There's a report out in the last few days about taxes paid in America.
And it shows we're kooky.
46 million of us pay no taxes at all?
I've reported a bit on this before.
Does this make any sense?
Shouldn't we ALL pay at least something on our taxes, so we can keep our infrastructure and schools--everything--running?
Wouldn't that make sense?
But no, we let corporations and wealthy people, mostly, pay for tax breaks--mostly by buying their Senators--and then jockeying up the books.
I've proposed this before--why don't we put in place a, say, 10% minimum tax that EVERYONE has to pay, for being a citizen and for having access to this country of ours and our markets?
Doesn't that make sense?
Oh, and, finally, check out the byline of the original article: "Surge of “Nonpayers” Will Be Part of Bush Tax Legacy."
One more way George W. screwed up the country and the world, with what time he had.
Note: Thanks to the Kruse Kronicle for bringing this to our attention, via Tony's KC Blog.
Original link: http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/kruse_kronicle/2009/12/almost-4-out-of-10-americans-pay-no-income-tax.html#tpe-action-posted-6a00d83451b14d69e201287631af3b970c
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
One day til launch
http://www.kcfreepress.com/
(I have no idea what it is to be. I just know it's almost here).
(I have no idea what it is to be. I just know it's almost here).
Gunmen exchanging fire in Kansas City
Now ain't that a shame?
Geez, it's the wild West over there. Check this out:
"A gunman suffered a shotgun wound to his face today after he allegedly barged into his ex-wife’s house firing shots — and met another gunman."
Good idea. You see your ex-wife so you start shooting at her.
No anger management problems there.
You really should check out that whole article in the Star. It's a stunner.
Geez, it's the wild West over there. Check this out:
"A gunman suffered a shotgun wound to his face today after he allegedly barged into his ex-wife’s house firing shots — and met another gunman."
Good idea. You see your ex-wife so you start shooting at her.
No anger management problems there.
You really should check out that whole article in the Star. It's a stunner.
Monday, December 7, 2009
It doesn't make it right but we don't know what to think
There's been controversy in Switzerland lately because the voters came out squarely for a ban on minarets on mosques in their country. It seems they don't want to change the "flavor", if you will, of their country.
And while many people have come out against this seeming discrimination, the fact is, the West just doesn't know what to think about Muslims, Islamists, the Muslim religion and Islam.
I'm not condoning any discrimination or racism, let me be clear and firm on that. I'm just saying too many people are confused, if not out and out confused or in fear when it comes to Muslimists and Islamists.
To begin, we just don't understand how anyone could strap bombs onto themselves, walk into a group of their own citizens and blow themselves up.
Secondly, we can't understand any leader of young men (or women), telling those same young people that strapping bombs onto themselves, to blow others up--other innocent civilians--could possibly get them to any "heaven" and/or a "god" (in this case, Allah) and then, that they get to spend a heavenly eternity with 71 virgins. That is some kind of outrageous, sexist "heaven".
Third, "honor killings". We just don't get those.
"Honor killings" are killings of young women by their fathers or brothers, because they've accused of being promiscuous.
Yeah, we just don't get that.
Here's another thing we just don't get: In July, 2008, a poll was taken in England and it was found that "Almost a third of British Muslim students believe killing in the name of Islam can be justified..."
There again. Don't get it.
It just seems that there is far too much death and killing by Muslims and Islamists and we just don't understand where it comes from, why it's done and how it could be condoned.
We understand it's not all people of the Muslim faith, sure. Most of the world doesn't practice any of these insanities. But enough do that we are all at least cautious, because of all the killings and death.
Finally, we don't understand, on a much easier, less deadly scale, why these Eastern people wrap their women from head to toe, don't let them be seen, treat them as second-class citizens, at best, and make them walk behind them, etc., and never meet with the men, etc., when the men can do whatever and go wherever they want. It takes civilization back too many centuries.
So, for all this, I'm just saying we don't get it.
Fortunately, it's gotten so bad recently that, in a recent bombing, Muslims are coming out upset, angry and complaining that Muslims are killing Muslims, which is supposed to be understandably forbidden.
We'd like to think there is an international outreach from the sane, educated and logical Muslims and Islamists, teaching the young men in the world, particularly, that killing others is not only not good but that it's crazy and wrong.
You just wouldn't think you'd have to teach that, would you?
Links:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1231854/Voters-ready-ban-minarets-Switzerland-exit-polls-show.html
http://www.iris.org.il/blog/archives/2250-UK-Muslim-Honor-Killing-Wife-Daughters-Burned-Alive.html
And while many people have come out against this seeming discrimination, the fact is, the West just doesn't know what to think about Muslims, Islamists, the Muslim religion and Islam.
I'm not condoning any discrimination or racism, let me be clear and firm on that. I'm just saying too many people are confused, if not out and out confused or in fear when it comes to Muslimists and Islamists.
To begin, we just don't understand how anyone could strap bombs onto themselves, walk into a group of their own citizens and blow themselves up.
Secondly, we can't understand any leader of young men (or women), telling those same young people that strapping bombs onto themselves, to blow others up--other innocent civilians--could possibly get them to any "heaven" and/or a "god" (in this case, Allah) and then, that they get to spend a heavenly eternity with 71 virgins. That is some kind of outrageous, sexist "heaven".
Third, "honor killings". We just don't get those.
"Honor killings" are killings of young women by their fathers or brothers, because they've accused of being promiscuous.
Yeah, we just don't get that.
Here's another thing we just don't get: In July, 2008, a poll was taken in England and it was found that "Almost a third of British Muslim students believe killing in the name of Islam can be justified..."
There again. Don't get it.
It just seems that there is far too much death and killing by Muslims and Islamists and we just don't understand where it comes from, why it's done and how it could be condoned.
We understand it's not all people of the Muslim faith, sure. Most of the world doesn't practice any of these insanities. But enough do that we are all at least cautious, because of all the killings and death.
Finally, we don't understand, on a much easier, less deadly scale, why these Eastern people wrap their women from head to toe, don't let them be seen, treat them as second-class citizens, at best, and make them walk behind them, etc., and never meet with the men, etc., when the men can do whatever and go wherever they want. It takes civilization back too many centuries.
So, for all this, I'm just saying we don't get it.
Fortunately, it's gotten so bad recently that, in a recent bombing, Muslims are coming out upset, angry and complaining that Muslims are killing Muslims, which is supposed to be understandably forbidden.
We'd like to think there is an international outreach from the sane, educated and logical Muslims and Islamists, teaching the young men in the world, particularly, that killing others is not only not good but that it's crazy and wrong.
You just wouldn't think you'd have to teach that, would you?
Links:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1231854/Voters-ready-ban-minarets-Switzerland-exit-polls-show.html
http://www.iris.org.il/blog/archives/2250-UK-Muslim-Honor-Killing-Wife-Daughters-Burned-Alive.html
Clint Eastwood's "Invictus"
To be clear, understand that Clint Eastwood's upcoming new movie, "Invictus" about South Africa, Nelson Mandela and a scrapping soccer team is a mea culpa from Mr. Eastwood to Spike Lee, purely and simply.
If you'll remember, Clint made 2 WWII movies and gave African-Americans virtually no coverage in all the hours of both critically-acclaimed hours of film.
Spike came down on him hard--fairly, but hard--for leaving out their contributions.
And now this movie.
Oh, yeah.
I don't think it will be discussed anywhere else and if it is, it will be denied but it seems rather blatant.
Links: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/movies/06invictus.html?th&emc=th
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/2098097/Clint-Eastwood-and-Spike-Lee-row-over-black-soldiers.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2008/06/07/2008-06-07_spike_lee_jabs_back_at_clint_eastwood.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1057500/
If you'll remember, Clint made 2 WWII movies and gave African-Americans virtually no coverage in all the hours of both critically-acclaimed hours of film.
