Republicans on the wrong side of public opinion

Too good not to post so here's a "guest posting". For the sake of brevity, there is a good, quick summary at bottom:

Republicans -- Not Obama -- More Often on Wrong Side of Public Opinion

by Nate Silver

One of the more commonplace assertions among pundits on the center-right -- made rather carelessly by Victor Davis Hanson and more thoughtfully by Jay Cost, is that agenda put forward by Obama and the Democrats is overwhelmingly unpopular and that Democrats are simply getting their comeuppance for having pushed such a liberal set of reforms forward. These claims, however, rely on selective evidence, invariably citing policies like health care and the GM bailouts which are indeed unpopular (strongly so, in some cases), while ignoring many other issues on which Obama has been on the right side of public opinion.

In fact, a more objective and equivocal evaluation of public opinion on more than two dozen specific issues finds that the Republican Congress has far more often been on the wrong side of it. Attempting to be as comprehensive as possible, I've identified 25 issues that Obama and the Democrats have made an affirmative effort to push forward since taking office a year ago, and summarized public opinion on each of them. Most of the numbers that I've cited come from PollingReport.com.

Afghanistan Troop Escalation. An average of seven polls taken since President Obama's speech on Afghanistan in December show a 54-41 majority of the public in favor of escalating troop commitments. However, Obama appeared to get a bump from his speech, as an average of four polls conducted in November, prior to the speech, had shown a 49-46 plurality opposed to greater troop commitments.

Bank Tax. An NPR poll found a 57-39 majority in favor of the bank tax proposal, which the Congress has yet to consider, after being read arguments both for and against the program. (An ABC/Post poll found a 73-26 majority in favor of taxing financial sector bonuses over $1 million dollars, although the White House has not advocated for that measure.)

Ben Bernanke. The only poll on Ben Bernanke, from NBC/WSJ, found a 37-34 plurality opposed to his reappointment; Bernanke was approved by 22 of 40 Senate Republicans and 48 of 60 Senate Democrats.

Bush Tax Cuts. Although this polling is somewhat out of date, a CBS/NYT poll in April found 74 percent in favor, and 23 percent opposed, to raising taxes on those making more than $250,000 per year, as Obama's budget would do. A Newsweek poll in March, with somewhat different phrasing, found 49 percent in favor of letting the tax cuts on the wealthy expire and 42 percent opposed.

Campaign Finance. The only poll to have asked directly about the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision is from FOX News, which found voters disapproving of the decision 53-27. A Gallup poll conducted last month found that, while most Americans consider campaign finance to be a form of free speech, they nevertheless by a 52-41 margin felt that the ability to place limits on political contributions was the higher priority.

Cap-and-Trade. The last five organizations to release polls on cap-and-trade (AP/Stanford, ABC/Post, CNN, Pew, Rasmussen) actually show it favored by the public by a 51-40 margin, on average. It is likely that a significant fraction of the public does not understand what cap-and-trade is; nevertheless most of these polls provided descriptions of the bill's contents. Eight House Republicans voted for the climate bill in June; the Senate has yet to consider the measure.

Cash-for-Clunkers. The only organization to poll on this was Rasmussen, which found voters opposed to the program 35-54 in June, but a 44-38 plurality favoring the program in retrospect after it had been implemented.

Credit Card Protections. 77 percent of respondents favored the Credit Card Protection Act, according to a poll by Open Congress. The bill was approved 90-5 by the Senate in May, as well as by a 105-69 majority of House Republicans.

D.C. Voting Rights. 58 percent of the public favored, and 35 percent opposed, giving an a House seat to D.C. in a nationwide Washington Post poll conducted last February. The Senate approved D.C. voting rights by a 61-37 margin last February, with 6 Republicans voting in favor and 2 Democrats voting against, although the measure subsequently died in the House.

Fair Pay. Congress approved the Liddy Ledbetter Fair Pay Act last January; it received the support of 3 Republicans in the House and 5 in the Senate. A Rasmussen poll conducted shortly after the legislation passed found that Americans by a 66-24 majority do not believe that women earn equal pay for equal work, although it did not ask about the legislation specifically.

Financial Regulation. A Time/SRBI poll in October found that 59 percent of the public favors more regulation of Wall Street versus 13 percent favoring less and 22 percent the same amount. A CNN poll two weeks ago found 62 percent in favor of greater regulations and 35 percent opposed. House Republicans opposed the financial regulation bill unanimously.

Gays in the Military. Four organizations -- FOX, Gallup, Quinnipiac, and CNN -- have released polls on Don't Ask Don't Tell since Obama's inauguration. They show an average of 58 percent saying that Don't Ask Don't Tell should be repealed and that gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the military, and 35 percent opposed. No votes have yet occurred on DADT in either the House or the Senate, although the House's repeal legislation has just one Republican co-sponsor.

GM/Chrysler Bailout. Quite unpopular: an NBC/WSJ poll in early June showed 39 percent of the public in favor and 52 percent opposed to the bailout, and a CNN poll in April found that 22 percent of the public favored additional assistance to GM and Chrysler while 76 percent would have preferred to let them go bankrupt. (There was no specific vote on GM in this Congress; instead, its funds came by way of the TARP program.)

Guantanamo Bay. Four organizations to release polls on Gutantanamo Bay between last February and last June found an average 55 percent of Americans opposed to closing the detention facility and 39 percent in favor, with the number of those opposed tending to increase over time.

Hate Crimes. Although there have been no recent polls on the subject, a Gallup survey in May 2007 found a 68-27 majority in favor of expanding hate crimes statues to include sexual and gender identity. The Matthew Shepard act, a hate crimes measure, passed the Congress last year, receiving the support of 18 House Republicans and 5 Senate Republicans.

Health Care. It has clearly become unpopular; the latest Pollster.com trendlines show 38 percent in favor of the bill and 55 percent opposed. One Republican voted for the health care bill in the House and none did in the Senate.

Jobs Bill. A CNN poll in December found 74 percent thought Obama should concentrate on creating more jobs "even if it means less deficit reduction." A Bloomberg/Selzer poll, also in December, asked about specific measures that might be undertaken as part of a jobs bill and found 68 percent in favor (and 28 percent opposed) to tax credits, and 66 percent in favor (versus 32 percent opposed) of spending on public works projects, although just 48 percent were in favor of additional assistance to state and local governments. House Republicans unanimously opposed a $100 billion jobs bill in December.

Mortgage Relief. Senate Republican unanimously voted against the Durbin Amendment to provide mortgage relief in April, as did 12 Senate Democrats. However, four organizations which polled on mortgage relief in February through April found an average of 60 percent of Americans in support of additional assistance versus 34 percent opposed.

PAYGO. There is no specific polling on Congressional pay-go rules, which Senate Republicans recently voted against 40-0., but in the abstract moves toward balancing the budget are almost always popular, such as a CNN poll in November which found 67 percent preferring balanced budgets to deficits "even when the country is in a recession and is at war."

SCHIP. Although there have been no recent polls on SCHIP (children's health care), an ABC/Post poll in September, 2007 found it supported 72-25 by the public, and a CNN poll in October, 2007 found that the public wanted by a 61-35 margin for the Congress to override President Bush's veto of the program. Nine Republican Senators voted to extend SCHIP in February as did 40 House Republicans.

Sonia Sotomayor. The last five polls to be released on Sonia Sotmayor in advance of her confirmation showed 52 percent in favor of her confirmation and 30 percent opposed, on average. Senate Republicans opposed her confirmation 31-9.

