digitalBLOG

A Leave of Absence

2006-07-24T22:51:00.000-05:00

My professional writing must take precedence, and I'm sad to say I will have to take a leave of absence from blogging to handle those responsibilities. Well, I haven't really blogged consistently for awhile, so it's more like I'm officially taking a leave of absence.

I'd like to thank everyone who read my comments and participated in the process of blogging about national events from lil ole Warrensburg. After all, the rest of the world deserves our opinion.

Please continue to read about Warrensburg on digitalburg dot com. I'm off to create news so SEE YA!

Money to Mexico

2006-07-05T07:32:00.000-05:00

I just heard on the news that the Senate is dead set to allow amnesty for illegal aliens. The House, on the other hand, does not want to allow amnesty until after they have dealt with border enforcement issues.

The other day when I was in Parker's, a local grocery store where I live, I saw two people sending money via Western Union from the customer service desk.

If we can track money sent around the world by terrorists, can't we devise a system to prevent transfers of money earned illegally by aliens in the U.S. and sent back to Mexico.

We confiscate money under RICO statutes illegally earned from drug transactions. Perhaps these same standards could be employed in confiscating money from illegally earned wages.

If we get to the root of the problem by taking away their ability to use the money, economic advantages in the U.S. goes away through enforcement. At the very least, the U.S. sets the tone that its immigration policies must be followed. Maybe they could even get back some of the illegally earned money and offset the costs of border enforcement.

THEN Senator Arlen Specter could get his immigration quotas raised.

What Missouri's Eminent Domain Law Should Say

2006-06-24T08:05:00.000-05:00

By way of response to critics of the Supreme Court decision in Kelo last year, the Bush administration issued an executive order limiting private property confiscation by the federal government for non-public uses. (In Kelo, the Supreme Court allowed the states to take private property in a "blighted" area to be used by a developer for a commercial development.)

Executive Order: Protecting the Property Rights of the American People
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to strengthen the rights of the American people against the taking of their private property, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the Federal Government to situations in which the taking is for public use, with just compensation, and for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.

Sec. 2. Implementation. (a) The Attorney General shall:

(i) issue instructions to the heads of departments and agencies to implement the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; and

(ii) monitor takings by departments and agencies for compliance with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(b) Heads of departments and agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law:

(i) comply with instructions issued under subsection (a)(i); and

(ii) provide to the Attorney General such information as the Attorney General determines necessary to carry out subsection (a)(ii).

Sec. 3. Specific Exclusions. Nothing in this order shall be construed to prohibit a taking of private property by the Federal Government, that otherwise complies with applicable law, for the purpose of:

(a) public ownership or exclusive use of the property by the public, such as for a public medical facility, roadway, park, forest, governmental office building, or military reservation;

(b) projects designated for public, common carrier, public transportation, or public utility use, including those for which a fee is assessed, that serve the general public and are subject to regulation by a governmental entity;

c) conveying the property to a nongovernmental entity, such as a telecommunications or transportation common carrier, that makes the property available for use by the general public as of right;

(d) preventing or mitigating a harmful use of land that constitutes a threat to public health, safety, or the environment;

(e) acquiring abandoned property;

(f) quieting title to real property;

(g) acquiring ownership or use by a public utility;

(h) facilitating the disposal or exchange of Federal property; or

(i) meeting military, law enforcement, public safety, public transportation, or public health emergencies.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order shall be implemented in a manner consistent with Executive Order 12630 of March 15, 1988.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 23, 2006.

Jesse Jackson's Extortion

2006-06-14T17:40:00.000-05:00

Jesse Jackson has once again thrown down the challenge that a national company doesn't do enough for African Americans. Threatening to boycott BP, the international oil giant, doesn't seem to scare him at all!

Here's how it works:

1. Jackson gets national media attention because AAs support the Democrat Party, and the media primarily supports the Democrat Party. Therefore, the media gives Jackson a platform.

2. Jackson uses his national media platform to threaten large multinationals with a boycott because they don't hire enough AAs.

3. Jackson goes away if the large multinational he's targeting happens to pony up $150,000 for a Platinum Sponsorhip of Rainbow Coalition, Jackson's slush fund for all his activities.

The only problem with Jackson's discrimination claim is that BP has more AA station owners and managers than the percentage in the general population. BP also has two AA board members.

BP's main problem is that they haven't given the $150k for a platinum sponsorship! You just wait... they will. It's soooo much cheaper than fighting Jackson in the media. Besides, there's all those great golf tournaments (or whatever) a corporation gets for being a platinum sponsor.

What you don't notice about "Ground Breakers"

2006-06-10T09:31:00.000-05:00

Maybe I was a corporate employee for too long before I set off into the world as an independent contractor. While watching Ground Breakers this Saturday morning (also reading High Plains Tango by Robert James Waller with one eye and reading through about six hundred blogs trying to decide whether to change the mix on my other website with the second eye), I realized something that I noticed before but couldn't put my finger on.

Ground Breakers, for those who do don't do the nesting thing vicariously first through the shows on HGTV, takes an "estate quality" home and landscapes the hell out of it. These homes appear to be inherited after grandpa so and so died, and he just happened to be a senator or some other sort of criminal... or perhaps a partner at a major law firm... or some other sort of criminal.

Having done what passes for substantial landscaping in my small burg, I would guess that most of the landscaping jobs require a minimum of $30,000.

One of the observations is that Joe Washington, the show's host, was originally in radio or something (based on his voice). He probably did not go to school with any of the people who do the landscaping to their estate-quality homes (watch the show and you'll know what I mean).

The second observation is that these homes are usually somewhere around Atlanta, judging from the accents, on occasion, and the red clay they're always moving around. It makes sense, too, because they can do these projects during a longer time period throughout the year (which promotes easy filming schedules).

The third observation is that the people on the show ALWAYS look the same. It's as if Ole Miss, University of Georgia, Citadel, or wherever the heck they went for their education taught them all how to dress so that they could be part of modern Southern culture... much as Colonel Sanders must have received an education that said chicken salesmen must wear white suits and have a funky chin-beard.

Just in case you don't watch the show, the uniform for the Southern corporate clone shooting a TV show in their back yard requires khaki pants with either a non-descript, monochromatic long-sleeve shirt (maroon, green or blue seem to be preferred colors) or a non-descript, monochromatic short-sleeve pique pullover (maroon, green or blue seem to be preferred colors). The shoes must be brown, oiled, leather.

I remembered back to a prior marriage to a girl from Jackson, Ms. Her stepfather graduated from Ole Miss and, at the age of about 65, still spoke of it as if he had no other life experiences. He still hung out with friends who went to Ole Miss about the same time. Her ex-husband was an engineer at Enersys and wore... khakis with a monochromatic maroon, green or blue shirt.

No other way to explain writers like Walker Percy, Tennessee Williams, etc. as going completely crazy... they lived in a very strange environment.

The other thing that the civilising environments of Southern University must teach is to often use the person's name you're talking to. Maybe it's just a placeholder so that you don't forget who you're talking to while saying nothing about nothing.

Conversations then end up sounding sort of like hearing the role call from the class you and your friend had together at the civilized Southern University.

I understand the whole khaki and monochrome thing, actually. I wear khakis a LOT, at least when I'm trying to impose an air of reliability and inter-generational stability. And much like my ex-wife's engineer husband who received his education at a Southern University... I prefer Duck Head.

Al Gore and the Environment

2006-06-06T19:01:00.000-05:00

I love it when CNN annoints Al Gore as an "expert" on the environment. (You couldn't see it, but I rolled my eyes and shook my head.)

Well, earth has been in the balance for going on 30 years now. Al Gore continues to do his part upsetting the precarious environmental balance by jetting across the world and driving in huge SUV caravans to deliver his message about global warming in the new book and movie tie-together "An Inconvenient Truth."

The only truth of concern here is that change happens. The snows of Kilimanjaro may be melting, and might have been melting whether humans were on the planet or no. In 300 years or so, they may be concerned that the earth is freezing. Who knows.

I am sadly old enough to remember when one of the national pander magazines touted the next "global ice age" in the mid-70s.

Here's an interesting question: If we have much more sensitive thermometers and such, purchased with the billions given to global warming theorists, what temperatures are they measuring against to determine that the earth has warmed by 1 degrees in the last 140 years? Maybe the older instruments just didn't get it quite right, eh?

Remember that ozone hole that would supposedly subject everyone to skin cancer? Where did that go?

Other experts on the opposite side of the question from Al Gore point to widely fluctuating temperatures throughout history.

The point is, we don't get to hear most of the opposition to global warming theorists because it's so darn fun to glamorize humans as victims of our own success... if you're a Democrat. The Republicans can be equally stupid on other issues, but the global warming fallacy totally belongs to the tree-hugging environmentalists coddled by left-leaning Democrats.

Maybe it's concrete exposed in the cities that hold the heat, rather than the autos producing CO2 emissions. Maybe we should advocate tearing down Park Avenue penthouses in an effort to reduce hot spots on heat sensitive photos of earth.

Mud huts are much cooler by comparison.

Look around and I'm sure you'll find many experts willing to testify against the global warming theorists. They don't get much funding though, do they? Maybe promoting global warming hysteria provides another method for government to take money from us and give it to someone else so that they maintain power over each of us.

Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate by scientist (contrasted with "idiot" Al Gore) S. Fred Singer puts quite a lot of the global warming "evidence" into perspective. Singer runs the Science and Environment Policy Project trying to set some of these fallacies straight. Gore is such a genius on cause and effect, by the way, that he shut down his family's tobacco farm AFTER his sister died of lung cancer!

Dr. William Gray of Colorado State University also opposes the global warming fallacies surrounding us in the media. Who? Exactly my point. Read this Denver Post article for an overview: http://www.denverpost.com/harsanyi/ci_3899807

We can't forecast tomorrow's weather. What makes any of them think they can forecast 10 years from now.

What's in a disease?

2006-06-06T18:53:00.000-05:00

Alcoholism is a disease. Obesity is a disease. Blah Blah Blah.

Diseases occur when OUTSIDE organisms enter the body. Everything else is an affliction. Unfortunately for doctors, afflictions were more difficult to get insurance to pay for. The American Medical Association then defined whatever they wanted to as a disease so that their members could get reimbursement from an insurance company for treating (at least) the symptoms.

Harmful chemicals entering the body do not create a disease, although they may weaken internal systems to the point where disease can take hold.

Getting fat faster than others is not a disease.

Getting addicted to alcohol or drugs is not a disease.

Arthritis is a disease. Aids is a disease. Polio is a disease. Cancer is a disease.

Now that they've coded the last genome, let's get some action on curing real diseases. The rest of it probably best rests with the shrinks.

Tax Incentives Corrupt Local Government

2006-06-01T10:52:00.000-05:00

I usually blog about national topics, but this one was too good to pass up.

From a Gov. Matt Blunt press release:

Gov. Matt Blunt today announced that Higginsville Senior Center will receive over $147,000 in state tax credits for the center’s Higginsville Youth Center project.

The Higginsville Senior Center is expected to leverage up to at least $295,480 in local contributions to help fund the project, which will renovate a portion of the senior center into a youth center offering fitness, recreation and opportunities for positive development for youth.

So local voters won't approve a youth center in Higginsville? No problem... just convert part of your existing senior center to a youth center, with a few hundred thousand in tax credits.

What if we thought Missouri should spend its money on roads and infrastructure rather than tax credits for a Higginsville youth center... clearly a local issue?

Too bad for us.

Sen. Harry Reid

2006-05-31T15:10:00.000-05:00

From the New York Times (May 29):

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, accepted free ringside tickets from the Nevada State Athletic Commission to three professional boxing matches while the agency was trying to influence him on the federal regulation of boxing.

Mr. Reid took the free seats for Las Vegas fights from 2003 to 2005 as he was pressing legislation to increase government oversight of the sport, including the creation of a federal boxing commission that Nevada's agency feared might usurp its authority.

Mr. Reid defended the gifts, saying that they would never influence his position on the bill and that he was simply trying to learn how the legislation might affect an important industry in his home state. "Anyone from Nevada would say, 'I'm glad he is there taking care of the state's No. 1 businesses,' " he said.

I wonder if he thought about having members of the boxing commission come up to Washington for a sit down if learning about the sport was so darn important to him.

No Illegal Alien Left Behind

2006-05-26T07:07:00.000-05:00

Can you imagine if the IRS came to you after not paying taxes for five years and said, "Why don't you just choose three of the last five years to pay on. Oh! And, by the way, we'll believe whatever number you give us for your earnings over those three years."

Well, that's just one of the truly RIDICULOUS provisions of the Senate's version of the immigration legislation, according to Fox News and the AP. Since no senator's seat is in jeopardy in this year's elections, I guess they aren't worried about how much money they spend or how repugnant their legislation.

While most Republicans didn't vote for the bill, most Democrat Party senators did.

Here are a few more of the provisions of the Senate bill going to the House for reconciliation with their bill:

1. Illegal aliens, once legal, will be able to bring over ANY number of family members.

2. Illegal aliens, once legal, will be able to attend any state university and pay only in-state tuition.

To their credit, the Senate also passed another bill on May 18, according to the New York Times:

The Senate voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to bar illegal immigrants convicted of a felony or three misdemeanors from having a chance at citizenship and to add hundreds of miles of fencing along the Mexican border.

Prominent Republican Senators voting in favor of the liberal bill passed Wednesday were, according to NewsMax.com:

Four of five potential GOP presidential candidates - Brownback, McCain, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee - are betting the wiser vote is in favor of the bill.

Missouri's Senator Talent, in a newsletter he periodically sends out, stated that he voted against the bill:

The bill is estimated to cost 54 billion dollars over the next 10 years. I can’t see how we can ask the American tax payer to cover the price tag for this proposal to pay for foreign workers whom our economy may not even need and put at risk programs that Missourians rely upon like Medicare and Medicaid.

Right on, Jim!

Attorney General and Prosecuting Journalists

2006-05-22T06:54:00.000-05:00

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales thinks its okay to prosecute journalists that publish leaks that could jeopardize national security. The only problem is that prosecuting these journalists would require that the government disclose the national security issue the leak jeopardized. Or maybe he thinks he can prosecute for jeopardizing national security without ever actually DISCLOSING what issue the leak jeopardized!

The article goes on to paraphrase and partially quote Gonzales:

"But he added that the First Amendment right of a free press should not be absolute when it comes to national security. If the government's probe into the NSA leak turns up criminal activity, prosecutors have an "obligation to enforce the law."

A FREE press is a free press. That's in the Constitution. Any law that violates the constitution, such as a law that forces prosecution of the press for actually publishing something, is by definition unconstitutional.

THE very reason we have a free press is to keep government honest. If we allow them to prosecute journalists for publishing something leaked to the press, then we jeopardize our form of government.

Especially if the government gets to decide, without actually telling why, that the press jeopardized national security.

National Guard Patrolling Against Illegals

2006-05-14T09:35:00.000-05:00

I like Arnold Schwarzenneger. He was great in Terminator. He's not such a great politician sometimes.

His big beef now is with the Bush plan, set to be unveiled in a speech Monday evening, to use National Guard troops to protect American from the invasion of illegal aliens. "Not to use our National Guard, soldiers that are coming back from Iraq, for instance, and that have spent a year and a half over there and now they are coming back," Arnold says.

He's got it exactly backward: The National Guard shouldn't have been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. They should be deployed to protect our borders.

Arnold thinks the Federal Government should do more (primarily because he doesn't want to spend state tax dollars that go to buy off the education union to do HIS job). "I think is maybe not the right way to go because I think that the Bush administration and the federal government should put up the money to create the kind of protection that the federal government is responsible to provide," Arnold says.

Part of me agrees that the Federal government should retain responsibility for protecting the borders. Since the Feds can't (or at least shouldn't) deploy the Military inside the U.S. Border, the National Guard MUST be the responsible party. And National Guard resides as a state responsibility.

It all goes back to the posse comitatus thing (where the U.S. federal government can't just willy nilly use the Military Machine against its citizens). Thus, the National Guard is the ONLY organization responsible for protecting our borders from the inside. The National Guard website states: "Each state and territory has its own National Guard, as provided by the United States Constitution."

If the National Guard does nothing, we pay all those guys and gals to DO nothing. The National Guard website details the rigorous service requirements: "What are the service obligations in the National Guard?
Army National Guard members are required to attend one drill weekend each month and one annual training period each year. Weekend drills are usually scheduled over one weekend - a Saturday and Sunday each month but can occasionally include reporting for duty on Friday night. In addition, units have a two week annual training (AT) period every year which is usually scheduled during the summer."

That is all they do... unless and until they are called into service.

Perhaps the compromise solution would be for the Federal Government to subsidize border states' National Guard deployment to the border. They would still be under state control, but would receive Heartland dollars to keep out illegals.

Catholic Church a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

2006-05-14T09:20:00.000-05:00

If the Catholic Church wanted to dispel the myth that it tried to suppress information in the DaVinci Code investigation, then I'm not sure persecuting the movie had the intended affect.

The act of trying to get the movie banned only re-inforces the idea that the church tried to suppress the information in the first place.

Obviously, any large political institution -- and make no mistake, the Catholic Church is just that -- has HUGE problems related to the power and corruption of those in the institution. I don't feel that the Catholic Church has come completely clean on the actual history of the whole Jesus, Mary Magdelene thing, for example. They aren't entirely honest about the triune God being a compromise after Constantine won control of the Roman Empire and attributed it to Jesus Christ, but was concerned about the fractious natue of theological disputes... so they made something up!

We encourage our secular politicians to be transparent, and theological political bodies should be no different. Hiding behind the mystery of the Church does little to instill faith in its institutions. Persecuting those who have a different story, rather than simply explaining the truth and leaving it to stand, only reinforces belief that the institution is hiding something.

An XXX Domain?

2006-05-11T09:51:00.000-05:00

ICANN, the organization regulating domain extensions for the internet, has put on hold a plan to ad a ".xxx" domain for adult websites. The ICANN caved to U.S. pressure after receiving an unprecedented 6,000 protests.

A .xxx domain would be a great idea... maybe. If it could be enforced, ALL adult sites could be migrated to the new domain. Browsers wouldn't have to moderate content, net nannies could go on vacation and email filters could take a breather. They could simply select NOT to accept content from the domain. This is MUCH easier technology than used for filtering.

ICANN could then agree to block content from websites that failed to migrate adult content to the .xxx domain.

Those who publicly oppose pornography (while no doubt secretly hiding a stash from their wife and kids) also oppose the .xxx domain without really understanding that it could help them moderate the content people receive (which I truly disagree with on many levels).

Just another case of wanting to be right rather than getting what they want.

Cingular Pulls Anti-immigrant Ringtone

2006-05-10T12:52:00.000-05:00

Do you think they'll be pulling the offensive rap songs any time soon?

Cingular Pulls Offensive Ringtone

The Associated Press
Tuesday, May 9, 2006; 10:48 PM

BROWNSVILLE, Texas -- Cingular Wireless LLC pulled a ringtone from its Web site Tuesday after learning that it carried a message the company called "blatantly offensive."

The cell phone company became aware of the ringtone, which uses mixed English and Spanish and threatens deportation, after an inquiry from a reporter for The Brownsville Herald.

The newspaper reported in its online edition Tuesday that the ringtone started with a siren, followed by a male voice saying in a Southern drawl, "This is la Migra," a slang term for the Border Patrol.

"Por favor, put the oranges down and step away from the cell phone. I repeat-o, put the oranges down and step away from the telephone-o. I'm deporting you back home-o," the voice continued.

Hispanic activists called the product racist.

"It's horribly offensive and a disgusting thing," Brent Wilkes, national executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens, told the newspaper.

Cingular removed the $2.49 ringtone, among thousands available for downloading from its Web site, Tuesday afternoon, said company spokesman Mark Siegel.

"Needless to say, we deeply regret and apologize for it ever being there in the first place. The ringtone is blatantly offensive," he said.

The ringtone became available between late February or early March and was downloaded eight times, Siegel said. It was developed by Barrio Mobile, Siegel said. Barrio Mobile is a brand owned by Lagardere Active North American, the U.S. division of a French media company.

Cingular officials were reviewing the process used to screen ringtones, which are developed by several other companies, he said.

Bipartisan Support for Port Security

2006-05-04T17:10:00.000-05:00

The Senate managed to get a port security bill passed ... a pretty tough one in fact. Amazingly, almost everyone seemed in favor of it. Well, for different reasons!

The bill requires that OTHER countries check shipments out of their ports, BOUND FOR THE US. Why would Democrats vote for this bill? Because it makes the price of imports higher, protecting overpaid factory workers in the U.S.

Here's a second reason Dems would vote for this. This bill will virtually assure a LOT more people work at ports.

According to a post on jobseekeradvice.com, "The average annual salary of a regular longshoreman is $95k." That's not awful, even in Los Angeles and San Diego. Temporary longshoremen, those who get jobs the regulars don't want, usually get at least $20 per hour.

But the longshoremen don't get to keep all $95,000. Part of it goes to pay union dues. Thus, the interest in this bill by the Dems.

*********

Moussaoui got off with life in prison after working diligently to be on the hijack team that killed over 3,500 Americans and foreigners on September 11, 2001.

Here's the deal... the French want him.

That's a problem... because the French have a history of caving to Muslim extremists. We have a history of caving to the French.

Won't it just be something if, after we Moussaoui to the French (to get a security council vote in the U.N., for example) and they LET HIM GO to avoid Muslim extremist riots in the streets of France.

Their economy is SO screwed up they can't afford to be tough with 21-year-olds that think everyone else owes them lifetime employment. Their political system, owing to years of immigration from Muslim countries, is SO screwed up that they can't stand tough against Muslim extremists that want ... well, they want to kill Americans, mostly.

How sad for us if we now give them Moussaoui after sparing his life.

Are we STILL a country of immigrants?

2006-05-02T16:12:00.000-05:00

I've heard several supporters of the illegal alien protestors suggest today that we're a country of immigrants and we should let every single one of the illegals become a citizen and let every single one who wants to cross the border to "Come on in!" Where would we be without the influx of Irish or Italians or Vietnamese, etc.

The only problem with that argument is that the Irish and Italians primarily came over in numbers during a time when there were no social welfare programs, and the Vietnamese didn't really need much in the way of social welfare support.

But when the government constantly has its hands in your pockets for more money to buy votes, as ours does, it makes us a little edgy when we think we might have to pony up even more money for people who may not even be paying any taxes at all.

And did these supporters of the illegal alien marches stop to consider the giant processing stations at Ellis Island? You didn't get into the U.S. unless you went through processing and we decided whether we wanted you here or not! Well, you may have been allowed in if you had enough money for a good bribe to a bureaucrat.

Bolivia and Bernanke

2006-05-02T06:41:00.000-05:00

Bolivia decided to nationalize their oilfields. International companies operating there will only be able to keep about 18 percent of their production under new President Evo Morales.

The only problems are: 1) We're so greedy for oil that we'll find some way to work with them (and probably increase foreign aid in the bargain), and 2) the oil companies are so greedy for profits that they'll find some way to make Morales rich in order to get in on the production, whether any of it makes its way back to us or not.

When will we learn? We essentially funded Bolivia's oilfied development throug IMF and other agency loans. Now they get the production.

If we pay for it, shouldn't we own it?

----

Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Ben Bernanke apparently told CNBC's Maria Bartiromo that the market misunderstood his comments at the last Fed meeting. The market interpreted his comments to mean a break in the interest rate increases that the Fed had been implementing. Bernanke had meant to convey the idea that they were taking a wait-and-see attitude toward more increases. After Bartiromo announced this Monday, May 1 on CNBC, the S&P fell about 0.7 percent along with other market indexes.

What was Bernanke thinking. THE most important financial institution in the world and he makes an offhand comment at a dinner party? I bet he learned that lesson.

----

Immigrants and/or those supporting their quest to remain illegally in the U.S. marched on Monday and boycotted U.S. merchants. About 400,000 attended rallies in Los Angeles and another 400,000 in Chicago. We already pretty much provide their medical care, let them avoid paying federal, state and local income taxes, and put up with their lack of auto insurance (I used to live in San Antonio).

If they obtain legal status, just imagine how much we'll have to do for them.

I bet if WE rise up and offer to vote ONLY for Congressmen and Senators that favor protecting our borders, WE could make a pretty good case for making illegal immigration REALLY illegal. And Mexico can participate in protecting its borders, or when we send truckloads of their people back and find a way to charge them for it they will BEGIN to participate in protecting their leaky border.

Do you know that some of the more virulent illegal immigration activists really want a return of Texas and California to MEXICO?

Read the digitalBURG.com editorial by Yeh Ling-Ling, Executive Director of Diversity Alliance for a sustainable America. She is a powerful voice from LEGAL immigrants that want illegal immigration stopped.

----

Kofi Annan at the U.N. receives a $500,000 prize for an energy initiative. Achim Steiner, the person responsible for giving the award, then gets a great job with the United Nations.

These nominations for Achim's new position usually come from a government. Not one government actually nominated Achim, according to news reports.

Cut them off.

----

I got a little backed up on my posts this month because we've been doing some reprogramming on digitalBURG.com. My former neighbor told his wife I needed to get busy and write something. She told my wife and there you are.

Hi, Ken.

Mexico's Hidden Agenda?

2006-04-26T07:13:00.000-05:00

I have had several bits of correspondence with Yeh Ling-Ling, the Executive Director of Diversity Alliance for a sustainable America. Yeh Ling-Ling writes:

Recent massive demonstrations with many protesters waving Mexican flags pressuring the U.S. with demands identical to Mexico's support the point I made in that article.

If you have the time, please also read my published scholarly article entitled, "Mexican Immigration and Its Potential Impact on the Political Future of the U.S, " which can be found by clicking http://www.diversityalliance.org/docs/DASA-ArticleList.html. That scholarly piece has made quite a few liberals and conservatives who favor mass immigration take a second look at immigration.

Here is Yeh Ling-Ling's article in Harvard's "The Record" publication:

President Bush and Congressional leaders of both parties are determined to achieve defacto amnesty in 2006 for millions of illegal migrants. Why should Americans concerned with racial harmony and national unity take a close look at the social and political impacts of massive Mexican immigration?

Professor Samuel P. Huntington, chairman of Harvard University's Academy for International and Area Studies, warned in 2004: "Demographically, socially, and culturally, the reconquista (re-conquest) of the Southwest United States by Mexican immigrants is well underway.... No other immigrant group in U.S. history has asserted or could assert a historical claim to U.S. territory. Mexicans and Mexican Americans can and do make that claim." Huntington also said that "Mexican immigration differs from past immigration and most other contemporary immigration due to a combination of six factors: contiguity, scale, illegality, regional concentration [in the American Southwest], persistence, and historical presence."

In May, 2005, the BBC reported: "The Latinization of California is nothing short of a revolution. California will become a predominantly Spanish-speaking state within the next few years. And, as the majority population, there is really no need, or incentive, for them to assimilate into mainstream American society as their predecessors have always done. Whether Latinos then decide to push for greater autonomy or to seek a political agenda of their own with closer ties to Mexico and Central America is very much up for grabs." In 2001, the pro-immigration New California Media reported that Mexico "continues to mourn the loss of half of its territory to the U.S. in the 19th Century."

Mexico is pushing hard for amnesty and various benefits for millions of illegal Mexican migrants. Once naturalized, amnestied migrants could add tens of millions of people and future voters to the U.S. through births here and through immigration of extended families. U.S.-born children, even of illegal immigrants and guest workers, are American citizens and could vote at 18. Furthermore, in 2001 Ernesto Ruffo Appel, then-border czar of Mexico, reportedly advised Mexican migrants: "If the border patrol agent finds you, try again." In 2004, the Mexican government published a guide with safety tips for Mexicans who want to illegally cross the U.S. border.

According to the 2000 Census, the U.S. population had increased by about 13% from 1990, but those who identified themselves as Mexican had increased by 53%. In 1997, Ernest Zedillo, then-President of Mexico, declared in Chicago that "the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders and that Mexican migrants are an important - a very important - part of it." Is Mexico using legal as well as illegal migration to extend the Mexican nation?

To quickly expand the Hispanic electorate, activists across the country have campaigned to secure the right to vote for non-citizens and actively register voters. MEChA, an acronym for a Chicano student organization with chapters on many U.S. college campuses, has actively recruited Mexican-American voters. MEChA's founding constitution called for the "liberation of our land." It has had prominent political leaders among its members, including current Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who headed MEChA's chapter in Los Angeles when he was a student at UCLA; Cruz Bustamente, the lieutenant governor of California; and California State Senator Gil Cedillo, who has pushed legislation to grant driver's licenses to illegal aliens.

The Mexican government and many Mexican American leaders have lobbied in tandem very effectively. For example, after California's voters approved Proposition 187, the 1994 ballot measure that would have denied public benefits to illegal immigrants, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund and other pro-illegal groups sued to overturn it. Parts of the initiative were ruled unconstitutional in a federal district court and the measure was taken up on appeal. Before the appeal could be, Mexican President Zedillo paid a visit to California Governor Gray Davis.

Subsequently, Davis decided to settle the case "out of court" through mediation. But only the opponents of Prop 187 were invited to take part and the measure was shelved. Antonio Villaraigosa publicly thanked the Mexican president for his help in killing Prop 187.

Many Mexican-American are patriotic. But many newcomers and their U.S.-born children can be mobilized by Mexico to vote according to Mexico's interests. U.S.-born Juan Hernandez, then a member of current Mexico President Vicente Fox's cabinet, has stated: "We are betting that the Mexican-American population in the United States...will think Mexico first." Indeed, many American citizens of Mexican descent have run for political offices in Mexico: Manuel de la Cruz wanted to make the U.S. a Mexican electoral district when he ran for Mexico's Congress.

Americans who doubt the U.S. Southwest might someday secede should heed Charles Truxillo, a Mexican-American professor at the University of New Mexico. Truxillo noted that the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia also seemed far-fetched 50 years ago. "Throughout history, nations and empires rise and fall," Truxillo warned. "No nation's borders have been permanent."

Yeh Ling-Ling is executive director of Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America, a national non-profit organization based in Oakland, CA.

If that doesn't make you think, what will?

Marching over a Cliff

2006-04-10T07:02:00.000-05:00

An estimated 500,000 supporters of illegal aliens remaining in the country marched in Dallas over the weekend... or tens of thousands, depending on which numbers you believe. More marches are expected today.

Why wasn't anyone there checking IDs and deporting those who were in the U.S. illegally?

According to NewsMax.com, a Time Magazine poll reports that most Americans favor closing off the border with a wall from sea to sea, and deporting those who came into the country illegally.

I just hate it when politicians think they're pulling the wool over our eyes. Suppose illegals get their way and are allowed to stay in the U.S., working as they now are, while their name goes to the back of the line and they wait for their turn for LEGAL immigration to the U.S.

Wouldn't it be better for illegals to be allowed to come forward NOW and go to the front of the line and get processed? This way, we determine whether we really want them NOW rather than four years from now.

The country's Republican leadership argues that Bush wouldn't have been elected without the Hispanic vote. Hmmm... were some of these illegals? Perhaps he got more of the Hispanic vote because he was Governor of Texas and his brother was governor of Florida. I'm pretty sure he didn't do that much better in California!

This also assumes that we want politics to favor special issues, such as immigration. Can we only elect a person that favors open immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens? That's as bad as saying we will only vote for someone that favors abortion on demand (or favors abolition of abortion).

What ever happened to the Republicans being a party of ideas? Where is Newt Gingrich in the Republican party today?

There is such a lack of leadership in the Democrat party, and a lack of fortitude in the Republican party, that the time may be right for a strong Libertarian candidate to rise to the top.

Where are the Libertarians on this issue? They believe that open immigration is the answer and I don't disagree!

We have, however, laws on the books that screen obvious illdoers out of the immigration queue and probably would work well if they were used. Laws, while I believe they should be rare, should be enforced. When we don't like them, we can change them through a political process.

Wouldn't it be the ultimate in political opportunism to allow illegal aliens to become legal, part of the political process, and vote... to get rid of illegal immigration.

That's like letting Iranians into the U.S. to vote to send missles to Iran.

Can anyone explain why illegal aliens believe they have the same rights and priveleges as U.S. citizens?

While illegal aliens deserve the same respect and treatment as any human being, and the rights appertaining thereunto, they should not be given the same priveleges as U.S. citizens.

How about the slogal, "No person is illegal?" That's just ridiculous!

The person isn't illegal because they're in the U.S. illegally. The act of entering the U.S. as an alien without proper entry most certainly is illegal.

That's like saying we shouldn't have any laws because no person can commit a crime.

The very fact that protests in such numbers occur to make illegal aliens legal should alert us to the real possibility that things would change dramatically if these people vote in any real numbers. If we think they're raiding the Treasury now by not paying taxes and sucking up social services, just wait until they learn the true raiding power of a voting block in this democracy.

That's the real danger of making illegal aliens legal.

While we should allow open immigration, we should be wary of groups that would illegally enter the country and then establish a voting bloc.

Illegal Immigrants as Insurgents

2006-04-05T11:34:00.000-05:00

Don't we have some sort of law against people ripping down an individual's American flag, which are our right as Americans to fly?

The illegal immigrants and their sympathizers, especially in California, are acting as insurgents and should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Insurgent:

"A person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the legally constituted authority."

Or how about:

"A member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger force by sabotage and harassment."

When the government fails to protect American citizens' rights for a politically correct movement, such as that of illegal immigration in California, the insurgents have hijacked a democratic country.

ACLU Finally on the Right Side

2006-04-05T11:14:00.000-05:00

The Oceanside Unified School District has banned flags or the display of patriotic clothing at schools, including both U.S. and Mexican. School officials claim that students taunt illegal immigrants and sensitive classmates with the patriotic clothing.

Fortunately, the ACLU found their sensibilities on this one and points to the landmark Tinker v. Des Moines court case in which students were allowed to wear black armbands in opposition to the Vietnam War. Supreme Court Justice Fortas, writing for the majority, stated:

". . . In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views."

In order to meet the criteria to ban the patriotic clothing, the school district must show that significant disruption of school operation would take place if they did not ban the clothing. The ACLU does not believe that the school district can show such "significant disruption."

Further, if the disruption was appearing whether or not they banned the clothing, it would be difficult to justify that they should ban the clothing.

Finally, the ACLU takes the right side of a case! Rather than inventing and protecting "rights" that don't exist, the ACLU actually takes on a case within the realm of their mandate.

As just one example of ACLU whack-out, consider their protest about the U.S. Military supporting The Boy Scouts. Their protest is based on the separation of church and state. What about the whole concept that the government doesn't get to spend money on whatever it wants to? Shouldn't they protect our larger rights not to have the government spend money outside their constitutionally mandated spending restrictions.

Obviously, they can't do that. It would take away their ability to promote a variety of liberal causes.

At least on the Freedom of Speech issue, the ACLU has approached this from a logical, legally sustainable perspective.

Good Leadership or Weather?

2006-04-03T23:30:00.000-05:00

When I edit releases from Missouri Department of Economic Development, I sometimes find the material a bit PR-ish (of a public relations nature).

For example, job growth resulted from Matt Blunt's fabulous leadership:

“Our efforts to attract and keep jobs in Missouri are clearly having a positive and lasting impact on our economy,” Blunt said.

On the other hand, an increase in unemployment (which means jobs didn't increase enough to overcome the increase in the Missouri civilian labor force) resulted from the weather:

According to the Missouri Department of Economic Development, weather was a contributing factor in slight unemployment increase from January to February. Missouri’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in February was moved to 4.8 percent, from 4.7 percent.

Good things come from Matt Blunt. Bad things come from the supreme being in charge of weather. Give me a break!!

So I just de-PR the material and get the facts.

Immigration Reform

2006-03-26T15:28:00.000-06:00

The next few weeks will see a flurry of fiery forensics from the members of U.S. Congress. The Senate wants a weaker bill and the House will probably vote out of session a much stronger bill than the Senate wants. What fun!

Setting aside the politics of who wants what for posturing in the next election cycle, business wants cheap labor because they can't get marginal workers' lazy butts off the daytime TV couch. As a former inner city landlord, I can assure you there are many lower income non-workers that prefer the public dole to working at the local 5-and-dime. See previous posts on feeding the cockroaches. And we can't really blame them because we've allowed the govenment to muck up the natural incentive system of "don't work, don't eat." (Again, that sets aside the group who actually cannot work due to no fault of their own.)

National (and state, and county and local) security issues rely on tracking people who come into the country. We have a huge gang problem developing as the result of immigrants from all sorts of places. We have drug dollars that leave the U.S. to pay for terrorism, narco- and other. We have an enormous overload on hospitals that really cannot turn away anyone, but get paid by no one when the worker has no insurance and probably pays no taxes to help support their own healthcare.

Why does Bush want immigration?

All those people paying all those payroll taxes, including social security (where the vast majority of immigrants are in their prime income earning years) will help balance the budget and satisfy his business bases' need for cheap labor.

Also, a lot of laws punish the business people for hiring illegals.

Allowing people to work will HELP remove incentives for millions to "ghost" through the system. Anyone here illegally will stand out like a sore thumb.

Here's the rub. One amnesty leads to another.

The U.S. should just let the people who want to come in and work ... come in and work, pay taxes, have access to services, etc. Then we need to start paring down services or at least better balance the income from taxes and the outgo to services.

Illegal aliens that engage in gang activity will be punished by the law whether they are immigrants or illegal aliens. We might as well have an immigration record for that person and, if they don't have one, we send them back and reduce our foreign aid to that country by the cost of the detention and removal from this country.

Costs allow an economy to make decisions about how resources get allocated. When the government gets involved, cost often get redistributed on the basis of fairness (in someone's opinion other than the person who pays the costs, usually) or pure political machinations.

We need to allow people to incur their costs of receiving a benefit such as life in the U.S. (other than the sales tax and other use taxes they pay by purchasing in the U.S.). Allowing workers in the U.S. to take their rightful place at the larger table makes sense; discouraging people who don't deserve a place at the table makes good sense. If we can't measure it, we can't manage it. If we don't allow them to be counted, we can't effectively allocate costs.

Art Critics

2006-03-19T09:25:00.000-06:00

After reading some of the art critics' rants in various publications, I reached an interesting conclusion: "You can criticize technique, but you can't criticize impact!"

Although technique may affect the artist's intended message, each of us has different wiring. Thus, different things affect us differently.

For example, I am not affected by the sight of blood. Nor is my wife, a labor and delivery nurse. She tells stories all the time of men who go in during delivery and faint or grow sick at the sight of the blood. She says that sometimes people who otherwise are not affected by the sight of blood grow quite ill when it is their own blood or that of a loved one.

Clearly, how we perceive something emotionally has a HUGE impact on how we view art.

I was deeply, deeply affected by Van Gogh's 1889 Irises painted in Saint-Remy, France ... to the point of tears. (Not the 1990 painting by the same name.) I cannot explain it except perhaps low blood sugar or a hormonal imbalance, or an emotional reaction to a great, great work of art. I still tear up when I think of that great painting.

Please note that you CANNOT just see a photo or a print of Van Gogh's Irises and get the same feeling as you can by seeing the original. A trip to the Getty Museum in Fall 2005 allowed me the opportunity to see so many, many masterpieces.

Whether you think Van Gogh had wonderful artistic technique, few would disagree he is a great artist because he has affected so many in an emotional way.

So art critics cannot say that a piece of art is "rubbish" simply because it does not affect them. They can only say a technique is rubbish if they are examining a technique and the artist provides a poor representation of the technique. Everyone is affected by different things, and by the same thing differently. Art criticism, of necessity, must be a very individual reaction.

All this came about as the result of reading art criticism in Art and Style Magazine.

New York Artists's online exhibition space provides some interesting and provocative works. I don't know if they allow any artist to exhibit, or whether they choose who gets to go online here.

Just in case anyone might think I'm wearing an ill-fitting hat, I admit to knowing NOTHING about art. I consider it a good day when my signature looks okay or I properly highlight some memorable bit of text. I do know when I'm affected by a work of art... whether or not I know anything about technique or the artist.

And what, really, is good art but good communication?

State Auditor McCaskill Gets the Word Out

2006-03-18T10:08:00.000-06:00

Apparently, someone is planning to propose legislation limiting Transportation Development District power to tax us without our approval. Their power used to be known as "Taxation without representation," but has been redefined in this century as "economic development."

The State Auditor's office released an audit identifying $800 million in unvoted taxes that will be collected over the life of Missouri's CURRENT TDDs.

If some state legislator didn't actually request the audit during a cocktail party with McCaskill... they should have.

TDDs represent one of the greatest transfers of wealth from individuals to developers and property owners, eclipsed only by some of the recent eminent domain abuses in the country and in the state.

Missouri Eminent Domain Constitutional Amendment

2006-03-18T09:52:00.000-06:00

Ron Calzone's recent petition to add an amendment to the Missouri Constitution limiting eminent domain powers is noble. Ron represents Missouri Citizens for Property Rights.

The only problem for the initiative from a constitutional perspective is that it is too specific.

A state's constitution is a FRAMEWORK for legislation. The constitutional amendment could be very simple and still serve the purpose of requiring the state legislature to re-write the state's laws related to eminent domain.

For example, how about language like:

The state shall not acquire property through eminent domain except as required for a public use.

The state then defines by statute "public use" and "eminent domain" and we're done.

By putting what essentially amounts to an ordinance in the state's constitution, Mr. Calzone lessens the power of the document and essentially allows lawmakers to fight over the constitutional amendment on the basis of specifics rather than on the basis of right or wrong. Eminent domain is usually just plain wrong.

The reason this is an ordinance is because it specifies how the bill cannot be used on blighted properties. Okay... what's a blighted property?

Additionally, the amendment specifies notification requirements and some other stuff that belongs in legislation rather than framework.

Souter's Home Safe from His Own Bad Ruling

2006-03-15T18:51:00.000-06:00

Supreme Court Justice David Souter voted last summer to allow municipalities to seize private dwellings through eminent domain, and essentially transfer the property to another private developer.

Souter, a liberal justice, gets to write his own version of the constitution. In his version, development need not have any public USE, it only need promote the public good. And local politicians have figured out that increasing tax revenues by replacing single family homes with commercial development promotes the public good.

So a group of concerned citizens set out trying to get Souter's New Hampshire farmhouse turned into an inn in the interest of increasing property tax revenues for the locality. They planned to use the inn to promote less government and individual freedom.

Unfortunately, their plan failed. They watered down the legislation they intended to promote to the point where nobody cared whether they succeeded or failed... because Souter would get to keep his home regardless of the voting outcome.

How in the world did Souter, a LIBERAL Supreme Court Justice, come to own a farmhouse in a state where the motto is "Live Free or Die?" Perhaps it was the only place he felt free from the reach of his own courtbench legislation.

AP Corrects Bush Katrina Video Story

2006-03-05T06:25:00.000-06:00

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/14015353.htm?source=rss&channel=thestate_news

AP clarifies story about Katrina, Bush

WASHINGTON — In a Wednesday story, The Associated Press reported that federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his Homeland Security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees in New Orleans, citing confidential video footage of an Aug. 28 briefing.

The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking.

National Organization Suspends Alpha Kappa Lambda

2006-03-04T07:34:00.000-06:00

All righty then... The National Alpha Kappa Lambda organization suspended the CMSU chapter for insensitive mimicry of 1960s black attire on MLK day. (Do I think it was a good idea? No.)

Gays take to the streets to sashay for Gay Rights (although they haven't exactly demanded preferential hiring quotas yet!).

Muslims riot in Europe because a cartoon of Mohammad with a bomb in his turban hits the papers.

What's next, not allowing people to portray pregnant women as anything but freedom fighters for the cause of positive population growth? (By the way, malls in San Fernando Valley and Santa Monica now have special parking for pregnant women.)

Freedom of Speech is a sticky issue. But think: "Sticks and stones." ALL speech should be allowed regardless of how offensive. I'm not going to go into the arguments for and against shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre, etc.

Why should we be allowed to speak freely?

What if we're not allowed to make fun of crazy artists because some son of a local politician wants to form a commission that funds his son's crazy art? We have to be able to parody the art and portray it in as ridiculous a manner as possible so that we aren't railroaded by our politicians.

They've taken away our freedom to speak in many areas, so that they could pass laws the majority would never have voted to allow.

Our Founding Fathers were pretty smart in many ways. One of those ways protected our ABSOLUTE right to free speech.

Breaching the Levees?

2006-03-02T07:21:00.000-06:00

Reminds me vaguely of a Led Zeppelin song!

Anyway, Reuters is reporting:

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said on Wednesday he was shocked by video showing U.S. President George W. Bush being told the day before Hurricane Katrina hit that the city's protective levees could fail.

The only problem is... that's not exactly what was said on the tape!

What they told Bush on the tape is that the water might go over the top of the levee. I guess, in a way, that's a breach of the levees or that the levees might fail.

An associated Press report says:

The National Hurricane Center's Mayfield told the final briefing before Katrina struck that storm models predicted minimal flooding inside New Orleans during the hurricane but he expressed concerns that counterclockwise winds and storm surges afterward could cause the levees at Lake Pontchartrain to be overrun.
"I don't think any model can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not but that is obviously a very, very grave concern," Mayfield told the briefing.

NOLA Mayor Ray Nagin, of course, thinks this means they had some inkling that the levees might collapse.

He thinks that because it's his job to be a politician covering his sorry butt.

I can't wait to hear the Louisiana Governor Blanco's take on all this.

Part of their problem down there is that they suffer from the same croneyism in state government that the Bush Administration exhibited in hiring FEMA director Mike Brown... only far worse.

Several of the reports on the appearance of the people in the videos describes them as "relaxed." I would be surprised if they weren't! They were prepared to respond. Then they had to sit and wait for Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin to get their act together and allow them in.

Dubai Ports World

2006-02-26T08:20:00.000-06:00

MSNBC wrote:

The $6.8 billion deal approved by the panel covers the ports of New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans and Miami. The operations in these ports are already being run by a British company, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, known as P & O.
P & O was bought last week by Dubai Ports World, a business owned and operated by the government of United Arab Emirates. The Bush administration considers the U.A.E. an ally in the war on terror, but the 9/11 Commission found that some of the money for the terror attacks went through banks located in the Arab Emirates and two of the hijackers were, for what it‘s worth, from the U.A.E.

Truthout.com brings out two important connections that make this deal look suspect:

Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush's cabinet.
The other connection is David Sanborn, who runs DP World's European and Latin American operations and was tapped by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration.

There's no doubt that allowing a United Arab Emirates company LOOKS like a bad idea. The Bush Administration NOT KNOWING about the deal until Feb. 16 after it had come to the various cabinet-level posts no later than Jan. 23 LOOKS like they aren't talking. And there's also no doubt that LOOKS are important in politics.

However, the whole Dubai Ports World story includes more than just meets the eye. LOOKS aren't everything.

On the other hand, if something looks this bad... maybe we need to check it out. Postponing a deal that has this many potential negatives for 45 days to review the situation won't hurt a darn thing. It's not embarrassing (or shouldn't be) for the UAE, nor will it make us look like bigots.

We have a right in the U.S. to protect ourselves from terror threats, and two of the 9/11 hijackers came from UAE. On the positive side, UAE provides intelligence and even allows U.S. military planes to refuel when they go to the middle east.

Terrorists are anti-government in many Arab countries because they look at such governments as being imposed during a colonial period.

What we have to remember is that DPW will be especially vigilant about letting terrorist cargo into the U.S. because of how it would LOOK for them.

Second State Forces Wal-Mart to Carry Morning After Pill

2006-02-14T22:24:00.000-06:00

Once again the socialist state of Massachussetts has shown its true colors by requiring retailer Wal-Mart to carry the "morning after" pill. Happy Valentine's Day.

Before today, only Illinois actually required the giant to carry RU-486, which is comparable to a handful of birth control pills (not the placebo ones, but the ones with real hormones in them) taken at the same time. Those concerned about unwanted pregnancy after ill-considered sex can take the morning after pill up to five days after the incident. This high dose of hormones keeps the fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall, thus giving rise to the claim that it's actually a form of abortion.

The rationale for requiring Wal-Mart to carry the morning after pill is that pharmacies are required to carry all "commonly prescribed" medications... whatever commonly prescribed means.

Now here's an interesting idea: A state decides that women who can afford to properly raise their children (have a high income level, for example) MUST maintain any pregnancy in order to increase the tax base for the state, and all women below a certain income level MUST abort their pregnancy. I don't think these women would be quite so inclined toward insidious government regulation.

If we can make people do something through government regulation, then it just comes down to who is in the government whether a regulation makes good law.

Wouldn't it make sense to require all retail men's clothing stores to carry Chief's jerseys? After all, you never know when you're going to get invited to a Monday night football party. If you don't have a Chief's jersey in your closet for the big game, you MUST be able to run out and buy a Jersey for the event. No matter that you could get one at a host of other retailers: By carrying men's clothing, your store somehow automatically OBLIGATES ITSELF to carry Chief's jersies.

I guess it makes about as much sense as requiring Wal-Mart to carry on-demand abortion even though it may be available through other drug stores.

Outsourcing in English

2006-02-04T19:55:00.000-06:00

I'm all in favor of outsourcing jobs that can be done at a better price than we can do them here in the U.S. I emphasize better, because you have to consider quality output per unit of labor dollar rather than just whether it costs less or not.

For example, if Chinese workers can produce an automobile better (that would be "same" car at a lower price per unit), I am SO in favor of that. Unfortunately, a variety of inequalities also enter into the production decision.

This hit home again today when I tried to install a ceiling fan made in China. Unfortunately, the instructions obviously were not American born. It's the little things that give it away... like the loss of articles before nouns. Americans like them and Chinese people have a tendency to just let them fly away. Well, sometimes American born writing has its deficiencies, as well.

Apparently, the instructions were also written by someone who never actually assembled the ceiling fan. I can understand that, though. Where, exactly, in China would you see a ceiling fan named "Miramar." At best, it would be pronounced "Milamall." It looks a little like a spaceship, too, so it probably wouldn't be China-style decor. It fits with our decor. (No, I don't live in a spaceship.)

Here's the situation: The lamp has an upper globe with 4 small bulbs each having a candelabra (small) base, and the lower globe has one large bulb. There were no instructions on installing the upper globe candelabra bulbs until after four other sections had been added to the lamp. The upper globe (and the candelabra bulbs became inaccessible except through little trap doors built into the TOP of the whole unit.

I could have installed the damn bulbs before putting the upper globe on (if I'd had decent instructions). Instead, they want me to put them in through the trap doors at the top?

Okay, so I'll follow their instructions. Sadly, however, the first trap door I tried had one usable screw, one screw that had been smothered in oiled bronze something-or-other to the point there was no removing it, and one TORX screw (OMG!!). Who thought it would be a good idea to put a friggin' TORX screw in an appliance sold in America?

Those of you who are scratching your head over what makes a screw TORX should have gotten the point by now. (For those of you who haven't figured it out, a TORX screw is the six-pointed screw that no one has a screw driver for!) Torx screws were named after the dinosaur of American engineering, Textron Fastening Systems. Even they don't claim their torx screws... at least there's no finding them in the aerospace catalog. Oh, yeah: Those screws cost $600 each and must be engineered by the hole, or something along those lines. Now THERE'S something they ought to outsource!

Well, I was pretty torxed by the time I reasoned that even should the screws work, the slot was too small to get both the bulb AND the fingers through the upper hole. Now I'm no great genius (well, actually, I am... but that's a discussion for a different day), but even with my limited engineering abilities I could figure out you had to somehow TURN the bulb once it fell through the slot.

My wife decided the lamp would indeed look better with the four 15 watt bulbs in the upper globe (and I can't say I blame her... that's why she bought it!). Okay, so they don't really light anything all that well and have a tendency to burn out quickly. So we will be taking apart the whole fan about twice a year... well, one of us will.

Sadly, her solution was: "Well, we just won't turn them on as often." That was the first woman-thing she's done to me in a long time.

I let it pass: too close to Valentine's Day.

While I'm on a rant about engineering design, let me just put in a word for the light bulb people. One of the companies that makes those 5-year light bulbs makes it easy to buy quantities of 60- or 100-watt "bulbs." It's pretty hard to find a 75-watt bulb. Now here's the funny part: they just add more length to the bulb-o-curl thingy to turn a 60-watt into a 75- or 100-watt. That's great... until you have more bulb length than you have globe room.

In other words, the 100 watt super saver $15 5-year bulbs won't fit in the lower globe of the ceiling fan.

The fan has huge blades and will keep me cool in summer. It has a remote control for the fan AND the lights. I can even reverse the fan blades while sitting on my ... couch. I bought stock in Everyready, too. Those 9-volt fellas for the remote are pretty pricey!

The president of ___________, however, has bought himself a presidential letter about this fan.

Maybe I'll get the guy who wrote the instructions to edit my letter to the president.

Thought (Hate) Crimes

2006-02-04T08:06:00.000-06:00

From Drudge Report:

WOMAN ARRESTED AFTER 'RACIST LANGUAGE' AT TACO BELL

A woman accused of using racial epithets while waiting for food at a Connecticut Taco Bell drive-through window was arrested Wednesday.

Jennifer Farrelly, 19, of East Windsor, has been charged with ridicule on account of race, creed or color and second-degree breach of peace. Farrelly's boyfriend, Eric Satterlee, 22, of Ashford, was charged with breach of peace in the incident.

On Dec. 18, Farrelly and Satterlee became frustrated by the slow service at the Taco Bell restaurant on Brookside Place, according to an arrest warrant. Farrelly banged on the drive-through window and called the Taco Bell attendant, Jamelle Byrd, a racial epithet, according to the warrant. Satterlee allegedly cursed and banged on the window.

Farrelly denied using racial epithets when she was interviewed by police, saying Byrd caused the dispute by ridiculing her for parking her car far away from the drive-through window, the warrant states. Byrd's supervisor told police that Byrd should not have been working the drive-through because he had gotten into a similar incident with another customer, the warrant states.

We made fun of Canada regarding their "speech" laws, but it's coming to that in the U.S. The problem with regulating speech is that it's unconstitutional... not to mention stupid.

Sure speech can occur as the result of a "hateful" thought. Making something illegal just because it is hateful denies the fact that it is the interpretation that creates the crime!

The receiver of hate speech, unlike the victim of a REAL crime, has the option of interpreting the person holding the poverty of the thought as the victim. I don't have any ability of interpretation when someone shoots me... my body has been damaged. I don't have the ability of interpretation when someone steals my property... my property is gone.

As the receiver of hate speech, however, you need me to agree before a crime can occur. Should the receiver of hate speech, then, be charged as an accessory to the crime?

Think about the next step. What if, in the course of disagreeing with ANOTHER government program (something other than their equal rights legislation)... like welfare... and our disagreement with the program becomes a form of hate speech. The government develops another protected class, and the incentive to become part of the protected class ensues.

When we attempt to speak against the protected class, we suddenly commit a "hate" crime punishable by loss of our rights. The government wins... you can't get people involved with the issue because you are committing a hate crime.

Democracy (or even a representative republic such as ours) requires free speech for proper functioning. Without it, we lose all our rights.

Licenses

2006-02-02T14:37:00.000-06:00

I don't usually write that much about local things, and this post isn't really that local because it applies to essentially all municipalities. It's motivated by two rather interesting recent requirements: 1) to license my online business, and 2) to license my dog.

Let's tackle the latter issue first. Why do we need dog licensure? The City of Warrensburg website has no interesting FAQs addressing this issue, so I have gone instead to the city of Chicago website:

"One major benefit of having a licensed dog is that the owner whose pet wears the license can be notified if a lost or stray dog ends in the care of the city's Animal Care and Control Center. New this year, the tags also carry the City Clerk's office phone number to aid in the search and retrieval of your pet."

If this is a benefit to me, why am I REQUIRED to do it? Not withstanding is the fact that I've had a rather expensive identity chip implanted somewhere on his body.

Now that even begs the question of whether the city's Animal Care and Control Center doesn't already have the City Clerk's office phone number. Okay, maybe that's not exactly what they meant. I guess it was meant for the missing pet to call the Clerk and find out where he lives. Or perhaps it's for the person finding a lost and stray dog who went through the Chicago school system and cannot read the phone directory or can't figure out who to call in the massive local bureaucracy.

Dog licenses, however, should be big enough to see from animal patrol cars. The little tags actually require animal control officers to stop their vehicle and capture the animal before they can find out what his name is, whether he's had shots and whether he can read the City Clerk's office phone number. This of course would lead to a whole data delivery system connected throughout the country and, perhaps, a new terminal in the recently completed 911 Emergency Center in the building just north of the local courthouse. If a dog is lost or stolen anywhere in the country, those annoying freeway signs can flash a signal something like, "Connor, black with white trim, 80 lbs., knows calculus." Motorists who actually look at the signs can then help find the missing pet.

Then the dog license would be worthwhile.

I'm sure my recent notice from City government resulted from my wife's "My border collie is smarter than your honor roll student" window sticker in her SUV. Someone in city government probably had an honor roll student offended by the comment.

Less defensible, however, is the requirement to obtain a business license. My business can't run away and, if it did, I'm pretty sure the city wouldn't care that much anyway.

Now my business doesn't really sell anything in Warrensburg any more than Google does. We don't have subscriptions; I don't even sell digitalBURG.com t-shirts on the website. The servers for the website are in Alburquerque, NM or somewhere desert-ish. We don't have a physical location in which we hold ourselves out to the public.

Ah, they said, but you sell advertising within the city. That's open for some debate. Oh, yeah... I SOLICIT advertising within the city... but so do a lot of websites. For example, all those national websites that have purchased local names, and hold themselves out as directories also SOLICIT advertising from Warrensburg merchants. Another competitor actually holds itself out as a DIRECTORY for Warrensburg. Okay, so they don't know that First Christian Church has had an interim pastor since June of last year. Maybe they don't even pop up on a Google search for the term "Warrensburg, Mo." But they SOLICIT advertising.

I think the reason for the recent spate of licensure requests must be more sinister. Makes me want to look into the whole dog license process a little further.

So what, exactly, is the purchase of a business license intended to accomplish?

Woman Goes Postal

2006-01-31T09:00:00.000-06:00

Apparently some other right-thinking people (or people who want to use me for editorial fodder) have discovered and linked to my blog. My page rank has risen (to 1 out of 10). Here's my thanks to both of them!

***

It's not funny, and I'm not trying to make light of this, but doesn't it seem strange that so many postal workers... go "postal?"

An EX postal worker killed six former postal workers and herself at a California mail distribution facility this morning.

Such behavior derives from stress. Stress derives from conflict. Conflict derives from inadequate feedback and helplessness.

Since the PO is a quasi-governmental organization, does the stress result from trying to run a business in a political framework? If so, what does this say about government? Or should we ask, what does this say about business?

It makes me wonder whether there is such a difference between environments that rely on competitive forces for information and action v. environments that rely on political forces for action. (There's rarely any information content in politics... I left it off on purpose.)

Have you noticed how much "news" revolves around politics and crime?

This is the pathetic path our country has taken. We care so much about political actions and don't get very much information at all about what really happens in the country... about the forces that really make a difference in our lives.

Politics creates nothing. Business builds homes and cars, puts fruit and meat on the table, etc.

Yet we focus so much on what's going on in POLITICS.

The only reason for government to exist is to ensure that market forces are not corrupted and to protect us from foreign and domestic invaders.

Government has usurped a lot of power not given to it by the Constitution.

***

Many liberal Democrats believe that we should examine the Palestinian ideas about US that lead them to kill Israelis as suicide bombers. If you follow the liberal Democrat philosophy, shouldn't we ask the dead postal worker what made her so angry that she killed six people and herself? Shouldn't we examine the dichotomy, then, between government and economy which resolves itself through suicide killings in a postal facility?

Maybe they need a few "skip-level" meetings in the Post Office. Or how about billions in government aid so that postal workers could set up their spouses in Europe and pad their retirement accounts (back to the old Yasser and Suha Arafat thing again).

***

It just sounds like I'm rambling. They'll probably examine this in some psychology class after I die.

WYSIWYG

2006-01-31T08:45:00.000-06:00

Coretta Scott King has died. Rosa Parks has died.

Now if we could just kill affirmative action, quotas (yes, they still use something like that in hiring and in college entrance), and programs that discriminate in favor of one group at the expense of another.

***

Just in case you use the WWW for research (like Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan will no doubt learn to do now that he's retiring), here's something to consider... it has a lot of HOLES! For example, arguably one of the "best" and least biased sources of quick info has been Wikipedia. The word "wiki" has been coined as a compendium of information.

Unfortunately, they allow a lot of people to work on the project and apparently the standards for doing so are low enough that even congressional staffers have been able to participate.

The problem with this, of course, is that politicians are inherently unreliable and have biased the unbiased wikipedia with politically motivated contributions.

***

And speaking of Alan Greenspan, it's just too much to ask us to believe that he wasn't on the internet all day long watching the stock market. Now his wife, TV news person Andrea Mitchell, explains that Alan might actually get his own email address! I relish having email correspondence with him. Tom Sowell sent me a free copy of one of his books after we corresponded.

Maybe that's the old OAR we talk about:

Operational
Administrative
Recognition

Oh... you have no idea what I'm talking about. Sorry.

These are the reasons for lags that make government micro-management of the economy less than effective sometimes.

Maybe if Alan had a computer terminal on his desk he could have cut out the "R" problem in monetary policy implementation. You have to recognize a problem before it can be solved.

Okay, so Greenspan recognized an internet bubble... TWO YEARS BEFORE IT BURST.

God Bless the new Fed Chairman. Maybe he'll figure out the economy.

Naw... it has people in it.

"Your Choice, Your Chase"

2006-01-27T08:54:00.000-06:00

How Annoying!

Have you seen the Chase Insurance Direct commercials where the woman, dressed in a lime green sweater, abusively suggests that the only way she gets things done is to do them herself? She's smart enough to somehow climb up on the internet and get an insurance quote.

All the while she is talking about how her husband procrastinates, he's in the background fixing the lock on a door and a variety of other little household tasks she's managed to think about for him to do.

He's not procrastinating... he's got a long Honey-do list!!

The annoying part is that she's telling us how she did this one little online task while her husband is out there actually fixing things!

It would be interesting to see how the different sexes view this commercial. From a male perspective, I see a woman thinking that something would be a good idea and assigning it to her significant other. My sense of things is that women would view this commercial as "a woman thinking that something would be a good idea and assigning it to her significant other."

If you don't see the difference, you must be a woman.

Now this is one of the reasons I have the perfect life. Although my wife's hormone affiliation would suggest the second interpretation, her brain works in a way that allows her to see the effect of her hormone affiliation.

If you don't get the difference, you must be a woman.

You know how some women would try on a dress they haven't worn for awhile, then ask something ridiculous like: "Do you think this makes my hips look big?" While my wife might ask the question, she would note the deer in the headlight look and quickly realize she is driving in my direction with her bright lights on.

Apparently, lime green sweater hasn't engaged the full power of her intellectual resources.

Cockroaches Take Over Palestine

2006-01-26T20:08:00.000-06:00

Okay... do we put butter on the floor over in Palestine, or let them disperse?

The U.S. has sent over a billion dollars to help Palestine. Much of it went to Yasser Arafat's wife, Suha, over in Europe. The rest of it went to buy guns. When Arafat passed on, the Fatah Party continued their reign of corruption.

Competing party Hamas lowered the rhetorical wall by NOT calling for the destruction of Israel for a couple of months, and managed to win the recent election.

The question is, do we pursue our policy of putting welfare butter in the cockroach infested Palestinian kitchen or do we withdraw support and let the world seek its own, sometimes ridiculous, equilibrium? We may not like the outcome if a vacuum ensues in the absence of U.S. funds, but we didn't like the outcome of the democratic elections just held, either.

Alternatively, we can continue to support the terrorists who will purchase guns and support their wives in Europe... oh, yeah... and promise the destruction of Israel.

BB&T Bank Denies Loans in Eminent Domain Abuse

2006-01-26T20:01:00.000-06:00

If you love liberty, you have to read the story from the Institute for Justice:

Arlington, Va.—BB&T, the nation’s ninth largest financial holdings company with $109.2 billion in assets, announced today that it “will not lend to commercial developers that plan to build condominiums, shopping malls and other private projects on land taken from private citizens by government entities using eminent domain.”

BB&T Chairman and Chief Executive Officer John Allison should be declared a national hero. We can only hope that United Missouri Bank and Commerce Bank have the guts to step up.

The Politics of Corporate Bureaucracy

2006-01-25T08:28:00.000-06:00

I'm not going to turn this into a screed against Google. I LIKE Google. Part of my working day revolves around finding ways to keep various websites high on the Google search results.

But would the pre-IPO (before issuing a gazillion shares of stock) Google have caved to the Chinese government? Google has agreed to censor search results and MY GOD not provide service in Tibet!!

I don't know when this is supposed to begin. I checked the www.Google.cn search results for "Democracy" today, and Wikipedia came up first on the list. It is the same result as if I use the English version of the search engine.

You have to ask the question whether Google would have done something like this when Larry Page and his co-founder Sergey Brin were just little computer geeks? Uh... money changes people?

Then again, did you know that PageRank technology was named after Larry Page? There is a little ego in everyone. Vast sums of money just make it more visible. (I hope to find out just how much... someday.)

The big difference revolves around the politics involved. Politics REALLY changes things. If Winston Churchill said, "Politics is the art of the possible," then Henry Kissinger could be thought to counter with "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

It all starts by telling yourself (or letting the Chinese convince you) that "It's better for the Chinese country to have Google information in some forms than not to have access at all."

By cooperating with the Chinese government, Google grants justification to the Chinese authoritarian system. If they said "No" to providing access at all, someone might step in. But if you're Google, and no one can do things just like you do, there's some weight behind your "no." The Chinese people would revolt and maybe, just maybe, Democracy would prevail.

But Google is a public company now. Politics wins out... especially where SO MUCH MONEY is involved.

Butter for Cockroaches

2006-01-24T09:13:00.000-06:00

I think I'll put some butter on my kitchen floor tonight to feed the cockroaches. No matter that they breed like crazy, resulting in demands for more butter or they leave the kitchen and crawl around in my sheets at night.

Throwing over a trillion dollars at welfare programs reminds me a little of giving butter to cockroaches. The more money we give to people to live lives of desperation, dependent on our kindness or desire to keep them out of our lives in some way, the more people there are living lives of desperation.

Welfare moms having 4, 6, 8, 10 or even 12 children cannot be a good use of our public butter. If you and I are providing the money for this, why are we so reluctant to say, "Okay, one mistake, shame on you. More mistakes, shame on me."

There probably needs to be a safety net. Our society needs to be generous to people who fall onto temporary hard times.

But paying people not to work... paying for their medical care... paying for them to have children they can't afford... just doesn't make sense.

Giving people money and services seems to be a pretty powerful motivator to continue the activities that lead to their desperation. If we really want to be generous, we should give people a chance... to change. Continuing to provide programs that really encourage something we don't want seems a little counterproductive.

Putting butter on the kitchen floor, however, keeps the cockroaches out of the bedroom... until we run out of butter (or money to pay for it).

One solution: Instead of offering endless abortions, those living on public generosity get to have one child by mistake. They receive mandatory contraceptive instruction including, perhaps, some talk about abstinence. They get their first (lucky) 7 AFDC checks at the end of these instructional meetings. After a second mistake, at our expense, we have the right to prevent the problem. Shame on us. We should have the right to impose embedded contraception, or perhaps a more permanent solution.

It would take some guts to propose such legislation.

Judiciary Debates Moving Alito to Vote of Full Senate

2006-01-24T09:06:00.000-06:00

"The people, not judges, should make the law."

Orin Hatch pretty much summed up the debate with those few words. He suggested that judges like Alito would make legislators... legislate... rather than counting on the Supreme Court to promote liberal policies.

Orin Hatch got it exactly right. Senators should vote to allow abortion. If the Democrat Party doesn't like the outcome, they can act to change the balance of power in the Congress. They should not count on the Court to pass legislation, but to rule on the constitutionality of passed legislation.

Abortion is not a right in the Constitution, even through an amazing stretch of the "privacy" clause. This is a right of individual states to decide through their elected representatives.

***

On the other hand, the Senators could reasonably ask whether Alito would overturn Roe v. Wade because, no matter how misguided, they honestly believe the Court would be acting on the Constitutionality of a "right" to abortion.

My opinion is that they are notorious for finding rights in the Constitution that can be legislated from the bench rather than delegated to the electorate in the states.

The Right to Die

2006-01-22T10:55:00.000-06:00

I have very mixed feelings about the Supreme Court's recent decision regarding the Oregon right-to-die law.

On the one hand, Oregon voters twice upheld their state's law allowing the terminally ill to take drug overdose if two doctors agree with the diagnosis and conclude the patient is of sound mind.

On the other hand, the Hippocratic oath requires doctors to promise: "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect." That's pretty clear. The oath also has such pearls as: "Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy...." and requires a doctor to regard another doctor's children "...as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art - if they desire to learn it - without fee and covenant." That ain't happenin'.

I believe that people have a right to die, if they so choose. I wouldn't want to languish in a Terri Schiavo-like state interminably, sucking dry the resources of my family and my society. I wouldn't want to endlessly endure torturing pain until the Great Spirit chose to bring me to his bosom.

Where I do come across a problem is the judicial outcome of the SCOTUS case.

Scalia, Thomas and Roberts -- theoretically judicial conservatives -- dissented from the court's opinion allowing the assisted suicide to stand. There is NOTHING in the constitution allowing the Feds to step in to regulate this area, absent a Federal law. Regulation of physicians is a state's right, and the conservatives had no call to disallow the state's law.

latimes.com had this to say: "But the ruling leaves open the possibility that the Republican-controlled Congress could amend federal drug control laws and forbid physicians from prescribing lethal medications. Congress also could pass laws explicitly banning doctor-assisted suicide, as it tried to do in 1999."

Suicide has long been against the law, as has aiding another's suicide. This brings up the question of punishment: Who gets punished for the suicide? If you are aided and successful, the person giving comfort in your final minutes goes to jail. If you are unsuccessful in your attempt, I suppose the State could compound your misery by sending YOU to jail along with the person who helps you attempt the suicide.

I'm not sure this gets around to the right remedies.

Since the doctors in the Oregon law are allowed to provide perscriptions for the suicide dose, this ranks as "assisted suicide."

Who Federal law banning assisted suicide make life better for those wishing to end it? Nope. What purpose would it serve in society.

In other ways, this is consistent with the liberal SCOTUS predisposition to use the "privacy" clause in the constitution for abortion. Whether you are for or against that, it is settled law... kinda. The states have the individual right to decide whether or not to allow assisted suicide, but would face huge SCOTUS obstacles if they passed a law to ban abortion.

The three dissenting justices erred in their dissent from a constitutional perspective, but probably had good intentions. The Roberts appointment was designed to showcase the idea that it was the Constitution first, and then the LAW (rather than intentions) that they swore by oath to uphold.

It's as bad as extending the Commerce Clause of the constitution to allow Federal confiscation of land to protect an endangered species.

National Rifle Association and Iran

2006-01-20T21:58:00.000-06:00

The title of this blog post seems strange at first, but Financial Times reports that the U.S. obtained a ruling that Iran must pay $126 million in damages to the families of three U.S. citizens killed by Hizbollah:

A court in Rome last month ordered Banca Nazionale del Lavoro to freeze an account held by the Iranian government, pending a lawsuit over the deaths of three Americans in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.

Iran has protested that its official accounts were protected by the Vienna Convention governing diplomatic relations. But families of US citizens killed in the bombing of its Beirut embassy in 1983 by Hizbollah, the Lebanese Shia militant group, plan to follow suit – asking European courts to seize Iranian assets after a US ruling that Iran should pay $126m in damages.

So here's the question: If Hizbollah killed the U.S. citizens, why would the U.S. try to freeze Iran's assets in payment of the settlement?

It's the financier that they're after.

That being the case, would it make sense to go after gun manufacturers for murders by people using their guns?

The answer is obviously "no." The Iranians sponsor terrorism; the gun manufacturers sells guns. Perhaps there remains a huge difference between testimony and demeanor (what you say v. how you say it).

It just makes me nervous when I hear that Iran plans to move its money out of Europe, and Jacques Chirac still sides with the U.S. against Iran on the nuclear plant issue. What if Iran moves its reserves to N. Korea? Yikes.

Chances are it would be spent by N. Korea before it ever went back to Iran.

Oil prices at $69 a barrel really make me nervous, though.

Hitting the Jackpot: How Indian Gambling Really Hurts Us

2006-01-16T08:33:00.000-06:00

Jack Abramoff, recently indicted Washington lobbyist, got money to spread around from Indian tribes and then bought votes that favor those causes. One of those causes is tribal gambling.

The only problem is that some of the tribes weren't even really "tribes."

The American Enterprise reported:

Another book on Foxwoods, Hitting the Jackpot, by Wall Street reporter Brett Fromson, explains how a "tribe" that disappeared 300 years ago resurrected itself and won a gambling monopoly now worth $1.2 billion a year. Like Benedict, Fromson concludes that the re-created Pequot tribe is illegitimate, a political contrivance based on sympathy and political correctness, not reality or common sense--"the greatest legal scam."

Although most states allow taxing sales to non-Indian customers, most of the property leaves the property tax roles from which schools are funded. Compound that with the influx to the community of low-income casino workers who need the most social service support and you've built a recipe for fiscal disaster.

Oklahoma reportedly has as many as 82 tribal casinos with $1.2 billion in earnings per year. Oklahoma does not see a cent of that money, but lost about $39 million in property tax revenues.

Since they claim to be independent nations, why are they allowed to contribute to political campaigns? Tongsun Park got his proverbial bian stuck in a wringer for giving political bribes directed from a foreign country. (For those strict purists out there, I know a bian is Chinese rather than Korean.)

Which brings me to my conclusion: If you really want to be a political Ninja, throw accusations against the other party for which you are the most guilty. According to The American Enterprise again:

Californians have already shown their disgust for the "pay-to-play" politics that linked Indians to ousted governor Gray Davis and his lieutenant governor Cruz Bustamante, who did the Indians' bidding while taking $12 million of their cash. Experts say that is only the tip of the iceberg. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-California) and Representatives George Miller (D-Richmond), Mary Bono (R-Palm Springs), Hilda Solis (D-East L.A.), and Joe Baca (D-San Bernardino) have long served as legislative activists to expand tribal sovereignty.

If you want to know what's going on... follow the money. Tom Delay may be out of the House of Representatives at the end because he knew Jack Abramoff a little too well. Maybe he'll go to jail and maybe he won't.

I'll bet a really smart prosecutor could figure out some sort of Abramoff connection with, say, Sen. Barbara Boxer.

How to End Lobbying

2006-01-15T10:33:00.000-06:00

I'm not sure why we need Lobbying reforms. Maybe what we need is an END to corporate- or organization-sponsored lobbying.

First, corporations and other groups are not "people" and are not entitled to representation. (Remember... they can't vote in elections.)
Second, putting all that money in too few hands invites corruption.

Here's how to solve the problem: End contributions from any but individuals, and disallow firms from pressuring employees to contribute to anything IN ANY WAY. (It upset me when one of my former firms just about fired me for not contributing to United Way!) That includes meetings at work, payroll deductions, etc.

Groups and businesses would then have the onerous requirement of using any funding they choose to allocate in educating the public. The public would then vote on the candidates that promote frameworks for legislation that makes sense to them. (We don't ask candidates to the Supreme Court to give us a list of issues and how they would rule; we ask for a framework for making decisions.) Candidates could even promote specific legislation if they thought it might get them elected by individuals who vote.

Here's the rub: Elected officials like getting large sums from special interests because it's easier than getting the opinions of large groups of individuals and convincing them to support the candidate.

I guess you could say that lobbyist contributions are simply a time management issue. We need to reallocate our elected officials' priorities.

Stupid in America

2006-01-15T09:31:00.000-06:00

We kid ourselves into thinking that spending money on education is the way to improve it. The structure is broken, and John Stossel knows this.

I missed his show on Friday, Jan. 13, but I've been using John Stossel films in my classes for years and know that he believes our education system is an achilles heel.

The Belgium kids called our U.S. students "stupid" if they couldn't do a simple test that the Belgium kids found easy. Aside from Belgium's decidedly European perspective of Americans, our education system pretty much stinks.

Like any other job, some people do it for the money (or the benefits). Others were inspired by a teacher in their own lives and want to inspire students (probably fewer than the first category). Others like having their summers off. I don't think we can reasonably assume all teachers should be treated as heroes any more than we can assume all teachers are slackers... and there's nothing wrong with doing something for the money as long as you're good at it.

And therein lies a big problem with education: measurement.

One of the things I learned while working is that it's easier to manage something when you can measure it. How do you measure whether a teacher is good or not? If you could measure that, how do you manage it?

Unfortunately, like everything else run by a political system, the more dispersed the responsibility the more difficult it is to fire anyone. Someone needs to be in charge. The Superintendent maintains responsibility for implementing the school board's vision. That requires a school board with a vision. Hopefully, schools will insist on spending less time dealing with problem parents and their problem students, and more time on teacher qualifications and measurement... less time dealing with freedom-of-religion issues and more time on curriculum and measuring achievement... less time on social promotion and more time on remediation for poor student performance.

Taking power away from the political system and bringing it closer to the parents seems to help immeasurably. The success of small urban schools cut out of the great education bureacracy points to the success of de-institutionalizing public school.

The best way to take power away from a political institution is to offer it less, not more, money.

You don't need the newest textbooks, the most up-to-date classroom furniture, or the most elaborate equipment. Having more computers won't help students who can't do math with a pencil and paper. Having more computers won't help students who don't go to sleep at night at a reasonable time. Having more computers won't help students with a poor diet, rich in processed sugar and simple carbohydrates that leave them unable to concentrate.

What you need in education is a return to basic instruction, with enrichment only after students have mastered the basics. And speaking of the basics, what ever happened to teaching students "civics?" And god forbid they learn anything about grammar (aside from beginning sentences with a conjunction).

I have had students in college-level economics classes that can't distinguish the x- from the y-axis on a graph, or do a simple change formula. That is an unacceptable result of a public secondary education system. Worse yet, how the heck did they get in college?

Paying existing teachers more won't solve the problem... and could result in adverse consequences. (That's a long economic argument that I won't get into here.) Reducing infrastructure expenses and using some of that money to increase teacher salaries over time will attract qualified people to the profession. Qualified people will tend to have more of a positive result than other categories of teachers.

Gov. Blunt has some interesting legislation coming up in 2006 that should strengthen the way education, rather than infrastructure, gets funded in Missouri.

Warrensburg R-VI K-12 expenditures are:

Average Per Pupil Expenditure By Building
Differences in per pupil expenditures are a result of variations
in staffing and equipment needs (editor's note: huh?)
High School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$6,292
Sterling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$6,008
Middle School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$5,544
Martin Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$6,651
Gateway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$7,210
Ridge View . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$6,187
WAVTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$5,298
South East . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$6,976
The district average investment per pupil is $6,080.

I'm sure you could get a darn good private education for $6,000 a year. In fact, the more I think about it, having 20 students in my class at $6,000 a year would bring in about $120,000... if we met in my basement. That wouldn't be so bad for a 9-month per year job.

Naw... I can't take the cut in pay.

Sam Alito

2006-01-14T18:15:00.000-06:00

What a fiasco, these hearings on a Supreme Court appointment. Poor Samuel Alito, an immigrant's son... married to the same woman for so many years... pretty much a boring, bookwormish constitutional scholar... having to sit through the interminable questioning by the likes of:

Teddy Kennedy: Unconvicted murderer, blustering boor and befuddled sot.

Joe Biden: Incontrovertible windbag who somehow believes that the hearings are about HIM!

Patrick Leahy: Hoping to avoid trial himself for giving away classified information on several occasions. He didn't earn the nickname "Leaky Leahy" for a bladder problem.

Then we have poor Sam. It would be nice to know what he really thought, but those who achieve high office somehow manage to put getting what they want above being right. This was a lesson that I still haven't learned... me and Robert Bork. Fortunately, I do not aspire to office and have little chance of an appointment to SCOTUS.

I suppose that means I can continue tilting at windmills.

Sam didn't give away a thing in the questioning. It would be really nice if he would JUST interpret the laws in the context of whether they pass constitutional muster. Perhaps he really will.

Here's what all the hubbub comes down to: The Democrat Party is in a minority and would NOT be able to get any really weird things passed without a compliant Supreme Court interpreting cases HOWEVER THEY CHOOSE. Strict constructionist like (hopefully) John Roberts and Sam Alito (claim to be) think the U.S. Constitution really does mean something and it is not for them to do whatever they think is RIGHT, but rather to do what is constitutional.

Sadly, this also means that totally ridiculous laws must stand... if they pass consitutional muster.

Here's part of the problem with interpreting the Constitution: There are many ways in which it may be interpreted. For example:

Originalists (like Robert Bork) interpret the consitution as it was intended to be meant by the writers based on a study of their writings during the time.

Constructionists (like John Roberts) interpret the constitution based on the words that were written rather than the intention behind the words.

Some scholars claim that each of the above simply subsets from textualism, although other scholars say that Constructionists are textualists, and that original meaning versus original intent are controlling doctrine of the two.

I think that the Constitution WAS a simple document, designed to let reasonable people turn out the rascals in power should we so decide. We haven't lived up to the original INTENT of the constitution because we have accepted the benevolent gifts of the elected to the point where we are too weak to turn them out.

Perhaps by having some strict constructionists on the court we can at least rest assured they will prevent the elected from doing maximum potential harm.

Alito and Alley-Oops

2006-01-10T22:08:00.000-06:00

Sen. Ted Kennedy strikes again by calling Supreme Court nominee Sam Alito by the name "Alioto."

At a birthday celebration for my now two-year-old nephew, my father suggested that Kennedy does this to irritate his debate opponents.

How could that be when he called the beloved Barak Obama by the name "Osama." Obviously he didn't mean to irritate his beloved fellow democrat.

The problem is that the poor old boor is simply addled. He got the veins in his nose fixed after all those years of drinking, but he simply couldn't repair the brain damage done over all those years.

***

On a different note... I think I finally fixed my computer. I landed on a web-site that decided to download a dreaded disease or two. The problem is that the diseases flourish faster than the doctors can find remedies.

Microsoft has released a malware removal tool that kills some trojans, but you have to try its antispyware beta product (free on the Microsoft website) to rid yourself of the adware. Adware downloads those annoying programs that pop-up seemingly out of nowhere (especially for Winfixer). And Microsoft doesn't kill everything. So I downloaded Xoft anti-spyware ($39.95 thank-you-very-much) which I had purchased to rid my wife's PC of some nasty things. Xoft killed the remaining evildoers.

You wouldn't let some advertising company come sit in your living room. Why haven't those addled boors like Kennedy figured out a law to keep adware/spyware/malware manufacturers from taking up residence in your computer?

I hate saying their ought to be a law, but when someone else brings their effulgent into my life, and I have no choice about it... there ought to be a law. THAT is the purpose of government.

The Ultimate Irony

2006-01-05T22:08:00.000-06:00

Imagine Ozzy Osbourne dies and leaves all his money to Jack Osbourne, adrenaline junkie. In the meantime, Jack has married Anna Nicole Smith. Anna Nicole accompanies him to El Capitan mountain, which he's climbing on his MTV reality show. Jack falls when he's just a few feet from the top. On the way down, he sees someone handing a note to Anna Nicole. Splat. Anna Nicole turns to the tour guide and asks: "Is he dead?"

The Rest of the World

2006-01-04T09:12:00.000-06:00

I'm a pretty happy guy. I live in a nice, middle-class neighborhood with my beautiful wife, Suzanne, and our border collie Connor. My work is interesting and, on occasion, challenging. My cars run.

If you're thinking about having a pity party for yourself on any given day, I suggest you check out Kids with Cameras. This was an organization developed by a photographer living in Calcutta, India among the prostitutes. She began holding photography classes with their children, who are about the only strata of Indian life lower than the prostitutes themselves. They used inexpensive 35mm cameras.

The images show joy among the desperate conditions. Sometimes the photos just show desperate conditions.

Thanks to web guru Jeffrey Zeldman for sharing that website with the world.

I guess I'll return to one of my two laptops to write a bit of code.

First Kill All the Lawyers

2005-12-30T23:17:00.000-06:00

I recently posted about Sony/BMG adding XCP spyware to about 3 million CDs. The spyware then proceeded to mess up just about every computer it touched.

Here is the settlement per Reuters:

The settlement would entitle people who bought the CDs with the copy protection to a cash payment of $7.50 and one album download from a list of more than 200 titles. Alternatively, they could download three albums from the list.

Lame.

Here's who made out on that one: Lawyers. $7.50 means squat to an individual that's had his computer messed up. Three million $7.50s at about a 30% lawyer cut means a whole lot more to the lawyers.

Shakespeare was right: First kill all the lawyers.

Another New Year's Recollection

2005-12-30T19:17:00.000-06:00

I've assumed the blogging position for one last post of the year 2005. That position either involves sitting up right or reclining with my feet on the counter in my kitchen, banging away at a Toshiba laptop that punches through to the internet on a wireless router through a cable modem.

Observation #1: Are we more connected or less connected? Although we don't spend as much time talking with each other, or reading books, or watching (god forbid!) TV, I would argue that we're more connected in many ways. For example, we get to talk to whom we wish rather than those that are only immediately available.

Heck... I met my wife through a dating site on the internet.

The police scanner buzzes quickly through its Johnson County-relevant channels (about 6 of the 900 available).

Observation #2: Most of our public services resources are used to transport 50-year-old women with chest pain to Western Missouri Medical Center, pull over people with the main offense of having broken registration laws, saving people from their own suicides, etc. Wouldn't it make sense to have a lesser category of law enforcement that tends to such matters, leaving the real Police, EMS, Fire Departments, etc. to tend to the serious issues? Much of the Police hoopla on the scanner, however, simply points to law as the leading cause of crime.

But it doesn't really matter what the law is if you happen to have a certain name (or bank account size).

Observation #3: The rich get richer. But that is a survival skill, brought about as the result of a lesser ability to humilate than the rest of us. It's a reverse bell curve really, with those at the bottom end of the social scale breeding like bunnies at public expense, and those at the top stealing cunningly from the rest of us. Why do the rich pray on the middle class? Because that's where the money is. Those who rob from the rich have never heard of taxes; those laws clearly work best when applied to a way larger group with a smaller amount of money.

"What?" you ask. "The rich pray on the middle class?"

Yes, my dear economic grasshopper. If you happen to own a utility, simply pay yourself a bonus for disposing of assets to keep the company afloat that you defrauded in the first place. Enron didn't work out either; why should the bright shining stars of Aquila be put to a different test?

Oh, yes... and those high rollers at the Red Cross? All they had to do was snow some gullible Republicans into believing that the way to reduce government graft and corruption was to give the money to private charities for disposition. Now, while charities line up at the public trough rather than coercing their employees and the public to make contributions, the limosine-riding heads of the private charities delegate to outside contractors the responsibility not to STEAL FROM THE CHARITY.

This should be further proof that taking money away from one group (through taxes, in this case) and giving to another group, regardless of the motivation is just a bad idea.

Observation #4: If we keep doing what we've been doing, we'll keep getting what we've been getting. I am over the Republicans as a national party. While better than the Democrat party alternatives in most cases, we need more political candidates with the courage to dismantle this web of government redistribution programs or we will find ourselves hanging on the next dollar of government kindness to live each day of our lives.

Observation #5: Most people don't get it or don't care. They still think if you check the box on your 1040 form, it really WON'T increase your taxes if the federal government makes a contribution to the Federal Election Commission for distribution to politicians. The same people who would be loathe to continue dealing with their rebellious 18-year-old glue-sniffing son shrug their shoulders when the social welfare programs and medicaid provide for that wayward child's life and medical care. Maybe it does take a village... to be that foolish.

If we could only remove all cause and effect from public view, then we would all be someday dependent on the loving arms of government to swaddle us throughout our lives.

Atlas Shrugged, baby, Atlas shrugged.

My wife has disallowed me from joining a militia, so government growth and income redistribution are safe for one more year.

Pursuit of Perfection

2005-12-26T21:31:00.000-06:00

Today I saw two old friends of mine from college. One of them is a five foot tall female who recently lost a lot of weight. I'm about 15 lbs. overweight myself after a week at a Jamaican all-inclusive culminating in Christmas excess right here in Warrensburg, Mo.

Cheryl looked great.

Tonight I ran across a Swedish website with subpages that study changes made to a magazine glamour cover.

Wouldn't it be great, I just thought, if we could Adobe Photoshop ourselves into perfection, not just on the printed page but in real life? This ranks right up there in my book with teleportation. But what if I could only have one or the other? Which would I choose?

See what happens when you read a philosophy website: choices between two hypotheticals!

The "Holidays"

2005-12-26T18:48:00.000-06:00

At the risk of offending nearly everyone, it's time to offer up a comparison of Kwanzaa and Christmas.

First, the required reading comes from the official Kwanzaa website, and The Right Coast blog.

It's really quite laughable to learn the true origins and development of Kwanzaa... until you think about Christmas.

Granted, Christmas was not the brainchild of a 1960s activist, torturer and convicted felon. But it's not really the birth of Jesus Christ, either!

For example, it's pretty likely that the birth took place in July, named for the Roman Emporer Julius Caesar to whom Mary and Joseph traveled to pay "tribute." That's a clever name for "taxes," doncha think? (Let's discard this possible explanation out of hand because it was Caesar Augustus rather than Julius Caesar that taxed the whole world into which Jesus was born.)

Kwanzaa, named for first fruit of the harvest, probably relates to a harvest that couldn't take place in December in West Africa (where most U.S. slaves come from). In all likelihood, Swahili was not the dialect spoken by most slaves.

In ancient Egypt (which is part of Africa, by the way), people became enslaved by losing wars, crimes, and indebtedness. There were slaves in biblical times.

Prior to the 16th century, most of the slave trade appears to have taken place between E. Africa and the Arabian Peninsula.

The 18th century slave trade took place primarily when W. Africans sold their own people to Europeans. The Europeans then transported the W. Africans to The New World to work on the plantations.

This isn't to deny that many Europeans also came to work in the new world from debtor's prisons, or that indigenous caribbean peoples also fell into slavery in the U.S. We're just talking about where the swahili word "Kwanzaa" might come from.

Now here's the problem: Swahili is an E. African language. Swahili probably came from the arabic word for "The Coast" and refers to Arabs landing on the coast of Africa. This, according to the Swahili Language and Culture website.

Kwanzaa is now celebrated by U.S. descendents of W. African slaves in December. Kwanzaa comes from the E. African Swahili language. In Africa, the Yam Festival generally celebrates first harvest. The Yam Festival is in August rather than December.

Christmas, on the other hand, probably developed in December as a counter-measure against many pagan sacrifices which occur in December. Bible.org gives another explanation:

Hippolytus, in the second century A.D., argued that this was Christ's birthday. Meanwhile, in the eastern Church, January 6th was the date followed.

Some scholars point to Josephus' written comment that there was an eclipse before Herod died. Jesus was born slightly before Herod died. Herod died around the time of passover, so scholars pinpoint this to somewhere between March 29 and April 4, in the year 4 B.C. rather than 0 B.C. The timing error is attributed to the monk Dionysius, charged with developing a calendar for the Church by the first Pope John in A.D. 525.

The whole idea of father Christmas bringing gifts probably started with a 4th century Roman Christian named Nicholas who escaped persecution for his religion. He had inherited a fortune, and fortunately ended up in Turkey. He heard of a man who would be forced to sell his three daughters into slavery if he couldn't raise a dowery for their marriage (in the old days, you had to pay a guy to marry a girl). Each night for three nights, Nick tossed a bag of coin through the father's window.

Nicholas also is known as a protector of children, thus the idea of gifts to children (rather than poor fathers with unmarriageable daughters).

Stnicholascenter.org explains that manna, a unique substance said to have healing powers, developed in his grave some time after he died in 343 A.D. He died on Dec. 6, leaving us with a possible explanation for the date around Dec. 25. He was eventually named a Saint by the Church.

So we can laugh at Kwanzaa, but maybe we should laugh at Christmas, too.

Equipment Failures

2005-12-20T09:08:00.000-06:00

My wife and I returned from Jamaica yesterday, deplaned, cleared customs and stood with almost 200 of our closest friends (well, we knew some of their names and where they stayed while in Jamaica) at the baggage carousel in the International wing at Lambert-St. Louis Airport.

After about 10 minutes of no ringing, no red light, no baggage, I heard an official say: "Oh. Noone told you!"

"Told me what?" I asked, puzzled.

"Told you that the baggage carousel wasn't working." He snickered. "They'll bring up the luggage on carts in a few minutes."

About 20 minutes later two airport guys that looked like they snuck in from Jamaica delivered the first of what would be approximately 20 loads of our luggage. To add to the confusion, they were delivered on opposite sides of the carousel. This meant that we had to check for our luggage among the hundreds of pieces on one side, then scurry to the other side of the carousel area to check for our bags there.

It was truly an embarrassing moment in U.S. aviation history.

Imagine people deplaning in the U.S. for the first time, seeing a non-working baggage carousel and the manual work-around that barely worked.

Here's the truly embarrassing part: The carousel had been inoperative for two weeks while they wait for some electronic part from Korea.

We Think We're Free

2005-12-16T12:27:00.000-06:00

I don't know what makes me want to post to the blog, or edit news for my online paper, digitalBURG.com, while I'm on vacation. I can only conclude that I've had too much Jamaican sun.

Besides, my wife has secluded herself in the massage hut where the masseuse will pour peppermint oil on her and wrap her in banana leaves.

I always enjoy coming to Couples Swept Away in Negril, Jamaica for the food, the sun, the scuba dives, the people we see again and the new ones we meet. This year I met a fellow with a high-level position in the government of Winnipeg, Canada and his lovely wife. We had dinner together at one of the many fine restaurants and discussed, among other things, politics.

In Canada, you can be prosecuted for uttering ugly words against homosexuals. They would never, however, consider allowing the state to take private property away from an individual and allow development of anything other than a "public use."

In the U.S., you can be prosecuted and jailed indefinitely for uttering ugly words against the government and a variety of other potentially terrorist-like actions. Note that you don't get to see a magistrate or otherwise take your prosecution before a judge for ... well, it could be years. The Supreme Court in the U.S. has also decided that it's okay to take property from one individual and give it to another, as long as the new owner promises to improve the tax base with some sort of development or another.

When will government start to act rationally and consistently here in the states. Perhaps they need a copy of L. Ron Hubbard's book Dianetics. At least they could determine from the "engrams" why they react so senselessly sometimes. (Note that I am NOT Tom Cruise-like in my appreciation for the "science.")

Also read Bill Wayne's recent blog post on political inconsistency.

Another diver, a German, decried the fact that their politicians have voted themselves an extremely rich retirement plan, healthcare plan, etc.

Guess what? In the U.S. our politicians retire with millions of dollars in retirement benefits while the rest of us get Social Security. If they don't want a black, a hispanic or a woman on their staff they are not tied to any EEO requirements. If they decide not to accommodate the handicapped, they don't have to. They have an all expenses paid trip to the doctor whenever they want one. I'm just waiting for the House post office and non-recourse lender of last resort to reopen.

We think we're free? We won't be free until our elected officials have to live by the same rules we struggle under and they stop making more restrictions for us to live under.

Next time you think we're better than the Canadians or the Germans, just talk to a couple of them. We certainly have our own crosses to bear in that respect.

Why "Merry Christmas?"

2005-12-11T05:22:00.000-06:00

I'm not a particularly religious person in most ways; I don't go to church on Sunday, I don't listen to religious radio stations, I don't watch Rev. Fallwell or the Hour of Power television shows. I grew up in the Methodist and Lutheran faiths, but just don't have the orthodox view of Christianity that would be implied by that upbringing.

I have a fairly agnostic view when it comes to the whole idea, I guess.

I do, however, appreciate the spiritual values that Christianity and other religions bring to the table... as long as they don't try to make me believe or follow their orthodoxy.

That's why I can't get too wrapped up about the whole politically correct orthodoxy of saying "Happy Holidays" rather than "Merry Christmas." (Note that my news publication digitalBURG.com carries a "Merry Christmas" header during these happy holidays.)

Christmas is a religious holiday appropriate for a country founded by people who were Christians. It's like Martin Luther King day. We haven't yet bastardized the MLK holiday into "Social Justice Season" or some such. Christmas honors Jesus "Christ," not "Doc Holiday." Therefore it seems appropriate to honor his contributions to society with a day that bears his name in some way.

Now to tie this together with my earlier post: I'm not sure that any person, remembrance or celebration should receive national holiday status. People shouldn't get paid days off for "national holidays." The nation shouldn't tell us what days we can and can't take off, or what days we must pay our employees not to work.

Not one single day should the government be allowed to tell us we must remember, or we must celebrate, or we must honor the dead. They don't have the right as our government to do that... even if we want to give it to them.

So I don't mind hearing or saying "Merry Christmas." In fact, I kind of like the holidays.

Can Someone Please Explain "Vacations?"

2005-12-10T11:01:00.000-06:00

I used to work in corporate environments where we received paid holidays and vacations. when I was younger, it seemed like a great idea; I didn't have to go to work that day! Since growing up a bit, I'm having more and more problem with the whole concept.

For example, why do we get paid not to work? Just a thought, but shouldn't the option be available to work and make more money?

Also, paid vacations simply mean that the firm pays us less than we could be worth because it costs them more to hire us. Here's how it works in a market economy: When the cost of something goes up, we use less of it. That works for gasoline or, if you happen to be an employer, it works for labor. Paid days off increase the cost of a worker not only because the company pays the wage for the worker that day but because the company loses the production from that worker for the paid day off. They hire less labor as the result of the higher labor cost.

Some companies have become wise to the whole folly of paid days off, sick days, etc. If you don't use your sick days, they reimburse you for them to some extent.

Wouldn't it be better to allow employees to schedule days off when they must have them, then deduct from their salary? The employee who doesn't need the days off can work, increasing his take home pay. The employee who doesn't need the take home pay can take the day off.

Companies have even become somewhat wise about this by announcing a certain number of holidays along with a certain number of "personal days" that the employee can specify.

Most companies still do not pay any more to the employee who works more days.

I'm going on "vacation" next week, but will take my laptop. I love what I do, I just want to do it from a warm beach for a week or so. Perhaps if I had lots of extra employees hanging about with the necessary skills to do what I do, I would not work for a week.

Maybe all those big corporations that have paid days off just have too many employees hanging about.

Clinton Embarrases U.S. at U.N.

2005-12-10T10:17:00.000-06:00

Aside from the pathetic malfeasance the U.N. hides behind to mask its sheer incompetence at bringing real solutions to world problems, it also will now serve as a springboard for Bill Clinton's next round of political aspirations.

Clinton, Canada's guest at the U.N.'s recent meeting on Kyoto accords, was miraculously allowed to speak. He pronounced President Bush's environmental policy "flat wrong" and declared that the U.S. could meet and even exceed Kyoto's restrictive policies "in a way that would strengthen, not weaken, our economies."

So he's working on becoming the next King of the U.N. I guess he saw the looting taking place under Kofi Annan's watch and thought that might be the next great opportunity for his legacy... of looting.

Makes one wonder what the payoff to Annan would be if Clinton were to become head of that ridiculous waste of our money.

By way of background, global warming is a non-starter with me. There's too much evidence against it and too much supposition to support it. Oh, and let's put all the restrictions on the U.S. and other developed nations rather than on the other developing countries in the world.

Developing countries like Kyoto because it would, in effect redistribute wealth from developed countries to less-developed countries. This includes Russia, which is quite Clintonesque in its pursuit of business opportunities. Among other things, Kyoto would provide the Russians with a trillion dollars in greenhouse gas permits that it could then sell to countries that need them (the U.S.). The strange part is that the Russians don't emit as much carbon dioxide in their home country because they can provide so much of their GDP through extortion that they don't produce that much domestically.

Since the annual costs of domestic heating oil and gasoline consumption would rise dramatically (estimates are around $3,000 for each U.S. household), and because this falls disproportionately on the poor, then the U.S. would have to devise yet another redistribution scheme.

The Clintons would once again move closer to their goals of a socialist Nanny State here in the U.S., a world political stage from which Bill could spot the next Monica Lewinsky, and unbelievable wealth looted from an organization which can't keep track of its program expenditures. What a perfect storm for the Clintons.

North Dakota News Bulletin

2005-12-09T10:04:00.000-06:00

After our recent six inches of snow in Warrensburg, Mo., I found this email from a county emergency manager out in the western part of North Dakota particularly interesting. Note that this has not been checked as an actual email sent by an actual county emergency manager. The sentiment rather than the news is the point:

WEATHER BULLETIN

Up here in the Northern Plains we just recovered from a Historic event --- may I even say a "Weather Event" of "Biblical Proportions" --- with a historic blizzard of up to 24" inches of snow and winds to 50 MPH that broke trees in half, stranded hundreds of motorists in lethal snow banks, closed all roads, isolated scores of communities and cut power to 10's of thousands.

FYI:
George Bush did not come....
FEMA staged nothing....
No one howled for the government...
No one even uttered an expletive on TV...
Nobody demanded $2,000 debit cards.....
No one asked for a FEMA Trailer House....
No one looted....
Phil Cantori of the Weather Channel did not come....
And Geraldo Rivera did not move in.

Nope, we just melted snow for water, sent out caravans to pluck people out of snow engulfed cars, fired up wood stoves, broke out coal oil lanterns or Aladdin lamps, and put on an extra layer of clothes because up here it is 'work or die'. We did not wait for some affirmative action government to get us out of a mess created by being immobilized by a welfare program that trades votes for 'sitting at home' checks.

Even though a Category "5" blizzard of this scale has never fallen this early...we know it can happen and how to deal with it ourselves.

Government as Religion

2005-12-08T08:05:00.000-06:00

The call for prayers in Iraq or any country of Muslim faith sounds very shrill and non-melodic to me. That could very well be because I don't have the traditions of that religion or understand the languages in which the singers praise... Allah?

I can assure those of you who have not heard the call to prayer that you would not want it playing over the loudest loud speaker from the tallest building in Warrensburg, MO. It would set your teeth on edge.

Atheists could very well feel the same way about public displays of Christianity, such as manger scenes, crucifixes, and the tablets of the Ten Commandments.

Agnostics can go two ways: 1) They could outwardly embrace the diversity of different religions and inwardly wonder why people go to all that trouble for something that cannot be proven or disproven, or 2) they could inwardly embrace the diversity of different religions and outwardly wonder why people go to all that trouble for something that cannot be proven or disproven. Have I left out any combinations?

Religions have served a dramatic purpose in the history of the world by vesting power in someone whose word is indisputable. If the god/prophet's words are indisputable, we must listen and obey... or risk destroying society or giving up the ultimate reward of peace and happiness for eternity. Strong religious leaders with zealot followers arise to enforce the teachings of that particular religion. If we don't obey, WE must die.

While that is an extreme outcome from religions that attempt to provide outlines for a religious individual's life, it's pretty much a normal outcome when all those religious individuals band together and enforce their will on others.

We still have blue laws in this country!

When you have a homogeneous society, it's pretty easy to get your brand of religion put into the law. When you have a diverse society, you have less chance of having your particular brand of religion put into law.

And note that this harmonizes around the melody of government.

People in a religious order look to their god for guidance in their life and heart, and to the church to redistribute income from the richer members of the congregation to the poorer members. After all, it's good to give (especially to the church).

As countries grow more educated and less dependent on religion, the urge remains strong to find someone who can tell us how to live and what to do. The need to have someone redistribute wealth from the richer members of society to the poorer members of society falls upon the government. A religious despot puts down his flock through public floggings or other torture for abuse of the moral code. Evolved societies put prostitutes and drug users in prison. A religious society elevates to cult status a Carrie Nation to axe unsuspecting whiskey aging patiently in oak casks, all the while the preacher sips his in private. Government just taxes the hell out of it (a "sin" tax), while government leaders happily spend the proceeds of the tax buying votes or otherwise purchasing support for their continued office.

Hundreds of thousands of people turn not to their god, but to the government for understanding, sympathy and relief when natural disasters lay waste to a major metro area. If no relief is forthcoming, we turn away from our leaders and cry "Oh, God. Why hast thou foresaken me?"

A claim to power in such a place is not an understanding of scripture, but an understanding of laws (and loopholes in laws) that allow you to corrupt spending plans to buy votes for supporters and pay off your enemies. If we don't have enough public trough to spend flagrantly through normal means, the government just takes more or turns one loaf of bread into many (inflation).

Libertarians listen to the politics of government as the new religion and hear shrill wailing where many people see the protection of a manger or hear the sweet voice of morning calls to Allah. They want to be free from the religious, er, government leaders constantly telling them to increase their contributions. They want to be free of the religious, er, government oppression that forces them to give their lands to followers of the religious order, er, government. They want to be free to pursue life without harming others or being harmed by others.

Government is the religion of a society that has no religion. And ultimately, for government to work in a land of diversity, it must totally replace any existing religions. It must take away their symbols of power (the cross) and erase the memories of its heritage (the manger).

If you don't believe this is possible, check out the societies that ultimately turn socialist or, worse, communist. Socialist countries deny religion; communist countries extinguish it. They have to in order to retain their power.

For government to work in Iraq, the leaders must sublimate a truth that never existed and get people to play along with the new religion.

When an insidious religion enters through the back door and promises people a new freedom, followers flock to the promise and raise the leader/prophet to exalted status. Ultimately, the government has to kill the leader or risk losing control.

Whether it's a religious order or government, the fellow at the top always commands that the followers give until it hurts. And while we all impoverish ourselves to provide for our fellow man, the guy at the top lives pretty darn well.

One Thing in Common with the French

2005-12-06T23:52:00.000-06:00

I haven't bought French wine since they failed us in an Iraq alliance. I seldom even think about the French without shaking my head on a variety of subjects.

The French make a lot of sense in one area, though: They don't think Google and other content aggregators should make money off other peoples' content. French news agency AFP is now suing Google for aggregating photos and story excerpts from thousands of news Web sites.

In addition to Google News, Google has an ownership interest in Topix.net. Both of these websites pull together headlines, photos, and content and redistribute it based on search engine technology. In essence, when readers enter "64093" or "Warrensburg, MO" into the search text field, the search engine scours its indexed material and delivers the story headlines, photos (in some cases) and summary text.

Topix.net even allows other news websites to use their free content as a method of deriving their own free content. What that means is I can take a snippet of code from Topix.net (that they provide) and insert it into my website. This code then delivers whatever I have asked for from all the other sources that Topix.net indexes.

Here's the problem with the business model: As people get all this news from Topix.net, they get the advertising revenues as the 900-pound guerilla and I don't get squat from the content they've used. It's much like sampling my music without paying me a royalty.

Further, the business model runs the risk of destroying the source of the very material that will make them successful. That is, as more advertising dollars flow to the aggregators and less to the originators, the originators (like digitalBURG.com) will go out of business and then there will be no reason to go to Topix.net. All that will be left is the homogeneous news provided by AP and other news wires.

I'm quite sure that the big guys at Google and Topix.net don't really care about that; they've made their billions (or millions, in the case of startup Topix.net). And I must say that they provide attribution, even though the search engine code doesn't always do a stunning job of getting the best local news. For example, we may have piles of local news on digitalBURG.com for 64093, but the Topix.net search engine takes a pretty broad swath around that zip for its search results. KansasCity.com, Springfield News Leader, Columbia Ledger, etc. all get their stories ranked higher than digitalBURG.com because they have more website hits. This criteria for ranking news selected for readers means that using Topix.net to find your news for 64093 gives you less 64093 news because the big guys all around us suck up the oxygen in search engine results.

Yahoo!, on the other hand, uses human editors and pays AFP (Agence France-Press) and AP (Associated Press) a royalty for using its content.

One of the reasons I don't use the Topix.net code snippet to render more material for the website is because I have no confidence that the material it returns will be relevant. The other issue is ethical; I don't want to use someone else's material in such a way.

digitalBURG.com and other small publishers need some sort of class action lawsuit to make sure we get some royalty for the content taken from us which Google then turns into Googlezillions in advertising revenue.

Googling Myself

2005-12-06T09:36:00.000-06:00

Google is an expensive stock. It's also a pretty darn good search engine. I haven't quite figured out why that makes it one of the largest companies in the world.

On a less serious note, have you ever googled yourself? Sometimes it's interesting to see who else has your name... and what they're doing with it.

When I googled myself today, I noticed that there is a Ben Pierce at University of Pennsylvania. He is professor of tuba and euphonium. Hmmm... I haven't heard "euphonium" since the musical "The Music Man."

Then there's a Ben Pierce who co-wrote "The Dracula Murders" for the Vampire Library of Darkness. Scary.

The one that really caught my attention was Ben Pierce the porn star. He is in the cast of "Bad Penny." I'm sure this was about someone who keeps coming back like a bad penny... and the men who let her. I hope that's not the only movie he's in (success will keep him from having to wait tables at Geoffrey's in Malibu).

Just to reassure my parents and the other four people who read this blog regularly... I am NOT a porn star. I go out to Los Angeles for two months each year to write and edit financial texts. Occasionally I star in an educational video.

Although I work in Northridge, which like Chatsworth has somewhat of a reputation for porn filming, I have not to my knowledge been filmed without my clothes ON. I live in Woodland Hills when I'm working in California, which has a reputation for being a little uppity even though it is only one city south of Chatsworth.

I'm the Ben Pierce that teaches economics and finance at Central Missouri State University, is a national instructor for Stalla Review for the CFA Exam, and am digitalBURG.com managing director.

Those crazy Bens.

Aetna's Medicare Commercial

2005-12-02T17:11:00.000-06:00

Aetna recently began airing a new commerical with a sweet old lady telling us that Medicare prescription plans picking up more of her expenses allowed her to spend more on gifts to her grandchildren.

You could look at it as if WE are paying for gifts to her grandkids. I rather resent that idea.

Here's how it works: You and I pay for medicare. When it picks up more of her expenses, we have less to spend on ourselves while she has more to spend on her grandkids.

Great. May I have another, sir?

When are we going to figure out that someone else's government payments are our COSTS. It's not nice to steal someone else's things... unless you're the government.

The New AT&T

2005-12-01T08:41:00.000-06:00

The Circle of Life appears to rule Corporate as well as private America, at least in some cases. Notably, SBC Communications (formerly Southwestern Bell Corporation) of San Antonio, TX will acquire its former parent AT&T (formerly American Telephone and Telegraph).

The main reason for my interest is primarily personal: I started my career as an economist for Southwestern Bell Telephone Company in Topeka, Kansas in 1981. From there, I went to St. Louis in January 1984 as a financial analyst when SWBT spun off from AT&T in one of the largest divestitures in the history of the world. SBC was one of the regional holding companies spun off from AT&T in the 1984 consent decree.

I was the financial analyst responsible for creating the first SBC Budget, and then provided variance analysis (describing how and why reality varies from a budget) for the budget.

All corporations appear to base their decisions more on the whims of the leaders and the politics of large organizations rather than any sort of economic reality. But I spent a lot of time at 1010 Pine Street and later on the 39th floor of One Bell Center in Downtown St. Louis. I learned to love to hate large corporations.

More stories on that later.

My real concern with "The New AT&T" is their new logo. Even the PR people sound dyspeptic in their faux-ebulient press releases announcing the logo. Was this a joke?

As if drawn by crayon in a 2nd grade class after a lecture on global warming, one budding young artist must have disagreed with the teacher and drew a globe that appears ready for a new ice age. The polar caps have grown, and the sun shining on the left side of the old logo has disappeared. The amateurish rendering of the ice as it spins around the globe are laughable.

At least someone with a sense of humor shot out the middle of the SBC logo in 1997 after the merger with Pacific Telesis. Okay... it was supposed to be PacTel's star in the middle of the "B."

Now to the question of why oh why SBC acquired AT&T. Getting bigger in itself is only fun for bodybuilders. Theoretically, companies should only merge to evolve synergies that result in higher earnings per share for all shareholders.

The reason, however, is simple: Broadband. In 1998, AT&T acquired TCI and MediaOne in an attempt to become a broadband provider that competes with cable firms, except on an enterprise (big company) level. The merger reduces choices for enterprise customers, but makes the connectivity more manageable and seamless. Essentially, it attempts to make a one-stop shop for corporate voice and data communications.

And guess what... that's exactly what AT&T was for the industry prior to 1984.

Hakuna Matata, y'all.

Should Bush Lead from the Center?

2005-11-27T08:25:00.000-06:00

The President's approval numbers are right around 40%, very low according to the panelists on Fox News Sunday. One of the panelists brought the perspective that Bush could improve his poll numbers by leading from the center.

While I am no great fan of President Bush and his open checkbook, the President gets terrible press in the face of amazing success:

There are several issues to address here:

Lower unemployment than during the Clinton years.

Greater GDP growth than anyone expected, primarily because of the tax cuts and continuing recovery from 9/11. Remember 9/11? We survived?

Increasing debt as a percentage of GDP. To some extent this is justified to pull us out of 9/11. For the most part, Twig has been WAY too much like Daddy Bush in terms of willingness to let Congress spend on stupid pork barrel projects like the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska, among others.

We've only lost 2000 men and women plus or minus in Iraq. This surpasses all possible outcomes we could have imagined. We lost 50,000 in Viet Nam, and while there was significant resistence in the U.S. against the war it didn't start to percolate until after President Johnson escalated the war.

The Press continues to essentially lie about the woe taking place in the economy. This is belied by the fact that polls indicate individuals feel positive about their own situation, but feel negative about the prospects for the economy. More people than ever are paying with debit cards and cash (maybe because they filled up their credit cards or maybe because they have the cash).

And here's the biggest issue: the poll itself. When you ask a question like "Do you think President Bush is doing a good job, people on the left say "no" and people on the right say "no." Bush is too much of a hawk for those on the left. He is too much of a liberal for those on the right, especially those who want smaller rather than larger government. Those in the center don't know who they are and are easily swayed by negative press accounts of widespread woe that doesn't exist.

Recommendation: Do the right things, President Bush. You can't affect mid-term elections, and you can't sway the liberal press.

Reduce the size of government.
Get tough on illegal immigration.
Eliminate the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services.These are state functions and the government is responsible only for the general welfare of the population.
Finish the job in Iraq and don't back down on the other big fights in the world (Iran, N. Korea, etc.). Don't start anything, but certainly don't back down.

Texas Steps Up Against Sony/BMG

2005-11-21T13:58:00.000-06:00

As I mentioned in a previous post, Sony/BMG recently agreed to cease distributing CDs that, when played on a computer, downloaded spyware that made sure you weren't pilfering music. Oh, yes... and sent back all kinds of other information from your computer. The program essentially worked like a virus and was quite difficult to remove.

The Texas Attorney General's office recently sued Sony/BMG for its violations against installing viruses on computers.

I recently ran into a similar problem with my wife's laptop. While visiting an unknown site, she picked up a virus that created a warning on the Norton Anti-virus protection. The Norton program was unable to remove the virus. A quick trip to their website, however, allows infected users to download an appropriate tool to fumigate the offending critter.

In essence, it sets up a trojan-like virus much like Sony/BMG's adware/spyware. Every once in awhile... when you hate it the most... an ad for WinFixer pops up. Further research shows this to be a file called ddaya.dll, which acts much like a cancer by linking itself through various other files. When it's time, the pop-up ad for WinFixer pops up.

I encourage everyone affected by (and concerned about) this virus to go to the WinFixer website to complain. Next go to the Federal Trade Commission website and enter your concerns.

I also voiced my opinion on the Texas Attorney General's website and will probably complain in Missouri, as well. The heinousness of this crime should not go unnoticed or unpunished.

