Blog Catalog

Saturday, February 20, 2010

A little entertainment today

Frankly, there's plenty of things to write about right now--rights, wrongs, injustices, truths, even funny and/or stupid things but it's been a busy week. I'll write this weekend.

In the meantime, some entertainment--a refresher.

Enjoy.

And have a great weekend.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Vancouver Olympics: So many things going wrong

This Winter Olympics started out on such a bad foot, what with the young luge competitor being killed in trials, the day before it opened.

Horrible.

And from there, it hasn't gotten worse, certainly, but it's definitely gone badly.

In the opening ceremonies, the fourth pillar of the Olympic cauldron failed to lift, screwing up the all-important introduction to it all.

Then, the rest of the world seems covered in snow--including Dallas, Texas, for pity's sake--but Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada didn't have enough snow for the games for a while.

Does that make any sense?

China has too much snow. Washington, DC, the list goes on.

What a bad break.

Let's see, what else has gone wrong?

Yesterday I heard a report about the mountainsides being groomed by people with shoes (wth?), which made the course rough, uneven and slow.

Then, the Alpine race schedule for the Vancouver Olympics had been revised--again--after the postponement of Tuesday’s men’s super combined and the women’s events were rearranged last week (though there were no new revisions to the women’s schedule this week).

Next, check this out--first, not enough snow, then this: "Tuesday’s Olympic men’s super combined has been postponed because of heavy snow on the top of the Whistler Creekside racecourse and soft snow conditions brought on by snowfall at the bottom of the mountain. The cold temperatures that helped bring about a smooth men’s downhill on Monday after two days of weather delays turned what had been a forecast of light rain for Tuesday into a significant snowstorm overnight. Tuesday’s women’s downhill training was also canceled."

I don't think I ever remember an Olympics with such problems.

But wait. There's more. This from last week:

"Vancouver Olympic organizers announced Tuesday that 20,000 tickets would be canceled for events at Cypress Mountain, including high-profile sports like men’s and women’s halfpipe and ski cross. Warm weather and rain have created unstable conditions in some spectator areas at Cypress, organizers said. They previously had canceled 8,000 tickets for snowboard cross events this week."

Finally, yesterday, it seems the Zamboni-type machine on the men's speedskating course broke down . (I say Zamboni-type because it wasn't a Zamboni. Somebody thought they'd save money by getting a cheaper one from another company. Anyone ever hear of "you get what you pay for"?).

How embarassing.

It seems the officials "stood looking sheepish as a small technical crew scratched their heads and tried to solve the problems."

Not good.

If this doesn't change, these may go down as the "bumbling, non-working, Socialist Olympics."

Man, let's hope not.

Which military dictatorship?

Okay, so first Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made big news for a couple of days with her quote and claim that maybe Iran was becoming a military dictatorship .

After I heard that, I thought (I may have said aloud), "Well, shoot, they could claim that of us."

And of course they did : "'They themselves' (the US) 'are involved in a sort of military dictatorship and have practically ignored the realities and the truths in the region,' Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said, according to ISNA news agency."

And you know what?

They have a point, just not in the way they went at it.

Actually, they have a few points.

Look at the facts :

--The US outspends the entire world in military weapons, offensive and defensive. We spend 41.5% of all military outlays in the entire world ($607 billion);

--China (5.8% or $84.9 billion), France and the UK (each at 4.5%) and Russia (4.0%) make for 18.8% of the world's total defense spending;

--The next 10 countries combined, after our spending, only comprise 21.1% of the world total;

--The rest of the world's countries, again, combined, spend 18.6% of the world's total on defense spending and arms

Sure, we have a government that is "in charge" of our military so we're not officially a true military dictatorship.

Yet, anyway.

But the fact is, we don't seem capable of cutting back on our defense spending in any way. Our government leaders want the military/industrial complex firms booming in their districts to keep up their employment rolls.

Further, no one leader or political party wants to be seen as the one person or group who "weakened" our country, even if it just means wisely cutting back on defense spending that is far out of control.

It seems that the military corporations are the leaders of our country. They're the ones who are "in charge" of controlling our military. The Department of Defense works closely together with them to insure that they're budgets--and so, our spending--is high.

And no one dare ask if all this spending--deficits be damned--makes any sense for the future and well-being of the country.