Stimulus. The stimulus has become somewhat unpopular now -- although most individual elements of the program remain popular. However, the stimulus was somewhat popular at the time of its passage. An average of the last five organizations to release polls in advance of the Senate's vote on the stimulus on 2/9/09 showed 50 percent in favor of the bill and 38 percent opposed. House Republicans opposed the stimulus unanimously; Senate Republicans gave it 3 votes.

TARP. The TARP program began under Bush and was extended before Obama took office, but Obama nevertheless actively lobbied Democrats for its extension. TARP was unpopular from the get-go, and Americans opposed its extension 56-32 last January, according to a poll then from Diageo/Hotline. All but 6 Senate Republicans voted not to extend TARP.

Terrorist Trials. An average of two recent polls from Rasmussen and CBS had 38 percent of the public in favor of terror trials in civilian courts, but 55 percent opposed.

Torture Memos and Investigations. Four polls conducted in April showed an average of 43 percent of Americans in favor and 51 percent opposed into an investigation of Bush-era torture policies. The only poll to ask about the release of the Bush torture memos, from ABC/Post, found 53 percent in favor and 44 percent opposed.


Of these 25 issues, Obama's position appears to be on the right side of public opinion on 14: the bank tax, repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, campaign finance, the credit card bill, D.C. voting rights, fair pay, financial regulation, gays in the military, hate crimes, the jobs bill, mortgage relief, PAYGO, SCHIP, and Sotomayor. It would appear to be on the wrong side of public opinion on five issues: the GM/Chrysler bailout, Guantanamo Bay, health care, the extension of the TARP program, and terrorist trials. On the other six issues, the polling is probably too ambiguous to render a clear verdict.

Republicans, on the other hand, have been overwhelmingly opposed to almost all of these measures with the exception of Ben Bernanke and Afghanistan troops, both of which poll ambiguously, and the credit card bill, which polled well.

Obviously, this analysis is superficial in certain ways. All issues are by no means created equal, and health care in particular, which is unpopular, has weighed heavily upon the public's perception of the Democrats. In addition, there is probably another layer of 'meta-argument' that goes beyond specific issues, and at which the GOP has tended to excel.

Nevertheless, it runs in contrast to the objective evidence when one asserts, as Hanson does, that "On every issue ... the Obama position polls 5-15 points below 50 percent." Rather, the votes taken by the Republican Congress have far more often been out of step with those of the median voter.

This is not to give a mulligan to the White House or to the Democrats -- as I've written before, their meta-strategy has necessarily had to be somewhat terrible so as to take what has been a fairly popular and centrist agenda and have it regarded as overwhelmingly contentious and partisan by so much of the public.

EDIT: What about EFCA/card check? I didn't forget about it; rather, I excluded it because it's something which the Democrats abandoned early on and which the White House never lifted a finger for. Obviously, there are a lot of policies that the Democrats theoretically have in their arsenal -- card check, legalizing pot, gay marriage, nationalizing the banks, a radically more progressive tax code, etc. -- which are both quite liberal and (with one or two possible exceptions) quite unpopular. But the Congressional Democrats didn't spend much of any effort on those issues, and the White House spent essentially none. The agenda they've spent their political capital on, rather, has been quite centrist -- which is sort of the whole point of this article.

If you did include card check, by the way, the verdict would be rather ambiguous. Ignoring some amazingly crappy (and contradictory) partisan polling on both sides of the topic, the closest we have to a neutral poll is this one from Gallup, which shows 53 percent in favor of a "new law that would make it easier for labor unions to organize workers" but which is probably too vague to be useful. To be clear, my hunch is that card check would indeed prove to become unpopular if it were debated more vigorously -- but that's just a hunch, and we're trying to rely on the objective evidence for this exercise.

What you've experienced, individually, doesn't make it so for the rest of the world

Note to football player Tim Tebow, his Mom and to everyone else out there in the world:

Just because you experienced something and have found something to be true for you, doesn't make it so, universally, for everyone else in the world.

In fact, this point drives me wild.

So many people going through life judging others based on what they think and believe is "universally true" when, in fact, whatever rules or ideas they're using may well not be at all. It's true for so many things.

So many people think that, just because their life has proven some idea or thought to be true, that this is the way it is for the rest of the world.

It just ain't so.

To wit: apparently, Mrs. Tebow was told, we are told, she should seriously consider terminating her pregancy (read: have an abortion) when her son, Tim, was coming along.

She decided against it. Good for her. Yahoo.

She went ahead, carried Matt to term, gave birth and we're all living happily ever after.

That's her story.

And just because that's true for her absolutely does not, then, as I said above, make this the same case for the rest of humanity.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not crazy for abortions. It's not like I think we need or want lots of these things in the world.

But we do, unfortunately--humankind's history has proven it--"need" the option of abortion.

There, I said it.

They're legal. And they've been legal since 1973.

And get this--some women really need them, for their own personal, serious, legitimate reasons.

But if some women can be assisted in some ways, whether with financial assistance or counseling or whatever so that she could either keep the child or have her/him adopted, terrific! That's great, of course.

Government, especially "conservative" and non-intrusive government shouldn't rule her options and make her have the child.

And to this, I offer a wonderful, simple, intelligent solution for all the "Right to Lifers" out there and that is this: stop fighting RU486 and other new medicines/drugs that could end a possible pregnancy within 24 hours of the possible conception.

Then people could stop having abortions.

Of course, you'd lose your one issue but that's what's really important anyway, isn't it?

You want to have your one issue you can rail about and judge others on.

A challenge to our city leaders

Questions that should be asked and answered by our Mayor, City Council, City Manager and all other leaders in the area, in case we could reduce the number of shootings and murders in town:

1) What are the organizations CeaseFire and Aim4Peace? What do they do?

2) Who is involved in the organizations?

3) Are they working effectively in town to reduce shootings and murders and possibly to otherwise improve our city?

4) What do they do? What are they doing in town?

5) What is their budget?

6) From where have they gotten their present, previous budget, to date?

7) Aim4Peace says they are short on funds. Is CeaseFire short, also?

8) If they are short on funds, are there good reasons for that?

9) If they are effective, would transferring city funds to either or both organizations help Kansas City reduce the number of shootings and murders in the area and/or otherwise improve life in Kansas City for a good number of our citizens?

Let's see if it happens.

Republicans and Conservatives really don't want this President to succeed

You have to understand, Republicans and Conservatives really don't want this President, Obama, to succeed.

In fact, his being successful scares the daylights out of them--and for several big reasons.

First, we're experiencing the biggest financial recession and difficulties in the last 80 years, since the Great Depression.

The last time we had a really ugly downturn in the economy like the one we're facing now--the Great Depression--a Democrat, Franklin Delano Roosevelt--came along with solutions and spending and lots of government in the form of programs and because of it he's credited by most all historians and Americans with having saved the Republic.

That's bad enough for the Republicans.

But then you know what happened?

For the next 40 years, approximately, the Democrats were in power in Washington and across the land.

And that scares the hell out of all those Republicans and Conservatives out there.

The last thing they want this President, President Obama, to be is successful.

So they bring it all out--they call him "Socialist" and "Liberal" and "tax and spend" and every ugly, true and untrue thing they can think of, to rail against him and his plans.

When you put their fragmentation, at minimum, and lack of leadership in their Party, in addition, to this mess and situation they're in, they're scared as hell he may be successful.

So fight this President?

You bet they do.

You bet they will.

Be the "Party of 'no'"? Oh, yeah.

It's all they've got.

They're desperate.

The trouble is, so is the US. So is our country. So are most of us out here in America.

