Hmm...
Less than two years after entering bankruptcy, General Motors will extend millions of dollars in bonuses to most of its 48,000 hourly workers as a reward for the company's rapid turnaround after it was rescued by the government.
So, perhaps those nine words aren't so terrifying after all.
The company made $4.2 billion in the first nine months of 2010 and is expected to announce a fourth-quarter profit soon.
Another quarter with a profit...hey, that's pretty great!
Anyone out there care to retract their statements on how "Government Motors" was a giant mistake?
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
It's About Time
I've been in Natalie Munroe's shoes more times than I can count. After putting up with endless bullshit from the youth of America, she finally cracked and let loose a spiel on her blog that has ended with her suspension. Her analysis of the youth of America is, in some ways, correct.
Yet her mistake was putting too much of the blame on the students and not enough where most of the problem truly lies...the parents. I suspect that's why she got in trouble. I'm willing to be that it wasn't a student that ratted her out but a parent who got called on their lazy bullshit and, rather than take responsibility for their child's horse shit attitude, turned to Munroe as a scapegoat. Until more parents take responsibility and actually fucking parent, this malaise is going to grow. Nikto wrote about his very problem recently and so have I. Can we all say Michael Jordan Generation?
After all, I can only do so much if they don't want to do their work. If they decide that they know they are going to make it as an athlete or recording artist and don't think they need a back up plan, there's only so much I can do. Remember, it's what they see as success defined, within the functionality of our society, that's the real problem. I'm going up against the onslaught of the images of corporate America which their parents buy into as well. Ms. Munroe and I are only one fifth of the primary agencies of socialization. As I will continue to say (probably forever), the mass media is the 400 pound gorilla in the room. They have smothered the other four agencies just like BP oil all over the Gulf.
The other side to all of this is Munroe's lack of reflection. This was also part of her undoing. Certain people become teachers for all the wrong reasons. They think they can connect with the youth of America but they really can't. They also don't have the thick skin that one needs (as I do) to let insults bounce right off and go into oblivion. I've had students hurl insult after insult at me and I just laugh. That just pisses them off even more. Clearly, Munroe couldn't handle this and part of me thinks that she lacked that coolnees with which kids can connect. The youth of today can smell "DORK" a mile away and woe be to anyone who has this built into their personality. This would also be where the lazy teacher rag that I sing quite often chimes in. If you aren't a very creative person to begin with and lack width of vision, you will not intrinsically motivate your students.
So, it was probably a combination of all of these things that caused this mini mushroom cloud in Pennsylvania. It's my hope that this incident acts as a catalyst for change. Kevin Baker is fond of saying, "Let's take off...nuke the site from orbit...it's the only way to be sure" when it comes to our education system. What he fails to see is that our education system is one small reflection in the extrinsically motivated cesspool that is our entire culture.
The reason why we are seeing more and more stories like Ms. Munroe's has to do with the giant flaw in the entire system. We have allowed the mass media to dictate our behavior and socialize our children as well as....everyone else. There are pockets of success here and there but you'll have to pardon my cynicism when I say that as long as we continue to function like this, President Obama's call for our country to out innovate the rest of the world will be pure folly.
In the final analysis, it's going to take a mass effort on the part of all of us to change the paradigm of how our culture operates. Parents, teachers, communities, and peer groups are going to have to regain control of socialization from the mass media. They need to take responsibility for themselves and actually dedicate their time to achieve this goal. It's going to take patience coupled with the willingness to manage complexities in order to shift the way our culture works.
Anyone out there think our ADD society can do it?
Yet her mistake was putting too much of the blame on the students and not enough where most of the problem truly lies...the parents. I suspect that's why she got in trouble. I'm willing to be that it wasn't a student that ratted her out but a parent who got called on their lazy bullshit and, rather than take responsibility for their child's horse shit attitude, turned to Munroe as a scapegoat. Until more parents take responsibility and actually fucking parent, this malaise is going to grow. Nikto wrote about his very problem recently and so have I. Can we all say Michael Jordan Generation?
After all, I can only do so much if they don't want to do their work. If they decide that they know they are going to make it as an athlete or recording artist and don't think they need a back up plan, there's only so much I can do. Remember, it's what they see as success defined, within the functionality of our society, that's the real problem. I'm going up against the onslaught of the images of corporate America which their parents buy into as well. Ms. Munroe and I are only one fifth of the primary agencies of socialization. As I will continue to say (probably forever), the mass media is the 400 pound gorilla in the room. They have smothered the other four agencies just like BP oil all over the Gulf.
The other side to all of this is Munroe's lack of reflection. This was also part of her undoing. Certain people become teachers for all the wrong reasons. They think they can connect with the youth of America but they really can't. They also don't have the thick skin that one needs (as I do) to let insults bounce right off and go into oblivion. I've had students hurl insult after insult at me and I just laugh. That just pisses them off even more. Clearly, Munroe couldn't handle this and part of me thinks that she lacked that coolnees with which kids can connect. The youth of today can smell "DORK" a mile away and woe be to anyone who has this built into their personality. This would also be where the lazy teacher rag that I sing quite often chimes in. If you aren't a very creative person to begin with and lack width of vision, you will not intrinsically motivate your students.
So, it was probably a combination of all of these things that caused this mini mushroom cloud in Pennsylvania. It's my hope that this incident acts as a catalyst for change. Kevin Baker is fond of saying, "Let's take off...nuke the site from orbit...it's the only way to be sure" when it comes to our education system. What he fails to see is that our education system is one small reflection in the extrinsically motivated cesspool that is our entire culture.
The reason why we are seeing more and more stories like Ms. Munroe's has to do with the giant flaw in the entire system. We have allowed the mass media to dictate our behavior and socialize our children as well as....everyone else. There are pockets of success here and there but you'll have to pardon my cynicism when I say that as long as we continue to function like this, President Obama's call for our country to out innovate the rest of the world will be pure folly.
