texas, unlike Pennsylvania, my previous state of residence, does not require a party, or no party, designation as a voter registration requirement. Actually, if the system were entirely fair there would be no voter registration, much less a party designation in some states.

In Texas all you have to do is tell the person validating your registration at the polling place in which primary you want to vote. This is another ridiculous requirement because if this were truly a democratic process anyone should be able to vote for anyone in a primary regardless of party. For example, I should be able to vote to nominate the best person for the job, which cannot always be the person in one or the other parties.

Back to my primary vote. I voted in the primary this year because, for the first time in a long time, I was actually inspired by a candidate and felt that I should do my part to try to get him nominated. So I voted and followed the news about the huge early voting turnout, during which time I learned that primary voting was only a part of the process. A caucus is also held after the primary voting concludes. Huh? Yes, two thirds of the delegates are purportedly determined through the primary vote and the other third comes from the caucus. If this seems pretty stupid to you, rest assured, it is.

The caucus begins after the poll closes and after the last vote is cast. Those in line to vote when the poll closes are permitted to vote thereby delaying the beginning of the caucus session. Our caucus began at about 30 minutes after the scheduled poll closing. Caucuses are convened for the two parties in separate rooms. Our room was a small chapel in a retirement home, which designed to accommodate 30 or 40 people. 81 voters who voted in the Democratic primary from our precinct showed up. The precinct chair person did not show up so one of the persons who was overseeing the poll took on the responsibility.

After reading the instructions given to her in an envelope full of papers she determined that the first order of business was to elect a caucus chairperson. We all agreed that she should just do it so she did. Next was the need to elect a caucus secretary. The chair person, a Clinton supporter, suggested person who was also working at the polling station who was an Obama supporter to ensure that the process was fair. We all agreed and that was done.

Each of us had to sign in on a preprinted form, filling our name, address, voter ID number and candidate preference. It seemed going into this process and even during the reading of the instructions that everyone had to show proof that they voted in the primary by providing the ticket that you are given at the polling station. No one at the early voting polling station told us to keep these tickets for the caucus, but I had kept mine because I put it into my wallet and had not thrown it away yet.

Well there were people without the tickets to prove that they had voted and also people who did not know their voter registration number. For all of these folks a validation was to occur after everyone signed in and before any other business could begin. There was a delay, but I have no confidence that any of this validation occurred. For one thing no one asked to see my, or anyone’s ticket. And it did not seem like anyone there was able to do any kind of validation. But the caucus continued.

When the last person signed in the sheets were tallied and the chairperson announced that there were 81 voters in our caucus, 48 for Clinton and 32 for Obama. I immediately said wait a minute, you are missing one. Neither the chairperson or secretary knew what I was talking about so I had to explain that 48 and 32 do not add up to 81. So they recounted and determined that the total for Obama was actually 33.

Based on some magic number unknown to anyone there our caucus was to receive 13 delegates to be sent to the state senatorial convention on March 29. This may have been determined by the number of votes cast in the primary, but I really doubt that these numbers were available to us. If they were I highly suspect their accuracy. But no matter, we had marching orders to split the 13 delegates based on the numbers of those at the caucus who supported each candidate. That resulted in eight Clinton delegates and five Obama delegates.

Since the Obama supporters were the smaller group they were asked to leave the room and caucus in the hall, which we did. The only thing that needed accomplished was to elect five delegates and five alternates to attend the convention. This was a very simple process in that the caucus secretary asked if anyone wanted to do it. We all said that she should and three others volunteered. No one else volunteered so I did so that we could get out of there. It had been a long night of a lot of sitting around doing nothing and I wanted to get out of there. The five delegates were set and five alternates were “elected” in a similar fashion. After we exchanged phone numbers and email addresses the caucus concluded.

So, based on my knowledge thus far there would be 13 of us going to the state senatorial convention, where I anticipated that there would be 39 total delegates from my precinct, one third from the caucus and two thirds from the primary. I was wrong.

Hillary - A Special Problem

2008-06-02T12:57:00.003-06:00

So I am reading a book that I obtained from bookmooch.com (This is an absolutely excellent book trading site). It is an older (2001) Chris Matthews book, "Now, Let Me Tell You What I Really Think" and I was reading a chapter while waiting for an Obama state delegate meeting to begin when I read this:

"Hillary Clinton is a special problem. She and her crowd see themselves as a guardian class. They see their mission as molding American life according to some grand design. Down here on planet earth we get to join Hillary's health "cooperatives." She expects us to cheer her as she gets to choreograph things from above.

There's an arrogance there. It's one people can smell, and they don't like it."

I do not think that anyone can say it any better than that. These are words he wrote seven years ago and are spot on today.

Cautious Discretion?

2007-08-27T13:07:00.000-06:00

Not long ago the City of Houston began installing red light cameras to record the identity of the cars running red lights. This was met with an uproar from folks whose arguments against the installation of these cameras included invasion of privacy and an unnecessary money grab by the city. There were others, most of which that fell into a category of exceptions, for example “What if someone else is driving my car?”, and “What happens if I am in a funeral procession?”. Without going into detail, none of the arguments against had enough merit to prevent the installation of the cameras, which currently total 50, located at the intersections where the most collisions have occurred in the past.

I was, and still am, a strong supporter of these cameras. I see this as an extremely positive use of technology that will make driving in Houston safer, free the HPD to concentrate on more pressing issues, and generate additional revenue for the city. All good things, I think.

Initially the cameras were to focus capturing those cars who proceeded through an intersection after the light had turned red. A ticket is sent to the owner of the vehicle based on the license number captured by the camera. The fine is $75.00 and the citation is not reported to those in charge of attaching points to the driver’s license.

Last week it was announced that the cameras use will be expanded to also capture cars turning right on red without first coming to a complete stop. Predictably there are folks who object to this use of the technology. One such objection appeared in the August 26 Houston Chronicle’s letters section. Here it is:

“Police wrong to cite cautious

I thought the idea behind traffic police was to give citations to those who drove around recklessly, flouting the laws. The recent news about police giving citations for making rolling stops when making a right turn on a red light is oppressive in the extreme (see the Chronicle’s Aug. 22 Page One article, “Red-light camera law may soon get stricter/ Illegal turns - such as slowing to go right on red - would be ticketed”).

To cite those drivers who use cautious discretion when turning right at an intersection is blatant exploitation of a new technology in an effort to generate revenue.

Welcome, good citizens, to 1984.

R. Belkin
Houston”

So we see several things in that letter; the writer has no concept of what extreme oppression is (the Patriot Act must have this person near suicidal), the writer thinks that breaking traffic laws are permitted under the guise of “cautious discretion”, and he is another of those who object to the city generating revenue from income stemming from fines levied to those who disregard traffic laws.

The first and third are extremely ridiculous, so much so that any person with half a brain can see that the writer has some serious problems with reality. But the second one begs for additional examination.

I was intrigued by the phrase “cautious discretion”, that maybe this person has a rational point,. However, this is just as misguided as the other two ridiculous statements. I could be wrong, but I think the Texas Transportation Code does not provide for the discretionary application of the traffic laws stated therein. So, the phrase “cautious discretion” has no applicability in this case.

An example of “cautious discretion” when operating a motor vehicle would be when a driver chooses not to make or answer a call on his or her cell phone in order to give total attention to the road. The key word here is “chooses”, because in Texas it is permissible to drive while operating a cell phone. However section 544.007 of the Texas Transportation Code states “After stopping, standing until the intersection may be entered safely, and yielding right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in an adjacent crosswalk and other traffic lawfully using the intersection, the operator may turn right.” So it is clear that there is no choice to be made, you must stop.

My take on the whole thing is that three are a lot of people out there who do not wish to be accountable for their actions. This is something that has reached epidemic proportions in this country. You do not have to look beyond the White House to see this.

What’s the answer? I don’t know. But I am positive that people like R. Belkin know even less.

Another Year, Another Worthless SOTU Address

2007-01-23T09:45:00.000-07:00

Tonight I may or may not watch the State of the Union (SOTU) address. Part of it has been leaked, the part about providing health care to those who need it. Do I really need my blood pressure raised to new levels as I listen to Bush finally talk about issues that affect us, even though his “plan” is crap? Where were you the last six years on this? Oh, that’s right, the Dems now have the power and you can no longer force your more of your doomed-to-failure plans down our throats, so you have to start addressing real issues.

Following a previous SOTU I listed my reasons in this space for not watching it. This time I will list the things that I would like to hear him say in case I decide to not watch another rerun of a Texas hold ‘em tournament, or some other horrible, mindless, dumbing-down crap that has more value than listening to anything that Bush says. I would really, really, really like to hear him say #1, but if that doesn’t happen any of the others would be nice. I realize that none of these will be uttered so following the list I will again provide you with how I would really like the SOTU to be executed.

1. “Effective noon tomorrow I and my entire administration will resign.”
2. “As of tomorrow we will begin implementing the selective service draft”
3. “Jenna and Barbara will be entering the Army as privates in the infantry, and will be deployed to a hot zone in Iraq after the completion of an accelerated, 2-week basic training.”
4. “I have ordered the commanders to begin removing troops in Iraq, and everyone will be stateside by the end of March.”
5. “Instead of threatening Iran, Syria, and others I will seek to meet with them to develop a plan to bring peace to the region.”
6. “I will sign the minimum wage bill, stem cell bill, and all other bills brought before me by this congress that I should have been pressing them to pass during the past six years.”

As promised here is what I would really like to hear him say:

“Good evening. Tonight I am implementing changes to the State of the Union address that I intend to follow for the remainder of my term, and am hopeful that my successors with adopt and enhance in future years.

The first thing that you have already notice is that I entered the chamber near the main stage, not the usual entrance from the rear. Everyone’s time, here and at home, is valuable so we do not need to waste it with unnecessary hand shaking and photo opportunities. I want this annual event to be one of substance, not the political opportunity that it has evolved into over the last several years.

During my address I request, no, I demand that I not be interrupted by any applause. If you like what you hear tonight and want to applaud, do so at the end of the address. I also ask that you not make any negative responses during my address. I was taught that that the office of the president was to be respected. While I do not believe that any freedom of speech be restricted, I ask that you save any boos or hissing until I finish my remarks.

This year there will be no opposition party response, for a lot of reasons, the primary of which is that this activity serves no constructive purpose and further divides this country. Instead, following my remarks I will answer questions from anyone in this chamber. I feel that if Tony Blair can routinely field questions from Parliament, I should at least be able to do this with Congress on an annual basis. The rules for this session are that I will not tolerate any obvious political posturing from either party, and the questions must be pertinent to what I will be discussing tonight. I expect you to challenge me on anything that I propose here, and when I do not have an answer for you I will tell you that with the intention of getting you and the American people an answer within 24 hours. We will limit the question/answer part of this event to two hours.

Instead of a long, drawn out address as I have given here in the past I will be presenting to you the State of the Union in three parts. First, we will review what I said that we would do last year in this chamber, identifying successes and failures, and I will subjectively give my administration a letter grade for each. Second, I will talk about those things that we did not foresee and had to react to, also grading each. And third, I will present my plan for the coming year. This will include any new initiatives necessary to move this nation in the right direction. All of this will be displayed in bulleted form on the large screens to my left and right.

