Once again, we have to deal with the Multnomah County, Oregon, Arts tax. We are assured that this tax is permanent, and that this tax is not an unconstitutional head tax.
The tax is to hire extra arts teachers in the public schools, because there isn't enough money for teachers after first supporting a bloated, over-staffed administration. That's half for teachers. The other half if for "the arts."
Oh, we are also assured that this tax was approved by voters, many of whom earn little or no money and therefore won't pay the tax, because of the unemployment circumstance here, or because their college degree is in stuff like Phony Studies, or Communications, or -- Art, none of which degrees are known for an abundance of employment opportunity. You can't get a job in a Phony Studies company, for example. All such degrees are not really intended to increase the information available to the student, or to increase their fitness for the world they will face after graduation. The purpose of such degrees is to make the student feel good about themselves.
I guess if you have such a degree, your only hope is to get a job with some outfit that doesn't have to bring anything valuable to the marketplace -- such as government, where revenue is all taxes.
As you know, taxes are primarily intended to support the pet project of politicians -- that is, that portion of tax revenue left over after taking care of political cronies.
Last year, at about this same time, I suggested we should have a similar "math" tax, which would hire math teachers. Soon thereafter, there appeared a thunderous lack of interest in such an idea.
Thursday, April 10, 2014
Friday, April 04, 2014
Because culture belongs to everyone . . .
So the government moved in and seized a collection of artifacts from a 91 year old Indiana man. Read about it. The motive is to catalog the stuff. one by one, and find out where the owner got them, in hopes that they may find out it's something he shouldn't have, even if it was legal to acquire it when he acquired it. Or some such.
Did they amend the constitution to eliminate the Fourth Amendment sometime while I was out of town, and nobody told me? Shouldn't there be a search warrant involved in this mess, somehow, which would indicate what probable cause exists to think a crime had been committed?
Or is it just that goons are exempt from constitutional limits and anything they do will be blessed by judicial authority on the assumption that everything the government does must be reasonable, somehow, by definition?
What can we learn, here?
Better not own any stuff that has some cultural significance, whateverthehell that means. Cultural stuff is collective property because it is cultural, meaning that it belongs to the collective and government has the right to say who gets and who can't have what.
I just want to say that I, for one, am glad that our government masters are monitoring all communications, including this one, and that I'm glad our government overlords are looking out for the collective good of all when it comes to private collections of cultural artifacts. Everybody knows that private ownership of property deprives all the non-owners of the use of that property and is therefor unfair.
Did they amend the constitution to eliminate the Fourth Amendment sometime while I was out of town, and nobody told me? Shouldn't there be a search warrant involved in this mess, somehow, which would indicate what probable cause exists to think a crime had been committed?
Or is it just that goons are exempt from constitutional limits and anything they do will be blessed by judicial authority on the assumption that everything the government does must be reasonable, somehow, by definition?
What can we learn, here?
Better not own any stuff that has some cultural significance, whateverthehell that means. Cultural stuff is collective property because it is cultural, meaning that it belongs to the collective and government has the right to say who gets and who can't have what.
I just want to say that I, for one, am glad that our government masters are monitoring all communications, including this one, and that I'm glad our government overlords are looking out for the collective good of all when it comes to private collections of cultural artifacts. Everybody knows that private ownership of property deprives all the non-owners of the use of that property and is therefor unfair.
Sunday, March 09, 2014
Poor Baby!
Have you seen that ad where the actors complain that they could only afford to travel on one vacation a year?
Aw. Poor baby! lots of people can't afford to do even one, even if they get a vacation, and lots of people don't have jobs to take a vacation from, let alone rent hotel rooms and buy airline tickets. And these people, aided by their travel company, exult because they vacay twice a year.
Hey! They aren't even politicians, let alone the politician-in-chief.
Aw. Poor baby! lots of people can't afford to do even one, even if they get a vacation, and lots of people don't have jobs to take a vacation from, let alone rent hotel rooms and buy airline tickets. And these people, aided by their travel company, exult because they vacay twice a year.
Hey! They aren't even politicians, let alone the politician-in-chief.
Saturday, March 01, 2014
And now, on top of everything else, the Ukraine is a challenge to . . .
The presidential response to the Russian incursion into the Ukraine is basically, that there's nothing we can do about it, now. Before the incursion, we had that fine, time-tested strategy of endlessly talking about it. This administration calls that diplomacy. Just keep talking until both sides in conflict come to some sort of agreement, the terms of which are immaterial. For example, we talked and talked with the masters of Iran about our sanctions imposed to impede Iranian nuclear bomb development, until we finally mutually agreed to end the sanction in return for the Iranians continuing to pursue nuclear erasure of Israel. Ain't diplomacy cool?
But as for the Russian armed entry into the Ukraine, like the Islamist armed entry into Begahzi diplomatic offices, we couldn't do anything, so we did nothing -- except to try to minimize the perception that the combination of a basic ineptitude with a big head leads to one bad event after another. But ultimately, as Hillary said, what difference would it make? The one trying to make a difference is the same person with the same character that made the mess more likely in the first place.
So, we can abandon the Ukraine with our sense of self intact, because, basically there's nothing we can do about it, now that we've downsized our military (look it up) because we weren't going to use it anyhow. Our modern diplomacy (see Iran) is, after all, so much less muscle headed.
We used to have nations that were our friends, and we used to have nations whose friendship could be relied upon because it was bought and paid for. Now, what nation feels it could rely on our friendship, or our promises? After all, the Ukraine gave up its atomic bombs in return for our promise that it wouldn't need them because we would protect them from being re-absorbed into the Russian hegemony to come.
But, there's nothing we can do about it.
A question comes to mind. Exactly why is it there's nothing we can do about it, and who is to blame for our current impotence in world affairs?
Hint: the source resides in the halls of government and academia, and in the newsrooms, and is supported by a large number of unelected tools, and under-informed stooges.
But as for the Russian armed entry into the Ukraine, like the Islamist armed entry into Begahzi diplomatic offices, we couldn't do anything, so we did nothing -- except to try to minimize the perception that the combination of a basic ineptitude with a big head leads to one bad event after another. But ultimately, as Hillary said, what difference would it make? The one trying to make a difference is the same person with the same character that made the mess more likely in the first place.
So, we can abandon the Ukraine with our sense of self intact, because, basically there's nothing we can do about it, now that we've downsized our military (look it up) because we weren't going to use it anyhow. Our modern diplomacy (see Iran) is, after all, so much less muscle headed.
We used to have nations that were our friends, and we used to have nations whose friendship could be relied upon because it was bought and paid for. Now, what nation feels it could rely on our friendship, or our promises? After all, the Ukraine gave up its atomic bombs in return for our promise that it wouldn't need them because we would protect them from being re-absorbed into the Russian hegemony to come.
But, there's nothing we can do about it.
A question comes to mind. Exactly why is it there's nothing we can do about it, and who is to blame for our current impotence in world affairs?
Hint: the source resides in the halls of government and academia, and in the newsrooms, and is supported by a large number of unelected tools, and under-informed stooges.
Thursday, February 20, 2014
But at least I don't have a moment to spare to reflect on our sad, dangerous, out of touch and corrupt government ,. , ,
Okay, so I've been away from home, and will continue to be so until the end of March. Very little time available to think of anything consequential, midst all of the child care going on. I think child care used to be easier forty years ago -- I don't remember it being this tiring.
As for the rest, well, the first part of February about the most exciting thing we did was watch the snow fall. Now, the most exciting thing I'm doing is watching the snow melt.
I have become quite good at putting a little four month old baby to sleep, thus earning the name, "Mr. Excitement."
The only problem now, is that I cannot either stand or sit without quietly rocking back and forth at the exact best rhythm to put a baby to sleep. Of course, I now resemble one of those poor wretches who sit and rock all day by reason of a brain injury.
I worry about becoming a head banger.
As for the rest, well, the first part of February about the most exciting thing we did was watch the snow fall. Now, the most exciting thing I'm doing is watching the snow melt.
I have become quite good at putting a little four month old baby to sleep, thus earning the name, "Mr. Excitement."
The only problem now, is that I cannot either stand or sit without quietly rocking back and forth at the exact best rhythm to put a baby to sleep. Of course, I now resemble one of those poor wretches who sit and rock all day by reason of a brain injury.
I worry about becoming a head banger.
Monday, February 17, 2014
Hooray for Hollywood . . .
my bride and I watched Gone with the Wind a few days ago. It's a great old movie, made, I think, in 1942, maybe 1941. More importantly, compare it to nearly anything coming out from the movie industry in the last few years and I think it's clear that the industry has basically lost its way.
It's a matter of values.
It's a matter of values.
Monday, February 10, 2014
Some people are irony impaired . . .
Some people in North Carolina intend to protest the requirement that voters show photo identification to vote. Showing ID = bad. Might suppress votes.
Of course, that is exactly what the id requirement is intended to do, suppress votes, that is, votes cast by people who are not eligible to be registered to vote, including "duplicate" votes of voters registered in more than one jurisdiction, disenfranchised voters because of felonies, and fraudulently cast voters of dead people, etc.
And that's why requiring I.D. is thought to be bad -- because no one knows what might happen or who might win, if the traditional ways of rigging election returns are eliminated. Why, if you allowed elections to be decided by only those citizens who took the trouble to properly register and vote, and you counted only those votes and reported the total accurately, well, that would be like telling citizens that their vote mattered. And politicians benefit from the cynical conclusion that votes don't matter. A citizen needn't bother to research the issues or character of the candidate, if his vote won't matter anyway. And if he does vote, since his vote probably doesn't matter anyhow he can do so confidently with little thought, because if it turns out his vote was foolish, it doesn't matter anyway, right?
Anyhow, here's the good part. To participate in the march to protest requiring photo identification to vote, protesters have to show photo identification!
You can't make this stuff up. Makes you real likely to think highly of the political thinkers who thunk up this stuff.
In other words, they really thunk up the place.
Of course, that is exactly what the id requirement is intended to do, suppress votes, that is, votes cast by people who are not eligible to be registered to vote, including "duplicate" votes of voters registered in more than one jurisdiction, disenfranchised voters because of felonies, and fraudulently cast voters of dead people, etc.
And that's why requiring I.D. is thought to be bad -- because no one knows what might happen or who might win, if the traditional ways of rigging election returns are eliminated. Why, if you allowed elections to be decided by only those citizens who took the trouble to properly register and vote, and you counted only those votes and reported the total accurately, well, that would be like telling citizens that their vote mattered. And politicians benefit from the cynical conclusion that votes don't matter. A citizen needn't bother to research the issues or character of the candidate, if his vote won't matter anyway. And if he does vote, since his vote probably doesn't matter anyhow he can do so confidently with little thought, because if it turns out his vote was foolish, it doesn't matter anyway, right?
Anyhow, here's the good part. To participate in the march to protest requiring photo identification to vote, protesters have to show photo identification!
You can't make this stuff up. Makes you real likely to think highly of the political thinkers who thunk up this stuff.
In other words, they really thunk up the place.
Wednesday, February 05, 2014
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
The State of the Union cotillion . . .
A little bit ago I heard Ex-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi say in an interview that the Republicans should take their party back from all the extremists who are ruining it for everybody. Said extremists hate government, hate science, and hate Obama. So Republicans should take their party back. She probably should have thrown in "hate women" and it would have improved the rhythm of her rhetoric without in any way blotting the essential silliness of the statement, nor added any element of truthfulness to it. So I'm going to assume she left women out of the hate equation inadvertently, and give her credit for it
And by the way, the "Ex" part of Pelosi's title ought to suggest to her what the mood of the electorate is, seeing as how the Democrats remain the minority party in the House even after President Obama's re-election. But maybe she missed that.
Anyhow, she was being interviewed on the eve of the Presidential State of the Union report. Hey, he could have just put it in writing and had it delivered to Congress, as was done for many years. But if he had done that, he would have deprived all of our political masters of the satisfaction to be gained by assembling the entirety of government, legislative, executive, judicial, together in one large room for them to congratulate themselves and preen before television cameras as the President pranced into room, hyped up in knowledge that these weighty political lords and barons intended to stand and applaud each presidential utterance, burp, and pose.
Maybe Mrs. Pelosi is right in a way. I don't myself consider myself a Republican and haven't done so for easy fifteen years. But I think the Republicans would certainly benefit by taking their party back, as Pelosi suggests. I just don't think the people running the Party are all that wrapped up in hating government, science, women, and Obama.
I know I don't hate government, being of Social Security age, and I don't hate science, and I'm really sure I don't hate women. I've never met anybody who plain hated government in general, even if they hated this particular government in this moment. I've never met anybody who hated science, even if they thought certain scientists were roaring, raging, flaming, gaping assholes. I've met people who hated women but they didn't start out that way. It kinda crept up on them. And I don't think all that many, if any, people hate Obama. Despise him, sure. Loathe him, maybe. Fear him, probably. But not hate. Hey, nobody has even tried to shoot him yet, and remember, Reagan got shot, Kennedy, Jack and Bobbie, got shot. There's precedent, in other words, and when somebody shoots, that's hate.
For that matter maybe the Democrats should try to take their party back from the redistributers, and the regulators, and the race pimps, and the cronies, and the Marxists, and all the fellow-traveling mouthbreathers infected with excessive self-esteem earned by claiming to care about social issues and sciency stuff, and who demonstrate the same by attending the required demonstrations and sporting caring bumper stickers, many of which nearly make sense but even if they don't, entitle the bearer to a warm, smug feeling of superiority.
On the other hand, why should Republicans, in particular, bother? They're pretty much against most of the stuff President Obama wants to do to the country, good and hard, but it really doesn't matter who is in charge of the party. Why? President Obama has stated that he intends to go it alone, without lawful legislation of Congress, and with or without the approval, advice and consent of Congress. He is going to rule by executive order and doesn't need any stinkin' legal restrictions imposed on him by so-called constitutional limitations. It doesn't matter what the Republicans and Democrats in Congress do, or don't do.
Deadlocked? Who cares? Not President Obama? Doesn't need 'em.
It occurs to me that President Obama's stated intention to institute his agenda by bypassing constitutional procedures makes the votes of Congressmen, Republican and Democrat alike, meaningless, and in turn, makes the votes of the citizens who elected Congressmen to represent them in Congress, likewise, meaningless. We are, essentially, deprived of legislative representation when the executive legislates through executive order.
In that connection, I seem to recall that some years ago a group of upset Americans gathered together one night in Boston to communicate objection to being deprived of effective representation in their legislature of the time -- Parliament.
Just a stray thought, probably means nothing.
And by the way, the "Ex" part of Pelosi's title ought to suggest to her what the mood of the electorate is, seeing as how the Democrats remain the minority party in the House even after President Obama's re-election. But maybe she missed that.
Anyhow, she was being interviewed on the eve of the Presidential State of the Union report. Hey, he could have just put it in writing and had it delivered to Congress, as was done for many years. But if he had done that, he would have deprived all of our political masters of the satisfaction to be gained by assembling the entirety of government, legislative, executive, judicial, together in one large room for them to congratulate themselves and preen before television cameras as the President pranced into room, hyped up in knowledge that these weighty political lords and barons intended to stand and applaud each presidential utterance, burp, and pose.
Maybe Mrs. Pelosi is right in a way. I don't myself consider myself a Republican and haven't done so for easy fifteen years. But I think the Republicans would certainly benefit by taking their party back, as Pelosi suggests. I just don't think the people running the Party are all that wrapped up in hating government, science, women, and Obama.
