From Dallas Business Journal yesterday:
"TXU Corp. has chosen Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to design up to three nuclear reactors in Texas, the companies said Wednesday.
…
Dallas-based TXU (NYSE: TXU) also is looking into installing two to three additional nuclear reactors at a separate site in Texas, TXU said in a March 9 letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
TXU still must submit applications for construction and operating licenses to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which are expected to be submitted in 2008, according to an announcement the company made in August."
Leave it to the private sector to finally get us moving.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
We dare not speak her name...
but Ann Coulter has some great thoughts on Walter Reed:
"Noticeably, the problems at Walter Reed are not with the doctors or medical care. The problems are with basic maintenance at the facility.
Unless U.S. Army generals are supposed to be spraying fungicide on the walls and crawling under beds to set rattraps, the slovenly conditions at Walter Reed are not their fault. The military is nominally in charge of Walter Reed, but -- because of civil service rules put into place by Democrats -- the maintenance crew can't be fired."
...
"You will find the exact same problems anyplace market forces have been artificially removed by the government and there is a total absence of incentives, competition, effective oversight, cost controls and so on. It's almost like a cause-and-effect thing."
"Noticeably, the problems at Walter Reed are not with the doctors or medical care. The problems are with basic maintenance at the facility.
Unless U.S. Army generals are supposed to be spraying fungicide on the walls and crawling under beds to set rattraps, the slovenly conditions at Walter Reed are not their fault. The military is nominally in charge of Walter Reed, but -- because of civil service rules put into place by Democrats -- the maintenance crew can't be fired."
...
"You will find the exact same problems anyplace market forces have been artificially removed by the government and there is a total absence of incentives, competition, effective oversight, cost controls and so on. It's almost like a cause-and-effect thing."
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Global Warming...
Though I think I'm somewhat of a reluctant believer, the New York Times publishes an article that, at a minimum, raises some doubts even if only as to degree:
While reviewers tended to praise the book and movie [Inconvenient Truth], vocal skeptics of global warming protested almost immediately. Richard S. Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, who has long expressed skepticism about dire climate predictions, accused Mr. Gore in The Wall Street Journal of “shrill alarmism.”
While reviewers tended to praise the book and movie [Inconvenient Truth], vocal skeptics of global warming protested almost immediately. Richard S. Lindzen, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, who has long expressed skepticism about dire climate predictions, accused Mr. Gore in The Wall Street Journal of “shrill alarmism.”
Monday, March 12, 2007
Carol Platt Liebau
She's hosting Hugh Hewitt tonight. When I was outside watering the plants, I first thought she was Michelle Malkin of Hot Air.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
300: the video game
Just a fun flick for what it was...a glorified video game. It was, though, the first movie I've watched in digital. Not sure my 47 year old eyes could really tell a difference.
Sin City is the only other movie I've seen using these techniques and 300 is certainly better than that. These techniques are very interesting but they have not yet been mastered.
If one is looking for Herodotus or Gates of Fire, he will be disappointed. Still, I did have tears in my eyes at the end.
Sin City is the only other movie I've seen using these techniques and 300 is certainly better than that. These techniques are very interesting but they have not yet been mastered.
If one is looking for Herodotus or Gates of Fire, he will be disappointed. Still, I did have tears in my eyes at the end.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Re: Walter Reed
Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D on the scandal and its bigger meaning in today's JWR:
"In this sense, the Walter Reed situation is symbolic of a much deeper dilemma. Governance no longer even tries to solve problems. It has become, instead, a self-referent, self-sustaining monster that consumes more and more of the nation's wealth and future while giving back less and less. And the American people put up with it and refuse to consider alternatives. "
"In this sense, the Walter Reed situation is symbolic of a much deeper dilemma. Governance no longer even tries to solve problems. It has become, instead, a self-referent, self-sustaining monster that consumes more and more of the nation's wealth and future while giving back less and less. And the American people put up with it and refuse to consider alternatives. "
Pleading guilty when guilty
Fox asked Garrison whether he wanted to plead not guilty.
"No, your honor," said Garrison, 26, who appeared in court dressed in a brown pinstriped suit, dark purple tie and lavender shirt.
Defense attorney Harland Braun broke in: "Mr. Garrison feels a deep sense of responsibility. ... The real issue is the level of culpability."
Braun said Garrison "doesn't feel comfortable" with a not guilty plea.
"He is going to be accepting responsibility for his conduct; the only question is the level of responsibility," the lawyer repeated.
"No, your honor," said Garrison, 26, who appeared in court dressed in a brown pinstriped suit, dark purple tie and lavender shirt.
Defense attorney Harland Braun broke in: "Mr. Garrison feels a deep sense of responsibility. ... The real issue is the level of culpability."
Braun said Garrison "doesn't feel comfortable" with a not guilty plea.
"He is going to be accepting responsibility for his conduct; the only question is the level of responsibility," the lawyer repeated.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Coulter 3
Ok, she can be a little funny:
The Republican former House Whip Tom DeLay is currently under indictment for a minor campaign finance violation. Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle had to empanel six grand juries before he could find one to indict DeLay on these pathetic charges -- and this is in Austin, Texas (the Upper West Side with better-looking people).
The Republican former House Whip Tom DeLay is currently under indictment for a minor campaign finance violation. Democratic prosecutor Ronnie Earle had to empanel six grand juries before he could find one to indict DeLay on these pathetic charges -- and this is in Austin, Texas (the Upper West Side with better-looking people).
The New F-word and Old N-word
Bruce Thornton on the word police and hyper-sensitivity:
The other glaring problem with this obsession with hurt feelings is that it is politically selected, just like those phony claims of “diversity,” which usually means creating a multicolored herd of the politically like-minded. Just about every university in this country insults the beliefs of Christians, Republicans, athletes, white males, and conservatives on a daily basis. Anti-Semitism, thinly camouflaged as “anti-Zionism,” is indulged constantly. The culture of white Southerners is mocked and demonized with glee. No one pays attention to complaints about this insensitivity. Nor should he (apologies to any women offended by my sexist use of the masculine pronoun). Part of being an adult is learning to deal with a world in which you, your beliefs, and your feelings are no more important than anybody else’s. What’s objectionable is the double standard and the censorship, particularly glaring in a university, supposedly the bastion of free speech and free thought, no matter whose ideological or political ox is gored (apologies to any oxen who are offended by this metaphor).
Most importantly, however, this obsession with individual feelings is incompatible with democratic freedom. A political system that allows large numbers of citizens to participate in public debate is necessarily raucous, insulting, and often vulgar. Just look at ancient Athens, where the level of political invective and insult makes our political campaigns sound like a Jane Austen novel. That’s why elitist snobs like Plato disliked democracy. When you give average people free speech, the debate is going to be rough and tough. If you want to participate, you have to be able to take it. The only alternative is some sort of control by an elite that always ends up stifling the expression of ideas and serving a narrow political interest — exactly what we see today in our universities and media. I learned this lesson the few years I was condemned to my university’s Academic Senate. As soon as the debate on an issue started getting close to the truth, someone would jump up and start squealing about “civility,” and nothing useful happened.
The other glaring problem with this obsession with hurt feelings is that it is politically selected, just like those phony claims of “diversity,” which usually means creating a multicolored herd of the politically like-minded. Just about every university in this country insults the beliefs of Christians, Republicans, athletes, white males, and conservatives on a daily basis. Anti-Semitism, thinly camouflaged as “anti-Zionism,” is indulged constantly. The culture of white Southerners is mocked and demonized with glee. No one pays attention to complaints about this insensitivity. Nor should he (apologies to any women offended by my sexist use of the masculine pronoun). Part of being an adult is learning to deal with a world in which you, your beliefs, and your feelings are no more important than anybody else’s. What’s objectionable is the double standard and the censorship, particularly glaring in a university, supposedly the bastion of free speech and free thought, no matter whose ideological or political ox is gored (apologies to any oxen who are offended by this metaphor).
Most importantly, however, this obsession with individual feelings is incompatible with democratic freedom. A political system that allows large numbers of citizens to participate in public debate is necessarily raucous, insulting, and often vulgar. Just look at ancient Athens, where the level of political invective and insult makes our political campaigns sound like a Jane Austen novel. That’s why elitist snobs like Plato disliked democracy. When you give average people free speech, the debate is going to be rough and tough. If you want to participate, you have to be able to take it. The only alternative is some sort of control by an elite that always ends up stifling the expression of ideas and serving a narrow political interest — exactly what we see today in our universities and media. I learned this lesson the few years I was condemned to my university’s Academic Senate. As soon as the debate on an issue started getting close to the truth, someone would jump up and start squealing about “civility,” and nothing useful happened.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Paul Johnson today at JWR
I just love the perspective of historians. One should really read the whole thing but here are the first three paragraphs:
America is the reluctant sheriff of a wild world that sometimes seems mired in wrongdoing. The UN has nothing to offer in the way of enforcing laws and dispensing justice, other than spouting pious oratory and initiating feeble missions that usually do more harm than good. NATO plays a limited role, as in Afghanistan, but tends to reflect the timidity (and cowardice) of Continental Europe. Britain and a few other nations such as Australia are willing to follow America's lead but are too weak to act on their own.
That leaves the U.S. to shoulder the responsibility. Otherwise — what? Is brute force to replace the rule of law in the world because there's no one to enforce it? I wish some of those who constantly criticize America's efforts and the judgment of President Bush would ask themselves this simple question: Would you really like to live in a world where the U.S. sits idly by and lets things happen?
Life in such a world would be like the bestial existence described in Thomas Hobbes' great work, Leviathan. If people "live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man." In that lawless state there will be "continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."
America is the reluctant sheriff of a wild world that sometimes seems mired in wrongdoing. The UN has nothing to offer in the way of enforcing laws and dispensing justice, other than spouting pious oratory and initiating feeble missions that usually do more harm than good. NATO plays a limited role, as in Afghanistan, but tends to reflect the timidity (and cowardice) of Continental Europe. Britain and a few other nations such as Australia are willing to follow America's lead but are too weak to act on their own.
That leaves the U.S. to shoulder the responsibility. Otherwise — what? Is brute force to replace the rule of law in the world because there's no one to enforce it? I wish some of those who constantly criticize America's efforts and the judgment of President Bush would ask themselves this simple question: Would you really like to live in a world where the U.S. sits idly by and lets things happen?
Life in such a world would be like the bestial existence described in Thomas Hobbes' great work, Leviathan. If people "live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man." In that lawless state there will be "continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."
Re: Coulter Part Deux
LJ wrote, "It doesn’t matter whether he or Ms. Coulter don’t think it is – if someone is offended, its offensive."
Not sure you really mean that. If someone is offended, it's offensive to that person. But that person may be unreasonable.
Not sure you really mean that. If someone is offended, it's offensive to that person. But that person may be unreasonable.
Re: Coulter
In my schoolyard we used to plead, "Why are you upset about being called a 'bundle of sticks?'"
Ann Coulter - Part II
So I was driving to work Monday morning and instead of listening to a sports talk station as I normally do, I’m listening to Mike Gallagher. He is doing a 15-20 minute diatribe about not only Ms. Coulters’ statement, but the reaction and response by “fellow conservatives”. First, he is blasting away at Laura Ingram, Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett and some other woman whose name I don’t know. Saying that they “have turned on her” and “unlike Ann Coulter, who isn’t afraid to attack liberals, they seem to wagging their fingers at her and telling her bad girl, bad girl.” He applauds Ms. Coulter for her statements and in fact, doesn’t seem to think there was anything wrong about what she said. Again, echoing the sentiment that the term used wasn’t meant as an anti-gay slander, but as a “schoolyard” insult. That it was a joke – a joke that everyone in the room understood because they laughed. He went on and on about how it wasn’t offensive, that it wasn’t derogatory anyway since Edwards isn’t gay.
What I found amusing during this rant was that he kept saying that “the word”, “the term”, the “slang word” she used wasn’t offensive. Yet…he would never say it. Why not, if it isn’t offensive? If he agreed that it was meant in a “schoolyard taunt” manner, why didn’t he say the word? If the word isn’t offensive, if it was “a joke” or “part of a joke”, why not repeat the joke? Probably because he knows she crossed the line and the term IS offensive. It doesn’t matter whether he or Ms. Coulter don’t think it is – if someone is offended, its offensive.
Of course, he concludes by saying that even if it WERE offensive, “liberals” having been calling “conservatives” and “republicans” worse. Why is OK for them to say offensive things, but not “conservatives”? Great argument. Instead of trying to get both sides to get out of the gutter, to stop the hate-speak and attack-dog journalism, so we can get some intelligent debate and discussion on issues and policy, he takes the position of a child caught in the act of doing something wrong who says…”well, THEY did it first”.
Just another reminder why I gave up on talk radio. Why I thought anything had changed is beyond me. I’m going to stick to sports scores and sports talk…until I get sick of hearing about how the Cowboys are going to win the Super Bowl.
What I found amusing during this rant was that he kept saying that “the word”, “the term”, the “slang word” she used wasn’t offensive. Yet…he would never say it. Why not, if it isn’t offensive? If he agreed that it was meant in a “schoolyard taunt” manner, why didn’t he say the word? If the word isn’t offensive, if it was “a joke” or “part of a joke”, why not repeat the joke? Probably because he knows she crossed the line and the term IS offensive. It doesn’t matter whether he or Ms. Coulter don’t think it is – if someone is offended, its offensive.