GM Ignores Public Relations

2005-11-21T08:37:00.000-06:00

General Motors recently announced that they will eliminate 30,000 manufacturing jobs and close nine North American assembly, stamping and powertrain plants by 2008 as part of an effort to get production in line with demand. This has been incorrectly reported as cutting 30,000 jobs. In fact, most of the 30,000 force reduction will be achieved through not rehiring to replace retiring workers. This reduction is 5,000 employees greater than the 25,000 previously announced.

Here's the rub: GM hasn't solved it's problem with costs. Even if they become more streamlined and reduce salaries and benefits and produce the right number of cars and trucks, they will still automatically increase the number of employees that receive retiree benefits as workers retire. Their health care costs and pension benefits will continue to increase as workers retire.

In spite of what most people think, it's not that easy to close a plant. Numerous local regulations, federal regulations, etc. make it expensive to close plants. They can't just stop operations and walk away from the buildings. Closing 9 plants in North America will be a painful and expensive process.

On the other hand, the plants they retain will hopefully be among the most modern and efficient and the move will reduce their costs for the cars that they still produce. Unfortunately, we can't assume that was the only consideration for which plants will close. On a running basis, GM hopes to achieve $7 billion in cost reductions from the plant closures and force reduction.

There was no announcement on how the company plans to stem the rising retirement benefit costs.

Making the announcements just before the holiday season was probably the dumbest thing I've seen by a major corporation in at least a few weeks.

Take Away Their Money

2005-11-18T09:04:00.000-06:00

In yet another stunning act of hubris by our elected officials, Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Arlen Specter (R-Penn.) have attempted to name buildings after themselves in a recent Labor/Health and Human Services appropriations bill.

House rules, under which the Congress operates, apparently anticipated egos run amock and prevented such self-aggrandizement in Section 6 of Rule 21:

6. It shall not be in order to consider a bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that provides for the designation or redesignation of a public work in honor of an individual then serving as a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator.

The building with a new visitors' center would have been named after Sen. Harkin, and Bldg. 21 at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would have been named after Sen Specter. The House voted down the report on Thursday afternoon.

Most of us would be at least mildly embarrassed to have a public building, paid with public money, named after us. Even though these Senators have dropped not one dime of their own money (other than through taxes... if they paid them) into these buildings, they somehow felt justified in instructing that these buildings act as a vanity plate for their own accomplishments with OUR money.

This follows Sen. Ted Stevens' infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" that made virtually every list of pork barrel projects. For those who haven't been watching a news source that might report government waste, Sen. Stevens' project built a $250 million bridge from Alaska to a small island, population 50. That's a $5 million investment for every person on the island. The government could have purchased a ferry for EACH of them (even though there is already a ferry that goes from the mainland to the island). The Federal government recently defunded the bridge, but GAVE BACK the money so that the state could do as it wished with the funds (with a *wink* agreement that it would be used for the bridge). Sen. Stevens' threatened to resign if the money was removed from appropriations for his state.

We MUST rise up against the spending taking place by our errant elected leaders! We need NEW tax cuts to remove money from their hands, a new constitutional amendment that limits spending, and new rules that clearly define what types of projects should be funded.

The constitution clearly defined what types of spending should occur at the Federal level. Everything else should be left to the states. And its NOT okay for the Federal government to take money away from us through taxes and give it back to states (revenue sharing).

The people who think they should run the country also think they know best what is good for us. They don't.

"De-fund the government" should be a rallying call for the next presidential election. We should pressure those seeking elected office to tell us how they will spend our money, and how they will reduce what they spend.

Home Sweet Home

2005-11-16T23:02:00.000-06:00

I flew into Kansas City International Airport on Friday evening where my wife Suzanne welcomed me into her loving arms, then off we went to dinner at Brio on the Plaza. After a gratifying reunion with my dog, Connor, and a couple of weekend days of rest, I flew into a frenzy of digitalBURG.com activity.

There are now two talented salespeople, formerly of Daily Star Journal, out to turn digitalBURG from a fabulous newspaper into a real business. I've been able to pick up an additional journalist with a lot of great ideas, and together with existing staff will have some wonderful new features to promote in the near future.

Best of all... the Bush administration is finally fighting back against the ridiculous assertion by Democrats that they were somehow misled into voting for the Iraq war. Aside from a willingness to say anything, they are apparently brain-dead, as well... not to mention new documents recently uncovered in Iraq.

Scooter Libby will in all likelihood soon be released from prosecution, as well. Bob Woodward recently came forward with the information that HE knew about Valerie Plame before Libby told the other journalist. I guess he finally got a case of the guilts and felt compelled to spill the beans.

So here I am on the frozen tundra of the plains states, still exposed to national news. It's good to be home... mostly.

Senate and House Fail Us During Oil Hearings

2005-11-10T00:57:00.000-06:00

Today, as the U.S. House of Representatives withdrew ANWR drilling from the budget bill in order to pacify namby-pamby liberal Republicans, the Senate was busy embarrasing themselves in front of stunned oil industry CEOs. Ted Stevens, R-AL, seemed to have his wits about him as he shot down Barbara Boxer, who wanted to compare what a minimum wage earner earns to what an oil industry CEO earns.

After watching the hearings on C-span, I wrote a note of encouragement to Sen. Stevens:

THANK YOU for doing your best to shut down Barbara Boxer during her ridiculous tirade as the chairmen of oil firms stood stunned.

I'm always amazed that, when asked why they earn so much compared to a minimum wage employee, an oil industry CEO doesn't respond: "Bring me a minimum wage employee that can run an oil company."

Further, I wonder why no one asks: "Why don't the various aspects of government that received increased state tax revenues from higher oil prices offer to reduce their taxes?"

Or how about this one for the Republican agricultural supporter from Montana: "Why does it cost over $3.00 to squeeze a gallon of milk out of a cow's teat, and you're here carping at us about a gallon of oil that has to come halfway around the world, go through a very expensive refining process, travel to various parts of the country ('cause no one wants a refinery in their back yard), and has about 40 cents in tax on it?"

Perhaps the Barbara Boxers of the world would get the picture. Somehow... I doubt it.

Bad Behavior Works - Part 2

2005-11-07T23:25:00.000-06:00

And now it's time for the French to take their turn receiving blame for the rioting now underway.

First, France encouraged 5 million economically depressed people with conflicting goals and little or no skills to come into the country. Why? Because as the population of white French dwindled under low birth rates, they needed someone to shore up their generous, but faltering, retirement systems. New workers = new money for retirees. (To be generous, this is what we're doing in the U.S., as well... but with Mexican labor.)

Oh, and next? Mais oui, they are French! Yes, the French love themselves but have little use for other cultures. You are noir? You are pauvre? We don't have any interest in you. Fifty percent youth unemployment (about half that of the country from which they came) combined with a Muslim culture at odds with modern culture makes for a poor mix.

Yes, the French need to be more accepting of the Muslims in their midst, and the Muslims imported from Africa need to move into the twentieth century... at least the early part.

de Villepin should not promise to accept their demands, and the French should quickly quash the rebellion. Behind the scenes, perhaps he should negotiate with tribal elders to begin discussions after the violence subsides. But to publicly indicate that bad behavior earns concessions is not only ridiculous, it's bad negotiating skills!

Bad Behavior Works... in France

2005-11-07T09:02:00.000-06:00

Supposedly disenfranchised Muslims have been rioting in France for the past week-and-a-half. Of course, French authorities have just sent the message that youths throwing stones and gasoline cocktails CAN, in fact, get concessions from the government:

Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, who stood by Chirac as he spoke, is expected to outline today a plan to deal with deprivation, discrimination and youth unemployment, which is close to 50% in some areas. The government will also speed up a multibillion-dollar overhaul of hundreds of run-down, crime-ridden housing projects, which are fixtures on the industrial peripheries of many French cities and towns and are populated largely by working-class immigrant families.

What a great idea! All you have to do is riot, and government will give you enhanced welfare, low-cost housing, and quite possibly a special status in future employment possibilities.
Perhaps a pre-condition is that you must fail to integrate with the culture you are asking to PAY for all those benefits.
Makes sense to me... NOT.

Should SONY Go to Jail?

2005-11-06T21:37:00.000-06:00

Federal authorities recently served Jeanson Ancheta with 17 Federal indictments for hacking about 400,000 computers to install pop-up "root-kits." The root-kits are designed to bypass computer security systems and allow "back-door" operations that manage adware, those annoying pop-ups that you can't get rid of without wiping your hard drive clean. Ancheta allegedly made about $60,000 off the scheme.

SONY recently took it on the chin from those watching such things for installing root-kits that cloak their copy protection software. Unfortunately, the SONY install left computer users with a hole big enough to drive a virus through. Essentially, anyone playing a SONY/BMG CD on their computer opened themselves up to the same type of adware that Ancheta installed through the backdoor.

Where is the 17-count indictment for SONY?

SONY did post a patch for the problem to its website. Who knows what else is in that!

Alito and Machine Guns

2005-11-01T22:26:00.000-06:00

Samuel A. Alito, Jr. has been nominated for what I would consider a promtion: from U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to Supreme Court Justice. He will be joining John Roberts, a well-qualified Chief Justice. Both are considered constitutional constructionists in that they believe judges should not invent law but should rule on the legitimacy of law created by lawmakers.

For example, Alito believes that Congress has no business within the construct of the Constitution regulating commerce within a state's borders. When the Brady Bill came before Alito's court, he opined against the Federal law that prevented the sale of machine guns WITHIN a state.

Now theoretically, the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution allows the government to regulate commerce among the states. Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, empowers the United States Congress "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes."

Quite simply, then, the Feds can regulate machine gun sales from New Jersey to New York, or from New Jersey to the Navajo nation, but cannot regulate machine gun sales from someone in New Jersey to someone else in New Jersey.

Alito quite rightly dissented from the court majority that allowed the Brady Bill to stand.

Just because people with machine guns kill each other, and we don't like it, doesn't mean we have the right to keep people from owning a machine gun. We shouldn't let the Federal government violate our rights not alloted to them.

So Random

2005-10-30T21:27:00.000-06:00

I watch a little show on MTV on Monday nights called Laguna Beach. It's about 8 months or so in the lives of several Laguna Beach teenagers working their way through the mysteries of life.

At one point during the season LC starts to date Jason, a known playuh and a bit of a bad boy. (Actually, he seems like a pretty cool guy... except for the smoking.)

Dieter and Stephen are talking about Jason dating LC, and Dieter proclaims "It's so random!" Random in this case means "unexpected" and/or "difficult to understand."

Tonight while watching Meet the Press on NBC, Tim Russert played excerpts from Reagan denying that the U.S. was sending arms to Nicaragua, Scott McClellan denying that the administration revealed Valerie Plame's identity as a cover agent, and Bill Clinton lying about "that woman... Monica Lewinsky."

The big difference that no one on the panel suggested was that CLINTON KNEW HE LIED WHEN HE DID IT. Reagan did not know the Arms-for-Contra deal was cooking... that was Ollie North's deal. McClellan, Bush and Cheney... well, we don't know yet what he knows. All we know is that Scooter Libby has been indicted.

How random that NBC would try to jam up the Bush administration like that. NOT.

Faith-based Organizations

2005-10-29T00:17:00.000-05:00

Can someone please explain to me why it's okay for the government to take away my money and give it to a faith-based organization? What the HELL was George Bush thinking?

See this story at digitalBURG.com.

Now here's the part I don't get: they take my money away at tax time and give it to (insert favorite religious institution here). The (favorite religious institution) turns around and gives it to kids that they choose.

WHY CAN'T I CHOOSE WHO GETS IT?

I may decide that I want it to go to Jimmy, the son of the poor boatbuilder that built my yacht; the government has decided, through some program, that it goes to Amanda instead.

Have we completely lost our MINDS in this country?

"Obscene" Oil Profits

2005-10-29T00:03:00.000-05:00

I'm getting a huge kick out of the talking TV heads (not to slight radio, but there it is) and their pronunciation of BILLION, spitting it out with a fricative "B" and bouncing it off the satellites as if they were proclaiming: PORNOGRAPHERS!

In a perfect world (you know, the one without ridiculous government intervention), obscene profits would be an indication that there isn't enough competition in the market. Usually, in the absence of interference, new business would come in and supply the needed amount to reduce economic profit to zero. Now that's not to say there wouldn't be ANY profit, there just wouldn't be obscene profit.

However, the bigwigs in domes across the country really pooched things up by letting environmentalists tell them that oil companies 1) couldn't drill in the U.S., and 2) couldn't build refineries in the U.S.

Here's the deal... most of the profits RIGHT NOW would go toward refineries and drilling if we'd just let Big Oil put the money where the talking heads' mouths are.

The All-Important 2000

2005-10-26T22:17:00.000-05:00

News organizations salivated at the prospect of delivering another "body" blow to the Bush Administration as deaths in the Iraq war topped the 2000 mark. Interestingly, several of the news organizations had editorials ready to run the next day. (It's interesting because many editorials are completed several days before they are to run, and the glacially slow editorial departments aren't equipped to handle ideas with news-like speed.)

It rather reminded me of preparing the obituary for a famous person months in advance of the actual death.

Perhaps we shouldn't worry so much about the number 2,000 when the number 3,000 is still out there hanging around. Huh? That's the short version of the number of innocent people who unwillingly gave their lives on September 11, 2001. Amazingly, not one of the military deaths in the Iraq war was a conscript; they were all volunteers who died so that we could start someday to live.

Then you could look at the millions of people recently freed from a tyrannical madman and who are now operating under a newly voted constitution. That didn't get nearly the editorial ink spilled on the 2,000 military dead. (Insert obligatory mention of the sanctity of all human life here.) In fact, the liberal media tried their best to play down Iraq's new constitution.

They should be ashamed.

Iran won't be satisfied until Israelis drown in a sea of blood. Iran would say the same about us except the Israelis wouldn't hold the U.S. back from taking out the evil dictators like the U.S. holds back Israel. Radical Islamists throughout the world have been brainwashed that it is their Christi... I mean Islamic... duty to take us out.

We still have work to do. The death toll of 2,000 while sad will not be the end of our sacrifice.

2005-10-15T02:54:00.000-05:00

So I'm eating my steak at Gorikee (Topanga Cyn at Ventura) when I see a lot of activity at Le Cannon next door. Chef Patrick and I exchange a couple of recipes and he tells me they are filming an episode of reality TV show Starting Over.

Since I'm from Kansas City and this is TVLAND, I decided to go over to Le Cannon and watch the filming. I started talking with some techie production assistants and the next thing I know I'm signing a realease to be on the show. I guess I got in the field of vision or something.

Strangely, I feel different about myself.

As a child, I always thought it a bit disorienting to see a place on television... and then go there in person. It was almost as if the place didn't really exist except in the TV. Even when I see myself on the training videos I do, it's a bit surrealistic.

Even more strange, a lot of people were NOT interested in signing the release. They were probably criminals of some sort and didn't want their names to enter the public arena.

So I think I have a pretty good chance of having my right hand appear in an episode of Starting Over.

The Scary Clintons

2005-10-11T14:20:00.000-05:00

Not that I'm a great fan of the Rupublicans, Democrats, or any political party, but the recent Dick Morris book Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race by Dick Morris has me absolutely petrified.

The Clintons are evil, but they're not dumb. In fact, they are so treacherous I believe the possibility that they never really had a falling out with Dick Morris. Perhaps he has been secretly paid by MoveOn.org or some George Soros-funded program from the netherworld to promote Hillary as a presidential candidate, and then suggest that the only way to beat her is to run Condi Rice.

After all, he is promoting her candidacy by suggesting (over and over and over again) that she will be the Democrat Party nominee in 2008. Then he goes so far as to suggest that the only way for Republicans to beat her is to run Condi Rice.

And then, on the other hand, Rice could cripple the Democrat run by siphoning off the black vote. Condi isn't stupid, either. She might actually make a good president. Hard to say if she would get the Hispanic vote. Those are extremely important constituencies, along with the homosexual community, the anti-war constituency, the tree-hugging constituency, etc.

In fact, the Democrat party has no real platform of consistent philosophical thought. They are a party cobbled together of disaffected constituencies. If you get enough minorities together, pretty soon you have a majority.

That's not to say the Republicans have much of a philosophical platform, either. I used to think they were the party of smaller government, states rights, etc. Now I just believe they are the "We can beat the Democrat Party" party. People vote for the Republicans to vote against the cobbled-together constituents that comprise the Democrat Party. Republicans now give away the store at every opportunity in order to get re-elected. So what's the point in re-electing them?

Maybe Condi can beat Hillary. I just hope Dick Morris isn't on Hillary's side after all.

Trivial Information

2005-10-10T00:56:00.000-05:00

How do you know when you have important information in your mind, versus something entirely trivial?

For example, I know the difference between interest rate SWAPs, interest rate forwards (FRAs), and interest rate futures. I've never worked in the derivatives market, but I still know the information and even write about it and teach it. Perhaps those who can't do teach.

I also know that BCBGMaxAzria is a designer boutique, and BCBG stands for "Bon Chic, Bon Genre." Why do I know that when my wife doesn't even like his clothes... not even his couture line?

Here's what I do know: How you measure success determines whether information you know is important or trivial. If you judge your worth by whether information can help you earn money, then maybe the SWAPs info is not trivial. If you work in the fashion industry, maybe the BCBG info is not trivial. So the trivial is situational. Or is it the important that's situational?

But if everything is important one way or the other, then everything is trivial. Have a nice day.

The Emerging digitalBURG.com

2005-10-04T00:29:00.000-05:00

I've been really proud of my digitalBURG.com team and how hard they are working to get the news from Warrensburg online while I've been out here "on assignment" in Los Angeles. When I have a few moments away from the highly technical work, I really enjoy dropping in on the Warrensburg community via the internet.

I'm also quite proud to have such excellent sports journalists working with me on the dB. They come up with work that others link to, and work that shows up often in first place on search engines (when you search the right terms, anyway).

The photography is crisp and clean, and I never get my hands dirty from reading the "paper."

We're nearing 1000 hits a day as I write this... and I couldn't be more excited.

Who Gets the Kids?

2005-10-02T09:51:00.000-05:00

If a woman marries herself in Belgium, and has children, but loses her split personality, who gets the kids?

Seen from the monotheistic perspective, Jennifer's "marriage" is the quintessence of idolatry; it is a bow before what Christopher Hershman, a pastor and psychologist in Allentown, Pa., calls the "postmodern Trinity": Me, Myself and I.

Jennifer doesn't say, but perhaps she got the idea of marrying herself after years of observing same-sex pairs of seemingly identical twins all over the place. If so, she is to be commended. What better way mock a culture, which is so much into itself that its generally youthful exponents -- their mobile phones glued to their ears -- keep banging into you in the street because they simply do not see you unless you look precisely like them.

Goldberg Throws Libertarians an Ideological Bone

2005-10-02T09:18:00.000-05:00

Jonah Goldberg at National Review threw Libertarians this ideological bone from his column:

If you want to know why business takes such an interest in Washington, the answer can be found in your low-flow toilet, in the warning labels adorning your cars, in your 8 zillion page tax returns. It can be found while you wait on hold trying to get a human to answer your questions about your health insurance. And the answer is most certainly somewhere in your box of cereal, made with grains subsidized by Uncle Sam and coated in sugar that has no business being grown in the United States of America. Corporations meddle in Washington because Washington meddles with them.

It is simply naive to believe that a businessman will have no interest in politics when politicians have taken a great interest in him. And it is grotesquely unfair to assume that businesspeople are corrupt simply because they want to support politicians less inclined to hurt them.