I think that is all of the ground rules, so let’s get started. Last year I came to you with the following …”

I Want a Voice, Part II

2006-11-06T12:34:00.000-07:00

Redistricting

The primary reason that voters like me do not believe that they have a voice is because they way our states have been sliced and diced to provide an advantage to one or the other major political parties. Anyone paying attention is aware of the recent redistricting that the Republicans forced through in Texas in order to gain seats in the House of Representatives. While this is absolutely marvelous for the party in power, this practice guarantees that a segment of our population is denied a voice in the political process. I do not profess that I know how all of this stuff works. My solution below is probably illegal in some obscure law or statute that the two major parties have created to protect themselves. But I offer an approach that would be fair, the four-letter “f” word that is missing in our federal government.

One more thing – what I suggest here is only for the districting that is put in place for national elections, i.e., President, Vice-President, Senate, and House. You may not consider the latter two to be national since they represent your state. However, a vote by any member of Congress from any state affects everyone in the country, and therefore we should consider these national offices. The primary focus of redistricting is for the election of members of the House. I will discuss in a later entry how this solution can positively affect the other offices.

I think that the way things are supposed to be set up is that each member of the House is to represent some number of citizens. The larger-populated states have more representatives that those with smaller populations. This seems reasonable and does not need to be changed. I do not know what the exact number, formula, or whatever they use to determine the “number” of representatives from each state is, nor is it important here, as long as it is defined and followed. What is important is how and when the districts are defined.

First the when. We “count” the number of citizens in this country once every ten years. With all of the systems in place you would think that this could be determined at any time, but that is a whole other issue. Let’s assume that this ten-year process is effective and use it as our baseline. Since we get a new official “count” every ten years it would make sense to adjust the districts in every state to maintain the proper representation for every citizen, based on that “number”, and only after that “number” is determined.

Now the how. I have no idea how these Einsteins determine what the districts will be. They are irregularly shaped and follow no set pattern. There is probably some basis like school district, county, or some other distinction responsible for this, but the bottom line is that some subjective process is used for, at least in the states where I have lived, political advantage.

I suggest that some independent group, who is a whole lot smarter than me, develop a standard algorithm that will be applied equally to every state. This algorithm would divide the state in to equally populated segments that will become the voting districts. No consideration would be given for anything except developing districts objectively based on population numbers. All other factors, e.g., race, income, political party, would be ignored.

I envision this as something like starting in the northwest corner of a state and drawing a line down the western border for some number of miles, then east until the number of citizens in the box represented by this L-shaped area reaches the “number” discussed earlier. Once this number is met the line stops and is drawn north the border. This would be repeated across the state, creating somewhat consistently-shaped districts, until the eastern border is reached. At that point the line would have to start south again for the specified number of miles and then proceed west until the number is met, then north to the southern border of the adjacent district. This process would be repeated back and forth across the state until all of the districts have been defined, reaching the southeast corner of the state.

Is this perfect? No, but it is fair. To make sure that it remains as fair as possible the starting point for drawing the districts in this manner should be rotated to each of the four corners before the districts are drawn again starting in the northwest corner, forty years later.

Won’t this create some irregularly-shaped districts? Yes, but it is fair. Because of the “number” and because we do not have our population equally dispersed within each state, some districts will be larger, area wise, than others. There is no way around this.

Won’t this complicate voting procedures? No, because I have a solution that I will cover in a later entry that will eliminate having to draw districts based on polling location, school district, etc.

Isn’t it possible that my next door neighbor and I could wind up with different representatives? Absolutely, but lines have to be drawn somewhere, just like today. But instead of politicians determining where the lines are drawn, an objective process will be used, again making this fair for everyone.

Will this eliminate the issue of districts being heavily populated by one of the two major parties? No, there is no way to do this, unless there is a major overhaul in how citizens are represented. But at least the districts would be drawn without party affiliation being a determining factor, thereby, in some cases, making districts more heterogeneous.

I think that I have covered everything, so shoot holes in if you like.

Coming up next campaigns and contributions.

I Want a Voice, Part 1

2006-10-30T13:40:00.000-07:00

I voted today. In Texas as in probably some other states, there is a two-week period before every election when registered voters may go to one of a number of places and cast their vote exactly as they would on election day. Today I am reminded that I have intended, for a long time to author a manifesto of how the election process could be fixed to give everyone a voice.

Realistically I do not have a voice in Texas. Unless I move to Austin, where people seem to do their own thinking I will continue to have ballots thrust in front of me with a plethora of unopposed Republican candidates, or challengers to Republicans who are running for the heck of it. For example I lost count of the number of unopposed candidates today and my choice for the House of Representatives was the less-than-effective, follow-the-party Republican incumbent or a teacher who is running because he promised his students that he would.

There is a whole lot that needs fixed so I will start today to lay out, in no particular order, solutions that would give everyone a voice. And, when I say everyone, I mean everyone who is interested in making an informed choice and not just going to the polls and looking for a party affiliation, or candidates whose names end in vowels, etc. This is a good segue into today’s topic:

The Ballot

1. Eliminate the option to check one box, flip one lever, or punch one hole that will vote for all nominees of a single party. This is really like not voting at all in that most persons casting ballots in this fashion have no idea who they are voting for or what these folks stand for. Consider all of those ill-advised folks in Pennsylvania who click, pull, or punch the straight Democratic option intending to vote for pro-abortion candidates. (I label these folks as ill-advised because single-issue voters are the worst of all voters for which there is no real fix.) They will have voted for Bob Casey, the Democratic candidate for the US Senate who is anti-abortion. People should know who they are voting for and while removing the straight party option will not ensure that they do, they likelihood increases that they may.

2. Eliminate the party affiliation designation next to each candidate’s name. The rationale for this is similar to that of item #1 above. This will remove the crutch that uninformed voters use to guide their vote. If a voter wants to vote for a Republican they will need to know their name. Maybe this will jog their memories when they cast their ballots. For example, when seeing Dennis Hastert’s name on a future ballot maybe they will think “Hey, isn’t this the guy who ignored the warnings about Mark Foley? I can’t vote for this guy, even if he is a Republican.” Again there are no guarantees, but there would be a better chance that an informed vote would be cast.

3. Randomize the presentation order of the candidate names for each office. I think that on the ballot today all incumbents were positioned in the first position under each office. This seems to give an unfair advantage or disadvantage to incumbents, depending on the current political climate. The order in which the names are presented should not be fixed, or the same from voter to voter. This is an easy fix on the electronic machines, and a little harder, but doable, on the punch cards and lever machines. This would again make sure that the voter looks at each name, with greater possibility that they will make an informed choice.

OK, that’s it for today. Look for more later.

9/11 Boo-hoo, Finally Over. Thank You!

2006-09-12T09:23:00.000-06:00

I didn't think that September 12 would ever get here. What we have been subject to in the past few weeks as we were forced to relive every painstaking detail of the World Trade Center (WTC) attacks borders on the insane. I guess we have to expect this from a country that places an enormous emphasis on and receives satisfaction from "fantasy grief", al la Ramsey, Peterson, Holloway, etc.

Let's not replay this year after year, dragging everyone down with all of the negativity associated with an attack by a religious lunatic. And no, I do not mean W's invasion and occupation of Iraq. I am referring to the WTC. But if you want to start a movement that will treat W's "war" as heinous as the WTC attack sign me up.

The Conversation II

2006-08-10T08:14:00.000-06:00

George: Hey Tony, we need some more diversion.

Tony: For what this time?

George: Same thing, Iraq is still a shit hole, my allies here are dropping like flies.

Tony: Yeah I heard about the Liebermeister going down in flames.

George: You need to organize an “attack”.

Tony: Why me? I did this for you at the G8 in ’05. It’s your turn

George: You forget what I did for you during the ’06 G8. I made you look like a Rhodes Scholar.

Tony: What are you talking about?

George: I looked like an idiot, talking with my mouth full, cussing on camera, inappropriately touching that German woman. By comparison you looked like a real statesman.

Tony: You didn’t do that stuff for me. That was just you being yourself, the frat boy who has yet to grow up.

George: Yeah, well, it still took people’s minds off your problems for a bit.

Tony: You’re right. OK, what do you want me to do this time?

George: I am not sure yet, but it has to be big, real big, but nobody can get hurt. I have too much of that going on in Baghdad.

Tony: So we need to plant some more FUD?

George: Whats that?

Tony: Fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

George: Oh, that’s good, real good. Did you just come up with that? I need to use that in a speech sometime. Do you mind if I use FUD?

Tony: Go ahead, you are already the master at it slinging it around.

George: OK, then. Let’s get a plan going here. How about planes. That has settled down since the double R incident.

Tony: Double R?

George: That Richard Reed thing that we did with the “bomb” in his shoes. I still have these people taking off their shoes at the security checkpoints.

Tony: Still? And they haven’t revolted over this?

George: I am amazed too. These lemmings will put up with pretty much anything that we come up with.

Tony: OK, so if it is a plane it will have to be a bomb. The public will not buy anything involving hijackings. We have that locked down quite nicely.

George: Yeah, but let’s make it a lot of planes. That will make it look real and not something that we cooked up.

Tony: I’ve got it! We claim that a lot of planes had terrorists on them planning to use liquid explosives hidden in their shampoo containers.

George: Oooo, that is good. But won’t they need gallons of that stuff like that McVeigh guy used?

Tony: I don’t know, but what’s better is that the public won’t either.

George: How do they blow that liquid stuff up?

Tony: Beats me. Probably with some kind of electronic gizmo. Nobody understands how that stuff works either so we can say just about anything.

George: Yeah, how do they get all of those CDs on an ipod?

Tony: I will show you the next time I am in town. Anyway this is brilliant!

George: What will be the fallout?

Tony: We’ll raise those meaningless terror alert levels, restrict liquids on planes, and we will look like heroes.

George: You are right this is good, real good. No real downside and we get those approval numbers moving back up.

Tony: I will get to work on this right away.

George: Get you guy to do it.

Tony: I don’t have a guy.

George: I thought Karl took care of that.

Tony: He did but the guy we found had a conscience and could not perform the required duties.

George: OK, I have a ton of these guys working for me. I will send one over.

Tony: OK.

How Low Will Bush Go?

2006-06-28T08:32:00.000-06:00

That ridiculous hypocrite who is ruining our great country proves once again that he will go as low as he has to for a photo op. The most recent being yesterday when he staged a 'run' with a soldier who lost both legs in Iraq. Hmmmm. He trots out a paraplegic that he is personally responsible for maiming, just so that he can have the press corps see him with this poor guy. I thought that Bush gave up running after receiving orders to do so from his doctor. The photo op should have been a picture of Bush on his knees in from of this guy begging for his forgiveness.

Whose Freedom?

2006-05-29T13:43:00.000-06:00

Today is Memorial Day, and if I hear one more talking head on TV talk about this being a time to honor all of those who gave their lives to protect our freedom I am going to puke. While I fully support the holiday and honoring those that died while serving this country, I strongly object to classifying all of these persons as having been protecting my or anyone's freedom. I am not totally sure but I think the last time that the freedom of the United States was threatened was during the Spanish-American war. So stop with the fascist propaganda surrounding Memorial Day, honor the dead, and move on.

One more thing, can we stop trotting out a bunch of folks in the service at every sporting event? I know that this fires up a lot of folks, but it does so for all of the wrong reasons. At yesterday's opening ceremonies at the Indy 500 some number of guys in uniform marched in formation for some reason. This reminded me of the numerous broadcasts from Russia during the cold war era. Please stop this crap, it is really embarrassing our country.

Finally, Enron Justice, or is it?

2006-05-26T07:30:00.000-06:00

I read in the Houston Chronicle today that they expect the sentencing for Lay and Skilling, each facing 100+ years maximum sentences, to actually come down at 12 to 25 years. Wow. Add that to the fact that they are freely walking around like you and me until September 11. What is going on here? Why is it taking so long to issue a sentence for these guys? Do you really think that the judge will work on this sentence for the next 109 days?

