31
Oct
There’s a lot being said over waterboarding. Michael Mukasey’s nomination is said to be “drowning” over this one single issue. Joe Biden and Patrick Leahy, who are prone to oppose just about anything for the sake of politics, are “concerned” that Mukasey, rather than completely cowering and denouncing PC-torture-procedure-of-the-day, stated he’d rather look at each instance as it occurs to see what laws were broken. Imagine that, a lawyer who’d rather look at the facts as opposed to publicly pinning himself in a corner. How stupid can he be? Leahy and Biden could care less about circumstances, they want to define what the military can or can not do in a way that strikes back to the days of “the wall“. It was the pandering of the CIA director to a political flunky to the Attorney General that led to the events of 9/11. Biden and Leahy were here then. They should know as well or better than anyone what happens when politicians wank security and defense issues.
But that’s exactly what they are doing now. And no one is calling their bluff. They are trying to micro-manage our ability to collect information by pinning this entire nomination on one issue that is probably never used and very few people even know what it is. The next nomination, if Mukasey fails, will know they have to pander to Biden and Leahy in order to get the nomination. That scares me folks.
Even if we never do waterboarding ( whatever the hell that is ), I’d like for our enemies to at least think we did on a very regular basis. Biden and Leahy would like them to think that if they do get caught, they’ll get a vacation where they’re well-fed, rested, and primed and ready to go at it again.
That’s just stupid.
I’d be more concerned if I thought Biden had a ghost chance in hell of winning.
27
Oct
I have written a few times about Westboro Church. They are disgusting and abusing religion in the worst possible way. Well, one father of a slain soldier has had enough. Albert Snyder, father of Matthew Snyder, is suing Westboro for disrupting his son’s funeral. I am 100% in support of Albert’s lawsuit. However, he’s an average guy with somewhat limited resources and needs help.
You can help by going following this link.
Please do.
November 1, 2007 UPDATE: Snyder won his case! However, some are feeling that free speech advocacy might win out in the long run. However, this ain’t your typical free speech. This is verbal assaults intentionally aimed at the families of someone who has just died. Twenty-two states have placed limitations on these idiots because it so out of the expectations the Founding Fathers had in mind. They can say whatever the hell they please. But, there is no logical reason on this Earth that they should have the legal right to say it DURING and AT a funeral. None. Let them say it all day and night in Topeka Kansas. The Constitution does not guarantee the right to say what you want, WHERE you want. And, saying some things will get you in trouble. That’s already proven and accepted by the Supreme Court. Assaulting someone is not protected by the Constitution. Never has been.
That’s the headline you won’t see. This is what I’m referring to:
Now, some people are trying to explain this off as a reference to socio/economic situations as opposed to racial ones. But, that’s not what Joe says. He’s been around long enough to know what he’s saying. And, that’s what he said. Very clearly and succinctly. In order to make it a socio/economic comparison, and stay within Joe’s statement, one has to assume the minority population determine the socio/economic situation. Bottom line, it’s racist. So, let’s look at the socio/economic aspect to see real quicklike if that’s what he’s actually referring to since that seems to be the defense being thrown in his direction.
The gross state product per capita last year in DC was $136,714. This ranked #1 in all the land. The gross state product per capita for Iowa? $38,521, which ranked 23rd. What this says is this is what each person living in each location produced. Now, in order to produce $136,714 per person, you’ve got to have some people making a LOT of money and a whole lot of others making pretty good money. In order to produce $38,521, you’ve got some people making pretty good money, and a whole bunch making not a whole lot. I’ll put it this way, how many readers make $18 an hour? How many make $65 an hour? I live pretty well, I make a lot closer to Iowa than DC. Using another indicator, the unemployment rate in Iowa is probably 2% less than DC at the time of this post. However, the population density of Iowa is about 23 per square mile. The density of DC is about 9,300 per square mile. Bottom line, there’s a lot more opportunity ( see gross state product ) in DC than Iowa, but there’s a heck of a lot more competition ( see densities ). Needless to say, the cost of living in DC is profoundly higher than Iowa.
Now, I’ve never lived in Iowa, but I have lived in DC. The reason I left DC was because it seemed like you spent way too much time just existing there. A two mile commute to get home takes an hour in DC. A two mile commute to get home here ( and Iowa as well ), is about five minutes. In other words, the societal differences of spending time laughing and playing with your kids in a place like Iowa is a lot easier because you don’t spend so much time just doing the basic functions as you do in DC. Those two hours a day commuting in DC take away from any opportunity the parent would have had to spend quality time with their child. That’s not a minority issue. Whether that commuter is black, white, Hispanic, or whatever, that’s not a social issue. Now, they could choose to live in Iowa to eliminate that issue from their life, but then Iowa gets the credit and DC loses a good parent. Commuting time is simply one issue that makes life in Iowa a lot different than life in DC. There are many more.