Spike came down on him hard--fairly, but hard--for leaving out their contributions.
And now this movie.
Oh, yeah.
I don't think it will be discussed anywhere else and if it is, it will be denied but it seems rather blatant.
Links: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/movies/06invictus.html?th&emc=th
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/2098097/Clint-Eastwood-and-Spike-Lee-row-over-black-soldiers.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2008/06/07/2008-06-07_spike_lee_jabs_back_at_clint_eastwood.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1057500/
Sunday, December 6, 2009
The US spends WAY too much on the business of war
I've written of this before, to be honest.
We spend 711 billion dollars a year on war (defense spending).
We more than double the 2nd-place spender in defense spending.
It's insanity.
We're building tanks, planes and bombs for almost no reason.
At some point, don't we have enough?
Check out these statistics:
"The extent of the U.S. global empire is almost incalculable. The latest 'Base Structure Report' of the Department of Defense states that the Department’s physical assets consist of "more than 600,000 individual buildings and structures, at more than 6,000 locations, on more than 30 million acres." The exact number of locations is then given as 6,702 – divided into large installations (115), medium installations (115), and small installations/locations (6,472). This classification can be deceiving, however, because installations are only classified as small if they have a Plant Replacement Value (PRV) of less than $800 million."
More:
"Although most of these locations are in the continental United States, 96 of them are in U.S. territories around the globe, and 702 of them are in foreign countries. But as Chalmers Johnson has documented, the figure of 702 foreign military installations is too low, for it does not include installations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan. Johnson estimates that an honest count would be closer to 1,000."
"The number of countries that the United States has a presence in is staggering. According the U.S. Department of State’s list of "Independent States in the World," there are 192 countries in the world, all of which, except Bhutan, Cuba, Iran, and North Korea, have diplomatic relations with the United States. All of these countries except one (Vatican City) are members of the United Nations. According to the Department of Defense publication, "Active Duty Military Personnel Strengths by Regional Area and by Country," the United States has troops in 135 countries."
Keep in mind, too, that the statistics above come from reports in or before 2004, before "W" escalated our spending so grossly on war and our mercenaries of war (read: Blackwater or whatever they're called now and all the rest).
The conclusion?
The United States of America has become a war-monger.
We love the business of war, for industry, and as a people, we need to stand up and say "enough".
President Eisenhower would be squarely behind us on this.
Link: http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance8.html
We spend 711 billion dollars a year on war (defense spending).
We more than double the 2nd-place spender in defense spending.
It's insanity.
We're building tanks, planes and bombs for almost no reason.
At some point, don't we have enough?
Check out these statistics:
"The extent of the U.S. global empire is almost incalculable. The latest 'Base Structure Report' of the Department of Defense states that the Department’s physical assets consist of "more than 600,000 individual buildings and structures, at more than 6,000 locations, on more than 30 million acres." The exact number of locations is then given as 6,702 – divided into large installations (115), medium installations (115), and small installations/locations (6,472). This classification can be deceiving, however, because installations are only classified as small if they have a Plant Replacement Value (PRV) of less than $800 million."
More:
"Although most of these locations are in the continental United States, 96 of them are in U.S. territories around the globe, and 702 of them are in foreign countries. But as Chalmers Johnson has documented, the figure of 702 foreign military installations is too low, for it does not include installations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan. Johnson estimates that an honest count would be closer to 1,000."
"The number of countries that the United States has a presence in is staggering. According the U.S. Department of State’s list of "Independent States in the World," there are 192 countries in the world, all of which, except Bhutan, Cuba, Iran, and North Korea, have diplomatic relations with the United States. All of these countries except one (Vatican City) are members of the United Nations. According to the Department of Defense publication, "Active Duty Military Personnel Strengths by Regional Area and by Country," the United States has troops in 135 countries."
Keep in mind, too, that the statistics above come from reports in or before 2004, before "W" escalated our spending so grossly on war and our mercenaries of war (read: Blackwater or whatever they're called now and all the rest).
The conclusion?
The United States of America has become a war-monger.
We love the business of war, for industry, and as a people, we need to stand up and say "enough".
President Eisenhower would be squarely behind us on this.
Link: http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance8.html
And while we're at it...
And besides needing to get out of Afghanistan, we need to get the 60,000 American Troops out of Germany, for God's sake and bring them home.
And Japan. We need to get out of Japan (Tokyo and Okinawa, to be specific).
There is a report today, on top of my long-held opinion on this, that "Four teenagers from an American military base in Japan were arrested on charges of attempted murder on Saturday for allegedly toppling a woman riding her motorbike, causing her to suffer a serious head injury."
This makes our being there that much difficult.
An American Soldier was accused of raping a Japanese woman there in 1995 and now this. Sure, there's a lot of time in between these two incidents but not for the Japanese people.
The fact is, the Japanese people feel they don't need us there any longer.
And I couldn't agree more.
This should be a terrific way to cut costs and spending, on top of being a good diplomatic move on our part, toward the respective host country.
The time has come.
Let's bring the American Soldiers from Germany, Japan and, while we're at it, Italy, all home.
It's way overdue. Let's stop trying to fight WWII.
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/world/asia/06japan.html?th&emc=th
And Japan. We need to get out of Japan (Tokyo and Okinawa, to be specific).
There is a report today, on top of my long-held opinion on this, that "Four teenagers from an American military base in Japan were arrested on charges of attempted murder on Saturday for allegedly toppling a woman riding her motorbike, causing her to suffer a serious head injury."
This makes our being there that much difficult.
An American Soldier was accused of raping a Japanese woman there in 1995 and now this. Sure, there's a lot of time in between these two incidents but not for the Japanese people.
The fact is, the Japanese people feel they don't need us there any longer.
And I couldn't agree more.
This should be a terrific way to cut costs and spending, on top of being a good diplomatic move on our part, toward the respective host country.
The time has come.
Let's bring the American Soldiers from Germany, Japan and, while we're at it, Italy, all home.
It's way overdue. Let's stop trying to fight WWII.
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/world/asia/06japan.html?th&emc=th
Afghan War a losing propostion
So the President came out and finally told us all what we knew--and that is, that he's going to send thirty thousand more American Troops to Afghanistan, in hopes of cleaning up the mess that's over there.
And the fact is, most Democrats don't want it, lots of Republicans don't want it, we can't really afford it, a lot of Afghanis don't want us there (though, admittedly, a lot more likely do) and what you end up with is a war we never wanted being extended when we don't really want it extended.
This is not good for this President.
And it's not good for his reform agenda.
Finally, it's not good for the work we need to do here in this country.
Fortunately, at least Senator Russ Feingold, for one, is speaking up against this war and against the troop increase. We'll see if anyone joins him.
I don't pretend this war--or the answers for it--are easy. They absolutely aren't.
What I will say is that the American people are solidly against this war and have been for a long time.
And you don't win a war if the people aren't with you.
Links: http://feingold.senate.gov/
http://feingold.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=320378
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/world/asia/06reconstruct.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
And the fact is, most Democrats don't want it, lots of Republicans don't want it, we can't really afford it, a lot of Afghanis don't want us there (though, admittedly, a lot more likely do) and what you end up with is a war we never wanted being extended when we don't really want it extended.
This is not good for this President.
And it's not good for his reform agenda.
Finally, it's not good for the work we need to do here in this country.
Fortunately, at least Senator Russ Feingold, for one, is speaking up against this war and against the troop increase. We'll see if anyone joins him.
I don't pretend this war--or the answers for it--are easy. They absolutely aren't.
What I will say is that the American people are solidly against this war and have been for a long time.
And you don't win a war if the people aren't with you.
Links: http://feingold.senate.gov/
http://feingold.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=320378
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/06/world/asia/06reconstruct.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
Saturday, December 5, 2009
War and Peace
I'm a major proponent of the idea that the arts are the antithesis of war. Not a new idea but an important and good one.