Of course, he concludes by saying that even if it WERE offensive, “liberals” having been calling “conservatives” and “republicans” worse. Why is OK for them to say offensive things, but not “conservatives”? Great argument. Instead of trying to get both sides to get out of the gutter, to stop the hate-speak and attack-dog journalism, so we can get some intelligent debate and discussion on issues and policy, he takes the position of a child caught in the act of doing something wrong who says…”well, THEY did it first”.
Just another reminder why I gave up on talk radio. Why I thought anything had changed is beyond me. I’m going to stick to sports scores and sports talk…until I get sick of hearing about how the Cowboys are going to win the Super Bowl.
Re: pleading ''not guilty" when guilty
The Jewish Ethicist on "Can I plead innocent if I did it?" Conclusion: Yes, unless it's big:
"If there is a high-profile case where a "not guilty" plea would create an impression of contempt for the law, then there would be special value in coming clean in court and accepting the prescribed punishment. Not long ago a prominent member of one North American Jewish community pleaded guilty to wrongdoing partly for this reason. And psychologically, the acknowledgment implicit in a guilty plea can sometimes be a helpful step in repentance and reconciliation with the community. But these considerations are hardly relevant for a relatively anonymous individual who has been charged with a minor crime."
ht: SJJ
"If there is a high-profile case where a "not guilty" plea would create an impression of contempt for the law, then there would be special value in coming clean in court and accepting the prescribed punishment. Not long ago a prominent member of one North American Jewish community pleaded guilty to wrongdoing partly for this reason. And psychologically, the acknowledgment implicit in a guilty plea can sometimes be a helpful step in repentance and reconciliation with the community. But these considerations are hardly relevant for a relatively anonymous individual who has been charged with a minor crime."
ht: SJJ
Re: Bart Whitaker took the stand
I distinguish between making one's plea and testifying. The former being the system and the latter being the very definition of bearing false witness.
Lileks on Walter Reed
"As many have pointed out, there's a shining example of a government-run hospital already: Walter Reed. Imagine that example replicated across the land. Then again, imagine if the government was the defendant in every single medical malpractice case in the land.
If nothing else, we'd get tort reform."
If nothing else, we'd get tort reform."
Bart Whitaker took the stand
yesterday in the punishment phase of his trial, having been found guilty of capital murder. He admitted he was the mastermind of the plot to kill his family. I'm not a criminal lawyer, but it seems to be an odd strategy. On the other hand, if the options are life in prison or the death penalty, what does he have to lose by testifying?
But had he pled guilty, wouldn't that have precluded the prosecutor from putting on a parade of witnesses to testify about this plot and other plots in the past? Maybe not. Did Whitaker think he might be found not guilty? "Felcman asked Whitaker why he did not plead guilty to begin with and what would have happened if the jury found him not guilty. 'I didn't think that was possible,' Whitaker said."
Whitaker claims "he is a different person now and has found God."
Does a Christian who knows he is guilty as charged have an obligation to so plead? Is a "not guilty" plea a lie, or just invoking one's rights in a system that requires the prosecution to put on and prove its case?
And what about that last speeding ticket I got where I pled not guilty, hoping the cop wouldn't show at trial (he didn't), and forcing the judge to dismiss the case?
But had he pled guilty, wouldn't that have precluded the prosecutor from putting on a parade of witnesses to testify about this plot and other plots in the past? Maybe not. Did Whitaker think he might be found not guilty? "Felcman asked Whitaker why he did not plead guilty to begin with and what would have happened if the jury found him not guilty. 'I didn't think that was possible,' Whitaker said."
Whitaker claims "he is a different person now and has found God."
Does a Christian who knows he is guilty as charged have an obligation to so plead? Is a "not guilty" plea a lie, or just invoking one's rights in a system that requires the prosecution to put on and prove its case?
And what about that last speeding ticket I got where I pled not guilty, hoping the cop wouldn't show at trial (he didn't), and forcing the judge to dismiss the case?
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Ann Coulter - Part I
As I was doing research for a much longer post I'm planning to make about Ms. Coulter, I ran across this quote from her appearance Monday night on "Hannity and Colmes":
"Faggot isn't offensive to gays; it has nothing to do with gays," Coulter said on 'Hannity and Colmes' Monday night. "It's a schoolyard taunt meaning 'wuss,' and unless you're telling me that John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person."
Perhaps I'm not as intelligent as Ms. Coulter, so I might not understand what she is saying. What it looks like she is saying (to me) is that the term isn't offensive nor does it even apply to the group most of us think it applies to. But, since Edwards isn't gay, it wasn't applied to a gay person.
But, Ms. Coulter, you just said that the term has nothing to do with gays, nor is it offensive to gays, so why add the qualifier..."and unless you're telling me John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person." So....if John Edwards were gay, it would have been applied to a gay person. But, that wouldn't be a big deal, because (1) the term has nothing to do with gays and (2) even if it did, it isn't offensive to gays. The qualifier makes it appear (again to me) that she really doesn't believe the first part of her quote and is defending her use of the term by saying, since he isn't gay, it can't be offensive. So does that mean that if he were gay, it would be offensive? That is the impression I'm getting, even though she contradicts that by the first part of the quote.
I'm so confused. And, how can a non-gay person say what is or isn't offensive to a gay person? Can I say what is or isn't offensive to women? To minorities?
"Faggot isn't offensive to gays; it has nothing to do with gays," Coulter said on 'Hannity and Colmes' Monday night. "It's a schoolyard taunt meaning 'wuss,' and unless you're telling me that John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person."
Perhaps I'm not as intelligent as Ms. Coulter, so I might not understand what she is saying. What it looks like she is saying (to me) is that the term isn't offensive nor does it even apply to the group most of us think it applies to. But, since Edwards isn't gay, it wasn't applied to a gay person.
But, Ms. Coulter, you just said that the term has nothing to do with gays, nor is it offensive to gays, so why add the qualifier..."and unless you're telling me John Edwards is gay, it was not applied to a gay person." So....if John Edwards were gay, it would have been applied to a gay person. But, that wouldn't be a big deal, because (1) the term has nothing to do with gays and (2) even if it did, it isn't offensive to gays. The qualifier makes it appear (again to me) that she really doesn't believe the first part of her quote and is defending her use of the term by saying, since he isn't gay, it can't be offensive. So does that mean that if he were gay, it would be offensive? That is the impression I'm getting, even though she contradicts that by the first part of the quote.
I'm so confused. And, how can a non-gay person say what is or isn't offensive to a gay person? Can I say what is or isn't offensive to women? To minorities?
Re: Walter Reed
Boortz had the same thought here:
While they're cleaning up this mess at Walter Reed ... here's what you need to know. This treatment that was being delivered to our injured soldiers is the future of your health care. This is what you, if you're somewhat young, and most certainly your children have to deal with as the United States moves inexorably toward socialized medicine. Government health care.
...
It's coming ... and it's going to be ugly as hell. The long waits for simple diagnostic tests that have become commonplace in Canada will become the norm here. It may come to the point ... most likely it will come to the point that you will be assigned to a doctor just as your child is assigned to a school. Remember Hillarycare? Under that system if you decided to take your own money and go hire your own doctor outside of the Hillarycare scheme (somewhat like taking your child out of a government school and putting him in a private school) you could be charged with a crime. It may be necessary to adopt that policy again after people discover what a disaster their precious "universal health care" is going to be.
While they're cleaning up this mess at Walter Reed ... here's what you need to know. This treatment that was being delivered to our injured soldiers is the future of your health care. This is what you, if you're somewhat young, and most certainly your children have to deal with as the United States moves inexorably toward socialized medicine. Government health care.
...
It's coming ... and it's going to be ugly as hell. The long waits for simple diagnostic tests that have become commonplace in Canada will become the norm here. It may come to the point ... most likely it will come to the point that you will be assigned to a doctor just as your child is assigned to a school. Remember Hillarycare? Under that system if you decided to take your own money and go hire your own doctor outside of the Hillarycare scheme (somewhat like taking your child out of a government school and putting him in a private school) you could be charged with a crime. It may be necessary to adopt that policy again after people discover what a disaster their precious "universal health care" is going to be.
Walter Reed
Hasn't the Veterans' Administration been a mess for a long time? I've deposed lots of veterans about their medical conditions over the last twenty years and it seems that the nearly universal sentiment is that one avoids the VA if at all possible. Isn't this a prime example of the federal government getting involved with and screwing up medical care, and if so, isn't it an argument against any sort of government-sponsored or administrated health care plan?
Monday, March 05, 2007
RE: Thune neck deep in pork
A reader writes:
Don't always believe what you're reading. Thune didn't sneak anything by anybody behind any closed doors. There were all kinds of hearings. Here's a link. Sure its to a railroad site supporting DM&E, but from there you can link to any number of congressionals or other info that will FACTUALLY set the record straight as to when and where the hearings took place. If you made a campaign contribution to John Thune it was money well spent.
Me: I'm less concerned about the behind closed doors aspect of this than Thune's connection to DM&E. I probably would have served my reader better by being more diligent with my quotes. I don't regret my contribution to Thune, yet...but the pork has got to stop as do the connections.
Don't always believe what you're reading. Thune didn't sneak anything by anybody behind any closed doors. There were all kinds of hearings. Here's a link. Sure its to a railroad site supporting DM&E, but from there you can link to any number of congressionals or other info that will FACTUALLY set the record straight as to when and where the hearings took place. If you made a campaign contribution to John Thune it was money well spent.
Me: I'm less concerned about the behind closed doors aspect of this than Thune's connection to DM&E. I probably would have served my reader better by being more diligent with my quotes. I don't regret my contribution to Thune, yet...but the pork has got to stop as do the connections.
Thune neck deep in pork...
Novak on Thune:
The Federal Railroad Administration handed a rare victory to the American taxpayer last week by denying a questionable $2.33 billion loan application by the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern (DM&E) Railroad. What makes this news of special interest is the paramount role Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota played in boosting the loan. Here is a cautionary tale of political life in Washington and how it corrupts.
Legislative changes that made the loan possible were guided through Congress behind closed doors by Thune. But the assessment that DM&E is a poor credit risk was shared by Thune's fellow conservative senators -- Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Jim DeMint of South Carolina -- who took the extraordinary step of advocating rejection of a colleague's pet project. Making matters worse, Thune is a former paid lobbyist for the South Dakota-based railroad and has received political contributions from the company's executives.
And I sent money to this guy?
The Federal Railroad Administration handed a rare victory to the American taxpayer last week by denying a questionable $2.33 billion loan application by the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern (DM&E) Railroad. What makes this news of special interest is the paramount role Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota played in boosting the loan. Here is a cautionary tale of political life in Washington and how it corrupts.
Legislative changes that made the loan possible were guided through Congress behind closed doors by Thune. But the assessment that DM&E is a poor credit risk was shared by Thune's fellow conservative senators -- Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Jim DeMint of South Carolina -- who took the extraordinary step of advocating rejection of a colleague's pet project. Making matters worse, Thune is a former paid lobbyist for the South Dakota-based railroad and has received political contributions from the company's executives.
And I sent money to this guy?
Friday, March 02, 2007
Thursday, March 01, 2007
RE: Biggio Cliché Watch
From IMDB with apologies to Costner and Robbins:
Crash Davis: It's time to work on your interviews.
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: My interviews? What do I gotta do?
Crash Davis: You're gonna have to learn your clichés. You're gonna have to study them, you're gonna have to know them. They're your friends. Write this down: "We gotta play it one day at a time."
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: Got to play... it's pretty boring.
Crash Davis: 'Course it's boring, that's the point. Write it down.
Crash Davis: It's time to work on your interviews.
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: My interviews? What do I gotta do?
Crash Davis: You're gonna have to learn your clichés. You're gonna have to study them, you're gonna have to know them. They're your friends. Write this down: "We gotta play it one day at a time."
Ebby Calvin LaLoosh: Got to play... it's pretty boring.
Crash Davis: 'Course it's boring, that's the point. Write it down.
Biggio cliche watch
"Former KPRC (Channel 2) sports director Chris Wragge has switched from sports to news and now anchors midday afternoon newscasts on WCBS in New York. He also will fill in next month on CBS' The Early Show. He e-mails: 'I continue to, if I may quote Craig Biggio, take it day by day and treat every newscast like it's my last.'"
Wraggee refers to Biggio's well-known penchant for giving interviews that are laden with sports cliches. If you're a sportswriter and you want a quote with some insight or originality, Bidge is not your man. It would be interesting if someone went back over the twenty years of Bidge's career and tabulated the cliches. [Note to LoveJ: Great project for your next hiatus!]
I'm second to none in my admiration for Bidge and his talents, but listening to his interviews is painful.
I heard just such an interview on the radio this morning and intended to put it up, but it doesn't look like the Chronic has it. So to demonstrate that the exception proves the rule, here is a profile of Bidge from a few days ago that is largely (and remarkably) cliche-free.
Wraggee refers to Biggio's well-known penchant for giving interviews that are laden with sports cliches. If you're a sportswriter and you want a quote with some insight or originality, Bidge is not your man. It would be interesting if someone went back over the twenty years of Bidge's career and tabulated the cliches. [Note to LoveJ: Great project for your next hiatus!]
I'm second to none in my admiration for Bidge and his talents, but listening to his interviews is painful.
I heard just such an interview on the radio this morning and intended to put it up, but it doesn't look like the Chronic has it. So to demonstrate that the exception proves the rule, here is a profile of Bidge from a few days ago that is largely (and remarkably) cliche-free.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Re: Leaving the Scene of the Crime
I really did "scoot" away from the Miata. Didn't even think anything wrong about it...until I actually started to think.
Bart Whitaker
is on trial. Dad was the first witness for the prosecution. Description of creepy message Whitaker left on a gaming site lamenting the death of his brother.
