Amazingly the United States public and most politicians still appear clueless about the war going on south of the U.S. border.
There seems to be a feeling that the violence and corruption will not spill over into the U.S. Unfortunately they are deeply mistaken. National Geographic Explorer recently did a show on the problems of Mexico’s failed drug war and how it affects the U.S.
It is widely accepted fact that corruption permeates through the Mexican government at all levels. To believe that it can’t happen here is simply ignorant. The money at stake is high. Already there have been cases of police and sheriffs prosecuted for aiding drug shipments across South Texas.
MSNBC.com reports that the Mexican drug cartels are stepping up efforts to recruit and infiltrate U.S. customs and border law enforcement agencies.
The case of Luis F. Alarid highlights a battle within the war. Alarid on the surface appeared on the straight path and headed on career in law enforcement. He served in the military, in the Army and Marines, did two tours in Iraq and returned home to pursue his dreams of law enforcement. An investigation into his activities revealed within in months of becoming a border agent, he earned $200,000 for waving trucks through with drugs and illegal immigrants. Alarid received seven years in federal prison.
The article states a few more cases. In one, another agent received 15 years for her crimes. A friend with connections to the cartels enticed her to turncoat while she was still in the academy. A former customs inspector received 20 years for her crimes.
In all cases, the convicted agents knew or were related to drug smugglers. With the need for increased numbers after September 11th, 2001, not every recruit could be scrutinized closely. Even if they had, who was going to disqualify Luis Alarid? He had a clean criminal and military service record. No matter how tight requirements tighten up, someone will always slip through or corrupted. There is no easy solution.
The sentences for all three agents strike me as light given the degree of the crimes. Corruption, breaches of security, betrayal of public trust and allowing illegal drugs and immigrants into the country should carry heavier sentences. In Texas, a corrupt public servant convicted of first degree felony can face 2-99 years or life imprisonment. With the threat of drugs and national security, I see know reason the laws aren’t toughened up and heavier sentences handed out. Drug lords pay large amounts of ransom for cooperation so it should be fitting that the U.S. extract a heavy sum too for breaking the public trust and allowing criminals to breach our borders.
Chaos doesn’t rule the border completely but politicians and the general public need to wake up and take action soon. Once the system breaks down completely then it will take many more years, if ever, to fix it.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Military, CIA and Blackwater used in Some Ops
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34372364/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/
The New York Times reports that Blackwater Worldwide security forces worked side by side with the CIA on some raids and special operations in Iraq. They also allege that Blackwater security helped transport detainees to the CIA's secret prison program. The article states that originally Blackwater personnel were hired to provide security to CIA agents and their bases.
Sources from former Blackwater and CIA operatives confirm that Blackwater forces did more that provide security.
Back when the war started in Afghanistan, I commented to a friend about the outsourcing of the war to the Northern Alliance. I had made an analogy to the Romans hiring mercenary armies toward the end of the Empire. Rome no longer used citizen soldiers for its army. My friend corrected me in my analysis. He said it was an interesting point but off the mark. Instead he believed it was a different scenario. The U.S. was aiding a local army fight its rebellion against a ruling regime. The U.S. wasn't really outsourcing the war but only aiding an ally. It just so happened that the ally's goals served the U.S.'s purpose. The U.S. ousted the Taliban with aid from the Northern Alliance. No mercenary army was hired. The Northern Alliance had a vested interest in ousting the Taliban.
After that point of view, I agreed with him for the most part. Still something bothered me about what I viewed as outsourcing.
On the surface, I don't see a problem with using a contractor for security. The CIA doesn't have a force to protect them in the field and the military is stretched around the world. I also don't see a problem using third parties for prisoner security and transportation.
According the Times article, former Blackwater employees said that "their involvement in the operations became so routine that the lines supposedly dividing the Central Intelligence Agency, the military and Blackwater became blurred."
The line blurring is what bothers me. Military, CIA and Special Ops forces
are trained specifically for the tasks at hand. Involving third party contractors into operations opens a whole can of worms. First of all, who do the contractors answer to? The military, CIA or corporate headquarters? How much influence do they have in planning missions? Sources are quoted saying that since Blackwater was involved with security they became involved in planning routes.
Another controversial point has been who are under whose legal system do they fall under? U.S, law or Iraqi or Afghan law? The military falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The CIA falls under U.S. laws for the most part. Third parties are civilian contractors. They aren't afforded the same legal protections that military and other government officials are. Even CIA agents don't fall under complete U.S. protection. If they are caught as spies in another country, that country can legal prosecute them and punish them. Similarly armed third party security aren't afforded rights under the Geneva Convention. Technically they could
be held and prosecuted as mercenaries. Mercenaries are generally prohibited by the Geneva Convention.
On the other hand, it is not so cut and dry as some critics would like.
After 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government had to act quick. In an instant the U.S. fight against terrorism changed. The intelligence community needed to expand rapidly. Translators, analysts and other technical experts were needed. It's not like the U.S. government had a stockpile of Pashtun speakers on staff. So while a plan was put in place to recruit for intelligence agencies for the long term, many slots needed to be field immediately. Thus came in the third party contractors.
