Alvaro Vargas Llosa wrote an article for The Washington Post. For a very brief background of what happened circa 1977, Roman Polanski had sex with a thirteen year old girl. Rather than going to trial, Polanski plea-bargained to avoid prison. The judge in the case refused to accept the plea deal. Polasnki fled the USA and has been a fugitive since then. Over the weekend, Polanski was arrested in Switzerland. He will be extradited to the United States, sentenced, and sent to prison.
All of this led Alvaro Vargas Llosa to come to a conclusion that starts like this:
Roman Polanski, the famed film director arrested in Zurich under a U.S. extradition request, has a perverse ability to bring out the worst in the judicial system. He must be thinking that the characters in his legal rigmarole resemble those incomprehensible creatures in his masterpieces who tell us normality does not exist.
Makes a point something like this:
When his victim became an adult, she reached an arrangement with Polanski — with the backing of her family, who had initiated the case, she asked the courts to give it up. This made irrelevant the defense’s contention that the girl’s mother had encouraged the relationship.
And finishes with this:
One is tempted to suggest that Polanski should accept his extradition and face the court, where most factors point in his favor. This would allow the director to re-establish a relationship with a country he admires and where he has as many friends as he does in Europe. And yet he would be taking a huge gamble because nothing in his case is ever logical or normal. And the last thing you want, if you are Polanski, is for the film of your life to end like so many of the lives in your films.
All of this led a commentor called Lauren006 to post a reply so dead-on perfect I had to steal their entire comment in its entirity:
This column is grotesque on many levels. The author knows absolutely nothing about American law.(1) The statute of limitations became irrelevant when Polanski pleaded guilty; it only runs against the initial filing of charges. You cannot outrun the law by becoming a fugitive.
(2) A judge cannot “renege” on a plea bargain, which is exclusively between the prosecution and defendant. In fact, it is totally illegal for a judge to enter into any deal with either party. The prosecutor may have promised to recommend a probation-only sentence, but a judge is under no obligation whatsoever to apply this recommendation.
(3) No amount of judicial misconduct results in dismissal of criminal charges – at most, judicial misconduct gets you a new trial. Since Polanski gave up his right to a trial by pleading guilty, he would be sentenced by another judge rather than the one who committed misconduct (ex part communications). Since the original judge is dead, this is moot – he will be sentenced by a new judge anyway.
(4) The mother’s supposed “encouragement” of the victim’s association with Polanski is irrelevant, morally and legally, to Polanski’s autonomous decision to rape a child. Yes, America is so medieval that parents actually don’t have the authority to “consent” to sex on their children’s behalf!
The rape case against Polanski is not “futile”. It is virtually certain that he will be extradited, sentenced for statutory rape, and charged with his failure to appear for sentencing. Justice long overdue.
Three cheers to the Washington Post, for publishing these delusional ravings. Please, more support for child molesters in the future!
Damn straight Lauren! I have no clue at all what Llosa’s background is, but it most assuredly is not law. Clue here Polanski, no lawyer on this planet will have a chance in pulling off what Llosa suggests. When Polanski pled guilty and went on the lam, he ceded any effort to prove his innocence and pretty much assured the rest of the planet that he was most obviously guilty as hell. What boggles me even more is Llosa’s contention that because the mother now says it was OK by her, statuatory rape is no longer an issue.
Another thing that bugs me is people keep calling Polanski the “famed director”. Scratch Rosemary’s Baby and Chinatown, two movies I never liked or thought were the least bit average as far as directing goes, and Polanski is a nobody. The only reason he’s been “famed” for the last thirty years is for raping a thirteen year old and running and hiding. And the Washignton Post doesn’t think even that is a very big deal.
A similar lighting in 2008
The managers of the Empire State Building have decided to honor the Communist takeover of China by lighting the building in red and yellow. I just find it highly ironic, a bit stupid, and a whole lot of insensitivity, that the managers feel an urge to celebrate an oppressive government that led to mass killings in a city that is still dealing with the death of many of it’s citizens due to an oppressive culture.
