One day, not so long ago, a United States Senator, one of one hundred of the most significant legislators in this country, was busted for playing footsie with an undercover cop in an adjacent stall in an airport restroom. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. When this was publicized, he was pressured by many of his colleagues, most, if not all, from his own party, to resign. He complied. Then he didn't. Then he vowed to resign if he could not get his guilty plea overturned. It wasn't and he didn't. He has now decided to finish his term and risk facing the "Ethics?" Committee in the Senate.
He protests that he is not gay. Gay Republicans, though rare, ARE more common than Conservative African-Americans on the Supreme Court. But do we really care? And, does it really matter?
He played footsie, perhaps, with the undercover cop in the next stall. Maybe it was a "gay signal"; maybe it was not. Does it really justify an arrest? Does it really justify a prolonged interrogation? It does not appear that any money was exchanged. It does not appear any offer was proffered. It certainly does not appear that any fluid exchange was even made or proffered! Nor does it appear any improper bodily parts were exposed. Just footsie!!!
So, how does one of the top one hundred legislators get himself arrested, interrogated, and plead guilty to such a weak and obviously unsupportable charge? How can he claim ignorance? How can he demonstrate such poor judgement? I REPEAT, he is one of the TOP ONE HUNDRED LEGISLATORS IN THE UNITED STATES. He is a LAWMAKER!!! This man cannot be ignorant of the law. The people of Idaho trust him to be a LAWMAKER!!! There is only one word for such a person. There is only one reason that the people of Idaho should feel betrayed. That word IS NOT GAY!!! That word is STUPID!!! After all, if the shoe fits......(regardless of what that shoe may be doing).....
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Friday, October 5, 2007
Ill-logistics
Over the past year, arguments on both sides of the aisle "debate" the war (?police action?) in Iraq. Democrats demand that the troops be removed yesterday .... today .... October.... Christmas... by January 20, 2008..... Pleeeaaasssseee!!!!!
Republicans say that the "surge" needs to have time to work.....as our soldiers over 6 to 8 months meander into Iraq to effectuate (sic)... institute... impose... win?... the "surge".
Meanwhile, Blackwater and their ilk, whose numbers seem to outnumber our armed forces, continue perform the duties for which they have been hired. These "contractors", (the older term is mercenaries), are providing the bulk of the security and support in Iraq....so why are our troops there??????
When President Bush declared "Mission Accomplished", he was right. What Congress authorized and what our armed forces did was what was asked by him. They did it admirably.
Our forces are designed to attack and win. "Shock and Awe" worked against Iraq, and probably would work against most nations today. Unfortunately, our forces are not well designed to be occupation forces. They are not police.... they are soldiers. Nation building was not part of the directive that Congress authorized... which is why the bulk of that stabilization duty was outsourced to our mercenaries (er...contractors). And that is where the State Department comes in using a silly thing called diplomacy.
The "Mission" was accomplished. And yet, common opinion of our leadership is that we are incapable of moving more than a brigade or two of our armed forces per month......HUH???????
I've been watching a little documentary called "The War" on PBS. These primitive troops of ours, from some 65 years ago, were moving troops incrementally larger than our forces in Iraq, in Normandy, and in Italy, and in the Philippines, and through the Pacific islands, and in a followup invasion in southern France.....and all at virtually the same time. I had an uncle in the 4th Marine Division that set off from San Diego, and traveled more than 3000 miles, to invade some po-dunk island in the Pacific, the longest invasion to that time. Today, we can barely move a brigade in a month..... HUH? On the Russian front in WWII, Germans were being captured in numbers larger than our current forces in Iraq. Yet today, our sophisticated mechanized forces can hardly move???? In WWII, Patton was moving a whole army across France, and would have gone further but for fuel. Today, in Iraq, with its oil, we can't even move a division??? HUH???
The argument that we cannot get out of Iraq in days is either A BIG LIE; or, our defense capabilities over the last 65 years have so eroded, that EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD SHUDDER!!!!
Republicans say that the "surge" needs to have time to work.....as our soldiers over 6 to 8 months meander into Iraq to effectuate (sic)... institute... impose... win?... the "surge".
Meanwhile, Blackwater and their ilk, whose numbers seem to outnumber our armed forces, continue perform the duties for which they have been hired. These "contractors", (the older term is mercenaries), are providing the bulk of the security and support in Iraq....so why are our troops there??????