But, the bottom line is there are very distinct differences between life in Iowa and life in DC or any city. That’s why people move to cities or leave them. That’s their choice. What Biden is assuming is all the negatives of city life are because there are more minorities there than in Iowa. As I have pointed out, the primary negative he points out can be just as easily argeud that the geography of any city is the culprit and not the racial make-up of that city. It’s a very simple and easy argument to make without bringing any aspect of race into it. But, Joe only sees the race issue. You know what that means dontcha?
Al Sharpton called for a national boycott on November 2 for reasons no one is particularly sure of. It’s being laughed off and dismissed by most people, including myself. The reason it’s being dismissed by most people is because he is wanting to punish corporate America for something no one knows what he’s talking about. In the meantime, something overt and obviously racial occurs, and Al totally dismisses it. As yet, I’ve not seen any condemnation from Jesse Jackson either. And, the ones I fully expect to hear nothing from are Harry Reid and of course, Nancy Pelosi.
Joe, like Byrd, will get a pass. He can’t be racist, he’s a Democrat. Just as DailyKos or Keith Olbermann.
25
Oct
I have been helping a friend of mine deal with Conseco Life Insurance over a small policy that pays a maximum of $70 a day for hospice type services. I can’t go into their personal details here due to HIPAA regulations. I also will not bore everyone with all the background of Conseco right now. I will do one thing tho, give just a little piece of advice:
IF YOU HAVE A CONSECO INSURANCE PRODUCT, CANCEL IT NOW!
You are wasting your money. Even if you have paid premiums for years, cut your losses and find something else. They will not pay the claim and instead will drag you through needless circles until you most likely die therefore nullifying the claim.
I am not the only one who feels this way.
I will gladly redact this post when I hear they are acting in a consumer appropriate manner.
I have written a lot on Louisiana’s propensity to condone corruption in their government. From governor to mayors to congressmen, it just seemed to be an accepted part of doing business. No matter how bad things got, they just kept sending the same people back. William Jefferson’s still there, Ray Nagin’s still there, Blanco decided not to run. I fully expected the same people to run someone else to keep the same old garbage going.
For once, Louisiana proved me wrong. They elected a very young, very upstanding ( apparently ), very honest young man of Indian decent. Bobby Jindal has been on the scene for a long time, which is pretty amazing considering he’s only 36 now. He’s been in the public spotlight and never has raised an eyebrow about his ethics. On top of that, he ran on an anti-corruption theme.
Now, our governor did the same thing here four years ago. He won, and was immediately attacked by those wanting to keep the status quo in place. In our case, that was the state attorney general. Things got messy real quick. We’ll see in a couple of weeks if the status quo will regain power or not. In the meantime, Kentucky has thrived quite well.
That can happen in Louisiana as well. When people know their money won’t be going directly to crooks like Ray Nagin, they’ll be a lot more likely to contribute to the local economy. You’ve got a good man Louisiana, I can see very good things coming for you all. Don’t let the bad ones ruin it as they have for a long time.
19
Oct
Well, it’s her ad about Bush’s trap door:
I have a couple of problems with this:
- It’s pure rhetoric for starters. She’s not saying one single word about HOW she’s going to build the middle class. IMO, the middle class is the hardest group to deal with because if someone’s rich, there’s no problem. If someone’s poor, just offer handouts like free medical coverage. The middle class? Well, they’re called middle class because they are everyone stuck in the middle. There’s too many to offer much of anything to, and a lot of them are on the edge financially, most often because of choices to be so. We’ve got tons of credit tossed in our laps every day. It’s that credit that puts us one disaster away from bankuptcy. But, if I want a big house or an expensive car that puts on that edge, that’s my choice. So, where’s the beef? What is she going to do to make my life better? Free gas? I hate commercials like this, obviously.
- Being as free choice is what puts most middle class who ARE in fiscal peril in that shape, anything she does offer will basically be stifling that free choice. Most people in middle class do have health insurance. She gonna make it cheaper somehow? The last time she tried, it just got LOTS more expensive. So, if a person is aware of history, and cares, they would realize very quickly, as I do, that the reason we are one health crisis away from bankruptcy if because of her. So, it only stands to reason if she attacks health insurance again, we’ll just be that much closer to bankruptcy. Not a terribly promising scenario for me, a member of the middle class.