Here is my take - Judges run in the same circles as the corporate honchos, plus they receive tons of campaign dollars from these same people. This guy could have easily sent Kenny Boy and Jeff away yesterday or next week, but a 'professional courtesy' has kicked in, and they are giving them the summer to get all of the stolen money hidden or untouchable, in case they decide to also fine these guys. Add this time to the time that they are out awaiting their appeals and that should take them up to about the end of 2008, at which time the guy that they helped put in the White House can pardon them, something that I predicted here on 1/15/2006.

Let's get back to 12 to 25 years. Of course this will be on the low side of the range, so assuming it will be 12 years, that means that they will be eligible for parole sometime sooner than that. I have no idea what the rules on this are but let's say it is 6 years and they are out, how's that for punishing the guys who ruined thousands of lives and careers?

I have to say that if I could get away with stashing away hundreds of millions or more than a billion dollars that I could steal from a company and only spend 6 years in jail, where I would hang out, read, lift weights, play some b-ball, and write a few books, so that my family could be financially secure for generations to come, I would do it. These guys are brilliant! And our legal system is letting them get away with it, all while everyone rejoices that they were convicted.

But as to justice being served in the Enron thing, I don't think so.

How Much Did It Cost Us?

2006-03-10T12:36:00.000-07:00

Have any of you wondered how much the Bush Administration paid the United Arab Emarites to pull out of the port management deal? I don't have an answer but I would guess that it probably cost us more than we would have paid them under the contract. As with most of what really goes on in the White House, we wiull never know.

A Challenge to Bush Lovers

2006-03-03T08:03:00.000-07:00

Those of you in that 33% who approve of the job that Bush is doing I ask that you provide some evidence of what he has done to gain your approval. Before you do, here are a few things that you cannot use:

- Security - Think about how many attacks on US soil occurred before he assumed power. We are probably less secure now than we were in December 1999.

- Economy - Unless you received a big fat tax refund from his giveaway to the top 1% of the country you do not have a leg to stand on. And if you did receive a check I would respect you a whole lot more if you returned it to him, indicating that you and everyone else in your tax bracket did not need the refund.

- Values - With the number of people in poverty rising steadily since he took office, after several years of decline, the number of people still without health care, and the savings rate a low not seen since the Great Depression, what values, besides lining the pockets of his friends, does he have. And don't start with that 'good Christian' crap, or I will come right back with the 'least among us' and 'eye of the needle' stuff.

Open your eyes and join the majority of the country who believes that this guy is ruining our country.

Cheney, What a Mess You've Created

2006-02-15T11:53:00.000-07:00

Wow, where does one start with this one? There are just so many angles and none of them offers a very flattering picture. I will briefly examine two items from the incident timeline.

On Saturday, Februrary 11, at 7:50 PM, a little more than an hour after the accidental shooting. The head of the Secret Service office in McAllen, Texas, calls the Kenedy County sheriff to report the accident. The sheriff asks to speak to Cheney, and they schedule an interview for 9:00 AM. So, no official contact is permitted with Cheney for over thirteen hours. Why? Lots of reasons, but most likely a spin team was assembled to help Cheney craft the proper story to tell the sheriff. Another likely one would be to let any judgment-impairing substance be diluted enough to not become an issue if a blood test was requested.

On Wednesday, February 15, at 11:00 PM the White House announced that Cheney will be interviewed by Fox News at 2:00 PM for a program that will air at 6:00 PM. Am I the only person who questions the sanity of this announcement? Fox News is not well known for its objectivity, or ability to criticize anything related to the GOP. I am certain that the questions will be carefully worded by the administration and handed to whomever is tasked with conducting this "interview". Plus the four-hour delay between the "interview" and its airing will give the administration's staff enough time to edit all of the takes and re-takes, giving the finished product the exact message that they want to present. Why wasn't this done live and on CSPAN in front of the press corps? Because they know there are enough of you lemmings out there that will lap this up and ignore the obvious improprieties and their abuse of power.

Post note added on 2/17/06:

Harry Whittington, speaking to reporters outside the hospital where he was treated, said: "My family and I are deeply sorry for all that Vice President Cheney and his family have had to go through this week."

The report did not indicate if he was wearing a brown shirt with the requisite arm band, or if he ended his comments with a hearty Sieg Heil! and stiff-arm salute.

Where do they find these people? Or better yet, how much do thay have to pay them to say this kind of stuff? Hmmmmm, the guy is sprayed with birdshot, pellets lodging in vital organs, nearly has a heart attack and he is sorry for what Cheney was put through? Wow, this is extremely rich. This is so far out there that a sane person couldn't come close to making it up.

Why I did not watch the SOTU address

2006-02-01T07:09:00.000-07:00

Last night I did not watch the State of the Union address for a lot of reasons that I am about to list. But unlike the Democrats, I provide to you what I would like this guy to say in the SOTU. My proposed introduction to his speech follow my reasons for watching Supernatural rather than Bush.

1. Bush has repeatedly lied to us.
2. I have no confidence that he will follow through on anything that he proposes. (remember hydrogen cars in 2003?)
3. Bush is a war criminal and should be in prison.
4. He has milked 9/11 long enough and I do not want to hear more FUD. (fear, uncertainty, and doubt)
5. $250 billion for Iraq but only $1 billion for New Orleans?
6. He seems oblivious to the corruption in both parties.
7. He has no health care plan and seems to not care about this.
8. I just hate seeing his face.

As promised here is what I would really like to hear him say, provided I could get by #8 above:

“Good evening. Tonight I am implementing changes to the State of the Union address that I intend to follow for the remainder of my term, and am hopeful that my successors with adopt and enhance in future years.

The first thing that you have already noticed is that I enter the chamber near the main stage, not the usual entrance from the rear. Everyone’s time, here and at home, is valuable so we do not need to waste it with unnecessary hand shaking and photo opportunities. I want this annual event to be one of substance, not the political opportunity that it has evolved into over the last several years.

During my address I request, no, I demand that I not be interrupted by any applause. If you like what you hear tonight and want to applaud, do so at the end of the address. I also ask that you not make any negative responses during my address. I was taught that that the office of the president was to be respected. While I do not believe that any freedom of speech be restricted, I ask that you save any boos or hissing until I finish my remarks.

This year there will be no opposition party response, for a lot of reasons, the primary of which is that this activity serves no constructive purpose and further divides this country. Instead, following my remarks I will answer questions from anyone in this chamber. I feel that if Tony Blair can routinely field questions from Parliament, I should at least be able to do this with Congress on an annual basis. The rules for this session are that I will not tolerate any obvious political posturing from either party, and the questions must be pertinent to what I will be discussing tonight. I expect you to challenge me on anything that I propose here, and when I do not have an answer for you I will tell you that with the intention of getting you and the American people an answer within 24 hours. We will limit the question/answer part of this event to two hours.

Instead of a long, drawn out address as I have given here in the past I will be presenting to you the State of the Union in three parts. First, we will review what I said that we would do last year in this chamber, identifying successes and failures, and I will subjectively give my administration a letter grade for each. Second, I will talk about those things that we did not foresee and had to react to, also grading each. And third, I will present my plan for the coming year. This will include any new initiatives necessary to move this nation in the right direction. All of this will be displayed in bulleted form on the large screens to my left and right.

I think that is all of the ground rules, so let’s get started. Last year I came to you with the following . . .”

Please, NO MORE Kate Moss

2006-01-29T07:23:00.000-07:00

Departing with my usual rants on important things, like how Bush is ruining our country, I delve into a minor but annoying issue - Kate Moss. I have no problem with her personally, in fact I do not know or have never even met her. For all that I know she may be a gem of a person, complete with her share of shortcomings like the rest of us. My problem is that I am tired of my paper wasting any space on a person with no visible talent, other than her appearance. This week the Houston Chronicle wasted at least three chunks of "Newsmakers" space on her and her problems. Why does anyone care? In fact, once she proved to all that she could not handle fame and fortune, i.e., her drug abuse, she should have returned to obscurity and replaced by some other "beautiful" person. It is not like she has some special talent, or is providing the world with something special or worthwhile. She is a model.

Again, she is a MODEL. This job requires the extreme good luck of being born at the right time with "the look" that designers are pushing. Beyond being "discovered" the difficult part of your life is over. You fly all over the place, get dressed up, have your picture taken, and cash big checks. Doesn't sound too hard or stressful to me. Only an idiot could screw up such a plum deal like this. Yet, Ms. Moss did. But my problem is not that she blew it, but that anyone cares enough to make this newsworthy.

To all of you out there controlling the media, we do not care about the ongoing "struggles" of someone who let go of the brass ring. Ignore her, let her move on, and stop wasting print space reporting anything about her.

More Hypocrisy from the Right

2006-01-23T13:29:00.000-07:00

Note: the following was written while offline last Wednesday. I forgot to post until now.

A report on the front page of papers everywhere today provided details about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling against Attorney General Gonzalez, actually the Bush administration, by preserving physicians’ rights in Oregon to prescribe lethal prescription drugs to terminally ill patients, thereby permitting them to die with dignity or commit suicide, whichever slant you choose. I ask those of you in either camp, but especially you on the right, to suspend your moral self-righteousness and look at the hypocrisy contained in the quotes from the Bush camp, as they relate to this and another event that was also reported in your paper today. Here are the quotes:

Scott McClellan, White House press secretary said that the administration was disappointed in the ruling, but added that Bush “remains fully committed to building a culture of life . . . that is built on valuing life at all stages.”

Justice Antonin Scalia said in his dissent “If the term ‘legitimate medical purpose’ has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death.”

Four pages later, in the Houston Chronicle, a headline reads “Second shot needed to execute elderly inmate in California”. How can this possibly be, by an administration that sits above all else in this country, that “values life at all stages” and believes that prescription drugs should not be used “to produce death”, that this person was allowed to die? And how do these people keep a straight face when they say and write this stuff? Just as baffling is that there are about 30 to 40 percent of you out there that eat it up and don’t think twice about how these idiots are ruining our country. Wake up America, before it’s too late!

Two Predictions

2006-01-15T06:15:00.000-07:00

I am often wrong, especially when I try to predict the future. Recent examples are predicting that Georgia would roll over the Mountaineers in the Sugar Bowl and that USC would rout Texas by at least 14 points. I offer this peek into my inept prognostication abilities as a warning that the following predictions may be equally inaccurate. Read on if you like.

1. If the Ken Lay/Jeff Skilling trail results in the defendants being found guilty, Bush will pardon them before leaving office. I am not confident that they will be found guilty, especially since they have huge stockpiles of cash to buy the best defense that money can buy. But if the miracle of miracle occurs, they certainly will not spend a single day in jail, with all of the appeals that their millions will purchase. These appeals will keep them comfortably at home until Bush can push through the appeal.

2. If the conditions in the United States continue to erode at the rate that they have over the past five years, within the next twenty years there will be some kind of civil war. (I use this term for lack of a better one.) Maybe not the kind that pitted the Rebs versus the Yanks years ago, but some major upheaval that will make the planes crashing into the World Trade Center seem trivial. As our political process ensures that the gap between the haves and have-nots continues to grow, and they mask it with smokescreens ‘issues’ or 'non-crises' like abortion, gay marriage, immigration, our entire country loses. We lose focus on what really matters while wasting time, effort, and money that we could be using to help everyone pursue happiness.