Additional link on worldwide military spending:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Monday, February 15, 2010

Maybe the EU can do what we can't

I've written here a bit on how corrupt Goldman Sachs has been in the last few years--at least--and how they're at least partly culpable for the financial crash of the last few years, the mess we're in now and for the collapse of AIG and the taking of millions (billions?) of government tax dollars over that collapse. (See Andrew Ross Sorkin's "Too Big to Fail" , among others).

If you haven't read anything about it, it makes terrific, though depressing, important information and reading. You should check it out.

Now, word comes out of Europe just today that "former IMF man Simon Johnson wrote that he thinks the EU will indeed ban Goldman."

According to Mr. Johnson: "Goldman made some $300 million over a short period of time setting up swaps constructions intended to fool Europe -and investors- about Greece's real financial situation, and it continued such efforts as late in the game as three months ago. It's all certainly immoral, if not downright illegal.

This on top of the wholescale theft they've made of the US markets in the last few years, at minimum.

So this is great. Maybe something can come from all this. Perhaps the EU can and will do what we haven't done on this and that is do an in-depth study of their actions, see if anything was blatantly illegal and then, if so, pursue legal action against them and, as the article states, maybe throw them out of the EU.

As I so frequently say, here's hoping.

But what really galls me is the Goldman Sachs people have been in--and still are--our own government for years, writing policy and policies that directly benefit them and the entire banking community.

And the American people stand for it.

Remember Hank Paulson, the guy who originally came up with the $700 billion TARP fund to save the banker's backsides?

Straight out of Goldman.

Current Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner?

Same thing.

The simple fact is, we need to get and keep Goldman Sachs--and other company and people like them--out of the White House and our government.

We need to get these foxes out of our chicken coops.

God, guts and guns

In the news today , it seems "three young men walked into the New Gethsemane Church of God in Christ and opened fire, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Monday."

It used to be we were safe in America, without getting too hyperbolic about this.

Then you used to be safe--mostly--in your neighborhoods.

Then you were safe in your home.

Now you aren't even safe in your church.

Maybe these shooters learned this from the nutcase who went on shooting spree 5 years ago in suburban Milwaukee when the church member left the service, only to return with his 9mm handgun and unload 22 shots, killing the pastor, the pastor's son and five other members and then himself. "Neighbors said he was quiet and devout...", the story said.

Maybe they learned this tactic from this shooting from last year in March when "An Illinois pastor was shot and killed, and two parishioners injured after an unknown gunman opened fire during Sunday services at the First Baptist Church in Maryville, Ill."

Or maybe they learned the technique from "pro-lifer" Scott Roeder who assassinated Dr. George Tiller, gun to his temple, in Dr. Tiller's own church in downtown Wichita, Kansas last May 31 on what was otherwise, no doubt, a beautiful Sunday morning when Dr. Tiller was volunteering, as he repeatedly did, at his own church.

Could be.

And besides the insanity of shooting someone in their own church, there is the additional craziness of the 2 victims in this most recent shooting, yesterday, of not assisting the police in their search for the shooters.

So much for law and order.

Bring on the anarchy.

So let's have it, folks, bring it on. It really has become "God, guts and guns!" in America, hasn't it?

And in our own churches.

But that's what we need--more and more guns.

Can I get an "Amen!"?

The next line of thinking?

"That's why we need to make it okay to bring our guns to church ..."

"Thank you, Ms. Davis. Now, sit down and shut up."

Coming together

With any luck, maybe we're coming together, as a city, to fight the shootings and killings in the area.

First it was Alonzo Washinton, frankly, who set up his blog and has been meeting around town to fight crime.

Then the organization CeaseFire came to town, trying to reduce the number of killings.

That's been followed, as I understand, by the AIM4Peace group that also, apparently, needs money and is hoping to get some from City Hall itself.

Now, there's a local man, a Father, whose son and nephew were killed by some of these same shootings who is trying to get the community to come together to fight the crime. He's setting up a group he's called "Operation Promise Land" , to create 'an agressive door-to-door assault on the 'Stop Snitchin' campaign."

Maybe with all this and involvement by more people and churches and other community organizations, we could get a handle on this and reduce the number of senseless, tragic killing this year.

Here's hoping.

In the meantime, is anyone paying attention at City Hall?


Additional links:

http://www.kansascity.com/news/columnists/steve_penn/story/1215899.html

http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1727682.html

Local weather forecasters and Dick Cheney

They should both just shut up.

Yesterday, on the front page of the Star, there was an article asking local meteorologists about global warming/climate change and whether or not they thought this winter proved or disproved anything.

Really.

That's liking asking the guy who just fixed your brakes about the international automobile market.

It makes no sense.

Sure, he has an opinion but it likely isn't an informed one.

How about let's ask the scientists who are studying the planet and not the guy who's watching a cold front coming in from Canada?

The fact is, snow or no snow in Dallas, the glaciers--around the world, mind you--are melting.

The ice caps are melting.

The oceans are rising, due to that melt-off.

Islands are shrinking and disappearing.

And we just had our warmest year ever, on record, and a whole lot more, but sure, let's focus on a few isolated snow storms.

The fact is, there is also a strong likelihood that, with the warming oceans, there is more moisture in the air and that this is what's causing the snow storms.

Insanity.

And then there was Dick Cheney on the television news shows yesterday morning, shooting off his mouth, too, on what this current Presidential administration in Washington is doing wrong.

Whatever happened to Vice Presidents who got out of the White House and did the respectable and respectful thing of shutting up and going on with their lives?

I don't ever remember a more troublesome or mouthy ex-Vice President than this one.

So yeah, guys, do us all a favor and shut yer pie holes, k?

Sunday, February 14, 2010

On KCMO School District budget and the KC Star

So The Star covered Superintendent Covington's meeting yesterday and plans for the KCMO School District.

And it was pretty informative, to a point. Fortunately, they didn't really put a "spin" on it--they just covered it very matter-of-factly. Good for them.

But there's a couple of things here that needs to be further pointed out that they didn't report--some shortcomings.

First, I was just told that, if the District doesn't do this and cut these schools, the 285 teachers and the 40 to 50 million dollars in expenses these cutbacks involve, this same District would be
financially bankrupt by next year.

That's pretty big, obviously, and that just can't happen.

But it wasn't mentioned in the paper.

Further, secondly, should that happen, Jeff City would have to take over.

And no one wants that.

No one.

Third, the good news is that, supposedly there are lots of teachers who are in line for retirement so they'll be asked to do just that. From what I understand a lot of them abe bailing already.

Fourth, note the date the Superintendent gave for everyone to respond and vote. He wants this ready for a vote at the Board's next meeting--Feb. 24--ten days from now.

Wow. That's a bit of a whirlwind schedule.

But these people have done the research and tried their best to come up with a plan to address the big budget problems.

It looks as though it's going to sail through.

Finally, if anyone does come out against this, really, they'll have a huge challenge to come up with any other options. How else, exactly, do you cut 40 to 50 million dollars in expenses from the budget
without closing these approximately 20 schools and slashing employment roles?

If you're out there and have any better ideas, you'd better speak up quickly.

It seems as though Superintendent Covington is the right man, doing the right things--the things that need to happen--at just the right time.

Stay tuned.

The meetings this week should be interesting.

Friday, February 12, 2010

US shut out of "Top 10 Cities" ranking

US "the best"?

The Economist Intelligence Unit doesn't think so.

Their survey "ranked 140 cities on 30 factors such as healthcare, culture and environment, and education and personal safety, using research involving resident experts and its own analysts" and decided the US doesn't have one city in the top ten.

Ouch.

Following is a list of the top 10 most liveable cities as ranked by The Economist:

1. Vancouver, Canada

2. Vienna, Austria

3. Melbourne, Australia

4. Toronto, Canada

5. Calgary, Canada

6. Helsinki, Finland

7. Sydney, Australia

8. Perth, Australia

9. Adelaide, Australia

10. Auckland, New Zealand

Neighbor Canada, however (you know the one--"Socialist Canada", the one with mass transit and national health care for all?) has 3 cities in the "top ten."

More ouch.

Between this and health care (we rank 37th in mortality rates, internationally, folks), we just keep getting put in our place, so to speak, don't we? So much for that "we're number one!" crap, huh?

The good news?

We didn't have any cities in the "bottom 10", either.

Thank goodness for that silver lining.

Notes on a Mayor

I have to say, I think the Mayor has this one right.

You'll have to see the Star this morning (Pg. A4) and its article about the mayor saying that $2 million of the city's money should no longer go to the Truman Sports Complex.

Yeah. You bet. He is right. (for once?).

And for a lot of good reasons:

First, it's not contractual. This was never set in stone anywhere and we've been doing it just to be "nice guys."