I know I don't hate government, being of Social Security age, and I don't hate science, and I'm really sure I don't hate women. I've never met anybody who plain hated government in general, even if they hated this particular government in this moment. I've never met anybody who hated science, even if they thought certain scientists were roaring, raging, flaming, gaping assholes. I've met people who hated women but they didn't start out that way. It kinda crept up on them. And I don't think all that many, if any, people hate Obama. Despise him, sure. Loathe him, maybe. Fear him, probably. But not hate. Hey, nobody has even tried to shoot him yet, and remember, Reagan got shot, Kennedy, Jack and Bobbie, got shot. There's precedent, in other words, and when somebody shoots, that's hate.
For that matter maybe the Democrats should try to take their party back from the redistributers, and the regulators, and the race pimps, and the cronies, and the Marxists, and all the fellow-traveling mouthbreathers infected with excessive self-esteem earned by claiming to care about social issues and sciency stuff, and who demonstrate the same by attending the required demonstrations and sporting caring bumper stickers, many of which nearly make sense but even if they don't, entitle the bearer to a warm, smug feeling of superiority.
On the other hand, why should Republicans, in particular, bother? They're pretty much against most of the stuff President Obama wants to do to the country, good and hard, but it really doesn't matter who is in charge of the party. Why? President Obama has stated that he intends to go it alone, without lawful legislation of Congress, and with or without the approval, advice and consent of Congress. He is going to rule by executive order and doesn't need any stinkin' legal restrictions imposed on him by so-called constitutional limitations. It doesn't matter what the Republicans and Democrats in Congress do, or don't do.
Deadlocked? Who cares? Not President Obama? Doesn't need 'em.
It occurs to me that President Obama's stated intention to institute his agenda by bypassing constitutional procedures makes the votes of Congressmen, Republican and Democrat alike, meaningless, and in turn, makes the votes of the citizens who elected Congressmen to represent them in Congress, likewise, meaningless. We are, essentially, deprived of legislative representation when the executive legislates through executive order.
In that connection, I seem to recall that some years ago a group of upset Americans gathered together one night in Boston to communicate objection to being deprived of effective representation in their legislature of the time -- Parliament.
Just a stray thought, probably means nothing.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
State of the Union address . . . Snore! . . .
Blah blah, income equality . . . All Americans . . . War on women . . . The environment . . . Fair share . . . Protecting privacy . . .
Any surprises are sure to be inadvertent and every solution to every problem, real, imagined, or invented, will be at least 75 years stale and a proven failure, at best, and lethal, at worst.
But I'd watch it if there were any chance he'd be heckled. "A consummation devoutly to be wished."
Any surprises are sure to be inadvertent and every solution to every problem, real, imagined, or invented, will be at least 75 years stale and a proven failure, at best, and lethal, at worst.
But I'd watch it if there were any chance he'd be heckled. "A consummation devoutly to be wished."
Saturday, January 18, 2014
Really? Give me a break . . .
Those who know me know I'm really into golf. So it shouldn't be a surprise that I'm interested in pro golf tournaments. I like to watch the LPGA because the ladies frequently show better fundamentals than the men, and I can learn from that, and I have a better chance of driving the ball as far as the women.
This summer the ladies are having a major event at Pinehurst a week after the PGA will have a tournament on the exact same course. That should really be interesting, to see what the women can do in comparison to the men.
But I heard that some of the ladies are worried that the course will be beat up from the men playing on it just a week before.
Give me a break. It's Pinehurst for heavens sake, and you can bet your grandmother that the course will have pretty much nothing but maintenance for the intervening few days between the tournaments. No golf course is perfect but tournament golf course preparation is a far cry from what most of us see -- even club golfers.
And public courses? The ladies are worried about three and four day old divots? You go to public courses and you'll even find divots on the driving tees where some poor hacker has taken a divot with his driver, four inches behind the ball and two inches deep -- after having done the same thing with a practice swing. Then he does it again, fifteen yards ahead, because that's as far as the ball dribbled after he hacked up the tee box. Then, eventually, he slams his putter into the green leaving a small trench, because he missed his fourth putt that was only eight feet away from the hole.
So what do everyday golfers do in such conditions? Play it as it lies and accept what the course gives you. That's what golf asks.
Give me a break. Top pro golfers are a coddled bunch. Watch one of 'em throw a small tantrum because a camera clicked or a mosquito farted in the next county, as he was making a backswing. Compare that to competitive gymnastics where a little fifteen year old girl will do a cartwheel into a front flip and land in perfect balance with her little feet on a four inch balance beam, all while music is playing elsewhere in the gym for floor exercises while the spectators are cheering and hooting for some other little girl in a different location flying around the uneven parallel bars. And pro golfers want silence as they hit a ball.
No golfer ever risked a concussion or broken collarbone or a shredded knee while competing.
Well, one thing. Pro golfers, men and women, don't get paid for just showing up. Sure, they live a coddled life compared to most of us, but their comfort is nothing to pro basketball players, who get a million or two for dogging it up and down the court, whether the team wins or loses, after having been exempted from all the normal expectations and rules of civilized human social behavior from the age of fourteen on, because they reached the height of six foot three in the eighth grade.
Give me a break.
This summer the ladies are having a major event at Pinehurst a week after the PGA will have a tournament on the exact same course. That should really be interesting, to see what the women can do in comparison to the men.
But I heard that some of the ladies are worried that the course will be beat up from the men playing on it just a week before.
Give me a break. It's Pinehurst for heavens sake, and you can bet your grandmother that the course will have pretty much nothing but maintenance for the intervening few days between the tournaments. No golf course is perfect but tournament golf course preparation is a far cry from what most of us see -- even club golfers.
And public courses? The ladies are worried about three and four day old divots? You go to public courses and you'll even find divots on the driving tees where some poor hacker has taken a divot with his driver, four inches behind the ball and two inches deep -- after having done the same thing with a practice swing. Then he does it again, fifteen yards ahead, because that's as far as the ball dribbled after he hacked up the tee box. Then, eventually, he slams his putter into the green leaving a small trench, because he missed his fourth putt that was only eight feet away from the hole.
So what do everyday golfers do in such conditions? Play it as it lies and accept what the course gives you. That's what golf asks.
Give me a break. Top pro golfers are a coddled bunch. Watch one of 'em throw a small tantrum because a camera clicked or a mosquito farted in the next county, as he was making a backswing. Compare that to competitive gymnastics where a little fifteen year old girl will do a cartwheel into a front flip and land in perfect balance with her little feet on a four inch balance beam, all while music is playing elsewhere in the gym for floor exercises while the spectators are cheering and hooting for some other little girl in a different location flying around the uneven parallel bars. And pro golfers want silence as they hit a ball.
No golfer ever risked a concussion or broken collarbone or a shredded knee while competing.
Well, one thing. Pro golfers, men and women, don't get paid for just showing up. Sure, they live a coddled life compared to most of us, but their comfort is nothing to pro basketball players, who get a million or two for dogging it up and down the court, whether the team wins or loses, after having been exempted from all the normal expectations and rules of civilized human social behavior from the age of fourteen on, because they reached the height of six foot three in the eighth grade.
Give me a break.
Friday, January 17, 2014
Profiles in Courage, updated . . .
Senator Diane Feinstein complains that while there was a protest going on around her house, there was a drone, spying on her through her window. Turns out that it wasn't a drone; it was a little $50.00 pink toy helicopter.
This woman is on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so, of course, she knows all about drones. She is also just as smart about guns.
California has a lot to answer for.
This woman is on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so, of course, she knows all about drones. She is also just as smart about guns.
California has a lot to answer for.
Sunday, January 12, 2014
Christie's bridge . . .
I guess Christie's boys figured that if it's okay to shut down federal parks and monuments in political retaliation for the federal budget sequester, it should be okay to shut down a bridge for political repairs. Haven't they been paying attention to the media for the last twenty years?
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Portland, the well-planned, model . . .
I've lived in Portland, now, for a little over twenty years. When I go "back east" to visit friends and family and generally socialize in the area, I frequently encounter a bewildering admiration for the wonderful way Portland manages city life for its inmates citizens. Portland is a model for desired solutions to modern urban issues.
So I'm told.
Well, I guess if you tilt your head to the left and look at it "this way," Portland is a model -- that is, it's a model if your model is meant as a teaching device for how blithering elected officials can blissfully spend public funds in great gobs and handfuls on personally much loved projects, without even asking for voter approval, all because they have in unerring belief in their ability to know what is the right thing. When you know what is right you need not test your notions, or consider possible adverse consequences, or compare cost to benefit, or even check your arithmetic. And our politicians are the kind of politicians who just know.
Of course, if you tilt your head to the other side, and look at it "this way," well, you'll just get dizzy.
For example, our water bureau just agreed to sell a house for a little under $400,000. It was probably a good idea to get rid of the house, and the money is going to good use, to offset a bunch of expenses. Where did they get the house? Well, a few years back some elected disaster decided that the water bureau should build a demonstration house, to show how modern methods could save water, 'n stuff. The budgeted cost to build the house was predicted to be about $250,000. So, they did it. Hey, showing people how to save water is a righteous thing to do!
The house they built was relatively modest, three bedrooms and two baths, and a little over 2000 square feet in living area. No biggie, right?
Except, they didn't get the needed approval of the City Council. They just went ahead. And, ratepayer funds were spent to build the house, in spite of the fact that the law says that ratepayer receipts are to be spent to supply water, only, not houses. Oh, and they spent a little more than $900,000 to build the damn thing. For those of you who recently graduated with a liberal arts degree, the arithmetic is $900,000 cost, less $400,000 sales price, equals $500,000, (that's a half a million dollars if zeros confuse you) flushed down the drain, for an unauthorized project paid for illegally, at a cost three times what is should have been, if the numbers they used to justify the thing was more than mere mumblings in their ears by dream unicorns.
Was anybody indicted? Well, some people in less enlightened cities might be a little perturbed off if their elected officials behaved in this way, but this is Portland and we expect this sort of thing from our political betters because we are a model for how other cities could and should do things. Portland is the city that works. It says so on city properties.
What's the proof of that bold statement? Well, for one thing, we have a tram. It goes from down there, to up there, despite complaints of homeowners who were concerned about the tram, a gondola on wires, pulled over their house. And then, a big pedestrian bridge was built, so as to enable pedestrians to get to the tram from up here so they could go down there, to get on the tram to go up there. Evidently insufficient pedestrians were using the tram because they didn't want to dodge traffic to get to the tram. But the tram is a pleasant way to go and take a ride from down there to up there if you need something to do with the family some afternoon, because, hey, we have a tram.
For another instance, we have bicycles. On the whole, bicyclists and bicycles are great. Oh, there's a few bicyclists around for whom bicycling is a divine calling, and a few more who bike in protest of capitalism, but mostly, bicycles are great. Who wouldn't enjoy seeing cyclists in elastic pants peddling their legs like crazy just to give their ass a ride, said ass being above the level of their ears? Yeah, mostly, bikes are great.
It's politics that suck. Portland politicians worship and revere bicycles, so much so that they are now converting four lane direct routes into two lane direct routes, so as to give bikes an easier commute. Because a ratio of seventy-five cars for every two bikes means -- we need more bikes. Oh, and because cars are an anachronism, anyhow, in a hip city like Portland.
Why would anachronistic cars be required, when we have a splendid transit system, including choo choos? Because there is nothing anachronistic about trains, a 19th century gamechanger, here, now in the 21st century. We like trains; we can ride for free, if we don't get caught. And our political masters like trains, so much so that they are spending public funds to build light rail into places which have emphatically said they don't want Portland light rail. Not that those places know what's good for them, being merely voters. Of course, adding trains to places where they are unwanted is not an easy task. Bridges must be built, roads must the closed and re-routed, and properties must be confiscated, because that's what us modern, progressive, hip cities like us, do.
Nevertheless, Portland traffic is generally managed creatively.
I remember an old three stooges movie where the stooges were plumbers. One of 'em was was trying to fix a leak, and kept making pipe connection after pipe connection, chasing the leak around, until he was completely and creatively caged in his own pipes. It's that's kind of creativity I mean. For example, the northbound exit on I-5 to the Ross Island bridge cannot be described accurately to anybody who hasn't been there. It's mighty stooge-worthy.
Something else that Portland is good at is managing urban sprawl, using an "urban growth boundary." The idea is to forbid building any more city beyond arbitrary boundaries under penalty of law, thus preventing the city from becoming "too big, and too spread out, like L.A." Of course, L.A. has more people in it than the entire state of Oregon, which has lots of unused space, but Portlanders want that unused space to remain unused, so that they can "enjoy nature," which means they like to go look at it from time to time. Accordingly, the city is increasing the population density, shrinking building lot size and discouraging yards and garages which take up space where people could and should be living, so as to preserve us from urban sprawl. Why would somebody need a car in a garage when you have public transportation, like light rail and a tram?
Why do we like urban population density? Probably because it reminds some city planner of the time when he still had hair, the summer he spent in Amsterdam between junior and senior year, with it's little streets, small apartments, bicycles, pot, and prostitutes with charming accents.
I can see a possible vision of the future of Portland, now. There we all are, wearing our well-planned proletarian grey-blue clothing, all trudging in single file on our well-planned way to the transit stations to report to our allotted tasks to earn our right to a 6 by 9 cubby and three bowls of food a day at the community center, because from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs.
So, yeah. Take a look at how we do things here. Portland is a model city.
As was a not so well-planned Detroit. Once.
So I'm told.
Well, I guess if you tilt your head to the left and look at it "this way," Portland is a model -- that is, it's a model if your model is meant as a teaching device for how blithering elected officials can blissfully spend public funds in great gobs and handfuls on personally much loved projects, without even asking for voter approval, all because they have in unerring belief in their ability to know what is the right thing. When you know what is right you need not test your notions, or consider possible adverse consequences, or compare cost to benefit, or even check your arithmetic. And our politicians are the kind of politicians who just know.
Of course, if you tilt your head to the other side, and look at it "this way," well, you'll just get dizzy.
For example, our water bureau just agreed to sell a house for a little under $400,000. It was probably a good idea to get rid of the house, and the money is going to good use, to offset a bunch of expenses. Where did they get the house? Well, a few years back some elected disaster decided that the water bureau should build a demonstration house, to show how modern methods could save water, 'n stuff. The budgeted cost to build the house was predicted to be about $250,000. So, they did it. Hey, showing people how to save water is a righteous thing to do!
The house they built was relatively modest, three bedrooms and two baths, and a little over 2000 square feet in living area. No biggie, right?
Except, they didn't get the needed approval of the City Council. They just went ahead. And, ratepayer funds were spent to build the house, in spite of the fact that the law says that ratepayer receipts are to be spent to supply water, only, not houses. Oh, and they spent a little more than $900,000 to build the damn thing. For those of you who recently graduated with a liberal arts degree, the arithmetic is $900,000 cost, less $400,000 sales price, equals $500,000, (that's a half a million dollars if zeros confuse you) flushed down the drain, for an unauthorized project paid for illegally, at a cost three times what is should have been, if the numbers they used to justify the thing was more than mere mumblings in their ears by dream unicorns.
Was anybody indicted? Well, some people in less enlightened cities might be a little perturbed off if their elected officials behaved in this way, but this is Portland and we expect this sort of thing from our political betters because we are a model for how other cities could and should do things. Portland is the city that works. It says so on city properties.
What's the proof of that bold statement? Well, for one thing, we have a tram. It goes from down there, to up there, despite complaints of homeowners who were concerned about the tram, a gondola on wires, pulled over their house. And then, a big pedestrian bridge was built, so as to enable pedestrians to get to the tram from up here so they could go down there, to get on the tram to go up there. Evidently insufficient pedestrians were using the tram because they didn't want to dodge traffic to get to the tram. But the tram is a pleasant way to go and take a ride from down there to up there if you need something to do with the family some afternoon, because, hey, we have a tram.