Monday, February 26, 2007
RE: I guess it was worth it
Scooter - have you seen the "Children of Men" movie? C and I went to see it about a month ago, after reading all the hype and glowing reviews. I didn't see what the fuss was all about. It was OK, but I was more interested in why the world was as it was, why children weren't being born. The movie didn't address any of that....only that it was just that way and had been for many years. Does the book, to your knowledge, address these subjects?
Re: 2008 Election
I agree with Michael at the moment that Rudy is the current hands down favorite on the Republican side. Romney has a long way to go but I think he can make a run, even if just to secure the number two spot. The big advantage over sitting senators? Execs have to do.
Senators are non-executives. Their job is to dicker, not decide. Accordingly, there is no sound any Senator loves more than his or her own voice.
The exception in this election is that there is one sitting Senator in the running with a great deal of executive experience...Hillary. She may not have been the one signing the bills or (formally) issuing orders, but she was there right next to the Arkanasas Chief Exec and the US Chief Exec for what was it..20 years? Was it 12 as gov'nuh and then, of course, the 8 as Prez? That's a lot of experience.
Senators are non-executives. Their job is to dicker, not decide. Accordingly, there is no sound any Senator loves more than his or her own voice.
The exception in this election is that there is one sitting Senator in the running with a great deal of executive experience...Hillary. She may not have been the one signing the bills or (formally) issuing orders, but she was there right next to the Arkanasas Chief Exec and the US Chief Exec for what was it..20 years? Was it 12 as gov'nuh and then, of course, the 8 as Prez? That's a lot of experience.
Re: LJ cameo
I can only attribute it to 1 of 2 things:
1) She refers to herself as a "liberal Democrat" and while I'm not a "liberal", I am a Democrat and we have a telepathic connection, thus she found SSJ and commented, or (and I think this is more likely)
2) she googled "love johnson" and since I am #1 on Google, she found SSJ.
1) She refers to herself as a "liberal Democrat" and while I'm not a "liberal", I am a Democrat and we have a telepathic connection, thus she found SSJ and commented, or (and I think this is more likely)
2) she googled "love johnson" and since I am #1 on Google, she found SSJ.
I guess it was worth it...
On Saturday I went to lunch at a newly opened Hyde Park Grill in South Austin (nowhere near Hyde Park, by the way). I pulled into a parking spot next to a new black Mazda Miata convertible with the top down. I carefully opened my door until it caught in that first groove so I wouldn’t ding him. If I’d opened the door to that last groove I would’ve dinged him for sure. I reached over to grab PD James’ Children of Men and my reading glasses when a thirty-five miles per hour gust caught my door. Ugh. It wasn’t a little ding. It was five inches in diameter and three quarters of an inch deep, high on the passenger door since my truck (even my little truck) rides so much higher than the Miata.
First reaction? You know d--n well what was my first reaction. I started the truck and moved it three rows over and went into the restaurant. I did everything right. I’m always careful. I didn’t do the slamming, the wind did.
Second reaction? Nausea. I asked the waiter for a pen, wrote a note on my business card (see World's Ugliest Business Card below) and lodged it in the driver’s seat.
He just called to thank me. Can't wait to get that bill.
First reaction? You know d--n well what was my first reaction. I started the truck and moved it three rows over and went into the restaurant. I did everything right. I’m always careful. I didn’t do the slamming, the wind did.
Second reaction? Nausea. I asked the waiter for a pen, wrote a note on my business card (see World's Ugliest Business Card below) and lodged it in the driver’s seat.
He just called to thank me. Can't wait to get that bill.
Re: Sitting Senator's Direct Move to Oval Office
Only two, JFK as you mentioned and, everyone's favorite....Warren G. Harding.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Friday, February 23, 2007
2008 Election
Yes, I'm back. For how long and how often will I post, I can't say. Just enjoy me while you can...
So, I hate to even bring this up because the election cycle/coverage/discussion is WAY too long and it pains me to be even a small part of that. But as I was driving to work this morning, listening to a right-wing (of course) talk show host giddy over the "Clinton-Obama" feud, it got me to thinking about this....
Who was the last "sitting" Senator elected President? If memory serves, it was JFK. And before him...? I have no idea and I don't want to find the answer on the internet. Guesses?
I've read/heard various discourses on why Senators traditionally do not get elected to the highest office, yet they seem to be the majority of the candidates. And in looking ahead to 2008, I would think that most pundits would agree that as of today, the winner will come from either Clinton, Obama or McCain. History (and who can argue against that), however tells us that it will NOT be a "sitting" Senator. So among those who have declared who are not Senators, who would that front-runner be? I'm glad to be able to say that while I know there are more than 3 declared candidates, I can only name 4 (the 4th is John Edwards). So, my fellow SSJ's, who is the non-Senator front-runner? I'm sure you 2 have been keeping up with this....
So, I hate to even bring this up because the election cycle/coverage/discussion is WAY too long and it pains me to be even a small part of that. But as I was driving to work this morning, listening to a right-wing (of course) talk show host giddy over the "Clinton-Obama" feud, it got me to thinking about this....
Who was the last "sitting" Senator elected President? If memory serves, it was JFK. And before him...? I have no idea and I don't want to find the answer on the internet. Guesses?
I've read/heard various discourses on why Senators traditionally do not get elected to the highest office, yet they seem to be the majority of the candidates. And in looking ahead to 2008, I would think that most pundits would agree that as of today, the winner will come from either Clinton, Obama or McCain. History (and who can argue against that), however tells us that it will NOT be a "sitting" Senator. So among those who have declared who are not Senators, who would that front-runner be? I'm glad to be able to say that while I know there are more than 3 declared candidates, I can only name 4 (the 4th is John Edwards). So, my fellow SSJ's, who is the non-Senator front-runner? I'm sure you 2 have been keeping up with this....
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
World's Ugliest Business Card
...is what I have in my wallet as of today.
The only good thing about it is that the accent color it has gone from aTm maroon to blue.
Print is too small.
Print is too light.
Worst aspect: the "notes" section on the back. As if I didn't know I could write notes on the back, but at least now I have half the space.
The only other only good thing is that they didn't make me put my picture on it.
The only good thing about it is that the accent color it has gone from aTm maroon to blue.
Print is too small.
Print is too light.
Worst aspect: the "notes" section on the back. As if I didn't know I could write notes on the back, but at least now I have half the space.
The only other only good thing is that they didn't make me put my picture on it.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Pardon my schadenfreude: Airbus a Disaster
From American Thinker via Real Clear Politics:
Yesterday, Airbus humiliated itself before the world civil aviation community. Already suffering a massive loss of credibility due to the repeated delivery delays for the A 380 super jumbo, the company was to have unveiled its recovery plan, dubbed Power8, consisting of restructuring and cost saving measures intended to save $2.8 billion per year by 2010.
Instead of triumphantly presenting Power8 to the world, the company admitted it could not come to an internal agreement on cost-saving measures, and word leaked out of heated arguments among the members of its board of directors. So much for boldly moving forward to solve its many problems. Airline customers cannot be comforted by the company's continued internal squabbling, the principal factor said to be at the root of the 380's repeated delivery delays. [emph. mine]
Yesterday, Airbus humiliated itself before the world civil aviation community. Already suffering a massive loss of credibility due to the repeated delivery delays for the A 380 super jumbo, the company was to have unveiled its recovery plan, dubbed Power8, consisting of restructuring and cost saving measures intended to save $2.8 billion per year by 2010.
Instead of triumphantly presenting Power8 to the world, the company admitted it could not come to an internal agreement on cost-saving measures, and word leaked out of heated arguments among the members of its board of directors. So much for boldly moving forward to solve its many problems. Airline customers cannot be comforted by the company's continued internal squabbling, the principal factor said to be at the root of the 380's repeated delivery delays. [emph. mine]
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Victor Davis Hanson
I had the distinct pleasure of hearing one of my favorite authors speak tonight at a guest lecture sponsored by the University of Texas Liberal Arts College Western Civilization Program. Of course, that was Dr. Victor Davis Hanson.
The lecture and Q & A were taped for podcast and as soon as I find out where, I'll post a link.
The subject was "The Ancient Greeks & Western Civilization: Then and Now." Dr. Hanson was very engaging (much more so than on the radio). He certainly was unafraid of sticking his neck out in what he clearly believed could be a somewhat hostile environment. When asked about what could be done about the "clash of civilizations," he said, "I suppose I'm the only person in the room who believes the only solution is to bring transparent, representative government to the Middle East." I paraphrase but that was the gist...the Bush Doctrine or at least part of it.
I'm not sure I heard anything new in the lecture (except for his sense of humor) that I hadn't already read in his columns and books. He touched on Xerxes and Cortes and Alexander and Socrates and Phillip and Penelope. He discussed property rights and freedom of speech. Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Democracies, Oligarchies, Theocracies all made the discussion. Heck, even female circumcision found its way in. Again, nothing he's not written about before.
In many ways the stereotypical professor. Balding and bespectacled, he was disheveled and his coat was missing a button. The tan (from his farming?) was a bit out of place.
I'm glad I didn't miss a minute.
The lecture and Q & A were taped for podcast and as soon as I find out where, I'll post a link.
The subject was "The Ancient Greeks & Western Civilization: Then and Now." Dr. Hanson was very engaging (much more so than on the radio). He certainly was unafraid of sticking his neck out in what he clearly believed could be a somewhat hostile environment. When asked about what could be done about the "clash of civilizations," he said, "I suppose I'm the only person in the room who believes the only solution is to bring transparent, representative government to the Middle East." I paraphrase but that was the gist...the Bush Doctrine or at least part of it.
I'm not sure I heard anything new in the lecture (except for his sense of humor) that I hadn't already read in his columns and books. He touched on Xerxes and Cortes and Alexander and Socrates and Phillip and Penelope. He discussed property rights and freedom of speech. Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Democracies, Oligarchies, Theocracies all made the discussion. Heck, even female circumcision found its way in. Again, nothing he's not written about before.
In many ways the stereotypical professor. Balding and bespectacled, he was disheveled and his coat was missing a button. The tan (from his farming?) was a bit out of place.
I'm glad I didn't miss a minute.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
My only Anna Nicole Smith post...ever.
I’ve been trying to figure out why I had any reaction at all the recent death of Anna Nicole Smith. Because she was originally from nearby Mexia? Maybe that had a tiny part in it. Because she married the rich, old guy in Houston with almost no perceptible phoniness...everyone involved knew what was going on and it seemed to make him happy? A bit.
But Larry Miller really seemed to capture it. As tragic and silly and sad as her life has been, there was something likable about her. Miller, from the Daily Standard (Weekly Standard’s site):
I DID the Tonight Show back in '93 or '94, and she was on it. Leno came in before and said, "She's a nice girl. See you out there." And she was. I've never had the slightest problem digging the different gifts people bring to show business and beauty is a gift as much as anything else. Anyway, it was a good show. And, frankly, sitting next to her wasn't exactly a chore.
But that's not the story. The story happened just a month or two later.
My wife and I were invited out to dinner with two friends of ours, other writers. We were newly married and they took us to one of the fanciest places in town. There were a couple of well-know folks there, but the place was so swank that no one even noticed. Then, very suddenly, the room got quiet. Hushed, in fact. My back was to the door, and my wife said, "Oh, wow . . ." and tapped me, and I turned, and, of course, you know who came in and stopped the presses.
Worth reading the whole thing. Great story about her date at the restaurant.
But Larry Miller really seemed to capture it. As tragic and silly and sad as her life has been, there was something likable about her. Miller, from the Daily Standard (Weekly Standard’s site):
I DID the Tonight Show back in '93 or '94, and she was on it. Leno came in before and said, "She's a nice girl. See you out there." And she was. I've never had the slightest problem digging the different gifts people bring to show business and beauty is a gift as much as anything else. Anyway, it was a good show. And, frankly, sitting next to her wasn't exactly a chore.
But that's not the story. The story happened just a month or two later.
My wife and I were invited out to dinner with two friends of ours, other writers. We were newly married and they took us to one of the fanciest places in town. There were a couple of well-know folks there, but the place was so swank that no one even noticed. Then, very suddenly, the room got quiet. Hushed, in fact. My back was to the door, and my wife said, "Oh, wow . . ." and tapped me, and I turned, and, of course, you know who came in and stopped the presses.
Worth reading the whole thing. Great story about her date at the restaurant.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
More on Recycling
Hat tip to Michael for a derivative hat tip to LGF further derivative hat tip to youtube for this Penn and Teller slam on recycling. The best point is that made about aluminum cans...profit makes the whole deal work.
Best point: aluminum recycling works. Why? Because you can make a buck doing it. No, that's not really right...better to say that the fact that you can actually make a buck doing it is evidence that it consumes less resources than it costs. Better Allocation of Resources than an $8B annual subsidy. If this were going to Exxon/Mobil, the screams would deafen us.
D--n Capitalists get it right again!
Best point: aluminum recycling works. Why? Because you can make a buck doing it. No, that's not really right...better to say that the fact that you can actually make a buck doing it is evidence that it consumes less resources than it costs. Better Allocation of Resources than an $8B annual subsidy. If this were going to Exxon/Mobil, the screams would deafen us.
D--n Capitalists get it right again!
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
P.J. O'Rourke
You've seen her on Youtube! From Larry Kudlow on today's Corner:
It's worth noting that Hillary Clinton doesn't want corporations to pay any taxes at all-not a single penny. Hillary plans on confiscating their profits altogether! (In our CNBC interview Friday night, P.J. O'Rourke referred to Mrs. Clinton as "Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit.")