Blurbage

2005-12-30T11:23:00.000-07:00

The following cannot be classified as full-fledged harangues, but I need to put this stuff somewhere so here goes:

Speeding – I am continually amazed but the large number of people who believe that driving at a speed in excess of the posted limit is OK. This is akin to everyone who legally owns a gun, constantly shooting it at other people but never hitting anyone.

Criminals On-board – Did anyone else notice that the killing of the bi-polar passenger came and went with little criticism or analysis? No one anywhere mentioned the fact that every passenger was treated as a criminal as they deplaned with their hands over their heads. A guy gets killed for no really good reason and nobody pays attention, but a rich white girl goes missing and we are constantly bombarded about it.

Hey! – I must be the only person to notice that Gary Glitter, the rock star who was convicted of child pornography, is in trouble yet again, this time for allegedly abusing two girls, 11 and 12 years old, in Vietnam. That is the only excuse that all of the idiots who mindlessly yell “Hey” when his song “Rock and Roll Part Two” is played in the sports stadiums and arenas must have. I am surprised that major league sports have not issued a mandate to stop playing his music at their games.

Tis the Season

2005-12-19T07:51:00.000-07:00

Every year some faction or another arises and claims that somebody, this year it’s the liberals (whoever they are), is removing Christ from Christmas. For my entire life this has been going on. I remember early on that there was a movement to boycott any business that referred to Christmas as ‘Xmas’. My parents were firmly in this camp, claiming that the use of ‘Xmas’ was anti-religious and was taking Christ out of Christmas. This lasted for quite awhile until everyone wised up when they “discovered” that ‘X’ was an ancient symbol of some sort that was a kind of short hand for Christ. Not sure when this occurred, maybe access to the Internet was partly responsible. Nevertheless, the outcry about ‘Xmas’ has come and gone.

Now we have a bunch of folks complaining about the use of the word ‘holiday’ as in ‘Happy Holidays’. They don’t seem to care about ‘Season’s Greetings’, which is equally non-Christian. Maybe they are saving this one for their next crusade. Anyway, the editorial pages and letters to the editor are filled with the angst of these folks, who must save it up for eleven months until they hear the first reference to ‘holiday’. They have pounced with a vengeance this year all the way to the White House. The Bush Christmas card makes no mention of ‘Christmas’, which is, when a rational human considers it, a very wise thing. While I cannot give credit to Bush on this, as I am sure that he had nothing to do with the text inside a Christmas card (he’s too busy illegally tapping citizens’ phones), I must commend the administration as a whole for this flash, albeit ever so brief, of tolerance or inclusion.

What is the big deal about this anyway? After all, Christmas is a holiday, so it seems reasonable that when the sentiment of ‘Happy Holidays’ is uttered or written it would Christmas should be joyfully implied along with all of the other year-end observances by non-Christian folks. It’s not like someone is saying “Happy ancient pagan ritual, stolen from religions pre-dating yours” or “Happy whatever to all of you fake Christians who have allowed the observance of the birth of the focal point of your religion turn into an excuse for rampant, uncontrolled capitalism” or “Merry anti-Christ behavior and wishing you even more criminal acts of killing, greed, and hate in the New Year”.

Until I die I will just sit back and be amazed at the annual outcry by some bunch of crazies with too much time on their hands. If any of you are reading this, and you know who you are, let me suggest that you spend your time crafting true, heartfelt greetings. Anyone can say “Merry Christmas” but what does that really mean? Does it mean something like “I hope your son or daughter never has to experience the horror of war” or “Let us all count our blessings for not being subject to genocide” or “Someday our country will stop ignoring the poor and less fortunate among us”. You see, these are much more specific and can apply to anyone, even those who do not observe any kind of holiday during this time of year.

Best wises to all, everywhere, all of the time.

Spin or More Lies?

2005-11-16T05:58:00.000-07:00

When will the constant “spinning” end in the Bush administration? Instead of offering any kind of explanation Bush continues to attack those who question his actions and inactions. The current line, which has been orchestrated to all in the administration by someone, probably Rove, is “they want to rewrite history”. Over the past few days I have heard this from a number of different officials, including Bush.

Exactly what do any of the Bushies mean when they say that their opponents want to “rewrite history”? I have not heard any Bush opponent state that:

- We did not invade Iraq based on a claim of Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.

- We did not invade Iraq based on a claim that Saddam Hussein was establishing a nuclear weapons program.

- The war was not to be paid for by profits from Iraqi oil.

- The United States would not realize lower gas prices.

If any of the Bush critics would say these things, then I would agree that they were attempting to rewrite history. Bush must face the facts that nothing, absolutely nothing that he said to justify the illegal invasion and occupation Iraq was accurate. Now, whether you call that a lie, manipulated intelligence, or something else, he was flat-out wrong and should be help accountable. Since the administration refuses to be part of the International Criminal Court and the thumb their collective noses at the United Nations, who has the stroke to make these people pay for their misdeeds? I do not really know but I will offer two possible actions:

- A class-action suit filed against everyone in the administration and all congressmen who voted to permit Bush to invade and occupy Iraq by all of the survivors of those killed in Iraq (including Iraqis) and those who have lost any aspect of their lives as they had before being sent to Iraq (maimed, wounded, foreclosure, etc.). I have no idea if this is legal, but it seems to me that powerful people with the power to kill at will should be put on trial when they abuse this power.

- A major upheaval in the form of civil unrest should occur in or throughout the United States. I don’t know what form this should take. Certainly we should not emulate the people in Paris who are burning cars. But aren’t there enough of us out there who have had enough of the Bush administration’s antics to do something? How about if millions of people poured into Manhattan in the middle of the night and clogged up the streets, subway entrances and exits, etc. No one could get to work or anywhere else in the city. I am talking about millions added to the eight million already there, the majority of whom would join this throng. What could they do? Tear gas? They would just create a panic and endanger lives. Maybe they could bring in the National Guard. Oh, I forgot, they are in Iraq. Think about it. An action that shuts New York City and everyone stays until Bush and the rest of his administration resign and leave Washington.

Those are things that dreams are made of.

Einstein Knew

2005-11-10T15:12:00.000-07:00

I have not posted in almost three months. Don't know why, especially since the current administration provides a wealth of idiocy to harangue about. How could I have passed up the leak, Katrina, the lies, etc.? I have no excuse.

But I have to come back swinging when I see the Bush approval rating between 37 and 39 percent, depending on which poll you trust. Take a close look at that number. This means that nearly 2 in every 5 people believes that Bush is doing a marvelous job. 2 in 5!!! Can anyone out there explain this? I know that I can't definitively, but will posit a theory here.

Probably the majority of these folks are in that group of lemmings that go to church every week and follow without question what is fed to them from the pulpit. As has been frequently reported a large number of churches are now directing their congregants in the matters of politics, making the weekly Sunday visit a one-stop for their dose of salvation and Bush. After that they have no need to peruse CSPAN, Meet the Press, or any other media outlet that exposes the criminality of the Bush administration. Just give them their NASCAR and all is well with the world.

Einstein nailed it when he said "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth".

'Nuff said.

Why are They Applauding?

2005-08-17T09:07:00.000-06:00

Recently I was sitting in the Dallas-Fort Worth airport during one of those times when a series of thunderstorms sent a rippling of delays throughout Continental Airlines’ timetable. A long line had queued up in front of the podium to seek information regarding connecting flights. I sat there next to this long line as the plane making up my flight arrived and passengers started coming through the door. My view of the door was blocked so I was not able to see these folks until they passed by the 40 or 50 people in the line at the podium. The people in the line started applauding for some reason as these people came off. I had no idea why until I saw the half dozen or so soldiers in desert BDUs walk by me.

This response to the sight of these guys puzzled me, and I did not join in on this lemming love fest. While I have the utmost of respect for these guys, I could not bring myself to elevate them to anything than they really are - members of the military who have chosen a profession that may at times put them into harm’s way. (Note that I did not say protect our country, because the idiot in the White House has chosen to renege on a campaign promise that he would not enter into nation building activities. While they could certainly be called upon to protect the US at some time in the future, our military has not done so since the Spanish-American war.) These guys are doing their job like anyone else. Some are doing it well and others are not, just like anyone else. To stand and applaud them seems silly, unless you have fallen for the daily streams of fascist propaganda initiated by the current administration.

Before you unwrap the flag from your body in order to free your hands to start typing a seething response, consider that these folks volunteered for this duty. When the soldiers returned from Vietnam they were spit on and ridiculed by the majority of the populace. These were people that went into the military unwillingly, i.e., they were drafted. If anyone should be, or in this case should have been, applauded these guys should have, for not taking one of many draft dodging ways out, like Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the chicken hawks in the current administration.

The next time you see a Vietnam vet, let them know that you appreciate that they made a sacrifice, one that few of us can imagine. When you have a chance to applaud these guys do so. As for the current troops, continue to give them the respect that they deserve, but think again before placing them on a pedestal for just doing their job. Applauding them in an airport will only demonstrate your ignorance of what is really going on.

A Baffling Response

2005-07-28T15:42:00.000-06:00

You know that you have encountered absolutely insane blind allegiance when you hear a guy say “You know, you cannot really believe eye witness accounts”. How is it possible to have a conversation with someone like this, who will believe anything that Bush says or does is perfect, and that Bush may actually be Jesus? OK, I made that last part up, but I would not be surprised if this guy would also be able to make the case for it being true as well.

I was talking to a coworker and the subject of the London bombings came up. I said something about the poor state of affairs that allows a tourist to be gunned down without question, having bullets being poured into him while he was posing no threat. This guy says “Who says so?” I say “An eyewitness provided the description of the event”, to which he added the above gem of a reply. Wow, I just had to stop talking to this guy and begin wondering how someone like this can survive in this world without the capacity for even a fractional iota of rational thought. The scariest part of this is that there are a lot of people in this country like this guy and, even scarier, they are permitted to vote.

The Conversation

2005-07-07T06:35:00.000-06:00

Tony: This Iraq thing that you got me into is bullocks. I almost lost the last election over this and my numbers are way down.

George: I know, mine too. What you need is an attack on London.

Tony: How would that help?

George: It worked for me. Before 9/11 my numbers were way down and sinking. I was way over my head and the public knew that Dick was calling all of the shots. Then BAM, and everyone loved me.

Tony: Do you really think I can pull this off?

George: Absolutely, just make sure you spin it right. Hell, half of my country still thinks that Iraq had something to do with it.

Tony: But you have the media controlled. Your citizens don’t know anything about what is really going on in your administration. The BBC is all over us. I don’t think I can cover up something like this.

George: That’s easy. I will have Karl call your guy and give him all that he needs to know.

Tony: I don’t have “a guy”.

George: Well you better get yourself one. Karl can help with that too. Give him a call.

Tony: OK, I am desperate here. I’ve got to get started on this.

George: Before you go could you do me a favor?

Tony: Sure, what is it?

George: Plan this to occur when I am in London. My numbers are way down too.

Tony: OK, how about during the G8?

George: Perfect. See you then.

Nobody Asked, So Don’t Tell

2005-06-29T08:23:00.000-06:00

During a congressional hearing yesterday to examine the report of religious tension at the Air Force Academy Rep. Michael Conway, R-Texas, said “I’m a Christian, and Jesus Christ is my personal savior. I hope that didn’t offend you.” No Mr. Conway it does not offend me, but what does offend me is that you feel that it is important that I know this about you. What is even more offensive is that you made this statement while investigating allegations of evangelical members of the Air Force Academy forcing their Christian faith on others with different beliefs. Sir, you seemed to miss the entire point by making your private stance on spirituality public. The motivations of this can be interpreted many ways, one of which is blatant proselytizing, which is extremely disgraceful in your powerful position in our government.