For another instance, we have bicycles. On the whole, bicyclists and bicycles are great. Oh, there's a few bicyclists around for whom bicycling is a divine calling, and a few more who bike in protest of capitalism, but mostly, bicycles are great. Who wouldn't enjoy seeing cyclists in elastic pants peddling their legs like crazy just to give their ass a ride, said ass being above the level of their ears? Yeah, mostly, bikes are great.
It's politics that suck. Portland politicians worship and revere bicycles, so much so that they are now converting four lane direct routes into two lane direct routes, so as to give bikes an easier commute. Because a ratio of seventy-five cars for every two bikes means -- we need more bikes. Oh, and because cars are an anachronism, anyhow, in a hip city like Portland.
Why would anachronistic cars be required, when we have a splendid transit system, including choo choos? Because there is nothing anachronistic about trains, a 19th century gamechanger, here, now in the 21st century. We like trains; we can ride for free, if we don't get caught. And our political masters like trains, so much so that they are spending public funds to build light rail into places which have emphatically said they don't want Portland light rail. Not that those places know what's good for them, being merely voters. Of course, adding trains to places where they are unwanted is not an easy task. Bridges must be built, roads must the closed and re-routed, and properties must be confiscated, because that's what us modern, progressive, hip cities like us, do.
Nevertheless, Portland traffic is generally managed creatively.
I remember an old three stooges movie where the stooges were plumbers. One of 'em was was trying to fix a leak, and kept making pipe connection after pipe connection, chasing the leak around, until he was completely and creatively caged in his own pipes. It's that's kind of creativity I mean. For example, the northbound exit on I-5 to the Ross Island bridge cannot be described accurately to anybody who hasn't been there. It's mighty stooge-worthy.
Something else that Portland is good at is managing urban sprawl, using an "urban growth boundary." The idea is to forbid building any more city beyond arbitrary boundaries under penalty of law, thus preventing the city from becoming "too big, and too spread out, like L.A." Of course, L.A. has more people in it than the entire state of Oregon, which has lots of unused space, but Portlanders want that unused space to remain unused, so that they can "enjoy nature," which means they like to go look at it from time to time. Accordingly, the city is increasing the population density, shrinking building lot size and discouraging yards and garages which take up space where people could and should be living, so as to preserve us from urban sprawl. Why would somebody need a car in a garage when you have public transportation, like light rail and a tram?
Why do we like urban population density? Probably because it reminds some city planner of the time when he still had hair, the summer he spent in Amsterdam between junior and senior year, with it's little streets, small apartments, bicycles, pot, and prostitutes with charming accents.
I can see a possible vision of the future of Portland, now. There we all are, wearing our well-planned proletarian grey-blue clothing, all trudging in single file on our well-planned way to the transit stations to report to our allotted tasks to earn our right to a 6 by 9 cubby and three bowls of food a day at the community center, because from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs.
So, yeah. Take a look at how we do things here. Portland is a model city.
As was a not so well-planned Detroit. Once.
Friday, January 03, 2014
Ah, the wonders of corporate phone services for we, the little people . . .
Automated answering systems -- what moron thought these were a good idea?
What that means is they don't want to hire enough people to answer the phone when it rings, because they may be paying for representatives to sit around doing nothing while waiting for the phone to ring. They are managing time efficiently, right?
I'm sure some business school moron thought this was a good idea. And I'm sure another one thought that as long as we were keeping people on the line, they might as well be listening to commercials praising the company for all the wonderful things they are doing for you.
Meanwhile, the customers' time is spent waiting around on hold when their time is just as valuable to them. is not a matter of any great importance to the company.
We, the customers, hear the message loud and clear. The words, "customer service," is code for something quite contrary.
Wonder if any of those business school morons ever thought to ask the customer, when they finally got a chance to talk to a representative, if they approved of the phone systems. Betcha they'd got a lot of no votes. And wonder if any of those business school morons thought to get a count of the number of hang-ups they get from people put on hold? Those are hell, no votes.
Not that anyone cares.
Your call is important to us and we look forward to helping you. Please stay on the line for the next available representative. Current wait time -- forty minutes.
What that means is they don't want to hire enough people to answer the phone when it rings, because they may be paying for representatives to sit around doing nothing while waiting for the phone to ring. They are managing time efficiently, right?
I'm sure some business school moron thought this was a good idea. And I'm sure another one thought that as long as we were keeping people on the line, they might as well be listening to commercials praising the company for all the wonderful things they are doing for you.
Meanwhile, the customers' time is spent waiting around on hold when their time is just as valuable to them. is not a matter of any great importance to the company.
We, the customers, hear the message loud and clear. The words, "customer service," is code for something quite contrary.
Wonder if any of those business school morons ever thought to ask the customer, when they finally got a chance to talk to a representative, if they approved of the phone systems. Betcha they'd got a lot of no votes. And wonder if any of those business school morons thought to get a count of the number of hang-ups they get from people put on hold? Those are hell, no votes.
Not that anyone cares.
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
I can't wait to see what happens next . . .
Happy New Year. We go into 2014 wondering what is going to go wrong next with Obamacare.
Did you know, by the way, that the Affordable Care Act -- Obamacare -- levies a 2% tax on all health care policies? So, supposedly you gotta buy health care insurance and if you don't, you pay a penalty for being uninsured, to be collected by the IRS, and if you do buy the insurance, you pay a tax on top of the premiums you have to pay, under penalty of law.
And your friendly neighbor from IRS is gonna see to it that you pay.
Gah!
Did you know, by the way, that the Affordable Care Act -- Obamacare -- levies a 2% tax on all health care policies? So, supposedly you gotta buy health care insurance and if you don't, you pay a penalty for being uninsured, to be collected by the IRS, and if you do buy the insurance, you pay a tax on top of the premiums you have to pay, under penalty of law.
And your friendly neighbor from IRS is gonna see to it that you pay.
Gah!
Sunday, December 29, 2013
A New Year's looming on the horizon . . .
Remember? This time last year you were saying to yourself that 2012 really blew backwards, and you looked forward to 2013 because you knew that 2013 just had to be your year, because . . .
How ya feelin' about 2014?
How ya feelin' about 2014?
Thursday, December 26, 2013
Faithfully doing the business of government . . .
It was reported the UPS could not get all the package deliveries for Christmas done on time, by Christmas eve. Oh, and UPS drivers frequently can be seen running , not walking, from the truck to the door, to drop a package. Evidently, they were just overwhelmed despite planning for the season well ahead of time. Weather probably made things worse. Just another failure and we're used to failures by now, right?
What hasn't been so widely reported was that UPS drivers were out and making deliveries on Christmas day, when I'm sure they would have preferred being with their families.
Good job, guys. And I hope you were paid something extra for working on Christmas day, when I'm sure the customers didn't expect it. Best wishes.
By comparison, emergency unemployment benefits are due to run out at the end of this year. Not a surprise, the deadline has been notorious. Congress has been expected to take up the question of whether or not to extend the emergency benefits into next year. Congress can either decide to do it, or decide to not do it. So, what was the decision?
The decision was to go home without considering the matter one way or the other, and maybe decide what to do about it when Congress returns next year. Or maybe not.
UPS to customers: We'll get it to you as soon as we possibly can, even if we have to work on Christmas.
Congress to citizens: We'll get around to it when we get around to it, not a minute sooner, because shut up.
What hasn't been so widely reported was that UPS drivers were out and making deliveries on Christmas day, when I'm sure they would have preferred being with their families.
Good job, guys. And I hope you were paid something extra for working on Christmas day, when I'm sure the customers didn't expect it. Best wishes.
By comparison, emergency unemployment benefits are due to run out at the end of this year. Not a surprise, the deadline has been notorious. Congress has been expected to take up the question of whether or not to extend the emergency benefits into next year. Congress can either decide to do it, or decide to not do it. So, what was the decision?
The decision was to go home without considering the matter one way or the other, and maybe decide what to do about it when Congress returns next year. Or maybe not.
UPS to customers: We'll get it to you as soon as we possibly can, even if we have to work on Christmas.
Congress to citizens: We'll get around to it when we get around to it, not a minute sooner, because shut up.
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
Merry Christmas to all . . .
As usual, I'm having a great holiday and I'll enjoy my children and grandchildren, with my wife. We're warm and dry and have more than enough to eat, with health and security. Life is good.
I know that my good fortune is not universal and for some, the season presents just that much more continuing struggle. I wish all of us, and especially those less fortunate, good things in the coming year ahead.
I know that my good fortune is not universal and for some, the season presents just that much more continuing struggle. I wish all of us, and especially those less fortunate, good things in the coming year ahead.
Friday, December 20, 2013
Where'd all the money go? . . .
When you save, you park some unneeded money somewhere -- bank, bond, stock, mattress -- in hopes that when you want to turn that money into something needed, like food or rent, it will be there. If you put the money into a bank you are thought to be prudent. If you put the money into the stock market you are thought to be a genius when the market goes up, and an unfortunate victim when the market falls, as it inevitably but unpredictably does.
When you put your money into any financial institution, bank or corporation, wonder of wonders, they don't actually keep it for you. The institution either spends it frivolously or loans it to some moron who can dress well enough to impress a lending officer. If you go to get your money out, the dollars you get are likely the result of somebody else who gave the institution some money. It's not your money; it's just money the bank owes you.
The financial institution frequently makes some money in spite of itself, in consequence of having a good lobby going in Washington. Sometimes it distributes some of the profits to you, the investor -- always first assuring that its officers get big bonuses at year end.
You, of course, would frequently not approve of how your money gets spent by the institution. And you are betting that both the money and the institution you put it into will be there when you need it to be, despite observing one institution after another bite the big one over your lifetime.
It requires a great deal of blind, unreasoning faith to make this bet, and this faith used to be called patriotism.
Nowadays, we have a new economic system. It seems a mere handful of exploited foreigners can manufacture all the products that are actually needed, and a great deal more besides. So we've turned ourselves into developers and marketers of unneeded goods and services -- just kinda to keep our hand in. Alternatively, many of us, finding there is nothing that even pretends to be productive that we can do, turn to work for the very government that pretty much screwed the system up in the first place. But most of us cannot muster sufficient cynicism or self-deception required to work for government, so we try to get jobs in the private sector, that is, laboring in some manner which hopefully makes a profit for a few years until it eventually sinks under the burden of supporting the self same governments, state, federal, and local, which we were too ashamed to work for in the first place.
Many of us basically get paid for peddling something unnecessary or possibly harmful, but if it doesn't sell we don't eat, so we keep at it anyway.
Many more of us, not wishing to peddle garbage, have become what is called -- with a straight face, mind you -- knowledge workers. We collect data and reassemble bits and pieces of it into new and exciting configurations so as to support the making of predominately inconsequential decisions, which in turn mostly have to do with how to sell more shoddy goods and unneeded services. Finally, if we are good at peddling garbage or mining data, we get to supervise others in the same sad trades, whether or not we are good at supervising.
But each and every worthless trinket that gets bought and pitched into a landfill ( a whole 'nother issue ) contributes even if only slightly to keeping some poor desperate drone alive and secure in the knowledge that somehow he matters. That drone may be you or it may be me, so spend while you can and don't be stingy. It all counts.
Of course, when times get tough, lots of us lose our worthless jobs, so we can't spend. Generally, the cause of such tough times is direct, government policies. This is known as capitalistic injustice, and is blamed on large corporations and "fat cats."
In such times, government steps in and gives money to those who are no longer getting paid for doing the stupid stuff they used to get paid for. The theory is that those people will thereby be able to continue to spend and will, in due course, continue to support this financial merry go round. But since we don't actually have a government that is quite right bright, those exalted government managers are unable to understand that every dollar they give to somebody to stimulate spending, comes from taxing somebody who now no longer has that dollar to spend because government took it. So, in fact, the effect of "stimulating" the economy which depends on spending, is really merely shifting the same spending from one sector to another, with no real actual gain. In other words, if you earned money and paid taxes, the government plan is to take money you earned and wanted to spend on something, and to give it to somebody else who didn't work and pay taxes, so he can spend it on something. Because government cares about people enough to spend your money on them. On penalty of criminal prosecution.
So hang on as long as you can, because our government leaders think that they have to keep the action going. So they are energetically whirling around in circles, because that's what big wheels do. And the fact that the economic system is slowly spinning around in one spot makes it screw itself in deeper and deeper.
In other words, we are so screwed.
When you put your money into any financial institution, bank or corporation, wonder of wonders, they don't actually keep it for you. The institution either spends it frivolously or loans it to some moron who can dress well enough to impress a lending officer. If you go to get your money out, the dollars you get are likely the result of somebody else who gave the institution some money. It's not your money; it's just money the bank owes you.
The financial institution frequently makes some money in spite of itself, in consequence of having a good lobby going in Washington. Sometimes it distributes some of the profits to you, the investor -- always first assuring that its officers get big bonuses at year end.
You, of course, would frequently not approve of how your money gets spent by the institution. And you are betting that both the money and the institution you put it into will be there when you need it to be, despite observing one institution after another bite the big one over your lifetime.
It requires a great deal of blind, unreasoning faith to make this bet, and this faith used to be called patriotism.
Nowadays, we have a new economic system. It seems a mere handful of exploited foreigners can manufacture all the products that are actually needed, and a great deal more besides. So we've turned ourselves into developers and marketers of unneeded goods and services -- just kinda to keep our hand in. Alternatively, many of us, finding there is nothing that even pretends to be productive that we can do, turn to work for the very government that pretty much screwed the system up in the first place. But most of us cannot muster sufficient cynicism or self-deception required to work for government, so we try to get jobs in the private sector, that is, laboring in some manner which hopefully makes a profit for a few years until it eventually sinks under the burden of supporting the self same governments, state, federal, and local, which we were too ashamed to work for in the first place.
Many of us basically get paid for peddling something unnecessary or possibly harmful, but if it doesn't sell we don't eat, so we keep at it anyway.
Many more of us, not wishing to peddle garbage, have become what is called -- with a straight face, mind you -- knowledge workers. We collect data and reassemble bits and pieces of it into new and exciting configurations so as to support the making of predominately inconsequential decisions, which in turn mostly have to do with how to sell more shoddy goods and unneeded services. Finally, if we are good at peddling garbage or mining data, we get to supervise others in the same sad trades, whether or not we are good at supervising.
But each and every worthless trinket that gets bought and pitched into a landfill ( a whole 'nother issue ) contributes even if only slightly to keeping some poor desperate drone alive and secure in the knowledge that somehow he matters. That drone may be you or it may be me, so spend while you can and don't be stingy. It all counts.
Of course, when times get tough, lots of us lose our worthless jobs, so we can't spend. Generally, the cause of such tough times is direct, government policies. This is known as capitalistic injustice, and is blamed on large corporations and "fat cats."
In such times, government steps in and gives money to those who are no longer getting paid for doing the stupid stuff they used to get paid for. The theory is that those people will thereby be able to continue to spend and will, in due course, continue to support this financial merry go round. But since we don't actually have a government that is quite right bright, those exalted government managers are unable to understand that every dollar they give to somebody to stimulate spending, comes from taxing somebody who now no longer has that dollar to spend because government took it. So, in fact, the effect of "stimulating" the economy which depends on spending, is really merely shifting the same spending from one sector to another, with no real actual gain. In other words, if you earned money and paid taxes, the government plan is to take money you earned and wanted to spend on something, and to give it to somebody else who didn't work and pay taxes, so he can spend it on something. Because government cares about people enough to spend your money on them. On penalty of criminal prosecution.
So hang on as long as you can, because our government leaders think that they have to keep the action going. So they are energetically whirling around in circles, because that's what big wheels do. And the fact that the economic system is slowly spinning around in one spot makes it screw itself in deeper and deeper.
In other words, we are so screwed.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
'Tis the season . . .
It is now the Christmas season, and once again we can see poor little Ralphie, longing for a BB gun. I remember it well, myself. When I was about nine years old, I, like Ralphie, wanted a BB gun. More than anything.