When President Bush declared "Mission Accomplished", he was right. What Congress authorized and what our armed forces did was what was asked by him. They did it admirably.
Our forces are designed to attack and win. "Shock and Awe" worked against Iraq, and probably would work against most nations today. Unfortunately, our forces are not well designed to be occupation forces. They are not police.... they are soldiers. Nation building was not part of the directive that Congress authorized... which is why the bulk of that stabilization duty was outsourced to our mercenaries (er...contractors). And that is where the State Department comes in using a silly thing called diplomacy.
The "Mission" was accomplished. And yet, common opinion of our leadership is that we are incapable of moving more than a brigade or two of our armed forces per month......HUH???????
I've been watching a little documentary called "The War" on PBS. These primitive troops of ours, from some 65 years ago, were moving troops incrementally larger than our forces in Iraq, in Normandy, and in Italy, and in the Philippines, and through the Pacific islands, and in a followup invasion in southern France.....and all at virtually the same time. I had an uncle in the 4th Marine Division that set off from San Diego, and traveled more than 3000 miles, to invade some po-dunk island in the Pacific, the longest invasion to that time. Today, we can barely move a brigade in a month..... HUH? On the Russian front in WWII, Germans were being captured in numbers larger than our current forces in Iraq. Yet today, our sophisticated mechanized forces can hardly move???? In WWII, Patton was moving a whole army across France, and would have gone further but for fuel. Today, in Iraq, with its oil, we can't even move a division??? HUH???
The argument that we cannot get out of Iraq in days is either A BIG LIE; or, our defense capabilities over the last 65 years have so eroded, that EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD SHUDDER!!!!
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Ahmadinejad in New York City
Americans consider the World Trade Center "Ground Zero" as sacred ground. They do have a fairly legitimate claim. After all, it IS in the United States and some 2900 or so American casualties were suffered in the calamitous attack.
However, Americans conveniently forget that some 70 or so other countries also suffered losses in that attack. Most of those foreign casualties remain missing or their remains are still unidentified. One of those nations suffering loss is IRAN.
As much as Americans and their leadership would like to demonize that country and its leadership, the President of Iran does have a legitimate interest in visiting the site and placing a wreath, or whatever other homage he wishes to convey on the part of his government, regardless of the underlying political motives.
Ironically, Saudi Arabia, a country we consider a close friend, suffered no casualties at the WTC, unless you count the hijackers of the two planes. Yet how do we treat their condolences?
On another note, Americans pride themselves on the Constitution's guarantees of free speech. Yet, rather than talk to nations such as Iran, or let them talk to us, we would rather bomb them back to the Stone Age. If actions speak louder than words, what does that say about Americans? The Iraq Commission, the generals in the field...in fact, just about everybody but the American President, have concluded that the Middle East problems will only be solved through diplomacy. That means talking....speech!!! America may win every battle militarily, and probably will. But those victories will come to nought without speech....diplomacy....talking.
So Americans should welcome whatever President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran has to say, whether it be at Columbia University, the United Nations, the WTC, or from his bully-pulpit back home. It opens debate. It begins diplomacy. It is a Constitutional imperative for each American, and especially their leadership, to listen, understand, respond, and negotiate. Be diplomatic and stop the rhetoric, the ad hominums, the demonizations and the body counts. Understand what they really want and need, and vice versa. Maybe...just maybe...there is a solution.
However, Americans conveniently forget that some 70 or so other countries also suffered losses in that attack. Most of those foreign casualties remain missing or their remains are still unidentified. One of those nations suffering loss is IRAN.
As much as Americans and their leadership would like to demonize that country and its leadership, the President of Iran does have a legitimate interest in visiting the site and placing a wreath, or whatever other homage he wishes to convey on the part of his government, regardless of the underlying political motives.
Ironically, Saudi Arabia, a country we consider a close friend, suffered no casualties at the WTC, unless you count the hijackers of the two planes. Yet how do we treat their condolences?
On another note, Americans pride themselves on the Constitution's guarantees of free speech. Yet, rather than talk to nations such as Iran, or let them talk to us, we would rather bomb them back to the Stone Age. If actions speak louder than words, what does that say about Americans? The Iraq Commission, the generals in the field...in fact, just about everybody but the American President, have concluded that the Middle East problems will only be solved through diplomacy. That means talking....speech!!! America may win every battle militarily, and probably will. But those victories will come to nought without speech....diplomacy....talking.
So Americans should welcome whatever President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran has to say, whether it be at Columbia University, the United Nations, the WTC, or from his bully-pulpit back home. It opens debate. It begins diplomacy. It is a Constitutional imperative for each American, and especially their leadership, to listen, understand, respond, and negotiate. Be diplomatic and stop the rhetoric, the ad hominums, the demonizations and the body counts. Understand what they really want and need, and vice versa. Maybe...just maybe...there is a solution.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Hizzoner Mayor Rudy Giuliani
There was once a mayor in NYC. One day he decided to run for President of the United States. When it came time to campaign and debate, it was discovered that he spoke no words. Every utterance from his mouth was numbers. To be exact, three numbers....and two of them were the same. During this period, in a sophisticated twist....a slash was inserted 'twixt one number and the pair of twins. To every issue he answered the same.....9/11, 9/11, 9/11....and so it went. His every speech, it was the same....9/11, 9/11, 9/11...and so on. The implication of the succinct soundbite was, of course, to let all know that he would protect us from the evils of the world.
But where was this saviour on that beautiful, clear, blue sky, pleasant morning on 9/11/01??????????????????????
It seems that some years earlier, some car bombs were detonated in the garages of the WTC. Fortunately, that day, no catastrophic damage was done. But it was enough of a warning to all that steps be taken to ensure that security issues be addressed, and most especially, that first responders can communicate and coordinate their activities. Two main recommendations were, as was known and yet ignored, vital. One was to move central control operations from the World Trade Center to Brooklyn. The other was to make sure that proper radio equipment was available to all critical personnel. Neither was done by Hizzoner Giuliani nor his predecessors.
Hizzoner Mayor Giuliani was nowhere to be found for hours and hours and hours after this beautiful day changed for the worse. Central Command was gone. Communications were a jumble. When finally he was found, all he could utter was...911.......
This is not the words (er...numbers) of a saviour!! This is nothing more the the mewling of an unprepared pretender who let his city down.
That is why at least one of the firefighters' organizations endorse......Christopher Dodd?!?!?!?!?
A vote for Hizzoner, on the basis of his campaign, is not a vote for security....it is a pity vote for a city whose former mayor does not deserve such pity. By using 9/11 as his rallying cry, he only deserves your contempt.
But where was this saviour on that beautiful, clear, blue sky, pleasant morning on 9/11/01??????????????????????
It seems that some years earlier, some car bombs were detonated in the garages of the WTC. Fortunately, that day, no catastrophic damage was done. But it was enough of a warning to all that steps be taken to ensure that security issues be addressed, and most especially, that first responders can communicate and coordinate their activities. Two main recommendations were, as was known and yet ignored, vital. One was to move central control operations from the World Trade Center to Brooklyn. The other was to make sure that proper radio equipment was available to all critical personnel. Neither was done by Hizzoner Giuliani nor his predecessors.
Hizzoner Mayor Giuliani was nowhere to be found for hours and hours and hours after this beautiful day changed for the worse. Central Command was gone. Communications were a jumble. When finally he was found, all he could utter was...911.......
This is not the words (er...numbers) of a saviour!! This is nothing more the the mewling of an unprepared pretender who let his city down.
That is why at least one of the firefighters' organizations endorse......Christopher Dodd?!?!?!?!?
A vote for Hizzoner, on the basis of his campaign, is not a vote for security....it is a pity vote for a city whose former mayor does not deserve such pity. By using 9/11 as his rallying cry, he only deserves your contempt.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
Electronic Voting Machines in California
I am starting my blogs with this relatively benign issue. Though it happens to be directed at the Secretary of State of California, I think there is equal applicability throughout the USA, and possibly elsewhere in the world where the premise of democratic representation is proffered. It may also give you some insight to some of my background and experience....and, as a result...biases...Cassandra.
Dear Ms. Secretary
I quite defininetly missed the March 30th deadline for commenting on the voting machine issue. I'm not a lobbyist, government official, vendor or any other special interest that would have been on the alert for this study. I am nothing other than an American citizen, resident Californian, and regular voter, who, incidentally tries avidly to keep up on current events. Yet I still missed this March 30th deadline. I suspect that I am not in the minority....by far.