With that thought in mind, I think it's important to point out that the more arts and exposure to the arts we can get (along with education, frankly), the less likely, I believe, we would take it upon ourselves to fight and go to war.
It was Lenin, I believe, who said there was a piece of music that, if he heard it too much, couldn't go to war.
I propose, then, that "Improv Everywhere" is to peace and sanity and cooperation what terrorists blowing themselves up, seemingly randomly, is to war, carnage and insanity.
So for today, for the Saturday, I present this video from the Improv Everywhere people, whom I respect and admire. We need more of this in our lives and in the world.
Enjoy and have a great weekend.
With that thought in mind, I think it's important to point out that the more arts and exposure to the arts we can get (along with education, frankly), the less likely, I believe, we would take it upon ourselves to fight and go to war.
It was Lenin, I believe, who said there was a piece of music that, if he heard it too much, couldn't go to war.
I propose, then, that "Improv Everywhere" is to peace and sanity and cooperation what terrorists blowing themselves up, seemingly randomly, is to war, carnage and insanity.
So for today, for the Saturday, I present this video from the Improv Everywhere people, whom I respect and admire. We need more of this in our lives and in the world.
Enjoy and have a great weekend.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Michelle Malkin smart?
In response to SOJOCO's claim of how bright Michelle Malkin is. This is purely to give two sides to the coin, so to speak. (To be clear, I don't wish to get into a "pissing match", to use a crude euphimism, with SOJOCO or anyone else. As I said, I just want to give a 2nd side to a stand here).
See links--and proof--below:
Ms. Malkin, hoping--like Rush "Porkulus" Limbaugh--that the President fails:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/28/malkin-obama-fail/
Ms. Malkin, for instance, wasn't invited to sit in on Sen. John McCain's conference calls, while he was running for President last year:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/18/michelle-malkin-not-invit_n_102305.html
Ms. Malkin called Michelle Obama, during the campaign "First Crony":
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/22/michelle-malkin-calls-mic_n_219247.html
Alex Koppelman describes Ms. Malkin's White Supremacist ties in detail:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-koppelman/michelle-malkins-white-s_b_20873.html
On Right-wing Conservative Bill Kristol calling Ms. Malkin a fascist:
http://hyerstandard.com/2008/01/08/michelle-malkin-is-an-idiot-and-thats-putting-it-nicely/
On Ms. Malkin claiming people would rather claim unemployment than work:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/michelle-malkin-uses-bogus-claim-gets-s
On Ms. Malkin being photographed with a man and his Obama/Swastika sign:
http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/you-stay-classy-michelle-malkin-poses
Ms. Malkin, in her own words--via video--on why President Obama was trying to have the Olympics in Chicago:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/cspanjunkie/michelle-malkin-why-obama-pushing-have
Now, admittedly, this is just dog-piling but here goes:
http://www.michellemalkinisanidiot.com/
http://edschultz.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=51713
It's just too easy, folks. She opens her mouth and out it comes.
Oh, and finally, I think Nicholas Kristof is the smart one here, hands down.
Again, have a great weekend.
See links--and proof--below:
Ms. Malkin, hoping--like Rush "Porkulus" Limbaugh--that the President fails:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/28/malkin-obama-fail/
Ms. Malkin, for instance, wasn't invited to sit in on Sen. John McCain's conference calls, while he was running for President last year:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/18/michelle-malkin-not-invit_n_102305.html
Ms. Malkin called Michelle Obama, during the campaign "First Crony":
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/22/michelle-malkin-calls-mic_n_219247.html
Alex Koppelman describes Ms. Malkin's White Supremacist ties in detail:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-koppelman/michelle-malkins-white-s_b_20873.html
On Right-wing Conservative Bill Kristol calling Ms. Malkin a fascist:
http://hyerstandard.com/2008/01/08/michelle-malkin-is-an-idiot-and-thats-putting-it-nicely/
On Ms. Malkin claiming people would rather claim unemployment than work:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/michelle-malkin-uses-bogus-claim-gets-s
On Ms. Malkin being photographed with a man and his Obama/Swastika sign:
http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/you-stay-classy-michelle-malkin-poses
Ms. Malkin, in her own words--via video--on why President Obama was trying to have the Olympics in Chicago:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/cspanjunkie/michelle-malkin-why-obama-pushing-have
Now, admittedly, this is just dog-piling but here goes:
http://www.michellemalkinisanidiot.com/
http://edschultz.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=51713
It's just too easy, folks. She opens her mouth and out it comes.
Oh, and finally, I think Nicholas Kristof is the smart one here, hands down.
Again, have a great weekend.
Completions
From the time City Manager Wayne Cauthen was fired until someone--anyone--from the city responded to questions of why, exactly, he was let go--impropriety, incompetence or whatever--it was 5 days, from November 19th to the 24th, until City Councilwoman Jan Marcason gave reason.
That was too long. It should have been immediate, since he was a public employee.
That said, I would like to salute and thank Ms. Marcason for giving her constituents reason and information why this took place, even if it was delayed. She was the only person who did, from what I've seen.
Lastly, on a completely different note, I wrote here last week that I thought it likely University of Kansas Football Coach Mark Mangino could be out of his job by Monday or Tuesday this week, given the situation.
I only missed it by two days.
Next prediction: Lew Perkins clock is ticking down.
Have a great weekend, y'all.
Links: http://voices.kansascity.com/node/6659
http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1609908.html
That was too long. It should have been immediate, since he was a public employee.
That said, I would like to salute and thank Ms. Marcason for giving her constituents reason and information why this took place, even if it was delayed. She was the only person who did, from what I've seen.
Lastly, on a completely different note, I wrote here last week that I thought it likely University of Kansas Football Coach Mark Mangino could be out of his job by Monday or Tuesday this week, given the situation.
I only missed it by two days.
Next prediction: Lew Perkins clock is ticking down.
Have a great weekend, y'all.
Links: http://voices.kansascity.com/node/6659
http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1609908.html
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Rep. Cynthia Davis, at it again
Missouri would ban the use of public dollars for stem cell research through a constitutional amendment proposed in legislation filed this week.
The Right-wing, Republican, ultra-conservatives in Jefferson City are working overtime to keep Missouri in the dark ages.
It seems our old, kooky friend Representative Cynthia "I haven't got a brain in my head" Davis, R-O'Fallon wants to go after stem cell research again.
The biggest problems there are with this are that it "could cost the state millions of dollars in revenue and thousands of jobs...", for starters.
What gets me is that this nut wants to make it a Constitutional Amendment.
This is the same nut who wants to be able to legally take her handgun to her church.
Seriously.
Here's where this hurts Kansas City, directly:
"The proposed ban would not directly affect research at the Kansas City-based Stowers Institute for Medical Research, which doesn’t rely on tax support. However, consistent efforts to limit embryonic stem cell research in Missouri have prompted the institute to hold off on local expansion plans."
Here's how it could effect Missouri directly:
"The amendment could cost Missouri millions of dollars in economic opportunities and thousands of high-paying jobs, according to a report released in October by Missouri State Auditor Susan Montee’s office on the Roundtable for Life’s ballot initiative."
"Affected industries would include the medical and research fields, as well as construction and other related sectors. The four-campus University of Missouri System came out against it, and the city of St. Louis said it would lose $14.3 million in general revenue a year if the amendment were to pass."
“'Scientists in general will view Missouri as a regressive and unfriendly place for life sciences research, and those who make careers of cutting-edge research will not locate in Missouri' if the amendment passed, city officials told auditors."
I don't want to always suck up to every business that comes along--as anyone who knows me would attest--but this one should be good for advances in pure science and health care, along with being good for our economy.