I made sure that everyone with any capability, authority or influence around me knew that a BB gun was necessary to fulfill my destiny. And, having been raised that way, I prayed to the all knowing and all powerful Big Guy upstairs, to please see to it that the grownups would furnish me with a BB gun. And, had the opportunity presented itself at the time, I would have happily traded away all future chances of salvation in the afterlife, if the devil below would just get me a damn BB gun.
There was no BB gun under the tree that year.
However, years later, when I was sixteen and had long, long before lost hope and lost interest in BB guns, guess what? I got a BB gun for Christmas.
Thanks Dad.
Now if either the Man above or the Devil below had anything to do Dad getting me a BB gun for Christmas when I was sixteen, I can't say, but if either of them did I am obliged to observe that there is something lacking in the reliability and efficiency, and timeliness, with which wishes are granted.
By the time I got the BB gun I had discovered girls, and with all the adolescent hormones sloshing around in my body, my perpetual wish from then and for very many years later had damn little to do with BB guns. At sixteen, I was certain that BB guns wouldn't work with girls. Maybe a new red, Ford convertible . . . but not a BB gun.
So, once again, I prayed, although I was a little more circumspect in the prayerful language used to describe who, I mean what, I needed.
So did I get laid that year? I did not.
Now, years later, experiences like the foregoing and others similar have taught me that it is the wanting that is the problem. If you don't want anything in particular, you certainly won't be disappointed.
And you just might get a BB gun.
I made sure that everyone with any capability, authority or influence around me knew that a BB gun was necessary to fulfill my destiny. And, having been raised that way, I prayed to the all knowing and all powerful Big Guy upstairs, to please see to it that the grownups would furnish me with a BB gun. And, had the opportunity presented itself at the time, I would have happily traded away all future chances of salvation in the afterlife, if the devil below would just get me a damn BB gun.
There was no BB gun under the tree that year.
However, years later, when I was sixteen and had long, long before lost hope and lost interest in BB guns, guess what? I got a BB gun for Christmas.
Thanks Dad.
Now if either the Man above or the Devil below had anything to do Dad getting me a BB gun for Christmas when I was sixteen, I can't say, but if either of them did I am obliged to observe that there is something lacking in the reliability and efficiency, and timeliness, with which wishes are granted.
By the time I got the BB gun I had discovered girls, and with all the adolescent hormones sloshing around in my body, my perpetual wish from then and for very many years later had damn little to do with BB guns. At sixteen, I was certain that BB guns wouldn't work with girls. Maybe a new red, Ford convertible . . . but not a BB gun.
So, once again, I prayed, although I was a little more circumspect in the prayerful language used to describe who, I mean what, I needed.
So did I get laid that year? I did not.
Now, years later, experiences like the foregoing and others similar have taught me that it is the wanting that is the problem. If you don't want anything in particular, you certainly won't be disappointed.
And you just might get a BB gun.
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Told by Someone's German Grossfather
Und whirren goon der potterish wheel
Gespinnen mit hummen of der potter
In machen der stuff of human life
Which might den call der potter Pater
Mit der muscle here und der bonisher there
Und ein great gross lump fer der belly
Der potter bin workin und sweaten blood
To mach perfect der humanish jelly
But der wheel ist untrue und der potter ist drunk
Und der clay ist gespoilen mach schnell
Cause der huffen und puffen mit der boozener breath
Has mach humans das stupidish hell
Und so it goon from morgan to nacht
Der potter bin constantly shtinkin
Und he botches each tag der humanish slag
Und das explains a lot Ich bin thinkin.
Gespinnen mit hummen of der potter
In machen der stuff of human life
Which might den call der potter Pater
Mit der muscle here und der bonisher there
Und ein great gross lump fer der belly
Der potter bin workin und sweaten blood
To mach perfect der humanish jelly
But der wheel ist untrue und der potter ist drunk
Und der clay ist gespoilen mach schnell
Cause der huffen und puffen mit der boozener breath
Has mach humans das stupidish hell
Und so it goon from morgan to nacht
Der potter bin constantly shtinkin
Und he botches each tag der humanish slag
Und das explains a lot Ich bin thinkin.
Sunday, December 08, 2013
And things that are hard . . .
Things that are hard, and things that are easy:
... The Manhattan Project, less than three and a half years,
... The Apollo moon project, less than three and a half years,
... Rebuilding the fleet after Pearl Harbor, less than three and a half years,
... Whipping Japan into submission after Pearl Harbor, less than three and a half years,
The so-called Affordable Care Act website . . . not completely working yet, after three and a half years.
Yeah, well, they didn't have computers back in those days. Computers are hard. All those floppy disks and stuff.
... The Manhattan Project, less than three and a half years,
... The Apollo moon project, less than three and a half years,
... Rebuilding the fleet after Pearl Harbor, less than three and a half years,
... Whipping Japan into submission after Pearl Harbor, less than three and a half years,
The so-called Affordable Care Act website . . . not completely working yet, after three and a half years.
Yeah, well, they didn't have computers back in those days. Computers are hard. All those floppy disks and stuff.
Monday, December 02, 2013
Equation: Failure plus Bluster equals Joyous Success. . . .
The various and sundry Obamacare proponents and pundits for the government have declared that the Obamacare website, known by some as the "Temple of Fail," has in fact met all their objectives by the end of November, just as they said it would.
We now get to see a working example of the oft-used phrase, "Close enough for government work."
We now get to see a working example of the oft-used phrase, "Close enough for government work."
Saturday, November 23, 2013
Not just "code words" anymore . . . now we have "code sandwiches" . . .
I like peanut and butter sandwiches. There. I said it.
According to published reports, Verenice Gutierrez, principal at Harvey Scott K-8 School, has decided that peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are racist.
Well, it is a Portland public school.
Wonder why it is that persons of a certain political persuasion feel compelled to seek out and stomp out any little moment of happiness that might be available to others.
It's just a sandwich.
What happened, babe? Didn't things turn out for you in your life the way you felt entitled to? Or are you merely foolish?
According to published reports, Verenice Gutierrez, principal at Harvey Scott K-8 School, has decided that peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are racist.
Well, it is a Portland public school.
Wonder why it is that persons of a certain political persuasion feel compelled to seek out and stomp out any little moment of happiness that might be available to others.
It's just a sandwich.
What happened, babe? Didn't things turn out for you in your life the way you felt entitled to? Or are you merely foolish?
Wednesday, November 06, 2013
Welcome Home
I just got back from staying a couple of days at a time share near Mt. Hood, right on a golf course. I didn't play -- too wet and windy to play for fun. Rain. You only do that sort of thing when you want to convince somebody of your manliness and I'm just not that interested in manly displays, which, after many long years, I've concluded are exhausting and frequently dangerous.
Anyhow, the location was splendidly quiet, and the only activity on the golf course the whole time I was there was four deer strolling along.
Now I'm back in Portland and it isn't quiet. I've got sirens, and trucks and diesels and blowers and big car thumpers, and a general low annoying hum. I think that's the sound of the universe, complaining. Also, it's raining.
Welcome home to me.
Anyhow, the location was splendidly quiet, and the only activity on the golf course the whole time I was there was four deer strolling along.
Now I'm back in Portland and it isn't quiet. I've got sirens, and trucks and diesels and blowers and big car thumpers, and a general low annoying hum. I think that's the sound of the universe, complaining. Also, it's raining.
Welcome home to me.
Monday, November 04, 2013
Sunday, November 03, 2013
XX and XY, again . . .
The situation: a married couple is considering buying a countertop home bread baking appliance.
The husband thinks to himself: I can't wait. I love fresh-baked French bread. Thinking about the aroma and the bright, white color and brown crust . . . and I could have it every day! It's just white bread that I love, but plain, fresh-baked and still warm, and melting butter. That's the best.
The wife thinks to herself: I can't wait. I will never have to eat plain white bread again. I can have pumpkin bread, and cumin bread, and garlic and olive flavored bread, and barley bread, and rye and parsley bread, and flaxseed and chickpea bread, and . . . . I promise that once I can bake automatically, I will never have plain white bread in my kitchen again.
The theory of evolution offers no explanation for this sort of thing.
The husband thinks to himself: I can't wait. I love fresh-baked French bread. Thinking about the aroma and the bright, white color and brown crust . . . and I could have it every day! It's just white bread that I love, but plain, fresh-baked and still warm, and melting butter. That's the best.
The wife thinks to herself: I can't wait. I will never have to eat plain white bread again. I can have pumpkin bread, and cumin bread, and garlic and olive flavored bread, and barley bread, and rye and parsley bread, and flaxseed and chickpea bread, and . . . . I promise that once I can bake automatically, I will never have plain white bread in my kitchen again.
The theory of evolution offers no explanation for this sort of thing.
Obamacare, Age of Wonders . . .
According to AP news, only half the states have numbers available, but in that half, at least three and a half million medical insurance policies are going to be cancelled as of the last day of the year. I'm sure that at least some of the policy holders liked their present plan, but they can't keep their plan because it doesn't comply with the requirements for medical plans under Obamacare.
So, cancelled planholders will have to buy different insurance policies, at greater rates. They will have to sign on to a health exchange website run by the states, which will coordinate with the federal website. Or, they will have to go to the federal website if their state doesn't have its own website, which is true of the majority of the states.
The federal website doesn't work. The government hired a Canadian company with a history of screw-ups to build the website, for a price of over six hundred million dollars, with over three years to get the job done. Oh, and there may be more than a little of crony-ism involved. It doesn't work, and all they can say about it is that they are fixing it as fast as they can and soon it will be all better. Trust us.
And this whole thing is such a gigantic, embarrassing disaster, that all the foul, nasty words and colorful, vile imprecations I can think of, are insufficient to say how bad it is. And it is likely to get worse when doctors begin dropping out, and you get politicians thinking about making it against the law for a doctor to not treat somebody insured under the health exchange for the prices set by the insurance company, as at least one has already done. (Can you say, involuntary servitude, boys and girls?) Consider this, the insurance companies writing health care coverage will be selling only products required by the government, because only those kind of policies will be purchasable by customers to avoid the penalty tax imposed by IRS on those who fail to have government prescribed health insurance policy.
In order to control costs, the insurance companies are reducing the number of doctors on the covered panel list.
The standard fellow-travelers who find no fault with notions rooted in socialism, have pointed out that it isn't the government's fault if you can't keep the policy you like, or you can't keep the doctors you like, consistent with President Obama's repeated promises. It's the insurance companies' fault. Yeah, right. There was a bill before congress to fix the problem of policies being cancelled, which would have "grandfathered" polices so people could keep them, but the bill was voted down. The party who killed the idea did so with all of their members voting in lockstep. It would be cruel to name the party containing all these morons, so a hint should suffice. The party which pulled this stunt which made certain the cancellation of so many medical insurance policies consistent with Obamacare has a "D" in its name.
And none of the foregoing, which only skims the surface of this odorous political swamp, is in the least bit surprising. It was all predictable, and predicted.
No, what is most wonderful in this age of wonders -- in the sense that you look, stand back, and wonder at the sheer, cosmic unliklihood of it all coming to pass in a country such as ours -- is that not a single person bearing any responsibility at all for this gigantic, ripping, roaring, raging, flaming, gaping pit of deliberate lies and obvious ineptitude, has been fired. Not one.
Oh, by the way, Obamacare isn't fully implemented through 2014. There are more surprises to come later.
And nobody has been fired. Not one.
So, cancelled planholders will have to buy different insurance policies, at greater rates. They will have to sign on to a health exchange website run by the states, which will coordinate with the federal website. Or, they will have to go to the federal website if their state doesn't have its own website, which is true of the majority of the states.
The federal website doesn't work. The government hired a Canadian company with a history of screw-ups to build the website, for a price of over six hundred million dollars, with over three years to get the job done. Oh, and there may be more than a little of crony-ism involved. It doesn't work, and all they can say about it is that they are fixing it as fast as they can and soon it will be all better. Trust us.
And this whole thing is such a gigantic, embarrassing disaster, that all the foul, nasty words and colorful, vile imprecations I can think of, are insufficient to say how bad it is. And it is likely to get worse when doctors begin dropping out, and you get politicians thinking about making it against the law for a doctor to not treat somebody insured under the health exchange for the prices set by the insurance company, as at least one has already done. (Can you say, involuntary servitude, boys and girls?) Consider this, the insurance companies writing health care coverage will be selling only products required by the government, because only those kind of policies will be purchasable by customers to avoid the penalty tax imposed by IRS on those who fail to have government prescribed health insurance policy.
In order to control costs, the insurance companies are reducing the number of doctors on the covered panel list.
The standard fellow-travelers who find no fault with notions rooted in socialism, have pointed out that it isn't the government's fault if you can't keep the policy you like, or you can't keep the doctors you like, consistent with President Obama's repeated promises. It's the insurance companies' fault. Yeah, right. There was a bill before congress to fix the problem of policies being cancelled, which would have "grandfathered" polices so people could keep them, but the bill was voted down. The party who killed the idea did so with all of their members voting in lockstep. It would be cruel to name the party containing all these morons, so a hint should suffice. The party which pulled this stunt which made certain the cancellation of so many medical insurance policies consistent with Obamacare has a "D" in its name.
And none of the foregoing, which only skims the surface of this odorous political swamp, is in the least bit surprising. It was all predictable, and predicted.
No, what is most wonderful in this age of wonders -- in the sense that you look, stand back, and wonder at the sheer, cosmic unliklihood of it all coming to pass in a country such as ours -- is that not a single person bearing any responsibility at all for this gigantic, ripping, roaring, raging, flaming, gaping pit of deliberate lies and obvious ineptitude, has been fired. Not one.
Oh, by the way, Obamacare isn't fully implemented through 2014. There are more surprises to come later.
And nobody has been fired. Not one.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Autonomy is doubleplus ungood. . . . .
Google's driverless cars are better than you or I.
I think this pretty well makes the case that we ordinary folk are too stupid, defective, inattentive and hormone-ridden to be trusted to get out of our own way and therefore our self-selected superior overlords at Google and all the state and federal legislative and executive offices should require us to give up personal driving. For our own good.
Not that there is an agenda or anything like that.
By the way, how much is a commercially viable Googlemobile going to cost, anyhow? And what's the chances of our being able to pay for one with the earnings from the part-time jobs that are apparently sufficient and will be all that is available to us as a natural consequence of recent government activities?
Oh, I didn't think. Cost of purchase won't be a problem because most of us will be riding light rail, and trams, and bicycles, and busses, all while our public administrative and corporate lords will be comfortably ferried around to their chosen destinations by a driverless vehicle while they play with their I-Pads and sip beverages, traveling at exactly 1 mph under the speed limit and introducing one extra precisely measured car length distance between vehicles for every additional 10 mph, no more and no less.
No doubt, driverless vehicles will be particularly adept at dodging ponderous big busses and trains, which stop at predicted locations, so big busses are good, right?
But how good are Google driverless vehicles at taking a pleasant ride in the country, with no particular destination or purpose in mind except to enjoy the day?
And when there is a desired destination, I can generally find my way to a place where I've been before, years ago, even though I don't know the address or the names of the streets along the way. Betcha Google can't do that.
So, as for driverless driving, screwgle.
Hasn't it been demonstrated sufficiently, over and over, that whenever a change is introduced intentionally rather than organically, there's always a pile of unanticipated consequences, usually bad?
Nah, no reason we should expect anything negative, not unless we are an unwashed troglodytes who fears all things progressive.
I think this pretty well makes the case that we ordinary folk are too stupid, defective, inattentive and hormone-ridden to be trusted to get out of our own way and therefore our self-selected superior overlords at Google and all the state and federal legislative and executive offices should require us to give up personal driving. For our own good.
Not that there is an agenda or anything like that.