It's worth noting that Hillary Clinton doesn't want corporations to pay any taxes at all-not a single penny. Hillary plans on confiscating their profits altogether! (In our CNBC interview Friday night, P.J. O'Rourke referred to Mrs. Clinton as "Hugo Chavez in a pantsuit.")
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
UT and Google Partner Up
From my Alma Mater's press release:
The University of Texas at Austin has become the newest partner in a broad book digitization project with Google.
The partnership between the University of Texas Libraries and Google is part of the Google Books Library Project, a project started in December 2004, initially to digitize books drawn from the libraries of the University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, Oxford University and the New York Public Library.
In the course of the multi-year project, Google will digitize at least one million volumes from the University of Texas Libraries’ collections....
The University of Texas at Austin has become the newest partner in a broad book digitization project with Google.
The partnership between the University of Texas Libraries and Google is part of the Google Books Library Project, a project started in December 2004, initially to digitize books drawn from the libraries of the University of Michigan, Harvard University, Stanford University, Oxford University and the New York Public Library.
In the course of the multi-year project, Google will digitize at least one million volumes from the University of Texas Libraries’ collections....
Monday, January 29, 2007
Reagan's Free Speech Legacy
Was just listening to a podcast of Michael Medved on the effort to bring back the "fairness doctrine." I'm sure it's not an original thought, but Reagan's greatest legacy, after the ruination of Communism, may have been the removal of the "fairness doctrine." I loved the battering of the air traffic controller's union, but what a legacy that was.
Political speech has never been freer than today and in spite of the current state of the Right's political position, I would never want it to change. If we regulate the radio and FoxNews, which is what they are really after here, how long before venues like this or any of those listed on the right side of this webpage are similarly regulated?
Let the marketplace of ideas work itself out. Even Air America found additional funding, even if Mr. Franken is leaving to test the waters in Minnesota. What does Congressman Hinchey fear?
Political speech has never been freer than today and in spite of the current state of the Right's political position, I would never want it to change. If we regulate the radio and FoxNews, which is what they are really after here, how long before venues like this or any of those listed on the right side of this webpage are similarly regulated?
Let the marketplace of ideas work itself out. Even Air America found additional funding, even if Mr. Franken is leaving to test the waters in Minnesota. What does Congressman Hinchey fear?
MORE BLACK HELICOPTERS...
Ok, I’m not sold on the whole North American Union thing (not even close) and cannot abide the New World Order nutters, but this does bug me a bit.
It does appear that an affiliate of Macquarie did acquire a bunch of those Texas and Oklahoma newspapers. It also appears that a Macquarie entity is involved with Cintra, the entity involved in the Trans-Texas toll road/corridor. It just smells bad. What if Wal-Mart were to buy all the entities owning publications spewing bile at them? I’d hate that, too. The fact that they are foreign entities makes it all the more uncomfortable.
In light of Kelo, I'm a bit concerned about where all this is going. 500,00 acres?
The only article I could find today is at WND. Read if you like but watch out for those helicopters.
It does appear that an affiliate of Macquarie did acquire a bunch of those Texas and Oklahoma newspapers. It also appears that a Macquarie entity is involved with Cintra, the entity involved in the Trans-Texas toll road/corridor. It just smells bad. What if Wal-Mart were to buy all the entities owning publications spewing bile at them? I’d hate that, too. The fact that they are foreign entities makes it all the more uncomfortable.
In light of Kelo, I'm a bit concerned about where all this is going. 500,00 acres?
The only article I could find today is at WND. Read if you like but watch out for those helicopters.
More on the Unnamed Health Insurance Issue
Jeff Jacoby makes a good start on the teaching needed on the subject in today’s JWR. As in education, we need to let the market back in to the world of medicine. I know it sounds simplistic, but it works every where else. Jacoby mentions the WWII point I made last week but the more interesting discussion involve the common thought that because medicine has become so high tech that the costs must soar:
Why is health insurance so expensive? .... The revolution in cardiac care, the myriad new drugs, the invention of CAT scanners and MRIs, the ability to transplant organs — these and so many other lifesaving medical miracles didn't come cheap. It stands to reason that insurance covering the cost of such miracles doesn't come cheap either.
But wait — [why does] it stand to reason? Information technology has exploded in recent decades too, yet computers have never been as affordable as they are now. Agriculture is far more advanced, and the quality and variety of food available to consumers far greater, than they were 50 years ago, yet the real cost of food has plummeted. The price of a primitive color television in 1954 was equal to three months' wages for an average American worker; today that worker gets a sparkling picture on a 25-inch screen for just three days of work.
"Why is it," asks David Gratzer, a physician and scholar at the Manhattan Institute, "that in every other field where enormous technological strides have been made, total costs have fallen over time, but in health care they have increased?" The answer, he writes in The Cure, a lively and engrossing new book on the American health care mess, is simple: Health care costs so much because most of us pay so little for it. And we pay so little — out-of-pocket expenses amount to just 14 cents of every health dollar spent in this country — because a third party nearly always picks up the tab. For most working Americans, that third party is an insurance company paid by their employers.....
Why does it matter whether Americans pay for medical care directly or let insurers cover their bills? Because thrift and price awareness usually go out the window when we're spending other people's money. Under the present setup, most Americans have little incentive to be economical consumers of health care. As a result, health care expenditures — and insurance premiums — have been racing ahead at three and four times the rate of inflation.
Why is health insurance so expensive? .... The revolution in cardiac care, the myriad new drugs, the invention of CAT scanners and MRIs, the ability to transplant organs — these and so many other lifesaving medical miracles didn't come cheap. It stands to reason that insurance covering the cost of such miracles doesn't come cheap either.
But wait — [why does] it stand to reason? Information technology has exploded in recent decades too, yet computers have never been as affordable as they are now. Agriculture is far more advanced, and the quality and variety of food available to consumers far greater, than they were 50 years ago, yet the real cost of food has plummeted. The price of a primitive color television in 1954 was equal to three months' wages for an average American worker; today that worker gets a sparkling picture on a 25-inch screen for just three days of work.
"Why is it," asks David Gratzer, a physician and scholar at the Manhattan Institute, "that in every other field where enormous technological strides have been made, total costs have fallen over time, but in health care they have increased?" The answer, he writes in The Cure, a lively and engrossing new book on the American health care mess, is simple: Health care costs so much because most of us pay so little for it. And we pay so little — out-of-pocket expenses amount to just 14 cents of every health dollar spent in this country — because a third party nearly always picks up the tab. For most working Americans, that third party is an insurance company paid by their employers.....
Why does it matter whether Americans pay for medical care directly or let insurers cover their bills? Because thrift and price awareness usually go out the window when we're spending other people's money. Under the present setup, most Americans have little incentive to be economical consumers of health care. As a result, health care expenditures — and insurance premiums — have been racing ahead at three and four times the rate of inflation.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Scooter starting to see black helicopters?
I'm starting to get a bad feeling about the toll roads. An Aussie company partners with the Spanish company (Citra [sp?] building the first of the toll roads) and then the Aussie company buys twenty Texas newspapers along the toll road corridor. Of course, these were papers editorializing against the the toll roads.
I've got to look for some independent articles/sources rather than the scary source from which I learned this; but if true, it's ugly.
I've got to look for some independent articles/sources rather than the scary source from which I learned this; but if true, it's ugly.
Friday, January 26, 2007
Tried to move SSG to the new format....
but got a message that only my scooterblog could be moved. Said the original creator had to do the moving...
Moving scooterblog was easy...just had to set up a google account.
Moving scooterblog was easy...just had to set up a google account.
More on the Health Insurance Plan with No Name (can you hear the crickets chirping?)
GWB makes the proposal and it’s DOA. But per Mike Franc at HumanEvents:
To [Dick] Armey [(R.-Tex.)] and [Pete] Stark [(D.-Calif.)]-, the solution [in 1999] was obvious: Use the tax code to help increase [health insurance] coverage. "We think Congress should create a new refundable tax credit to enable all Americans to buy decent health coverage." Other liberals agreed. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), and Reps. Barney Frank (D.-Mass.) and Jim McDermott (D.-Wash.) sponsored legislation creating tax credits or deductions for individuals to purchase health coverage.
...
Stark refused to even hold hearings on it in the health subcommittee he chairs, saying the plan was "designed for disaster." Rep. Charles Rangel (D.-N.Y.), dismissed it as "a dangerous policy that … shifts cost and risk from employers to employees."
This knee-jerk opposition prompted some journalists to scold Democrats. The Post’s Steve Pearlstein noted that the plan "actually involves raising taxes on the rich and lavishly insured and giving the money to the working poor and the uninsured...."
To [Dick] Armey [(R.-Tex.)] and [Pete] Stark [(D.-Calif.)]-, the solution [in 1999] was obvious: Use the tax code to help increase [health insurance] coverage. "We think Congress should create a new refundable tax credit to enable all Americans to buy decent health coverage." Other liberals agreed. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.), and Reps. Barney Frank (D.-Mass.) and Jim McDermott (D.-Wash.) sponsored legislation creating tax credits or deductions for individuals to purchase health coverage.
...
Stark refused to even hold hearings on it in the health subcommittee he chairs, saying the plan was "designed for disaster." Rep. Charles Rangel (D.-N.Y.), dismissed it as "a dangerous policy that … shifts cost and risk from employers to employees."
This knee-jerk opposition prompted some journalists to scold Democrats. The Post’s Steve Pearlstein noted that the plan "actually involves raising taxes on the rich and lavishly insured and giving the money to the working poor and the uninsured...."
Simple Health Insurance Plan needs better explanation (Does it even have a Name yet?)
How many people know that employer funded health insurance was the market’s not so great response to FDR’s wage freeze (itself obviously grossly anti-market)? Amity Schlaes has a pretty good article today at bloomberg.com explaining how this would work but this project is going to take a LOT of selling. I mentioned it to a medical technician about to give me an MRI a year and a half ago and he was dumbfounded, having assumed that this was the way things HAVE ALWAYS BEEN DONE.
Ms. Schlaes:
Back in the 1930s, Congress and President Franklin Roosevelt created Social Security over corporate protests. A national system of payment for health care seemed next. (In 1945 Harry Truman would go around talking about "the right to adequate medical care.'')
Terrified employer raced to preempt FDR and Truman by proving they could handle health themselves. They contracted with Blue Cross and Blue Shield to provide benefits for employee pools. The tax treatment came last -- in fact no one knew for a while whether companies really could claim the insurance deduction.
But World War II made the new arrangement seem doubly logical. Congress imposed an "excess'' profits tax of as much as 90 percent and froze wages. Paying for health insurance was a way to reduce tax bills and keep workers, who were suddenly scarce. Unions were pleased. By 1945, 32 million Americans were in health-insurance programs, many sponsored by companies, up from 12 million to 13 million just five years before.
Bush has been awful at marketing his domestic agenda except for the early tax breaks, No Child Left Behind (and that was as much Kennedy’s doing as the POTU) and Medicare Part whatever.
I fear that she’s right and that these reforms will only begin to take root now while we most scratch our heads and try to think things through. For those of us who have decent employer provided coverage, we will be hard-pressed to allow any monkeying with it.
She concludes:
But if the Democratic leadership is already rejecting the Bush idea, is it still worth thinking about? The answer is yes. Parties come up with some of their best ideas when they are down -- ideas that tend to become law five or 10 years later.
Several other Bush proposals have been fakes -- programs that called themselves free market but actually extend the role of government, such as the Medicare Part D prescription-drug plan.
The standard-deduction plan, by contrast, truly is free market and anti-Washington. Though it may have come at the wrong time, this increase is one all can endorse -- even the tax warriors.
This is going to be a hard but necessary sell. First they need a great acronym.
Ms. Schlaes:
Back in the 1930s, Congress and President Franklin Roosevelt created Social Security over corporate protests. A national system of payment for health care seemed next. (In 1945 Harry Truman would go around talking about "the right to adequate medical care.'')
Terrified employer raced to preempt FDR and Truman by proving they could handle health themselves. They contracted with Blue Cross and Blue Shield to provide benefits for employee pools. The tax treatment came last -- in fact no one knew for a while whether companies really could claim the insurance deduction.
But World War II made the new arrangement seem doubly logical. Congress imposed an "excess'' profits tax of as much as 90 percent and froze wages. Paying for health insurance was a way to reduce tax bills and keep workers, who were suddenly scarce. Unions were pleased. By 1945, 32 million Americans were in health-insurance programs, many sponsored by companies, up from 12 million to 13 million just five years before.
Bush has been awful at marketing his domestic agenda except for the early tax breaks, No Child Left Behind (and that was as much Kennedy’s doing as the POTU) and Medicare Part whatever.
I fear that she’s right and that these reforms will only begin to take root now while we most scratch our heads and try to think things through. For those of us who have decent employer provided coverage, we will be hard-pressed to allow any monkeying with it.
She concludes:
But if the Democratic leadership is already rejecting the Bush idea, is it still worth thinking about? The answer is yes. Parties come up with some of their best ideas when they are down -- ideas that tend to become law five or 10 years later.
Several other Bush proposals have been fakes -- programs that called themselves free market but actually extend the role of government, such as the Medicare Part D prescription-drug plan.
The standard-deduction plan, by contrast, truly is free market and anti-Washington. Though it may have come at the wrong time, this increase is one all can endorse -- even the tax warriors.
This is going to be a hard but necessary sell. First they need a great acronym.