But you know what? This is in the midst of the worst recession in 80 years, since the Great Depression. Times are difficult, to say the least, and that's the 2nd reason.

Third, we really could use that money on our infrastructure like roads and bridges and sewers and who knows what all. We just hope the mayor can keep his mouth shut the rest of the time he's in office so it doesn't go to settle more lawsuits against him. (Seriously, have you ever known a Mayor to have had more public lawsuits against him because he's mayor? I can't think of any. I wonder what this clown has cost us so far. Good question. Note to self: possible additional blog entry).

Fourth and finally, both the Chiefs and Royals have taken millions and millions of dollars in taxes from the citizens of Jackson County, Kansas City (and for that matter, from Johnson County and Kansas), even though they are extremely profitable monopoly businesses. They'd have a lot of chutzpah complaining about missing this $2million. (Not that they won't complain about it, it wouldn't be surprising).

Now let's hope that, if they go through with this, the city really does spend the $2 million on street repair.

Coincidentally, there's a campaign being put on right now by the area's Heavy Construction Association to the tune of $110,000 (and possibly more) that starts soon and goes for the next year.

It seems the big boys are starting this "Stop the Nonsense" PR campaing "to pressure the" city "council to spend more general fund money for capital maintenance projects such as roads and bridges."

It seems the budget for these projects is down $7 million and they want it back, at minimum.

Hmmmm. Isn't that what the Mayor said he would do in his campaign for the job he has, make us "The City that Works"?

"An early draft of the group's campaign...shows plans for a broad-based critique of the mayor and council on radio, in newspaper ads, billboards and direct mail to residents."

The mayor will most assuredly bear the brunt of this negative campaign, too. To criticize "the council" is too vague. I'll bet most Kansas Citians can't even name one council member.

So here's one more group aligned against the mayor and our current local government.

It would be nice if those folks would wake up down there and give us the kind of efficient government the mayor promised and that we should, rightly, have, instead of things like Ed Ford's boneheaded idea of expanding the city North with his Tomahawke Ridge boondoggle.

Here's hoping.

Have a great weekend, y'all.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

What the Mayor could do and should have done

There's a terrific article right now up on an Oklahoma blog, pointing out how our very own Negro League's Museum is in trouble and needs money and more.

What a cool thing that is, this guy, Barry Tramel, pointing out how it's one of his "favorite places on Earth".

Good on ya', Barry. Thanks. It is a cool place and we appreciate the mention.

And you know what?

This is the kind of thing our own Mayor should have been working on the last--what is it? 15 years?--he's been in office. (exaggeration for effect, folks).

Here's this potential gold mine for the city's tourism trade and I don't remember the Funk pushing or working for it much, if at all, in all the time he's supposed to have been in charge.

Now that I think about it, here's another thing he could have been working on at the same time, in the same vein: attendance at and the success of our Union Station.

Both of those tasks could have kept him busy all these years he's been in office.

Those would have been terrific endeavors and they both need help.

Instead, he and his wife wanted to throw their little tantrums and retreat back to Brookside, but that's another matter.

(And what was up with that weinie "phone-in" session he had the other day with Kansas Citians, instead of having a meeting where we'd really talk with him, face to face. To repeat, what a weinie).

And now, for something to divert attention, he's come up with a "school plan", to improve the schools in Kansas City.

Of course, he's about a day late and a dollar short but at least he came up with something, right?

Except what he came up with suggests that he thinks he ought to do what the Mayor should have been doing all along--fixing our streets and sidewalks, etc. (read: infrastructure) around the KCMO schools so they have less problems.

WTF?

Are you kidding me?

Don't you think that's what we elected you for years ago, you big clown?

What do you think you were put in that office for, anyway?

We're glad you've finally gotten a clue and realized that's what Mayors are for and that's what you're supposed to be doing.

Not get busy with it.

And while you're at it, look into doing something for the Negro League Museum and Union Station.

Maybe if you do these things you won't get our city any additonal, costly lawsuits we have to pay.

A challenge for Tony and a question for intelligent men and women in town

I'll only address this issue once and that issue is the sexist, stupid, infantile pictures Tony at Tony's KC Blog puts up on that same blog.

My question:

Why?

He's addressed it before on his blog, at least a couple of times but seriously, I don't think people read it because he puts those things up there.

He insists it gets him notice. Or "readership" or something.

But why, too, are local women not saying anything about this?

Is this pathetic, high school age sexism so pervasive that you just put up with it?

Is it so rampant that it makes it okay?

I don't get it.

I'd think intelligent, educated, sophisticated women in town--bloggers and non-bloggers, both, would rail against it and request he--Tony--refrain from posting those really childish, insulting things as soon as possible.

On the one hand, he writes mostly about serious things that are going on in the area, however snarkly.

But on the other, he thinks he needs these pictures of buxom young women, barely dressed, so people will read his blog?

No.

Huh-uh.

It doesn't make sense.

There's a total disconnect there.

And he doesn't have any more self-respect, or respect for his column or respect for his readers to do otherwise.

Tony serves a good purpose---most of the time. He writes okay to good stuff lots of times.

But the pictures, too frequently.

That is some kind of sad.

Sure, it's a reflection on him but it's a reflection on the city, too.

So here's the challenge ladies: challenge Tony to, as I put in his comments on his blog, come to the "adults table" and take down the stupid pictures.

Any takers?

(For the record, I'm hopeful. Think of it as a Quixotic dream. Also, again, I will only bring this up this once. I have no interest in some of silly "blog war", if there is such a thing. I wish Tony well. I just wish he'd get and stay more professional--and adult).

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

We were right--the world DID want us to get rid of "W"

From Gallup , the polling organization, just now:

"Perceptions of U.S. leadership worldwide improved significantly from 2008 to 2009. The U.S.-Global Leadership Project, a partnership between the Meridian International Center and Gallup, finds that a median of 51% of the world approves of the job performance of the current leadership of the U.S., up from a median of 34% in 2008."

"Gallup has asked residents worldwide to rate the leadership of the U.S. since 2005, which enables a comparison of how perceptions of U.S. leadership have changed from the Bush administration to the Obama administration. The global median approval of U.S. leadership remained relatively steady from 2005 to 2008. In 2009, a bare median majority approves of the job performance of U.S. leadership (51%) -- a first since Gallup began asking the question worldwide in 2005."

"Significant improvements in sentiment toward U.S. leadership are evident in all four major global regions, with the largest year-over-year increase in approval measured in Europe. Median approval of U.S. leadership increased by 28 percentage points between 2008 and 2009 in this region. A median of 47% approves and a median of 20% disapproves -- the first time disapproval has dropped below 50% in Europe since Gallup first asked the question."

"Among the Group of Twenty (G-20) members, approval of U.S. leadership changed significantly in 16 of 17 countries where Gallup collected data before and after the Obama administration took office early last year. In 15 of these countries, approval ratings increased substantially, with increases of 39 points or more in Canada, France, and the United Kingdom. Although sentiment improved significantly in Turkey and Saudi Arabia from 2008 to 2009, majorities in these two countries still disapprove of the job performance of U.S. leadership."

So besides the fact that he's much more intelligent than "W" and the fact that he's not as completely, totally and utterly "in the pocket" of corporations and the wealthy, it seems the world, along with us, approves far more of the job President Obama is doing than we were used to for the previous 8 tortuous (no pun intended) years.

Now if this current President would only throw the health insurance companies and bankers out of the White House, we might achieve something for the average American, instead of the average American corporation.

Thankfully, Roeder just won't shut up

Scott Roeder is back, this time on radio , rambling with his thoughts on his situation. Fortunately for us all, he keeps admitting he cold bloodedly shot and killed Dr. George Tiller in Tiller's church on a Sunday morning, while the Doctor was volunteering for the church. ("Tell me, Mr. Roeder, who would Jesus kill, anyway?").

Since the question about Roeder is whether or not he killed Dr. Tiller and nothing else, he keeps assuring his own life sentence.

Good on ya', Scott. Thanks.

Roeder's attorneys have petitioned for a retrial, of course.

Nope. No, I don't think so but thanks for trying anyway, boys.

Another, new reason we shouldn't have invaded Iraq

We're coming up on the 6th anniversary of invading Iraq and fighting and dying there ever since.