In the final analysis, it's going to take a mass effort on the part of all of us to change the paradigm of how our culture operates. Parents, teachers, communities, and peer groups are going to have to regain control of socialization from the mass media. They need to take responsibility for themselves and actually dedicate their time to achieve this goal. It's going to take patience coupled with the willingness to manage complexities in order to shift the way our culture works.
Anyone out there think our ADD society can do it?
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Making Complete Sense
Ah, now I get it.
A 51% majority of national GOP primary voters erroneously think President Obama was not born in the U.S. 28% know that he was. With the latter, Palin’s favorability rating is 41-52—other than Ron Paul, the only candidate these voters view negatively. But with birthers, she has a soaring 83-12, far higher than for any of the others.
I completely understand Sarah Palin now and why she is as popular as she is.
A 51% majority of national GOP primary voters erroneously think President Obama was not born in the U.S. 28% know that he was. With the latter, Palin’s favorability rating is 41-52—other than Ron Paul, the only candidate these voters view negatively. But with birthers, she has a soaring 83-12, far higher than for any of the others.
I completely understand Sarah Palin now and why she is as popular as she is.
Monday, February 14, 2011
He's Correct!
There are a few things on which Mitt Romney and I agree. At the recent CPAC conference, Mr. Romney stated that Canada created more jobs than the US. This statement was verified by the folks at Politifact which is illustrative (once again) that they are not in the tank for the left. Here are they are rating a statement as "True" made by a Republican (although he probably is an impure RINO to some of you).
More importantly, however, is the fact that a country with socialized medicine can create jobs. I was under the impression that all of those countries were falling apart and looked like Detroit now. What the--??!!?? How dare Canada with its liberal ways beat us at something!
Thanks for the heads up, Mitt!
More importantly, however, is the fact that a country with socialized medicine can create jobs. I was under the impression that all of those countries were falling apart and looked like Detroit now. What the--??!!?? How dare Canada with its liberal ways beat us at something!
Thanks for the heads up, Mitt!
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Get Out of the Way?
For the last few months, we've been hearing a classic line from the right. It goes something like this.
If the government would only get out of the way, the economy could take off.
Like many things they say, it's a giant pile of steaming shit and, sadly, has the distinct odor of the John Birch Soceity. I smell a lot of Koch on this mound of poo...
According to the National Science Foundation, the federal government funds 57 percent of basic research, compared to less than 18 percent for business, 15 percent for colleges and universities and 11 percent for nonprofits. And business only funds about 6 percent of university-based scientific research.
And take a look at this table which shows that the Evil Government has been a major contributor to science for the last half century. They've also given tax breaks to companies that engage in research which has saved each of these businesses billions of dollars. This was begun under President Reagan. The government also sets standards which provides a framework for companies to work more efficiently.
This is all great information. And where did I find it all? Well...here.
Yeah, that's right...PolitiFact...a topic that has recently come up in comments. Politifact has become yet another (in a very long series) of sties that is "liberally biased." TRANSLATION: I am a conservative who wants to win arguments, can never be wrong, and don't like what they say. Therefore, they are liberally biased.
As we will soon see, the next step will be to a). completely ignore Politifact's analysis of Democratic statements or b). applaud (spin) them for being factually based while the Republican statement analyses are faulty and riddled with errors. How convenient. I'm fairly certain this will occur for this post.Well, they are just going to have to get used to it because now I'm going to link a whole shit load of Politifact and Factcheck articles which have caught my fancy of late.
Anyhoo, The government has been an integral part of innovation which has lead to the United States being leaders in the world when it comes to innovation. The notion that they need to get out of the way is ludicrous when you consider the facts. They need to be very much leading the way given their successful track record.
Makes Reagan's nine terrifying words seem awfully silly.
If the government would only get out of the way, the economy could take off.
Like many things they say, it's a giant pile of steaming shit and, sadly, has the distinct odor of the John Birch Soceity. I smell a lot of Koch on this mound of poo...
According to the National Science Foundation, the federal government funds 57 percent of basic research, compared to less than 18 percent for business, 15 percent for colleges and universities and 11 percent for nonprofits. And business only funds about 6 percent of university-based scientific research.
And take a look at this table which shows that the Evil Government has been a major contributor to science for the last half century. They've also given tax breaks to companies that engage in research which has saved each of these businesses billions of dollars. This was begun under President Reagan. The government also sets standards which provides a framework for companies to work more efficiently.
This is all great information. And where did I find it all? Well...here.
Yeah, that's right...PolitiFact...a topic that has recently come up in comments. Politifact has become yet another (in a very long series) of sties that is "liberally biased." TRANSLATION: I am a conservative who wants to win arguments, can never be wrong, and don't like what they say. Therefore, they are liberally biased.
As we will soon see, the next step will be to a). completely ignore Politifact's analysis of Democratic statements or b). applaud (spin) them for being factually based while the Republican statement analyses are faulty and riddled with errors. How convenient. I'm fairly certain this will occur for this post.Well, they are just going to have to get used to it because now I'm going to link a whole shit load of Politifact and Factcheck articles which have caught my fancy of late.
Anyhoo, The government has been an integral part of innovation which has lead to the United States being leaders in the world when it comes to innovation. The notion that they need to get out of the way is ludicrous when you consider the facts. They need to be very much leading the way given their successful track record.
Makes Reagan's nine terrifying words seem awfully silly.
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
I Didn't Need A Poll To Tell Me That!
Poll: GOP voters just want to win
Sixty-eight percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents surveyed for a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Tuesday said they prefer a nominee who stands a real shot at winning in the general election but with whom they may have ideological disagreements. Meanwhile, 29 percent said want a candidate who they agree with on all the important issues.
Winning the argument...
PWNED!
Sixty-eight percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents surveyed for a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Tuesday said they prefer a nominee who stands a real shot at winning in the general election but with whom they may have ideological disagreements. Meanwhile, 29 percent said want a candidate who they agree with on all the important issues.
