Mixing Politics and Alcohol

Some pre-election generalizations

2010-10-08T16:48:00.000-07:00

Republicans =

The Rich keep all of the money.

The government gets to keep some (which they give to their buds).

They get to tell you what to do.

The get to tell you how to act.

Democrats =

The Rich keep most all of the money.

The government gets to keep some (which they give to their buds).

They get to tell you what to do.

They profess to not care how you act.

Libertarians =

They profess to not care who keeps the money (but the rich keep it all in practice).

The government keeps none (So if they wanna give money to their buds, it comes out of their pocket).

They don't care what you do.

They don't care how you act (but retain the right to blow your ass away if you act out on "their" property.

Pick your poison...

This trumps all as an American

2010-08-20T12:11:00.000-07:00

I just heard that 80% of New Yorkers are opposed to the Islamic center being built in New York, near "Ground Zero". I understand and share some of their misgivings; it does feel somewhat like this religious group is giving us the collective finger by desiring to build so close to a site of national grieving...

However...

It is not our property. They own it. As Americans, they have the right to do with it as they wish.

Others also have the right to not work on building it; and in New York labor is still organized. Zoning laws may preclude the construction (although zoning against a religious use would be on some pretty shaky constitutional grounds.) There are a number of ways to stop this from being built, many of which go against the ideals the nation was founded upon. The best way (and, coincidentally, the most ethical) is thus:

Offer the owners of the property an amount sufficient to induce them to sell it without coercion.

If you cannot do that, sit down, be insulted, butt-hurt or whatever; but STFU. It ain't your property. This ain't a chicken processing plant or toxic waste dump. You have no say in this.

Greasy Business

2010-06-08T00:55:00.000-07:00

Let's just say the concept of limited liability did not apply to shareholders in a corporation. If you owned shares in BP right now, what would you be telling management? Yah, I thought so...

Surprise! You're soaking in it!

2009-08-23T18:47:00.000-07:00

I was recently watching a special on the "Healthcare Nightmare" on the Faux Network, and was very entertained by the usual fear mongering by Hannity and the bunch. During their rants, they suggested that the cost of universal health care would be astronomically more than it is now.

I differ, as we already have universal health care, and we are already paying for it, and in the most expensive way possible.

When I was in the hospital earlier this year for surgery--a stay paid for by my work-sponsored insurance program--I had a number of roomies in my semi-private digs. One was on Medicare, and was having gall bladder surgery. Two others were in for emergency kidney stone surgery. Of those two, one was a citizen uninsured in his job, the other was an illegal immigrant, also uninsured in their job. All of us received the same treatment--top notch, with room service feeding (which I could only avail myself of sparingly), nurses and aides to wait on our needs.

The uninsured patients were not treated shabbily, the nurses and room service came just as speedily for them as they did for me. They did not want for attention, nor were pain meds refused to them. Doctors saw them expeditiously.

In the case of the two uninsured gentlemen, I would bet that the care and the bills were totally uncompensated, indigent care. This indigent care is paid for by billing paying customers, such as myself, astronomically higher bills to make up for the lost money. Other customers, especially those that self-insure, or pay their own bills, are billed even more outrageously for their care to cover those indigent costs.

So, since money to cover the indigent is taken from those that have--the insured and the self-paying--and used to cover those that have not, do we not have a de-facto socialized health care system?

I would argue that is most assuredly the case. And since the burden of caring for the indigent falls mainly on emergency rooms (the only medical facilities that are unable to turn them away--at least until their condition is stabilized), they are being cared for in the most expensive and inefficient way possible.

I will grant that there are free clinics about (and God Bless those that run and staff them) and other programs to help the indigent, but way too many people simply wait until they are sick to the point of death to get care. When they do, it's the ER that gets them.

I would like to see us get past the point of squabbling about whether or not we are going to have a universal, socialized health care system, and move on to how we are going to pay for it and administer it efficiently and fairly. There is no point in arguing about whether or not it exists, it's there, and as long as emergency facilities have to stabilize patients without asking about means to pay, it will continue to soak the rest of us.

What is the deal with external drives?

2009-04-29T16:49:00.001-07:00

I've had the worst luck with external drives...my Maxtor Central Axis is going south (literally, that's where the return depot is) and a number of other externals have taken a dump out of warranty.

Most of the problem drives I've had have been Western Digital 3.5" models of varying capacity--they tend to give the "click-o-death" far before their MTBF stat would indicate they should. Internal Western Digital drives seem to do just fine.

I wonder if the interfaces on the portable drives are the issue, or if they do not dissipate heat properly. In any case, I'll not be buying another MyBook.

Wish I had the kind of cred to say this....