Krauthammer Joins Scooter's Chorus on Ethanol
In today's JWR, Dr. K echoes my earlier post and Robert Samuelson's column from earlier this week:
This is nonsense. As my colleague Robert J. Samuelson demonstrated this week, biofuels will barely keep up with the increase in gasoline demand over time. They are a huge government bet with goals and mandates and subsidies that will not cure our oil dependence or even make a significant dent in it.
...
So much easier to say ethanol. That it will do farcically little is beside the point. Our debates about oil consumption, energy dependence and global warming are not meant to be serious. They are meant for show.
This is nonsense. As my colleague Robert J. Samuelson demonstrated this week, biofuels will barely keep up with the increase in gasoline demand over time. They are a huge government bet with goals and mandates and subsidies that will not cure our oil dependence or even make a significant dent in it.
...
So much easier to say ethanol. That it will do farcically little is beside the point. Our debates about oil consumption, energy dependence and global warming are not meant to be serious. They are meant for show.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Friday, January 19, 2007
Embracing the Suck
The best movie example I’ve ever seen of that concept is Tom Berenger’s character in Oliver Stone’s Platoon "encouraging" a wounded soldier to, "Shut up and Take the Pain!"
Obama’s conversion from Islam
If Obama converted to United Church Christ from Islam, isn’t that punishable by death in most of the Muslim world? Especially given that the UCC is way out in front of the Episcopal Church on most issues that would particularly upset a more radical Wahhabi type?
Thursday, January 18, 2007
California Citrus Damage exacerbated by EPA
In today's TCSDaily's article by Dr. Henry I. Miller entitled "Feds Freeze Out Antidote, Costing Billions", we see once again why the scariest words in the US remain, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
A couple of paragraphs:
In the early 1980's scientists at the University of California and in industry devised a new approach to limiting frost damage. They knew that a harmless bacterium which normally lives on many plants contains an "ice nucleation" protein that promotes frost damage. Therefore, they sought to produce a variant of the bacterium that lacked the ice-nucleation protein, reasoning that spraying this variant bacterium (dubbed "ice-minus") on plants might prevent frost damage by displacing the common, ice-promoting kind. Using very precise biotechnology techniques called "gene splicing," the researchers removed the gene for the ice nucleation protein and planned field tests with ice-minus bacteria.
Then the government stepped in, and that was the beginning of the end.
What else do you need to know? (But read the whole thing if only for the science.)
A couple of paragraphs:
In the early 1980's scientists at the University of California and in industry devised a new approach to limiting frost damage. They knew that a harmless bacterium which normally lives on many plants contains an "ice nucleation" protein that promotes frost damage. Therefore, they sought to produce a variant of the bacterium that lacked the ice-nucleation protein, reasoning that spraying this variant bacterium (dubbed "ice-minus") on plants might prevent frost damage by displacing the common, ice-promoting kind. Using very precise biotechnology techniques called "gene splicing," the researchers removed the gene for the ice nucleation protein and planned field tests with ice-minus bacteria.
Then the government stepped in, and that was the beginning of the end.
What else do you need to know? (But read the whole thing if only for the science.)
Monday, January 15, 2007
The new F-35 from Lockheed lets the fighter pilot be more fighter than pilot
This is very cool. From today's NRO:
On Wednesday afternoon, a few hours after testing the F-35, Beesley explained why the new nine-G, Mach 1.6 (just over 1,200 miles per hour) fighter is unlike anything ever flown.
"I’ve never felt any airplane that had better performance coming off the ground," Beesley tells National Review Online. "I had a very good idea of how I would climb out, but [because the single Pratt and Whitney F135 engine generates more thrust than any fighter engine ever built] I had to keep pulling the nose up. I was thinking, ‘this is interesting.’"
MORE FIGHTING THAN FLYING
In September, I talked with with Marine Lt. Col. Arthur "Turbo" Tomassetti. Tomassetti, who had flown the X-35 (the stripped-down experimental version of what would evolve into the current F-35) explained that, "Mission stuff — killing things and blowing things up — should be what is most challenging. You don’t need to complicate a pilot’s life by making the hardest part of his combat mission getting back aboard ship."
On Wednesday afternoon, a few hours after testing the F-35, Beesley explained why the new nine-G, Mach 1.6 (just over 1,200 miles per hour) fighter is unlike anything ever flown.
"I’ve never felt any airplane that had better performance coming off the ground," Beesley tells National Review Online. "I had a very good idea of how I would climb out, but [because the single Pratt and Whitney F135 engine generates more thrust than any fighter engine ever built] I had to keep pulling the nose up. I was thinking, ‘this is interesting.’"
MORE FIGHTING THAN FLYING
In September, I talked with with Marine Lt. Col. Arthur "Turbo" Tomassetti. Tomassetti, who had flown the X-35 (the stripped-down experimental version of what would evolve into the current F-35) explained that, "Mission stuff — killing things and blowing things up — should be what is most challenging. You don’t need to complicate a pilot’s life by making the hardest part of his combat mission getting back aboard ship."
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Firetrucks disturb Scooter's sleep....
From News8Austin:
A million-dollar new home under construction in Tarrytown was destroyed by fire early Thursday morning.
LOUD SIRENS for an hour straight...dogs in the 'hood (in honor of our new subtitle) went crazy.
A million-dollar new home under construction in Tarrytown was destroyed by fire early Thursday morning.
LOUD SIRENS for an hour straight...dogs in the 'hood (in honor of our new subtitle) went crazy.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Paul Greenberg
One of the things about the Internet, generally, and Jewish World Review, specifically, for which I’ll always be grateful: they introduced me to Pulitzer Prize winner for editorial writing, the editorial page editor of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Paul Greenberg.
Excerpts from today’s column:
Dear Ozark Correspondent,
It was wholly a pleasure to hear the newest euphemism in your part of the state for the now politically incorrect term, hillbilly: Ozark-American.
...
So are hillbillies the same as rednecks? Those categories may overlap, but they're certainly not the same. You gotta hand it to rednecks; they don't care who calls 'em rednecks. Indeed, the true redneck takes pride in the name, and it does beat all heck out of the more scholastic classification, Southern Yeomanry.
....
The least appealing may be the professional Southerner, aka the More Southern Than Thou variety. The species can often be found up North or on the fringes of the Old Confederacy. It seems that those most removed from the center of any ethnic group may be most insecure in their identity and most bent on exaggerating it. [Me: the professional Texan is so annoying that Bud Light dedicated a "Real Men of Genius" commercial to Mr. Way Too Proud of Texas Guy.] The way Austrians make the most fanatic German nationalists. Or American Jews the most fervent Zionists.
One of the best, funniest and warmest columists in America.
Excerpts from today’s column:
Dear Ozark Correspondent,
It was wholly a pleasure to hear the newest euphemism in your part of the state for the now politically incorrect term, hillbilly: Ozark-American.
...
So are hillbillies the same as rednecks? Those categories may overlap, but they're certainly not the same. You gotta hand it to rednecks; they don't care who calls 'em rednecks. Indeed, the true redneck takes pride in the name, and it does beat all heck out of the more scholastic classification, Southern Yeomanry.
....
The least appealing may be the professional Southerner, aka the More Southern Than Thou variety. The species can often be found up North or on the fringes of the Old Confederacy. It seems that those most removed from the center of any ethnic group may be most insecure in their identity and most bent on exaggerating it. [Me: the professional Texan is so annoying that Bud Light dedicated a "Real Men of Genius" commercial to Mr. Way Too Proud of Texas Guy.] The way Austrians make the most fanatic German nationalists. Or American Jews the most fervent Zionists.
One of the best, funniest and warmest columists in America.
My Morning Chill
From Mark Steyn at National Review:
There are ten million people in Moscow. Do you know how many of them are Muslim? Two and a half million. Or about a quarter of the population. The ethnic Russians are older; the Muslims are younger. The ethnic Russians are already in net population decline; the Muslim population in the country has increased by 40% in the last 15 years. Seven out of ten Russian pregnancies (according to some surveys) are aborted; in some Muslim communities, the fertility rate is ten babies per woman. Russian men have record rates of heart disease, liver disease, drug addiction and Aids; Muslims are the only guys in the country who aren’t face down in the vodka.
Faced with these trends, most experts extrapolate: thus, it’s generally accepted that by mid-century the Russian Federation will be majority Muslim. But you don’t really need to extrapolate when the future’s already checking in at reception. The Toronto Star (which is Canada’s biggest-selling newspaper and impeccably liberal) recently noted that by 2015 Muslims will make up a majority of Russia’s army.
More scary stuff....
There are ten million people in Moscow. Do you know how many of them are Muslim? Two and a half million. Or about a quarter of the population. The ethnic Russians are older; the Muslims are younger. The ethnic Russians are already in net population decline; the Muslim population in the country has increased by 40% in the last 15 years. Seven out of ten Russian pregnancies (according to some surveys) are aborted; in some Muslim communities, the fertility rate is ten babies per woman. Russian men have record rates of heart disease, liver disease, drug addiction and Aids; Muslims are the only guys in the country who aren’t face down in the vodka.
Faced with these trends, most experts extrapolate: thus, it’s generally accepted that by mid-century the Russian Federation will be majority Muslim. But you don’t really need to extrapolate when the future’s already checking in at reception. The Toronto Star (which is Canada’s biggest-selling newspaper and impeccably liberal) recently noted that by 2015 Muslims will make up a majority of Russia’s army.
More scary stuff....
Monday, January 08, 2007
Avian Flu or the commencement of the the 80th Texas Legislature???
KLBJ reports:
They've closed off most of Congress Avenue for the morning downtown -- along with all side streets between Colorado and Brazos streets. That's after dozens of birds were found dead in the area.
They've closed off most of Congress Avenue for the morning downtown -- along with all side streets between Colorado and Brazos streets. That's after dozens of birds were found dead in the area.
It’s not quite the same as the “recycling” scam, but it’s close...
This is just nuts and another example of (i) good intentions driving policy without examining the bad results and (ii) what happens when the market is influenced by subsidies rather than, well, the market.
From John Fund’s column at WSJ’s opinion website:
As for corn-based ethanol, Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute calls the current mania to subsidize it "the closest thing to a state religion America has." Corn farmers have done a good job of disguising the fact that it still takes more than a gallon of fossil fuel — 29% more is the best estimate — to make a gallon of ethanol. [emph added] In addition, various mandates requiring the use of ethanol significantly increased gasoline prices last summer and led to spot shortages because ethanol can't be carried through pipelines and requires special blending plants. James Glassman, an economist with J.P. Morgan Chase, notes that expensive ethanol was a big factor in the sticker shock consumers encountered at the pump this summer. "We'd probably have retail gasoline prices between $2.30 and $2.40 a gallon if not for ethanol," he told The Wall Street Journal last June, when pump prices were topping $3 a gallon.
So, it takes a almost 1.3 gallons of gasoline or oil or the equivalent of natural gas or coal to create a gallon of ethanol. And not only that, I paid an extra $0.50 per gallon of gasoline this summer because of it.
Terrific policy. Right up there with recycling.
From John Fund’s column at WSJ’s opinion website:
As for corn-based ethanol, Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute calls the current mania to subsidize it "the closest thing to a state religion America has." Corn farmers have done a good job of disguising the fact that it still takes more than a gallon of fossil fuel — 29% more is the best estimate — to make a gallon of ethanol. [emph added] In addition, various mandates requiring the use of ethanol significantly increased gasoline prices last summer and led to spot shortages because ethanol can't be carried through pipelines and requires special blending plants. James Glassman, an economist with J.P. Morgan Chase, notes that expensive ethanol was a big factor in the sticker shock consumers encountered at the pump this summer. "We'd probably have retail gasoline prices between $2.30 and $2.40 a gallon if not for ethanol," he told The Wall Street Journal last June, when pump prices were topping $3 a gallon.
So, it takes a almost 1.3 gallons of gasoline or oil or the equivalent of natural gas or coal to create a gallon of ethanol. And not only that, I paid an extra $0.50 per gallon of gasoline this summer because of it.
Terrific policy. Right up there with recycling.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Christmas
One really interesting thing (at least to me) about this Christmas: my mom kinda adopted her bridge partner who has little family around. The partner, probably in her 80s, was invited to spend Christmas with us.
My first thought was, "INTERLOPER!" Then as I got to know the woman, I really liked her. As things progressed, the whole affair came to remind me of any Christmas with my mom's mom, Sweet (that is what her grandkids called her). It was great.
To be so reminded of Sweet was melancholy, but nice.
The "interloper" even broke out her violin and performed Christmas Carol duets with my mom (on the piano). It sounds corny, I know, but it was great.
Thanks, Mom.
My first thought was, "INTERLOPER!" Then as I got to know the woman, I really liked her. As things progressed, the whole affair came to remind me of any Christmas with my mom's mom, Sweet (that is what her grandkids called her). It was great.
To be so reminded of Sweet was melancholy, but nice.
The "interloper" even broke out her violin and performed Christmas Carol duets with my mom (on the piano). It sounds corny, I know, but it was great.
Thanks, Mom.
Friday, December 22, 2006
Bloodcurdlingly (Is that a word?)
I remember thinking my mom was all wet in the 60’s when she told me not to believe that nonsense about it hurting the eggs of bald eagles, but I was naïve. From Human Events, this sickening paragraph:
Bloodcurdlingly, Berlau cites several prominent environmentalist leaders who explained that their opposition to DDT was based on their desire for Third World people to die. For example, Sierra Club Director Michael McCloskey said in 1971 in order to explain his organization’s opposition to DDT, “By using DDT, we reduce mortality rates in underdeveloped countries without the consideration of how to support the increase in populations.” Alexander King, co-founder of the Club of Rome, wrote in 1990, “So my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it greatly added to the population problem.” That’s right—prominent and influential environmentalists oppose DDT because it saves human lives.