Winning the argument...
PWNED!
Monday, February 07, 2011
The Purest Depth of Loathing
Right around this time of year, I make a comment at either my children's school or my school that is a catalyst for the crook eye, stink eye, or evil eye...actually all three. Generally speaking, it's the same comment every year and it goes like this.
I hate Black History Month.
At first, people think I'm joking. Then they realize I'm not. A quick glance at my bald head and they think I might be a member of the skin heads. This usually evolves into indignant anger and outright disgust...even when I explain why I hate it. It's terribly vexing.
I hate Black History Month because every month should be Black History Month. To put it simply, our curriculum should be similar to the theme and style of Ken Burns' fantastic documentary series, Baseball. If you haven't seen it, this is how the story of our history should be told...from the point of view of all people, not just the famous ones that have been heroified being belief. One cannot look at the history of this country without looking at the role of black people in our culture.
To set aside one month as a metaphorical highlight reel is akin to asking the one black friend you have to be a spokesperson for all blacks. It's simply ridiculous. I get the reasons why we do it but, in the end, it only makes it worse. People pay attention for one month and then our ADD culture tunes out the rest of the year and it's back to the myopic view of our history and culture. It's crap and I hate it.
I catch a lot of heat for not doing more at this time of year but I just tell people,
"Come see me the other 11 months of the year."
I hate Black History Month.
At first, people think I'm joking. Then they realize I'm not. A quick glance at my bald head and they think I might be a member of the skin heads. This usually evolves into indignant anger and outright disgust...even when I explain why I hate it. It's terribly vexing.
I hate Black History Month because every month should be Black History Month. To put it simply, our curriculum should be similar to the theme and style of Ken Burns' fantastic documentary series, Baseball. If you haven't seen it, this is how the story of our history should be told...from the point of view of all people, not just the famous ones that have been heroified being belief. One cannot look at the history of this country without looking at the role of black people in our culture.
To set aside one month as a metaphorical highlight reel is akin to asking the one black friend you have to be a spokesperson for all blacks. It's simply ridiculous. I get the reasons why we do it but, in the end, it only makes it worse. People pay attention for one month and then our ADD culture tunes out the rest of the year and it's back to the myopic view of our history and culture. It's crap and I hate it.
I catch a lot of heat for not doing more at this time of year but I just tell people,
"Come see me the other 11 months of the year."
Sunday, February 06, 2011
Super Socialist Sunday
As millions settle in to watch the big game today between the Green Bay Packers and the Pittsburgh Steelers, half of them (who are likely conservatives) need to read Bill Maher's New Rule on the NFL.
Hilarious! And more true than he realizes. The NFL is indeed socialism in action. Smaller market teams like Green Bay and Pittsburgh share revenue with the bigger market teams like the New York Giants and the high profile teams like the Dallas Cowboys. All the money goes into one pot and it is shared. Shared! What a concept...
Success is punished as the winner of today's game will be picked last in the draft. In addition, today's game is a double dose of socialism as the city of Green Bay (aka the GOVERNMENT) owns the the Packers. So if they Pack do go on to win, all the people in Green Bay will benefit and not just one tyrannical owner.
Sit back for a moment and think about the BILLIONS of dollars the NFL makes every year. To call them a success would be as much of an understatement as saying the Beatles were a pop group in the 1960s. The reason why they are successful is due to their framework which is completely socialistic. I know this will be tough concept for the conservative brain to grasp (as they are wired differently) so I'm going to skip over the part where I ask some of you to reflect. Instead, I will point the light of interrogation on myself.
Looking inward, I do not like what I see. I actually prefer baseball to football. As Maher astutely points out, baseball is the libertarian's dream...every man for himself...smaller market teams crushed by giants like the Yankees...hands off my cash...fuck sharing....and, until very recently, indentured servants. Ideologically, I am more in line with football yet I prefer baseball. WTF??!!???
Perhaps I need to re-think all of this. As I often lament, I will not stand for such hypocrisy!
Hilarious! And more true than he realizes. The NFL is indeed socialism in action. Smaller market teams like Green Bay and Pittsburgh share revenue with the bigger market teams like the New York Giants and the high profile teams like the Dallas Cowboys. All the money goes into one pot and it is shared. Shared! What a concept...
Success is punished as the winner of today's game will be picked last in the draft. In addition, today's game is a double dose of socialism as the city of Green Bay (aka the GOVERNMENT) owns the the Packers. So if they Pack do go on to win, all the people in Green Bay will benefit and not just one tyrannical owner.
Sit back for a moment and think about the BILLIONS of dollars the NFL makes every year. To call them a success would be as much of an understatement as saying the Beatles were a pop group in the 1960s. The reason why they are successful is due to their framework which is completely socialistic. I know this will be tough concept for the conservative brain to grasp (as they are wired differently) so I'm going to skip over the part where I ask some of you to reflect. Instead, I will point the light of interrogation on myself.
Looking inward, I do not like what I see. I actually prefer baseball to football. As Maher astutely points out, baseball is the libertarian's dream...every man for himself...smaller market teams crushed by giants like the Yankees...hands off my cash...fuck sharing....and, until very recently, indentured servants. Ideologically, I am more in line with football yet I prefer baseball. WTF??!!???
Perhaps I need to re-think all of this. As I often lament, I will not stand for such hypocrisy!
Saturday, February 05, 2011
A Simple Suggestion
"WAAAAAAH. They are trying to make me do something I don't wanna do. WAAHHHH"
No, that's not my 8 year old son. Nor are "they" making you do anything. First Lady Michelle Obama is suggesting that people eat less shitty food. Every first lady has a pet project and hers is childhood obesity. Because the Right has to counter every single thing the left does (winning the argument, never being wrong, bully power fantasies), Sarah Palin made a media event out of bringing sugar cookies to a school. Rush Limbaugh claims that Ms. Obama is coming to get your furnace.On Laura Ingraham’s talk show she challenged Michelle Obama to “get off our back and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions.”