I do not care what religion anyone is and further have no desire to know. A few decades ago the country seemed to respect this very personal and private information. But now, thanks to you, Mr. Conway, and those of your ilk, the quality of life in the US has been steadily eroded by the movement toward a theocratic, Christian-focused country. This is extremely scary and I am ashamed that my country is moving in this direction. What’s worse is that there is no end in sight to this arrogance.

Spin it Bush

2005-06-28T05:58:00.000-06:00

So Bush is going to make an address tonight regarding Iraq and he has chosen to do it front of an audience of soldiers at Fort Bragg. Wow, now that’s really brave. Rather than putting himself out there in front of an audience of civilians, the majority of which do not agree with his handling of Iraq, he chooses the safe route by surrounding himself with people who are not permitted to show open disagreement with their ultimate boss. Bush, you are a coward and a criminal. Instead of spinning your policies for the sake of nose-diving poll numbers, why aren’t you in Washington doing your job? By the way, we are still waiting for you to identify the person in your administration that leaked the identity of the CIA agent, and while you are at it we are waiting to see your DD-214.

Marriage Already Redefined

2005-06-24T06:41:00.000-06:00

Arkansas and a few other states have something that they call a “covenant marriage”, which is some kind of super or mega marriage that has a more intense commitments and is much harder to get divorced from. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in this? Here is a state, a dark red, “patriotic” blood red state, that is firmly against permitting homosexuals to marry because it will “redefine marriage”. Yet they have redefined marriage. A kind of interesting sidebar to this is that the governor and his wife entered into a covenant marriage where she promised to submit to him. This seems like a lose-lose situation for women, at least those who feel that they must enter into an unequal partnership when they get married.

Mattress Ads

2005-06-24T06:38:00.000-06:00

Have you ever seen a mattress advertisement without a very attractive, often scantily-clad young lady sitting or lounging seductively on the mattress? It kind of make you wonder if women ever buy mattresses, or is this a decision that is exclusive reserved for men? What about all of those single, heterosexual ladies out there? Do they not purchase mattresses or is it assumed that they either rent furnished apartments or are shacked up with some guy?

Of Our Time

2005-06-06T18:33:00.000-06:00

Once again Bush and all of his blindly-allegiant followers miss the point, this time by failing to read or, more likely, understand Amnesty International’s statement “Guantanamo has become the gulag of our time” Do they not understand that the “of our time” is as important to the statement’s point as is the word “gulag”? Probably, but their calculated response focuses on “gulag” as they act all incredulous that such a statement can be made about their holier-than-thou administration. It is a brilliant defense of deflection by a miserable failure in the White House, by a man who cannot recognize, or at least admit, that stripping detainees of their freedom, not telling them why they are being held, not permitting them legal representation, and putting them through mental and physical torture, could be viewed as a modern-day gulag, or a “gulag of our times”.

The only consolation is that there are only 1,325 days until a new president is inaugurated, unless by some miracle this guy can be thrown out before then.

Memorial Day

2005-05-31T10:11:00.000-06:00

Another Memorial Day has come and gone and I must comment on an oft-used phrase during this annual event. That phrase is some derivation of “They died for our freedom.” I cringe every time I hear this as I have trouble reconciling the invasion of another country with defending my freedom. I am not a student of history so I will say right now that I do not know the exact details of any decisions that have led to our country sending members of the Department of Defense into an offensive mode. But I still cannot understand what any American’s freedom has to do with invading Iraq, or liberating Kuwait, or whatever we were doing in Vietnam, Granada, etc. I would like someone out there to enlighten me on where the freedom of the US was threatened by any conflict that we chose to enter since the Spanish-American war.

Last night Andy Rooney pretty much summed up my feelings on the subject of Memorial day when he said:

“Remembering doesn’t do the remembered any good, of course. It's for ourselves, the living. I wish we could dedicate Memorial Day, not to the memory of those who have died at war, but to the idea of saving the lives of the young people who are going to die in the future if we don’t find some new way - some new religion maybe - that takes war out of our lives.

That would be a Memorial Day worth celebrating.”

I would be first in line at the events honoring those who were responsible for taking war out of our lives.

Worst Flight and Other Stuff

2005-05-18T16:03:00.000-06:00

Here is one to file away for future reference. The absolutely worst flight that one can take is from anywhere to Orlando (ATO). I am on the Houston to Orlando flight as I type this. I have flown several of these from various parts of the US and they are consistently packed with kids too small to walk and their older siblings. Today I counted 12 strollers parked at the door waiting to be loaded in the baggage compartment by patient folks who must walk up a crummy set of stairs and return down them carrying these cumbersome loads. So when you board an ATO flight there is a good chance that you will be tortured by the noise from these crumb crushers or other annoying acts. I not only have one directly behind me, but one who loves to kick the back of my seat while simultaneously putting the tray table up and down. Normally I am a fairly reasonable guy, one who usually just puts up with this stupid nonsense of parents not knowing how to make their kid behave like a civilized human being. Today will be no different because I am a confrontation-avoiding mega-wuss. But today will be much harder for me to maintain this demeanor because I have something wrong with me that is making me much less tolerant with these idiots who should be given some kind of test before boarding a plane with young children. Seems like the airlines should do this, monitor each parent’s ability to control their kids and install a “Please counsel the people behind me because their kid is driving me nuts” button overhead each seat. I have been sick since I received a root canal on 10 days ago. I have no pain in the affected tooth, but I have a headache that comes and goes, chills to the point that I cannot get warm, my neck and shoulders ache, my feet and calf muscles ache, and my hair hurts when I touch it. Add to this that I was all comfy when I boarded with an empty seat beside me when a guy decides that he doesn’t want to sit near a family, i.e., kids who are loud and obnoxious, so he decides to take the middle seat next to me. He is a young guy with shoulders seemingly wider than I am tall. To avoid touching him I have to squeeze myself against the window. Now, I do not blame the guy for moving, since he was trying to avoid some stupid people, but as soon as he sat down he started into a Chatty Kathy routine with the guy on the aisle with some boring stuff about his real estate job. In front of me is a giant-sized guy whose big head is blocking my view of the nearest TV screen. This is not a big deal since I have decided not to watch an old episode of Friends. I do question Continental’s decision to show a program like this, especially on a flight that they know will have so many children on board. This particular episode has Ross and Tom Selleck boinking Rachel and Monica, respectively. None of these folks are married. While I certainly do not care about what anyone does with anyone in their bedroom, in our outside of marriage, I am sure that there are a ton of prudes on this flight who would not appreciate this fare, let alone expose it to their children. You know, if it were up to me I would air a recent replay of a CSPAN program. Since most f the folks on this flight probably have never watched CSPAN it would be a public service to expose them to something like a Senate or House hearing where Condi Rice lies through her teeth.

I have gotten a little off topic here, and rambled a bit. I will conclude this by reminding you that the worst flight is anywhere to Orlando. (There is one flight worse than this and that is any flight taking Bush out of Washington on vacation, which is about 50% of the time that he has been in office. This ranks ahead of ATO because we are paying for it through our tax dollars, and getting the double whammy of Bush not staying in DC and doing his job. Maybe we should not complain too much about this because if he was always in DC maybe the country would be twice as fucked up. Hey, I just talked myself out of that one, and I would support Bush being on vacation full time. 2008 cannot come soon enough.) The only alternative to flying on an ATO flight is to fly into Tampa, or some other Florida destination, and drive to Orlando. I should have done this today.

Oh Really? Where is the Outrage?

2005-05-05T07:19:00.000-06:00

On Sunday morning, Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson told TV viewers nation-wide that the threat posed by liberal judges is "probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings." When an incredulous George Stephanopoulos asked if Robertson really believed that these judges posed "the most serious threat America has faced in nearly 400 years of history, more serious than al Qaeda, more serious than Nazi Germany and Japan, more serious than the Civil War?," he responded, "George, I really believe that."

When Ward Churchill, a professor at the University of Colorado, said in an essay that the folks in the twin towers who support the financing of Israel are viewed by some in the Muslim community as evil as the Eichmans of Nazi Germany, all hell broke loose for him, after his this portion of his essay was taken out of context and plastered all over the networks. But Robertson gets away with a comment that he fully intended to make and stands behind, without anyone anywhere challenging him?

Since no one else has the guts to say it I will. Pat Robertson is as evil and full of hate as anyone that you can find in the radical Muslim community, or probably anywhere else. The world would be a better place if he were not permitted to make any statements in public or in private to anyone ever again.

Where is your outrage America? Or maybe I should ask were is your conscience? I know that our state-run media is not providing any balance or even a fraction of what is really going on in the world (CNN today had a 5-minute segment on ipod speakers and just a few sentences about the elections in the UK) . But when you see or hear this stuff you should be demanding that this guy be held accountable for these ridiculous comments and urged to stop brainwashing the lemmings who tune into him everyday and mindlessly send him millions of tax-free dollars to spread his hate.

What is Wrong with This Picture?

2005-04-28T07:46:00.000-06:00

This week we see Bush HOLDING HANDS with Saudi royalty while vacationing in Texas. Am I the only one who thinks that there is something really wrong with this? I hope not, but all of the Bush lovers out there who are incapable of anything but blind allegiance need to wake up. Most of you voted for this guy because you believe his line that Iraq had something to do with 9/11. Yet you look the other way as Bush gets into bed with the Saudis, who had 17 of its citizens leading the 9/11 attack. If you all are so filled with the vengeance of retaliation why aren’t you storming Washington, or Crawford, insisting that Bush invade Saudi Arabia, instead of cozying up to them for oil?

Overhead Compartments

2005-04-22T13:53:00.000-06:00

I board my flight for Seattle and follow my rule for use of the overhead compartment. That is, get on as early as I can so that I can put all of my stuff in one place, avoid placing anything under the seat in front of me (on many planes the room under the seat in front of window seats is too small for either of my carry-ons, and I do not have enough memory to store the models of the planes that are in this category, nor do I care to make any effort to commit this to memory if I had the extra space up there), and be sure to place the items in the compartment on the opposite side of the plane from my seat. This last one is important because on packed flights, sometimes the flight attendants will move stuff in the overhead compartments around to make room to fit everything in. This happened to me on a flight where, for some reason, one of my bags was moved two or three compartments further back in the plane, and I did not witness this action. The first thought is that someone boosted my bag. So that created some stress. When I finally found out that my bag had been moved, I had to wait for a long time to retrieve it when getting off the plane. So to avoid all of that I always place my stuff on the opposite side, just a little ahead of my seat so that I can keep an eye on it.

Today a guy whose seat is under the compartment where my bags are stowed takes exception to this. Instead of saying something to me so that I can explain that this is a perfectly reasonable thing to do he starts a loud conversation with the guy behind him about this as if I am not there. The other guy says something about me having no clue, to which I respond, just loud enough that they could hear but not directed at them or loud enough for them to get the whole thing “I have lots of clues and two of them are that you are assholes.” I say “lots of clues” and “holes” loud enough that I am sure they heard me. They shut up and sat down.

These are obviously not road weary travelers that have had to endure the ridiculous and routine rigors of air travel.

Ever the Concynicist

2005-04-13T14:42:00.000-06:00

What’s that you say? You don’t know what a concynicist is? Well it is a new term that I have coined to describe myself, equal parts of CONspiracy TheorIST and CYNIC. Concynicist, pronounced kon-SIN-eh-sist.