2009-04-18T14:29:00.001-07:00

oUR vIEW: discombobulation, government, spending, conservatives - Opinion - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO

Indeed, where were they last fall when a Republican president TARPed us....but nonetheless, I can't blame eight years of Dubya for the whole mess either. I certainly won't blame a president who has been in office for less than 100 days for it. Indeed, it's interesting to see The Gazette, a paper not known for it's left-leaning editorial stance, bashing it.

These tea parties DO send notice to Washington that angry mobs with pitchforks and torches are not inconceivable...it's all part of the American Right to Be Revolting. There could quite possibly be an Auto-da-Fe in the future, and that prospect should be feared by us all.

Indeed, not all of me is appalled by the prospect of a few investment bankers roasting over an open fire, and I like to consider myself a rational human being (if occasionally chemically-enhanced). This tendency in myself makes me worry about those that are not quite so introspective...we have a large reservoir of Righteous Anger in this country, and we have to really be careful in how we decide to direct it. Angry mobs are rarely constructive.

I am in no way saying the tea party folks are in any way related to the aforementioned angry mobs--my point is that they are a manifestation of an anger that needs to be acknowledged and dealt with--hopefully before some demagogue finds a way to harness it.

An immodest thought on campaign finance

2009-04-13T12:05:00.000-07:00

"An honest politician is one that stays bought"--H. L. Mencken

Campaign finance laws do not work. Money continues to influence elections no matter how hard Mr. McCain and Mr. Feingold work to stop it. Libertarians rightly bring up first amendment concerns about telling people how to spend their money, and folks on the left decry the fact that influence is being bought and sold on Capitol Hill.

Campaigns have become expensive circuses, with attack ads, swift-boating and interest campaign groups becoming common as an unintended result of people trying to keep the interest groups out of political finance. It obviously is not working.

Here's a suggestion...

Repeal McCain-Feingold, for a start. Replace it with a simple scheme that has worked well for NASCAR--Corporate Sponsorship. Anyone tired of watching power suits on C-SPAN would get an immediate benefit, as elected representatives would be required to "proudly" display their sponsor's logo on colorful corporate livery. It would also be much easier to explain why a certain politician was speaking on behalf of a certain bill...for instance, if Senator Foo Bar from the great state of whatever was speaking for or against an appointment to the FCC, it would make a lot of sense for us to be able to see the fine "Comcast" logo displayed on his colorful outfit.

Replace that dignified library where elected officials make their pronouncements with a backdrop showing their fine sponsors, with the largest donors having their logo more prominent, and the lesser ones smaller.

Lining up campaign funds would be much easier as well--$5 million gets your logo on the congressman's door, as well as on the hood of his limo, $1 million gets the logo on the limo door, $500,000 buys the chairs in his office, etc.

Government could also save money on the franking privilege if mailing costs were defrayed by placing the rep's corporate sponsors prominently on his mass mailings--"And now, a word from your congressional representative Mud Face, proudly brought to you by the friendly folks at National Right to Life--remember, don't kill that baby!"

Wearing the logo of the contractor that benefited the most from government contracts at the ribbon cutting for a new bridge could give everyone that saw the photo op a new respect for the role of the building interests in politics, as well as a documented photo record of responsibility when the bridge collapses from shoddy construction. Wearing the Halliburton logo when at a signing ceremony for a bill awarding a no-bid contract would show dedication to their masters, as well as provide clarity to the public.

Money buys political influence, there is nothing new about that, and there is nothing that will ever change that.

Let's just make them display who their bitch ass belongs to.

Still Alive

2009-03-25T23:31:00.000-07:00

On 3/26/04 I recieved my last radiation treatment for throat cancer. I am still alive. On the fifth anniversary of my last radiation treatment, I will pray that all that have cancer will get the treatment that they need, and as working human beings, deserve. God bless you all.

Yes, I Discriminate

2007-10-16T10:57:00.000-07:00

I got a phone call this morning from a very hostile gentleman that I'll call Mr. Felon. I received this call because I have a part-time, semi-profitable occupation as a landlord. The first words out of Mr. Felon's mouth were a question: "Do you rent to felons?" The communication being somewhat garbled, I asked him to repeat himself. He elaborated: "Do you rent to sex offenders?"

I was somewhat taken aback--the first questions are usually about the rent, the deposit, how much space, whether or not Fido is allowed and such.

So, with the clarity of someone who has figured out the appropriate response to an insult 15 minutes after the offender has left, I thank you, Mr. Felon, for making me think my position through.

Yes, I discriminate. Everybody does. From your choice of breakfast coffee, to the television shows you watch, choices are made--you discriminate against one for the other. Decisions are made thousands of times a day, and all of them discriminate for or against other options.

Do I discriminate against you? That depends--by law, I cannot discriminate in housing decisions on the basis of race, creed, national origin or sex. That's okay--that's not how I make my decisions. I make decisions on the basis of what's likely to cost me money, or cause me grief, or both.

Personally, Mr. Felon, I don't care about your past except it provides me indicators on your likely future behavior. You may have found God, reformed yourself, and grown into a beautiful, caring and productive person. People do this all the time.

Also, Mr. Felon, I don't care about what helps you Get Your Freak On, except as it involves unwilling accomplices, children, animals or disturbance to my tenants or destruction of my property.

What I want is simple--a business relationship with someone that will pay the rent on a steady and timely basis; a tenant that will live tidily and quietly in my place, obeying the rules agreed upon in the lease.

I DO care what your felony was. I don't care for thieves, rapists, child molesters, murderers, violent folks of any stripe, drug manufacturers or distributors. I want people that are legally and gainfully employed. I do not wish to rent to folks that think that paying the rent is optional; or that think that they can get over on me because I am ignorant. I do not want someone that is going to store corpses of victims in the freezer, or the closet. That tends to make me unpopular with the neighbors, as do large numbers of people, police cars, ambulances and fire trucks at all hours of the day or night.

What I'm saying, Mr. Felon, is that yes, I'm probably going to discriminate against you, even if your only crime was selling someone like me a bag of pot 20 years ago. Why? Because I don't want to lose my house when the city declares it a nuisance and confiscates it because you were selling pot there again. I also don't want protesters outside of the place picketing because there is a registered child molester in the neighborhood.

I do want to thank you, Mr. Felon, for making me rethink my criteria. From now on, I'll pay the extra eight bucks and get the criminal background report with the credit check.

...and I will discriminate.

These Two Things Do Not Go Together.....

2007-06-28T20:32:00.000-07:00

Two words that should never appear adjacent in the news ever again are "Paris" and "Hilton". Anything they would indicate when adjacent is not, and should not ever be called "news". (picture omitted out of respect for the reader, if you are out there)

How the City Pooched the Rain Tax

2007-05-25T17:34:00.000-07:00

The City of Colorado Springs has a problem: Too much water at once. When it rains in our fine desert town, water runs off all the roofs, onto the driveways, into the streets, and down the storm drains, into the creeks. From there, it rolls down the creek, happily eroding banks, around sewer lines and bridge supports until it visits our neighbors to the south. Sometimes, the excess water breaks sewage facilities, and takes that dark gift to our neighbors as well.

Our neighbors don't take too kindly to us pooping in their creek, and object strongly, and the City gets fined. The neighbors to the south even get uppity, and try to block water projects the City needs to continue growing. (Whether the growth is a good idea or not is a different discussion.)

So, to counter the first problem, the City creates a second one, their "Stormwater Enterprise" to fund work needed to control the flooding issues. This "Enterprise", having all the attributes of a tax, was pushed through the City Council by a majority that deemed this issue "too important" to be left to a vote of the people, as required by Colorado state law, even though this same council repealed a "fee" added to utility bills that funded streetlights because of similar objections.

Now, people are refusing to pay the "Rain Tax" bill, for numerous reasons...some because they don't recognize the legitimacy of the tax, others because the didn't know it was a real bill, others (like myself) that never received the bill. Douglas Bruce, a man that never met a tax he liked, attempted to get a petition started to repeal the tax, unfortunately, he larded it up with other tax issues he didn't like, the city ruled his petition had too many issues, and refused to approve the title so signatures could be gathered.

Doug--simplify your petition so it only deals with repealing the City's "stormwater enterprise", and leave the other issues off it. We'll sign and pass it (at least those of us that have the option to vote on it will--I live in Manitou, and don't get to vote on those city issues, even though I own property and pay taxes in the city--a completely different issue). If the city considers the issue that "important", it can sell the idea to the voting public, or decide what to de-fund in order to do the alleged "backlog" of stormwater projects they've been backburnering for years. In either case, they've got some explaining to do, and should be made to do so.

Insurance and Bookmaking....

2006-09-21T20:37:00.000-07:00

Although both are gambling, there are some serious differences among which are the size and duration of the bets. It's usually easier to collect on a win from your local sports book than it is to clear an insurance claim though.

Also, the complexity of the bet will be much higher with insurance...there is an incentive to cloud, obfuscate and otherwise deceive with legalese policies and agreements designed to exclude the exact thing you are trying to claim for.

I have an insurance policy through one of the Blues where I work. I am a lucky guy, as without insurance, some health issues I've had would have bankrupted me easily, and all of my paycheck would be garnished by the medical industry and the credit card companies I pay the bills through.

I have a serious issue about the policy. It's too damn complicated. I cannot understand the math used to compute what the insurance pays for, or won't pay for.

Take, for instance, two specialists I visit. One has a private office. When I visit him, I pay a $30 copay on the spot, insurance covers the rest after I pay the annual deductible. The other, who has his practice in a hospital, is quite different. After deductions for co-insurance, I get a bill for about $54 from the doctor's practice. Later, I also get a $38 bill for the portion of the doctor's facility charge from the hospital. This is under the same policy that says I have a $30 copay when visiting a specialist. I call both the doctor's bookkeeper and the insurance company, and they both assure me I am being billed an appropriate amount, and I simply do not understand the rules.

I lost it. The poor woman on the phone at Anthem got an earful about what lousy bookies they were.

You see, if I go to a sports book, the rules of the bet are absolutely clear--the results of a misunderstood bet are often violent and personal. They want me to understand that if I get Denver and 3, I win my bet if Denver loses by a safety. They are also very clear on how much I stand to win or lose on a given bet. They make their money on balancing the action on both sides of a contest and changing the spread as needed to make sure they have prospective winners and losers roughly equal, and make their money either as a percentage of the bet or by taking a point or two in the middle of the spread.

Insurance companies work the spread as well, but they use actuarial statistics instead of points. They measure the likelihood of a disaster versus the likelihood of life-as-usual over long periods of time. They do not have the luxury of balancing bets on both sides--but they do have the advantage of being able to change the terms of the bet unilaterally. They also get to hold the bet, which they then take and gamble themselves, either in the stock and bond markets, or in other investments. This "float" on bets payable and premium received is a very important part of their income.

They also make a large amount on convincing people that they are covered for damages that they actually have no intention to cover. Ask a Katrina victim who had their home destroyed by storm surge about whether the wind that pushed the wave was the cause of the destruction or not.

A modest proposal: Let's have insurance companies phrase their policies as bets--Your car gets wrecked; we fix it. You get sick--we pay the costs over X dollars. Your house burns down, we rebuild it (unless you set it on fire on purpose). Make all exclusions as clear as the large print benefits--in other words, a clean bet. Furthermore, establish in law a principle that such policies must be easily comprehensible by the poor working slob that ultimately pays for them. If they aren't, penalize the person that writes the policy with a punch in the face or a broken leg--the penalty for being a bad bookie.

Capitalism the Right Way...Kudos...

2006-06-26T20:15:00.000-07:00

You won't often hear me say nice things about many billionaires, so pay attention.

Thank you, Bill and Melinda Gates, and Thank you as well, Warren Buffet.

There--it hurt, but I said it in public.

The news that prompted this outpouring of public gratitude was the announcement that Buffet will donate a large portion of his wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a charity that spends a good part of the Gates fortune on world health and educational issues; and Gates' announcement that he will divorce himself from his Chief Software Architect post at Microsoft to spend more time running the foundation.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is how capitalism is supposed to work---after using capital to amass more wealth than one could possibly spend in a lifetime, they are working now on attacking Great Problems, in the fashion of the Rockafellers and the Carnegies. With this many resources to throw at the issues (Buffet is bequeathing $31 BILLION) we can expect great strides to be made.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/business/27friends.html

Maybe We're Going At This Wrong....

2006-06-21T17:47:00.000-07:00

Mind The (CEO Pay) Gap - Forbes.com

An interesting little story about how the American executive can be expected to see his compensation package grow more slowly in coming years due to globalization...it got me to thinking that maybe we're approaching the issue of the widening gap between the rich and the poor the wrong way.

Maybe, instead of a minimum wage, we should have a maximum wage...say, oh, 20 times the wage of the lowest paid contractor in the company. As it stands at the present, there is no incentive, indeed dis-incentives exist, for the captain of the corporation to level the pay scale throughout the organization.

With a maximum wage in effect, the CEO would take care to make sure the janitorial contractor got a living wage--it would affect his potential salary far more than a performance-based package would, and it would have the effect of narrowing the gap between rich and poor far better than a tax-based redistribution scheme would.

I have no illusions that if such a scheme were enacted in the United States, there would not be massive flight of capital from the country--indeed, I would expect that there would soon be no corporations based here. There must be a way to get competent people to run corporations other than throwing bucketfuls of money at them; perhaps there are even a few that would enjoy working in an organization where the suits and the grunts enjoy closer lifestyle and sense of purpose and value in the company.

Ken Lay and the Courts...a Feel-Good sentence

2006-06-01T22:29:00.000-07:00

Well, a jury of people that Ken Lay certainly would not accept as peers deliberated and found the former Enron CEO guilty of fraud and other charges, and it looks like he gets a Neo-Nazi named Bubba for his roomie for up to 30 years. This is a good start--but by no means enough.

Having him rot in jail for the remainder of his days does not pay for the damage he has done--to investors, to employees and to the economy. We need to go further. The government needs to seize every penny he or his family owns, every asset, every palatial home, every fancy car, every bit of jewelry. No hiding place or shelter should save his family from penury, as they all benefited from his crime. The crying shame is that most of his wealth is probably very well hidden in some offshore bank or corporation where his family and other cronies will be able to enjoy it.

The thought of Jeff Skilling working in the prison laundry does warm the heart. Add the spice of seeing his family impoverished, and maybe we can think that the American justice system is not completely owned by the rich.

Let's get the bankruptcy courts and government investigators busy tracking down their ill-gotten gains before they all vanish, and maybe the folks who lost their asses on believing these jokers will see a little justice by getting some of their money back.

2006-05-28T20:53:00.000-07:00

News Item....

WITH ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FIGHTING WIDLFIRES, WEST FACES A DILEMMA

Written by KIRK JOHNSON
Sunday, 28 May 2006

The debate over immigration, which has filtered into almost every corner of American life in recent months, is now sweeping through the woods, and the implications could be immense for the coming fire season in the West.
As many as half of the roughly 5,000 private firefighters based in the Pacific Northwest and contracted by state and federal governments to fight forest fires are immigrants, mostly from Mexico. And an untold number of them are working here illegally.
A recent report by the inspector general for the United States Forest Service said illegal immigrants had been fighting fires for several years. The Forest Service said in response that it would work with immigration and customs enforcement officers and the Social Security Administration to improve the process of identifying violators.
At the same time, the State of Oregon, which administers private fire contracts for the Forest Service, imposed tougher rules on companies that employ firefighters, including a requirement that firefighting crew leaders have a working command of English and a formal business location where crew members can assemble.

remainder of the story at: http://www.amhersttimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1691&Itemid=27

My take...

It's about time government got out of the business of hiring or winking at the hiring of illegals on government contracts. It's hard, demanding work, fighting fires, but if you need an American to do a job, he'll be there...all you have to do is PAY enough to make it attractive.

Yet Even More Redundant Ranting on Illegals...

2006-05-18T22:38:00.000-07:00

Bush Requests $1.9B to Bolster Borders
By SUZANNE GAMBOA Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush sent Congress a $1.9 billion request Thursday to increase border security as supporters of sweeping immigration legislation reasserted control in Senate debate.
The White House said the money would pay for the "first 1,000 of 6,000 new Border Patrol agents that will be deployed in the next two years," as well as the temporary deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops to states along the Mexican border. The request includes funds for new fencing and other barriers as well as two new unmanned surveillance aircraft and five helicopters to curb illegal immigration...

Okay, that and the national guard should stop a few thousand per year...how about financing the program with bankruptcy-inducing fines and jail terms for employers that knowingly hire these folks? Who knows, maybe the budget could be brought back to surplus again? Gawd it sucks being nostalgic for Clinton....

Workers of the World Unite!

2006-05-07T21:59:00.000-07:00

Living in a heavily Republican county, I am used to hearing the word "union" spoken with dirision or disgust, even by people that are busting their ass at a minimum-wage job. I'm sick of it.

I will grant that trade unions today do not do all they could and are even sometimes corrupt, however, I cannot imagine what conditions for ALL workers in this country would be like without them. No minimum wage. No health care benefits for anyone. No retirement benefits for working-class Americans. No Social Security. Working conditions from hell in many industries. Children working instead of attending school.

If business and government are going to collude in this post-Reagan era of labor relations by manipulating the inflation/deflation of the currency and the boom/recesssion business cycle in order to weaken worker's purchasing power; labor needs to collude to control the labor supply to some extent--employers are not by nature benevolent, and do not usually have the needs of the worker in mind. Their job is maximizing capital by making customers and stockholders happy, not workers. There are very few employers that actually realize that a happy worker is a productive one. Many make the noises, but few deliver.

Therefore, if the unions did not exist, it would be necessary to invent them to avert the crushing oppression of workers that existed before they came along. Be nice to the union guy--he and his predecessors are paying their dues for you, the American worker.

Repel the Reconquista!

2006-05-01T11:58:00.000-07:00

So...millions of illegal immigrants want to take to the streets and protest for more equitable treatment and a path towards citizenship? They intend to boycott their jobs, their schools and American businesses to show their economic clout? Fine...fire them. Deport them.

Make Tyson and Gallo pay Americans to work in their packing plants, and take the extra money they will have to pay them out of the pay of the shameful executives and CEOs that put the policies in place to hire them. Stop financing our public expenditures and debts by manipulating and lowering the wages of American workers to keep inflation in check.

We need to stop and repel what amounts to no less than an economic invasion of our country by foreigners who are no longer simply content to sneak in, steal our jobs and ship the money back to their country of origin. Now they want recognition of their status.

I have a proposal...the next time they want to demonstrate in our major cities, offer them the use of the local football or baseball stadium. Then, when they are inside, surround the place with National Guard troops, bring in temporary American drivers to load them into every bus that can be commandeered to drive them back to the border. Let them demonstrate in Mexico, Guatamala, Haiti or whatever politically corrupt, economically bankrupt basket case of a country they came from. Then, maybe THEIR government will take action to fix their OWN economy, so they don't have to export poverty to us.

See Where You Stand...

2006-04-30T22:49:00.000-07:00

I added a link to a libertarian page sponsoring "The World's Smallest Political Quiz". I took the quiz, and the results did not suprise me, I am, and proudly so, a social liberal.

What did suprise me is the non-judgemental way the purveyors of the quiz presented the results. I expected some sort of spin to try to convince me of the error of my ways, but that was not present on any of the pages the results linked to.

In short, it's a fun little page that may help you sort yourself out.

Does Government Really Need a Colander?

2006-04-29T21:36:00.000-07:00

Its kind of interesting to listen to folks on the "Right" howl treason when somebody that they can link to the Democratic Party "leaks" classified information that would show government wrongdoing, and disquieting to listen to the silence when their own Leaker-In-Chief admits to "de-classifying" information that effectively outed one of his own CIA agents... I would submit that this facile partying around with truth in the White House is far more damaging to our country and way of life than ol'Billy-Boy's lying about getting a hoover. Nobody was even threatened with death over that blow job; an outed CIA operative becomes a target quickly.

In other news, noted pundit and blowhard Rush Limbaugh will not be tried for "doctor shopping" or illegal possession of Oxycontin. Limbaugh, who has ranted on his program about drug users and how they should all be jailed, will not get the fine opportunity to bunk with people who did not get the quality of drugs he used for even a week. I guess that millions of dollars to spend on lawyers and rehab make it all right. I hope I'm not the only one that can smell the hypocrisy here.

I Wonder If There's a Market for Telemarketer Stew..

2006-04-26T22:34:00.000-07:00

First, let's kill all the marketing professionals....

Doesn't have the same ring as Shakespeare's comment about the legal profession, but one wonders how he'd feel about the constant flood of stuff trying to sell him things today. From the relatively innocuous study of how to place merchandise advantageously on store shelves to the sinister, but unproven, practice of placing products subliminally, these guys are everywhere in our lives. Like Tom Cruise in Minority Report, we will soon be submersed in targeted ads that will follow us wherever we go, through our cell phones, our computers, our cars.

I don't think I'm alone when I think they have gone way too far.

Even now, there are marketing flyers in with my credit card bills and every business I have a relationship with thinks they have a right to fill my email with spam.

I don't like spam.

I am sure there are folks out there that are so lonely that any semblance of human contact is welcome, even if that contact is only a spammer or a telemarketer. I am not one of those people. I have specific sources I go to when looking for information on sales or just browsing for bargains. They do not have to seek me out to target me; I will find them. (The Sunday paper is one source; I find it relaxing browsing the thick stack of ads that come with it.) I understand that there are valid relationships between media and marketers--such as those between radio programmers and the folks that buy and sell the commercials, and the television stations that need to sell ads to provide content. There are also websites that have ads that I must view in order to use content. I understand this relationship; it's relatively straightforward--you want content, you get ads.

Where I rebel is when they get sneaky and obnoxious, or where I am paying for a service and they continue to market to me.

Is it really going to break a movie theater to not show paid ads before a screening of a film I went out to see? Is it really necessary to bend art to position product within that film? Would Bond really drive a BMW?

Is it really necessary to pelt my computer with spyware that tracks my surfing preferences so it can rat me off to a supplier of pop-up ads? Or plant a beautiful woman in a bar to spread buzz about some lame product?

Is it necessary for every company I do business with to have a 10-page privacy policy with tons of fine print informing me that unless I take certain steps to "opt-out" they will "share" my personal infomation with whoever they can sell it to?

Marketing, in short, has gone from being merely crass and intrusive to downright rude and intrusive.

This is a profession that, at best, feeds off of gentle misrepresentation of product, to, at worst, complete thievery and fraud. This is a profession that needs to police itself in its ethics and methods in the worst way, before others do it for them. The national "no call" list is only a beginning to what needs be done.

Laws are needed holding companies responsible for the content of their ads. If a company wants to advertise a product, that ad should contain statements about the product that are demonstrably true, without disclaimers in tiny print that anyone without training in speed reading will not be able to read as they scroll by. If a product is being advertised to brighten and whiten teeth, we should not need to read tiny print to find "side effects may include syphilis, flatulence and green tongue."

Speaking of side effects, we should not be inundated with ads for drugs that we cannot go down to the store and buy. If your doctor, as your health advisor, does not recommend a prescription drug, companies should not market to us to pressure them to prescribe it.

Laws need to be amended to cast real penalties on virus and spyware writers. Spammers need to be bankrupted rather than slapped on the wrist with small fines. Perhaps the idea of spending 10 years in a prison cell with a bodybuilder with an appetite for forced anal sex will deter some. Perhaps the reality will change others.

Perhaps businesspeople of good will will realize that the best way to market a product is to find a true need, and design effective, fairly-priced honest solutions for those needs. Perhaps.

About that time, I fear, Satan will be fielding a Major-League Hockey team because hell will have frozen over. Until then, the rude rip-off will continue unabated.

Maybe There is Hope...Thanks, Jim

2006-04-21T21:57:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I get down in my cups, alcohol, after all, is a depressant. Sometimes it's about silly crap like a total lack of a love life (due to a total lack of social skills or realistic expectations), other times it's over "The State of The World." In those World-Depression moments, I am sometimes haunted by the images on TV showing how much people in the Islamic world hate us Americans, and I get to thinking genocidal thoughts about how, if our liberal, free society is to survive, we must war upon Islam. I was having one of those gloomy, genocidal drunks a number of weeks ago, when a good friend of mine, Rev. Jim (whos blog http://jimsbell.blogspot.com/ I have linked to, even though he disagrees with everything I believe in) told me of another blog http://www.sandmonkey.org.

Again, the politics there are not always those I agree with, but the free-spirited banter and humorous approach to the "Middle Eastern Problem" are interesting and amusing enough to make me almost believe there is a way out of this mess without having to kill all adherents of a religion....

Anybody Got A Plan?

2006-04-21T19:39:00.000-07:00

With the Republican party divided on issues and racked by scandal, one would think that Democrats would be licking their collective chops at the prospect of the fall elections. Twelve years after Newt congress's "Contract With America," congressional Republicans have shown themselves no better than the Democrats they replaced when it comes to controlling spending, controlling the size of government or even providing moral tone for the country.

With the Abramoff scandal and George Bush's increasingly unpopular and bloody little war dragging on, support for the Republican government continues to fall, and with more and more of Bush's earlier statements turning out to be demonstrable lies, the hole gets deeper and deeper.

So where are the Democrats?

Nowhere to be found, it would seem.

In news reports, we read nothing from the opposition about concrete plans to extricate ourselves from the Iraq quagmire, nothing about how we can re-create the budget surpluses of the '90s, not a single thing about how to keep our representatives hands out of the till. Is the opposition totally out of ideas?

It may play out that the Republican party manages to soil itself out of control in the House of Representatives, but they aren't getting any help in that goal from Democrats. All they are able to do is naysay the Republican program.

I have a few suggestions on issues that Democratic policy wonks could busy themselves on...how about...

....A concrete plan to contain health care costs while expanding coverage to all Americans...

...A concrete plan to make sure the top one percent of the money earners in the country pay a share of taxes commensurate with their degree of political control (after all, if they want to buy the government, they should be willing to pay a fair price)....

...A plan for oversight of government contracts and spending that ensures that nobody lines their pocket while in public office without spending a long time in a crowded, violent prison...

...A plan to restore civil liberties to all people under American governance...

...A plan to close the earnings gap between the richest and poorest Americans...

...A plan to reconsider the things we jail our citizens for, so we can relinquish the dubious honor of being the nation with the highest number of prisoners on the planet...

Please note that all of these ideas are prefaced with the phrase "a plan". Without solid ideas on how to achieve the goals that have been traditionally espoused by the Democrats, we are in for a muddy season of character assassination and obfuscation, and, worse yet, the possibility that the current gang of thieves will retain control of the finances and policies of our nation.

Too Little Too Late?

2006-04-20T22:41:00.000-07:00

More Than 1,000 Undocumented Workers Arrested
by Jennifer Ludden
All Things Considered, April 20, 2006 · U.S. immigration officials announce their largest ever worksite enforcement action. In raids across the country, agents arrested more than 1,100 unauthorized employees at IFCO Systems, a distributor of wooden pallets. They also arrested seven officers of the company.
The executives are charged with conspiring to "harbor and induce illegal aliens to reside in the U.S." Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff says the operation is part of a shift in strategy aimed at reversing widespread tolerance for the use of illegal foreign workers.....

This action is politically expedient, performed by an administration that needs to show it is "doing something" about the issue. Much more needs done. Perhaps if the executives responsible for the recruiting and hiring of these illegals could be deported "sin dinero" to Guatemala....

More True than Ever...

2006-04-16T18:34:00.000-07:00

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theatre." Frank Zappa (1977)

Work is the Curse of the Drinking Man

2006-04-12T22:11:00.000-07:00

I don't like to work. I am not one of the people who can get up every morning, raring to go, glad to be on the way to their job. I'd rather be slacking, riding my scoot around the countryside on a beautiful spring day.

That said, I go to work instead. It's not simply that I need the money--I can certainly use it--but that it is a responsiblility that I have assumed by choice; a decision to not have someone else take care of me.

I have not always been this way about work. When I was much younger, I "retired" for a few years, doping, slacking, hitchiking around and panhandling for whatever I could scrounge. It was fun and educational. One can really survive out of dumpsters. (Or sleeping in one, if it's raining hard enough and there are no other options.)

I developed a few habits after those years---eating unspoiled food, wearing clean, dry clothes, enjoying a heated place to defecate. I got soft, college-educated, and finally, when I could avoid it no further, a full-time job.

I didn't get a high-paying professional job, no, not me. I wound up with a series of low-paying houspainting and retail jobs. I could bitch about the hourly, but it all taught me. There is honor in doing any job well.

Which gets me to the meat of this rant--the social contract between all members of society should provide these four things at a minimum to anyone that is willing to work a full-time job in that society. They are:

Sufficient good food.
Warm clothes.
A roof over their head.
A visit to the village shaman should they become ill.

Now, none of these things need be luxurious. Food can be simple, but healthful, clothes simple and non-stylish, housing cramped and unassuming, medical care simply adequate...but they need to be affordable in the aggregate. In some American communities, sadly, this is not the case.

This is the issue that minimum-wage laws were meant to address. Unfortunately, they have not done so to great effect. The working poor, as a class, are increasing in number, both as a percentage of the work force as well as raw number. As more and more people are unable to provide the four items I bulleted before, the social contract breaks down. Hungry people do stupid, desperate things. When they do these things, we put them in jail, which costs taxpayers money.

One wonders, what costs less....jailing people, or making sure they can get a living wage?

What Cheek! What Brass!

2006-04-10T11:22:00.000-07:00

NATION/WORLD
AP Top News at 2:00 p.m. EDT

ATLANTA (AP) - Tens of thousands of immigrants spilled into the streets of Atlanta and other cities Monday in a national day of action billed as a "campaign for immigrants' dignity." In North Carolina and Dallas, immigrant groups called for an economic boycott to show their financial impact. In Pittsburgh and other cities, protesters gathered at lawmakers' offices to make their voices heard as Congress considers immigration reforms......

One has to admire the gumption of people that will risk death by exposure in the desert, brave possible deportation and detention, tolerate low pay and miserable living conditions for the dubious joy of doing our scutwork. That many of these people are willing to actually appear "en masse" in public to demonstrate for "immigrant's dignity" is a source of amazement.

Proper respect is hereby given.

Now they need to leave.

It is commonly observed that illegals take jobs "Americans do not want". What these observers fail to do is complete the statement. Illegals take jobs "Americans do not want at the wage that employers are willing to pay." When there is a shortage of a commodity (in this case labor) the price tends to rise, when there is a surplus, the price declines. What is happening in the case of illegal immigration, is that government and business are colluding to keep the price of labor low by leaving the borders open and winking at the people that break our laws by working here.

I am not going to blame the immigrants...they are simply doing what makes sense to them, leaving their homeland and coming to a strange (and occasionally hostile) land to make what seems to them to be extravagant wages doing hard work.

I blame the American employers who ignore immigration law by hiring either undocumented or falsely documented workers, lured by the promise of a cheap labor supply. I blame the government that inadequately funds the departments that are responsible for detaining and deporting these people and punishing the employers.

There was a proposal in Congress to make people in the country illegally felons. I believe the focus of that proposal is flawed. What they need to do is make the meat packer, the concrete contractor, the lawn service owner and the lettuce farmer that uses this labor felons. Were that enforced, the migrants would stop coming, and we could have a legitimate debate in this country about what our real labor needs are. We could then create a program to allow workers in the country for a period, legally, to work in industries that have trouble filling jobs with Americans at a fair wage, rather than acknowledging the status quo and offering a blanket amnesty to both the immigrant and the employer who exploits this source of cheap labor.

A New Start at a New Hobby, or Virgin Experiences

2006-04-09T21:43:00.000-07:00

Revelation to all...writing has never come easily to me--choosing words and placing them on a clean sheet of paper has always been like sucking concrete through a straw. It's difficult and not easy to enjoy, nor always profitable. I post here out of an exaggerated sense of self-importance; I feel that my opinion, unlike most others, does not stink, and, of course, the rest of the world "Just Does Not Get It."

All rants here are mine, and only mine, unless credited to somebody else.

Now that I have this started, I think I'll have a couple of drinks....