And what has to be the most idiotic fucking thing I have ever heard, Matt Drudge has suggested that Michelle Obama is to blame for the increase in pedestrian deaths because more people are walking per her suggestion. Are you kidding me?
How about we take a look at the number of lard asses that die every year because they don't take a walk once in awhile? Must the right find fault with everything the Obamas do even if it is a good idea?
Yes. Yes, they must.
What's truly hilarious about all of this is these aren't laws. They are suggestions. Within a one mile radius of my house there is a McDonald's, a Dairy Queen, several greasy bars, and three grocery stores that all have fully stocked bakeries. The government is not regulating my ability to pile on to my gut.
Yet the fear is still there. More and more these days any remaining doubt that I had about the conservative brain being wired differently is being washed away. All Rush Limbaugh has to do is look in the mirror when he gets out of the shower to see that the government is not forcing him to do anything.
No, that's not my 8 year old son. Nor are "they" making you do anything. First Lady Michelle Obama is suggesting that people eat less shitty food. Every first lady has a pet project and hers is childhood obesity. Because the Right has to counter every single thing the left does (winning the argument, never being wrong, bully power fantasies), Sarah Palin made a media event out of bringing sugar cookies to a school. Rush Limbaugh claims that Ms. Obama is coming to get your furnace.On Laura Ingraham’s talk show she challenged Michelle Obama to “get off our back and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions.”
And what has to be the most idiotic fucking thing I have ever heard, Matt Drudge has suggested that Michelle Obama is to blame for the increase in pedestrian deaths because more people are walking per her suggestion. Are you kidding me?
How about we take a look at the number of lard asses that die every year because they don't take a walk once in awhile? Must the right find fault with everything the Obamas do even if it is a good idea?
Yes. Yes, they must.
What's truly hilarious about all of this is these aren't laws. They are suggestions. Within a one mile radius of my house there is a McDonald's, a Dairy Queen, several greasy bars, and three grocery stores that all have fully stocked bakeries. The government is not regulating my ability to pile on to my gut.
Yet the fear is still there. More and more these days any remaining doubt that I had about the conservative brain being wired differently is being washed away. All Rush Limbaugh has to do is look in the mirror when he gets out of the shower to see that the government is not forcing him to do anything.
Comments Spam Problem Solved?
I thought I had the comments spam issue solved as the only one I saw in the spam filter recently was something in Spanish offering male enhancement services. Everyone seemed to be getting their comments through just fine. But then Guard Duck's comment yesterday ended up in there. Drat! Apologies to Guard Duck. I did publish it a little later but still this is a continuing problem, I guess.
Thursday, February 03, 2011
What You Afraid Of?
It's been a few weeks since the tragedy in Tuscon reignited several debates. One of them was the gun debate and in all of the swirl of dialog, a question arose in my head.
What you are afraid of?
I am asking this question specifically to the gun rights folks that migrated to this blog from Kevin's site. After the Tuscon shooting, gun sales skyrocketed. Many gun rights proponents told me this was due to fear of a new wave of gun control yet the only thing that I have seen being seriously considered is a ban on the high capacity clips that are similar to what Loughner used. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with that but I'd like to see tighter controls on the mentally ill being able to purchase guns before that sort of ban.
I'm still lost, though. Was there another reason why people rushed out to buy a gun? I think so but I'll get to that in a moment. I get the fact that people should be able to own guns and use them for hunting, sport, and target practice. I even get the collectible side of it...I'm the world's biggest pack rat with comic books, CDs, and DVDs, books...so I get the obsessive need to collect.
But what I don't get is the ridiculous notion that an AR-15 is for home protection. Or a Glock with a high capacity clip is used to protect oneself on the street. Again, if it's just because they are cool and you want one, fine. I'm that way with stuff too. But don't give me the BS about protection. And that goes for just about every situation regarding protection.
In some situations, I can see it. I have a friend who lives in Chicago who got mugged a few times and bought a gun. She has since been nearly mugged three times and her gun has been an effective deterrent. Women protecting themselves....I get it...no problem. But I had someone tell me the other day that if Abe Lincoln had a gun, he would've been able to turn around and shoot John Wilkes Booth. He was serious but I just laughed at him. Where would he have kept it for easy access? In his hat?
Then it all dawned on me. In their continued adolescent power fantasy, people who (over) use the line of protection think they are living their lives in an episode of 24. Or in the film Die Hard where John McLane duct tapes guns to his back and tricks the bad guys. This is complete fiction. It NEVER happens like this. Yet these folks thinks that it does and that's a big problem. They are so afraid of...something...in their lives that they primarily reside in a world of fantasy (Ayn Rand) in which they are Campbell's archetypal hero...shooting their way to security.
I've always been a huge action film and TV fan. I love 24, the Die Hard films, and have been obsessed for over 20 years with HK action flicks (Chow with two guns=Mega) but I know that they are complete fantasies and have no resemblance to real life. The same person who told me that if Abe Lincoln had a gun, he would've been able to defend himself said the same thing of Gabby Giffords. This mentality is so silly that it's hard to even comment. She would've had no time to react and the one guy that was there with a gun didn't even draw it because was uncertain as to who the gunmen was during the incident.
This is how the real world works, folks. So, if you just like guns because they are cool to collect or you have a legitimate reason to defend yourself, fine. Fess up. If neither are true, however, I ask again.
What are you afraid of?
What you are afraid of?
I am asking this question specifically to the gun rights folks that migrated to this blog from Kevin's site. After the Tuscon shooting, gun sales skyrocketed. Many gun rights proponents told me this was due to fear of a new wave of gun control yet the only thing that I have seen being seriously considered is a ban on the high capacity clips that are similar to what Loughner used. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with that but I'd like to see tighter controls on the mentally ill being able to purchase guns before that sort of ban.
I'm still lost, though. Was there another reason why people rushed out to buy a gun? I think so but I'll get to that in a moment. I get the fact that people should be able to own guns and use them for hunting, sport, and target practice. I even get the collectible side of it...I'm the world's biggest pack rat with comic books, CDs, and DVDs, books...so I get the obsessive need to collect.
But what I don't get is the ridiculous notion that an AR-15 is for home protection. Or a Glock with a high capacity clip is used to protect oneself on the street. Again, if it's just because they are cool and you want one, fine. I'm that way with stuff too. But don't give me the BS about protection. And that goes for just about every situation regarding protection.
In some situations, I can see it. I have a friend who lives in Chicago who got mugged a few times and bought a gun. She has since been nearly mugged three times and her gun has been an effective deterrent. Women protecting themselves....I get it...no problem. But I had someone tell me the other day that if Abe Lincoln had a gun, he would've been able to turn around and shoot John Wilkes Booth. He was serious but I just laughed at him. Where would he have kept it for easy access? In his hat?
Then it all dawned on me. In their continued adolescent power fantasy, people who (over) use the line of protection think they are living their lives in an episode of 24. Or in the film Die Hard where John McLane duct tapes guns to his back and tricks the bad guys. This is complete fiction. It NEVER happens like this. Yet these folks thinks that it does and that's a big problem. They are so afraid of...something...in their lives that they primarily reside in a world of fantasy (Ayn Rand) in which they are Campbell's archetypal hero...shooting their way to security.
I've always been a huge action film and TV fan. I love 24, the Die Hard films, and have been obsessed for over 20 years with HK action flicks (Chow with two guns=Mega) but I know that they are complete fantasies and have no resemblance to real life. The same person who told me that if Abe Lincoln had a gun, he would've been able to defend himself said the same thing of Gabby Giffords. This mentality is so silly that it's hard to even comment. She would've had no time to react and the one guy that was there with a gun didn't even draw it because was uncertain as to who the gunmen was during the incident.
This is how the real world works, folks. So, if you just like guns because they are cool to collect or you have a legitimate reason to defend yourself, fine. Fess up. If neither are true, however, I ask again.
What are you afraid of?
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Proud To Be An American (Part 1)
It's cold up in the North Woods and several million of us around the country are now experiencing what we Minnesotans call a real winter. Yet, today, my heart is warmed because of this story.
Young women in evening gowns and young men in dark suits walked through a makeshift arch and to the stage during the Monday afternoon pep rally complete with cheerleaders, dance teams and the school band. So did two young women in suits, and the crowd cheered for each one.
Several of the students in the crowd didn't understand what all the fuss over the lesbian couple."Some people are against it, but they don't care if they walk down a stupid runway," said Maggie Hesaliman, 14.
Melissa Biellefe, 16, said, "We're a pretty respectful school. Our rule is just let people be who they are."
The crowd cheered for each one. We have come a long way since stuffing homos into paddy wagons, haven't we? Kids today don't look at people as being gay or straight. They look at them as people. Thank God. Although this younger generation has several other challenges (the chief one being learned helplessness but that's just the MJG at work), one thing is very clear: on the whole, they don't give a crap if someone is gay. No doubt, there is still bullying that goes on but I view this as a dying gasp more than a recurring trend.
When events like this happen, the future is quite clear. The end of discrimination and bias against homosexuals is nearly upon us.
Young women in evening gowns and young men in dark suits walked through a makeshift arch and to the stage during the Monday afternoon pep rally complete with cheerleaders, dance teams and the school band. So did two young women in suits, and the crowd cheered for each one.
Several of the students in the crowd didn't understand what all the fuss over the lesbian couple."Some people are against it, but they don't care if they walk down a stupid runway," said Maggie Hesaliman, 14.
Melissa Biellefe, 16, said, "We're a pretty respectful school. Our rule is just let people be who they are."
The crowd cheered for each one. We have come a long way since stuffing homos into paddy wagons, haven't we? Kids today don't look at people as being gay or straight. They look at them as people. Thank God. Although this younger generation has several other challenges (the chief one being learned helplessness but that's just the MJG at work), one thing is very clear: on the whole, they don't give a crap if someone is gay. No doubt, there is still bullying that goes on but I view this as a dying gasp more than a recurring trend.
When events like this happen, the future is quite clear. The end of discrimination and bias against homosexuals is nearly upon us.
Proud to be an American (Part 2)
Continuing with the warming heart trend, I have to admit that I have taken a liking to John Boehner. Maybe it's the fact that he is a man not afraid to show emotion. Or maybe it's that he seems fairly moderate for a Republican. I don't know. His words and actions have thus far done nothing really to piss me off. In fact, he's said a few things I agree with since he has taken over the mantle. I suppose the Health Care repeal thing sucked but it was little more than a political stunt.
And I have to say that I'm really irked at left wing pundits for making fun of the guy for crying as often as he does. In fact, I think it really sucks that Maddow and Maher have made fun of him.Yes, it's self involved but so what? Aren't we all? I know I am. If people on the right start counting emotion as relevant (it's called being human) and move towards individual reflection, shouldn't that be applauded? I will if no one else will.
(CLAP CLAP)!!!!!
And I have to say that I'm really irked at left wing pundits for making fun of the guy for crying as often as he does. In fact, I think it really sucks that Maddow and Maher have made fun of him.Yes, it's self involved but so what? Aren't we all? I know I am. If people on the right start counting emotion as relevant (it's called being human) and move towards individual reflection, shouldn't that be applauded? I will if no one else will.
(CLAP CLAP)!!!!!
Monday, January 31, 2011
No Shit
If traffic lights were invented today, the Republican Party would be against them.
No shit. And so begins Anthony Schlaff's wonderful opinion piece in a recent issue of the Christian Science Monitor.
It's a very honest discussion about how the word "freedom" has been hijacked by the conservative movement in this country. As with many things today, we need to unhijack it.
This thought experiment about traffic lights points to how simplistic and wrong-headed current Republican rhetoric about freedom is. Freedom is about rights, choices, and opportunities. Government action, whether through laws or taxes, does not necessarily restrict freedom. As with traffic lights, it can enhance freedom, and we need to be thoughtful, not reflexive, in how we view what we ask of government.
This is really all I have been saying. So have many other Democrats and even some (no longer pure) Republicans. Yet, we are now Hitler. Or Commies. Or whatever demonized bullshit word they come up with for the week.
As for the notion that the new health-care law robs us of freedom because it is a mandate, let us not forget that we as a society created our government to make our choices and we used this mechanism to do so. This was an exercise of our freedom!
Freedom starts with the opportunity to make choices, including the choice of whether to act individually or collectively. A choice once made sets us on a more limited path – but are we not freer for making choices rather than remaining forever frozen in a prechoice world of possibility but no fulfillment?
Therein lies the problem...acting collectively. Any sort of talk involving collective action is quickly demonized. This would involve following a law that some people (8 year old boys and/or adolescent power fantasists) don't like. Right around now is where I imagine my 8 year old son, shouting, "I DON'T WANNNA!!!!!!"
Well...too bad....is what I usually say...followed by "Grow Up."
But here's the best part of the whole piece.
I know of no one on the left of the political spectrum who accepts the right's characterization that they are against personal responsibility. They believe in both personal and social responsibility, as these are complementary, not competing, notions. Trying to address major public problems with just a greater push for personal responsibility is like tying one of our hands behind our back. We must leverage social responsibility, too, enabling us to use both hands to tackle our toughest problems.
Complementary, not competing notions. This is what I have been saying all along. It has to be both.
Schlaff ends the article with a question.
If public schools or public drinking water and sewer systems were invented today, would Republicans oppose them, along with the traffic lights?
Sadly, he answers this in such a way that it demonstrates the enormous naivete on the part of the left. The answer is a simple YES because the conservative movement in this country worships (fake) people like Daniel Plainview. To them, Plainview is the perfect hero.
After I read this piece, I reached a conclusion. I am going to make it my life's mission to demolish Reagan's Nine Terrifying Words and all that lies behind them. They are a boy's fantasy meant strictly to undermine government efforts at regulation and to encourage private industry greed.
In short, they are a lie.
No shit. And so begins Anthony Schlaff's wonderful opinion piece in a recent issue of the Christian Science Monitor.
It's a very honest discussion about how the word "freedom" has been hijacked by the conservative movement in this country. As with many things today, we need to unhijack it.
This thought experiment about traffic lights points to how simplistic and wrong-headed current Republican rhetoric about freedom is. Freedom is about rights, choices, and opportunities. Government action, whether through laws or taxes, does not necessarily restrict freedom. As with traffic lights, it can enhance freedom, and we need to be thoughtful, not reflexive, in how we view what we ask of government.
This is really all I have been saying. So have many other Democrats and even some (no longer pure) Republicans. Yet, we are now Hitler. Or Commies. Or whatever demonized bullshit word they come up with for the week.
As for the notion that the new health-care law robs us of freedom because it is a mandate, let us not forget that we as a society created our government to make our choices and we used this mechanism to do so. This was an exercise of our freedom!
Freedom starts with the opportunity to make choices, including the choice of whether to act individually or collectively. A choice once made sets us on a more limited path – but are we not freer for making choices rather than remaining forever frozen in a prechoice world of possibility but no fulfillment?
Therein lies the problem...acting collectively. Any sort of talk involving collective action is quickly demonized. This would involve following a law that some people (8 year old boys and/or adolescent power fantasists) don't like. Right around now is where I imagine my 8 year old son, shouting, "I DON'T WANNNA!!!!!!"
Well...too bad....is what I usually say...followed by "Grow Up."
But here's the best part of the whole piece.
I know of no one on the left of the political spectrum who accepts the right's characterization that they are against personal responsibility. They believe in both personal and social responsibility, as these are complementary, not competing, notions. Trying to address major public problems with just a greater push for personal responsibility is like tying one of our hands behind our back. We must leverage social responsibility, too, enabling us to use both hands to tackle our toughest problems.
Complementary, not competing notions. This is what I have been saying all along. It has to be both.
Schlaff ends the article with a question.
If public schools or public drinking water and sewer systems were invented today, would Republicans oppose them, along with the traffic lights?
Sadly, he answers this in such a way that it demonstrates the enormous naivete on the part of the left. The answer is a simple YES because the conservative movement in this country worships (fake) people like Daniel Plainview. To them, Plainview is the perfect hero.
After I read this piece, I reached a conclusion. I am going to make it my life's mission to demolish Reagan's Nine Terrifying Words and all that lies behind them. They are a boy's fantasy meant strictly to undermine government efforts at regulation and to encourage private industry greed.
In short, they are a lie.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Shocked (Not)
Well, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission report is in. The collapse of 2008 was caused by:
Of course, this didn't stop Peter Wallison from offering up his lone dissent, described quite eloquently by Joe Nocera in a recent New York Times article.
Or that Peter Wallison, the American Enterprise Institute scholar and the fourth Republican F.C.I.C. commissioner, had already released his own, one-man dissent — a lonely, loony cri de coeur that placed the blame for the financial crisis entirely on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and federal home ownership policies, a position so contrary to the facts that even his fellow Republican commissioners did not agree with him.
The commission’s analysis of the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — a hotly contested battleground — is utterly persuasive. You may recall a few months ago, when I scoffed at Mr. Wallison’s contention that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were ground zero for the financial crisis, he told me that he had seen internal documents that would prove him right. His dissent does not deliver the goods. Instead, it is the report itself that is chock-a-block with internal documents conclusively showing that the two government-sponsored entities followed Wall Street and the subprime companies off the cliff, rather than the other way around.