- The middle class is just too big a chunk of voters to ignore. However, the only real effect a president has on the middle class by and large, and can be handled quick enough to make an immediate impact, is tax policy. Hillary has made no effort to extend the tax credits of 2001 and 2003 and openly opposed them at the time. Americans for Tax Reform give Hillary a score of 6.7 on her tax policies. Now, these people don’t believe in any tax. So, the higher the score, the better. 6.7 wouldn’t be so bad if 100 weren’t the top. To put it in simple perspective, Fred Thompson got 83.75. That’s only based on the legislation they’ve supported or not. That folks, is what they do.
Hillary’s talking vague here, with no substance at all, and a history of taxing the hell out of the middle class. Don’t give me the “taxing the rich” bull. It always falls on the middle class for the biggest part. While married to then President, they passed the largest increase in the history of the United States. The biggest part fell right on that middle class she wants to grow. If you can’t trust me, try real numbers. Here’s the Personal Chapter 7′s by year immediately preceding and following her last time in office:
1987 403473 �
1988 431231 7%�
1989 464375 8%�
1990 521358 12%�
1991 639504 23%�
1992 684866 7%�
1993 621071 -9% 54%
1994 571971 -8%�
1995 598250 5%�
1996 761652 27%�
1997 958045 26%�
1998 1026134 7%�
1999 959291 -7%�
2000 1262102 32%�
2001 1014137 -20% 151%
2002 1084336 7%�
2003 1177292 9%�
2004 1137958 -3%�
2005 1659017 46%�
2006 360890 -78% -64%
Now, given the 2005 and 2006 years are skewed because of changes in the law, the highest Bush got was 2003 at 1,137,958. That’s about 10% more than when he took office. All we’ve heard is how disastrous his fiscal policies have been. During the glory years of the Clintons, personal bankruptcies rose 151%. The Peaked out at 1,262,102 in 2000.
So, you sort of have to ask yourself, if Bush’s trap door has gotten the middle class one disaster away from bankruptcy, then why were more people going bankrupt when she was in charge?
This is nuts:
I got all kinds of problems with this.
- Who pays for the nurses and clinic space? I can only assume it’s the taxpayers of San Francisco. Probably with a little help from the taxpayers of California mixed in with a little more help by the taxpayers of the United States. I for one have absolutely no desire whatsoever to condone drug addiction. Addiction prevention and intervention, maybe. Pacifying addiction, no way in hell. That’s their path they chose to take, not mine. If they want to kill themselves, do it at their own expense. If I were living in San Francisco, a lawsuit would be flying to stop my money from abetting in a crime.
- They say they’re trying to curb the expense of overdose emergency hospital visits. There’s a much easier way to do it, if they have no insurance, and they’re overdosing from a situation they willfully got themselves into, leave them in the parking lot. Social medical care is for those that NEED it, not those that ABUSE it. When society gets that part straight, it will go a long way towards paying for SCHIP and other programs Pete Stark and Nancy Pelosi wants. We can’t solve every problem. What we can do is focus on the people who truly deserve it. Addicts can solve their own problems and not be a burden on society. Only their selfishness makes them a burden on the San Francisco health care system. Pandering to that selfishness only will make it worse.
- I work in the medical field at this time. We are required to report situations that are detrimental to a client’s welfare and report the problem to the appropriate agency that can help resolve the situation. Will these nurses be required to report these people to the various entities that could help them resolve their problem?
- How many of these people will be violating OTHER laws by going there such as parole and custody requirements? How many laws will have to be ignored in order to provide this service? To assume a heroin addict who has to rely on a public clinic to safely administer their hit is responsible in every other facet of life is a unrealistic leap that I’ll never be convinced of.
- How are these burdens oon society going to repay society for all the free services they expect? They’re just going to get free-heroin-assistance and walk away? Horrible plan. If they have nothing better to do than get stoned in the morning, they could be spending that time working for their heroin by cleaning up San Francisco or doing SOMETHING constructive. My bet is if they were expected to do something, they’d never show up.
- I can not believe you could find enough nurses in San Francisco that ethically could sit back and watch someone do that to their body. That’s not the ethical standards of any nurse. At least, that’s not what they teach in nursing in Kentucky. Here you’re taught to try to mitigate or eliminate the problem, not make it worse.