And the reasons we shouldn't have invaded have been spelled out before:

--It's against our own national law;

--It's against international law;

--The UN inspectors weren't finding any WMD's;

--Saddam Hussein was cooperating;

--Our invasion of Iraq was totally, completely and utterly unprovoked;

--Our own intelligence agencies--13 of them--advised against the invasion and attack;

--Former President George H. W. Bush himself was against attacking Iraq;

--We had to do it unilaterally and without the world community which made it both costly--in terms of soldiers and materiel--and we didn't have world opinion on our side so it cost us our image, which is not to be dismissed;

--We were all for Saddam Hussein earlier in his career and we traded with him, no problem, while he was gassing his people. We didn't have any problem with it then. It was only later, with George W. Bush and Dick "Lemme at 'em" Cheney that we arbitrarily decided we should attack them without provocation.

And the list goes on.

But here's the real, new beauty today.

Did you hear on NPR this morning that there is a common feeling and thought of Iraqis actually missing Saddam Hussein and the days of his rule in Iraq?

Yeah, and here's why:

--they don't have any jobs

--they can't count on basic services like electricity (ever since we blew them up)

--there's less safety and security

--in Anbar Province, they're disillusioned with "the current Shiite-led government and the local Sunni provincial council"

and more.

Some quotes from Iraqis:

"It is only now that we have discovered how valuable Saddam was to us. People have compared the situation before to the situation now. And then was better."

"Saddam's popularity is back because Saddam gave Iraqis dignity. Now, Iraqis have no dignity whatsoever."

"At the mobile phone shop in Ramadi, owner Abu Mohammed says at least when Saddam was in power, people knew what to expect."

Again, this is another case of the Americans absolutely not being "greeted in the streets with flowers, as liberators", as the Bush Administration promised.

In the meantime, let me mention two statistics, not including what the war is costing us in materiel and dollars:

--The US has suffered 4375 casualties in American Soldiers, men and women and

--We have suffered 31,639 wounded American Soldiers, total, to date

And for what?

So the Iraqis could lament the days they had their own leader, however brutal and barbaric, and we hadn't yet blown them up, put our own soldiers lives at risk and spent trillions of dollars to do all the above.

Do you suppose there are still people out there who think George W. Bush and his administration are going to be thought of in a positive light one day, in retrospect, in the history books?

One expensive snowstorm

Have you been keeping up with the snow storms on the East coast --specifically, the ones going through Washington, DC?

It seems a 2nd big one is going through now so the nation's capital--our seat of government is shut down for the 3rd day. No one's been in their government offices all week, save the President, since he can walk there from upstairs.

Normally, Washington can count on about 10 inches of snow per year.

This year? They've gotten 45 inches.

Holy cow.

That's a lot of shoveling.

Anyway, I understand they will likely be shut out of their offices all week--five full days.

It's estimated this is costing us $100 million dollars per day in lost productivity.

Once you do the simple math, you see that the total, then, hits $500 million dollars, give or take.

And that's one thing but then think about it--$500 million dollars spent.

And nothing's getting done.

Dang.

One-half billion dollars and nothing's getting done.

It's as now-deceased Senator Everett Dirksen is reported to have said once:

" A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."

Try to think good, happy, positive thoughts.

Great insights

If you haven't read Midtown Miscreant's latest post , you need to.

Go.

Do it.

Now.

Then, read his Part 1 of this thought process from yesterday .

And thank him.

This from a "liberal" who's supposed to want people to "get off easy", right?

On the launch of a "solar dynamics observatory"

In case you missed it, there is a solar dynamics observatory going up into space today, thanks to NASA--and our tax dollars--that is going to study the sun for the next 5 years, inside and out, literally.

And while I find this fascinating, I can't help but also think that, between this new instrument, the Hubble telescope already looking into the far reaches of space and the Hadron collider in Switerland, looking back to the original, creating "big bang" that made us all, the universe, really, that somewhere we don't have one hell of a lot of information out there on this crazy universe of ours.

I mean, think of it. The Hubble alone is collecting so much data NASA said they can't keep up with it.

What if they found there was no God?

Or what if they found there was--but she/he was unlike what anyone had proposed to date? (Which, after all, is highly possible and even likely).

So it makes me want to propose two thoughts:

1) What if the US government learned something particularly incredible about us, about the universe--and then could not/would not tell us?

I think it makes a great story line.

Which brings me to my 2nd point:

2) Wouldn't this make a terrific sci-fi movie?

If only Rod Serling were alive.

"Calling Mr. Spielberg..."

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

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.

Monday, February 8, 2010

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).

Sunday, February 7, 2010

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!

Saturday, February 6, 2010

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.

Friday, February 5, 2010

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).

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

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.
Posted by Picasa