By the way, how much is a commercially viable Googlemobile going to cost, anyhow? And what's the chances of our being able to pay for one with the earnings from the part-time jobs that are apparently sufficient and will be all that is available to us as a natural consequence of recent government activities?
Oh, I didn't think. Cost of purchase won't be a problem because most of us will be riding light rail, and trams, and bicycles, and busses, all while our public administrative and corporate lords will be comfortably ferried around to their chosen destinations by a driverless vehicle while they play with their I-Pads and sip beverages, traveling at exactly 1 mph under the speed limit and introducing one extra precisely measured car length distance between vehicles for every additional 10 mph, no more and no less.
No doubt, driverless vehicles will be particularly adept at dodging ponderous big busses and trains, which stop at predicted locations, so big busses are good, right?
But how good are Google driverless vehicles at taking a pleasant ride in the country, with no particular destination or purpose in mind except to enjoy the day?
And when there is a desired destination, I can generally find my way to a place where I've been before, years ago, even though I don't know the address or the names of the streets along the way. Betcha Google can't do that.
So, as for driverless driving, screwgle.
Hasn't it been demonstrated sufficiently, over and over, that whenever a change is introduced intentionally rather than organically, there's always a pile of unanticipated consequences, usually bad?
Nah, no reason we should expect anything negative, not unless we are an unwashed troglodytes who fears all things progressive.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Doing what I can about demeaning American minorities . . .
A Minnesota Congressperson has called for the Minnesota Vikings not to display the flags or logos of the Washington Redskins when the two teams play in Minnesota.
I say that the dismissive term, "Viking," demeans Norse-Americans and is hurtful hate speech.
You know, this being offended act could become kinda fun.
I say that the dismissive term, "Viking," demeans Norse-Americans and is hurtful hate speech.
You know, this being offended act could become kinda fun.
Thursday, October 24, 2013
XX and XY, and the cosmic significance thereof . . .
The situation: The husband is awake, is up, has showered, shaved, and has made and eaten breakfast. The wife remains motionless under the covers, in bed.
The husband thinks to himself, "My poor darling must really need her sleep. I'll be real quiet so she can get all the rest she needs."
The wife thinks to herself, "That selfish shit is going to let me stay in bed forever. It's like he doesn't care that I'm around. I could be gone and he wouldn't know or care."
Scientists say we must doubt in cases where there is no evidence that a thing imagined actually exists, and therefore, there are no parallel universes.
I say, don't so quick to deny parallel universes, there, Sparky.
The husband thinks to himself, "My poor darling must really need her sleep. I'll be real quiet so she can get all the rest she needs."
The wife thinks to herself, "That selfish shit is going to let me stay in bed forever. It's like he doesn't care that I'm around. I could be gone and he wouldn't know or care."
Scientists say we must doubt in cases where there is no evidence that a thing imagined actually exists, and therefore, there are no parallel universes.
I say, don't so quick to deny parallel universes, there, Sparky.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
A literary note, the Alexandria Quartet . . .
The other day, while poking around in a terrific used book store in Ashland, Oregon, I encountered Durrell's Alexandria Quartet, all four books in one big volume. So I bought it.
I read these books fifty years ago, now, while in college. A horse's ass of a college professor had spoken rapturously and at length about the books, and being a horse's ass myself and an English major as well, I was obliged to read them in order to prove that the professor was, as mentioned, a horse's ass. Of course I raced through the books, in a hurry to find out what happens next in the narrative, consistent with my intention to be dismissive as all hell. Also, I was somewhat distracted in all my endeavors at the time, what with being always on the lookout for the next chance to get laid.
Having read the first few pages with an intervening fifty year's worth of experience in the world, and no longer being bothered by women as I have now become completely invisible to them --- I think I'm really going to enjoy these books
I read these books fifty years ago, now, while in college. A horse's ass of a college professor had spoken rapturously and at length about the books, and being a horse's ass myself and an English major as well, I was obliged to read them in order to prove that the professor was, as mentioned, a horse's ass. Of course I raced through the books, in a hurry to find out what happens next in the narrative, consistent with my intention to be dismissive as all hell. Also, I was somewhat distracted in all my endeavors at the time, what with being always on the lookout for the next chance to get laid.
Having read the first few pages with an intervening fifty year's worth of experience in the world, and no longer being bothered by women as I have now become completely invisible to them --- I think I'm really going to enjoy these books
Sunday, October 13, 2013
So we vote for these people because. . . why? . . .
Ya'know, all this continuing resolution panic and yelping is an alternative to adopting a federal budget, kinda like the Constitution requires. Harry Reid's Senate hasn't voted for a budget since 2008.
Help me; altogether now, everybody say WTF!
Actually, at this point, WTF should be the stock response of all non-government citizens of whatever political inclination or affliction, left, right, committed, non-committed, ignorant or deranged, upon learning of each and every bit of news about the current political developments.
What would happen if bunchteen thousand citizens surrounded the White House and Congress, chanting, "WTF, WTF."
Nothing would change because our government masters no longer care. But it might make us feel better for a little bit.
Maybe we could all get matching tee shirts.
Help me; altogether now, everybody say WTF!
Actually, at this point, WTF should be the stock response of all non-government citizens of whatever political inclination or affliction, left, right, committed, non-committed, ignorant or deranged, upon learning of each and every bit of news about the current political developments.
What would happen if bunchteen thousand citizens surrounded the White House and Congress, chanting, "WTF, WTF."
Nothing would change because our government masters no longer care. But it might make us feel better for a little bit.
Maybe we could all get matching tee shirts.
Saturday, October 12, 2013
Potato Chip genius . . .
America does potato chips better than anybody. Just think, every potato is different, but American national snack companies can produce them in volume, all perfect in crispy, salty, potato chip goodness, packaged to assure you get the product while still fresh. I'm not talking about healthy eating. If you want to snack healthy, go ahead and munch vacantly on sprouts. And I'm not putting down other countries who may have their own national culinary triumphs, like . . . well, I'm sure there's something. Just, yea potato chips and American productive genius.
Monday, October 07, 2013
I don't care about the three-strikes rule. If you don't let me swing until I get a hit and be the pitcher, you can't use my baseball
Here's a growing list of things being shut down by the current tenant of the Spitehouse.. But the Spitehouse cooks and ushers and the military golf courses where the President plays, well, they are all essential federal services.
To switch metaphors, we are being treated like the bad doggie who has to have his nose rubbed in it.
I'm starting to think that it isn't a matter of we're all in this mess we're in together because of our unserious Democrats and our silly Republicans. I'm starting to suspect that maybe this mess we're in is because it's THEM against US.
I'm starting to suspect that shutting the government down all the way, not just 17% of it, could all maybe even work out.
But if we didn't have a federal government, the FBI wouldn't come if you called 911. Oh, wait, they already don't.
If we dint have the postal service, we wouldn't be able to get all our junk mail. Oh, wait, we can depend on email spam for that.
If we dint have the federal bank and the U.S. Mint, we would have to use debit and credit cards instead of cash. Oh, wait.
What if we didn't have the Department of Education, trying to make all state schools to look alike? Betcha home schooling could become an attractive alternative if the states failed to supply quality education. Oh, wait. And in the absence of student loans, colleges and universities might have to find pricing schemes based on demonstrative career value to students, instead of diversity and athletic showmanship, and the long con that is current higher education.
If we dint have the IRS, who could we pay our taxes to, under threat of penalties, for essential services, like Whitehouse ushers and cooks and cleaning staff? We'd have to depend on other tax nibblers, like states, counties, and municipalities. Oh, wait. We already do.
If we dint have the border patrol, who would prevent terrorists and criminals from walking in and preying on citizens? Oh, wait. That part of government is already shut down and the federal government says that states like Arizona can't step into the breach and patrol their own borders, even if they want to. Guess we are meant to welcome bomb throwers and drug dealers to their new home. Have a nice day.
For that matter, as to drugs, if we didn't have the DEA who would fight the war on drugs, you know, the attempted military and judicial interdiction on substances that a very many citizens routinely buy for their own entertainment, at prices way too high because of the interdiction activities of the federal and collaborating state governments? Like tobacco and booze.
And if we dint have the Department of Transportation and EPA, who would see to it that our gasoline supply was made artificially expensive with a heavy tax burden, used to require us to adulterate the fuel with 10% alcohol? Because polar bears, and because shut up. Who would manage things so that our miles per gallon is reduced due to the lesser caloric efficiency of the adulteration of the fuel with alcohol, while correspondingly reducing the availability of corn, which people around the world like to eat because it is cheap and nutritious. That is, cheap until we begin burning the stuff as fuel after processing the living daylights out of it, using fuel to do so, to turn it into alcohol to put into gasoline.
I'll observe that if a person feels antagonistic towards the current federal government, (Oops I typed "feral government by mistake so I fixed it.) that doesn't require one to be against all government, wherever and whenever. We could still have states even if the federal government were to be radically and brutally trimmed back or eliminated. And maybe the states could provide essential government services more effectively than the federal government. Or at least, no worse. For myself, I don't like the federal government much more than I don't like the state of Oregon. And while there is certainly an excessive portion of governmental boneheadery here, where would you rather live, Oregon with mountains and rivers and such, or the District of Columbia with, well, the District of Columbia?
Much of the basic structure of the modern United States of America was already in place by the time Woodrow Wilson went to the White House and began to progressivize government. There wasn't an interstate expressway system, but we have that now, because of Eisenhower. We also have much better communications and computing abilities but that largely is independent or even in spite of government activity, once DARPA turned the internet loose. And the federal government has grown awesomely since Woodrow Wilson, and especially, since Lyndon Johnson. (I'm told Harry Truman used to go for evening walks all around D.C., at night, instead of remaining secure in a White House surrounded by men with guns and ear pieces, as presidents are now)
So maybe the Spitehouse's attempt to rub out noses in it by closing some federal properties down will make us much more aware that those in government think that the free citizens of the United States of America must be coerced and managed and duped and bribed into behaving with deference to the wants, dreams, desires and beliefs in singing bullfrogs and unicorns of the political class and their fellow travelers. (I used the expression "fellow travelers" on purpose, and people of a certain age will know what I mean.)
Maybe the events of our current government shutdown could inspire many of us to begin to speculate about our relationship to our government -- there, I said it. "our government." And maybe there are those in our current government, from top to bottom, who could use a little dose of unemployment. Just as so many real Americans, not government Americans, are enduring presently.
I mean, think about it.
To switch metaphors, we are being treated like the bad doggie who has to have his nose rubbed in it.
I'm starting to think that it isn't a matter of we're all in this mess we're in together because of our unserious Democrats and our silly Republicans. I'm starting to suspect that maybe this mess we're in is because it's THEM against US.
I'm starting to suspect that shutting the government down all the way, not just 17% of it, could all maybe even work out.
But if we didn't have a federal government, the FBI wouldn't come if you called 911. Oh, wait, they already don't.
If we dint have the postal service, we wouldn't be able to get all our junk mail. Oh, wait, we can depend on email spam for that.
If we dint have the federal bank and the U.S. Mint, we would have to use debit and credit cards instead of cash. Oh, wait.
What if we didn't have the Department of Education, trying to make all state schools to look alike? Betcha home schooling could become an attractive alternative if the states failed to supply quality education. Oh, wait. And in the absence of student loans, colleges and universities might have to find pricing schemes based on demonstrative career value to students, instead of diversity and athletic showmanship, and the long con that is current higher education.
If we dint have the IRS, who could we pay our taxes to, under threat of penalties, for essential services, like Whitehouse ushers and cooks and cleaning staff? We'd have to depend on other tax nibblers, like states, counties, and municipalities. Oh, wait. We already do.
If we dint have the border patrol, who would prevent terrorists and criminals from walking in and preying on citizens? Oh, wait. That part of government is already shut down and the federal government says that states like Arizona can't step into the breach and patrol their own borders, even if they want to. Guess we are meant to welcome bomb throwers and drug dealers to their new home. Have a nice day.
For that matter, as to drugs, if we didn't have the DEA who would fight the war on drugs, you know, the attempted military and judicial interdiction on substances that a very many citizens routinely buy for their own entertainment, at prices way too high because of the interdiction activities of the federal and collaborating state governments? Like tobacco and booze.
And if we dint have the Department of Transportation and EPA, who would see to it that our gasoline supply was made artificially expensive with a heavy tax burden, used to require us to adulterate the fuel with 10% alcohol? Because polar bears, and because shut up. Who would manage things so that our miles per gallon is reduced due to the lesser caloric efficiency of the adulteration of the fuel with alcohol, while correspondingly reducing the availability of corn, which people around the world like to eat because it is cheap and nutritious. That is, cheap until we begin burning the stuff as fuel after processing the living daylights out of it, using fuel to do so, to turn it into alcohol to put into gasoline.
I'll observe that if a person feels antagonistic towards the current federal government, (Oops I typed "feral government by mistake so I fixed it.) that doesn't require one to be against all government, wherever and whenever. We could still have states even if the federal government were to be radically and brutally trimmed back or eliminated. And maybe the states could provide essential government services more effectively than the federal government. Or at least, no worse. For myself, I don't like the federal government much more than I don't like the state of Oregon. And while there is certainly an excessive portion of governmental boneheadery here, where would you rather live, Oregon with mountains and rivers and such, or the District of Columbia with, well, the District of Columbia?
Much of the basic structure of the modern United States of America was already in place by the time Woodrow Wilson went to the White House and began to progressivize government. There wasn't an interstate expressway system, but we have that now, because of Eisenhower. We also have much better communications and computing abilities but that largely is independent or even in spite of government activity, once DARPA turned the internet loose. And the federal government has grown awesomely since Woodrow Wilson, and especially, since Lyndon Johnson. (I'm told Harry Truman used to go for evening walks all around D.C., at night, instead of remaining secure in a White House surrounded by men with guns and ear pieces, as presidents are now)
So maybe the Spitehouse's attempt to rub out noses in it by closing some federal properties down will make us much more aware that those in government think that the free citizens of the United States of America must be coerced and managed and duped and bribed into behaving with deference to the wants, dreams, desires and beliefs in singing bullfrogs and unicorns of the political class and their fellow travelers. (I used the expression "fellow travelers" on purpose, and people of a certain age will know what I mean.)
Maybe the events of our current government shutdown could inspire many of us to begin to speculate about our relationship to our government -- there, I said it. "our government." And maybe there are those in our current government, from top to bottom, who could use a little dose of unemployment. Just as so many real Americans, not government Americans, are enduring presently.
I mean, think about it.
Sunday, October 06, 2013
"Take a Bow" Rides Again . . .
In the government shutdown in the absence of budget sppropriation, the administration and President can keep "essential" functions up and running. So, only 17% is actually shut down and stuff like defense and Socisl Security and Medicare continue. President Obama has now called all union representatives back on the payroll; they're just that important to him. Other stuff, like Border control, which has been ordered to stand down, and the Amber Alert system -- just not all that essential to the administration.
Great show, guys. Take a bow. I can't wait to see this administration's antics when it steps into the health care ring and all the clowns erupt from the goofy clown car and start making decisions about who gets what medical procedures.
Great show, guys. Take a bow. I can't wait to see this administration's antics when it steps into the health care ring and all the clowns erupt from the goofy clown car and start making decisions about who gets what medical procedures.
Saturday, October 05, 2013
Take a Bow, Junior . . .
According to the Constitution, spending decisions are for the House of Representatives. The Democratic message is that Republicans are a deranged minority. Nevertheless, the most recent congressional elections put Republicans in the majority of the House and the Democrats are the minority. They also expected the House to cave in to the Senate intransigence, as they frequently, but not always, have done in the past, for "the good of the country" and to support comity.
Surprise!