- There are drug addiction specialists here as well as anywhere, but I would think they’d be rather appalled at the idea of the government assisting losers in staying stoned. You want big brother, it couldn’t get any worse than this.
- In San Francisco, you can pretty much come to the conclusion that they have surrendered in the war on drugs. Pretty much exactly what Pete Stark and Nancy Pelosi want us to do in every war. That’s just not my gut instinct. If there’s a threat to my way of life and quality of life, I fight it. If I see it as a threat to my kid, I fight it even harder. For reasons completely alien to me, politicians from California seem to want to pacify it. Have they never dealt with the consequences of drug addiction in their life? I can’t imagine that they have not, and I can’t imagine, based on what’s going on in their back yard, that they have. I just truly can’t imagine what the leaders of San Francisco are thinking right now. I’m just glad they’re not here.
That’s probably enough for now. I know I could go on. This is a HORRID idea and if I lived anywhere near there I’d be suing on a myriad of legal reasons. If nothing else, I think I could easily have the nurses working there arrested for aiding and abetting in a crime. Using federal laws, all the FBI would have to do is walk in, find one drop of heroin, and all the assets of the clinic could be seized. Which, in this case, it needs to be.
Did I say this idea is horrible?
18
Oct
First, Nancy Pelosi promised to take her bi-partisan support and push the Armenian Genocide resolution to a vote. In the process, ignoring the advice of just about every concceivable branch of government that was having to deal with the consequences. It served no purpose, got no public support, and was panned mightily from ambassadors to military. When crunch time arrived, no vote. Her party got some sense and figured an 87 year old event wasn’t worth compromising the future.
Then, she led the charge to over-ride Bush’s veto of expanding the SCHIP program. This one had some legs. Providing health insurance to kids always sounds good. It’s a darling for liberals by socializing medicine and appeals to conservatives by taking care of children. Congress passed it, Bush vetoed it. With a very narrow Democrat margin, she only had to come up with a hand full of Republicans to over-ride the veto. As of today, that looks very unlikely.
Two very embarassing losses in one week.
Add on top of that I think most Americans think the tax incentives need to be kept and the fact that the tax-free internet protections are lapsing and I think the picture is becoming clear that this is a Congress that’s not going to get much of anything done.
Who will get the blame for that? Bush?
It should fall squarely in Nancy Pelosi’s lap.
But in most media, it won’t.
18
Oct
Kids at King Middle School in Portland Maine haveto be feeling pretty darn good about themselves. The school’s so concerned about their health and welfare that they are passing out birth control for those that feel the urge. I’m just totally stumped by this one. We’re talking 12-14 year olds. For the most part, I don’t think most 12 to 14 year olds really think about having sex that much at that point. Those that do, well, usually don’t do it AT school. In other words, it’s not a school function or responsibility. By making sure they’re well protected if they decide to, the school is condoning the act whether they intend to or not. By making access to birth control fairly easy and discreet, they can hide it from their parents that much easier and feel that much more confident about giving it a go. So, the effect of what King Middle School is doing is encouraging sex at a time when they should be educating kids on the consequences. Plus, there are more consequences of having sex than simply popping out a kid. Will the school/health department take care of those consequences as well? If one of their kids does get pregnant by not appropriately using the stuff the school gave them, can she sue the school for support? I just think this opens a whole can of worms the school’s not thinking about.
Scrappleface of course skewers the topic appropriately by pointing out another angle I hadn’t thought of. By handing out birth control at taxpayer’s expense, the school is showing preference of heterosexual activity over any other form of sexual activity. How does this make the gay 12 year olds feel? I see a sexual orientation discrimination lawsuit over this. In order to counter that, what will the school hand out to the 12 year old lesbians and gays?
This is a road the schools should not be going down. The road they should be going down is encouraging the kids to prosecute whoever they are having sex with. It is after all, illegal at that age.
If you’re through laughing, dig this:
Despite McKinney posting a letter on her Web site last month, saying she is not interested in the Green Party nomination, a group called “Run! Cynthia! Run!” is trying to draft her as a candidate in California. McKinney and six other Green Party candidates, including Ralph Nader were nominated by the Green Party Convention in September, and McKinney has yet to remove her name from the ballot.
“‘She’s got us all guessing, but she hasn’t removed her name, and that’s a good sign,’ said John Morton, a California Green Party delegate, ‘I talked to her last week and she said she’s very interested but not ready to make an announcement.’”
Now, I’m laughing this off as the joke it truly is. However, sometimes I’m wrong and underestimate people’s ability. So, let’s see how wrong I am on this one:
