15
Apr
Got this via email, loved it:
A cowboy named Bud was overseeing his herd in a remote mountainous pasture in California when suddenly a brand-new BMW advanced toward him out of a cloud of dust.
The driver, a young man in a Brioni suit, Gucci shoes, RayBan sunglasses and YSL tie, leaned out the window and asked the cowboy, “If I tell you exactly how many cows and calves you have in your herd, Will you give me a calf?”
Bud looks at the man, obviously a yuppie, then looks at his peacefully grazing herd and calmly answers, “Sure, Why not?”
The yuppie parks his car, whips out his Dell notebook computer, connects it to his Cingular RAZR V3 cell phone, and surfs to a NASA page on the Internet, where he calls up a GPS satellite to get an exact fix on his location which he then feeds to another NASA satellite that scans the area in an ultra-high-resolution photo..
The young man then opens the digital photo in Adobe Photoshop and exports it to an image processing facility in Hamburg , Germany .
Within seconds, he receives an email on his Palm Pilot that the image has been processed and the data stored. He then accesses an MS-SQL database through an ODBC connected Excel spreadsheet with email on his Blackberry and, after a few minutes, receives a response.
Finally, he prints out a full-color, 150-page report on his hi-tec h, miniaturized HP LaserJet printer, turns to the cowboy and says, “You have exactly 1,586 cows and calves.”
“That’s right. Well, I guess you can take one of my calves,” says Bud.
He watches the young man select one of the animals and looks on with amusement as the young man stuffs it into the trunk of his car.
Then the Bud says to the young man, “Hey, if I can tell you exactly what your business is, will you give me back my calf?”
The young man thinks about it for a second and then says, “Okay, why not?”
“You’re a Congressman for the U.S. Government”, says Bud.
“Wow! That’s correct,” says the yuppie, “but how did you guess that?”
“No guessing required.” answered the cowboy. “You showed up here even though nobody called you; you want to get paid for an answer I already knew, to a question I never asked. You used millions of dollars worth of equipment trying to show me how much smarter than me you are; and you don’t know a thing about how working people make a living – or about cows, for that matter. This is a herd of sheep. ……
Now give me back my dog.
23
Feb
Just got the numbers for the Medicaid add-on from the stimulus package. I don’t deal with Medicaid directly, but it indirectly affects what I do in a large way. As such, I was interested in the numbers. However, the bigger picture bugged me more than the dollars I was assigned to look at. In essence, Barack Obama has preached bipartisanship. With the stimulus debate, although the Republicans were not allowed direct input into the final package, they were expected to vote for it purely in the spirit of bipartisanship. Now, bipartisanship goes a lot deeper than just simply voting as expected. Partisan politics permeates the entire government system. Now, if Obama wants bipartisan support from the Republicans, he needs to enforce bipartisanship throughout his administration. Given that, this is what bugged me. Here’s the breakdown of the Medicaid Add-on state by state with some additional data tossed in:
| State | Voted | Medicaid Add-on | Population | Avg Per Person | State Dev | |
| Alabama | McCain | $ 850,000,000 | 4,661,900 | $ 182.33 | $ (89.11) | -33% |
| Alaska | McCain | $ 220,000,000 | 686,293 | $ 320.56 | $ 49.13 | 18% |
| Arizona | McCain | $ 1,980,000,000 | 6,500,180 | $ 304.61 | $ 33.17 | 12% |
| Arkansas | McCain | $ 730,000,000 | 2,855,390 | $ 255.66 | $ (15.78) | -6% |
| California | Obama | $ 11,230,000,000 | 36,756,666 | $ 305.52 | $ 34.09 | 13% |
| Colorado | Obama | $ 880,000,000 | 4,939,456 | $ 178.16 | $ (93.28) | -34% |
| Connecticut | Obama | $ 1,320,000,000 | 3,501,252 | $ 377.01 | $ 105.57 | 39% |
| Delaware | Obama | $ 320,000,000 | 873,092 | $ 366.51 | $ 95.08 | 35% |
| District of Columbia | Obama | $ 300,000,000 | 591,833 | $ 506.90 | $ 235.46 | 87% |
| Florida | Obama | $ 4,390,000,000 | 18,328,340 | $ 239.52 | $ (31.92) | -12% |
| Georgia | McCain | $ 1,730,000,000 | 9,685,744 | $ 178.61 | $ (92.82) | -34% |
| Hawaii | Obama | $ 360,000,000 | 1,288,198 | $ 279.46 | $ 8.02 | 3% |
| Idaho | McCain | $ 300,000,000 | 1,523,816 | $ 196.87 | $ (74.56) | -27% |
| Illinois | Obama | $ 2,900,000,000 | 12,901,563 | $ 224.78 | $ (46.66) | -17% |
| Indiana | Obama | $ 1,440,000,000 | 6,376,792 | $ 225.82 | $ (45.62) | -17% |
| Iowa | Obama | $ 550,000,000 | 3,002,555 | $ 183.18 | $ (88.26) | -33% |
| Kansas | McCain | $ 450,000,000 | 2,802,134 | $ 160.59 | $(110.84) | -41% |
| Kentucky | McCain | $ 1,030,000,000 | 4,269,245 | $ 241.26 | $ (30.18) | -11% |
| Louisiana | McCain | $ 1,660,000,000 | 4,410,796 | $ 376.35 | $ 104.91 | 39% |
| Maine | Obama | $ 470,000,000 | 1,316,456 | $ 357.02 | $ 85.58 | 32% |
| Maryland | Obama | $ 1,630,000,000 | 5,633,597 | $ 289.34 | $ 17.90 | 7% |
| Massachusetts | Obama | $ 3,090,000,000 | 6,497,967 | $ 475.53 | $ 204.10 | 75% |
| Michigan | Obama | $ 2,270,000,000 | 10,003,422 | $ 226.92 | $ (44.51) | -16% |
| Minnesota | Obama | $ 2,030,000,000 | 5,220,393 | $ 388.86 | $ 117.42 | 43% |
| Mississippi | McCain | $ 790,000,000 | 2,938,618 | $ 268.83 | $ (2.60) | -1% |
| Missouri | McCain | $ 1,600,000,000 | 5,911,605 | $ 270.65 | $ (0.78) | 0% |
| Montana | McCain | $ 180,000,000 | 967,440 | $ 186.06 | $ (85.38) | -31% |
| Nebraska | McCain | $ 310,000,000 | 1,783,432 | $ 173.82 | $ (97.61) | -36% |
| Nevada | Obama | $ 450,000,000 | 2,600,167 | $ 173.07 | $ (98.37) | -36% |
| New Hampshire | Obama | $ 250,000,000 | 1,315,809 | $ 190.00 | $ (81.44) | -30% |
| New Jersey | Obama | $ 2,220,000,000 | 8,682,661 | $ 255.68 | $ (15.75) | -6% |
| New Mexico | Obama | $ 630,000,000 | 1,984,356 | $ 317.48 | $ 46.05 | 17% |
| New York | Obama | $ 12,650,000,000 | 19,490,297 | $ 649.04 | $ 377.60 | 139% |
| North Carolina | Obama | $ 2,350,000,000 | 9,222,414 | $ 254.81 | $ (16.62) | -6% |
| North Dakota | McCain | $ 110,000,000 | 641,481 | $ 171.48 | $ (99.96) | -37% |
| Ohio | Obama | $ 3,010,000,000 | 11,485,910 | $ 262.06 | $ (9.38) | -3% |
| Oklahoma | McCain | $ 960,000,000 | 3,642,361 | $ 263.57 | $ (7.87) | -3% |
| Oregon | Obama | $ 830,000,000 | 3,790,060 | $ 218.99 | $ (52.44) | -19% |
| Pennsylvania | Obama | $ 4,070,000,000 | 12,448,279 | $ 326.95 | $ 55.52 | 20% |
| Rhode Island | Obama | $ 470,000,000 | 1,050,788 | $ 447.28 | $ 175.85 | 65% |
| South Carolina | McCain | $ 860,000,000 | 4,479,800 | $ 191.97 | $ (79.46) | -29% |
| South Dakota | McCain | $ 120,000,000 | 804,194 | $ 149.22 | $(122.22) | -45% |
| Tennessee | McCain | $ 1,620,000,000 | 6,214,888 | $ 260.66 | $ (10.77) | -4% |
| Texas | McCain | $ 5,450,000,000 | 24,326,974 | $ 224.03 | $ (47.41) | -17% |
| Utah | McCain | $ 320,000,000 | 2,736,424 | $ 116.94 | $(154.50) | -57% |
| Vermont | Obama | $ 280,000,000 | 621,270 | $ 450.69 | $ 179.25 | 66% |
| Virginia | Obama | $ 1,470,000,000 | 7,769,089 | $ 189.21 | $ (82.23) | -30% |
| Washington | Obama | $ 2,060,000,000 | 6,549,224 | $ 314.54 | $ 43.10 | 16% |
| West Virginia | McCain | $ 450,000,000 | 1,814,468 | $ 248.01 | $ (23.43) | -9% |
| Wisconsin | Obama | $ 1,240,000,000 | 5,627,967 | $ 220.33 | $ (51.11) | -19% |
| Wyoming | McCain | $ 110,000,000 | 532,668 | $ 206.51 | $ (64.93) | -24% |
There are some deviations from the conclusion, but not many. To come to a simple conclusion of your own, just match the colors. See how many are red on the left side, and on the right. Then look to see how many are blue on the left, and blue on the right. Some conclusions from the Medicaid release:
- States that voted for Obama got over $65 billion in Medicaid funding. States that voted for McCain, $21 billion.
- States that voted for Obama averaged $403.36 per person. States that voted for McCain got $231.77.
- The state that got the most per capita is New York at $649.04, which went to Obama. The state that got the least per capita is Utah at $116.94, which went to McCain.
Draw your own conclusions. These are the numbers given to me by Medicaid. It can be argued that demographics and such mixed into the numbers. However, this is an add-on. It’s not the actual expenses per se. I don’t know what the actual criteria was for determining the add-on values. But, I just don’t think a person needing Medicaid assistance costs nearly five times as much in New York as they do in Utah. If that truly is the case, then we need to start moving those people to cheaper places. However, before we go to that extreme, I’m gonna guess it doesn’t really cost five times as much and something else affected those numbers.
Think about that the next time Obama preaches about bipartisanship.
26
Jan
One of Obama’s first actions is to restore the auto emissions waivers for several states that requested them under Bush. Bush said no, because mainly they were unenforceable. Those states include:
- California
- Connecticut
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- New Jersey
- New York
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- Vermont
- Washington
Now, the issue I have would be better reflected with a map I think:
Now, I am going to assume the waiver applies to cars manufactured in those states. It would be kind of difficult to apply it to autos previously manufactured or manufactured outside of those states, which most cars are. Although the laws of demand would dictate the higher standards of the the consumers in California, the laws of the land probably would dictate selling to the lowest possible standard and letting the buyer deal with the states. In other words, it would be a lot cheaper for the average person I’m sure to buy their car on Ebay and go get it than to pay for a car modified just for California. And, as some of those states try to outdo each other pandering to the global warming hysteria, how will automakers deal with the potentially wildly differing requirements of each state?
Now, these state in my opinion could have really gone full radical and done something I would have gotten a real kick out of, banning combustion engines entirely. Now, that WOULD have changed the world. But, they didn’t do that. They are simply dicking around with emissions. Big fat hairy deal. All automakers have to do is knock off another 10 or 20 horsepower and they probably will satiate the enviro-whackos. I don’t see them pursuing this issue any more than they have now that they’ve made their statement. It’s just hard to do. All the automakers have to do is cruise down an interstate at 35 mph and they will get their 43.7 mpg. What no one can do is dictate how the average driver will drive their 43.7 mpg auto once they’ve got it. So, setting some bogus standard that determines what’s efficient or not is meaningless when you’ve got the intangible of human nature.