Now, the President wants the House to have a vote on a spending bill, as if they've been on strike or something. (He yelped that disgruntled workers who disagreed with their corporate employer and didn't do as they were told would be fired). But the House has passed and sent four separate spending bills to the Senate where they've been voted down and the President declared he'd veto them even if passed.
Great theater, guys. Take a bow, and exit. Stage right.
Surprise!
Now, the President wants the House to have a vote on a spending bill, as if they've been on strike or something. (He yelped that disgruntled workers who disagreed with their corporate employer and didn't do as they were told would be fired). But the House has passed and sent four separate spending bills to the Senate where they've been voted down and the President declared he'd veto them even if passed.
Great theater, guys. Take a bow, and exit. Stage right.
Thursday, October 03, 2013
Take a bow, guys, II . . .
Now the shut down government is spending money to close parks that ordinarily cost nothing for the government to run in the first place. In other words, more shut down theater.
They even wanted to close down Mt. Vernon, which is privately owned.
Take a bow, guys.
They even wanted to close down Mt. Vernon, which is privately owned.
Take a bow, guys.
Tuesday, October 01, 2013
Shut it down and take a bow! . . .
Check it off the list;I have now survived the first day of the Great Government Shutdown of 2013. It was actually okay and I bet most Americans found the day unremarkable.
Actually, maybe we should consider making it a permanent feature. When Congress chooses to ignore the requirement to adopt a budget, which Congress has done, and when Congress refuses to adopt a budget proposal from the president, which Congress has also done with an overwhelming vote against the president's budget by his own party, then the government should be shut down until it is properly funded with a true budget appropriation, and not just a cockamamie resolution.
There's now about bunchty thousand non-essential federal workers sitting on their non-essential butts, worrying that the public will figure out what non-essential means and will spy a path to government debt reduction springing into sight when the government doesn't loom so high on the economic horizon, because of the shutdown.
As for the rest of us, well, the economy is already pretty well shut down already, so us civilians don't see that the government shutdown is that big a deal, when you get down to it. All those non-essential government workers haven't done all that much by way of curing the economy in the past five years. The governmental cure for an economy that doesn't generate enough wealth to support everybody, is to extract a major portion of the little wealth the economy actually produces, and then re-inject the wealth back into the economy in a non-productive fashion, and then stand up with outstretched arms expecting thunderous applause, gratitude, and admiration.
So let's try this shutdown thing out for a while; we might find we like it. We might find that the only damage the shutdown does is to the political class and its parasitical hangers-on.
I can live with that. Government workers have not shown much concern for us so we need not feel bad for them. And I don't.
Actually, maybe we should consider making it a permanent feature. When Congress chooses to ignore the requirement to adopt a budget, which Congress has done, and when Congress refuses to adopt a budget proposal from the president, which Congress has also done with an overwhelming vote against the president's budget by his own party, then the government should be shut down until it is properly funded with a true budget appropriation, and not just a cockamamie resolution.
There's now about bunchty thousand non-essential federal workers sitting on their non-essential butts, worrying that the public will figure out what non-essential means and will spy a path to government debt reduction springing into sight when the government doesn't loom so high on the economic horizon, because of the shutdown.
As for the rest of us, well, the economy is already pretty well shut down already, so us civilians don't see that the government shutdown is that big a deal, when you get down to it. All those non-essential government workers haven't done all that much by way of curing the economy in the past five years. The governmental cure for an economy that doesn't generate enough wealth to support everybody, is to extract a major portion of the little wealth the economy actually produces, and then re-inject the wealth back into the economy in a non-productive fashion, and then stand up with outstretched arms expecting thunderous applause, gratitude, and admiration.
So let's try this shutdown thing out for a while; we might find we like it. We might find that the only damage the shutdown does is to the political class and its parasitical hangers-on.
I can live with that. Government workers have not shown much concern for us so we need not feel bad for them. And I don't.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Well, if I have to choose which side . . .
Here's a story in the Daily Mail about a stand-up comedian I never heard of who punched a journalist when he found out the journalist was tweeting about him negatively. The punchee appeared to have been injured more in his self-absorbed dignity than physically.
It occurs to me that the Republic might be much improved if maybe three or four journalists got punched now and then. Maybe a coupla dozen politicians as well. Not to cause injury, but just, shall we say, for purposes of enlightenment.
It occurs to me that the Republic might be much improved if maybe three or four journalists got punched now and then. Maybe a coupla dozen politicians as well. Not to cause injury, but just, shall we say, for purposes of enlightenment.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Things that happen when certain kinds of people are in charge . . .
Here's a list of over 700 companies and organizations that have applied for and received an exemption from Obamacare. They don't have to comply with the employer mandated health insurance laws, but of course -- their employees are not exempted.
Oregon has been advertising it's exchange to begin October 1, 2013. There is a grace period between then and the first of 2014 after which you must be insured. IRS will be on the case to assure you buy medical insurance for 2014, for in case your employer doesn't cover you. If you don't guy coverage, you'll pay a fine to IRS -- I mean, a tax on uninsured people. It's the same money, tax or fine. But the Supreme Court wants to call it a tax to make Obamacare all legal and stuff, and if they call it a tax, it probably would be unconstitutional.
What's it going to cost if you don't get employer provided coverage? What will you have to pay for a family plan? What happens if you lose a job, or get cut back on hours? What insurance companies are going to sell through state exchanges in each state? What is going to happen in states where the exchanges aren't set up yet, or aren't ever going to be set up? What happens if you have to move from one state to another, in search of a job?
Need help trying to figure out what to do?
Good luck.
This is so not ready for prime time.
Oregon has been advertising it's exchange to begin October 1, 2013. There is a grace period between then and the first of 2014 after which you must be insured. IRS will be on the case to assure you buy medical insurance for 2014, for in case your employer doesn't cover you. If you don't guy coverage, you'll pay a fine to IRS -- I mean, a tax on uninsured people. It's the same money, tax or fine. But the Supreme Court wants to call it a tax to make Obamacare all legal and stuff, and if they call it a tax, it probably would be unconstitutional.
What's it going to cost if you don't get employer provided coverage? What will you have to pay for a family plan? What happens if you lose a job, or get cut back on hours? What insurance companies are going to sell through state exchanges in each state? What is going to happen in states where the exchanges aren't set up yet, or aren't ever going to be set up? What happens if you have to move from one state to another, in search of a job?
Need help trying to figure out what to do?
Good luck.
This is so not ready for prime time.
Monday, September 23, 2013
The Sky is Falling, Zombies, and Government Shut-Down . . .
The House has passed a CR (continuing resolution) to keep the government in business until they can get around to ever passing a budget, because they have so much work to do and can't get it all done in maybe two days a week of actually working, for which they get paid over $150,000 a year, plus perks.
The only problem is that they left out Obamacare from the CR, which means that there will be no legal way for Obamacare to operate come October 1.
Also, there is some reluctance to agree to raise the debt limit, you know, the rule that says there's a limit to how much the government can borrow -- the debt limit that gets raised every time the executive bureaucrazy wants to pass money out to their cronies in big business. (You didn't think the cash all went only to poor people, did you?)
Anyhow, the government could shut down real soon, if the Senate doesn't do something about a continuing resolution.
My question is this. If the government shuts down, does that mean that Senators, Representatives, and executive officials won't get their pay checks?
You know what the answer is, and you know what the answer should be, and those two ain't the same thing.
The only problem is that they left out Obamacare from the CR, which means that there will be no legal way for Obamacare to operate come October 1.
Also, there is some reluctance to agree to raise the debt limit, you know, the rule that says there's a limit to how much the government can borrow -- the debt limit that gets raised every time the executive bureaucrazy wants to pass money out to their cronies in big business. (You didn't think the cash all went only to poor people, did you?)
Anyhow, the government could shut down real soon, if the Senate doesn't do something about a continuing resolution.
My question is this. If the government shuts down, does that mean that Senators, Representatives, and executive officials won't get their pay checks?
You know what the answer is, and you know what the answer should be, and those two ain't the same thing.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Maybe it was just routine. . . workplace violence , or maybe they were just horsin' around . . .
An Al Qaeda affiliate, Al Shabaab, sent a bunch of gunmen into a crowded shopping mall in Kenya and shot up the place. They would ask if somebody was Muslim, and if not, they'd kill'em. Thirty-nine dead and well over a hundred wounded. Hostages were taken as well.
Remember how, just before the election, what was left of Al Qaeda was on the run, basically all but all washed up?
Yeah, right. That and rap music is lyrical, Co'- Cola is a disinfectant, and Hillary Clinton just learned she is pregnant.?
Remember how, just before the election, what was left of Al Qaeda was on the run, basically all but all washed up?
Yeah, right. That and rap music is lyrical, Co'- Cola is a disinfectant, and Hillary Clinton just learned she is pregnant.?
Friday, September 20, 2013
Let's get this straight . . .
The Republican majority-controlled House, at nearly the last minute, has passed a bill to provide continuing financial authority to keep the government spending money . . . but not Obamacare. They are voting to keep the government open. Those who voted against the bill would let the government shut down before they give up Obamacare.
For the bill to become law it must be passed in the Senate and survive a possible presidential veto. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats who vow not to pass the bill, thus leaving the government without continuing funds. Even if it were to pass in the partisan Senate, the President promises to veto the financial authority to keep the government running unless Obamacare is also funded.
In other words, the Senate and the President will vote against funding the entire government - defense, entitlements, federal aid, everything - if they can't have Obamacare.
So what do you think we'll hear from politicians and public comments in the media? The Republicans want to shut down the government.
Hey, I think Obamacare will prove to be a disaster, and an increasing number of citizens agree with me. Maybe even more are opposed than approve if you believe some recent polling. But opinions vary. It's at least possible that the country could grow to accommodate Obamacare if the economy and employment situation could ever get out from under the load of crap burdening us at the time.
I just want it straight. It's the Democratic Senate and President threatening to let the government shut down, and the Republican House which has voted to fund the government.
For the bill to become law it must be passed in the Senate and survive a possible presidential veto. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats who vow not to pass the bill, thus leaving the government without continuing funds. Even if it were to pass in the partisan Senate, the President promises to veto the financial authority to keep the government running unless Obamacare is also funded.
In other words, the Senate and the President will vote against funding the entire government - defense, entitlements, federal aid, everything - if they can't have Obamacare.
So what do you think we'll hear from politicians and public comments in the media? The Republicans want to shut down the government.
Hey, I think Obamacare will prove to be a disaster, and an increasing number of citizens agree with me. Maybe even more are opposed than approve if you believe some recent polling. But opinions vary. It's at least possible that the country could grow to accommodate Obamacare if the economy and employment situation could ever get out from under the load of crap burdening us at the time.
I just want it straight. It's the Democratic Senate and President threatening to let the government shut down, and the Republican House which has voted to fund the government.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Monday, September 09, 2013
The confict in the middle east is both more and less complicated than you think . . .
Check this out. Bashar Assad's grandfather has some insights into the conflict between his Alewite culture, and the Arab Muslim objectives in the region. And he said some nice things about the Palestinian Jews. France was in charge at the time, and he was looking for French protection from the Muslims.
Thursday, September 05, 2013
How about just assigning fifty push-ups and a penalty patrol . . .
I'm still thinking about this Syrian adventure before us. Well,it wouldn't be an issue except President Obama kinda made it an issue some time ago when he blustered that if poison gas was used, that behavior would cross a red line requiring the U.S. to toss some bombs. So now his story is that he kinda sorta didn't say what it sounded like he was saying. Then he said he didn't need any stinking congressional permission to send "his" military into action, and now he wants congressional approval.
I don't think there's any good guys in the Syrian conflict. That isn't to say that Assad deserves to die. He does. But I don't trust our current political masters to get the job done in a clean, uncomplicated fashion. There is just way too much crocodile tears being conspicuously shed by professional moralizers.
Oh, he gases his own peepul! He must be shown how unacceptably uncivilized that is. He must be punished. Such evil cannot be permitted by us to persist in the world.
Oh, yeah? If we are now in the business of punishing evil heads of state for abuse of their citizens. . . When do we start bombing North Korea?
I don't think there's any good guys in the Syrian conflict. That isn't to say that Assad deserves to die. He does. But I don't trust our current political masters to get the job done in a clean, uncomplicated fashion. There is just way too much crocodile tears being conspicuously shed by professional moralizers.
Oh, he gases his own peepul! He must be shown how unacceptably uncivilized that is. He must be punished. Such evil cannot be permitted by us to persist in the world.
Oh, yeah? If we are now in the business of punishing evil heads of state for abuse of their citizens. . . When do we start bombing North Korea?
Monday, September 02, 2013
A different kind of reluctant warrior . . . .
Our president sent our Secretary of State to make the case for punishing somebody in Syria, explosively. A bunch of federal employees were told to stay close to the office over the holiday weekend, because maybe stuff was going to happen where they would be needed. And then, and then . . . Nothing.
President Obama has asked Congress to decide whether or not to act in Syria, despite the fact that he has basically already declared war on Syria. At least that's what the Syrians think. No doubt President Obama is snickering to himself over the clever way he stuck the turd in somebody else's pocket, so when things get bad he'll have somebody else (besides Bush) to take the blame.
So now it is up to Congress to make an executive decision. (And yes, I see what I just did, there.). Two things: Kerry is probably steamed pretty good, after having been a self-righteous, smug dove since 'Nam. And I sure would like to see a landslide Congressional vote of "present."
President Obama has asked Congress to decide whether or not to act in Syria, despite the fact that he has basically already declared war on Syria. At least that's what the Syrians think. No doubt President Obama is snickering to himself over the clever way he stuck the turd in somebody else's pocket, so when things get bad he'll have somebody else (besides Bush) to take the blame.
So now it is up to Congress to make an executive decision. (And yes, I see what I just did, there.). Two things: Kerry is probably steamed pretty good, after having been a self-righteous, smug dove since 'Nam. And I sure would like to see a landslide Congressional vote of "present."
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Who thinks Syria needs to be bombed a little?
I saw people holding up signs opposing our attacking Syria, today. Not many, maybe four or five standing on a pedestrian overpass. Betcha this is the beginning of something that's gonna get real interesting, given our Secretary of State's long history of peace demonstration and his current statements calling for military action in Syria.
Friday, August 30, 2013
We must bomb Syria because Syrians are killing one another in unpleasant ways . . .
President Obama is having a tough time getting anybody to support his plan to punish Bashar Assad for using poison gas. He said a year ago that the use of chemical warfare in Syria would cross a red line requiring a military response on his part. Now that poison gas has been used, Obama will look like a roaring doofus if he doesn't at least fire some bombs off at Assad.
The absence of support by anybody, except maybe the Fwench, is mainly because people can't see how attacking Syrians advances or supports any national interests. There are no important objectives, people say, to be gained from an attack on Syria.
But they're wrong. There is an objective.
The objective is for Obama to feel good about himself.
The absence of support by anybody, except maybe the Fwench, is mainly because people can't see how attacking Syrians advances or supports any national interests. There are no important objectives, people say, to be gained from an attack on Syria.
But they're wrong. There is an objective.
The objective is for Obama to feel good about himself.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
It's just bidness. . . .
You maybe knew that Al Gore had a television network. Maybe you knew that his network didn't attract many viewers, so he wanted to get out from under it. Glenn Beck, an "arch-conservative," was interested in buying the network, but Al Gore refused to sell to him. Beck had wrong political ideals and Gore didn't want to have the subsequent promotion of those ideals on his conscience.
So Al Gore sold his network to Al Jazeera, America.
You can't make this stuff up.
So Al Gore sold his network to Al Jazeera, America.
You can't make this stuff up.
Bengahzi, latest news . . .
Okay, so the State Department has investigated itself and found it was okay on the Benhgahzi matter. And the four State Department minions who were disciplined for their role in the Bengahzi matter have now been reinstated. I guess that means that Mrs. Clinton, the head of the State Department at the time, is cleared to run for President, now.