Anyway, I arrive at the Newark Airport in plenty of time, thanks to my good friend Frank Bresz who I met for breakfast and he paid (thanks Frank). I am there early enough that I do not get going about the long line in security and complain to the person in front of me about this process being the Bush illusion of secure air travel. I reach the guy who is stationed at the entrance to the cattle lanes, he checks my boarding pass and ID and starts writing something on a clipboard. He finishes and hands me a sheet of paper, which is a homemade form, one that has been duplicated several times not using the original each time. I ask what this is and he says, or at least I think he says because he is an ESL employee, “Give this to the guy at the metal detector” I ask “What is this?” He says the same thing. I ask “What is this for?” He again says the same thing as if there is someone behind him pulling a string to make him talk. I don’t look at it and stuff it into my shirt pocket, with no intention of giving it to anyone unless forced to. I assume that it is some kind of “random” checking process where they are going to shake me down for that package of baby wipes that I carry with me to give my ass that fresh-as-a-baby feel after my mega-fiber-induced bowel movements. I may have missed this prohibition that might have been attached to the recent “no lighters” policy on flights and do not want to take any chances. I go through security without a hitch, except, of course, having to endure that ‘I-will-now-feel-dirty-all-day’ syndrome because they have made me take off my shoes and walk across their filthy floor. When I think about it again I take out the sheet that the ESL guy handed me and look at it. It has my first name on it and the time that I arrived at his position. The guy that I should have handed this to would have filled in the time that I left security to measure the flow rate of the line. So, this was an efficiency monitoring thing, which I fully support. Had the ESL guy told me that everything would have been fine. But since he didn’t, my concynicist antennae went up and I went into you’re-not-doing-that-to-me mode. Do I feel bad about this? Kind of, but not really. This is W’s fault. He created this atmosphere where any person with half a brain starts to question any deviation in routine, especially when it comes to guys wearing uniforms, badges and/or guns. I am just a victim of his failed policies that are eroding what used to be free country.

Fantasy Pope Draft

2005-04-07T06:37:00.000-06:00

Departing from my usual ranting state that is nearly constant for me, I am asking for your help. The office Fantasy Pope Draft is coming up soon and I need to be prepared. I am not catholic so I do not follow the minor leagues of pope-dom, the cardinals. I have the 10th pick overall so all of the blue-chippers will be taken. So I am thinking about taking long shot picks in every round by staying away from cardinals from European countries. From the rest of the world where should I look? I was thinking South America, Africa, and Canada.

If any of you who are watching the 24-hour pope stuff that is preempting all of the other news that is going on in the world have any ideas please let me know. We don’t have big money tied up in this pool, but it does raise my interest level and give some reason to pay attention to all of the repetitious, currently meaningless, crap that being aired 24 hours a day by CNN, MSNBC, et. al.

Thanks a lot.

RIP Terri Schiavo

2005-03-31T12:21:00.000-07:00

I offer my most sincere condolences to the family before I provide some thoughts on the matter here.

1. The politicians were, and continue to be, grandstanding on this tragedy. Anything to get the attention off unethical behavior is OK for Delay and company, but it doesn’t wash.

2. With all of the politicians’ emphasis on not redefining marriage so that they can discriminate against homosexuals you would think that they would be consistent and not want to let the court redefine marriage and take the decision-making authority away from Michael Schiavo. But no, they try to get the law changed for this case. Wow. Why can’t all of you who vote these imbeciles into office see through this charade? Oh, I forgot, you cannot see through that “born-again” veil that they have cloaked over themselves, giving them immunity from having original, critical, or objective thought, or most of all, accountability.

3. Why is it that when a judge rules in favor of changing a law to not discriminate against homosexuals he or she is categorized as an “activist”? And, when a judge evaluates a case and rules to let a husband make decisions for his wife, as it has been for a zillion years, they are also called “activist”? Seems like any judge who does not rule in favor for the religious right is an “activist”.

4. When you watch the coverage of this issue they show all of these people protesting. While everyone has a right to assemble, except when Bush appears somewhere, where do these people come from? Are these the same people who demonstrate everywhere and just travel around from cause to cause? Does someone pay them for this? What is the going rate for these “fantasy grievers”?

5. Don’t you think that the “fantasy grievers” protesting outside the hospice could have put their time to better use? The could have spent all of that energy getting people to write living wills, instead of wasting their time trying to see their face on CNN.

6. Last thing on “fantasy grievers”. I would like to see a law put on the books that you cannot be a “fantasy griever” until the age of 18. It is so scary to see these folks dragging their grade school age kids around there with them. These kids have no idea what is going on, yet they are on display there holding a sign that says something that most of them cannot read. I would put this is the category of child abuse, and charge their parents with it.

7. Had Terri Schiavo been in a hospice in any other state, or at least almost any other state, we probably would not have heard about her. But the Bush brothers saw a way to make political hay with their misguided political base and pounced on it. It kind of blew up in their faces, but again the misguided base is so brainwashed that they cannot see through the “cloak”.

If Being Gay is a Choice, Then it’s Time to Remove Religious Protections

2005-03-14T13:02:00.000-07:00

After all of the debate about same-sex marriage no one has yet to define for anyone what is the actual threat to America that will require Congress to consider a constitutional amendment to ban it. If anyone out there has a good reason, please post it here. And before you start with your "because it is bad" or "because the bible say it is bad" or any similar response please note that I am asking for an explanation on what is the actual threat to America.

I have had several discussions about this and have heard numerous presentations and panel discussions on television and radio. It appears that one common thread throughout the argument against same-sex marriage is based on a religious belief coupled with the notion that being homosexual is a choice. Both of these are potential subjects of separate harangues so I will not explore them now. What I do want to present is based on a hypothetical, that being for you to assume that I could actually be convinced that being homosexual is a choice. I know that is an enormous leap as I will probably never be convinced of that, but for now, at least the remainder of this harangue let's assume that I believe that it is a choice.

Now we have a consensus between a lot of you out there and me about this choice that a person makes sometime in their life. It is a clear-cut choice that one sits down and says to himself or herself, "Yup, I think that I will be homosexual. That looks like fun." Maybe some other process is used, but the bottom line is that a person makes the choice.

So, since this is a choice and we now want pass a constitutional amendment to discriminate against these people because of this choice, I believe that this logic would support the elimination of any protection from discrimination based upon religion. After all, isn't a person's religion, or lack thereof, based on a choice?

Time to start calling and writing your congress person. Hopefully you are smart enough to realize that I am NOT suggesting that you ask them to support a ban on same-sex marriage. But if you want to start a campaign to remove religious protection, knock yourself out.

Movie Late Comers

2005-03-11T07:53:00.000-07:00

Here's the scene: I am by myself in Scottsdale, AZ, a week before the Oscars and decide to see The Aviator, a 3-hour movie. I know that I will need a lot of room to move around during the movie because I have trouble sitting still for long amounts of time. My doctor says I have ADD in my butt. Anyway, I go early sit in the middle of the last row, throw the arm rests next to me up and spread out. As expected people come in and eventually a couple sits on my right with a seat between us, and later a couple sits on my left with a seat between us. Perfect! I sit back with my feet out and my hands clasped behind my head spreading my elbows out like the comfortable guy that I am and need to be. The place continues to fill, but not pack, so there are a lot of seats, especially in the front. The lights go down, the previews begin and don’t you know that some folks come up to the last row expecting to find 4 seats together. They insist that everybody to my left move over to make room. They do, so now I have someone cramped up against me. Just as the movie begins, it happens again on the other side, smashing me from the right side. So I have to sit there scrunched in like being in the middle seat on a 3-hour flight. All because these idiots insist on coming late and not sitting where there are plenty of available seats. Thank god for Netflix, so that I don’t have to deal with these arrogant bastards every time I want to see a movie.

Social Security Solvency: It’s Easy

2005-03-09T14:02:00.000-07:00

The simple, fast, risk-free, fair, and painless way to ensure the solvency of Social Security is to remove the salary cap for contributions. Currently earnings in excess of $90,000 are not taxed. That’s right, as one’s income rises above the $90K mark his or her contribution percentage is reduced, making Social Security the king of all regressive taxes. For example, someone right at the $90K level pays 6.25% of this $90K into Social Security. Someone making double that, or $180K, only pays in 3.125%. Someone making $360K pays in only 1.5625%. Last year, Tiger Woods made $80,300,000. Want to guess how much he paid? Approximately .007%. That is 7 one thousandths of one percent! Had a person making $90K been taxed at Tiger’s rate he or she would have paid in $6.30 instead of $5,625.00. Wouldn’t we all like to have that deal?

The solution to the solvency of Social Security is staring at you in the numbers presented above. Everyone should at least be paying the same rate on their earnings and the only way to do that is to eliminate the cap. But, forgive me, I forgot. That would be the fair thing to do, and Bush does not know the meaning of that four-letter “F” word. I guess he and I are even when you consider that every time I think of him I think of the other four-letter “F” word.

Bush: Stay in DC

2005-03-07T07:57:00.000-07:00

I noticed that Bush is planning to travel to 60 cities in 60 days to campaign for his “plan” to “save” Social Security. This makes me curious about:

1. If the Bush “plan” to change Social Security is such a good one why does he have to stage these campaign events?

2. Why are these events staged as were his election campaign events, i.e., only supporters are permitted to attend, questions are planted in the audience and dissenters are hauled away or arrested?

3. Who is really paying for all of this?

I have said it before and will continue to say that the basic premise on which the Bush “plan” is based is flat out wrong. The amount deducted from your paycheck for Social Security is NOT YOUR MONEY. This is a TAX that is used as an insurance policy for the elderly, their survivors, and the disabled, who need financial assistance. It is also NOT A RETIREMENT PLAN. Before Bush can even begin to think about crafting a plan to address the solvency issues of Social Security, he must understand these two principle factors about Social Security.

Mr. Bush, stay in Washington and DO YOUR JOB!

Texas - The Rich get Richer

2005-03-03T06:36:00.000-07:00

A bill is being sent to the state senate that will reduce property and school taxes and pay for this by raising the sales tax, cigarette tax, and a few other taxes. Who wins on this one? Definitely not anyone who cannot own a home. So the poor continue to get trampled on while the rich take more and more away from them. What is most amazing is that nearly all of those who voted for this measure go to church on Sundays and call themselves Christians. They seem to conveniently ignore the 'least among us' teachings of Jesus.

Oscar Telecast: What Happened to the Music?

2005-02-28T08:25:00.000-07:00

Anyone with even a half an ounce of musical discernment who watched Oscar telecast could not help to notice the hideous selection of artists that they had performing, especially Beyonce Knowles. They have her “sing” three songs, none of which did she have any association prior to the telecast. The first one she tries to sing in French with what appeared to be the boys’ choir who perform the song in “The Chorus”. It was obvious that she was not fluent in the language. With all of the talented French singers that there are in the world, why did the organizers of this event allow her to embarrass herself like that? They should have let the kids do it by themselves. Then she performed a song from “The Phantom of the Opera” that she butchered. Her inability to pick out the pitch and her horrendous phrasing and breathing were bad on all three songs, but most obvious on this one. Then they have her butt into Josh Groban’s song from the Polar Express. Why not let him do it alone as he did for the movie. Like him or not, this is his song. He should have walked off the stage when that hack showed up.

They also dragged out Antonio Banderas to sing the song that would win the Oscar. Pairing him up with Carlos Santana produced the most forgettable rendition of this tune possible. I am sure that none of you were whistling or humming it on your way to work today, or ever.

As for the song from “Shrek 2”, I have no complaints. The Counting Crows performed as they should have. Even though I am not a big fan of theirs, they earned the right to perform their song and did a fine job.