Bloodcurdlingly, Berlau cites several prominent environmentalist leaders who explained that their opposition to DDT was based on their desire for Third World people to die. For example, Sierra Club Director Michael McCloskey said in 1971 in order to explain his organization’s opposition to DDT, “By using DDT, we reduce mortality rates in underdeveloped countries without the consideration of how to support the increase in populations.” Alexander King, co-founder of the Club of Rome, wrote in 1990, “So my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it greatly added to the population problem.” That’s right—prominent and influential environmentalists oppose DDT because it saves human lives.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Monday, December 18, 2006
B.C.E. ???
My favorite historian used this term. I don't really object but who decides these things?
The context was immediate:
This catchy sobriquet, however, is only a new name for something very old. In fact, radical transformations in military practice have marked Western history at least since Sparta and Athens squared off in the Peloponnesian war in the 5th century B.C.E.
The context was immediate:
This catchy sobriquet, however, is only a new name for something very old. In fact, radical transformations in military practice have marked Western history at least since Sparta and Athens squared off in the Peloponnesian war in the 5th century B.C.E.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Don't tell Mama...
I have to admit my knowledge of Harold Ford is primarily limited to what I've seen of him on the evil Fox News Network but that limited knowledge led me to agree with NRO's Larry Kudlow:
If the Democrats really want to embrace a rising star, they need look no further than Harold Ford, the young African American congressman from Tennessee who nearly captured a senate seat last month. Ford appreciates free markets and capitalism. He has boldly crossed party lines to vote to extend the investor tax cuts and expand tax-free savings accounts. He avoids class-warfare platitudes and embraces the Ownership Society. He’s optimistic — Reaganesque. And his pro-growth vision stands in stark contrast to Obama’s nanny-state predilection.
I know he lost (and I admit to Repub. dirty tricks) but I think Tenn. made a mistake.
If the Democrats really want to embrace a rising star, they need look no further than Harold Ford, the young African American congressman from Tennessee who nearly captured a senate seat last month. Ford appreciates free markets and capitalism. He has boldly crossed party lines to vote to extend the investor tax cuts and expand tax-free savings accounts. He avoids class-warfare platitudes and embraces the Ownership Society. He’s optimistic — Reaganesque. And his pro-growth vision stands in stark contrast to Obama’s nanny-state predilection.
I know he lost (and I admit to Repub. dirty tricks) but I think Tenn. made a mistake.
Apocalypto
Hugh Hewitt is really right about the movie...at least as far as its "art" goes. It is beautiful. It is a step similar to the one Spielberg took with Saving Private Ryan. The plot and characters though....
Victor Davis Hanson disappoints and then sates...
Victor Davis (or David, as Laura Ingraham says) Hanson irked me then made up for it today:
From today's NRO:
This week Iran hosted an international conference on Holocaust denial. The gathering was as bizarre as a bar out of Star Wars [emph. added], a collection of every crackpot anti-Semite the world over, all there for a scripted, tightly controlled hatefest advertised as a “free” exchange of ideas unknown in Europe.
Jimmy Carter, silent about Iran’s latest promotion for its planned holocaust, is hawking his latest book — in typical fashion, sorta, kinda alleging that the Israelis are like the South Africans in perpetuating an apartheid state, that they are cruel to many Christians, and, as occupiers, are understandably the targets of suicide bombers and other terrorist killers. Sadly, all that shields this wrinkled-browed, lip-biting moralist from complete infamy is sympathy for a man bewildered in his dotage [emph. added].
From today's NRO:
This week Iran hosted an international conference on Holocaust denial. The gathering was as bizarre as a bar out of Star Wars [emph. added], a collection of every crackpot anti-Semite the world over, all there for a scripted, tightly controlled hatefest advertised as a “free” exchange of ideas unknown in Europe.
Jimmy Carter, silent about Iran’s latest promotion for its planned holocaust, is hawking his latest book — in typical fashion, sorta, kinda alleging that the Israelis are like the South Africans in perpetuating an apartheid state, that they are cruel to many Christians, and, as occupiers, are understandably the targets of suicide bombers and other terrorist killers. Sadly, all that shields this wrinkled-browed, lip-biting moralist from complete infamy is sympathy for a man bewildered in his dotage [emph. added].
Re: McConnell
Somehow someone "commented" with a unremovable link. At least there is no little trash can to click.
Star Wars Bar Scene
I read it once this morning and then heard it on the radio and I want it stopped. Edict: Thou shalt not invoke the "Star Wars Bar Scene" to describe a motley crew.
RE: Violent crime is up in Houston after Katrina (Part One*)
Aggravated assault up a mere 2%
Auto theft up 11%; I’d have thought that would be much higher with many of the evacuees going from N.O. to Houston (must have auto)
Burglary down 20%
Burglary of auto up 1%
As Michael mentioned, DWI down a staggering, slurring amount (75%?)
RAPE UP 120%! What is that?
Negligent manslaughter too small to take into account
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter up 23% (how much of that will be old time Houston gang versus new New Orleans gang members and/or NO gang versus NO gang members?)
Drug violations up 16% and
Robbery up 6%
With the exception of the two biggies (rape and murder), I'm guessing there was not much of a per capita increase.
Auto theft up 11%; I’d have thought that would be much higher with many of the evacuees going from N.O. to Houston (must have auto)
Burglary down 20%
Burglary of auto up 1%
As Michael mentioned, DWI down a staggering, slurring amount (75%?)
RAPE UP 120%! What is that?
Negligent manslaughter too small to take into account
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter up 23% (how much of that will be old time Houston gang versus new New Orleans gang members and/or NO gang versus NO gang members?)
Drug violations up 16% and
Robbery up 6%
With the exception of the two biggies (rape and murder), I'm guessing there was not much of a per capita increase.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Violent crime is up in Houston after Katrina (Part One*)
I was asked recently if my concerns immediately after Katrina about the New Orleans evacuees coming to Houston had been realized. [Very soon after Katrina I was worried about reports that the crime rate in New Orleans was much higher than in Houston, and predicted that we were going to see increased crime in Houston as the result of our New Orleans neighbors coming to visit. I posted some anecdotal stuff along the same lines here, here, here, and here.]
After looking a bit I found a chart created by Pat Ramsey at Southwestern University that compares crime stats for the eight months before Katrina (Jan-Aug '05) to the same period in 2006. [I'm grateful I found Pat's work because it makes the point and saved me a lot of work, but it seems a better comparison would be the year before (Sept '04-Aug '05) to the year after.]
Look at Pat's chart and you'll see crime was up in most catagories tracked, and significantly up in some (interestingly, burglary and DWI were down).
But, my correspondent wanted to know, was there an increase in the per capita crime rate? In other words, was the increased crime due simply to the fact that there were more people or were the evacuees in fact committing crimes at a greater rate than Houstonians had before Katrina?
To answer that question one needs population numbers: Houston before Katrina and the number of New Orleans refugees. The Census Bureau, in a special project to assess the effects of Katrina, made estimates of the Houston population before and after Katrina. In Part Two, I'll look at those numbers and show that per capita crime rate increased in several catagories.
* I left my analysis of the per capita figures at the office and I'm too lazy to rerun it now. So there's a Part Two. While you wait, chew on this: My correspondent contends that everyone is one bad break away from destitution and criminality (in her case, crack whoring). "There but for the grace of God go I." Discuss.
After looking a bit I found a chart created by Pat Ramsey at Southwestern University that compares crime stats for the eight months before Katrina (Jan-Aug '05) to the same period in 2006. [I'm grateful I found Pat's work because it makes the point and saved me a lot of work, but it seems a better comparison would be the year before (Sept '04-Aug '05) to the year after.]
Look at Pat's chart and you'll see crime was up in most catagories tracked, and significantly up in some (interestingly, burglary and DWI were down).
But, my correspondent wanted to know, was there an increase in the per capita crime rate? In other words, was the increased crime due simply to the fact that there were more people or were the evacuees in fact committing crimes at a greater rate than Houstonians had before Katrina?
To answer that question one needs population numbers: Houston before Katrina and the number of New Orleans refugees. The Census Bureau, in a special project to assess the effects of Katrina, made estimates of the Houston population before and after Katrina. In Part Two, I'll look at those numbers and show that per capita crime rate increased in several catagories.
* I left my analysis of the per capita figures at the office and I'm too lazy to rerun it now. So there's a Part Two. While you wait, chew on this: My correspondent contends that everyone is one bad break away from destitution and criminality (in her case, crack whoring). "There but for the grace of God go I." Discuss.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Mitch McConnell
Straps it on: “And as odd as it sounds, some of the high points of my Senate career have been killing things”
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Road Trip
Just got back from a trip to help my sister-in-law move. My route was Dallas-El Paso-Las Cruces-Tucson-Phoenix-Flagstaff-Gallup-Gunnison-Denver-Boulder-Dallas. Drove through dust storms, flash floods, temperatures ranging from 103 (Phoenix and in the Texas panhandle) to the 40's (Gunnison). Even had 20+ degree temperature changes within 5 minutes near El Paso and going over Lizard Head Pass in SW Colorado. Saw elk, deer, prairie dogs, antelope, a roadrunner. Was verbally accosted by a Navajo at a gas station in the middle of the Navajo reservation in NW New Mexico ("What are you doing in Navajo country? Why are you here?). Listened to "reservation radio" - they had 2 stations. Both spoke in Navajo, but one played songs in English, but the other played native Navajo music.
With the recent interest in illegal immigration, I was pleased to see a BIG increase (based on my last trip through El Paso - New Mexico - Arizona) in the border patrol presence. Lots of agents in vehicles, helicopters. But they were mostly sitting in cars talking to each other. Had to go through a border checkpoint outside Las Cruces, but the agent just waved everyone through. Not sure what he was looking for.
Kinda reminded me of trips many years ago to Big Bend National Park. Ahh...those were the days.
With the recent interest in illegal immigration, I was pleased to see a BIG increase (based on my last trip through El Paso - New Mexico - Arizona) in the border patrol presence. Lots of agents in vehicles, helicopters. But they were mostly sitting in cars talking to each other. Had to go through a border checkpoint outside Las Cruces, but the agent just waved everyone through. Not sure what he was looking for.
Kinda reminded me of trips many years ago to Big Bend National Park. Ahh...those were the days.
Minimum Wage
Saw an interesting letter to the editor in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on this subject during our trip up north at the beginning of July. This may not be a new idea, but it was new to me and I like it. A lot.
The writer said that the solution to this problem was to tie increases to the minimum wage to increases in pay that Congress votes to themselves. If they get a raise, the minimum wage goes up as well. The same percentage. God, I love that.
Of course, this will never happen because Congress would have to approve it and pass it. But it makes sense to me, which is another reason it won't happen.
The writer said that the solution to this problem was to tie increases to the minimum wage to increases in pay that Congress votes to themselves. If they get a raise, the minimum wage goes up as well. The same percentage. God, I love that.
Of course, this will never happen because Congress would have to approve it and pass it. But it makes sense to me, which is another reason it won't happen.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Wisc
Only because I can't spell. Tell our friend to call me; we've switched home and cell phones and lost the number; I've spent hours trying to find her in WauwatosaMiiniTosagSag that she owes me a few (hours).
Re: LJ
C and I are heading up north to the land of brauts and beer tomorrow for the holiday - get back on the 4th, then on the 6th I'm driving out to Arizona to help my sister-in-law move from Flagstaff to Gunnison, CO. I should be back on the 11th or 12th.
I've never been to Disney World. Only suggestion I would have is hit the most popular rides early (like you haven't figured that out already). On second thought, I do have another...don't go. WAY too crowded, WAY too commercial, WAY too many kids. But then again, that's me and it's a bit late since you're already there.
Have fun :)
I've never been to Disney World. Only suggestion I would have is hit the most popular rides early (like you haven't figured that out already). On second thought, I do have another...don't go. WAY too crowded, WAY too commercial, WAY too many kids. But then again, that's me and it's a bit late since you're already there.
Have fun :)
LJ
1) Where you going? 2) It's "couldn't." 3) In addition to the launch we're spending several days at Disney World. Have you been and if so any suggestions*? Looks like a big complex.
*Behold the power of the Blogger Spellchecker: I typed "suggetions." It gave me about ten possible alternatives, none of them "suggestions."
*Behold the power of the Blogger Spellchecker: I typed "suggetions." It gave me about ten possible alternatives, none of them "suggestions."
RE: Hey
Wow...I thought my eyes were deceiving me. I check the blog a couple of times a day and for what, 2 months, nothing. And this morning, lo-and-behold, MULTIPLE posts!
As for the subject of flag-burning, let me say this: I never know which is the gramatically correct term..."couldn't care less" or "could care less"? Whichever is, that is how I feel about it.
It's too bad that at least one of my SSJ brothers has deciced that now is the time to get back to blogging. For the next 2 weeks, I will be away from any computers or internet, so I will not be able to voice my opinions or even check the blog. Guess that means I'll have some catching up to do when I get back home.
As for the subject of flag-burning, let me say this: I never know which is the gramatically correct term..."couldn't care less" or "could care less"? Whichever is, that is how I feel about it.
It's too bad that at least one of my SSJ brothers has deciced that now is the time to get back to blogging. For the next 2 weeks, I will be away from any computers or internet, so I will not be able to voice my opinions or even check the blog. Guess that means I'll have some catching up to do when I get back home.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
FLASH BUMP
"Flash" I think is a radio term meaning something important is about to be said. "Bump," as I understand the blogsphere, connotes something you wrote recently that has been pushed down on your blog by later posts but which you now believe should be top and center.