So, come you guys, do something real. If you don’t like the effects of burning gas, go full radical or just quit whining about it. Dicking around with standards ain’t gonna do squat. Go full radical, ban combustion engines!
That’s the argument being made today after the collapse of the Big Three bailout. For the record, it came because UAW refused to bargain.
Now, this argument is so bogus it’s amazing. People are actually debating this issue as if it’s fact. One of the states being singled out is Kentucky because of Mitch McConnell. Now, I know Kentucky kinda well. What people are not wanting everyone to know is Toyota isn’t the only car manufacturer here.
Ever seen one of these?
That folks, is a Kentucky car. GM only makes Corvettes in Kentucky.
Ever seen one of these?
![2007-ford-explorer-front-view[1]](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3061/3102743672_8eeac54fe8.jpg)
That folks, is another Kentucky only car.
So, don’t feed me the bull that Kentucky Republicans don’t have to worry about GM or Ford because we have one Toyota plant. The facts are totally against that and the media’s not too concerned about making sure people making that argument are corrected.
The real reason GM is in the shape it’s in is not because Kentucky Republican Senators are against making sure union dues are made by people making on average triple what I do to put a nut on a screw, it’s because people in California will not buy American made cars. Mitch McConnell writing the UAW a check for $15 billion will not fix that.
Earleir this year, Ford announced the KENTUCKY plant that makes the massive Explorer SUV’s will be re-tooled to manufacture alternative fuel cars. GM has already done that to some degree at the KENTUCKY plant that manufacters the $80,000, 8 mpg sportscar. A big part of the domestic auto manufacturing future is in Kentucky. So, the argument that Kentucky Republicans have nothing to lose by opposing this bill is completely bogus. We have a lot of jobs invested here. Some people, me included, know that for those jobs to be there in the future, “Detroit” is going to have to adjust their business model to be more competitve, and people in California will have to adjust their attitude that anything made in the US sucks.
When that happens, then I expect my Republican Senators will have a much different outlook. And, when that happens, the Big Three won’t be begging for handouts.
This to me is one of the biggest legal travesties I’ve witnessed in a long time. Jose Luis Nazario served his country in the marines. He saw basically hand to hand combat. He got shot at. He shot at others. He did all the things normally expected during live combat in a war where the other guy’s intention is to kill him. He survived.
Then, he came home and things got tough.
Nazario was charged with voluntary manslaughter, assault with a deadly weapon and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.
That “crime” was serving in the US Marine Corps.
The real crime in my opinion was committed by the State of California ( where else would anyone expect this to happen? ). In this state it would be called something along the lines of corruption of justice, and something along the lines of criminal coercion. To wit:
The message I think whoever the idiot was that instigated this lawsuit is trying to send is if you commit what would have been a civilian crime while serving in the military anywhere on Earth, California is gonna prosecute you. They’re gonna lose, but they’re gonna wreck your life in the process. If you live in California and wanna join the military, best not to return there.
That folks, is just extortion pure and simple.
I think Mr. Nazario has a case for suing the hell out of the state of California. How many legitimate lawsuits are filed by states against individuals where there is no victim, no evidence, no willing accuser, and no witness?
The jury even wept when the verdict was rendered. They knew how incredibly bogus this personal legal vendetta was.
Californians, you all have a serious problem going on. What you just witnessed in Riverside is BIG BROTHER
Has anyone asked what would happen if the California attorney generals decided your political views are no longer acceptable to them?
What happened to Jose needs to induce outrage and protests all over San Francisco and the usual places in California that love to be outraged. But, since the victim was a military person, you won’t hear a peep.
And by stuck, I do mean stuck. Nancy Pelosi has agreed to take into consideration four bills aimed at energy relief next week. One item she absolutely will not even debate or discuss is offshore drilling. Her logic? Get this:
That folks, is the reason we should not get oil lying in the middle of nothing. Now I, along with most supporters of offshore drilling, do not think it’s the single bullet solution to a huge problem. However, when you take resources off the table, it just simply limits that resource. By adding offshore drilling, you just simply add another resource to those available.