But the Republicans would rather have the country fail on this President's watch--and then blame it on him--than have the US succeed.

And if that doesn't scare you, no matter who you are or what your politics, then you aren't thinking out the entire situation and what it could possibly mean for this country, as a whole and all of us, individually.

China vs. the US: Who's going to win this?

Recently, the US and China have been sparring a bit.

We recently made a 6.4 billion dollar military arms sale to Taiwan which, of course, upset the mainland. That always gets them going.

Then we recently increased our tariffs on their steel and tires.

Higher tariffs on anyone is never well-received, naturally.

This week we also found that President Obama is going to meet with the Dalai Lama , personally, finally, too.

The President can't back down from this meeting, frankly, because he had already put it off at least once, just before he went to China. If he were to put it off now, again, he would look soft on China, it's perceived and he'd be seen as giving in to pressure on them.

Anyway, they aren't liking this meeting.

All this on top of the fact that China is our biggest lender.

Most people would say they "own us."

It seems to point out that China may have already won any contest we're in against each other.

We hope that's not the case but we're so intertwined and, as I said, we owe them so many billions and trillions of dollars of our debt, how can we really fight them in any arena, without shooting ourselves in a proverbial foot? How do you fight your banker?

The banker always wins.

The banker is in control.

Remember the cynical--but true--"golden rule"?

"He who has the gold, makes the rules."

Food for thought.

On the one hand, we can hardly afford to upset them.

On the other, we can't be seen as weak and/or giving in to them, even if they are our financial masters.

This is going to be a tough relationship to handle for some time to come.

(Unless China's economy collapses).

Notes on a Sunday newspaper

Specifically, today's Kansas City Star:

1) Karen Pletz and the KC Univ. of Medicine: It's great to see the Star report on the Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences and former President Karen Pletz's firing, frankly. She was let go in December but neither anyone from the University or Ms. Pletz herself will say why she was forced out. This situation brings up the following important questions: Since tax money was involved, we have a right to know why the University let Ms. Pletz go. Why was she, in fact, fired? Was there any impropriety--or illegality--or was it merely a disagreement on the path she was taking the University? If it was merely a disagreement, someone from the University should say so, publicly, and as soon as possible;

2) Missions to moon cancelled: Good. I'm no druid but this was a dumb idea to begin. As the article states, "The moon program, called Constellation, already was behind schedule, over budget and deemed too low-tech." And you know what else? It doesn't make sense, cost-wise, to send people into space. Machines can be sent far less
expensively and get a great deal of data. I'd be against this even if it weren't originally George W. Bush's idea but that fact just makes it that much easier;

3) Stupid criminals: I always love reading the short articles from virtually any source, telling of some new knucklehead and their stupid way to end up getting arrested. One of my favorite ones today is the guy who stuck about 75 bottles of lotion in his pants at a Bath and Body Works store back East. (How could stealing 75 8 ounce bottles of lotion benefit you?);

4) Irrelevant Chiefs history: As a city, we need to stop trying to be interested in the history of Kansas City Chiefs on big game days like the Super Bowl. It's pathetic and has nothing to do with anything;

5) Toyota and their recall: In spite of our media's and government's opinions that Toyota has been acting slowly and irresponsibly to its recall of cars to repair the gas pedals, I beg to differ. From what I understand, 19 people were killed over a 6 year period. When it was finally declared a problem, Toyota immediately did big things--they
instituted the recall of millions of cars for repairs to address the problems, they cancelled the sales of 8 of their models, which hurt them badly, financially, the President of the company made a public apology and finally, this morning, I saw a commercial from the company, explaining and addressing the problems and asking for logic to prevail.

If an American car company had these problems, we'd still be waiting for a recall, I'd wager, they wouldn't have cancelled the sales of ANY cars and there would never be a public apology from anyone in the company, let alone the president of the company, for fear of further, ugly reprisals and lawsuits;

6) Possible federal charges for the murderer: It's great to see that there will likely be additional, federal charges against the murderer Scott Roeder and possibly even charges against others who may have helped or worked with him. Yay. Good on ya', Federal Justice Department. Let's make sure he stays in prison for the rest of
his miserable, psychotic, self-righteous life;

7) Casino taxes and revenue: It's disgusting to see casinos asking that the State of Kansas take less revenue from them, and that they should reduce the State's take from 40% to 22%. When casinos first came to the area, they knew they would promise anything and everything to get in the area. The State to take 40% of revenue? Sure, fine. Loss limits for customers? No problem. But after the fact, once
they're in the area and entrenched in the economy, then they start backing out of those agreements. They did away with the loss limits some time ago and now this.

And the casinos will keep asking/pushing for more, with time, too. Like all corporations in America, they're insatiable when it comes to profits and they'll take them from wherever they can get them. If Kansas representatives and their citizens allow this, they're foolish, at least;

8) Aim4Peace coverage: The Star's small article on Aim4Peace (on page C2) was tiny and pathetic. KCTV 5's coverage, online, was far larger and more informative. This is too important a story in town, considering they're trying to reduce or stop the shootings and killings in town, to relegate to such a small, less-informative mention as they gave. I recognize that online "space" is unlimited while extremely limited for an actual paper medium but still, this is an important story that deserves coverage;

9) T. McClanahan and DADT: I can't believe Thomas McClanahan and I agree on ANYTHING but here we are, in today's column, he agrees that we need to, as a nation, discard the military's "Don't ask, don't policy" on gays in the military. How refreshing. He's finally on the right side of an issue;

10) When did the cost of the newspaper on Sunday go to $2.00? More and more money for less and less paper;

11) Aaron Barnhart and news reporting: That said, I hope these notes prove that we need "newspapers" (or whatever we'll call them if/when they go online) and their reporters and badly. As citizens of our cities, states and nation, We are
greatly weakened against our government and corporations as a whole and our government representatives more individually, without them.

Aaron Barnhart's article on budget cutbacks and firings at CBS and other media networks in their news departments is not only true but speaks for McClatchy Newspapers, virtually all other news organizations and The Kansas City Star, too, of course. It's an important article. If you haven't seen it, you ought to maybe take a few minutes and see it.

To repeat (and I will keep covering this here, on this blog, in different ways) we, as citizens of our cities, states and nation, are greatly weakened when our media outlets report important, hard news on our governments and corporations. That includes television as well as newspapers.

(Side note on The Star: their online search engine for their own paper is still miserable and too frequently not helpful).

12) Non Sequitur: The comic is particularly funny but poignant today.

Enjoy your Super Sunday, y'all and GO SAINTS!

Note to Ed Ford and the City Council of Kansas City, Missouri

I don't think I'm being presumptuous here by pretending to, singlehandedly, speak for the citizens of the entire city but I think I'm safe in sending you this following note:

After the City Council's Planning and Zoning Committee passed a preliminary resolution this week this week in favor of the new Tomahawke Ridge housing community, North of the city, we, the citizens of Kansas City, whom you are supposed to represent, want you to know

WE DO NOT WANT THE TOMAHAWKE RIDGE DEVELOPMENT TO GO FORWARD.

And we don't want it for the following reasons, at minimum:

--It contributes to sprawl;

--It's too far from the city;

--It weakens the city's core further;

--It is 25 miles from the city's core;

--It will be difficult, at best, to give it fire protection;

--Our own Fire Department doesn't recommend it;

--The City Planning Department doesn't recommend it;

--The City can't even clear our streets now, with what we've got, let alone if we add 300+ more homes;

--The City can't even tend to our own street maintenance now, with what we've got, let alone by adding all these more miles of streets;

--The City can't even tend to our sewage system now, with what we've got, let alone by adding all this much more sewers, drains and pipes.