Somehow, deep inside me, I really doubt these people would have been so eager to celebrate communism before this year.
OK, things are starting to get kinda creepy. Watch this one closely:
I’m waiting to see who claims this is a parody.
So far, no one is.
Waxman-Markey is the creme of every liberal’s crop of life control legislations. This thing affects every single aspect of life as you know it. Surprisingly, it’s not gotten anywhere. “Cap and trade” has sort of become synonoums with “taxing”. Now, I a cynic. I think Waxman-Markey is loonie. I have yet to have one single person explain to me exactly how it is that cap and trade actually eliminates any carbon that would have been eliminated anyway. But, the liberals continue to hammer it down everyone’s throats anyway because Henry Waxman wrote it.
Well, a strange thing happened on the way to Obama’s desk:
A competing bill from Barbara Boxer started making the rounds. I haven’t read a whole lot of it. It does carry the odd choice of costs tho:
To carry out this subsection, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary”.
In other words, there will be no discussion over what it costs.
It just gets worse from there.
Bigger problem I see is the problem with the healh care debate right now is no one seems to know what it is. There are multiple bills and well over 500 amendments. In the meantime, the people supporting Obama in general are just telling everyone else to shut up and take it. That’s not working. Now, looks like the same scenario is starting to unfold in the cap and trade, or rather global warming, or rather climate control debate.
29
Sep
Some people think this carries a political risk. Rio seems to be the perceived frontrunner. They’ve never held the Olympics. So, this would be a first for the Olympics. They like firsts. Brazil has brought athletic stars, political heavyweights, and bankers to assure them the financing is there. So, Obama is going in as the clean-up batter in the bottom of the ninth with the home team losing pretty badly I would think. However, he is very popular outside of the US. He is a first as well. That carries some weight as well. He could possibly hit a home run and pull this thing out. But, it’s a long shot.
Meanwhile, while Obama’s sticking his political butt out there to be shot at, this is what Chicago is doing to help Obama, and it’s own cause:
Way to go, Chicago.
So far, four have been arrested in the beating death of an honors student simply trying to get home. They knocked him out, and when he came to, beat him to death. That’s right, they beat him when he was down.
Prosecutors are looking for three more in the murder. That makes about seven. The still from this video clearly shows about thirteen. Now, just because some of them aren’t carrying a 2×4 doesn’t mean they’re not guilty as well.
What amazes me is this comment:
“They need to stop the crime, but when they do it, they need to get the right person,” Bacon said.
That is from the aunt of one of the kids arrested. What more evidence does this woman need? Her nephew is clearly a murdering animal. If she’s raising this kid, it’s her fault. He’s on film I imagine. The evidence is pretty out there in our faces. Whether her nephew was carrying the stick, he didn’t stop it. He was there. He let it happen. He’s as guilty as those that hit him with the stick and kicked him when he was down.
Bottom line, none of the people in this video have any respect whatsoever for anyone else’s safety or well-being. They have all committed murder in a morbid display of inhumanity. Currently Illinois has a moratorium on the death penalty. The argument is that evidence in some older cases was reversed, so no murder evidence could be fool-proof.
Governor Quinn, what more do you need?
This is all over the news. I’m going to guess it will be seen by the Olympic Site Committee as well. I’m also guessing, given all the pro’s for Rio, this might very well be the final nail for Chicago. If Chicago is not selected, it will be used to illustrate a weakened President Obama by his antagonists. An internationally weakened Obama will only bolster the ambitions of the Chavez’s, Ahmadinejad’s, and Bin Ladens of the world. In other words, this is not just another mindless murder in Chicago. It has ramifications. This is the impression a lot of people have of Chicago already. This picture, and video, just reinforces it.