If that’s not stupid enough, her response to any mention of Iraq is “….President Bush’s failed policy in Iraq.”
On Bush endorsing McCain, “Bush’s endorsement “was appropriate,” she said, “because [McCain] has endorsed whatever George Bush has wanted, whether it’s his failed economic policies, or his failed policy in Iraq.”
Every time she decides she doesn’t want to do something, it’s because of “Bush’s failed policies”.
Now, how’s about this, instead of reciting the same damn thing over, and over, and over, Pelosi gives us an actual reason why she thinks intentionally limiting the supply of oil won’t continue to hurt us? In this particular situation especially, she’s just flat out lying to the public. And no one really seems to be calling her hand on it. Maybe it’s because her logic is screwed up even Bill O’Reilly can’t seperate facts from her rhetoric. To be specific, the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee is where the original debate began. Don’t bother looking to see who’s currently on the Marine and Fisheries Committee, it was eliminated over a decade ago. They presented their committee report to open oil exploration in ANWR in 1988. In 1995, drilling was approved by Congress, but Clinton vetoed it. In fact, he vetoed the entire budget largely on account of ANWR.
So, Nancy Pelosi, if Congress has been debating ANWR for twenty years, and have NEVER TRIED IT, how is this “another failed policy that has left the United States more reliant on energy imports? It would seem to me, that if we had mined the oil, then her argument would have something to it. But, to have never done it and declare something never done as a “failed policy” is just mind-boggingly stupid. And then, to use that double-negative as “proof” of why adding supply to a market is a bad thing is just a slam-dunk in stupidity.
The #1 reason to vote Republican for Congress, regardless of how qualified that candidate may be, is to get Nancy Pelosi out of the rest of the United States’ hair. We can not afford this kind of stupidity right now. If you all want her in California, so be it. That’s their choice. I don’t want her ruining our lives everywhere else.
A lot is being made over another milestone in Iraq. The 4,000th US soldier died since the war started in 2003. That’s five years. That’s about 800 a year. That’s a lot. But, not much is being made over the perspective of this. For instance, about 2,000 people were killed in 2006 ( the most recent readily available data ). That’s just in California. From 2003 through 2006 more than three times as many Americans got killed in California than Iraq. Nationwide, 17,000 people were killed in the US in 2006. From 2003 until the end of 2006, 66,450 people have been killed in the US. Maybe the people worrying so much about the people who understood the risks and believe in what they are doing is for the good of man should worry a lot more about the people who don’t worry so much about the good of man living in their own neighborhoods.
Here’s my early morning list of the jerks of the day:
- Tom Bates, Mayor
- Calvin Fong
- Linda Maio
- Darryl Moore
- Maxwell Anderson
- Dona Spring
- Laurie Capitelli
- Betty Olds
- Kriss Worthington
- Gordon Wozniak
They all get it for abusing their position as a representative FOR Berkeley in order to embarass the rest of the country, which they do not represent.
If Berkeley feels so compelled to speak on behalf of someone in Kentucky, be assured that person in Kentucky is more than ready to speak on behalf of the Berkeley City Council and say they are completely bonkers and I object to their motions and resolutions via a Point of Order that the resolution is not germaine to the entity considering the resolution and therefore should be reconsindered and removed from the table.
Of course, from what I can tell, points of order are completely irrelevent in Berkeley.
Needless to say, I won’t be visiting Berkeley again any time soon. Someone let me know when they elect a City Council with some God given sense.
Whoopi Goldberg replaced Rosie Odonnell on The View. Rosie being gone is a good thing because Rosie seemed to rely on rhetoric, stupidity, and generalizations as a basis for most of “the views”. However, Whoopi’s been known to drop some stupid bombs of her own in the past. Apparently not much has changed by replacing Rosie with Whoopi as Whoopi dropped this stupid bomb yesterday:
“from where he comes from” in the South, dogfighting isn’t that unusual.