And that's just for starters.

We don't want it.

It isn't prudent, to use an old phrase from Saturday Night Live.

But we're serious.

And we mean it.


Thank you,

The citizens of Kansas City, Missouri

A coming, fantastic addition to the city

Not enough is being said about and for the Kauffman Center for the Performing Arts that's going up here in town.

It's going to be fantastic.

This is long overdue in town and will be a huge benefit and centerpiece for the city and region.

Besides being an incredibly beautiful building by Moshe Safdie, the renowned architect, it's also going to be intricately adjusted within so it has phenomenal acoustics, I understand.

Personally, I can hardly wait for its opening in the Fall of 2011.

It can't come soon enough.

Right now, I think more needs to be said of and for it so we all get behind it, as a city, so it's terrifically successful.

This should be of great benefit to nearly all of us--all socio-economic classes, everyone.

So at this moment, while you can, you might go to their website and learn more about it, sign up for their newsletters and possibly even volunteer to further their work. While you're at it, if you can, you might even donate to the cause.

I never want to forget Ewing, Muriel and now their daughter, Julia Irene Kauffman, since, without any of the three of them, we wouldn't have this magnificent jewel.

Eureka!

I think I've found the group Kansas City needs to help us reduce the shootings and killings in town.

They are called CeaseFire and were formed in Chicago to, according to its mission statement:

a) work with community and government partners to reduce violence in all forms; and,

b) help design interventions required to better define what should be included in a community or city anti-violence plan.

And thank goodness.

I've written for some time that we need some group of community activists that can somehow reduce the ridiculous number of pointless shootings and murders that happen in town.

This, I think, could be the group.

And the thing is, the churches and other community groups could all form around them and work with them to get this done.

From the Star:

"An expert who has helped decrease shootings and killings by 40 to 70 percent in cities such as Chicago was in Kansas City on Thursday to talk with City Council members about using his program to help cut crime."

"'We see the issue of violent behavior is a learned behavior,' said Gary Slutkin, founder of Ceasefire."

"Slutkin said it starts with hiring and training community organizers to step in and prevent retaliations and disputes by reaching out to the parties that are at war with each other."

"'Most of the shootings and killings in Kansas City, as well as in most cities around the country, are related to grievances and interpersonal disputes,' Slutkin said."

"In Kansas City this method is being used in the east zone area, where the most murders occur. An 11-member group known as Aim For Peace is working in the area."

"'There were two houses that were warring across the street (from each other) where there were multiple bullets flying,' said Tracie McClendon-Cole. 'They were able to intervene on both parties behalf to the point where there were no shots fired.'"

Now, apparently, they're running out of money.

The city should at least look into this and check on the viability and reliability of this information and group and see if they don't deserve our support through tax money.

It certainly sounds as though they do.

Then, as I said, church members, activists, families and everyone interested in having a safer city should get behind the groups, too--both CeaseFire and Aim for Peace.

This may well be the solutions we've needed.

Here's hoping.

The indictment that was the Governors' Summit

The fifth annual bistate Governors’ Summit sponsored by the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce was held this past week and what a doozy it was. It was "spot on" for and about the city.

It told what the Missouri and Kansas Governor thought about the area and covered, then, of course, in The Kansas City Star:

"Area residents on both sides of the state line think Kansas City, Mo., is sick — riddled with crime, bad schools and a squabbling City Hall."

Yeah, no kidding.

"Armed with those views from a metrowide survey of residents, business leaders on Wednesday put a stethoscope to the community’s heart."

"The diagnosis: It’s time for business to play doctor."

Well, somebody ought to.

And to me, one of the glaring conclusions of both the Governor's Conference and this article from The Star for me is this: our inglorious mayor is a horribly poor leader and he has not been giving us the vision and leadership we need or expected--and that he promised.

It needs to be said, yet again.

"...Gov. Mark Parkinson of Kansas and Gov. Jay Nixon of Missouri emphasized that the area must coalesce around a specific agenda, something it now lacks."

"Parkinson said it was sobering to hear how poorly area residents thought of Kansas City and he feared 'a malaise of mediocrity.'”

"Nixon said it was important for the area’s population to believe it could “get educated and grow a business here because we can never import enough to grow” otherwise."

"The governors said their state legislatures seem more focused on 'bumper sticker' issues partly because Kansas City area representatives do not speak with clear priorities."

Boy, as citizens of Kansas City, can't we relate to that?

This conference and the attendant article The Star wrote on it were both excellent and important for the city and shouldn't be overlooked, discounted, ignored or forgotten.

Note to Mayor Funkhouser: you don't have a lot of time left but you do have time. Start doing good things for the city and stop just taking care of yourself--and your wife.

Important side note, too: While it may be thought, rightly or wrongly, that we are suffering from a "malaise", watch what happens when the Center for the Performing Arts opens downtown (in the Fall of 2011).

Kansas City won't be thought of as suffering any such thing then.

And we'll have the Kauffmans to thank--greatly--for that.

(More about the Center tomorrow).

That's what I'm talkin' 'bout...

 

The above picture is one of the best and most glaring examples of what I've written about here a few times. And that is, The Kansas City Star's inability--or lack of desire or something--to write anything penetrating--and yes, potentially negative--about the state of the area's real estate, with some few, rare exceptions.

I assume the realtors have them by the throat or something.

I thought one of the most important jobs the local newspaper would be to keep the area readers and inhabitants informed on the state of one of our most important facets of our economy--that is, both the commercial and residential real estate markets.

Silly me.

The above condominium building was created in the last year or two but to this day has remained vacant. It's in a very desirable area, too, overlooking Mill Creek Park, just off the Country Club Plaza, and is a beautiful facility.

And if it were the only one--or just one of few in the area--I could understand overlooking it.

But the fact is, there is a great number of these condominiums available in the area.

And you wouldn't know it by reading the local paper.

Commercial real estate? Especially retail?

Same thing.

I would think there are more stories there.

They did have one article, a couple days ago on foreclosure notice rates in the city compared to others, nationwide and another on discounts home buyers were getting on properties--the "pretty" news, for buyers--but that's nearly it.

And sure, they'll report the opening of a new store now and again, but give the overall, big picture on real estate, especially now, when we're in a downturn?

Not really.

Not if you read The Kansas City Star.

It needs to be said

Dave Helling and Steve Kraske are two of the best things happening in Kansas City when it comes to reporting political issues and stories for the Kansas City metropoltan area, the state of Missouri and the Midwest.

Without their reporting and writing, we wouldn't know a lot about what's going on in this city, for good or ill and we need them and their work.

What's happening in Kansas City right now

For starters, it's cold, naturally, since it's January. It's been bitter cold. And then there has been the ice and/or snow, at times.

And yet--secondly--the shootings and killings continue.

What the heck?

Aren't the killings and shootings supposed to stop in this cold, dark time of the year?

You would think so.

They used to.

They should, still, too.

But check it out --last night, according to Alonzo Washington and his local blog, there were 6 people shot in the metropolitan area last night.

That's insane.

And though last year was bad in this city, for murders, we're at 8 killings right now, compared to 6 at this time last year. (Thanks to Ernest Evans for this information).

I, along with other bloggers, have been writing about this time and again.

Somehow, we need to solve this problem, as a city. We need to get a handle on this.

Really, if we can have 6 people shot on a Saturday night in January, how many will it be in June, July and August, when temperatures are so much higher?

Then, third, for what's going on in town, I went to The Kansas City Star's website just now (mid-morning Sunday) and do you think anything is there about these shootings and murders in town last night?