What Ms. Davis and her group of kooks need to know is that, in the first place, the stem cells used are ones that would be thrown away anyway and, secondly, that new research is getting stem cells from other sources than embryos.
But, hey, why should facts stand in the way of a religious, fundamentalist nutcase?
Personally, I just thank God I'm not from O'Fallon, Missouri.
Link: http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2009/11/30/daily32.html?ed=2009-12-03&ana=e_du_pub
http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/12/cynthia_davis_fighting_for_gun_rights_in_missouri_churches.php
The Right-wing, Republican, ultra-conservatives in Jefferson City are working overtime to keep Missouri in the dark ages.
It seems our old, kooky friend Representative Cynthia "I haven't got a brain in my head" Davis, R-O'Fallon wants to go after stem cell research again.
The biggest problems there are with this are that it "could cost the state millions of dollars in revenue and thousands of jobs...", for starters.
What gets me is that this nut wants to make it a Constitutional Amendment.
This is the same nut who wants to be able to legally take her handgun to her church.
Seriously.
Here's where this hurts Kansas City, directly:
"The proposed ban would not directly affect research at the Kansas City-based Stowers Institute for Medical Research, which doesn’t rely on tax support. However, consistent efforts to limit embryonic stem cell research in Missouri have prompted the institute to hold off on local expansion plans."
Here's how it could effect Missouri directly:
"The amendment could cost Missouri millions of dollars in economic opportunities and thousands of high-paying jobs, according to a report released in October by Missouri State Auditor Susan Montee’s office on the Roundtable for Life’s ballot initiative."
"Affected industries would include the medical and research fields, as well as construction and other related sectors. The four-campus University of Missouri System came out against it, and the city of St. Louis said it would lose $14.3 million in general revenue a year if the amendment were to pass."
“'Scientists in general will view Missouri as a regressive and unfriendly place for life sciences research, and those who make careers of cutting-edge research will not locate in Missouri' if the amendment passed, city officials told auditors."
I don't want to always suck up to every business that comes along--as anyone who knows me would attest--but this one should be good for advances in pure science and health care, along with being good for our economy.
What Ms. Davis and her group of kooks need to know is that, in the first place, the stem cells used are ones that would be thrown away anyway and, secondly, that new research is getting stem cells from other sources than embryos.
But, hey, why should facts stand in the way of a religious, fundamentalist nutcase?
Personally, I just thank God I'm not from O'Fallon, Missouri.
Link: http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2009/11/30/daily32.html?ed=2009-12-03&ana=e_du_pub
http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/12/cynthia_davis_fighting_for_gun_rights_in_missouri_churches.php
Big or small, government should work
Did you miss the latest Ponzi scheme catch?
Ever heard of Tom Petters?
Here we go again.
This clown ran a $3.65 billion dollar Ponzi scheme out of Minnesota that bilked thousands of people out of their money.
One more in a long line up of Ponzi schemes.
First--and biggest--was Bernie Madoff.
Then there was R. Allen Stanford and now this guy.
In the 2000's, it seems the government virtually shut down and didn't investigate anyone who was--or was supposed to be--taking money for investments. Bernie Madoff, in the most aggregious example, didn't have an investor's license. Ever.
It needs to be asked: Where were the government regulators when these men were taking in all this money?
We need our government to work for us.
Sure, we want less government and smaller government and the requisite lower taxes but for the agencies that exist, we want and need them to do the jobs they were designed and created for.
In this case, where was the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)? What the hell were they doing these last 9 years?
There should be hell to pay for them for all that has happened.
Links: http://www.reuters.com/article/fundsFundsNews/idUSN024978920091202
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Petters
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/business/03stanford.html?_r=1
Ever heard of Tom Petters?
Here we go again.
This clown ran a $3.65 billion dollar Ponzi scheme out of Minnesota that bilked thousands of people out of their money.
One more in a long line up of Ponzi schemes.
First--and biggest--was Bernie Madoff.
Then there was R. Allen Stanford and now this guy.
In the 2000's, it seems the government virtually shut down and didn't investigate anyone who was--or was supposed to be--taking money for investments. Bernie Madoff, in the most aggregious example, didn't have an investor's license. Ever.
It needs to be asked: Where were the government regulators when these men were taking in all this money?
We need our government to work for us.
Sure, we want less government and smaller government and the requisite lower taxes but for the agencies that exist, we want and need them to do the jobs they were designed and created for.
In this case, where was the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)? What the hell were they doing these last 9 years?
There should be hell to pay for them for all that has happened.
Links: http://www.reuters.com/article/fundsFundsNews/idUSN024978920091202
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Petters
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/business/03stanford.html?_r=1
Reasons not to be a Republican today
Though I loathe Andrew Sullivan for being the self-hating hypocrite he is--almost solely for being a gay Republican--I have to say, he finally, in 2009, woke up to what the Republican Party is in the US and has decided to leave them.
How overdue can you get?
And even then, he only did it because another, fellow blogger came out before him and beat him to it.
Though he's way overdue, as I said, for leaving this hateful, exclusive bunch of small-minded radicals, at least he had the decency to describe why he was, finally, pushing them away.
Herewith are, in his words, great reasons for not being a Republican in the United States today:
I cannot support a movement that claims to believe in limited government but backed an unlimited domestic and foreign policy presidency that assumed illegal, extra-constitutional dictatorial powers until forced by the system to return to the rule of law.
I cannot support a movement that exploded spending and borrowing and blames its successor for the debt.
I cannot support a movement that so abandoned government's minimal and vital role to police markets and address natural disasters that it gave us Katrina and the financial meltdown of 2008.
I cannot support a movement that holds torture as a core value.
I cannot support a movement that holds that purely religious doctrine should govern civil political decisions and that uses the sacredness of religious faith for the pursuit of worldly power.
I cannot support a movement that is deeply homophobic, cynically deploys fear of homosexuals to win votes, and gives off such a racist vibe that its share of the minority vote remains pitiful.
I cannot support a movement which has no real respect for the institutions of government and is prepared to use any tactic and any means to fight political warfare rather than conduct a political conversation.
I cannot support a movement that sees permanent war as compatible with liberal democratic norms and limited government.
I cannot support a movement that criminalizes private behavior in the war on drugs.
I cannot support a movement that would back a vice-presidential candidate manifestly unqualified and duplicitous because of identity politics and electoral cynicism.
I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.
I cannot support a movement that does not accept evolution as a fact.
I cannot support a movement that sees climate change as a hoax and offers domestic oil exploration as the core plank of an energy policy.
I cannot support a movement that refuses ever to raise taxes, while proposing no meaningful reductions in government spending.
I cannot support a movement that refuses to distance itself from a demagogue like Rush Limbaugh or a nutjob like Glenn Beck.
I cannot support a movement that believes that the United States should be the sole global power, should sustain a permanent war machine to police the entire planet, and sees violence as the core tool for international relations.
_________________________
While years, if not a decade or more overdue, I couldn't agree more.
Link:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/12/leaving-the-right.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/03/andrew-sullivan-im-breaki_n_378625.html
How overdue can you get?
And even then, he only did it because another, fellow blogger came out before him and beat him to it.
Though he's way overdue, as I said, for leaving this hateful, exclusive bunch of small-minded radicals, at least he had the decency to describe why he was, finally, pushing them away.
Herewith are, in his words, great reasons for not being a Republican in the United States today:
I cannot support a movement that claims to believe in limited government but backed an unlimited domestic and foreign policy presidency that assumed illegal, extra-constitutional dictatorial powers until forced by the system to return to the rule of law.
I cannot support a movement that exploded spending and borrowing and blames its successor for the debt.
I cannot support a movement that so abandoned government's minimal and vital role to police markets and address natural disasters that it gave us Katrina and the financial meltdown of 2008.
I cannot support a movement that holds torture as a core value.
I cannot support a movement that holds that purely religious doctrine should govern civil political decisions and that uses the sacredness of religious faith for the pursuit of worldly power.
I cannot support a movement that is deeply homophobic, cynically deploys fear of homosexuals to win votes, and gives off such a racist vibe that its share of the minority vote remains pitiful.
I cannot support a movement which has no real respect for the institutions of government and is prepared to use any tactic and any means to fight political warfare rather than conduct a political conversation.
I cannot support a movement that sees permanent war as compatible with liberal democratic norms and limited government.
I cannot support a movement that criminalizes private behavior in the war on drugs.
I cannot support a movement that would back a vice-presidential candidate manifestly unqualified and duplicitous because of identity politics and electoral cynicism.
I cannot support a movement that regards gay people as threats to their own families.
I cannot support a movement that does not accept evolution as a fact.
I cannot support a movement that sees climate change as a hoax and offers domestic oil exploration as the core plank of an energy policy.
I cannot support a movement that refuses ever to raise taxes, while proposing no meaningful reductions in government spending.
I cannot support a movement that refuses to distance itself from a demagogue like Rush Limbaugh or a nutjob like Glenn Beck.
I cannot support a movement that believes that the United States should be the sole global power, should sustain a permanent war machine to police the entire planet, and sees violence as the core tool for international relations.
_________________________
While years, if not a decade or more overdue, I couldn't agree more.
Link:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/12/leaving-the-right.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/03/andrew-sullivan-im-breaki_n_378625.html
No climate change, eh, Mike?
According to rocket scientist and local meteorologist Mike Thompson, there isn't any such thing as climate change or global warming.
This news comes to us today from a fellow blogger at Bottom Line Communications and Tony at TKC (see links below).
According to Bottom Line: "Veteran WDAF-FOX4 meteorologist Mike Thompson went on the "KCMO Morning Show With Chris Stigall" on KCMO-710 AM (12/2) taking the controversial stance that global warming is not man-made."
Who knows what that's supposed to mean.
Does he mean it's fictitious and made up or does he mean there is such a thing as global warming but it's "man-made"?
Who can say?
All I know, Mike, is that the ice caps and glaciers are melting and, if you'd read the article link below, from CNN, you'd see that people in Alaska are losing ground--literally, they're losing permafrost, earth, and homes, etc.--right out from under them.
"Coastal erosion has been an issue for decades here, but rising global temperatures have started to thaw the permafrost that once helped anchor this village in place. Sea ice that protects Shishmaref's coast from erosion melts earlier in the spring and forms later in the fall. As a result, the increasingly mushy and exposed soil along Shishmaref's shore is falling into the water in snowmobile-sized chunks."
How do you 'splain that, Mike?
Links: http://www.bottomlinecom.com/kcnews/thompsonglobalwarming.html
http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2008/04/mike-thompson-compares-global-warming.html
http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2009/12/kansas-city-weather-newsie-mike.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/12/03/shishmaref.alaska.climate.change/
This news comes to us today from a fellow blogger at Bottom Line Communications and Tony at TKC (see links below).
According to Bottom Line: "Veteran WDAF-FOX4 meteorologist Mike Thompson went on the "KCMO Morning Show With Chris Stigall" on KCMO-710 AM (12/2) taking the controversial stance that global warming is not man-made."
Who knows what that's supposed to mean.
Does he mean it's fictitious and made up or does he mean there is such a thing as global warming but it's "man-made"?
Who can say?
All I know, Mike, is that the ice caps and glaciers are melting and, if you'd read the article link below, from CNN, you'd see that people in Alaska are losing ground--literally, they're losing permafrost, earth, and homes, etc.--right out from under them.
"Coastal erosion has been an issue for decades here, but rising global temperatures have started to thaw the permafrost that once helped anchor this village in place. Sea ice that protects Shishmaref's coast from erosion melts earlier in the spring and forms later in the fall. As a result, the increasingly mushy and exposed soil along Shishmaref's shore is falling into the water in snowmobile-sized chunks."
How do you 'splain that, Mike?
Links: http://www.bottomlinecom.com/kcnews/thompsonglobalwarming.html
http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2008/04/mike-thompson-compares-global-warming.html
http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2009/12/kansas-city-weather-newsie-mike.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/12/03/shishmaref.alaska.climate.change/
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
What television has come to
Did you see the TV Tuesday night?
Did you also scroll past the "Victoria Secret Fashion Show"?
Holy cow.
It was just shameful.
Talk about base.
Late teens and early twenties young women, parading around like it was a Las Vegas show from the 60's.
And all this for our sacred "Christmas", don't kid yourself. They want to do all they can, of course, to get the neanderthal husbands and boyfriends of the world to schlep into their stores in the next 22 days and pick some of that over-priced stuff up.
But, really, let's get back to reality. Look around. Look at your office. Look on the streets of any city in the world. How many women REALLY look like those girls? (and I mean girls. they were EXTREMELY young).
They looked fantastic, of course, and they barely had clothes on.
It brings up questions.
First, do you know how few people can wear these things and look good?
Second, who would buy this stuff and while we're at it, where do they live? Florida? California?
Third, do you know how few of the people who can wear this stuff and AFFORD it?
And finally, why isn't the extreme far-right and why aren't all the "Christian Conservatives" raising bloody hell about that nearly obscene show last evening?
(One possible answer is that they're hoping their sons see it and decide they don't want to be gay).
I'm reminded of the quote by Abraham Lincoln: "Common looking people are the best in the world: that is the reason the Lord makes so many of them."
It puts things in perspective, brings me back to reality and gives me some comfort from all the media insanity and worship of the temporarily young and rare beautiful.
The other thing TV has come to: We have the Grammy Awards Nomination Show tonight.
We apparently didn't have enough awards shows (didn't we?); now we have to have shows announcing the awards shows.
The world just keeps getting a little bit dumber, virtually non-stop.
Links: http://www.cbs.com/specials/victorias_secret/
http://home.att.net/~rjnorton/Lincoln78.html
http://www.cbs.com/specials/grammys/video/?pid=xO6f180vfgx6N7O_ytmpa0C5Z0gqLDWI
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/12/03/the-grammy-nomination-show-live-blog-foo-fighters-john-mayer-taylor-swift-and-a-bunch-of-names/
Did you also scroll past the "Victoria Secret Fashion Show"?
Holy cow.
It was just shameful.
Talk about base.
Late teens and early twenties young women, parading around like it was a Las Vegas show from the 60's.
And all this for our sacred "Christmas", don't kid yourself. They want to do all they can, of course, to get the neanderthal husbands and boyfriends of the world to schlep into their stores in the next 22 days and pick some of that over-priced stuff up.
But, really, let's get back to reality. Look around. Look at your office. Look on the streets of any city in the world. How many women REALLY look like those girls? (and I mean girls. they were EXTREMELY young).
They looked fantastic, of course, and they barely had clothes on.
It brings up questions.
First, do you know how few people can wear these things and look good?
Second, who would buy this stuff and while we're at it, where do they live? Florida? California?
Third, do you know how few of the people who can wear this stuff and AFFORD it?
And finally, why isn't the extreme far-right and why aren't all the "Christian Conservatives" raising bloody hell about that nearly obscene show last evening?
(One possible answer is that they're hoping their sons see it and decide they don't want to be gay).
I'm reminded of the quote by Abraham Lincoln: "Common looking people are the best in the world: that is the reason the Lord makes so many of them."
It puts things in perspective, brings me back to reality and gives me some comfort from all the media insanity and worship of the temporarily young and rare beautiful.
The other thing TV has come to: We have the Grammy Awards Nomination Show tonight.
We apparently didn't have enough awards shows (didn't we?); now we have to have shows announcing the awards shows.
The world just keeps getting a little bit dumber, virtually non-stop.
Links: http://www.cbs.com/specials/victorias_secret/
http://home.att.net/~rjnorton/Lincoln78.html
http://www.cbs.com/specials/grammys/video/?pid=xO6f180vfgx6N7O_ytmpa0C5Z0gqLDWI
http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/12/03/the-grammy-nomination-show-live-blog-foo-fighters-john-mayer-taylor-swift-and-a-bunch-of-names/
Reasons the "Concerned Clergy Coaltion" should be marching--but aren't
Did you see the Killa City's "Top 10 things to know about homicide in Kansas City"
By Casey Lyons in Killa City, NewsWed., Dec. 2 2009 @ 12:00PM?
Herewith:
The KCPD released it's third quarter homicide results yesterday, which includes some 98 homicides up to September 30. The total to date is 105. We dug through all 24 pages so you don't have to to find the most important things to know about staying alive in Kansas City.
1. July is the new deadliest month. The summer spike came earlier this year, with the most deaths per month (14) coming in July, rather than August.
2. Kansas City killers have got a case of the Mondays. Nearly 1 in 5 deaths takes place on the first day after the weekend. Saturday and Sunday each held 15 percent.
3. Watch out for the witching hour. Thirteen percent of deaths happen between midnight and 2 a.m. Noon to 2 p.m. accounts for 12 percent of homicides and is the second most dangerous time.
4. Violence is random. Motive is unknown more than half the time.
5. East Patrol District is the most dangerous. So far, 634 people have been beaten and 27 killed there.
6. Men fare worst. Three in four homicide victims are men. Among known suspects, there are 10 times more men than women (51 versus 5).
7. There is a lot of black-on-black crime. Over 70 percent of victims are African American. Among suspects, 79 percent are African Americans. By contrast, no victims have been Asian.
8. Senior citizens are the safest. No victims have been over 65. There have been 36 in the 17-25 age range.
9. Victims aren't so innocent. Three in four victims have prior arrests.
10. Drive-by. September is drive-by king with 32 incidents reported.
So, with No. 7, above, wouldn't you think this "Concerned Clergy" group would have been marching last July on a Monday, protesting these senseless killings on the East Side?
No, no. They had to wait until November, when Wayne Cauthen is let go of his job as City Manager, instead.
Sure, that makes sense.
Link: http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/12/killa_city_top_10_things_to_know_about_homicide_in_kansas_city.php
By Casey Lyons in Killa City, NewsWed., Dec. 2 2009 @ 12:00PM?
Herewith:
The KCPD released it's third quarter homicide results yesterday, which includes some 98 homicides up to September 30. The total to date is 105. We dug through all 24 pages so you don't have to to find the most important things to know about staying alive in Kansas City.
1. July is the new deadliest month. The summer spike came earlier this year, with the most deaths per month (14) coming in July, rather than August.
2. Kansas City killers have got a case of the Mondays. Nearly 1 in 5 deaths takes place on the first day after the weekend. Saturday and Sunday each held 15 percent.
3. Watch out for the witching hour. Thirteen percent of deaths happen between midnight and 2 a.m. Noon to 2 p.m. accounts for 12 percent of homicides and is the second most dangerous time.
4. Violence is random. Motive is unknown more than half the time.
5. East Patrol District is the most dangerous. So far, 634 people have been beaten and 27 killed there.
6. Men fare worst. Three in four homicide victims are men. Among known suspects, there are 10 times more men than women (51 versus 5).
7. There is a lot of black-on-black crime. Over 70 percent of victims are African American. Among suspects, 79 percent are African Americans. By contrast, no victims have been Asian.
8. Senior citizens are the safest. No victims have been over 65. There have been 36 in the 17-25 age range.
9. Victims aren't so innocent. Three in four victims have prior arrests.
10. Drive-by. September is drive-by king with 32 incidents reported.
So, with No. 7, above, wouldn't you think this "Concerned Clergy" group would have been marching last July on a Monday, protesting these senseless killings on the East Side?
No, no. They had to wait until November, when Wayne Cauthen is let go of his job as City Manager, instead.
Sure, that makes sense.
Link: http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/12/killa_city_top_10_things_to_know_about_homicide_in_kansas_city.php
Will the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" be marching for Nelson E. Hopkins, Jr?
It was announced earlier today:
"Kansas City police say the victim of Tuesday night's fatal shooting is 17-year-old Nelson E. Hopkins Jr. of Kansas City, Missouri."
"KCPD detectives believe Hopkins had left the Plaza Library and caught a bus to 54th and Troost prior to the shooting. Hopkins was shot while walking home on 54th Street."
So, I ask again--will the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" be concerned about this 105th homicide, here in Kansas City?
Or is the only thing they're concerned about is Wayne Cauthen losing his high-paid job as City Manager downtown at City Hall?
Links: http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/12/killa_city_kcmo_homicide_no_105_nelson_e_hopkins_jr.php
http://www.kansascity.com/679/story/1606774.html
"Kansas City police say the victim of Tuesday night's fatal shooting is 17-year-old Nelson E. Hopkins Jr. of Kansas City, Missouri."
"KCPD detectives believe Hopkins had left the Plaza Library and caught a bus to 54th and Troost prior to the shooting. Hopkins was shot while walking home on 54th Street."
So, I ask again--will the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" be concerned about this 105th homicide, here in Kansas City?
Or is the only thing they're concerned about is Wayne Cauthen losing his high-paid job as City Manager downtown at City Hall?
Links: http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/12/killa_city_kcmo_homicide_no_105_nelson_e_hopkins_jr.php
http://www.kansascity.com/679/story/1606774.html
This is not your Grandfather's war
Okay, the President finally came out, after collecting all his information and doing his just homework (unlike the previous clod) and told us what he wanted and needed for our war in Afghanistan.
And it was "leaked" out so we knew what it was, too--30,000 more troops to go over as soon as possible.
Okay, blah, blah, blah.
We all knew it. We're resigned to it, let's move on.
I'm not being flip about war or our soldiers going to war, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying this was not a surprise.
What I would like to say is--could we stop acting like this is a war we can win in any way?
This is not World War I. This is not World War II.
This is not, as I said in the title, your Grandfather's war.
And it's not your Father's war, either.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a war against terrorism, as though we haven't been told that, what? a thousand times?
Terrorism is an ongoing mess, folks. Terrorism is some nut seemingly randomly shooting people. Terrorism, we have found out, is right-wing fundamentalists (hear that, Pat Robertson?) strapping bombs to their chests and blowing as many people up as they can, thinking they're going to some lunatic heaven, with--how many was it?--71 virgins waiting for them. (I wonder what the female suicide bombers get).
Terrorism isn't, as we've found out, a standing army, waiting to attack us. It is a disparate group of people, loosely defined and organized who do their best to make their opposition's (read: virtually everyone else) lives miserable.
So could we stop talking about "winning this war", please?
We won't "win" Afghanistan or the Afghan war.
To "win" this war, we would have to rebuild virtually the entire country AND educate its people and no one has the time or money to do that.
To repeat: The Afghanistan war is not a war ANYONE can win.
Some day---and hopefully soon--we will have to leave Afghanistan, just as all the other invading armies have. We will have to do what Russia did, not that long ago.
And you know what? Russia survived. More than that, no one talks about how they were "defeated". Russia found it couldn't "win Afghanistan", so they took all their toys and went home.
Which is what we should do.
And the sooner, the better.
So, all you right-wingers out there--all the Glenn Becks and Rush "Porkulus" Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys and Bill O'Reillys and yes, even local Thomas McClanahans should stop talking about "winning Afghanistan".
No one wins Afghanistan, folks. Look into it. It just doesn't happen.
And it ain't gonna happen.
You don't win a war against terrorism.
You just educate as many people as you can and always stay on your guard, to watch for the nincompoops.
The previous administration didn't read that Daily Presidential Brief about terrorists training to attack us by plane.
Side note: If you want to know more on this, you might read Norman Mailer's book "Why Are We at War?" or any number of other books on the subject.
Links: http://voices.kansascity.com/node/6737
http://summit.clubmadrid.org/keynotes/a-global-strategy-for-fighting-terrorism.html
http://milo.com/why-are-we-at-war
And it was "leaked" out so we knew what it was, too--30,000 more troops to go over as soon as possible.
Okay, blah, blah, blah.
We all knew it. We're resigned to it, let's move on.
I'm not being flip about war or our soldiers going to war, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying this was not a surprise.
What I would like to say is--could we stop acting like this is a war we can win in any way?
This is not World War I. This is not World War II.
This is not, as I said in the title, your Grandfather's war.
And it's not your Father's war, either.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a war against terrorism, as though we haven't been told that, what? a thousand times?
Terrorism is an ongoing mess, folks. Terrorism is some nut seemingly randomly shooting people. Terrorism, we have found out, is right-wing fundamentalists (hear that, Pat Robertson?) strapping bombs to their chests and blowing as many people up as they can, thinking they're going to some lunatic heaven, with--how many was it?--71 virgins waiting for them. (I wonder what the female suicide bombers get).
Terrorism isn't, as we've found out, a standing army, waiting to attack us. It is a disparate group of people, loosely defined and organized who do their best to make their opposition's (read: virtually everyone else) lives miserable.
So could we stop talking about "winning this war", please?
We won't "win" Afghanistan or the Afghan war.
To "win" this war, we would have to rebuild virtually the entire country AND educate its people and no one has the time or money to do that.
To repeat: The Afghanistan war is not a war ANYONE can win.
Some day---and hopefully soon--we will have to leave Afghanistan, just as all the other invading armies have. We will have to do what Russia did, not that long ago.
And you know what? Russia survived. More than that, no one talks about how they were "defeated". Russia found it couldn't "win Afghanistan", so they took all their toys and went home.
Which is what we should do.
And the sooner, the better.
So, all you right-wingers out there--all the Glenn Becks and Rush "Porkulus" Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys and Bill O'Reillys and yes, even local Thomas McClanahans should stop talking about "winning Afghanistan".
No one wins Afghanistan, folks. Look into it. It just doesn't happen.
And it ain't gonna happen.
You don't win a war against terrorism.
You just educate as many people as you can and always stay on your guard, to watch for the nincompoops.
The previous administration didn't read that Daily Presidential Brief about terrorists training to attack us by plane.
Side note: If you want to know more on this, you might read Norman Mailer's book "Why Are We at War?" or any number of other books on the subject.
Links: http://voices.kansascity.com/node/6737
http://summit.clubmadrid.org/keynotes/a-global-strategy-for-fighting-terrorism.html
http://milo.com/why-are-we-at-war
The 2nd time 4 men do a robbery in a week
Think about this.
Four men, for the 2nd time in about a week, did a hold-up.
Here's the details on the latest one, yesterday:
"The 46-year-old woman told police that she had just finished shopping at the Walmart at 1725 E. Santa Fe around 1:30 a.m. and was walking toward her vehicle when the four males approached in a light-colored small sport utility vehicle, said Capt. James Moore with the Gardner Public Safety."
November 30, four guys "robbed a Thriftway grocery at 7320 Prospect Ave."
Now, really, four guys?
Can you say "cowards"?
What did they, think this would be fun and that they'd have safety in numbers?
And when you consider it further, in the first place, the four aren't likely to get much money and secondly, what little they'd get would have to be split 4 ways.
We aren't talking a million dollars here.
Idiots, truly idiots.
This proves what a friend of mine said a long time ago. His little brother worked for the FBI. He pointed out that most of their work isn't taken up by the masterminds of crime. Most of their time is taken up by idiots who decide on the spur of the moment to do something terribly, terribly shallow and stupid.
Both of these, then, would be just such cases.
Links: http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1606030.html
http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/play/1197371/4_armed_men_rob_grocery_store?cpt=8&wpid=1277
Four men, for the 2nd time in about a week, did a hold-up.
Here's the details on the latest one, yesterday:
"The 46-year-old woman told police that she had just finished shopping at the Walmart at 1725 E. Santa Fe around 1:30 a.m. and was walking toward her vehicle when the four males approached in a light-colored small sport utility vehicle, said Capt. James Moore with the Gardner Public Safety."
November 30, four guys "robbed a Thriftway grocery at 7320 Prospect Ave."
Now, really, four guys?
Can you say "cowards"?
What did they, think this would be fun and that they'd have safety in numbers?
And when you consider it further, in the first place, the four aren't likely to get much money and secondly, what little they'd get would have to be split 4 ways.
We aren't talking a million dollars here.
Idiots, truly idiots.
This proves what a friend of mine said a long time ago. His little brother worked for the FBI. He pointed out that most of their work isn't taken up by the masterminds of crime. Most of their time is taken up by idiots who decide on the spur of the moment to do something terribly, terribly shallow and stupid.
Both of these, then, would be just such cases.
Links: http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1606030.html
http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/play/1197371/4_armed_men_rob_grocery_store?cpt=8&wpid=1277
So, did the Concerned Clergy Coalition protest when Carleton Temple was killed?
And the answer is a decided no.
Sure, again, they protest Wayned Cauthen's being let go from his high-paying job but where's the protest for Mr. Temple?
Mr. Temple was killed August 9 when he was shot to death in his car at 67th and Monroe.
Concerned clergy, indeed.
Link: http://blogs.kansascity.com/crime_scene/2009/12/10k-added-to-reward-in-kc-homicide.html
http://www.kansascity.com/1047/gallery/1454344.html
http://www.kmbc.com/news/20334886/detail.html
Sure, again, they protest Wayned Cauthen's being let go from his high-paying job but where's the protest for Mr. Temple?
Mr. Temple was killed August 9 when he was shot to death in his car at 67th and Monroe.
Concerned clergy, indeed.
Link: http://blogs.kansascity.com/crime_scene/2009/12/10k-added-to-reward-in-kc-homicide.html
http://www.kansascity.com/1047/gallery/1454344.html
http://www.kmbc.com/news/20334886/detail.html
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Unconscionable hypocrisy
Tony, over at Tony's KC Blog (you knew that) reports today that there was a memo sent out from a group calling itself the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" about the firing of Wayne Cauthen as Kansas City's City Manager.
The "Concerned Clergy Coalition"??
Interesting name.
I wonder when they're going to get off their lazy butts and give a damn about the young African-American men that are shooting--and frequently killing--other African-Americans here in town. I've been writing about it for months, as have other people in town. (See here: http://moravings.blogspot.com/2009/08/heres-way-to-start.html).
On August 7 this summer, where was the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" when this shooting occurred on the East side?
Oh, that's right. It was only a shooting and 2 near-deaths. No reason to form a "coalition" yet, right?
Freakin' hypocrites.
To be incensed about what appears to be a legitimate business dismissal when people are being shot and killed is virtually unbelievable and, as I said above, unconscionable.
Where was their march last summer when there were 40 people celebrating at a cookout on the front lawn of one of their own citizens and some chucklehead drove by and shot both a 3 year old child and the Father?
What are we to assume here? That this group is only concerned when one of their own is fired from a high-paying job but not when the average person on the street is shot and/or killed, frequently in broad daylight?
Unless and until the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" has a march--and as soon as possible--about these killings, they seem to be a group that simply can't be taken seriously or regarded with any legitimacy.
They mock themselves, at this point.
Link: http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2009/12/tkc-exclusive-kansas-city-concerned.html
The "Concerned Clergy Coalition"??
Interesting name.
I wonder when they're going to get off their lazy butts and give a damn about the young African-American men that are shooting--and frequently killing--other African-Americans here in town. I've been writing about it for months, as have other people in town. (See here: http://moravings.blogspot.com/2009/08/heres-way-to-start.html).
On August 7 this summer, where was the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" when this shooting occurred on the East side?
Oh, that's right. It was only a shooting and 2 near-deaths. No reason to form a "coalition" yet, right?
Freakin' hypocrites.
To be incensed about what appears to be a legitimate business dismissal when people are being shot and killed is virtually unbelievable and, as I said above, unconscionable.
Where was their march last summer when there were 40 people celebrating at a cookout on the front lawn of one of their own citizens and some chucklehead drove by and shot both a 3 year old child and the Father?
What are we to assume here? That this group is only concerned when one of their own is fired from a high-paying job but not when the average person on the street is shot and/or killed, frequently in broad daylight?
Unless and until the "Concerned Clergy Coalition" has a march--and as soon as possible--about these killings, they seem to be a group that simply can't be taken seriously or regarded with any legitimacy.
They mock themselves, at this point.
Link: http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2009/12/tkc-exclusive-kansas-city-concerned.html
Monday, November 30, 2009
Stupid move but fortunately, it turned out well
More proof of why we need a good local newspaper (Tony):
From The Kansas City Star:
Armed KC robber loses fight with Starbucks manager
A Starbucks manager in Kansas City thwarted a robbery Sunday night by disarming the gunman and slashing him with a box cutter.
The 30-year-old suspect showed up at a hospital for treatment of a cut to his chest. After being released from the hospital, he was booked into jail.
The failed holdup occurred about 10:45 p.m. at the coffee house at 4140 Main St. The suspect walked into the back office where the manager was counting money and told the manager to get into a freezer. The manager refused and fought the suspect, who hit the manager in the head with the butt of his gun. The manager pulled a box cutter out of his pocket and cut the suspect. The manager took the gun away and shoved the suspect out the door.
The manager suffered a cut above his eye, which was closed with glue at a hospital.
____________________________
As I said, stupid move, as the police would tell him--the manager--but fortunately it turned out well.
Good on ya', mate.
Everyone's tired of taking this kind of stupid crap, wherever it happens.
http://www.kansascity.com/679/story/1602134.html
From The Kansas City Star:
Armed KC robber loses fight with Starbucks manager
A Starbucks manager in Kansas City thwarted a robbery Sunday night by disarming the gunman and slashing him with a box cutter.
The 30-year-old suspect showed up at a hospital for treatment of a cut to his chest. After being released from the hospital, he was booked into jail.
The failed holdup occurred about 10:45 p.m. at the coffee house at 4140 Main St. The suspect walked into the back office where the manager was counting money and told the manager to get into a freezer. The manager refused and fought the suspect, who hit the manager in the head with the butt of his gun. The manager pulled a box cutter out of his pocket and cut the suspect. The manager took the gun away and shoved the suspect out the door.
The manager suffered a cut above his eye, which was closed with glue at a hospital.
____________________________
As I said, stupid move, as the police would tell him--the manager--but fortunately it turned out well.
Good on ya', mate.
Everyone's tired of taking this kind of stupid crap, wherever it happens.
http://www.kansascity.com/679/story/1602134.html
Oh, hell no
If what BlogKC says is true, it's time to go ballistic.
"Real estate developers are asking KCMO to annex over 300 acres of rural Platte County just north of the Kansas City International Airport for a large suburban-style housing development called 'The Lake at Tomahawke Creek.'”
No, no and hell no and here's why:
The city of Kansas City, Missouri is broke, folks.
We have no money.
We have a poor credit rating now--and it's slipping.
We have too much sprawl now.
It's in the flight path of the airport and (as BlogKC reported) "the airport is warning that it will be noisy for anyone living there..."
"The site is far from existing city services..."
I think that's enough right there.
No.
No.
The answer is no.
Are we clear here?
Link: http://blogkc.com/archives/2009/11/city-asked-to-annex-300-acres-of-sprawl-north-of-kci/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Blogkc+%28BlogKC%29
Addendum: And since when do you make the name for an American Indian tool (tomahawk) British by adding an "e" to the end? Does that make any sense to anyone?
"Real estate developers are asking KCMO to annex over 300 acres of rural Platte County just north of the Kansas City International Airport for a large suburban-style housing development called 'The Lake at Tomahawke Creek.'”
No, no and hell no and here's why:
The city of Kansas City, Missouri is broke, folks.
We have no money.
We have a poor credit rating now--and it's slipping.
We have too much sprawl now.
It's in the flight path of the airport and (as BlogKC reported) "the airport is warning that it will be noisy for anyone living there..."
"The site is far from existing city services..."
I think that's enough right there.
No.
No.
The answer is no.
Are we clear here?
Link: http://blogkc.com/archives/2009/11/city-asked-to-annex-300-acres-of-sprawl-north-of-kci/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Blogkc+%28BlogKC%29
Addendum: And since when do you make the name for an American Indian tool (tomahawk) British by adding an "e" to the end? Does that make any sense to anyone?
A bullet, dodged
Did you hear that sound?
It was the sound of all of us, here in the US, dodging a bullet.
I believe that was done this past long holiday weekend when the international markets tumbled on news of Dubai's default on their loans.
Actually, I guess it's technically not a default, they just asked if they could not repay their loans for 6 months. If you're the banker, it's a default, though.
Anyway, the markets tumbled Wednesday night.
Luckily for us and the world, it was our national Thanksgiving holiday so our trading markets were closed. Had they been open, I feel sure our markets would have emotionally, psychologically and, really, understandably reacted to this news and been set back with a down trading day. There's no telling how much it would have dropped, if at all, if I'm right.
Then, the next international trading day (our Thanksgiving night), the markets came back and were mostly up so by the time we had our partial trading day on Friday, all the bad news was buffered by this second round of better news.
A friend and I predicted a down day on the markets Friday and, as it turned out, we were right.
What I'm saying is that, with the international markets taking a hit last Wednesday, if ours had been open the next day, we likely would have tumbled--and a good deal, I believe--and then, that night, there could was likely a strong chance those same international markets would have reacted to that, too, and negatively.
Of course this is all speculation but I will say that I'm not the only one that thinks that if there is one more big financial problem any time soon, the whole international deck of cards is in fairly precarious shape and it will be tough on this already-weak system.
Here's hoping we skate by.
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091130/wl_time/08599194339200
It was the sound of all of us, here in the US, dodging a bullet.
I believe that was done this past long holiday weekend when the international markets tumbled on news of Dubai's default on their loans.
Actually, I guess it's technically not a default, they just asked if they could not repay their loans for 6 months. If you're the banker, it's a default, though.
Anyway, the markets tumbled Wednesday night.
Luckily for us and the world, it was our national Thanksgiving holiday so our trading markets were closed. Had they been open, I feel sure our markets would have emotionally, psychologically and, really, understandably reacted to this news and been set back with a down trading day. There's no telling how much it would have dropped, if at all, if I'm right.
Then, the next international trading day (our Thanksgiving night), the markets came back and were mostly up so by the time we had our partial trading day on Friday, all the bad news was buffered by this second round of better news.
A friend and I predicted a down day on the markets Friday and, as it turned out, we were right.
What I'm saying is that, with the international markets taking a hit last Wednesday, if ours had been open the next day, we likely would have tumbled--and a good deal, I believe--and then, that night, there could was likely a strong chance those same international markets would have reacted to that, too, and negatively.
Of course this is all speculation but I will say that I'm not the only one that thinks that if there is one more big financial problem any time soon, the whole international deck of cards is in fairly precarious shape and it will be tough on this already-weak system.
Here's hoping we skate by.
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091130/wl_time/08599194339200
Sunday, November 29, 2009
The wonderful, long Thanksgiving weekend, somewhat documented
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