I'm certain that we will continue to hear cries of Fannie/Freddie for years to come. No doubt we will also continue to hear the mouth foaming about the Community Reinvestment Act as being the problem. Both of these canards are rooted in the anaphylaxis about entitlements and illustrate a clear denial of what caused the problem which is so eloquently detailed in the report.
None of this is anything new to me, of course. I've been saying it for months if not years now. And I don't really hold out much hope, even if Elizabeth Warren does, that the new finreg bill will help. Until there are real consequences for greed (jail and/or liquidation of all assets) and a decided shift in how our country defines success (intrinsically as opposed to extrinsically), we don't be getting anywhere.
I do take heart, though, that Inside Job was nominated for an Academy Award.
- Excessive borrowing and risk-taking by households and Wall Street.
- Systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels.
- Corporate Mismanagement, Ineptitude and Greed
- Widespread failures in financial regulation.
- Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance.
- Policy makers who were ill prepared for the crisis.
Of course, this didn't stop Peter Wallison from offering up his lone dissent, described quite eloquently by Joe Nocera in a recent New York Times article.
Or that Peter Wallison, the American Enterprise Institute scholar and the fourth Republican F.C.I.C. commissioner, had already released his own, one-man dissent — a lonely, loony cri de coeur that placed the blame for the financial crisis entirely on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and federal home ownership policies, a position so contrary to the facts that even his fellow Republican commissioners did not agree with him.
The commission’s analysis of the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — a hotly contested battleground — is utterly persuasive. You may recall a few months ago, when I scoffed at Mr. Wallison’s contention that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were ground zero for the financial crisis, he told me that he had seen internal documents that would prove him right. His dissent does not deliver the goods. Instead, it is the report itself that is chock-a-block with internal documents conclusively showing that the two government-sponsored entities followed Wall Street and the subprime companies off the cliff, rather than the other way around.
I'm certain that we will continue to hear cries of Fannie/Freddie for years to come. No doubt we will also continue to hear the mouth foaming about the Community Reinvestment Act as being the problem. Both of these canards are rooted in the anaphylaxis about entitlements and illustrate a clear denial of what caused the problem which is so eloquently detailed in the report.
None of this is anything new to me, of course. I've been saying it for months if not years now. And I don't really hold out much hope, even if Elizabeth Warren does, that the new finreg bill will help. Until there are real consequences for greed (jail and/or liquidation of all assets) and a decided shift in how our country defines success (intrinsically as opposed to extrinsically), we don't be getting anywhere.
I do take heart, though, that Inside Job was nominated for an Academy Award.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Role Models
The best line from President Obama's speech was this
That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It’s family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair; that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline.
Hmm...the Michael Jordan Generation?
Gripe all you want about our education system (and there is PLENTY to grip about) but it starts with ridding our culture of COP (checked out parents). As I have been saying for quite a long time, the first agency of socialization is the family. If the family falls into the mass media fly trap definition of success, it's hard to break out. Of course, it does help that President Obama is a role model.
On election day of 2008, I went over to my children's school to help out with the mock vote. I get done an hour and a half before my kids get done so I volunteered to assist kids with the touch screens for the all school vote. Some black kids were talking about LeBron as they came in and sat down to vote. They all voted for Obama and then one of the turned to me and said, "If Barack Obama wins, that means I could be president too now, I guess." They spent the rest of the time talking about how cool it would be if he won.
It helps when they see someone who looks like them succeeding at something other than sports.
That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It’s family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair; that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline.
Hmm...the Michael Jordan Generation?
Gripe all you want about our education system (and there is PLENTY to grip about) but it starts with ridding our culture of COP (checked out parents). As I have been saying for quite a long time, the first agency of socialization is the family. If the family falls into the mass media fly trap definition of success, it's hard to break out. Of course, it does help that President Obama is a role model.
On election day of 2008, I went over to my children's school to help out with the mock vote. I get done an hour and a half before my kids get done so I volunteered to assist kids with the touch screens for the all school vote. Some black kids were talking about LeBron as they came in and sat down to vote. They all voted for Obama and then one of the turned to me and said, "If Barack Obama wins, that means I could be president too now, I guess." They spent the rest of the time talking about how cool it would be if he won.
It helps when they see someone who looks like them succeeding at something other than sports.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Friday Funnies
Between Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert and the Onion, do we really need MSNBC or Fox News any more? The way that humor and sarcasm have come to define political analysis is quite fascinating these days.
The Onion has always spared no one from its wrath and a recent issue is no exception.
Congress Honors 9/11 First Capitalizers
"It is high time we paid tribute to those who sensed the direness of the moment and immediately sprang into action on that terrible day, exploiting it for personal gain," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Tuesday. "These were the thoughtless men and women who selfishly showed us that in desperate times, the most callous among us will always be there to step forward and do whatever it takes to get a piece of the action."
It would be more amusing if it wasn't exactly true.
The Onion has always spared no one from its wrath and a recent issue is no exception.
"It is high time we paid tribute to those who sensed the direness of the moment and immediately sprang into action on that terrible day, exploiting it for personal gain," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Tuesday. "These were the thoughtless men and women who selfishly showed us that in desperate times, the most callous among us will always be there to step forward and do whatever it takes to get a piece of the action."
It would be more amusing if it wasn't exactly true.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
A Modern Philanthropist
Recently Robert Burton, a big donor to the UConn football team, wrote a letter demanding the return of millions of dollars of he donated to the university and his family name removed from the football complex.
And you can add blackmail to the list of Burton's crimes. (Note that said luxury suite is another tax-deductible perq of corporate execs, who use company money to fund their own personal entertainment at public expense.)
Burton Capital Management LLC is a hedge fund. They recently forced a Colorado printing company to put Burton's guys on the board of directors. It's hard to know the merits of that action from the short mention in the article, but it shows that Burton isn't afraid to throw his weight around.
Burton said that he didn't expect "veto power" over the selection of the new coach, he just wanted to "add value and comments on any prospective candidates."