OK, for starters, dogfighting is NOT that common here. I’ve never been to one, I’ve never even heard of one. There was some cockfighting going on when I was younger, but that sort of lost it’s glamour about twenty years ago around here. Now, it probably still happens, but it’s rogue idiots doing it, not anything organized or anything. And, if caught, they will go to prison and that’s the end of it. In simple terms, it’s as condoned here as whereever Whoopi lives now. Dogfighting’s the same. It may happen here, but it’s probably more likely to happen in Los Angeles than here. Simple math makes it so, there’s more people in Los Angeles than a lot of the South combined.
Some simple facts here for Rosie Whoopi:
-
Some states have various aspects of dogfighting that are not prosecuted as felonies. Those are:
-
Sponsoring a dogfight: Idaho and Wyoming
-
Possessing fighting dogs: Georgia, Idaho, Nevada, New York, Texas, West Virginia, Wyoming
-
Being a spectator: Alaska, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
-
OK, the facts.
-
As far as sponsoring a fight, 100% of the non-felony states are NOT “where he comes from”.
-
As far as possessing fighting dogs, 71% of the non-felony states are NOT “where he comes from”.
-
As far as being a spectator, 80% of the non-felony states are NOT “where he came from”.
So, her generalization that it’s not that unusual “where he came from” is not in the least bit by existing laws. Now, laws might not reflect prevelance, but it does reflect public sentiment most usually. Especially in regards to social norms.
If Whoopi needs more evidence it’s not a “where he’s from” exclusive activity, here’s a headline from a couple of weeks ago with some pretty impressive numbers:
78, read seventy-eight, people busted in one sting. That wasn’t Georgia, that was San Francisco, California. That’s not where Vick’s from, that’s a lot closer to where Whoopi’s from.
She’s relying on stereotypes and rhetoric. That’s the same crap Rosie did. Try researching an issue before spewing it on public television. This garbage is what has kept the United States divided, not the political candidates. And, by pointing the finger in one direction only, it allows the places that still do condone this activity to some degree to continue doing so since there’s no public heat to do anything about it. Apparently one of those places is Whoopi’s back yard.
Barbara, you could have done so much better than this. Whoopi is apparently very stupid too. It’s gotten so consistent of late it’s starting to make me think this is the company Barbara chooses to associate with. One thing that is common down here is the phrase “birds of a feather”. Know-what-mean, Barbara?
In 2000, George W. Bush won the electoral college. He however, lost the popular vote. The election was so close that Al Gore challenged one state in an effort to change the outcome of the election. The only reason it was that close was because Gore focused on a hand full of huge electoral prizes and won most of them. Bush carried about 70% of the states, but that didn’t matter, most were small electoral prizes. Gore’s strategy I felt cheated most of America. It was smart mathematically, but nevertheless allows a candidate to ignore most of America and focus primarily on California, New York, and Texas. One vote more than the other candidate in those states and you got the whole prize. The entire representation of that state. That just ain’t right. Now, Republicans are sponsoring a change to the California electoral college that will dole out electoral votes based on the percentage of votes received. This is a win-win for all of America in my opinion. First of all, it forces Democrat candidates to work California as hard, if not harder, than they ever had to before. Most popular Democrat candidates could take California for granted, it’s just that urban, and that Democrat because of it. Now, taking Los Angeles will not guarantee 55 electoral votes. They’ll have to work all of California. It’s a win for the smaller states in the rest of the country as well. If the Democrat candidate knows they’re not going to get a 20 something electoral vote bonus for one extra vote in California, they’ll attempt to make up those votes elsewhere. That will force them to recognize the Idaho’s and Alaska’s.
I like this plan a lot. I have argued that the electoral college was designed with a purpose. A purpose I agree with. However, the sheer size and disproportionate population shifts have kind of undermined the college’s intent. Proportional college allotments will return it to it’s original intent. How a state assigns their college is up to them. So, it’s all within the intent of the Founding Fathers. This is a good plan California, I hope you all take it seriously. And, I think all states should follow their lead.