The brouhaha over the various electronic voting machines strikes me as highly disingenuous. Errors rates from paper ballots, lever voting machines, punch cards, and other methods of vote casting are well documented in California and the nation by people and organizations much more into this issue than I am. Groundwork has been laid to, at the very least, suggest that at least two of the amendments to the constitution are being compromised. These methods of voting tend to have their error rates exaggerated on voters who are poor, less educated, mentally compromised, disabled, etc....basically, the disenfranchised. This is above and beyond whatever corruption may occur at the voting area that may be in the effective control of the dominating party in the area. Trying to discern ballot tampering is a difficult task. Most of the delving into voter tampering is, by necessity, manual, labor intensive, and expensive.
Electronic voting, on the other hand, seems to lend itself to computer modeling. Marked differences in specific voting patterns in a demographic area, it would seem, would be easy to flag and investigate. After all, sophisticated computer models are already being used by both parties to gerrymander the voting districts in order to keep the party in power....IN POWER! This is a local, state, and federal pattern of devaluing individual voter's rights.
It appears that electronic voting is being attacked because it may, more certainly, uncover voter tampering and corruption. Not because it is flawed. Computer errors are far ranging and stick out like a sore thumb. In the other methods of voting, it becomes difficult to distinguish voter's errors, counter's errors, and tampering. I've worked as a clerk and as a computer programmer in my career. Believe me, a computer error compared to a clerical error is like an atomic bomb to a pin prick. It is noticed!!!!
Personally, I have been blessed with above average intelligence, but cursed with below average eyesight, with some occasional difficulties in motor skills. As a consequence, I have screwed up punch ballots, mishandled lever machines, and had my difficulties navigating paper ballots. However, with the electronic machines, I have been able to thoroughly review my ballot before casting it. I am confident that my personal error rate with electronic machines is zero. What happens afterward I cannot say. But I am confident, based on years of computing and my observation of redistricting, that tampering, if occurring, could be easily uncovered.
Dear Ms. Secretary
I quite defininetly missed the March 30th deadline for commenting on the voting machine issue. I'm not a lobbyist, government official, vendor or any other special interest that would have been on the alert for this study. I am nothing other than an American citizen, resident Californian, and regular voter, who, incidentally tries avidly to keep up on current events. Yet I still missed this March 30th deadline. I suspect that I am not in the minority....by far.
The brouhaha over the various electronic voting machines strikes me as highly disingenuous. Errors rates from paper ballots, lever voting machines, punch cards, and other methods of vote casting are well documented in California and the nation by people and organizations much more into this issue than I am. Groundwork has been laid to, at the very least, suggest that at least two of the amendments to the constitution are being compromised. These methods of voting tend to have their error rates exaggerated on voters who are poor, less educated, mentally compromised, disabled, etc....basically, the disenfranchised. This is above and beyond whatever corruption may occur at the voting area that may be in the effective control of the dominating party in the area. Trying to discern ballot tampering is a difficult task. Most of the delving into voter tampering is, by necessity, manual, labor intensive, and expensive.
Electronic voting, on the other hand, seems to lend itself to computer modeling. Marked differences in specific voting patterns in a demographic area, it would seem, would be easy to flag and investigate. After all, sophisticated computer models are already being used by both parties to gerrymander the voting districts in order to keep the party in power....IN POWER! This is a local, state, and federal pattern of devaluing individual voter's rights.
It appears that electronic voting is being attacked because it may, more certainly, uncover voter tampering and corruption. Not because it is flawed. Computer errors are far ranging and stick out like a sore thumb. In the other methods of voting, it becomes difficult to distinguish voter's errors, counter's errors, and tampering. I've worked as a clerk and as a computer programmer in my career. Believe me, a computer error compared to a clerical error is like an atomic bomb to a pin prick. It is noticed!!!!
Personally, I have been blessed with above average intelligence, but cursed with below average eyesight, with some occasional difficulties in motor skills. As a consequence, I have screwed up punch ballots, mishandled lever machines, and had my difficulties navigating paper ballots. However, with the electronic machines, I have been able to thoroughly review my ballot before casting it. I am confident that my personal error rate with electronic machines is zero. What happens afterward I cannot say. But I am confident, based on years of computing and my observation of redistricting, that tampering, if occurring, could be easily uncovered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)