If Burton is telling the truth about not expecting to exercise veto power over the football program, he's a narcissist who constantly needs his ego stroked. If he's lying, he's a vindictive control freak who thinks he's running the football program at a public university.
According to another article:
Burton said his company will also start sending its managers to Syracuse University's business school for training instead of UConn, and will no longer pay for its $50,000-per-year luxury suite at Rentschler Field.
This is a rare example of an American corporation having its temper tantrum exposed to the nation. It shows how much power these guys think they have over public institutions like a state university football program.
President Obama mentioned corporate tax reform in his State of the Union address. It's obvious from the maze of loopholes that is corporate tax law that corporations have had pretty much complete control over tax law for decades But now they think they own college football too? Of course they do. They pay for a huge number of utterly pointless bowl games to satisfy their egos and stamp their names on three-hour blocks of TV time.
And the thing that really galls me about Burton is that hedge funds like his are among some of the worst actors in the economy, making the bubble worse and actually designing investment vehicles intended to fail. These guys make money by killing American companies and putting Americans out of work.
As this episode shows, corporations don't give money to colleges and politicians out of the goodness of their hearts. They expect some kind of return. Some corporate philanthropists expect that return to be a burnishing of their reputation, to make themselves look better in the public eye, to build a better university for their employees to attend. Or, like Bill Gates, spend billions of dollars curing diseases for poor people in other countries.
But others obviously expect the recipients of their largesse to do what they say: hire a football coach, pass favorable tax laws, or get rid of regulations that stop them from polluting the air and water we all breathe and drink. Or they're like Massey Energy's Don Blankenship, who paid to get a state supreme court judge elected to rule in his favor (and the judge did. Twice!).
It's not like we didn't know that corporations wield this kind of power. It's just so rare that we see such a blatant public display of arrogant power mongering. And still we have corporate apologists telling us that government is the problem and those poor defenseless corporations are totally at the mercy of bureaucrats.
America has had a long hard slog against corporate robber barons: Teddy Roosevelt's trust-busting of monopolies, FDR's fight against union busting, Eisenhower's warning against the military-industrial complex. The shipping of manufacturing jobs to Mexico in the last century and high-tech jobs to India and China in this century. But the robber barons are coming back like gangbusters, and they're not even trying to hide their disdain for the very idea of public institutions like universities.
Guys like Burton think they own this country lock, stock and football program. But you know what? I'd like nothing better than to see Burton and his ilk keep their filthy money and take their names off all our stadiums.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Head....Hurts....:(
Last night, Michele Bachmann (MN-06) delivered the Tea Party response to President Obama's SOTU address. For the most part, it was fairly predictable. But that's not the speech that has everyone scratching their heads this week. Last week, Ms.Bachmann delivered a speech in Iowa (see: dipping toe in water for possible presidential run now that Palin is tanking) which left many to wonder why someone so incompetent is leading anyone.
Here is the speech in its entirety. C-Span ran the whole thing so we have it all. I didn't want to be accused of taking anything out of context. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, pay close attention to minutes 24 to 26.
Anyone care to explain WTF she is talking about?
Immigrants to this country were always treated like crap and there certainly was no equality. Our entire history is filled with people from different cultures and races being treated like shit. Sorry, but that's human beings, folks. And John Quincy Adams was not a Founding Father. His father was but he was not. He was in short pants when this country was born. In addition, small point but I think that her use of the word 'forebearer' is also incorrect. I think she meant "Forefather' because forebearer is the noun form of the verb forebear which means to restrain from, avoid or cease; to endure or tolerate; to keep oneself in check or control oneself under provocation.
How ironic...
The real head scratcher, though, was her statement about how the people that wrote the Constitution worked tirelessly to end slavery. Um....Michele? THEY OWNED SLAVES!!!!
It would be OK to excuse this if she was just another fringe person spouting lunacy but this woman is the head of a very large and powerful caucus in the United States House of Representatives. She has won her district three elections in a row with record contributions from around the country. She is a leader of the conservative movement with many supporters and has been dubbed the head of the Tea Party.
Are you kidding me?!!?
Delusions are not opinions, folks. Our history is filled with a lot of good, a lot of bad, and a whole lot of ugly. To put this kind of spin on it goes beyond batshit. It's irresponsible. People look up to our leaders and trust that they will be competent enough to use our history as a learning tool. Her view of US History is destructive. Pure and simple.
I truly hope this means people will stop listening to her.
Here is the speech in its entirety. C-Span ran the whole thing so we have it all. I didn't want to be accused of taking anything out of context. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, pay close attention to minutes 24 to 26.
Anyone care to explain WTF she is talking about?
Immigrants to this country were always treated like crap and there certainly was no equality. Our entire history is filled with people from different cultures and races being treated like shit. Sorry, but that's human beings, folks. And John Quincy Adams was not a Founding Father. His father was but he was not. He was in short pants when this country was born. In addition, small point but I think that her use of the word 'forebearer' is also incorrect. I think she meant "Forefather' because forebearer is the noun form of the verb forebear which means to restrain from, avoid or cease; to endure or tolerate; to keep oneself in check or control oneself under provocation.
How ironic...
The real head scratcher, though, was her statement about how the people that wrote the Constitution worked tirelessly to end slavery. Um....Michele? THEY OWNED SLAVES!!!!
It would be OK to excuse this if she was just another fringe person spouting lunacy but this woman is the head of a very large and powerful caucus in the United States House of Representatives. She has won her district three elections in a row with record contributions from around the country. She is a leader of the conservative movement with many supporters and has been dubbed the head of the Tea Party.
Are you kidding me?!!?
Delusions are not opinions, folks. Our history is filled with a lot of good, a lot of bad, and a whole lot of ugly. To put this kind of spin on it goes beyond batshit. It's irresponsible. People look up to our leaders and trust that they will be competent enough to use our history as a learning tool. Her view of US History is destructive. Pure and simple.
I truly hope this means people will stop listening to her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)