We knew going in that this was not a good year in the Best Song category. But they did not need to exacerbate the problem by these bad performances. On a night when a number of presenters and awardees lauded the artists and composers that provide the music for the movies, it was extremely surprising that they would not speak out about these horrible performances.

Bottom line on this is that somebody got paid big bucks to force Beyonce Knowles into the Oscar telecast. What else could it have been? Ratings? Hardly. They blew their wad on hyping the Chris Rock angle, who by the way should put this one on his resume and move on. His rant against Bush, while I agreed with everything that he said, was inappropriate for the event.

My message to the Oscar organizers is this: Wake up and return the art to the artists. You have moved very close to that unforgivable debacle during the 1998 Grammy telecast when Aretha Franklin embarrassed herself and the world when she screeched and squawked her way through “Nessun dorma” from Puccini's “Turandot”. I have not watched the Grammy awards since and will stop watching the Oscar telecast if you guys continue to produce the schlock that you did this year.

Bush Keeps Sicking it to the Little Guy

2005-02-11T06:32:00.000-07:00

Now he has gotten passage of a bill to make it harder for the average person to bring suit against corporations. This is yet another example of Bush ignoring the little guy, as he did with the tax cut, the prescription drug "benefit", Iraq, and what he wants to do with Social Security. I am so glad to hear that he is praying for the poor and less fortunate, while taking more and more away from them. How does this guy sleep at night?

Bush: You are a Hypocrite

2005-02-10T06:18:00.000-07:00

At the 53rd annual prayer breakfast Bush said "praying reminds the faithful to hear the cry of the poor and the less fortunate". Then a few days later he releases his FY06 budget that had cuts to, an the elimination of some, programs specifically targeting the poor in our country. Here is the most powerful person in the world with respect to having the ability to help the poor and all he does is "pray" for them. For this I am not sure why he has not had a meeting with a lightening bolt, because if, as Pat Robertson says, god wanted him to be president, he or she certainly cannot be pleased with his self-serving performance.

One Michael Jackson Supporter

2005-02-03T18:56:00.000-07:00

I saw an interview with a woman on one of the news shows who stated that the Michael Jackson’s court case is so important that she felt that she needed to quit her job as a kindergarten teacher to travel to California to be near him. Imagine what the parents whose children were her students felt like when they saw this. Something like “You mean that we had a lunatic like this teaching our children?”

Goodbye Tom Ridge

2005-02-03T18:55:00.000-07:00

Tom Ridge is stepping down as the head of the Department of Homeland Security because he is not making enough money. He claims that his $175,000 annual salary is not enough for him to pay for his children’s college costs. (Hey Tom, trade me salaries and I will pay for your kids’ education) No one seems to care that he says stuff like this, not to mention that he has done nothing to really secure this country. Our ports are wide open, our chemical plants are sitting ducks, and we have been provided the illusion of security at the airport when we are forced to remove our shoes. All that he has accomplished is helping Bush expand government with this department of 170,000 people. So much for smaller government.

Oh well, at least this guy is gone, and for that we can be thankful.

Social Security Cheats African Americans?

2005-02-03T18:52:00.000-07:00

According to Bush African Americans are being cheated by Social Security because they are “more likely than whites to die before receiving their fair share of retirement benefits.” I have said this previously on my blog and I will repeat it here to reinforce what an idiot this guy is: SOCIAL SECURITY IS NOT A RETIREMENT PLAN!!!! It appears that Bush continues to believe that it is and is basing this proposal to “save” Social Security by selling out to Wall Street on the fact that many Americans do not understand that Social Security is a tax.

Using his logic, since African Americans have shorter life spans they should be taxed a lower rate across the board, because they will not be getting the use out of the roads, schools and other public infrastructure that their federal and state taxes fund. And what about people with genetic diseases that shorten their life spans? Will he make adjustments for these folks also? The guy thinks that if he says something enough times that everyone will think it is true. The really sad thing is that there is a very large contingent in this country that only needs to hear him say something once, as they worship every word he says.

Call or write your Congress representatives, insisting that they not let this madman ruin Social Security!

Do the Math?

2005-02-03T18:50:00.000-07:00

During one of his too-infrequent press conferences Bush said that Social Security will not be able to meet its obligations in 13 years and will be bankrupt in 42 years. His quote was “Do the math.” Well, apparently he must have recently completed a remedial course himself, otherwise he would have “done the math” three years ago and diverted the $1.2 trillion tax break for the rich into the Social Security fund.

His plan to “save” Social Security is a pure and simple reward to yet another rich segment of our society, Wall Street. Wake up America!

I Pledge Allegiance . . .

2005-02-03T18:48:00.000-07:00

From a recent “Non Sequitur” comic strip:

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the corporate states of America, and to the Republicans for which it stands, one nation, under debt, easily divisible, with liberty and justice for oil.”

If it only had a reference to god the Bush administration would be pushing to have this pledge replace the current one.

Time Off for Off-Hour Travel?

2005-01-20T09:09:00.000-07:00

On January 28 federal employees will be given time off when they travel for business on personal time. Wow! That's a really efficient thing for the Bush administration to push through. Does this mean that he will be spending even more time away from the most important job in the world?

Those of us in the private sector should not expect this any time soon, or more accurately, EVER. The corporate powers would never let something like this pass for the general working slugs. It would eat into their profits and, possibly but not likely, reduce their obscene bonuses.

For anyone who resents traveling during their personal time for their job, I say GET ANOTHER JOB! You do not have to do this. It is just like any other aspect of the job, if you do not like it then head for the door.

"The Village" & Our Government

2005-01-20T08:40:00.000-07:00

I recently rented the film "The Village", a decent and fairly entertaining movie, in which Ron Howard's real-life daughter gives a stunning performance. Since it has been out for quite a while I do not have a problem with giving you a little information on it, but if you have not seen it and want to be surprised, or, you want to try to be surprised because the twist is not that big of a deal, then stop reading. Otherwise I will be giving away a little bit of the story. I will reduce the font size in case you want to jump over it and read the rest of this post.

The movie is about a guy who creates an insulated community, using fear and money to maintain order.

That's it, all that I am going to say about the movie, so any of you jumped over the last sentence can now safely return to my harangue.

It occurred to me that the movie was an excellent metaphor for how the Bush administration operates. (It is an equally-excellent metaphor for organized religion) They have stricken fear in the general populace by continuing to beat the 9/11 tragedy into our brains along with the "threat" of terrorism, rather than doing something that would give us the confidence that this was an isolated incident. They have CREATED a war and are funding it with billions of dollars to keep the "threat" of terrorism, something that really is not present in IRAQ, at least with respect to the US, constantly on our minds.

They continue to fund this out-of-control propaganda machine with handouts to the rich in the form of tax breaks, giant give aways to the pharmaceutical companies disguised as a prescription drug plan for seniors, and are now trying to give our social security taxes to Wall Street.

The guy in the movie was successful because the majority of the folks in his community had no idea what was going on. I concluded a long time ago that the majority of folks in this country are equally clueless, or worse, they just don't care.

So all of you who worship Bush, enjoy your $40 million day to celebrate a man who is ruining our country, and just doesn't seem to care.

Am I the Only One Who Thinks This is Wrong?

2005-01-11T13:29:00.001-07:00

Former Presidents Bush and Clinton are currently appearing in a commercial asking that we give to help the victims of the earthquake and tsunami in southeast Asia stay alive and rebuild their cities, towns and villages.

The United States is spending one billion dollars each week to kill Iraqis and tear down their country.

If you were in control, wouldn't you stop the killing and spend this enormous amount of money to help people who need it most?

Social Security is NOT Retirement Savings

2005-01-11T13:11:00.000-07:00

With all of the attention that Bush's promised privatization of Social Security has created I think that you all should know what no one seems to be telling you, or that very few people actually know - Social Security is NOT your retirement savings. Social Security is a TAX. This tax is used to pay current retirees. This is just like federal or state income tax, except that it has a specific purpose. That purpose has nothing to do with your personal financial security. In other words this is not YOUR money. Establishing private accounts with this money, as Bush proposes, is akin to delivering a few feet of asphalt from the freeway to you, or sending you a school desk or books. You may or may not use the freeways and schools, but just because you helped pay for them with your tax dollars you do not actually own any part of them. Why in the world would this guy believe that you should "own" a piece of the Social Security tax? Because he is an idiot, and if you let him, he will ruin Social Security with this stupid plan. The only folks who will gain from this plan is Wall Street, his base, also known as "the haves who want even more", and Bsh will give it to them.

Oooooo, Those Threatening Coffins

2005-01-11T07:39:00.000-07:00

The Secret Service issued a directive on 12/17 to the National Park Service that along the inaugural parade route there can be no folding chairs, bicycles and other structures, and displays "such as puppets, papier mache objects, coffins, crates, crosses, theaters, cages, and statues" because all of these "could be used in potentially threatening or harmful manner".

When was the last time that you heard a report of someone being threatened or harmed by a coffin? Seems like Bush does not want to be reminded again of the large number of service men and women that he is killing in Iraq. It was very chilling to see 1,000 mock coffins draped in black during the protest march at the Republican National Convention.

Also, beware of threatening or harmful puppets. Maybe Homeland Security should shut down Sesame Street? How could any sane person have voted for these idiots?

Another Waste of Taxpayer's Money

2005-01-05T08:03:00.000-07:00

Did anyone notice that accompanying Secretary of State Colin Powell on a trip to Indonesia was Florida Governor Jeb Bush. Why? Why are our tax dollars being spent on this? There is only one reason and that is for the photo opportunities that this will provide for his campaign in 2008. If anyone can think of another please let me know.

Those Stupid Yellow Magnetic Ribbons

2005-01-05T07:46:00.000-07:00

I did a lot of driving over the holidays and saw scads of various flavors of "Support Our Troops" magnetic ribbons plastered on cars and, of course, gas-guzzling SUVs. I wonder about the motivation of people who feel a need to purchase these things. They are certainly not expecting the proceeds to benefit the sodiers or their families, or they would be sending their donations directly. Maybe they believe these to be some kind of immunization against having anyone in their family sent over there to kill innocent people or to be killed. Or maybe it is just another way for them to jump up on their "holier-than-thou" pedestal. While I am sure that some folks have honest intentions when purchasing and displaying these ribbons, I would also say that these folks are also just not intelligent enough to recognize that these are just another money-making scam that preys on the weak and those most susceptible to "fantasy grief".

Maybe they should consider the words of social critic Benjamin Melançon, "Coward's yellow is the right color for anyone who hasn't done anything for our soldiers except put a ribbon on their rolling monument to fossil fuel dependence." He adds, "And not even stickers, but easily removable magnets, as if ready remove and no longer 'Support Our Troops' when the war gets too unpopular."

Traffic Laws and the Golden Rule

2005-01-04T07:14:00.000-07:00

Here's the scenario: I was driving the speed limit, 70 MPH, in the right lane on an interstate through a Red state. In the left lane is an 18-wheeler that does not seem to be in a hurry to pass me. Tailgating me is an SUV that is flashing its lights. Once the semi finally passes me the SUV does likewise. As he passes the SUV driver honks his horn and displays an obscene gesture with his right hand. On the tailgate of the SUV is one of those fish things with the word "Jesus" inside, a bumper sticker saying something like "Spread the Word" and the name of some church, and a sticker on the window that looks like Calvin, from Calvin and Hobbes, kneeling in prayer beside a cross.

It was obvious that this guy did not really get too much out of his weekly visit to church. He at least violated the golden rule, and maybe a whole lot of other stuff that is buried in the bible. But it occurred to me that maybe everyone who violates traffic laws is also violating the golden rule. Don't you just hate it when you are on a road or street following someone who slows sudddenly and turns off without providing the advance warning by using their turn signal? Or, how about those folks who nearly clip you as the run a red light or a stop sign? These are easily violations of the golden rule. But so is speeding. To that "Christian" SUV driver I contend that by putting me at risk because you want to drive faster than has been deemed safe is clearly a violation of the golden rule. Surely you would not want me to put you life at risk so why do you imperil me?

To all of you folks who consider yourselves "Christian" out there, please think about the golden rule the next time that you choose to ignore traffic laws. I know that Christian cult does have an exclusive patent or trademark on the "do unto others" mantra, so all of the rest of you should also obey traffic laws, lest you be deemed in violation of the dogma of your religious sect.

Time to Remove the Stickers

2005-01-04T07:10:00.000-07:00

For all of you with political stickers on your car, e.g., Kerry-Edwards or W04, it is time to remove them. By continuing to display them you are contributing to the polarization of this country. Nobody cares who you voted for. Grow up!

Breakfast in a Red State

2005-01-03T07:51:00.000-07:00

While driving through Virginia I stopped for a late breakfast at a Cracker Barrel. At 11:15 AM there was a 45-minute wait for a table. I could not believe it. I wanted to jump up on the counter and scream "This is a RED state. Why aren't you people in church? Shouldn't you be singing hymns and congratulating one another on your moral superiority?" But I didn't. I just left, hungry.

More Children Left Behind

2004-12-17T10:06:00.000-07:00

I see in the paper that one of the Bush daughters will be teaching in a DC public school. I have never been a proponent of school vouchers, but this is the best support of them that they could have rolled out. After the mass exodus from her school begins the legislation can’t be far behind.

More Dumbing Down of America

2004-12-17T10:05:00.000-07:00

I hate to sound like Andy Rooney, but did you ever wonder why the public has an insatiable desire for information that is absolutely meaningless to their lives while they ignore things that directly affect them? Take this Billy Tauzin story about him being rewarded with a plum lobbying job for his work for the drug manufacturers while in Congress. Nobody seems to care about that. No report of this by the major network news, just a little few-paragraph blurb buried in the business section, if included in the paper at all. Here is a guy that will have an impact on all of our lives, ensuring that the government does nothing to lower the already too high price of prescription drugs in this country, while the president looks the other way. But we get bombarded with stories and analysis of a murder trial that has no impact on our lives for months and months, even after the verdict has been read. Wake up America!

Another Example of the Corporate Stranglehold on America

2004-12-17T10:04:00.000-07:00

I see that Billy Tauzin, former House member who headed the committee that “regulates” the pharmaceutical industry, is being rewarded for ramrodding that ridiculous Medicare prescription benefit into law, with a $2 million per year salary to head up the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. This is the powerful lobbying group, members of which were illegally permitted on the House floor during the vote for the prescription drug bill, the vote that Bush illegally held open for three hours, while he lied to House members about the cost of the bill, having been told that it would cost nearly $200 billion more than he was promising to get these votes. With Billy at the helm we have no hope of seeing any meaningful reform/repeal of this horrible bill, and we can be certain that drug prices will be increased to obscenely new heights.

Never Any Gas When You Really Need It

2004-12-17T10:03:00.000-07:00

On a full flight the guy next to me, in the middle seat, who is a regular sized guy, spreads out into my space, taking the armrest and resting his leg against mine. If you liken your position in an airplane seat to that of a quarterback in the pocket directly behind the center, this guy was clearly outside the tackle box, that being his arm rests. The entire time he sits there spitting some tobacco crap into a cup and listening to cowboy music on those cheap open headphones that you purchase in flight. Even over the roar of the flight noise, I can hear this intellectually-challenged noise throughout the flight. My only defense would have been a number of good farts, but alas and alack (whatever that means) I was gasless, a rarity these days for me since I have been trying to maintain a high fiber diet. I hear that they may be eliminating the restriction of in-flight cell phone use. If that happens I will be increasing me pre-flight ingestion of legumes to fire a few volleys back at these jabbering annoyances.

Why All of the Noise?

2004-12-17T10:02:00.000-07:00

I was having breakfast at the Ontario, CA airport Applebee’s at 6:00 AM. I was one of a handful of people in the place where I would have expected a quiet and peaceful meal while reading a book. But no. I was seated about six feet from a TV blaring ESPN and sitting directly under a speaker that was playing “Funky Town” equally loud. Why is it that these places think that we need all of this noise. It seems like we are being forced into an existence of mindless drivel and someone does not want us to have our own thoughts anymore. This explains a lot of what is going on today, for example the last presidential election.

Exactly What are They Doing for Me?

2004-12-17T10:01:00.000-07:00

On a recent flight the captain came on shortly before landing with the obligatory thanks-for-flying-with-us speech, but added a bit about telling us that we may be seeing soldiers in desert camouflage in the airports coming/going from/to Iraq. He asked that we thank them “for what they are doing for us in Iraq”. Huh? Exactly what are they doing for me over there? I don’t work for Halliburton, so I am not receiving the rewards of that gravy train. Did he mean the added stress of seeing innocent people being killed every day over there while our egomaniacal presidents yuks it up on camera, ignoring the real cost of this war? I don’t think so. This captain like a huge number of the lemming population of this country believe that these soldiers are fighting for our freedom over there, at least I hear that over and over from these conservative wonks on TV. If they are, someone sure has been keeping it a secret that my freedom was in doubt due the previously-controlled regime without an effective army, no air force or navy, and no weapons of mass destruction, repeat NO weapons of mass destruction. Wake up America.

Dumbing Down of America

2004-12-17T10:00:00.000-07:00

I guess that I shouldn’t be surprised, but on a recent visit to Baskin Robins I purchased two scoops of ice cream (have you ever noticed that all of their flavors seem to taste the same?) and paid with cash. I asked for a receipt and the cashier said “We do not give receipts for cash transactions, only credit card charges.” I say OK then I will charge it, handed him my card and took my money back. He then does not know how to void the cash transaction and asks a co-worker for help. She does not know either so they ask a girl who appears to be a customer, but either must be there on an off day or was a former employee. He explained the situation to her and she said just push this button and print a receipt for the cash transaction. He does and everything works fine, almost. He gives me my card back and I give him $5 for a $2.99 charge. After printing the receipt the cash register reset and did not display the change figure. So, he pulls out a calculator to help him determine the change amount. Wow. Somebody please call Bush. This child seems to have been “left behind”.

The Illusion of Security

2004-12-17T09:59:00.000-07:00

The lines at the “security” checkpoints at airports are longer than ever, all because the Bush administration wants us to believe that this is securing our flights. What does taking your shoes off, walking on a filthy floor in your socks, really accomplish except make you feel dirty for the rest of the day? C’mon, because of one guy we now have to take our shoes off? I guess it can be seen as a good thing that Richard Reed did not have some C4 wrapped around his penis, or we would all be whipping it out at the security checkpoint.

A Morally Superior Waste of Money

2004-12-17T09:57:00.000-07:00

Did you see what the presidential inauguration is going to cost? How about $45 million? Yep, all that money for 4 days of parties. I guess I can understand why these folks can be so happy, after all, their candidate was really elected this time (shhhh, don’t tell Ohio) so a 4-day celebration may be justified. But what puzzles me is that, if you believe the media, Bush “won” this election because of something called “moral values”. (I am still not sure what this phrase means, but that is a different topic.) So if he is really on the moral high ground shouldn’t everyone, especially his supporters, be questioning the moral value in wasting such a large sum of money on a big party for the elite? Wouldn’t it be quite refreshing for him to call a press conference (no questions unless he plants them, as usual, of course) to announce that there will be no parties this year. Instead the $45 million will be used to send the troops in Iraq the luxuries that they are asking for, like soap. (Soap! Can you believe it? Parent groups are putting “care packages” sending soldiers stuff that they have asked for and on the list is soap. $200 billion and you would think that somewhere in there we could ask Halliburton to distribute some soap, forget the fact that they would probably charge $10 for a each bar. At least our soldiers could have some SOAP!) But Bush would never do this because he has to reward his “base” with an unnecessary series of parties. A nice night at home with his Stepford wife just won’t do.

Rich Getting Richer

2004-12-17T09:56:00.000-07:00

An article in the December 13 Houston Chronicle reported that “Total retail sales for November rose by 1.7 percent, on a year-over-year basis, . . . But in the luxury segment sales increased by 5.2 percent.” Hmmmm. So what does this really mean? Do you think that the “Haves” seem to have even more? I wonder why. It couldn’t have anything to do with the Bush administration giving away the surplus to them in the form of a “tax break”, could it? But before you jump up and say that the plan worked, the “Haves” are spending their money, think about it. How many jobs are really created when the extremely wealthy decide to buy that one-of-a-kind piece of jewelry, or invest in some rare art, or purchase that special collectible car for their garage? Exactly the same number as were employed before they made these purchases. Thanks Bush, for selling out the country for your wealthy friends.

Say it Ain’t So

2004-12-17T09:54:00.000-07:00

No one seems surprised that major league baseball players are now admitting that they use steroids, including me. But what does surprise me, no, it really sickens me, that so many people reacting to this say something like “This sends the wrong message to our children”. I hate to use an old and tired reaction to that statement but I must: PUHLEEESE! The hypocrisy is just dripping off that statement. Does no one consider the wrong message that all professional sports send the children by being in the back pockets of the makers and distributors of alcoholic beverages? I know, alcohol is legal for adults. But hey, guess what, so are steroids. You can consume alcohol as long as you meet the minimum age and you can take steroids as long as you have a prescription. I will bet that alcohol kills a lot more people annually than steroids, but since they do not bankroll the large salaries in major league sports everyone can act all incredulous about them, while getting hammered in a bar, driving home, and putting the public at risk. If I had to choose, I would legalize steroids and ban alcohol from all public places.

They are All Heroes

2004-12-17T09:53:00.000-07:00

We continue to hear about Pat Tillman, this time the Pentagon is denying the report that he was killed by friendly fire, and is standing by its story that he died while encountering the enemy. My problem with this has nothing to do with the way he died or the typical Rumsfeldesque head-in-the sand approach to accountability. I do not understand why we have placed this guy, Tillman, on a pedestal, making him a larger-than-life hero just because he used to play in the NFL. I know that he volunteered for this, but so did all of the others who died in this unnecessary, illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. None of these soldier’s lives are any less valuable than Tillman’s, just ask their families. Wake up America! Don’t let your fantasy grief for a former football player cloud the real issue – Iraq is a mess and a whole lot more people are going to die. If you support this “war” then go over there and die for what you believe in. Otherwise show your support for our troops by replacing your silly “look at me and how sensitive I am because I have a yellow ‘I support out troops’ metallic ribbon my car which means that I am better than you are because you don’t” ribbons with ones that say “Bring our troops home – NOW!”

Three kinds of people

2004-12-10T08:17:00.000-07:00

I believe that the US is made up of three kinds of people:

Those that are always looking at everything with a "What's in it for me?" attitude.
Those who are willing to be led like sheep without critical thought, i.e., the majority of Democrats and Republicans.
Everybody else

Trouble is the majority of our country fits into the first two categories. I have never felt that we have a truly united nation, at least not during my lifetime. As long as our country remains embedded in the first two categories, we never will.

Screaming Out Loud to Nobody

2004-12-08T07:32:00.000-07:00

Just introduced to this site by a good friend and fellow blogger Frank Bresz. He offered the title of this first post as a description of exactly what I could do with this new-fangled thing. There is so much to harangue about these days as our country continues its downward spiral toward self destruction. Stay tuned.