I started to type that this is neither, but then I looked at my definitions.
If this small small part of the bsphere is to continue, there has to be a reason why. Did we run out of things to say? We never have before. Are we tired of the constant onslaught of partisanship? I think we'd all say yes. Do we just not care anymore? I say no.
Can we let this noble enterprise die a whimpering death? I say never:
To that end, and keeping with the Flash and not so much the Bump, let's revisit the birth of SSJ:
I'm getting a lot of email along these lines: "Love your site! You guys are great! Only place on the web where a couple of 'nuts and a 'bat can duke it out in a civilized fashion. But what's the deal with your name?"
Well. A considered question deserves a considered answer. Here it is:
One day last year, out of the the blue, I got this email from my good and close friend Scooter:
Scooter: Let's start a blog.
I was thrilled (in the old sense of "terrified" [look it up]) and terrified. What in the world would I be able to blog about? I had not had an original idea in twenty years.
Michael: What? I haven't had an original idea in twenty years.
Scooter: You're right, me neither. Forget it.
Michael: OK.
Scooter: OK.
Michael: OK then.
Scooter: But...
Michael: But what?
Scooter: What if we had a site devoted to esoteric economic theory with an occasional pop culture reference AND some hardcore conservative political commentary?
Michael: Gosh, when you put it that way, count me in!!
Michael: We're going to need a name. Punditguys?
Scooter: I don't think so. Overdone.
Michael: How about "Jacks of Spades," y'know like "Ace of Spades?"
Scooter: meh.
Michael: Ok fine.
Scooter: How about something with pajamas? [Ed. note: this was when jammies were hot.]
Michael: I dunno, seems like everyone's doing jammies.
Scooter:...
Michael:..
Scooter: I've got it. Not pajamas: smoking jackets. Like Astaire and Cary Grant.
Michael: Yeah I like that. But I dunno. It seems a little . . . gay?
Scooter: Yep.
Michael: Instaguys?
Scooter: Please.
Michael: ...
Scooter: OK. Let's go back to first principles. We've got nothing new to say, right?
Michael: Check.
Scooter: We haven't had an original idea in twenty years.
Michael: Check.
Scooter: Anything we say is going to be derivative of something someone else has already said.
Michael: Check.
Scooter: Dig this: Secondhand Smoking Jackets.
Michael: Ah, "secondhand smoke," secondhand = derivative. Not bad, not bad at all.
Scooter: Grazie.
Michael: AND if we go back to my earlier "Jacks of Spades," we could make it "Secondhand Smoking Jackets of Spades." No, that's just stupid. "Secondhand Smoking Jacks of Spades?" Too long. How about "Secondhand Smoking Jacks?" Which doesn't really make much sense.
Scooter: I kind of like it.
Michael: Eh. I guess we can think about.
Scooter: OK. I've got a site on Blogger for "Secondhand Smoking Jacks."
Michael: What?? I thought we we're going to talk about this some more.
Scooter: I guess not.
Michael: Fine.
My blog brothers: We've had our sabbatical. The times, they are a'changing, and we don't want not to be not on record, or at least I don't. E.g., I've waded in [weighed in?] on the flag thing, have you?
I started to type that this is neither, but then I looked at my definitions.
If this small small part of the bsphere is to continue, there has to be a reason why. Did we run out of things to say? We never have before. Are we tired of the constant onslaught of partisanship? I think we'd all say yes. Do we just not care anymore? I say no.
Can we let this noble enterprise die a whimpering death? I say never:
To that end, and keeping with the Flash and not so much the Bump, let's revisit the birth of SSJ:
I'm getting a lot of email along these lines: "Love your site! You guys are great! Only place on the web where a couple of 'nuts and a 'bat can duke it out in a civilized fashion. But what's the deal with your name?"
Well. A considered question deserves a considered answer. Here it is:
One day last year, out of the the blue, I got this email from my good and close friend Scooter:
Scooter: Let's start a blog.
I was thrilled (in the old sense of "terrified" [look it up]) and terrified. What in the world would I be able to blog about? I had not had an original idea in twenty years.
Michael: What? I haven't had an original idea in twenty years.
Scooter: You're right, me neither. Forget it.
Michael: OK.
Scooter: OK.
Michael: OK then.
Scooter: But...
Michael: But what?
Scooter: What if we had a site devoted to esoteric economic theory with an occasional pop culture reference AND some hardcore conservative political commentary?
Michael: Gosh, when you put it that way, count me in!!
Michael: We're going to need a name. Punditguys?
Scooter: I don't think so. Overdone.
Michael: How about "Jacks of Spades," y'know like "Ace of Spades?"
Scooter: meh.
Michael: Ok fine.
Scooter: How about something with pajamas? [Ed. note: this was when jammies were hot.]
Michael: I dunno, seems like everyone's doing jammies.
Scooter:...
Michael:..
Scooter: I've got it. Not pajamas: smoking jackets. Like Astaire and Cary Grant.
Michael: Yeah I like that. But I dunno. It seems a little . . . gay?
Scooter: Yep.
Michael: Instaguys?
Scooter: Please.
Michael: ...
Scooter: OK. Let's go back to first principles. We've got nothing new to say, right?
Michael: Check.
Scooter: We haven't had an original idea in twenty years.
Michael: Check.
Scooter: Anything we say is going to be derivative of something someone else has already said.
Michael: Check.
Scooter: Dig this: Secondhand Smoking Jackets.
Michael: Ah, "secondhand smoke," secondhand = derivative. Not bad, not bad at all.
Scooter: Grazie.
Michael: AND if we go back to my earlier "Jacks of Spades," we could make it "Secondhand Smoking Jackets of Spades." No, that's just stupid. "Secondhand Smoking Jacks of Spades?" Too long. How about "Secondhand Smoking Jacks?" Which doesn't really make much sense.
Scooter: I kind of like it.
Michael: Eh. I guess we can think about.
Scooter: OK. I've got a site on Blogger for "Secondhand Smoking Jacks."
Michael: What?? I thought we we're going to talk about this some more.
Scooter: I guess not.
Michael: Fine.
My blog brothers: We've had our sabbatical. The times, they are a'changing, and we don't want not to be not on record, or at least I don't. E.g., I've waded in [weighed in?] on the flag thing, have you?
STS-121
For those of you not steeped in NASA doings that's the next Shuttle mission and it is currently scheduled to launch 3:49 pm EDT July 1. We're fortunate to have one of the astronauts as our friend and neighbor and have been invited to view the launch from the family/friends area. I don't know where that is but it has to be better than where I saw the first launch from*. I never saw an Apollo (i.e. Saturn V) launch (I think T did), which was the most powerful vehicle to ever leave the Earth, but I can say the Shuttle launch I saw was pretty damned impressive, even from the peanut gallery.
*The non-dangling, and correct, being "from which I saw . . ." Can't do it. Which begs the question: What's happened to Michael's stand against the degeneration of grammar and syntax? What, indeed.
*The non-dangling, and correct, being "from which I saw . . ." Can't do it. Which begs the question: What's happened to Michael's stand against the degeneration of grammar and syntax? What, indeed.
Friday, May 19, 2006
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Getting back on the bicycle...maybe.
I was out-and-about this morning, running errands and decided that after a 2 to 3 week hiatus from any talk radio, it was time to tune in. I've been so apathic lately, regarding anything even remotely political. But, my thinking was, it's been long enough. Time to jump back on that bicycle and see what happens.
Turn on the radio and the Glenn Beck show is on. He is railing against the do-nothing politicians. Both sides. Talk and talk and talk, but never do or fix anything. Immigration...Iraq....fuel prices...scandals...he rants for 10 minutes or so. Listening to it was giving me a headache. so I swtiched over to Air America.
The Rachel Maddow show is on. Her topics? New CIA director....Iraq war...."The Decider's" fish story. Since I agree, at least to some extent, to her views on these subjects, I last about 15 minutes before I get bored and my head starts hurting again. Next stop, Laura Ingraham.
She seems all worked up over an interview Katie Couric had this morning with Joel Osteen, the pastor of the Lakewood mega-church in Houston. After listening for a few minutes, I wasn't quite sure what she was worked up about. Her focus seemed to be (1) that when Katie was quoting Bible verses to Mr. Osteen, she referred to them as "quotes" rather than "passages" and (2) her questions seemed hypocritical, as Katie was asking Mr. Osteen about he reconciled being a pastor while at the same time his church rakes in huge $$ and he just signed a big book deal (larger than Bill Clinton's, as Katie pointed out). Now, I just happened to see this interview while I was doing my 30 minutes on a treadmill at my gym. I'm not a big Katie fan, but her interview broached many more subjects than just money and she seemed informed and respectful of his position. And given the scandals that seem to follow many of these TV evangelists, I thought the line of questions on this subject was fair. Ms. Ingrahams' point appeared to be that Katie had no right to ask him about this, since she herself is quite wealthy. Well, I can think of one big difference...Katie isn't on TV asking people to send her money. Whether she earns what she is paid by NBC and now CBS could be a matter of debate, but if the networks are willing to pay her millions, then more power to her. Somehow I doubt that Ms. Ingraham is hurting financially herself.
I had to turn this off as well, not because I was at my destination, but because I just couldn't take it anymore. So off went the radio and on went the CD player....Roxy Music. My headache went away. And it was obvious that my talk radio hiatus wasn't long enough.
Turn on the radio and the Glenn Beck show is on. He is railing against the do-nothing politicians. Both sides. Talk and talk and talk, but never do or fix anything. Immigration...Iraq....fuel prices...scandals...he rants for 10 minutes or so. Listening to it was giving me a headache. so I swtiched over to Air America.
The Rachel Maddow show is on. Her topics? New CIA director....Iraq war...."The Decider's" fish story. Since I agree, at least to some extent, to her views on these subjects, I last about 15 minutes before I get bored and my head starts hurting again. Next stop, Laura Ingraham.
She seems all worked up over an interview Katie Couric had this morning with Joel Osteen, the pastor of the Lakewood mega-church in Houston. After listening for a few minutes, I wasn't quite sure what she was worked up about. Her focus seemed to be (1) that when Katie was quoting Bible verses to Mr. Osteen, she referred to them as "quotes" rather than "passages" and (2) her questions seemed hypocritical, as Katie was asking Mr. Osteen about he reconciled being a pastor while at the same time his church rakes in huge $$ and he just signed a big book deal (larger than Bill Clinton's, as Katie pointed out). Now, I just happened to see this interview while I was doing my 30 minutes on a treadmill at my gym. I'm not a big Katie fan, but her interview broached many more subjects than just money and she seemed informed and respectful of his position. And given the scandals that seem to follow many of these TV evangelists, I thought the line of questions on this subject was fair. Ms. Ingrahams' point appeared to be that Katie had no right to ask him about this, since she herself is quite wealthy. Well, I can think of one big difference...Katie isn't on TV asking people to send her money. Whether she earns what she is paid by NBC and now CBS could be a matter of debate, but if the networks are willing to pay her millions, then more power to her. Somehow I doubt that Ms. Ingraham is hurting financially herself.
I had to turn this off as well, not because I was at my destination, but because I just couldn't take it anymore. So off went the radio and on went the CD player....Roxy Music. My headache went away. And it was obvious that my talk radio hiatus wasn't long enough.
Old rivarly rekindled
This from today's Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:
"Arkansas and Texas have agreed to a two-year, home-and-home football series
beginning in 2008. The Razorbacks visit their former Southwest Conference
rival on Sept. 13, 2008. In 2009, Texas plays in Fayetteville on Sept. 12."
I can't speak for the "tea-sippers", but I can say that ALL Razorback fans will be very excited about this. From another article in the ADG, it appears the game in 2008 will be the first in the expanded, renovated Royal-Memorial Stadium. Hopefully, the UT athletic department will give more tickets to the UA than they did when we played there in 2003. C and I will be there of course (as we were in 2003), and I can only hope the result is the same.
"Arkansas and Texas have agreed to a two-year, home-and-home football series
beginning in 2008. The Razorbacks visit their former Southwest Conference
rival on Sept. 13, 2008. In 2009, Texas plays in Fayetteville on Sept. 12."
I can't speak for the "tea-sippers", but I can say that ALL Razorback fans will be very excited about this. From another article in the ADG, it appears the game in 2008 will be the first in the expanded, renovated Royal-Memorial Stadium. Hopefully, the UT athletic department will give more tickets to the UA than they did when we played there in 2003. C and I will be there of course (as we were in 2003), and I can only hope the result is the same.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Shoes?
"Keen" (brand name, not adjective) hiking sandals on sale at REI from the 5th to the 14th. $69.00 as opposed to the usual $90.00.
I abhor the look of sandals but love the comfort. I acknowledge the bad feelings are at least in part due to the fact that I have the planet's ugliest toes. These give me the comfort without exposing the ugly toes.
Best story: some months after I bought my first pair a couple of years ago, I was walking thru the shoe department at a fru-fru department store here in Austin. The department manager came over to me and asked me about my shoes. I told him about them and where I got them. 60 days later this store was carrying them.
LJ, you once gave me a pair of shoes that I wore foe almost 10 years and still have...you'd love these.
I abhor the look of sandals but love the comfort. I acknowledge the bad feelings are at least in part due to the fact that I have the planet's ugliest toes. These give me the comfort without exposing the ugly toes.
Best story: some months after I bought my first pair a couple of years ago, I was walking thru the shoe department at a fru-fru department store here in Austin. The department manager came over to me and asked me about my shoes. I told him about them and where I got them. 60 days later this store was carrying them.