Oh, look. There is a new puppy at the White House.
Oh, look. There is a new puppy at the White House.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
How to be happier . . .
Some studies have shown that older people tend to be happier than younger people, and researchers seem to be puzzled by the phenomenon.
It's not so difficult to understand.
I'm 71, so I think I can be counted as among the older. I'm pretty happy. Every day I look and don't see my name in the obituary reports, it makes me happy. Woohoo! Way to go!
It's not so difficult to understand.
I'm 71, so I think I can be counted as among the older. I'm pretty happy. Every day I look and don't see my name in the obituary reports, it makes me happy. Woohoo! Way to go!
Monday, August 19, 2013
The Solheim Cup . . .
I watched bits of the Solheim Cup this weekend. That's where the best of the LPGA play against the best female golfers from Europe. Of course, there's top competitors on the LPGA tour from Asia, but they get left out. It's team Europe against team America. Team America lost. But their outfits were hotter, so they had that going for them. If only their putters had been hotter.
A little hint to the academic left . . .
Just as a symbol is not the same thing as the thing symbolized, socialism is not the same thing as society, and society is not the same thing as the state. Try to catch up.
Thursday, August 15, 2013
I am Spartacus . . .
Sarah Hoyt so writes, "I am Spartacus," and maybe we should all be prepared to declare ourselves Spartacus, as well, and soon. Check it.
Monday, August 12, 2013
The special language of the celebrity life-style . . .
All of a sudden, I noticed. Whenever some minor celebrity permits herself to be photographed without clothing or appearance of shame, the accompanying text invariably describes her as "confident."
I guess they have to feel confident, because otherwise they would merely be bare-assed naked, and anybody can do that. In fact, most of us spend considerable effort to avoid being caught bare-assed naked.
Next up. A female celebrity bursting out with a loud, swampy fart of extended duration will be described as "charitable."
I guess they have to feel confident, because otherwise they would merely be bare-assed naked, and anybody can do that. In fact, most of us spend considerable effort to avoid being caught bare-assed naked.
Next up. A female celebrity bursting out with a loud, swampy fart of extended duration will be described as "charitable."
Friday, August 09, 2013
Al Qaida is on the run, we were told . . .
Let's see, now. We've shut down a bunch of embassies and consulates, so any Americans in the area who need our government's help will find the doors locked. We've evacuated embassy staff from Lahore.
Who is on the run, exactly?
Who is on the run, exactly?
Sunday, August 04, 2013
What's going down here?
I remember as a little kid when out of the country there'd be beggers. My Dad explained that begging was what they had to do to eat, and they'd be happy to get the dime I had to give. But the deal was, you wouldn't see beggers in the States. At least not in the fifties and sixties. Not that there weren't poor people in the U.S.
That's why President Lyndon Johnson declared a "war" on poverty in the middle of the Vietnam war. He said we could afford both "guns and butter."
Now, there's beggers at all major intersections and at interstate rest stops. Without passing judgement on those with their cardboard signs, I mean, WTF?
It's been about fifty years and billions of dollars on government aid of various kinds and evidently we are losing the war on poverty. What's the chances that government "help" is a big part of the problem?
That's why President Lyndon Johnson declared a "war" on poverty in the middle of the Vietnam war. He said we could afford both "guns and butter."
Now, there's beggers at all major intersections and at interstate rest stops. Without passing judgement on those with their cardboard signs, I mean, WTF?
It's been about fifty years and billions of dollars on government aid of various kinds and evidently we are losing the war on poverty. What's the chances that government "help" is a big part of the problem?
Friday, August 02, 2013
Recent Obamacare detours . . .
Remember when Pelosi said they'd have to pass Obamacare to find out what was in the bill?
Well they passed it, and then they read it. Now, Congress and its staffers want no part of it, despite a statement in the law that says they have to participate in the plan.
Obama has now exempted Congress from paying for their own medical coverage under Obamacare, so they're cool, now.
Of course, you know who will pay for their share of the insurance, don't you.
What I want to know, is where do us aroused villagers get pitchforks and torches, like we see in the movies. Or tar and feathers for that matter. Amazon?
I think Obamacare is a bad idea, but many don't. Nevertheless, even if you think Obamacare is great, can you think of anything that would say Congressmen and their staff should be given a pass?
Well they passed it, and then they read it. Now, Congress and its staffers want no part of it, despite a statement in the law that says they have to participate in the plan.
Obama has now exempted Congress from paying for their own medical coverage under Obamacare, so they're cool, now.
Of course, you know who will pay for their share of the insurance, don't you.
What I want to know, is where do us aroused villagers get pitchforks and torches, like we see in the movies. Or tar and feathers for that matter. Amazon?
I think Obamacare is a bad idea, but many don't. Nevertheless, even if you think Obamacare is great, can you think of anything that would say Congressmen and their staff should be given a pass?
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
The self appointed cool kids are all way above this sort of patriotic hickery. . .
Many of us remember the iconic photos around 9/11, and one in particular with firefighters in the rubble with a flag. Well, it was almost not included in the 9/11 Exhibit because the unqualified dimwits in charge thought it to be too over the top patriotic and American. They thought we should tone down the patriotism thing a little bit, so as to, well, I don't know what. Misha's reaction is what we call a righteous rant. Take a look, but put your coffee down first.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
The empire strikes out . . .
Ilya Somin has a box score of the government's losing attempts to stifle rights.
In Horne v. Department of Agriculture, a decision issued in June, the justices unanimously rejected the Obama administration's argument that raisin farmers did not have the right to go to court to contest the seizure of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of raisins. The Fifth Amendment states that the government must pay "just compensation" whenever the government takes private property for "public use." But the administration claimed that farmers could not even raise the takings issue in court without first enduring lengthy delays and paying a $483,000 fine.
Horne was the administration's third unanimous defeat in a property rights case in 18 months. In Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, it claimed that a couple had no right to go to court to seek compensation after the EPA blocked construction of their "dream house."
In Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States, it unsuccessfully argued that the Fifth Amendment doesn't require compensation when the federal government repeatedly and deliberately floods property owners' land. Even liberal justices normally skeptical of property rights claims, including one of President Obama's appointees, found these arguments too much to swallow.
The Obama administration has also suffered unanimous defeats in several other important cases.
Last year, the justices rejected the administration's position that the religious freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment does not apply to churches' decisons to hire and fire employees with religious duties, such as teaching theology. Obama appointee Justice Elena Kagan called the administration's position "amazing."
In United States v. Jones, another 2012 case, the justices unanimously rejected the administration's claim that the Fourth Amendment does not restrict the government's authority to attach a GPS tracking device to a car
Degradable bumper stickers . . .
In the last three weeks, as I've rambled through Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina, I've seen no more than a couple dozen Obama stickers. They've even been vanishing here in Portland.
I'm sure it must be a matter of sticker material that degrades, as one can still find a Kerry or Gore sticker 'round here, and true Portland progressives would surely not be scraping their bumpers clean.
Right?
I'm sure it must be a matter of sticker material that degrades, as one can still find a Kerry or Gore sticker 'round here, and true Portland progressives would surely not be scraping their bumpers clean.
Right?
Monday, July 22, 2013
Golf vacation . . .
Golf vacation is over. Four days in North Carolina - nothing but golf, and food, and smoking and drinking, and calling one another names where parental legitimacy was involved or where the named was favorably compared to an organ of elimination . . . and there were no women present but for the ladies serving coffee at the breakfast buffet.
It was great!
I am now back in the world of women.
It was great!
I am now back in the world of women.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Inexplicable increase in I.Q. detected . . .
In the last presidential election, it's been reported, about 55% of women voted for Obama. Now, a recent poll shows less than half of all women approve of Obama.
Friday, July 05, 2013
Civilization!!!! .....
We are on vacation and visiting with family in Cincinnati. We dropped into a grocery store and, wondrous to behold, our stuff was put into plastic bags and I could loop them all over my forearms and make a single trip to the car instead of carrying two bags at a time in my arms with three trips to the car.
Cool!
I know, I know. In Portland we know that using paper bags is good and plastic bags are evil, but I don't care. I like plastic; I'm a wild man and I cannot be restrained.
Cool!
I know, I know. In Portland we know that using paper bags is good and plastic bags are evil, but I don't care. I like plastic; I'm a wild man and I cannot be restrained.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
The Death of DOMA, and another fine mess you've gotten us into . . .
It's the latest, most important news. DOMA is toast.
I never knew where Congress got the authority to create a restrictive definition of marriage in the first place. It sure isn't in the enumerated powers. What, the interstate commerce clause? That means if a homosexual couple gets married in a state which permits such marriages, they are married for purposes of federal law, and have the benefits and obligations that arise under federal law.
Well, if the Defense of Marriage Act is toast, does that mean that states now have to recognize homosexual marriage relationships created under other state's laws? Or can the states say that a marriage that would be contrary to law in one state isn't automatically made lawful because some other state let it happen under more liberal laws? In other words, may states now question the legitimacy of actions of other states, when citizens move from state to state?
Further, there is the Prop 8 clusterf*ck the court is dealing with. California voters passed Prop 8, saying, no homosexual marriage. Some people sued the state, saying that Prop 8, enforced by the state, would violate some sort of rights they imagined they had, just as if a right is some sort of biological appendage rather than a condition created by government action. Anyhow, the political masters of California, who didn't like Prop 8 much in the first place mostly because they don't like the idea of citizens getting all uppity and thinking they should be considered, decided not to defend the case brought by the people who were suing to claim Prop 8 was a violation.
So, how tough is it to win a lawsuit, when the defendant doesn't show up?
To avoid a default position, the original proponents of Prop 8 stepped in and nominated themselves as defendants. The plaintiffs, suing the state, wanted them kicked out of court, saying, "We aren't suing you, we're suing California and you have no right to be here." The problem went to the 9th circuit judges who said citizens can defend a lawsuit when the state defendant won't. Contrarily, the Supreme Court has ruled that citizens cannot appear and defend if the state, as defendant, won't.
I guess that means that the challenge to Prop 8 will be upheld because the political masters of California are going to take a dive on the issue, and the voters who voted and passed Prop 8 can pretty much go pound sand, for all that they matter. Governor Brown wants queer marriage in California, and his will be done.
So where does that leave us? Who the hell knows. More litigation will ensue, for sure, for sure, and speeches will be made, politicians will weep phony tears, activists of one sort or another will activate, and pulpits will roar with righteousness. And all the sturm und drang will be in aid of homosexual marriage.
Hey, what percentage of Americans are exclusively homosexual in the first place? Maybe 5%, if that? And what percentage of those want the right to marry? Certainly not all. After all, a helluva lot of straight people have determined that marriage isn't all that. So we have all this attention paid to something that will benefit only a fraction of a very small minority.
Thanks Supremes. You made the mess worse. Gah!
I guess that the issues of government surveillance of citizens without probable cause, contrary to the 4th Amendment, can be safely ignored. And no need to concern ourselves with the politicizing of IRS decision making. And we needn't be concerned about who decided to let Americans die without even trying to do something about it in Bengahzi. And nothing to look at when Kathleen Sibelius tries to shake down constituents. No need to wonder about the EPA's violation of administration rule making rules. Homeland Security's heavy handed violation of travelers means nothing. A porous border with the federal government declining to enforce its own laws is something we should welcome in the name of diversity and social progress. And don't speak of the threat of militant Islamism which has declared war on us and shown over the years that attacks can be made within our borders with impunity.
None of that dreck is all that important, compared to the rights of homosexuals to fulfill their heart's desire to prance down a wedding aisle with a white veil masking a heavy beard, all with the approval and support of loving government busybodies.
Don't get me wrong. Homosexuals are wronged by the present state of the law. Well. Fix that. Let's get it done clearly and without confusion, and let's stop screwing over the icky queers, if that's our thing, and let's get on with the real challenges to our republic.
Or could it be that our government masters welcome and promote the distraction provided by minor issues, like homosexual marriage, so that attention will be directed away from some the concerns noted above, all of which arise in the first place mostly because many of our government masters are not fundamentally in favor of a republican form of government which essentially empowers the little people to resist the depredations of solipsistic politicians?
Nah, surely not that.
I never knew where Congress got the authority to create a restrictive definition of marriage in the first place. It sure isn't in the enumerated powers. What, the interstate commerce clause? That means if a homosexual couple gets married in a state which permits such marriages, they are married for purposes of federal law, and have the benefits and obligations that arise under federal law.
Well, if the Defense of Marriage Act is toast, does that mean that states now have to recognize homosexual marriage relationships created under other state's laws? Or can the states say that a marriage that would be contrary to law in one state isn't automatically made lawful because some other state let it happen under more liberal laws? In other words, may states now question the legitimacy of actions of other states, when citizens move from state to state?
Further, there is the Prop 8 clusterf*ck the court is dealing with. California voters passed Prop 8, saying, no homosexual marriage. Some people sued the state, saying that Prop 8, enforced by the state, would violate some sort of rights they imagined they had, just as if a right is some sort of biological appendage rather than a condition created by government action. Anyhow, the political masters of California, who didn't like Prop 8 much in the first place mostly because they don't like the idea of citizens getting all uppity and thinking they should be considered, decided not to defend the case brought by the people who were suing to claim Prop 8 was a violation.
So, how tough is it to win a lawsuit, when the defendant doesn't show up?
To avoid a default position, the original proponents of Prop 8 stepped in and nominated themselves as defendants. The plaintiffs, suing the state, wanted them kicked out of court, saying, "We aren't suing you, we're suing California and you have no right to be here." The problem went to the 9th circuit judges who said citizens can defend a lawsuit when the state defendant won't. Contrarily, the Supreme Court has ruled that citizens cannot appear and defend if the state, as defendant, won't.
I guess that means that the challenge to Prop 8 will be upheld because the political masters of California are going to take a dive on the issue, and the voters who voted and passed Prop 8 can pretty much go pound sand, for all that they matter. Governor Brown wants queer marriage in California, and his will be done.
So where does that leave us? Who the hell knows. More litigation will ensue, for sure, for sure, and speeches will be made, politicians will weep phony tears, activists of one sort or another will activate, and pulpits will roar with righteousness. And all the sturm und drang will be in aid of homosexual marriage.
Hey, what percentage of Americans are exclusively homosexual in the first place? Maybe 5%, if that? And what percentage of those want the right to marry? Certainly not all. After all, a helluva lot of straight people have determined that marriage isn't all that. So we have all this attention paid to something that will benefit only a fraction of a very small minority.
Thanks Supremes. You made the mess worse. Gah!
I guess that the issues of government surveillance of citizens without probable cause, contrary to the 4th Amendment, can be safely ignored. And no need to concern ourselves with the politicizing of IRS decision making. And we needn't be concerned about who decided to let Americans die without even trying to do something about it in Bengahzi. And nothing to look at when Kathleen Sibelius tries to shake down constituents. No need to wonder about the EPA's violation of administration rule making rules. Homeland Security's heavy handed violation of travelers means nothing. A porous border with the federal government declining to enforce its own laws is something we should welcome in the name of diversity and social progress. And don't speak of the threat of militant Islamism which has declared war on us and shown over the years that attacks can be made within our borders with impunity.
None of that dreck is all that important, compared to the rights of homosexuals to fulfill their heart's desire to prance down a wedding aisle with a white veil masking a heavy beard, all with the approval and support of loving government busybodies.
Don't get me wrong. Homosexuals are wronged by the present state of the law. Well. Fix that. Let's get it done clearly and without confusion, and let's stop screwing over the icky queers, if that's our thing, and let's get on with the real challenges to our republic.
Or could it be that our government masters welcome and promote the distraction provided by minor issues, like homosexual marriage, so that attention will be directed away from some the concerns noted above, all of which arise in the first place mostly because many of our government masters are not fundamentally in favor of a republican form of government which essentially empowers the little people to resist the depredations of solipsistic politicians?