I searched a few pages and found nothing. Nada.

So the local newspaper isn't even covering this.

That's stunning.

Finally, then, for events of the city, it's been reported that cars are getting broken into in the Crossroads District, downtown. It's happened, apparently, at least twice.

It happens--and has been happening--frequently, right on the Plaza. I know it happens all too frequently on the East side of the Plaza, over by the Board of Trade, at minimum. So it's occuring in some of the most prized real estate in town, as well as downtown, at minimum. (Admittedly, I don't know how you stop this kind of quick, stupid "smash and grab" crime but you have to think something's got to be done.)

If the Mayor or City Council or other leaders in town think this city is in control, it seems they're mistaken.

Possibly badly mistaken.
_________________________

Mid-day update: at 1:30 pm today, Sunday, I see the Star has updated their online page and there are 2 stories about the shootings. Hoo-rah.

A weekend observation on Western civilization

One of the absolute best values for the money in the current Western world has to be the ability to purchase an entire toilet for $80.00.


Just sayin'...




Have a great weekend, y'all.

Here's hoping

I'll say what has been suggested, if not said, outright:

Let's hope Mr. Salinger has a huge stash of terrific, unpublished works, waiting for us at his home.

RIP, Mr. Salinger

Another salute to Howard Zinn, historian

“Let’s talk about socialism. … I think it’s very important to bring back the idea of socialism into the national discussion to where it was at the turn of the [last] century before the Soviet Union gave it a bad name. Socialism had a good name in this country. Socialism had Eugene Debs. It had Clarence Darrow. It had Mother Jones. It had Emma Goldman. It had several million people reading socialist newspapers around the country… Socialism basically said, hey, let’s have a kinder, gentler society. Let’s share things. Let’s have an economic system that produces things not because they’re profitable for some corporation, but produces things that people need. People should not be retreating from the word socialism because you have to go beyond capitalism." --Howard Zinn (who died yesterday)

It frustrates the crap out of me that most Americans think Socialism is a) purely evil and b) right up there with the worst of Communism and anything and everything else bad they can throw in.

It's maddening.

Most Americans haven't the foggiest idea what it means in Europe and Scandinavia what the benefits are, for example.

Ignorant gits.

Now, go read up on Howard Zinn.

And while you're at it, get a copy of his book "A People's History of the United States".

***With specific and sincere thanks to Matt Payton and his Tumble-o-rama for pointing out this quote.

Roeder found guilty

"A Wichita jury found confessed killer Scott Roeder guilty of first-degree murder for killing Wichita abortion provider George Tiller."

"The jury also found Roeder guilty of two counts of aggravated assault against two witnesses."

"The state will be seeking a 'hard 50' sentence."

"Jurors deliberated for less than an hour Friday morning."

I'm glad that's over.



Link here:

http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2010/01/scott_roeder_guilty_of_first-d.php

The Roeder trial should be over

The Scott Roeder trial about whether or not he shot and killed (murdered) Dr. George Tiller should be, in effect, over as of yesterday .

Roeder (I refuse to refer to him as "Mr. Roeder. I cannot/will not give him that respect) confessed, under oath, on the witness stand in court.

To repeat for emphasis: Roeder is on trial to decide if he killed Dr. Tiller.

He confessed to it yesterday, under oath, on the witness stand, in court.

And get this--not only did Roeder admit to killing him but he also offered up that " he had been thinking about doing so since 1993."

The Judge made two very simple but wise and true statements regarding the case yesterday, too because, as the article in The Star pointed out "at the end of the day he ruled that he would not give jurors the option of considering a voluntary manslaughter conviction."

"Such a defense requires that a person must be stopping the imminent use of unlawful force," he said.

"There’s no imminence of danger on a Sunday morning in the back of a church,” Wilbert said, “let alone unlawful conduct." (This is as Sevesteen pointed out here, a couple days ago, in comments on this blog).

“In the state of Kansas, abortions are legal.”

It's over.

Roeder has declared himself guilty.

Fortunately, Judge Wilbert seemed to have had a change of mind on the case, too, when he announced, finally and fortunately, that the murder charge is the only option the jurors can decide after all, thank goodness.

I'm glad we've conclusively gotten that out of the way.

Sentencing should precede.

The only question now is whether the jury will return its verdict today or Monday, I believe.

Side note: I love the picture of Roeder on the front page of The Kansas City Star today. He looks as though he had a lobotomy and is trying to understand whatever someone is saying to him.

Brief thoughts on the State of the Union Address ('scuse me while I stick this in yer eye)

Lest anyone think I'm a sycophant for this, my Democratic President:

1) The President proposed last night we should take away tax credits that took manufacturing "off shore" and give them, instead, to companies that create more manufacturing jobs here in the US.

Well, duh.

Questions that seem obvious to me: a) Why is this a big revelation? b) Why did no one propose this before? (This occured to be YEARS ago) c) How could anyone be against this? (unless they're Republican and they just don't want this guy to succeed, for fear of creating another FDR and his legacy of Democratic rule for, oh, what? another 40 years?);

2) When the President compared us-a couple of times-to France and Germany and India and China, I got the feeling that, all of a sudden, the US is not only realizing its "catch up" status, but we're acknowledging it. It's a not too subtle shift, I think, from the last 200 years, when we virtually always assumed we were the best, the "top of the heap", so to speak;

3) The President called for more nuclear power plants and "clean coal". Wow. What a disappointment. What a letdown. What a sellout. Way to give in to the Right and the corporations:

4) He proposed doubling American exports.

Really? To where? What country is ready to buy more from us? Oh, and shall we crush some other, Third World country's production, just so we can sell more? Explain this, Mr. President, please;

5) I swear, at one point, I thought he was pushing for international trade wars so we could push our products more;

6) The President called--again, as he should and had to--for health care reform. AND THE REPUBLICANS SAT ON THEIR HANDS;

7) There was one cool, new shot of the chamber, from what I assume was the peak of the celing. Very cool. And another down the aisle he had originally come down. It was very cool, too. Nice to see the camera person was being creative;

8) Here's another easy one he threw out there--doing away with "earmarks". Could we not have that, like, yesterday, please?;

9) This took guts but it'll never happen--the President proposed killing the tax cuts for oil companies (and people making $250,000.00/year). Leave aside the 2nd part--this is a terrific idea. The oil companies are making billions in profits. We shouldn't need to give them tax cuts.

And it has about as much chance of happening as me growing wings;

10) The President's idea of forming a bipartisan commission to balance our budget is a good one. You could also look at it as a way for him to get to share the blame for the budget with the Republicans but hey, you have to start somewhere. We aren't going to solve these problems with only one political party's input;

11) Bringing back the "pay-go" provision should be a no-brainer, too. The Repubs did away with it (thank you very much, you chowderheads) while they were in office. Now that they're out, I'm hoping they'd like to shackly the Dems w/ it;

12) Okay, there's no getting out of pointing out that the President REALLY stuck his thumb squarely in the Republican's eye, in a matter of speaking, with this speech and that's the biggest "takeaway" I have on it afterward. To begin, he blamed Bush and his party for the last 8 years, which is fair, since we're in such a big mess, but do you want them to work with you or not? (Note to Republicans: both demi-god Reagan and Bush did this same thing, in their SOTU speeches, at times). Then he mocked them, on this huge, public forum, for not supporting the American people and for giving tax cuts to the rich, instead. Then he pointed out that that was what got us in the mess we're in today, to paraphrase.

The President didn't make any friends this night, except warming to his own, stalwart base. The Repubs are going to come out swinging today, this week and here on. Just wait until Rush and Glenn and Bill and Sean speak out on this one;

13) Question: Were Joe Biden's shoes bothering him or something?;

14) Twittering is now, officially, clearly ingrained in our culture. You can tell it when you see so much of an audience with their heads down during this speech, punching away furiously at their little machines. It was both funny and sick, at the same time. We can't do one thing any more--we have to make 140 character (or less) notes on it, too;

15) I wish the cameras would have shown the Republican side of the chamber when the President called for the repeal of the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. I feel sure they were sitting on their hands again but they would not/did not show it to us. That really frustrated me;

16) Joe Lieberman looks like he is perpetually reacting sarcastically, even when he's not talking. Since I don't like him and his traitorous, self-serving ways, I'm good with that;

17) The side view shot of VP Biden and Ms. Pelosi, while original, was not attractive. Note to cameraman: don't do it again;

18) Side/final note: looking at the Capital, on the outside, at the end of the speech, can you imagine how strict and tight the security is in Washington when this speech is given, annually? Can you imagine how busy Andrews Air Force Base is this night? Yikes.

On the Scott Roeder murder trial

This, ladies and gentlemen, is what a newspaper does best.

The coverage, in Wichita, of this murder trial--that of Scott Roeder having premeditatively shot and killed Dr. Tiller with a gun and bullet to the head while Dr. Tiller volunteered for and in his church one Sunday morning--is what The Wichita Eagle-Beacon and The Kansas City Star--and all other newspapers--do best.

They are covering a local story and they are covering it completely and thoroughly with terrific detail and moment to moment coverage and keep this in mind--BLOGGERS CAN'T DO WHAT THE NEWSPAPERS ARE DOING.

It takes a reporter, it takes a seasoned reporter and it takes someone with the wherewithal (read: income from a revenue source--in this case, advertising and subscriptions) to cover a story like this completely and with this kind of dedication.

This trial is going to take at least a couple of weeks.

There is a strong chance, too, that this trial, already, will be called for a mistrial (see earlier post here) and that will take still more weeks of coverage, along with the depth of knowing about this history of all involved--the Judge, the District Attorney, the defense attorney, the victim, the victim's family and the accused murderer.

So complain all you want about newspapers and how they "don't work anymore", especially you bloggers out there, should you have any complaints.

But this proves, better than most anything, how important newspapers, their resources and their reporters are and the value they give to society.

Again, calling for Judge Wilbert to recuse himself

Okay, this does it. This proves beyond any doubt that Judge Wilbert, in Wichita, overseeing the Scott Roeder trial for the murder of Dr. George Tiller is, unequivocally, biased in favor of the accused and that, secondly, he should--without that same doubt--recuse himself from the case.

Get this--this is what happened today:

"Tempers flared today when a judge said he would allow the man charged with killing abortion doctor George Tiller to tell jurors how he formed his beliefs about abortion."

This isn't a trial on or about abortion in any way.

This is a trial to decide if one Scott Roeder is or is not guilty of shooting and killing one Dr. George Tiller and whether or not it was premeditated.

With this action today, allowing the accused to describe a side detail--that of "how he formed his beliefs about abortion", Judge Wilbert has, without question, set this trial up to be heard yet again, once it's made clear this jury was contaminated, in effect, by this line of questioning.

This is not a trial on or about abortion. This is a murder trial.

Listen to how the Judge talked out of both sides of his mouth here, earlier today:

“We’re not going to discuss partial-birth abortions, we’re not going to discuss late-term abortions and actual medical procedures. But his personally held beliefs in general about abortion, whether it’s harmful, whether it terminates a viable baby, he’s going to get to testify to that.”

Excuse me? You're not going to have the trial be about abortion but you're going to let the defense and Mr. Roeder talk about his opinions on abortion and what Dr. Tiller's job was?

Judge Wilbert has spoiled the atmosphere in his court--and of this jury--with this allowance.

The case should now be dismissed and retried, with another, new jury.

The sooner he does, the sooner justice might be served.

More brilliance and prescience from Thomas Jefferson

“I hope we shall...crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of our country.”

~Thomas Jefferson, letter to George Logan, November 12, 1816


Who knew this was a problem, all that long ago?

This applies, today, in so many different ways. It applies to our health care system and its problems, our taxes and taxation, their use of us, as a labor force, etc., etc.

Is this the only way we can legislate now?

Dum-dum legislation seems to be the only thing the Obama Administration can come up with right now.

First, it's been "leaked out" from the White House that the President is going to recommend we freeze Federal spending for the next 3 years, in an effort to keep deficits and spending down.

This seems pretty easy to pass and sure to please the opposing Party, if only because it's throwing them an economic "bone", so to speak.

The American people have been shown in polls to be against these big deficits we're running up so this is what what they came up with.

Whatever.

There are people chiming in on it, for and against. Some say it will help keep deficits down. Others say we shouldn't try to keep spending down too much, since we're in a deep recession.

We'll find out who's right, soon enough.

The other easy government we were given came yesterday when the President and White House got a law to make texting for commercial vehicles illegal.

Talk about an easy one.

Who could be against this?

We're in 2 wars and the worst recession in 80 years and this is the legislation we get from our government.

I'm still a supporter of this President, to be sure, but I hope we're doing what we can be doing on all the right things.

It feels like Nero is fiddling sometimes, to me.

France and the burqa

A French panel has just come out with the conclusion that burqas--the all-covering clothing for women of the Muslim faith--must "outlawed in public buildings such as schools and hospitals."

And this really shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.

Further, it has nothing to do with religious intolerance.

It is clearly a matter of security for the French.

Fortunately, the French government is spelling out two reasons for the ban.

"Jean-Francois Cope, leader of the Union for a Popular Movement, or UMP, Sarkozy's majority party in Parliament, believes France needs a solid law against the burqa."

"'The two reasons why we have to implement legislation is to respect the rights of women and, second, it's a question of security. Who can imagine that in a country like ours, people can walk everywhere in the country and also in our cities with a burqa, without the possibility to recognize their face?' Cope says."

So they're standing up for women in this 21st Century as well as spelling out the need for security.

Good for the French.

Hopefully they're leading the way for the rest of the free, educated world.

Still don't think we need health care reform?

If you still don't think we need health care reform here in the US, consider these three facts and all the supporting data:

1) In the U.S., health care costs run nearly $7,000 per person. But in Cuba, they spend around $251 per person.

•United States health spending per capita is $6,697 per person according to Catlin, A, C. Cowan, S. Heffler, et al, "National Health Spending in 2005." Health Affairs 26:1 (2006). As with the number of uninsured, the number continues to increase and is projected to be $7,092 per capita in 2006, $7,498 per capita in 2007 and reaching $12,782 by 2016, according the Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures, National Health Expenditures Projections 2006-2016,
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/proj2006.pdf
•The 2006 United Nations Human Development Report says Cuba spends $251 per capita on health care. (Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme, 2006. http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html)

2) In Cuba, access to health care is universal.

•"Cuban dissatisfaction with their personal lives does not mean they are negative about the revolutionary government's achievements in health care and education. A near unanimous 96 percent of respondents say that health care in Cuba is accessible to everyone. Gallup polls in other Latin American cities have found that on average only 42 percent believe health care is accessible." Gallup/ Consultoría Interdisciplinaria en Desarrollo, "Cubans Show Little Satisfaction with Opportunities and Individual Freedom Rare Independent Survey Finds Large Majorities Are Still Proud of Island's Health Care and Education," January 10, 2007.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brlatinamericara/
300.php?nid=&id=&pnt=300&lb=brla

3) Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate and a longer average lifespan than the United States.

•The 2006 United Nations Human Development Report's human development index states the life expectancy in the United States is 77.5, and is 77.6 in Cuba. Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme, 2006 at 283. http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/pdfs/report/HDR06-complete.pdf.
•According to the United Nations Statistics Division, Population and Vital Statistics Report, the rate of infant deaths per thousand in Cuba is 6.2 per thousand, and in the United States is 6.8. "Table 3, Live births, deaths, and infant deaths, latest available year, June 15, 2007."
http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/vitstats/serATab3.pdf

And there is a hell of a lot more where this comes from.

How I can--occasionally--love Republicans and Conservatives

Breaking news, boys and girls and it's hot.

It seems 4 clowns tried to tap the phones of Moderate Louisiana Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu.

It sounds like it was a real cluster truck, too:

"A conservative activist who posed as a pimp to target the community-organizing group ACORN and the son of a federal prosecutor were among four people arrested by the FBI and accused of trying to interfere with phones at Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu's office."

Get that, already--"posed as a pimp." Man, these people are fun. And they didn't want to stop there so they figured they'd just walk into a Senator's office and tap the phones.

And it doesn't stop there:

One of the two guys--they were 24 years old--is "the son of acting U.S. Attorney Bill Flanagan in Shreveport..."

This just gets better and better.

And this is only day one of the scandal. I'm sure more terrific, juicy stuff will come of it.

So, as I said, this is why and how I can--occasionally, anyway--love my fellow Republican and Conservative brethren.

Part of it is because they'll do anything to attempt to "get ahead."

But the other part is because they never learn or they just never learned their American history.

They never heard of Watergate.

Don't need health care reform?

If anyone still says we don't need to reform health care in America, point out the following new study, in addition to all the existing data there is out there:

"Mothers are giving birth to lighter babies in the U.S., and no one is quite sure why."

"The finding, published Thursday in the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, has potentially troubling public-health implications, if the trend continues. Low-birth-weight babies are at higher risk for a host of health problems."

"Between 1990 and 2005, the birth weight of full-term babies in the U.S. declined nearly two ounces to an average of 7 pounds, 7.54 ounces, a reversal of a trend that had seen birth weights climb steadily since the 1950s, according to the study. Babies were also born 2.5 days earlier on average in 2005 than in 1990, the study said."

It goes on:

"The results are 'surprising and unexpected,' said Emily Oken, an author of the paper and an assistant professor of population medicine at Harvard Medical School. "We do need to keep a close eye on the babies that are the smallest babies to see if the proportion of those is increasing over time, because they may require extra resources and have extra health concerns,' she said."

If this most expensive of health care systems in the world that we have here in the US--and it is--is the best in the world, as people claim, why do we now have this additional issue/potential problem?

And check this out, it isn't just minorities and/or the poor to whom this is happening, either:

"Researchers repeated their analysis in a sample of low-risk women—healthy, educated Caucasians in their mid-to-late 20s—and found that the decrease in birth weight was even more pronounced, suggesting that the trend wasn't the result of changes in the population of mothers."

The fact is, for the most money we can spend in the world in every measure, the only ones benefitting from all the money spent are the insurance companies and corporations.

We're getting less healthy.

We rank 37th, internationaly, when considering mortality rates. (Read: when people die).

That's behind Costa Rica, people.

If you don't think we need health care reform, please do some research. You will find out differently.

If you know, as I do, that we do need this reform--and desperately--contact your congressional representatives now. Email them and tell them we need this.

Hopefully it's not too late.

____________________________

For lots more data--hard statistics--on the US' health care system and how expensive, ineffective and downright unhealthy it is, go here.

Trends toward mass transit in the US--even Kansas City?

Evidence in the form of statistics, showing America may well be absolutely ready for more mass transit even, one day soon? in Kansas City:

"The U.S. fleet has apparently peaked and started to decline. In 2009, the 14 million cars scrapped exceeded the 10 million new cars sold, shrinking the U.S. fleet by 4 million, or nearly 2 percent in one year."

We've got fewer cars due, at least in part, to the worst recession in seventy years.

More:

"With four out of five Americans now living in cities, the growth in urban car numbers at some point provides just the opposite: immobility. The Texas Transportation Institute reports that U.S. congestion costs, including fuel wasted and time lost, climbed from $17 billion in 1982 to $87 billion in 2007."

"Economic uncertainty makes some consumers reluctant to undertake the long-term debt associated with buying new cars. In tight economic circumstances, families are living with two cars instead of three, or one car instead of two. Some are dispensing with the car altogether. In Washington, D.C., with a well-developed transit system, only 63 percent of households own a car."

So the young people, the next generations of Americans, seem much more likely to share transportation. And if oil goes up as it is expected to do? All the more likely to push them to share even more trips to and from work and around town.

"Perhaps the most fundamental social trend affecting the future of the automobile is the declining interest in cars among young people. For those who grew up a half-century ago in a country that was still heavily rural, getting a driver's license and a car or a pickup was a rite of passage. Getting other teenagers into a car and driving around was a popular pastime."

"In contrast, many of today's young people living in a more urban society learn to live without cars. They socialize on the Internet and on smart phones, not in cars. Many do not even bother to get a driver's license. This helps explain why, despite the largest U.S. teenage population ever, the number of teenagers with licenses, which peaked at 12 million in 1978, is now under 10 million. If this trend continues, the number of potential young car-buyers will continue to decline."

Check this out:

"The United States is entering a new era, evolving from a car-dominated transport system to one that is much more diversified. As noted, this transition is driven by market saturation, economic trends, environmental concerns, and by a cultural shift away from cars that is most pronounced among young people. As this evolution proceeds, it will affect virtually every facet of life."

With all this, it looks much more like Clay Chastain (I loathe to even mention his name) would love this data.

God help us, we may get that clown back still more.

Thoughts on keeping weight off--and feeling good, if not great

It's January, right? At least at the beginning of the year and month, people are supposed to be working on ideas to lose weight or get in shape.

Well, I've noticed a few good ideas (rules?) for living, day to day, I think, that help keep off weight and excess pounds.

Herewith are a few of them:

1) Don't keep cookies in the house. Ever. Unless they're for a specific party or something, they too frequently get people in trouble. Too many people don't eat just one, I think. They just march right through the bag. Bad idea. Bad habit;

2) Same with potato chips. Don't ever buy and keep chips--of any kind--in the house. Face it--they're not good for us. They are horribly empty calories, for one. They're loaded with fat. And oil--the bad oils. And sodium/salt, which is awful for blood pressure, at minimum. The same goes for these--chances are, we just march right through the bag, instead of eating just a few. Making matters worse, as bad as these things are for us, they don't fill us up quickly, either, so we keep downing more and more of these destructive buggers. Really. Think about it. Keep all those chips out of the house for all but parties. Get low-fat, tasty, low-salt crackers, instead;

3) The same, here, for candy. Just don't even keep it around--unless you've got terrific willpower and/or candy's not an issue for you. If you can ration yourself a little bit and be done with it for the day, good for you. Then keep it around. If, however, you are like most people and can't begin a bag without, for the most part, if not completely, wiping out the entire container, then keep it out of the house completely. You'll be much better for it. Then, have it at special occasions, preferably family or social gatherings where you'll be in front of other people and (hopefully) won't go overboard on it and have way too much;

4) Soda pop. Don't. Ever. See numbers 1, 2 and 3, above. They're not worth it. There is nothing redeeming to or about them. There's nothing good in them. Again, don't;