LJ, you once gave me a pair of shoes that I wore foe almost 10 years and still have...you'd love these.
True reality TV
So yesterday afternoon I turn on the TV to watch the local news a few minutes before 5 pm (just for the record, the local ABC affiliate). They have broken into the scheduled program for "breaking news" - a Continental Express plane has blown it's 2 tires on the left side on take-off and is circling Bush Intercontinental Airport burning off fuel before it attempts to land. I flipped over to NBC and they are covering it too. CBS as well. So I'm thinking, "wow, this must be a big deal if all three stations are covering it." So if it's a big deal, CNN must be all over this. I turn over and....nope, not CNN. OK, Fox....nope, not them either. So I go back to ABC and they cover this thing for at least 1 hour and 45 minutes (with a break for the national news at 5:30, even though they break in during the commercials to give updates). And of course, no mention of it on the national news. While watching this "drama" unfold, I have several thoughts:
1) Why are the local stations even covering this? It's not a flight that was coming to or leaving Dallas, nor is it American Airlines. So why do they think it's such a big news story for DFW?
2) If all 3 local stations are covering it, why isn't CNN, Fox, etc? I'd be willing to bet if this were happening in NYC, LA, Chicago, they would be all over it. But since it's Houston, it's not worth the air time.
3) News anchors are very good when reading their script - get them in a situation like this, and you see how pathetic they are. Asking stupid questions. Asking the same ones over and over and over again. Saying things that make no sense. At one point, the anchor from the ABC affiliate was introducing a local Houston reporter on scene from "our sister affiliate station in Houston, KHOU". Now, I know I've been gone for a few years, but isn't KHOU the CBS station? KTRK is the ABC one. Nice...
4) So the 2 anchors and the 2 "airline experts" are discussing how the plane will land, what should happen, what they don't want to happen, all the while showing all the emergency vehicles getting ready. And just before the plane begins to land, I think to myself..."I wonder if the news people are thinking what I am....I hope 'something' happens. Something dramatic. Because if it all works out OK, we just invested 2+ plus hours into this and for what"? And lo and behold, the plane lands perfectly, hardly any sparks or anything. And I swear you could hear the disappointment in the anchors voices. After a couple of minutes, they went back to regular programming - Wheel of Fortune.
I was trying to decide if I should feel bad or not because I felt a small level of disappointment that it worked out OK. No sparks. No fire. No passengers sliding down out of the plane. Basically a waste of 2 hours. Then again, it was better than most anything on network TV these days. A "true" reality show, without the edited "most dramatic and emontional"....whatever. And that is the true lesson here - that if "true" reality show were on TV, no one would watch them because they would be as boring as hell. At least most of the time. Directors, editors, producers have to create reality to get anyone interested. I'm barely interested these days in true reality - that is why I pass on the TV versions of it.
1) Why are the local stations even covering this? It's not a flight that was coming to or leaving Dallas, nor is it American Airlines. So why do they think it's such a big news story for DFW?
2) If all 3 local stations are covering it, why isn't CNN, Fox, etc? I'd be willing to bet if this were happening in NYC, LA, Chicago, they would be all over it. But since it's Houston, it's not worth the air time.
3) News anchors are very good when reading their script - get them in a situation like this, and you see how pathetic they are. Asking stupid questions. Asking the same ones over and over and over again. Saying things that make no sense. At one point, the anchor from the ABC affiliate was introducing a local Houston reporter on scene from "our sister affiliate station in Houston, KHOU". Now, I know I've been gone for a few years, but isn't KHOU the CBS station? KTRK is the ABC one. Nice...
4) So the 2 anchors and the 2 "airline experts" are discussing how the plane will land, what should happen, what they don't want to happen, all the while showing all the emergency vehicles getting ready. And just before the plane begins to land, I think to myself..."I wonder if the news people are thinking what I am....I hope 'something' happens. Something dramatic. Because if it all works out OK, we just invested 2+ plus hours into this and for what"? And lo and behold, the plane lands perfectly, hardly any sparks or anything. And I swear you could hear the disappointment in the anchors voices. After a couple of minutes, they went back to regular programming - Wheel of Fortune.
I was trying to decide if I should feel bad or not because I felt a small level of disappointment that it worked out OK. No sparks. No fire. No passengers sliding down out of the plane. Basically a waste of 2 hours. Then again, it was better than most anything on network TV these days. A "true" reality show, without the edited "most dramatic and emontional"....whatever. And that is the true lesson here - that if "true" reality show were on TV, no one would watch them because they would be as boring as hell. At least most of the time. Directors, editors, producers have to create reality to get anyone interested. I'm barely interested these days in true reality - that is why I pass on the TV versions of it.
Monday, May 01, 2006
Re: Apathy
Dude, kind of a bummer. Sounds like Savage in one of his moods. Having said that, I'm kind of feeling the same, but for different reasons. I know the Dims are out to lunch, so I'm not troubled by that. It's disappointing to see the Rethugs misfire on the gas prices and spending. I am hopeful we have turned the corner in Iraq, but I wish there were more positive indicators that is the case.
I have an inkling, only, of your frustration re employment and know it's tough. Doors close and open, but sometimes not as fast as we would wish. And with that sappy and completely unhelpful aphorism, I'm done.
I have an inkling, only, of your frustration re employment and know it's tough. Doors close and open, but sometimes not as fast as we would wish. And with that sappy and completely unhelpful aphorism, I'm done.
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
The disease that is apathy
The unemployed, when not looking for a job, have plenty of time to think and reflect. On life. On current events. On anything and everything. Perhaps that is why I have caught a disease - the disease of apathy. Day after day I enter the world of the internet and see what is going on in the world and what "people" are saying about said events. That is how one contracts the disease.
Politics - one party says ying, the other says yang. They agree to disagree. Unless the polls show that the public is overwhelmingly for or against something. Then they all say they will fix it. But first, they have to have hearings. Actually, pre-hearings before the hearings. Then they take one of their numerous "breaks" to go home to "hear from their constituents" (i.e. big donors). Then they go back to D.C., posture for the cameras and what happens - nothing. Never. Ever. I've often wondered why polls and stories always say that the voters have HUGE negative feelings about Congress, yet the voters always re-elect the same ones over and over again. I used to think that it was because the incumbents have fixed the election rules so much to their advantage that unless they are caught with an animal and/or a child in some seedy motel (and in some districts, that wouldn't even matter it seems), re-election is almost a given. Now I am convinced that when push comes to shove, by the time election day rolls around, the voters are like me - they don't care. Apathy has taken hold of them. It doesn't matter who gets elected, nothing will change because of it. Politics - right now I don't care anymore.
Bush - he is such a disaster, I'm rapidly getting bored reading and listening to all the haters, spinners, apologists, worshipers, etc. When he speaks, I turn it off. Doesn't make any diference what he says - nothing changes because of it. I see today that he has named a new Spin Master - er, Press Secretary. Yawn....do I care, not really.
Reviewing the headlines on Drudge....Brittany Spears pregnant again. Who cares about that? Did anyone care the first time? Tom Cruise / Katie Holmes...again, who cares about this? Why is this even news. Teri Hatcher suffers eye injury. Ohh, the stock market might crash because of this.
Geesh, I can't read anymore of this. I'm going to check out CNN...
Rumey and Condi make a surprise visit to Iraq. Of course it is a surprise, it's so damn dangerous (even though we are making real progress) that they can't announce it in advance or they might get killed. And of course they will stay in the "green zone". Won't venture out. But it's great over there...uh huh. Secrest not talking to Paula Abdul. So what. Who cares? I even read that now there is going to be a reality show about a realty show (American Idol). Is the best that TV execs can come up with? No wonder I only watch sports on the tube. Drivers running out of gas to save money. What? Gas prices...like anyone can do anything about them. It's the same every year. High around Easter, go down a little, high around Memorial Day, go down a little, high around July 4th, go down a little, high around Labor Day (is there a trend here?), then down a little. All it takes is some yahoo oil shiek in some god-forsaken desert country to say "oil", "terrorist", "nukes", "refining capacity" and the oils prices shoot up. Here is the problem in a nutshell - we like big cars. Big SUV's. Big hummers. And nobody is going to tell us what kind of car to drive. Today, as I was driving to the gym, I saw the American gas/oil problem in full view. Sitting at an intersection, there were 10 vehicles waiting for the light to change. All 10 were SUV's (mine included). Of the 10, 8 had only 1 person in them (mine included). There it is. That is the problem. I don't need CNN or Bush or some ExxonMobil executive or some Saudi oil shiek to rail on and on - just go to an intersection and look at the vehicles and how many people are in them.
So I guess the point of this rant is this. I don't care about too much right now. I don't want to watch TV, I don't want to listen to talk radio, I don't want to read papers or surf the web. I have no desire. I'm apathetic. These days, I spend my time 1) sorta looking for a job 2) playing free cell on the computer and 3) watching the NHL play-offs.
I need a life...and something, anything to care about. And quickly.
Politics - one party says ying, the other says yang. They agree to disagree. Unless the polls show that the public is overwhelmingly for or against something. Then they all say they will fix it. But first, they have to have hearings. Actually, pre-hearings before the hearings. Then they take one of their numerous "breaks" to go home to "hear from their constituents" (i.e. big donors). Then they go back to D.C., posture for the cameras and what happens - nothing. Never. Ever. I've often wondered why polls and stories always say that the voters have HUGE negative feelings about Congress, yet the voters always re-elect the same ones over and over again. I used to think that it was because the incumbents have fixed the election rules so much to their advantage that unless they are caught with an animal and/or a child in some seedy motel (and in some districts, that wouldn't even matter it seems), re-election is almost a given. Now I am convinced that when push comes to shove, by the time election day rolls around, the voters are like me - they don't care. Apathy has taken hold of them. It doesn't matter who gets elected, nothing will change because of it. Politics - right now I don't care anymore.
Bush - he is such a disaster, I'm rapidly getting bored reading and listening to all the haters, spinners, apologists, worshipers, etc. When he speaks, I turn it off. Doesn't make any diference what he says - nothing changes because of it. I see today that he has named a new Spin Master - er, Press Secretary. Yawn....do I care, not really.
Reviewing the headlines on Drudge....Brittany Spears pregnant again. Who cares about that? Did anyone care the first time? Tom Cruise / Katie Holmes...again, who cares about this? Why is this even news. Teri Hatcher suffers eye injury. Ohh, the stock market might crash because of this.
Geesh, I can't read anymore of this. I'm going to check out CNN...
Rumey and Condi make a surprise visit to Iraq. Of course it is a surprise, it's so damn dangerous (even though we are making real progress) that they can't announce it in advance or they might get killed. And of course they will stay in the "green zone". Won't venture out. But it's great over there...uh huh. Secrest not talking to Paula Abdul. So what. Who cares? I even read that now there is going to be a reality show about a realty show (American Idol). Is the best that TV execs can come up with? No wonder I only watch sports on the tube. Drivers running out of gas to save money. What? Gas prices...like anyone can do anything about them. It's the same every year. High around Easter, go down a little, high around Memorial Day, go down a little, high around July 4th, go down a little, high around Labor Day (is there a trend here?), then down a little. All it takes is some yahoo oil shiek in some god-forsaken desert country to say "oil", "terrorist", "nukes", "refining capacity" and the oils prices shoot up. Here is the problem in a nutshell - we like big cars. Big SUV's. Big hummers. And nobody is going to tell us what kind of car to drive. Today, as I was driving to the gym, I saw the American gas/oil problem in full view. Sitting at an intersection, there were 10 vehicles waiting for the light to change. All 10 were SUV's (mine included). Of the 10, 8 had only 1 person in them (mine included). There it is. That is the problem. I don't need CNN or Bush or some ExxonMobil executive or some Saudi oil shiek to rail on and on - just go to an intersection and look at the vehicles and how many people are in them.
So I guess the point of this rant is this. I don't care about too much right now. I don't want to watch TV, I don't want to listen to talk radio, I don't want to read papers or surf the web. I have no desire. I'm apathetic. These days, I spend my time 1) sorta looking for a job 2) playing free cell on the computer and 3) watching the NHL play-offs.
I need a life...and something, anything to care about. And quickly.
The Thin White Duke....in Portuguese
I saw this and thought of you Scooter. HERE is a link to a zip file of songs from the movie "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou", which I admit I liked. I love the Bill Murray understated style of comedy. Anyway...throughout the movie, one of the characters sang Portuguse versions of David Bowie songs. The zip file contains the 11 full version songs he sang snippets of in the film.
Pretty cool stuff.
Pretty cool stuff.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
William Shatner
I wanted to be on record somewhere that I love this guy whatever he does. Just saw a piece of a lawyer show: he was fabulous.
Monday, April 24, 2006
Begging the fargin question
This week's hall of shame: (1) "Author and conservative comedian Brad Stine;" (2) Mike McDaniel of the Chronic;
and (3), well I don't have one (or do I?). This travesty is so widespread I thought I could get a weekly feature out of it, you know, three (surely not more) violations I saw THIS WEEK. Either I've not been paying attention or ... something. Anyway, I only had two, so I thought I'd cheat and google some news stories for "begs the question."
The result was shocking. Aussies, at least at 9 CDT, 4/24/06, seem to be the worst offenders.
and (3), well I don't have one (or do I?). This travesty is so widespread I thought I could get a weekly feature out of it, you know, three (surely not more) violations I saw THIS WEEK. Either I've not been paying attention or ... something. Anyway, I only had two, so I thought I'd cheat and google some news stories for "begs the question."
The result was shocking. Aussies, at least at 9 CDT, 4/24/06, seem to be the worst offenders.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