Nah, surely not that.
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Big Alterna . . .
Got some unsolicited stuff in the mail, as we do, now that my bride has subscribed to some information services promoting good health.
It occurs to me that providing for alternative medical practices and ingestible supplements is a big business, bringing in big, big bucks, when you figure that on top of all the stuff being sold, there's a whole arkload of alternative treatment practitioners, healers, spiritual advisors, swamis, consultants, and suchlike, from acupunctuationists to rolfbrokers, to reikipilots, and all notional practitioners in-between.
And every damn one of them shares to following two points.
In that regard, Big Pharma is indistinguishable from Big Alterna, and don't think otherwise.
But hey, if you believe that a $139.00 hat with earflaps, made out of a sun activated corn silk and mole fur blend derived from ranch-raised moles, will cure migraines and ice-cream headaches, well, go for it.
It probably won't make any difference, in Darwinian terms, anyhow.
It occurs to me that providing for alternative medical practices and ingestible supplements is a big business, bringing in big, big bucks, when you figure that on top of all the stuff being sold, there's a whole arkload of alternative treatment practitioners, healers, spiritual advisors, swamis, consultants, and suchlike, from acupunctuationists to rolfbrokers, to reikipilots, and all notional practitioners in-between.
And every damn one of them shares to following two points.
- They aren't doing what they do or distributing what they deliver for no charge.
- They all hate and despise what they contemptuously call Big Pharma, by which they mean protocols and substances that have been developed with more than a passing familiarity with the scientific method.
In that regard, Big Pharma is indistinguishable from Big Alterna, and don't think otherwise.
But hey, if you believe that a $139.00 hat with earflaps, made out of a sun activated corn silk and mole fur blend derived from ranch-raised moles, will cure migraines and ice-cream headaches, well, go for it.
It probably won't make any difference, in Darwinian terms, anyhow.
Monday, June 10, 2013
The NSA, that is, National Spy Agency . . .
There are reasons for being suspicious of our government. And keep in mind that being against the government is not the same thing as being against the country. We're just talking about the guys running the place, you know, the current four branches of government, the judiciary, the legislature, the executive, and the vast unelected civil service. (Yeah, there's four, that is, one more than your teacher, who didn't know any better, told you about in the seventh grade.)
Let's see. There's Fast and Furious. There's Sibelius. There's Bengahzi. Then there's the Bengahzi cover-up. There's the IRS being politicalized. And there's the NSA wiretapping deal. There may be more that I've forgotten. Any of these could be enough to shake up the White House. After all, with Nixon, the problem was bugging just the Democratic campaign offices, and that was enough. But the NSA has bugged the entire country, including your voice calls, email, texts, etc. A ginormously huge data center is being built in Utah to store everything the NSA gets.
And this is potentially the worst of all. First, I'm pretty sure there are hackers in China and Russia, and maybe Iran, who can't wait to hack into all this NSA data. If they haven't already. And of course, we have our own domestic hackers to worry about, not the mention the various government busybodies who are going to check you out. And if they are collecting information from everybody, then everybody is the potential target, and it has nothing to do with actual guilt or 4th Amendment probable cause.
Do you think that girl you dumped in your senior year has forgotten about it, now that she works for the Veteran's Administration where you just happen to be applying for benefits? Let's just check you out.
But that isn't the worst of it because, second, there's a million dedicated, crazy conspiracy-theory paranoids out there, slapping their knee right now and saying, "I knew it!"
We have a whole lot of crazy people running around loose, since the great psychiatric insight of the seventies -- that the best and most humane treatment for crazy people is to pretend they can function in normal society and to ignore them and their emotional pain until they commit a serious crime that gets them locked up for a time.
So here's a little message for all the crazy people.
Boys and girls, just because it's true that the NSA really is collecting all sorts of information about everybody, not just foreign transactions, doesn't mean you haven't been crazy all this time. You just caught a lucky break, but you are still crazy. Even though all the electronic data is being collected, the government is still not spying on you and watching what you do through the light bulbs, not now and never was
At least not the old kind.
I'm not so sure about those new curly compact florescent kind.
Let's see. There's Fast and Furious. There's Sibelius. There's Bengahzi. Then there's the Bengahzi cover-up. There's the IRS being politicalized. And there's the NSA wiretapping deal. There may be more that I've forgotten. Any of these could be enough to shake up the White House. After all, with Nixon, the problem was bugging just the Democratic campaign offices, and that was enough. But the NSA has bugged the entire country, including your voice calls, email, texts, etc. A ginormously huge data center is being built in Utah to store everything the NSA gets.
And this is potentially the worst of all. First, I'm pretty sure there are hackers in China and Russia, and maybe Iran, who can't wait to hack into all this NSA data. If they haven't already. And of course, we have our own domestic hackers to worry about, not the mention the various government busybodies who are going to check you out. And if they are collecting information from everybody, then everybody is the potential target, and it has nothing to do with actual guilt or 4th Amendment probable cause.
Do you think that girl you dumped in your senior year has forgotten about it, now that she works for the Veteran's Administration where you just happen to be applying for benefits? Let's just check you out.
But that isn't the worst of it because, second, there's a million dedicated, crazy conspiracy-theory paranoids out there, slapping their knee right now and saying, "I knew it!"
We have a whole lot of crazy people running around loose, since the great psychiatric insight of the seventies -- that the best and most humane treatment for crazy people is to pretend they can function in normal society and to ignore them and their emotional pain until they commit a serious crime that gets them locked up for a time.
So here's a little message for all the crazy people.
Boys and girls, just because it's true that the NSA really is collecting all sorts of information about everybody, not just foreign transactions, doesn't mean you haven't been crazy all this time. You just caught a lucky break, but you are still crazy. Even though all the electronic data is being collected, the government is still not spying on you and watching what you do through the light bulbs, not now and never was
At least not the old kind.
I'm not so sure about those new curly compact florescent kind.
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Can you say "ersatz," boys and girls? . . .
I drink no-fat milk. I use whole wheat spaghetti noodles and pizza dough. I eat low fat cheese. I use turkey sausage, not pork. One morning, for breakfast, my wife made "pancakes" using grated apple, banana, and egg. (They were good.) I use artificial sweetener. My hamburgers have no burger in them, so they have soy and nuts instead. I think the little bits of bacon in my salad are really flavored bits of brown styrene. My buttery popcorn involves no actual butter.
I could have teeth "whiter than white" by use of an inexpensive product.
My shirts don't need ironing after washing.
My car shifts its own gears. The gasoline in its tank comes partly from corn alcohol. The fabric of my pants comes from an oil well.
So, it occurs to me that I am living an inauthentic life. And I'm not alone in that.
Is it then any wonder that we can hear the pitchman on television say, "Get the facts, just try it for yourself," and not even hear the clanking of the logic underneath that statement?
All the phony we live with has nourished our stupid quotient. (If you can have an intelligence quotient, I.Q., then you can have a stupid quotient.)
So, don't get me started on politicians.
I could have teeth "whiter than white" by use of an inexpensive product.
My shirts don't need ironing after washing.
My car shifts its own gears. The gasoline in its tank comes partly from corn alcohol. The fabric of my pants comes from an oil well.
So, it occurs to me that I am living an inauthentic life. And I'm not alone in that.
Is it then any wonder that we can hear the pitchman on television say, "Get the facts, just try it for yourself," and not even hear the clanking of the logic underneath that statement?
All the phony we live with has nourished our stupid quotient. (If you can have an intelligence quotient, I.Q., then you can have a stupid quotient.)
So, don't get me started on politicians.
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Bad moon rising . . .
IRS is being sued for going far beyond the scope of a search warrant and seizing all sorts of patient treatment records, far in advance of 4th Amendment limits.
Keep in mind that IRS is given enforcement obligations for Obamacare.
If IRS won't "play by the rules," why are the citizens required to report honestly, on penalty of criminal punishment?
Are we getting closer to when massive and pervasive civil disobedience is in order?
Keep in mind that IRS is given enforcement obligations for Obamacare.
If IRS won't "play by the rules," why are the citizens required to report honestly, on penalty of criminal punishment?
Are we getting closer to when massive and pervasive civil disobedience is in order?
Freedom of speech . . .
The Homeowners Association said he couldn't have an American flag in his yard, so, as a good neighbor, he took the flag down and freshened the look of his home. Take a look.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
That'll show 'em who's boss . . .
So the acting head of IRS had turned in his notice that he was quitting in June. in response to the IRS scandals - one of the four breaking out in Washington at the moment - the President fired him. Two weeks before he was going to leave on his own.
The President wants us to know that sometimes doing the right thing means being a hard-ass.
The President wants us to know that sometimes doing the right thing means being a hard-ass.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Happy 21st Century Mothers Day
Mothers Day. Once, 'twas an honored and harmless commercial tradition of coercing males to spend money on useless trinkets, flowers, and over-priced buffets.
Now, in the politics is everything age, it is a splendid opportunity to increase breast cancer "awareness," whateverthehell "awareness" is supposed to actually mean. Also, a good time to celebrate and encourage abortion rights for reluctant breeders - they's kinda the same thing as mothers, right?
Fathers Day? The kids spend five minutes crayoning a card.
Increased awareness of prostate cancer?
Cue the sound of crickets.
Now, in the politics is everything age, it is a splendid opportunity to increase breast cancer "awareness," whateverthehell "awareness" is supposed to actually mean. Also, a good time to celebrate and encourage abortion rights for reluctant breeders - they's kinda the same thing as mothers, right?
Fathers Day? The kids spend five minutes crayoning a card.
Increased awareness of prostate cancer?
Cue the sound of crickets.
Monday, May 06, 2013
Hey, make me a sammitch . . .
Washington State Senator Jeannie Kohl-Welles
is sponsoring a six year effort to go through all the laws of Washington and remove all mentions of men, males, and suchlike so as to make all official language gender neutral. It's going to be a six year process to bugger the language so as to make men aware of their reduced status in a modern world run by women who are mighty. Hear them roar.
So, instead of watchman, we'll have watchperson. Also, there'll be firepersons on duty and people can make a living or just be fisherpersons for a hobby. Instead of penmanship, we'll have something horrible like good write-itude.
I guess Senator Jeannie Kohl-Welles has checked around and satisfied herself that having a hyphenated name entitles her to a mandate. I mean persondate.
And for manhood and womanhood, I guess we could go with "convexity" and "concavity" to refer to traits normally associated to distinguish gender behaviors.
One can make jokes about this endlessly, but I'm pretty sure Senator Jeannie Kohl-Welles would not "get" any of them.
The sad thing is that this sort of effort to achieve gender neutrality in the language can only grow out of a sense of inferiority. I suspect that women who are comfortable with themselves don't get their ears hurt when they hear the word "fireman."
So, instead of watchman, we'll have watchperson. Also, there'll be firepersons on duty and people can make a living or just be fisherpersons for a hobby. Instead of penmanship, we'll have something horrible like good write-itude.
I guess Senator Jeannie Kohl-Welles has checked around and satisfied herself that having a hyphenated name entitles her to a mandate. I mean persondate.
And for manhood and womanhood, I guess we could go with "convexity" and "concavity" to refer to traits normally associated to distinguish gender behaviors.
One can make jokes about this endlessly, but I'm pretty sure Senator Jeannie Kohl-Welles would not "get" any of them.
The sad thing is that this sort of effort to achieve gender neutrality in the language can only grow out of a sense of inferiority. I suspect that women who are comfortable with themselves don't get their ears hurt when they hear the word "fireman."
Saturday, April 27, 2013
This can't be the new normal, can it? . . .
The report says that a young woman couldn't enter a stranger's home in the ordinary way, like, maybe ringing the doorbell or knocking on the door. So the young woman, being unusually small, took off her black dress and crawled through the doggie door. The homeowners, hearing odd noises, investigated, and found her sitting in the bathtub, no water, naked. She was in due course arrested. When being taken into custody, she told the cops she didn't think she was doing anything wrong, sitting naked in a bathtub in a home she entered through the doggie door.
What do you say to an unknown naked girl in your bathtub?
And what's going on between the ears when a young woman thinks it's okay to take off all her clothes and crawl through the doggie door into a stranger's home?
I know, nobody is ever actually told, specifically, that as you go through life you should never take off all your clothes and crawl through a doggie door and go sit naked in a strangers' bathtub.
But we all pretty much agree that that's something not to do, without being told. Right?
I know this must be true, because in all these years I've never met an unknown naked woman in my bathtub. I have a camera for just in case.
What do you say to an unknown naked girl in your bathtub?
And what's going on between the ears when a young woman thinks it's okay to take off all her clothes and crawl through the doggie door into a stranger's home?
I know, nobody is ever actually told, specifically, that as you go through life you should never take off all your clothes and crawl through a doggie door and go sit naked in a strangers' bathtub.
But we all pretty much agree that that's something not to do, without being told. Right?
I know this must be true, because in all these years I've never met an unknown naked woman in my bathtub. I have a camera for just in case.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Where do terrorists come from? . . .
Many observers of public affairs express fear that all of the many no-neck mouthbreathers who make up the political right will collectively rise up against poor, pitiful not-hurtin-nobody Muslims, because said mouthbreathers are ignorant Americans, "clinging to their guns and religion."
No sign of it yet. Wonder here do we keep 'em?
Americans pretty much know that not all Muslims are terrorists, so there isn't any general persecution of Muslims forthcoming. And that's the truth.
On the other hand, while not all Muslims are terrorists, the terrorists have all been Muslim. Not one damn Buddhist in the lot. And that's also the truth.
So, if anybody is looking to find a terrorist, I wouldn't spend a lot of time looking at the membership of, say, some Presbyterian church.
No sign of it yet. Wonder here do we keep 'em?
Americans pretty much know that not all Muslims are terrorists, so there isn't any general persecution of Muslims forthcoming. And that's the truth.
On the other hand, while not all Muslims are terrorists, the terrorists have all been Muslim. Not one damn Buddhist in the lot. And that's also the truth.
So, if anybody is looking to find a terrorist, I wouldn't spend a lot of time looking at the membership of, say, some Presbyterian church.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
We need to do something . . .
It's far too easy for people to go to kitchen utensil conventions and to buy pressure cookers from unlicensed vendors there. We need tougher laws governing selling of pressure cookers, licensing, and background checks. Because if we can save one life, and because shut up.
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Latest science news . . .
Some scientists have been studying vertebrate brain structure, and there are similarities, in all vertebrate nervous systems, no matter whether fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, or mammal. After much brilliant work with that part of the brain that deals with hoots and calls and language in humans, scientists can now understand the meaning of sparrow bird calls.
It turns out that "tweet tweet twitter peep twitter," doesn't mean, "good morning to all the world!"
It means, "Back off or die, motherfuck!"
It turns out that "tweet tweet twitter peep twitter," doesn't mean, "good morning to all the world!"
It means, "Back off or die, motherfuck!"
Friday, April 12, 2013
John Kerry be clowns himself again . . .
Kerry said that we are "all united," and North Korea will "never be accepted as a nuclear power."
Never be accepted!
He went to elite schools, was admitted into elite clubs, and has unwaveringly thought of himself as one of the superior, able to identify all who fail to measure up for membership in his exclusive digs.
Hey John. You don't get to say who gets to be a nuclear power. If the get ahold of a bomb, they're a nuclear power. Q. E. D.
Doofus!
Never be accepted!
He went to elite schools, was admitted into elite clubs, and has unwaveringly thought of himself as one of the superior, able to identify all who fail to measure up for membership in his exclusive digs.
Hey John. You don't get to say who gets to be a nuclear power. If the get ahold of a bomb, they're a nuclear power. Q. E. D.
Doofus!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)