5) Eat more fruits. Eat lots of fruits. Eat your favorites. Discover new ones. Then, always eat them plain. Don't add sugar or anything else bad, to them. Have them be your desserts. Enjoy;

6) Eat more vegetables. Seriously. We've heard it before. It's true. Do it. They are vital to our good health. If they fill you up, it's with good calories and vitamins and nutrients, to boot. And the fact is,they won't "fill you up" like the fatty stuff will. You'll feel better after you eat. That gross, really full, "heavy" feeling you sometimes get after some meals? It's not good for you. It means you've eaten wrong. It means you either eaten too much or that you've eaten the wrong stuff. Or worse, it means you've done both. More on this in the next note, too:

7) That "full" feeling we used to (or, God forbid, still do) associate with a "good meal"? It's bad for you. That is not a good sign--or way to live. Stop it. Quit associating that full feeling with a good meal. It means (see no. 4, above) that you've either eaten too much or you've eaten badly, with gross, fattening, fatty, salt-laden foods--or, as I said above, in the worst case, it means you've done both. Eat like that and it's no wonder we'd get fat. And unhealthy. And heart attacks;

8) If you drink beer, keep it to a minimum. One a day, at most. On a special night or occasion? Maybe 2? Just don't over do. They're loaded with calories, as you likely know. (I know, I know--you love 'em. Well, just keep it down. In moderation. To repeat--don't overdo. Beside, it will keep you from getting drunk and that's a good thing, too. Just ask your wife, partner, family or friends. Or that cop on the street, waiting for you to drive by;

9) Don't eat that much red meat. You can still have it, just keep it to about 3 to 4 ounces per meal, at most, if that. It's fatty, usually always and too much really is bad for us;

10) Season your food. Do it healthily. Do it a lot. Explore. Discover. Rosemary isn't just the name of an old girlfriend. Thyme? Sure. There are loads of these natural flavors and couple things come from them. First, they make the food taste better, period. Second, they keep the food interesting. Keep this in mind---EATING HEALTHY DOES NOT/SHOULD NOT BE BORING. Far from it. Want an example? Put your favorite green vegetable(s) (broccoli, asparagus, brussels sprouts, whatever) on some aluminum foil, sprinkly lightly with olive oil--don't drench it--then sprinkle on your favorite hopefully-fresh seasoning. Wrap it up in the foil then put it in the oven (or on the grill, without the foil, if you can and/or want to) at 350 degrees on each side for 10 minutes. Voila'. Easy, tasty, delicious vegetables that you'll love and that are good for you. It just isn't that tough;

11) Walk. Walk daily. Or do some not-that-difficult-an-excercise daily. This isn't tough, either. Walk the dog. Walk yourself--whatever. Walk. Do some exercise. And get this, too--IT DOES NOT--in fact, should not--HAVE TO HURT. The whole notion that if you're not hurting, you're not helping your body is only true for weightlifters that are trying to literally build muscles. Most of us on the planet are not trying to do that and that's more than okay. But we need to move. We need to stretch ourselves--and our muscles. Do it. The kicker is, you'll feel better, even if you just do this. But if you combine it wth good food, good eating and drinking habits and common sense, you'll feel a great deal better in short order;

12) Don't over do. Don't overeat. Don't over exercise. Don't drink too much. Modration really is a great thing. If you're questioning that next bite of food, it's probably too much (unless you're anorexic but that's a whole other set of problems);

13) The next one is an important one. Here it is: YOU DON'T NEED PROBABLY THREE QUARTERS OF THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THE GROCERY STORE. Deal with it. Here's what we really need there: the produce section (for fruits and vegetables, obviously), maybe, maybe the meats department, if you're not a vegetarian, the canned beans that are there and seasoning, though if you can get these fresh (which usually means somewhere other than the grocery store), fresh is far, far better. That's it. That's all we need at the grocery store. And a rule to keep in mind to make it easy for shopping is this: IF IT'S PACKAGED, IT'S LIKELY NOT GOOD FOR YOU (with the exception of some canned vegetables but, again, I'd go for fresh there, at virtually all time, if and when possible which, really , with modern distribution, is nearly all the time;

14) Someone in your household needs to cook, at least a bit. And this, too, is not that tough. We don't have to be chefs, either. Keep it simple. The old idea of having one meat portion (remember, 3 to 4 ounces per meal, maximum), a starch (potato--don't load it with too much butter and use very little sour cream, if at all--rice, noodle, coucous or some such) and a vegetable, and you're done. Dessert, if any, would be, again, some fruit. Then, mix these up. Keep it fresh. It's like sex--don't do the same things again and again so it doesn't get stale. Or dull;

15) In the summer, if you can, when it's hot, eat lots of salads with fresh greens and vegetables. Load it with things you like. These also happen to be very good for you, of course, they don't require a lot of preparation time and, again, you can mix them up a lot so they're never the same twice unless you want them to be. It won't get dull this way. Just again, don't overdo quantity. Moderation;

16) And in winter at least, eat a lot of soups. Same things here--you can do all kinds of different ones and use only the favorite things you like. Also, do them with broth, not cream-based. Use chicken or beef broth, use tomato-based soups, this kind. The cream-based ones will get you in trouble as they're loaded with fats. An additional, organizational benefit is that you can make a big, favorite pot on the weekend and serve it a few--maybe even several--times through the following week. It helps with busy schedules. If you eat canned soups--and they're still good for you, though likely not as good as homemade soups--make sure you don't get the ones that have 800 to 900 milligrams of sodium (salt) in them. Your blood pressure will go off the charts;

17) Finally, don't eat dinner after 8 pm, as much as possible. Don't sleep on your food--it will digest much better and you'll feel much better, too.

I think that does it.

It's not that long a list and it's fairly simple and straightforward.

The fact is, folks, we're all "bodybuiders". We're all shaping the kind of body we have. It's just that a tiny minority of us--the ones we usually label "bodybuilders"--are doing it positively and with a great deal of thought and discipline. If we follow the above ideas, we'll be building our own good body.

And feeling and maybe even looking great, in the meantime.

Further proof of premeditated first-degree murder

From The New York Times:

"In her opening statement, Ms. Foulston made clear that she intended to head off suggestions that Mr. Roeder’s acts were anything short of meticulously planned. Among the evidence she promised to show jurors: a brochure from Dr. Tiller’s Wichita church, dated nearly a year before the killing, and found at Mr. Roeder’s Kansas City home; a receipt for an ammunition purchase 11 days before the shooting; a Wichita motel registration bearing Mr. Roeder’s name from one week before the killing, a weekend when Dr. Tiller happened to miss church; and Mr. Roeder’s calendar — with the day of the shooting, May 31, marked with highlight."

So from this we can gather the following:

1) Roeder had been tracking Dr. Tiller for at least one year (brochure in his pocket)

2) purchase of ammunition 11 days before (I referred to this yesterday)

3) there is a good possibility the murderer was going to commit this same murder one week earlier but for Dr. Tiller missing church

4) the 1st degree murderer had clearly planned and dated when he wanted to commit his execution-style murder of Dr. Tiller in Dr. Tiller's church, by marking the date on his calendar.


My point in covering this?

There are some things--like unlimited corporate finance of political campaigns--that are so eggregious that I want to make sure they're explained, covered and communicated, so hopefully people know what's happening and so the right thing comes out of it.

As to the Supreme Court ruling last week on corporations and campaign financing, the wrong thing happened.

Hopefully the right and true, correct outcome will arise from Wichita and this Roeder, murder case and he will get a full life sentence, with no possibility of parole.