The other part is we aren't on the ground with CIA and Special Ops. Who knows how bad the security situation is? Maybe occasionally it is permissible to use contractors to help in a mission. I prefer that they weren't but sometimes a situation may dictate that they are needed that way. Honestly we just don't know nor should we know everything that happens in the field.
The bottom line is that lives are at stake both on the frontlines and maybe here at home. Used wisely, third party contractors can be an asset. Steps must be taken though that the U.S. agencies and military don't become to dependant on them. If not careful, then maybe we are hiring mercenaries to fight our wars and starting to slip into a Roman like decline.
The New York Times reports that Blackwater Worldwide security forces worked side by side with the CIA on some raids and special operations in Iraq. They also allege that Blackwater security helped transport detainees to the CIA's secret prison program. The article states that originally Blackwater personnel were hired to provide security to CIA agents and their bases.
Sources from former Blackwater and CIA operatives confirm that Blackwater forces did more that provide security.
Back when the war started in Afghanistan, I commented to a friend about the outsourcing of the war to the Northern Alliance. I had made an analogy to the Romans hiring mercenary armies toward the end of the Empire. Rome no longer used citizen soldiers for its army. My friend corrected me in my analysis. He said it was an interesting point but off the mark. Instead he believed it was a different scenario. The U.S. was aiding a local army fight its rebellion against a ruling regime. The U.S. wasn't really outsourcing the war but only aiding an ally. It just so happened that the ally's goals served the U.S.'s purpose. The U.S. ousted the Taliban with aid from the Northern Alliance. No mercenary army was hired. The Northern Alliance had a vested interest in ousting the Taliban.
After that point of view, I agreed with him for the most part. Still something bothered me about what I viewed as outsourcing.
On the surface, I don't see a problem with using a contractor for security. The CIA doesn't have a force to protect them in the field and the military is stretched around the world. I also don't see a problem using third parties for prisoner security and transportation.
According the Times article, former Blackwater employees said that "their involvement in the operations became so routine that the lines supposedly dividing the Central Intelligence Agency, the military and Blackwater became blurred."
The line blurring is what bothers me. Military, CIA and Special Ops forces
are trained specifically for the tasks at hand. Involving third party contractors into operations opens a whole can of worms. First of all, who do the contractors answer to? The military, CIA or corporate headquarters? How much influence do they have in planning missions? Sources are quoted saying that since Blackwater was involved with security they became involved in planning routes.
Another controversial point has been who are under whose legal system do they fall under? U.S, law or Iraqi or Afghan law? The military falls under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The CIA falls under U.S. laws for the most part. Third parties are civilian contractors. They aren't afforded the same legal protections that military and other government officials are. Even CIA agents don't fall under complete U.S. protection. If they are caught as spies in another country, that country can legal prosecute them and punish them. Similarly armed third party security aren't afforded rights under the Geneva Convention. Technically they could
be held and prosecuted as mercenaries. Mercenaries are generally prohibited by the Geneva Convention.
On the other hand, it is not so cut and dry as some critics would like.
After 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government had to act quick. In an instant the U.S. fight against terrorism changed. The intelligence community needed to expand rapidly. Translators, analysts and other technical experts were needed. It's not like the U.S. government had a stockpile of Pashtun speakers on staff. So while a plan was put in place to recruit for intelligence agencies for the long term, many slots needed to be field immediately. Thus came in the third party contractors.
The other part is we aren't on the ground with CIA and Special Ops. Who knows how bad the security situation is? Maybe occasionally it is permissible to use contractors to help in a mission. I prefer that they weren't but sometimes a situation may dictate that they are needed that way. Honestly we just don't know nor should we know everything that happens in the field.
The bottom line is that lives are at stake both on the frontlines and maybe here at home. Used wisely, third party contractors can be an asset. Steps must be taken though that the U.S. agencies and military don't become to dependant on them. If not careful, then maybe we are hiring mercenaries to fight our wars and starting to slip into a Roman like decline.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Prison Escapee Caught, Mom Turns in Murder Suspect Son
The Escapee and the Gun
On December 1, 2009, convict Arcade Joseph Comeaux, Jr. escaped from a prison van while in transport from one prison unit to another one. He allegedly pulled a gun on the two officers transporting. He then stripped the officers and took the clothes for his disguise and weapons for his use.
Officials suspect a prison guard may have sneaked the gun into the prison for Comeaux.
He was finally caught by some workers at a flange factory.
Comeaux fooled prison officials he was wheelchair bound for ten years. Yet he was able to walk off during his escape.
One trouble spot seems to recur with in the Texas Correctional Department. Some prison guards supply contraband to inmates. Last year there was a scandal about cell phones smuggled into death row. In light of the cell phone smuggling, cries are starting to call for a shake up.