Microsoft CEO Bill Gates used to brag that he barely spent a dime on lobbying — “I live in the other Washington,” he liked to say. But the very moment that government — federal and state — tried to tear apart his company, Gates abandoned his view that the New Economy could ignore the Old Politics. Now D.C. is awash in Microsoft lobbyists. Wal-Mart is only now learning the same lesson. If you don’t get in the game, you might be regulated out of it.

Of course, not all businesses that support politicians of either party are doing it out of self-protection. Some are merely rent-seeking opportunists. Some are both. Sugar growers, for example, have ripped off taxpayers and consumers to the tune of billions. If government stopped protecting the industry from competition, it would mostly disappear and stop gouging us at the same time.

Liberals think Republicans are living up to their principles when they get cozy with fat cats. The reality is that Republicans betray their principles when they give fat cats a reason to come to Washington to begin with.

If we really want to get corporations and other special interests out of Washington, we should make it impossible for federal government to do anything that messes with the free market, allows one group of people an unfair advantage over another, takes money from one group and gives it to another, etc. Government should be acting to preserve free markets by not allowing strong-willed and cash-rich businesses to beat up on small businesses with a better idea, even if it is the politicians' donor companies.

One of the ways we make it more difficult to gerrymander free markets is to take out the benefit to politicians and their corporate supporters. Reduce the size of the federal government, allow them only enough money to perform essential services that benefit ALL in the country and protect those who cannot protect themselves, and you reduce the incentive for firms to support politicians.

Fire

2005-09-29T09:04:00.000-05:00

I heard the news yesterday afternoon that the east-west 118 (Hwy 118 north of where I work) was closed because of the Chatsworth fire. Fortunately, I don't drive the 118. In fact, I don't drive the east-west 101, either, which is fortunate, because it's the road south of where I work and picked up the traffic from the 118 closure.

My route involves following E-W Roscoe to N-S Topanga Cyn road. On the way home (west of where I work), you could actually see the fires cresting the mountains on the west side of the San Fernando Valley. This was the closest I've seen them this early in the process, may 10-15 miles or so. The fires come along with the Santa Anna winds, which started yesterday also. I'm not sure how hot winds start fire, but they seem to come at the same time.

The Chinese "family" on the same floor in my apartment was enjoying the scene from their west-facing balcony, and someone climbed up on the roof for a better view about midnight. Had I a gun, there would be holes in the ceiling this morning.

***

Kathleen Blanco asked not to be asked about Katrina when she appeared before Congress yesterday. Instead, she asked for incentives to help with job creation. Sounds like there were too many people in New Orleans already. And Congress, since they're not spending their own money, and they don't worry about their own retirement, will line up to throw money at New Orleans for job creation just like they have for rebuilding.

The only problem is... YOU DON'T NEED MONEY FOR JOB CREATION!

If there is a job to be done, people will go to it if they want to work. If there is no job to be done, there will be no REAL work and job creation amounts to taking money from one group of people (that work) and giving it to another group of people (that want to work).

I still haven't figured out why it's okay for the government to take money away from an area that's working, and give it to another area that's not working. If people want to go back to Louisiana, they will go without incentives.

Government's role in job creation is NOT to create them, but to facilitate the roads and infrastructure necessary to support growth once job creation has begun on its own. "Job creation" as a goal of government is a government power grab, or an attempt to grab power by making people believe you're doing something. It's like a 90-year tax abatement for Wal-Mart: the only reason your community needs it is to compete with the other community that has it. Otherwise, Wal-Mart would go there anyway.

***

And the last comment brings up an important point. John Roberts will be confirmed as the Supreme Court Chief Justice this morning. One of his first cases will be the Ohio case where a large auto manufacturer received all sorts of benefits to move a plant there. The details are sketchy in my mind this morning, but the essence is that communities have to stop competing on what they give away and this case will give the government an opportunity to better manage that process.

Communities should compete, instead, on what they have to offer.

Congressional Hearings on FEMA

2005-09-27T09:51:00.000-05:00

I saw a great email circulating through the U.S. yesterday. Two pictures, side by side. One is buses underwater (New Orleans). One is buses leaving the Texas Gulf coast. One has the caption "Democrat governor." One has the caption "Republican governor."

Mr. Jefferson, a Democrat, is asking questions of Michael Brown, former FEMA head. Mr. Jefferson is BLIND to what happened.

Gov. Blanco requesting a disaster declaration is NOT the same as requesting federal troops. Jefferson somehow thinks they are the same. One is to facilitate financial disaster relief. One is for troops. How hard is that? Too hard for Jefferson.

Blanco dithered. Nagin dithered. The levee breaking was no one's fault, but a mandatory evacuation would have left fewer people there after the storm.

Okay, I admit I was right... except about my last post on Katrina being my last post on Katrina.

Laguna Beach v. Entourage

2005-09-26T23:15:00.000-05:00

The difference between the East Coast and the West Coast has finally been revealed through the TV shows representing those regions.

The East Coast guys from Entourage always have their girls, but the friendships still survive.

The West Coast girls from Laguna Beach always have their guys, but the friendships still survive. They just have to split up into smaller, like... support groups.

***

I went to dinner with some colleagues Sunday night. We went to Picanha in Burbank, a Brasilian gaucho restaurant where they keep bringing meat on swords until you turn over your indicator so that the red (for STOP!!) part is on top. During our conversation, a few statistics came up. One statistic was how long people from the OC thought it would take to drive to New York. They thought it would be 6 hours.

***

The sunset was beautiful on the way home tonight. This is the first time I've left the Northridge office early enough to see it. I usually leave about 6:45 p.m., and by the time I get to a place to see the sunset, it's done set.

***

And it rained today.

The 21st Century

2005-09-22T22:32:00.000-05:00

I can't imagine a world without rapid and sometimes incomprehensible change. I remember my grandmother marveling at television, electric car windows, air conditioning, and microwave cooking.

Today I marveled at email.

I received an email this morning from a former student who now works in New York for a company that provides hedge fund accounting services. If you just made that flat hand motion over your head, I don't blame you in the least. At the very most, I have a strong disinterest in the subject myself.

But it has to be done.

So I got this email, and later heard that a fellow in Dallas who does some part-time writing for the same company I do is looking for a full-time job. I send an email back to my former student, asking if they have openings. He emails back that they have one in Chicago... a good one! I talk with my colleague on the phone, and he emails his resume to me. I forward his resume to my former student at the hedge fund valuation company.

Maybe there's a match, maybe not. But back in the old days, people limited their work to areas where they live, or take weeks to get to the area where they thought there might be a job.

Time is precious; so many wonderful things make all those tedious processes in our lives resolve faster.

The Latest Political Tragedy

2005-09-20T20:44:00.000-05:00

You'd think after equestrian horse show promoter-turned-FEMA-head Mike Brown got booted out of his undeserved position, that would be the end of politically motivated appointments to high-level government positions. Shouldn't they be serious kick-butt people in those jobs?

But no. Julie Myers, recently married to Michael Chertoff's Chief of Staff and daughter of retired Air Force General Richard B. Myers, has become the likely head of ICE (immigration and customs enforcement, and formerly INS, immigration and naturalization service).

Her high-level personal relationships, one an accident of birth, appear to be her only qualifications.

With 20,000 employees, ICE is the second largest agency in the federal government. Sen. Voinovich, Republican from Ohio, has gone so far as to tell her that she wasn't qualified to manage an agency of that size. A spokesman for Voinovich later indicated that he met with her and decided to vote in favor of her appointment.

According to WashingtonPost.com,

In written answers to questions from Congress, Myers highlighted her year-long job as assistant secretary for export enforcement at Commerce, where she said she supervised 170 employees and a $25 million budget. ICE has more than 20,000 employees and a budget of approximately $4 billion. Its personnel investigate immigrant, drug and weapon smuggling, and illegal exports, among other responsibilities.

What was Michael Chertoff, the head of Homeland Security, thinking when he offered this appointment? What was George Bush thinking when he approved it?

Some people believe that Bush is offering a weak appointment because he doesn't believe in keeping out immigrants. It would be nice to hear him speak on that subject.

Sleep: The Ultimate Narcotic

2005-09-20T07:49:00.000-05:00

I miss work so seldom, you know it's serious when it happens. Monday about 1:30 a.m. I had a recurrence of the pain from Saturday... even though I had been taking the hydrocodone (Vicodan). Nothing would shake it, so I dosed up and hit the bed for the day.

Since I was floating in and out of mental acuity, I decided to watch TV. I've decided it's better not to waste my time watching a television series when it airs and just watch it when they present all the episodes in a couple of days... or get the shows on DVD at the end of the season. Suzanne and I have done this with Deadwood, Entourage, Sapranos, and now I have completed an entire season of Laguna Beach.

Strangely enough, I've always like the coming of age shows like Sixteen Candles, Pretty in Pink, The Breakfast Club, etc. Now I like Laguna Beach. The show is a reality show based on the actual experiences of some high-schoolers in Laguna Beach, California. They are uniformly rich, pretty and totally self-absorbed. There's not much thought given to world peace in this show.

Anyway, the hydrocodone is a horrible little narcotic. It doesn't really kill the pain, but made it tolerable. When you stop taking it, you get a headache. It is physically addictive, causes constipation, and doesn't work as well as morphine (in my humble opinion). Worst of all, it only lasts about 4 hours. But it is what they gave me to take.

After a day of little relief, I hit the sack for the night at 8:30 p.m. and slept until about 5:30 a.m. The pain is gone (excluding the residual headache from the hydrocodone).

If those pharma companies could just turn sleep on and off, with all the benefits and none of the side effects, then they'd really have something!

Louis Vuitton and Hurricane Katrina

2005-09-18T10:50:00.000-05:00

Why don't I give money to large bureaucratic relief organizations:

10. The government will throw money at those people once they figure out just how much to throw.
9. A large percentage of Red Cross/United Way/You name the group money goes for the director's salary and other overhead.
8. I have no control over how the money gets delivered. (Debit cards? They can be stolen and used by others, they only work at places that can take them... what if the power is out? Do they run them through the old fashioned press plates?)
7. I have no control over how recipients spend the money. (Red Cross gave out debit cards. The Louis Vuitton store has already seen them. Red Cross should have purchased items and set them up for delivery to the people who NEED them.)
6. My retirement is in jeopardy through a lousy social security system that doesn't properly fund future expenditures.
5. Religious groups will funnel money to their local organizations.
4. Large organizations are subject to political pressures. Red Cross may decide to dole out money through a political rather than humanitarian process.
3. I have no control over whether the money goes for aid, or for liberal (or almost never conservative) causes rather than relief. (After 911, several liberal political organizations received money obtained through contributions.)
2. Taking in a family makes more sense. We would have done that if I had been home during this time. (I suppose I could invite a family to stay in my one-bedroom corporate apartment in Los Angeles.)
1. There is no provision for people to help themselves in any way. This promotes a culture of victims. (At least habitat for humanity requires the recipient to work on building the property.)

Judgment and Racism

2005-09-18T10:12:00.000-05:00

By the time one reaches 30 or 40, one should be steeled against the ridiculous assertions of pundits. Ruben Navarrette's opinion piece at IndyStar.com just points out that one is never too old to be disturbed by the ridiculous.

Looking at the title, "No one can sit in judgment on America's racism issue," compels you to read on. The article actually uses as its theme the OPPOSITE of the headline. The headline should read: "Only those affected by the racism can judge."

His premise can be summarized as:

It's a simple concept. A locker room full of men probably isn't the best judge about the existence of sexism. A group of non-Jews isn't equipped to determine if something is anti-Semitic. Heterosexuals probably aren't the ones to assess homophobia.

On the face of it, this sounds reasonable. In our convoluted justice system and criminal government hand-out system, however, those potentially affected by racism have a huge stake in appearing damaged by society's injustices.

After all, handouts don't go to the successful... unless they have friends in high political places. Even when the government does unlock the treasury to parcel out gold to the upper classes, it's usually in the form of tax breaks, subsidies for performing some function that results in an outcome of some sort, etc. Very seldom do we see the government handing out money to the rich just because they're... well... rich. We see many examples of government handing out money to politically powerful groups that control voting blocks and there is NO outcome at the end.

Are there fewer persons of different skin color because government projects must set aside some percentage to go to minority businesses? No, there are still minorities. As long as there shall be government subsidies, there shall be vocal minorities. They will seek a voice through those who make their living making sure we recognize that we're all racists (background whisper: Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton). I'm not sure taking my money to give to someone with a different skin color makes me more favorably disposed toward persons of that skin color.

Navarette's opinion should lead to amazing conclusions like: "Only the dead can judge whether they've been murdered." Or how about "only the blind can judge whether people are making faces at them behind their back."

Navarette's article continues on with the thought:

Bush has a good line of defense -- or rather a good line in his own defense. He insists that the storm "didn't discriminate" and so neither will the federal recovery effort.

But, good line or not, black people aren't buying it. According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, when asked if race was a factor in the slow response by the federal government, 60 percent of blacks said "yes" and only 37 percent said "no."

Interestingly, though, a lot of white people are buying it. When whites were asked the same question, 86 percent said that race was not a factor and only 12 percent said that it was.

Asked if they thought that the problems with hurricane relief were or were not an indication of some deeper "racial inequality in this country," 63 percent of blacks said "yes" it was and 73 percent of whites said it wasn't.

So I guess if white people had primarily been the ones affected we would be sending $400 billion in government handouts rather than a paltry $200 billion? Or how about the gazillion dollars collected through contributions to actual relief organizations?

I guess they're afraid we'll stop sending money if they don't remind us about the racism that still afflicts the country.

Pain Beyond Belief

2005-09-17T23:32:00.000-05:00

It started Friday, although I had no idea what was about to happen. I had some urgency with regard to using the restroom, but not frequency. (Those in the medical profession who read this blog will know what I'm talking about.)

It was a strange Thursday night, too. I had gone to bed early and awakened around 2:30 in the morning on Friday... couldn't get back to sleep. Worked until about 7 p.m. and went to bed at 9:30 p.m. (on a Friday night!). I awakened at my regular time (around 6:30 a.m.) on Saturday morning, worked out at the gym, and felt great...

Until 10 a.m. on Saturday morning, that is. I was on my way into the office and started to feel a really bad pain in the left side of my back. Then the pain moved to my front. It finally moved to the 5 p.m. position (if you look at me like a clock with my belly button in the center which, I suppose, some people do).

Kidneys? Gall bladder? Gas? I took 2 - 500 mg Tylenols and by 11 a.m. the pain was unbearable. I called a doc-in-the-box in Woodland Hills, but they said my wait was 45 minutes (I could get to Woodland Hills from the office in Northridge in 20 minutes). I thought I'd better take my chances with the Northridge Hospital emergency room.

You know those "poison control" faces they use to identify different levels of pain? My face was to the far right, eyes rolled up in its little sweating forehead.

RTM (the "M" standard for morphine) killed the immediate pain. A CT scan identified the problem... a 1 millimeter kidney stone had temporarily parked at the top of my bladder, leaving a swollen trail between there and my kidney. 1 silly millimeter big! I found out later they don't even start trying to bust them up with sound waves until they hit 5 millimeters.

I stopped at the Rite-aid on my way back to work to fill my Vicodin prescription, but they didn't have the proper type/size/whatever. By 3 p.m. I was back in my office with no pain.

After I left at 7 p.m. or so, I went by the Rite-aid on Saticoy. The pharmacist was a very nice vietnamese man who couldn't type, and therefore couldn't fill my scrip. His assistant wasn't working/took a drug overdose/whatever.

I went back to Topanga Cyn Blvd (Cyn stands for "canyon") to the only other Rite-aid I knew in that area. They filled my scrip which, after using my insurance card, was $1.11. How did they come up with that number? I spent a billable hour getting a scrip filler for $1.11.

Surprisingly, there was no mention of other/larger/whatever stones. Apparently, I am free...

At least until it clears through my bladder if it hasn't already.

How Government Limits Choices in the Katrina Rebuild

2005-09-16T07:09:00.000-05:00

I'm no great Bush fan... he just happens to be the better of two evils we were destined to suffer from under a two-party system of big and bigger government. One of the reasons that I'm no great fan is that he favors the politically expedient over the economically prudent policy.

His most recent fiasco, Hurricane Katrina relief, plans to spend about $200 billion when everything is said and done to rebuild the gulf coast area. The BIGGEST issue here is that the money will be wasted on bureaucracy and, especially in Louisiana, on croneyism. Or maybe that is the second biggest issue. The real issue is that Bush is essentially spending $200,000 or more for every man, woman and child affected by the burricane!

Wouldn't it make more sense to let them have the $200,000 per person as a buyout? They could also sell their property to whoever would buy it, or could use the money to rebuild. Those that chose not to rebuild could take their new nest egg and relocate to a place where the lake level isn't higher than their home. The corps of engineers would spend whatever they had already budgeted plus the repair and reinforcement for the levee.

Instead, the people in New Orleans and the gulf area will be forced by the government to rebuild on small lots in blighted areas. And it's the people that blight an area, not the poverty. (If you need examples of this, moving the poor out of the privately owned slums and into government housing created... government slums.) These same people will be able to sell their government-rebuilt home and move out, if they like, but do you think they'll get $200,000? Not likely. And the people that should do the rebuilding (the homeowners) won't be made to actually DO the rebuilding. They'll be allowed to sit around, collect "The Welfare" and return to their lives of blight, albeit in a new home.

The poor are the best indication of what happens when government controls your destiny.

We should already know that after about $6.6 trillion spent during the War on Poverty over the last ... well, I guess there have always been poor... it's only been officially someone else's responsibility since Roosevelt's Great Society and Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty beginning in 1964. See Thomas Sowell's brilliant (as always) analysis http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20040817.shtml

Art in Real Life

2005-09-14T21:56:00.000-05:00

I'm writing this sitting almost in the dark in my Los Angeles apartment, after 11.5 hours of writing financial text materials. It's almost painful to write one more letter in one more word, but I want to get this out of my system before I settle in for about 2.5 hours of Entourage re-runs on HBO2.

If you've never seen the masterpieces in real life, you have not seen the masterpieces.

Last weekend, I saw Irises by Van Gogh at the Getty Museum... and started to cry. I've been processing that for several days. You can look at the pictures of the painting, but it's just not the same as seeing the art. http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/gogh/irises/gogh.irises.jpg

The colors are so full of pain. It's simply amazing to me that someone has the talent to do that with color.

Perhaps, someday, I will learn to do that with words.

Waking Up Early

2005-09-12T07:49:00.000-05:00

This morning I awakened at my normal 6 a.m. time... in the Midwest. The problem is that I'm in an apartment in Woodland Hills, Ca., where the time was 4 a.m. Why is there so much traffic at 4 a.m.? I have several possibilities that may explain this, although no concrete answers.
First, there are a lot of people who live here in the Valley and work in Los Angeles. In order to get to work at a service job that starts at 6 a.m., they have to get moving by 4 or 4:30 a.m.
Second, they want to miss traffic jams on the interstates. Imagine rush hour in Kansas City all day long. That's what traffic is like in both directions. I still haven't figured out why people in the Midwest would choose to live more than about 5 minutes from where they work. People in Los Angeles have no choice: they can't afford to live close to some of the places they work. People live in the Valley so that their $500,000 two-bedroom home isn't a $750,000 one-bedroom condo.
Carpool describes two people in the same car. To use the carpool lane requires two people that are going to the same place. Your neighbors don't usually work in the same place you do.
Well, I'm just about all out of reasons why traffic is so heavy (and loud) at 4 a.m. Your suggestions?