It also, I hope ( but doubt ), helps some of these animals get the idea that this world is not isolated any more. Every move you make in a public place has the potential of being pictured. Mrs. Bacon would love to think that her nephew is a sweet kid simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Pictures show her nephew is a murdering, uncaring, inhuman animal, that quite frankly, needs to be put down for the safety of the rest of us. I have never bought the argument that the death penalty is a tool to deter future violators. It is simply a tool to protect the rest of us. These people just don’t need to be roaming the streets anywhere. They don’t need to be recruiting younger kids to become one of them.
In this case, I think Governor Quinn needs to lift the moratorium. It just get any clearer than this. And quite frankly, I’m not concerned with exactly who it was that dealt the fatal blow. They are all guilty in this case for not stopping it.
And don’t give me a bunch of crap about reforming these people. That’s too late.
25
Sep
This one screams of Greek tragedy. In 1998, Steve Nunn, as a state legislator and rising political star, co-sponsored a bill pretty much everyone in the Kentucky House co-sponsored. It was a bill that made committing murder by violating a protective order punishable by death.
A while ago, his former girlfriend asked for a protective order against Nunn. Last weekend, he shot and killed her.
Hassan Nemazee has been charged with all kinds of stuff of late. Basically, it’s now a charge of running a $292 million pyramid scheme. Not terribly sure how that’s different than Bernie Madoff’s ponzi scheme. But, I don’t really care. What I do care is Nancy Pelosi assuring everyone that all Republicans were corrupt, and all Democrats pure of heart. This week’s installment once again doesn’t involve just one Democrat, it involves bunches. Nemazee is charged with frauding banks for millions of dollars by faking and forging documents. He also was donating heavily to candidates. I’m guessing his assumption was they would keep the feds off his back. I really don’t think this ever works any more. But, it has implicated a lot of Democrats. So, I now expect Nancy Pelosi to demand the following candidates return the donations they received from Nemazee. I’m quite sure some have already. But, it’s nearly impossible to trace who has and who hasn’t. If they have, I apologize in advance and will welcome and corrections.
| Recipient | Total |
|---|---|
| Aydelott, Judy (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Begich, Mark (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Biden, Joseph R Jr (D) | $10,800.00 |
| Boxer, Barbara (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Brown, Sherrod (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Cantwell, Maria (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Casey, Bob (D) | $2,000.00 |
| Clinton, Hillary (D) | $19,500.00 |
| Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte (D) | $50,000.00 |
| Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D) | $141,700.00 |
| DNC Services Corp (D) | $7,100.00 |
| Durbin, Dick (D) | $2,000.00 |
| Emanuel, Rahm (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Ford, Harold E Jr (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Franken, Al (D) | $3,300.00 |
| Gillibrand, Kirsten (D) | $11,600.00 |
| Gillibrand, Kirsten (D) | $2,000.00 |
| Hagan, Kay R (D) | $1,000.00 |
| HILLPAC (D) | $10,000.00 |
| Iranian American PAC | $35,000.00 |
| Keeping America’s Promise (D) | $10,000.00 |
| Kerry, John (D) | $9,200.00 |
| Klobuchar, Amy (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Lamont, Ned (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Lautenberg, Frank R (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Levin, Carl (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Maloney, Carolyn B (D) | $10,600.00 |
| Martin, James Francis (D) | $1,000.00 |
| McCaskill, Claire (D) | $2,000.00 |
| Meehan, Marty (D) | $2,000.00 |
| Merkley, Jeff (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Murphy, Scott (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Nelson, Bill (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Obama, Barack (D) | $13,800.00 |
| Pryor, Mark (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Reed, Jack (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Reid, Harry (D) | $9,600.00 |
| Richardson, Bill (D) | $4,600.00 |
| Rockefeller, Jay (D) | $4,600.00 |
| Schumer, Charles E (D) | $4,800.00 |
| Shaheen, Jeanne (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Shahinfar, Darius (D) | $4,600.00 |
| Shays, Christopher (R) | $500.00 |
| Tester, Jon (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Tsongas, Niki (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Udall, Mark (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Udall, Tom (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Unite Our States (D) | $6,900.00 |
| Vilsack, Thomas J (D) | $2,300.00 |
| Webb, James (D) | $2,000.00 |
| Whitehouse, Sheldon (D) | $1,000.00 |
| Yassky, David (D) | $500.00 |
I can’t wait to see how quickly Nancy demands Howard Dean send back nearly $200,000. Any takers on it happening?
