Entertainment overnight

New, just out from Ben Howard:

One more big endorsement for this President

Important to note:

Washington Post endorsement: Four more years for President Obama

By Editorial Board, Published: October 25

MUCH OF THE 2012 presidential campaign has dwelt on the past, but the key questions are who could better lead the country during the next four years — and, most urgently, who is likelier to put the government on a more sound financial footing.

That second question will come rushing at the winner as soon as the votes are tallied. Absent any action, a series of tax hikes and spending cuts will take effect Jan. 1 that might well knock the country back into recession. This will be a moment of peril but also of opportunity. How the president-elect navigates it will go a long way toward determining the success of his presidency and the health of the nation.

Here's the money-quote:

President Barack Obama is better positioned to be that navigator than is his Republican challenger, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

Republican? Right Wing? Libertarian? Independent?

Whatever you are, unfortunately for us, at least right now, until we change the system, there are only two real, viable candidates for the next president of the nation.

Re-elect this President.

Links: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/washington-post-endorsement-four-more-years-for-president-obama/2012/10/25/6ca309a2-1965-11e2-bd10-5ff056538b7c_story.html?hpid=z2

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/washington-post-endorses-obama-in-2012-race/2012/10/25/327d3f8a-1eca-11e2-8817-41b9a7aaabc7_story.html

Don't like long, seemingly unending elections?

Keep this quote in mind, then.

If you don't like these interminably long elections or the obscene corporate money in our election system and so, our government, keep this in mind.

It's all this way because we allow it.

Want shorter elections?

Do something about it.

Raise heck with your Senators and Representatives in Congress. Email them. Post as much on their Facebook page.

Don't just sit there and gripe.

Do something.

We can still fix this political mess that is America but it will take work.

And it has to come from us.

The Kauffman

A friend of mine put this picture up on his Facebook page of the Kauffman. I haven't verified but I think he took it with his cell phone, maybe last evening.

I just liked it too much and wanted to share it. I think it pretty outstanding. (Kudos, Barry).

We're so fortunate to have the Kauffman Center.

I'm so old...

...I remember when the notifications, messages and friend requests on Facebook were at the left hand top of the page.

THAT old.

What a staunch business magazine has to say about this election

From Forbes on this election and these two presidential candidates:

Want a Better Economy? History Says Vote Democrat!

"...The common viewpoint is that Republicans are good for business, which is good for the economy. Republican policies – and the more Adam Smith, invisible hand, limited regulation, lassaiz faire the better – are expected to create a robust, healthy, growing economy. Meanwhile, the common view of Democrat policies is that they too heavily favor regulation and higher taxes which are economy killers."

According to Bob Deitrick and Lew Godlfarb in their reputedly "easy to read book", “Bulls, Bears and the Ballot Box”, they found the following and more:

--Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents

--Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents

--Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)

--Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)

--Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents

--The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations

And that's just for starters. The book holds much more information and data.

I thought it important to point out, so close to election day.

Link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2012/10/10/want-a-better-economy-history-says-vote-democrat/

A new Kansas City International Airport?

A funny thing happened yesterday.

I've been posting on this blog and on Facebook--both at "Things
and places we loved in great KC when we were younger" and "The Kansas City International Airport" page--that I'm squarely against the plans to vacate the existing KCI/MCI airport, only to build an entirely new facility.

Because of that, Mr. Joe McBride, Senior Manager in Marketing and Communications for the Kansas City Aviation Department wrote me. He sent me a note, asking me to read through it and then this information on the airport:

A new, single terminal for KCI Airport customers

Kansas City International Airport reached its 40th birthday in 2012. In the last 20 years KCI has undergone two Master Plan Update Studies. Both studies called for investigating building a new, single terminal to address aging infrastructure, outdated features and inefficient design from the 1960s. The Kansas City Aviation Department was given Federal Aviation Administration and City Council approval to commission a study to investigate the feasibility of building a new terminal.

Now underway is an 18-month study by Landrum & Brown. Funded by a Federal Aviation Administration grant, the study's Scope of Services includes: Airport planning services to identify passenger terminal operational requirements; a survey and inventory of environmental conditions; a plan to implement a program for the design and construction of a new terminal; and a financial planning document to provide funding alternatives. A critical step in the refinement of the terminal complex facility requirements is the need to better understand and respond to the needs of passengers arriving and departing the Airport. This will be accomplished through user intercept surveys in the terminals.

After the study is complete, the Aviation Department will evaluate and determine if it is feasible to go to the next steps, which include financing and terminal and roadway design. The total project cost estimate is $1.2 billion. Funding may include federal, existing Passenger Facility Charges, Aviation Department funds or other mechanisms.

To put the study into perspective, KCI's passenger terminals were designed in the late 1960s, prior to airline hubbing, terrorism and security checkpoints. The layout is very inefficient for passenger flow, security screening, baggage handling, concession variety and the taxi and bus operation. While the terminals were renovated nearly 10 years ago, the infrastructure is aging and there is little room for growth. City officials at that time decided to extend the useful life of the passenger terminals at the lowest possible cost. Shortcomings still exist.

Most issues are rooted in the narrow structure and not enough room. Lanes cannot be added to alleviate long security lines at peak times or to incorporate lanes for TSA trusted traveler programs. Adequate seating and amenities cannot be added inside security. Mergers create issues like United operating out of two terminals, closure of concessions after an airline moves, empty gate areas, and Terminal B garage filling up three days each week. The latter is not as simple as moving Delta or Southwest since no other existing areas have the capacity and infrastructure to accommodate them.

Features of a new terminal would include: just 30 gates needed - smaller overall footprint than the other three terminals combined, making it more efficient and cost-effective to operate; more room for a variety of concessions and amenities; more room for security checkpoints, cueing and less intrusive security screening technology; easy walks due to efficient layout and people movers; reduced ticket lobby size; self bag check; common-use gates for airline flexibility; separated arrival and departure areas for less traffic congestion and safer pedestrian routes; green LEED building design standards; lower operating costs; and others.

The new terminal can be the next big project for Kansas City, creating many construction jobs. A more efficient layout might make Kansas City more attractive to airlines. The new terminal would be a facility Kansas Citians can now be proud of and help Kansas City attract new businesses and jobs. After the new facility is constructed the Aviation Department will explore ways to make good use of the old terminals still standing.

If it is feasible to build a new terminal we will task planners to produce efficient concepts that best achieve the level the customer convenience of KCI's current terminals that Kansas Citians appreciate. As is in the case of the Master Plan process, terminal design will be developed with public input. The prospect of starting from scratch and to incorporate the strengths of KCI's terminals in a sparkling new facility is an exciting opportunity!

Here, then, are reasons I wrote back to him of why I am, to date, strongly against the plan to build a new airport:

It's my contention that the conclusion to tear down or walk away from the current KCI/MCI was made long ago. The Airport Authority only seems to be searching now for a way to make it happen, without the input or agreement of Kansas Citians as to what should happen. It's not enough to want to make the airlines happy alone. Kansas Citians and all the people from the region need to be behind these ideas, too, and that hasn't happened, to date.

I'm absolutely no fan of replacing our terminals at KCI, certainly.

Part of the reason is that it is a good, workable layout and the other
part is that it makes no sense to "throw buildings away" and start all
over.

Yet another reason, however, is because I've seen in the Star reports for months on months that the Airport Authority decided they should do this--throw the old terminals away and start all over yet the plans have continued to change, over these same months. It seems clear there is not now nor has there ever really been a clear plan for KCI. Now, you show here that there is a study, going on at this very moment, on what we should do at, about and with our airport.

So if change needs to come to KCI/MCI, cannot the center, existing terminal be turned over to security, with the other two are then used as the connections to our planes? That seems far more workable and less wasteful. It seems it would be a way to accomplish the goals for reducing security costs while not, again,"throwing away" the entire airport. I'd love to see if that's an option. It seems far more responsible, less wasteful and less expensive, too.

It also seems that the conclusion to get rid of the airport was clearly made prior to any study, let alone this one that is now ongoing.

Another note on the evolving, elusive "plan" of a new terminal at KCI, deals with the part about "The new terminal can be the next big project for Kansas City, creating many construction jobs."

This is a weak argument, at best, as the jobs would be extremely temporary. Would local construction companies want the work? Sure. Would there be benefits of the work for these people? Again, yes, but it would be just months of work, at longest. This is a fairly weak argument for tearing down an entire airport only to build another.

As for the claim about "green LEED building design standards" in the new facility--this is laughable since about the least "green" thing you can do is walk away from or tear down an older, existing, working facility. It would be very "un-green" to plow up the new ground and build this new facility, too, on top of this, so please, forget the "green" claim. It insults our intelligence.

The next comment, that "A more efficient layout might make Kansas City more
attractive to airlines," while true is not something anyone can possibly promise and we all know that. It's possible but no guarantee.

Then there is the statement that "The new terminal would be a facility Kansas Citians can now be proud of..."

The fact is, Kansas Citians are already proud of our airport, at least some, even lots of us. We needn't tear down the old airport to make us somehow yet more proud.

The next claim that a new airport would "help Kansas City attract new businesses and jobs"?

Regarding jobs, no one can really promise new jobs as the result of a new airport. Could it happen? Yes, sure. Can it be promised? No, certainly not. The arts in town seem to be doing far more for growing any attraction for our metropolitan area than any development like this.

Finally, the claim that "After the new facility is constructed the Aviation Department will explore to make good use of the old terminals still standing."

We understand they'll do their best to make the most of that old airport--if left standing--but even in a good, strong economy, no one can promise anything to come of the old location. In the worst economy in the last 80 years--since the Great Depression--no one can really make any promises along those lines.

I have to say, I will continue to fight this any and every way I can, on the KCI Facebook page, here on my blog and everywhere else I can unless or until I'm shown why this needs to happen for the people of the area and not for the airline companies.

I'm all about change in my life and city and nation and world but I'm for smart change and change that is well thought-out and planned.

The plan to tear down and replace our airport has been anything but.

Happy Hallowe'en

An oldie and a goodie:

Happy Hallowe'en

Notes on a hurricane

--How ironic--and horrible for the people effected by it--that hurricane Sandy should hit the most dense part of the nation, hardest of all;

--How, again, ironic and awful that the same storm should also hit on the very day of the full moon, increasing high tides that much more;

--How unfortunate that these three storm fronts should collide in this one area and create everything from downpours of rain and so, flooding, as well as heavy snow, this early in the season;

--It has always seemed unnecessary to me that the Weather Channel should and would have their reporters outside, in the midst of the storms, period, but especially the hurricanes, to report to us. We know it's raining/snowing/storming (whatever). They shouldn't need to stand out there in the rain/wind/snow or whatever, do you think?

--It nearly makes me feel guilty for the perfectly calm, mild, even beautiful and comfortable weather we're experiencing here, in the middle of the nation, while so many hundreds of thousands are in the midst of a huge, even dangerous weather event, just to our East.

Entertainment overnight

Joss Whedon on the importance of voting Romney/Ryan

You know he's right.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joss_Whedon

Mitt Romney to the East coast right now: "Helping you would be immoral"

Yes, he actually said that in the Republican presidential debates. Mitt Romney said federal assistance to Americans for emergencies is and would be "immoral."

Nice, huh?

Link: http://www.politicususa.com/remember-mitt-romney-called-disaster-relief-immoral-wanted-privatize-it.html

The biggest and most under- or un-reported story of the year?

Have you seen anything on or about this story?:

Israel accused of air strike on Sudan munitions factory

1,000-mile air raid on Khartoum seen as signal to Iran of ability to attack nuclear facilities

Sudan has complained to the UN security council that Israeli planes bombed a munitions plant in Khartoum, an attack that has been widely interpreted as a warning to Iran over its nuclear programme.

Israeli military commentators said that the Yarmouk facility in the Sudanese capital was owned by Iran and had been used to supply weapons to Hamas fighters in the Gaza Strip. The "impressive" reach of the secret operation was said to have demonstrated an ability to hit Iran's nuclear facilities — a similar distance from Israel.

As reverberations continued from Tuesday's 1,000-mile attack, Israel would neither confirm nor deny it was involved. Ehud Barak, the defence minister, said : "There is nothing I can say about this subject." But one of his most senior officials praised the country's air force and called Sudan a "terrorist state".



Get that?

Israel--or someone--flew in, blew up a nation's nuclear facilities LAST TUESDAY, flew out and there has been precious little news coverage of it here in the States.

I was told about it earlier in the week by a friend but hadn't seen or heard anything of it and I'm a rabid news hound. I had to do a Google search to find these links and stories.

This has got to be one of the biggest stories of the year, to date, and simultaneously, one of the most unreported or under-reported of the year, I believe. It has huge implications and potential ramifications for the world, really, since it deals so much with the Middle East.

The scary part--the really scary part--is that naturally Sudan has already said they will "retaliate," of course. Naturally.

Oh, boy.

It's a huge, huge story with incredible international implications but I--a newshound--haven't heard a thing about it. That is freaking weird. It's also grossly irresponsible on the part of the American news media, I think, unless I've only just missed it.

"Hang on to your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night."

Links: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/25/israel-accused-sudan-munitions-air-strike

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/25/israeli-sudanese-factory-secret-war

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/oct/24/world/la-fg-sudan-airstrike-20121025

Quote of the day

Entertainment overnight

Have a great weekend, y'all.

One more caution on Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan

Standard caution with Bill Maher: there is one expletive here:



Friends don't let friends vote Romney/Ryan.

The real Mitt Romney, from a Reagan Republican

Click on picture for easier reading:

And he's not for you and me, folks.

You, me, America and the Congressional "fiscal cliff"

Yes, our own US Congress created this "fiscal cliff" and now they're bringing us closer and closer to it. They created it and they're the only ones who can bring us away from it.

How's that for irony?

And hypocrisy?

Want to know what "uncertainty" is responsible for a lack of growth in our economy? Look no further, this is it. This from the Wall Street Journal yesterday:

Firms Hit Brakes Before Fiscal Cliff

Here is why dozens of chief executives have inserted themselves into the debate over reducing the federal budget deficit: Some say uncertainty over the looming "fiscal cliff" of tax increases and spending cuts already is hurting their business.

Here is why dozens of chief executives have inserted themselves into the debate over reducing the federal budget deficit: Some say uncertainty over the looming "fiscal cliff" of tax increases and spending cuts already is hurting their business.

The "fiscal cliff" is shorthand for the double whammy set to take place at the end of the year. That is when spending cuts enacted to end a 2011 standoff over the U.S. debt ceiling are to take effect. At the same time, tax cuts first passed under George W. Bush will expire.

The spending cuts were designed to be so unpopular that they would prompt Congress to adopt a more sophisticated deficit-cutting plan. So far, that hasn't worked and officials of both parties don't expect serious talks until after the Nov. 6 election, which will go a long way to determining the course of negotiations.

The urgency of the situation was underscored Thursday when chief executives of more than 80 big U.S. corporations released a statement urging Congress to reduce the federal deficit with tax-revenue increases as well as spending cuts...

...There is no doubt most companies would suffer if the U.S. goes over the cliff. Economists say the tax increases and spending cuts would slow economic growth, and could push the U.S. back into recession.

Email your representative in the House. Email your senators. Let them know this is completely, totally and utterly unacceptable and that they need to get back to work. They need to get back to Washington and they need to compromise on this most-important of issues right now.

To close, a side note to our Representatives and Senators--get back to work, you slugs.

Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203400604578074920349130776.html

We need to kill "campaign contributions", folks

Click on picture for better viewing

Unless and until we get the big, ugly, corrupting money, and its influence, out of our election system, we will continue to have our representatives, their legislation and so, our laws and finally, our government bought for corporations and the wealthy and not for the nation.

And it will never happen unless or until we, the people, demand it and make it happen.

Quote of the day

And Mitt Romney and his friends and cohorts are only too happy to take us all there, to their collective benefit.

USA Today comes to the same conclusion as the rest of us

Among the rest of USA Today's evaluation of NFL Sports for this weekend's games in Friday's paper is the fact that the Chiefs are in a bad way and that things need to chage:

As chill in air grows, hot seats come out

8:24PM EDT October 25. 2012 - Firing season has started early in the NFL this year. Less than a week after Philadelphia Eagles coach Andy Reid dismissed defensive coordinator Juan Castillo, the Carolina Panthers dumped general manager Marty Hurney on Monday.

And the season hasn't even hit halftime.

More changes are coming. That's a fact of life in the pressurized, win-now NFL, where patience seems to be more a liability than a virtue.

Scott Pioli and Romeo Crennel, Kansas City Chiefs. While Chiefs owner Clark Hunt has not sent any public signals suggesting his brain trust is in jeopardy, fans are getting restless amid a 1-5 start. There's a Save Our Chiefs site on Twitter with 70,000-plus followers. Will fourth-year GM Pioli get another offseason to draft the quarterback of the future? His 2009 trade for the quarterback of the future, Matt Cassel, has been a bust.

Crennel is just in his first full season, but his fate is likely tied to Pioli's.

Hope for a good game and outcome this weekend. One of the only teams that stink as bad as the Chiefs lately is the Raiders.

Link: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/2012/10/25/coaches-on-the-hot-seat/1659169/

Entertainment overnight

Here's Libertarianism for you

If you've been following the news lately, you may have, likely have heard the story about the people who've been exposed to and some even killed by, having received medication from what we now hear is a "compound pharmacy":

‘High risk’ drug making is at center of meningitis inquiry

Federal officials are investigating practices at New England Compounding Center in Framingham, a compounding pharmacy that has been linked to an outbreak of fungal meningitis. The outbreak has been blamed in 24 deaths.

Inside its sprawling red brick offices, New England Compounding Center engaged in the most hazardous type of pharmacy drug making. The company bought unsterilized powders and turned them into liquid steroids and other medicine supposedly pristine enough to inject into a patient.

It’s called “high-risk compounding,” and doing this safely, industry specialists say, requires elaborate and expensive manufacturing processes, sensitive tests for sterility and potency, and exacting attention to detail.

At the center of the federal and state investigation into New England Compounding, whose steroids were contaminated with a fungus that led to an outbreak of meningitis that has killed 24 people nationally, is whether the company violated these procedures.

My point?

My point is, this is yet one more example, like the BP oil blowout and spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the 2008 financial collapse that nearly took down the nation's and world's economies, that we need at least some government oversight and--gasp--regulations.

Without government and without that oversight and without regulations the Libertarians and so many Republicans and Right Wingers and "Conservatives" abhor, we--the people--are left exposed to the greed of we-don't-know-who.

No, thanks.

Leave me out, please.

I'll take some regulation, thank you.

Links: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthcare/PA-lacks-patient-protection-against-sterile-compounding-errors.html

http://bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2012/10/25/framingham-pharmacy-engaged-high-risk-compounding-higher-chance-contamination/BxwAtkfmCg9rW7EsJqv7HM/story.html

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthcare/PA-lacks-patient-protection-against-sterile-compounding-errors.html

http://www.npr.org/2012/10/25/163641002/after-meningitis-deaths-a-look-at-drug-safety

KCUR---Wth?

KCUR, buddy, we had a great thing going.

Every Friday, we could count on you for either restaurant reviews and criticism, one week, and movie reviews the next.

It's been great. Week in and week out, you were there.

Sure, we had Walt Bodine for years--decades, actually--and at 90, he finally retired but we still had this every-other-week date and arrangement.

Now, this week, you had what?

Actually, who cares?

You didn't have Charles Ferruzza and his crew for local foodie input.

Additionally, this happens to be a HUGE weekend for movies coming up, what with another big Tom Hanks film coming out and so on.

Yet you covered neither?

What, you don't love us any more?

Chinese ignorance and hypocrisy in full flower

Last weekend, Sunday's New York Times had two full-page advertisements in it, I noticed.

One was from, by and for Saudi Arabia, so we'd like them more and, I'm sure, so our business people would invest more in their country.

The second was for the same reasons and was by and for China.

It struck me as interesting at the time and I very nearly wrote about the two ads just because I thought it interesting and unusual.

I got busy and now I write about one of them--the Chinese one--for completely different reasons that happened to break late yesterday. This is it:

China Blocks Web Access to Times After Article

While this is the article they're blocking:

Billions in Hidden Riches for Family of Chinese Leader

It is unclear how much Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, who has staked a position as a populist and a reformer, knows about the $2.7 billion in assets his family has amassed. (Links at bottom)

How ironic--and even hypocritical--is that?

First the Chinese are spending what I'm sure is big money to impress us Americans to invest in their country and think of them differently and then this. They shut down a report on the possible or even likely corruption of one of their leaders.

Considering this, that there is no freedom of the press--or, likely, any real freedom there--and that businesses can be and sometimes are taken over by the government, no questions asked, how can they advertise to us like that?

You want us to invest in your country why?

And how?

Link: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=new+york+times+china+news&btnK=

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/business/global/family-of-wen-jiabao-holds-a-hidden-fortune-in-china.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121026

The State of the Union

And it will stay this way--if not get worse--until we tamp down the NRA, folks.

Entertainment overnight

Quote of the day (on Romney? or Fox? Beck? O'Reilly? Hannity?)

It's Rush Limbaugh, all over, at least.

Catholic Church protest this Sunday morning

From one David L. Biersmith on the "Bishop Finn Must Go" Facebook page:

"I have not visited this site for a few weeks, trying to get over my anger with what has happen concerning Bishop Finn.

It seems like it never happened.

Bishop Finn has not resigned, nor is he gong to resign, and the Vatican has not moved him, nor are they going to move him.

And we laity have not done a damn thing about any of it.

We are reacting just like the Diocese thought we would, with apathy.

I have marched in front of the Cathedral for the last four weeks before the Sunday 11:00 a.m. Mass protesting the situation and create interest for change.

Would you join me on Sunday Oct. 28, 2012 @ 10:45?"

Yes, Mr. Biersmith, by all means, lets.