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed doesn’t particularly like being a prisoner in Guantanamo. Call it Gitmo if you wish. For about eight years, he had tons of supporters that didn’t want him in Gitmo either. Problem was, once Bush was out of office and Obama said he’d close it down, everyone forgot all about Gitmo. Once forgotten because Obama said it was closed, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is still there. Now, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed doesn’t get to stay there without a plan. So, occasionally, due to a rather bizarre set of legal shenanigans designed only to shut up pacifists, he has to plead his case to stay at Gitmo. He does this quite well. Not wishing to waste all his retirement money on legal fees, he makes this plea himself. This year’s plea was different in that instead of attacking Bush, he’s had to re-focus on Obama. Everyone used to love to pick on Bush, so his message got lost in the chorus. I thought his message this year was particularly unique. And, the responses to it even moreso. I’m not going to do Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s bidding and repeat his entire message here. I’m just going to focus on a couple of points that I think are relevant to issues that affect US citizens.
We went from the “dark ages” of Bush to “the black ages”. OK, anyone wanna guess why he thinks he’s in “the black ages”? Huh? Wanna? Clearly, in order to stay where Obama said he could not, he’s apparently flung out the race card. This is obvious race baiting. The response has been under-whelming.
Maureen Dowd immediately recognized that what Mohemmed stated had to be racially motivated since Mohammed was not a Democrat. Belonging to an organization that has discriminated against others for a thousand years certainly didn’t help Mohammed’s case with Dowd. She immediately points out Mohammed has to be a racist since Jim Clyburn didn’t say he wasn’t.
Once Hank, Jimmy, and Jim piled on Mohammed, MSNBC, CNN, and CBS all jumped in on the chorus. ABC didn’t realize it was a story for a couple of days after. Once they realized what was going on, they denied it was ever a story in the first place and left it up to the internets.
But, that was just the beginning of Mohammed’s problems. He also blurted out the unthinkable, he also said Obama lied.
At that point, of course, The Congressional Black Caucus introduced a resolution telling the world that it is not nice to call the President a liar and therefore should apologize repeatedly on national television. A few made the argument that if you didn’t support it, you had to be racist. Congress passed it.
No one asked why the prisoner that would not be held indefinitely at the place that was supposed to be closed immediately was even writing a letter to the military that was not supposed to be trying him in the first place.
I read a lot. I work in social services. I also live in the poorest Congressional District in the United States which is in one of the poorest states in the nation. So, needless to say, I’ve seen poverty and deal with it rather regularly. So, I took particular interest when I received this newsletter:
FRANKFORT, Ky. – Members of the Poverty Task Force held the first of their four meetings Monday in an effort to develop comprehensive anti-poverty legislation for the 2010 Regular Session General Assembly.
“The Bible says the poor will always be with us, but we have to try to take care of them,” said House Speaker Greg Stumbo, D-Prestonsburg, who is chairing the task force alongside Sen. Brandon Smith, R-Hazard.
The initial meeting was staged as an information-gathering exercise, with a presentation by Drs. James P. Ziliak and Richard Fording from the University of Kentucky’s Center for Poverty Research. The two professors introduced some statistics on the commonwealth’s comparative poverty before suggesting possible policy solutions.
One in six Kentuckians lived below the federal poverty line as of 2008, Fording said, the fourth highest rate among all states. “Keep in mind this doesn’t include the bulk of the recession,” he noted, indicating that current rates are likely to be even higher.
Certain demographics fare even worse, Fording said, with minorities, female-headed families, rural families, those with less than a high school education, and children all having higher rates. Ninety-five of the state’s 120 counties had child poverty rates of 20 percent or more as of 2007, and three counties had rates of more than 50 percent.
Sen. Robert Stivers, R-Manchester, noted that he represented two of those counties, and that the federal poverty threshold did not account for local differences in the cost of living. Ziliak acknowledged that there were some shortcomings in federal data, but that it proved useful in tracking trends.
Rep. Addia Wuchner, R-Burlington, pointed out that even in relatively well-to-do counties, there are pockets of poverty, and that effective programs are crucial in every county.
Among the programs tried by other states in reducing poverty are early education and home nurse visits, Ziliak said. “The seeds for dropping out (of high school) are planted earlier,” he remarked, and a high school education or more are crucial in the modern economy. Reaching children before they reach the age of 3 can have a tremendous impact on later achievement, he said.
Several lawmakers also said that additional opportunities for vocational education are essential to keep all students on a path toward personal prosperity. The UK researchers observed that workforce training helped boost the benefits of economic development subsidies to businesses as well.
Modernizing the tax code and establishing a state earned income tax credit could also result in more Kentuckians joining the work force, Ziliak said. Subsidies for child care and incentives for savings accounts could also help people lift themselves out of poverty, he said.
Expansion of broadband capability and other technology was a favorite of several legislators.
“The Internet provides access to information that the folks in the urban areas can get every day,” said Rep. Richard Henderson, D-Jeffersonville. Rep. Leslie Combs, D-Pikeville, remarked that in many poverty-stricken areas of the state, large service providers choose not to expand their service because it’s not cost-effective, and Kentuckians suffer as a result.
Lawmakers throughout the meeting suggested options and programs that have worked or could provide promise. “It’s becoming clear to me that a multi-field approach is critical,” said Rep. Kelly Flood, D-Lexington.
The panel also has meetings scheduled for Oct. 26, Nov. 16, and Dec. 1.
OK, so, we got legislators in one of the poorest states in the country meeting to discuss poverty. Right off the bat I see problems. First of all, the fact that there is poverty in Kentucky is not really something anyone needs to point out. It’s not like it’s been on national news over the last forty years or anything. Whenever Hollywood wants to make a movie with characters that are down on their luck and basically stupid, they were from Kentucky. So, for this group of esteemed lawmakers to suddenly feel a need to address poverty in Kentucky is rather amazing to me.
But it just seems to get worse once they did gather to discuss it. Greg Stumbo, known for not being a terribly righteous person, starts by quoting the Bible. I might add, he gets it wrong:
37“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’
That’s not implying the poor have to always be with us. It just simply says if you meet a person in need, do for them as you’d have them do for you. Then another legislator points out we need all kinds of social programs to help them. Daycare, welfare, etc. etc. In other words, if a young girl goes out and gets knocked up and drops out of high school, we’ll make sure she’s provided for. That’s BS. That’s enabling. That’s the reason we have entire communities gripped in poverty.
The simple fact is this is the 21st century. This committee has the concept that if you bring internet jobs to a bunch of people who never bothered to learn to read, they will suddenly become good employees. Not one single employer on this planet will take that chance. And for good reason. These people have developed a mentality that it’s fine and dandy living on the backs of others via social programs. Not one kid born in this country sets out to be a pregnant, unwed, drug addicted, teenager. They learn that it’s OK to be that as they grow up. Their parents got by. They can too. Our society has bent over backwards, even going so far now as to fabricate verses from the Bible, to show how sympathetic we are to those in need. Politicians climb over each other in desperate displays of sympathy knowing full well they are enabling the next generation of losers who will simply be fodder for the next generation of politicians. I have seen six young girls in high school get pregnant over the last year. Only one I give a chance of not being on welfare the rest of her life. Their parents for the most part could care less where these girls were so long as they weren’t in their hair. They are cranking out kids about as quickly as they can get laid. They could care less what the consequences are.
So, the situation is we’ve got people making up Bible verses to enable parents abandoning their responsibilities, which allows their kids to not understand what responsibility is, which just passes on the problem to the next generation and starts it all over again.
Some hard realities need to be addressed before this cycle is broken. Jobs are not the answer for those who see no value in working. Harsh, but I know this to be true. Some people just feel justified to mooch off everyone else because of (insert cop-out here). They don’t care if they are considered a failure. Teaching them to fish is a waste of time. They do however, screw around, do drugs, get drunk, do whatever they please whenever they see fit. I don’t get that luxury, I have to work to support my family. So, pardon me if I’m possibly the first person to come and state I’m sick and tired of those that don’t feel compelled to work. There are exceptions of course for those physically unable to work. But, if you can work, you should be.
A little history here. Pre-1960 or so, people went wherever they had to in order to work. There was no welfare. There were no food stamps. In that situation, children were a burden. If things got too bad at home, you went to large cities to get a job. Most of Kentucky went to Michigan and Ohio to work. There just weren’t any jobs. My grandfather came to this area by way of Alabama. He came here to work building bridges and sawmills. His children all left here for the most part to work. Sitting on your ass just wasn’t an option. You starved. People felt pity, but they had their own to feed.
Rule #1 to fight poverty, don’t reward laziness. We’ve gotten ourselves in a jam by doing that for forty years. Let’s not make it that much worse by creating even more programs to reward doing nothing.
Rule #2, don’t reward behaviors detrimental to society. If you’re living off the public, ie, my money, I just don’t think you’ve got what it takes to raise a kid. Sorry, but you’ve obviously not thought much about what you have to offer a kid. If that person wants to continue living off of me, get fixed. And, if they continue to live off me for more than, say, two years, give the kid to someone who doesn’t. There are lots of people desperate to adopt. I’d much rather they adopt our own than import third-world kids. And, I’d love to give that kid an idea that there are better things in this world to pursue than, well, what their mother obviously was pursuing.
Rule #3, if a guy fathers a child and doesn’t feel like supporting it, make him feel like it. Right now things are just too easy if the guy doesn’t want to deal with it. He just basically denies paternity, the mother doesn’t push it, he’s off the hook, and I am put on the hook. Screw that. If a girl cranks out a kid on the public dollar, that kid is automatically DNA’d and fingerprinted. If the couple is not terribly willing to identify that dad, the government will do it for them. When it does, that dad pays, period. If he’s on welfare, he’s docked whatever the benefit for that kid is. No exceptions.
Rule #4, when applying for benefits, when jobs are made available, don’t limit those jobs by location. If they have to move to another place to do the job, so be it. Give them a little extra for moving.
Rule #5, if you don’t pass high school, no drivers license. Period.
Rule #6, if you don’t pass high school or get a GED, no state or federal jobs. Period. Reserve those for those that do try.
Rule #7, LIMIT FOOD STAMPS TO ONLY THOSE FOODS DEEMED NECESSARY. No Coca Cola, only generic. No Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Nutter Butter. Only nature cereals, bread, corn, green beans, things like that. If they want to gorge themselves on sweets, get a job. In this day and age with grocery scanners, this is way too easy to do.
Rule #8, make sure they understand that only one kid will be provided for by us. If they get, say, $500 a month for childcare, that’s for one or ten. It’s very difficult to get young girls to understand the burdens and responsibilities of motherhood before they have kids. It’s a lot easier after the first.
Rule #9, give out condoms, birth control pills, sponges, and any conceivable birth control device to any kid receiving free lunches. Teach them how to have sex without cranking out accidental burdens. I’d go into that detail here, but, I’d enjoy that too much. The assumption unsupervised teens don’t get horny is about as stupid as having kids in high school.
Rule #10, double the tax credits for adopting US born children. It’s a very expensive process for the average person. If they can afford the process, they should be putting the kid in a better environment and most often appreciate that child a lot more than a mother that just had an accident. We should do everything we can to get that kid in a better environment.
Rule #11, do not allow a GED until that person has performed a bona-fide job requirement. These legislators think bringing the internet to these communities will help, but, people have to know how to even use the internet tools to be attractive to employers. Cruising Facebook just won’t do it. Make them compose a web page. Unless they are retarded, every single one of them can do it.
Rule #12, if someone’s receiving public assistance, require random blood screening. Make it hurt too. For a lot of people on assistance, this is their job. Hit their paycheck. Let them worry about the ramifications. I could care less if someone wants to get stoned on their own dime. I have real problems with an entire culture that feels they have the Constitutional Right to get stoned on my money.
Rule #13, penalize those that abandon family. It’s gotten so bad that in Kentucky, the state is pushing a program that rewards kids who abandon their indigent parents. Re-visit the moral implications of Consumer Directed Options, Stumbo. If the state has to provide for an indigent family member, then the state should dock the other family members for that expense. The annoying thing about that is that is already the law, the state just selectively enforces it.
Rule #14, don’t allow politicians to pander the issue unless they have a concrete plan to remove people from poverty. No one program is going to do it all. You see a situation, you address it. One of the biggest hurdles here in poverty stricken Appalachian Bible belt is drug abuse of every sort you can imagine. People are blowing themselves up to make meth. If you want a social program to address poverty, get these people off meth and other drugs. No internet company will ever hire them the way they are. If they don’t want to get off the drugs, cut off assistance. They’re killing themselves just a little more slowly and a lot more expensively if we simply abet and supplement their habit. Do interventions, rehab, drug-replacement programs, you name it, whatever it takes to get them back on their benefits until they can find a job. You lower the drug abuse rate, you lower the poverty rate. Period.
The reason we have the poverty levels we do right now has been vocalized by a lot of non-committees. We reward poverty. When we make it undesirable to live in poverty, poverty will lessen. It really is that simple. If kids become a burden, they will have fewer kids. It’s not that hard to do. It does however, require two things that our society seems to have completely abandoned over the years, sternness and personal responsibility. In most cases of a healthy young person on benefits, it really is their own damn fault.
22
Sep
Jimmy Carter, who blamed the most horrid economic policies in US history on the general public, has generally been a malaise since then. About once or twice a year, he takes jabs at the United States. I’m not sure if he’s had anything nice or relevant to say in the last thirty years. But, he’s sure had plenty of bad. The current debates over federal policy have opened the door for more Carter malaise:
Of course, he justifies that with the fact a lot of people refer to Obama being from Africa. That of course, has appealed to those that are quite sure racism affects everything and if you don’t agree with them 100% all the time, it’s because you’re racist. It of course, has nothing to do with his trip to Africa during the election or his father.
One black man has figured out what’s happened over the last twelve months:
Whatcha think about that Jimmy? Now, Carter’s point was there are some, not all, that are so racist they can’t accept a black President. And because of that, they’ll never support any of his proposals. Now, there are some, not all, who refuse to believe 9/11 was actually carried out by radical Muslims. Charlie Sheen comes to mind. And, there are some, not all, who believe we’ve never been to the Moon. There is no need for me to mention those people in regards to health care debate or cap and trade. They are not relevant to the discussion of the issue itself. Marginalizing them serves no purpose. So, again, what was the point of Jimmy saying what he did? What is the point of people agreeing with him? I’m going to toss out a profound concept here, you all can do with it whatever you like. Just, if you would, give attribution. I’d really love to hear Jimmy’s take on it, but I know I won’t. OK? Here goes:
What if there are people who don’t like having a black President, but still don’t agree with the health care proposals, cap and trade, or other major economic issues being debated? Are their opinions any less relevant than if they felt like electing a man to be President only because he is black?
And you know what, I know a few people who did just that. That’s just as racist, and most likely those people support his policies no matter how bad they may be. And, since, as Obama pointed out, he won the election, it can be argued there are most likely more of them than there are the people Jimmy says exists.
But, I know, Jimmy will never grasp that concept. It’s just so, not, 60′s.