Both cases of smuggling are serious issues. Inmates are put in prison to not only punish but to protect society. When the jailers and guards are bringing contraband, the lives the public are a danger. One cell phone was used to threaten a family of a state Senator. Not only the inmates are responsible but so are the ones who facilitate life and smuggle items in for prisoners.
The only way to help remedy the situation is to come on down hard on those that receive the contraband but also on those that facilitate the smuggling harshly. When a prison guard takes the position he becomes a public servant of trust. The guard is entrusted to keep those on the inside locked up but also charged to keep the inmates influence outside to a minimum. Governments should just fire the guards but prosecute to the maximum the law allows. If for nothing else but betraying the public trust.
Scrupulous Mom
Over the week, a Galena Park teacher was stabbed, beaten and mutilated to death.
The amazing thing is the mother of the alleged suspect heard he was involved and called the police.
From the Houston Chronicle article linked above:
Good for Mom. She made a choice and decision over the nature of her son's alleged behavior. Maybe empathizing with the murdered teach and his family she called him in. I'm sure it's not an easy thing to do at all but she had the moral strength and judgment to do it. Congrats, Mom!
On December 1, 2009, convict Arcade Joseph Comeaux, Jr. escaped from a prison van while in transport from one prison unit to another one. He allegedly pulled a gun on the two officers transporting. He then stripped the officers and took the clothes for his disguise and weapons for his use.
Officials suspect a prison guard may have sneaked the gun into the prison for Comeaux.
He was finally caught by some workers at a flange factory.
Comeaux fooled prison officials he was wheelchair bound for ten years. Yet he was able to walk off during his escape.
One trouble spot seems to recur with in the Texas Correctional Department. Some prison guards supply contraband to inmates. Last year there was a scandal about cell phones smuggled into death row. In light of the cell phone smuggling, cries are starting to call for a shake up.
Both cases of smuggling are serious issues. Inmates are put in prison to not only punish but to protect society. When the jailers and guards are bringing contraband, the lives the public are a danger. One cell phone was used to threaten a family of a state Senator. Not only the inmates are responsible but so are the ones who facilitate life and smuggle items in for prisoners.
The only way to help remedy the situation is to come on down hard on those that receive the contraband but also on those that facilitate the smuggling harshly. When a prison guard takes the position he becomes a public servant of trust. The guard is entrusted to keep those on the inside locked up but also charged to keep the inmates influence outside to a minimum. Governments should just fire the guards but prosecute to the maximum the law allows. If for nothing else but betraying the public trust.
Scrupulous Mom
Over the week, a Galena Park teacher was stabbed, beaten and mutilated to death.
The amazing thing is the mother of the alleged suspect heard he was involved and called the police.
From the Houston Chronicle article linked above:
Vega, a Mexican citizen, is believed to be in Mexico, said a source close to the investigation who asked not to be identified. Vega called his mother from Mexico and told her what he had done, and his mother then called police, the source said.
Good for Mom. She made a choice and decision over the nature of her son's alleged behavior. Maybe empathizing with the murdered teach and his family she called him in. I'm sure it's not an easy thing to do at all but she had the moral strength and judgment to do it. Congrats, Mom!
Monday, November 30, 2009
Highway Thievery?
We all know bank and financial service companies nickel and dime us to death. High interest rate, unreasonable fees, cutting credit lines for even people who pay on time and late fees despite the payment late on another card.
Basically banks look to make the most amount of money with the least amount of effort.
Take my case for instance. I went to the dentist Monday morning. I paid $280 for the visit. Then the receptionist noticed I had a credit due to insurance payments. She asks me if I want to apply the $280 to future visits or refund to my debit card. Of course I decided for the refund.
I get home to check my balance. Sure enough the amount online showed the bank happily subtracted the amount from my checking account. They weren't so quick to refund my money. I called Chase and asked why they deducted but didn't refund. The customer service rep kindly told me that they didn't refund accounts right away. It took 3-5 business days for the credit to appear.
At first I left it at that. Then I started thinking about it. Basically the bank uses my money for free. The money never changed hands. It was refunded less than an hour from when it was deducted. The bank never paid it out. They have free access to my money to earn interest and what other evil things banks to do make money.
I'm a free market capitalist. I have no problem with banks, business and individuals making money. I only have one requirement and that is they make money honestly. Things like trade secrets and company information that's proprietary is fair to keep secret. A business is entitled to keep anything they discover or invent confidential.
What Chase has done to me is at best unethical and at worst criminal. You might think that $280 is no big deal or that it is. To me it's not the amount but how they handle it. The money is rightfully mine. The bank has no right to use it and not credit my account right away. That money is still with the bank. It's money I can't use to pay a bill, buy a book or rent a movie. It's money I can't invest or save. It's free money for the bank to use for 3-5 days. At least they could return some interest to me.
In the grand scheme of things, what is $280. For some people it's a huge amount. For others it's pocket change. But the money belongs to them and not the bank. Think also of how many times in a day, week, month and year a bank does this practice. My guess is that it amounts to millions of dollars if not billions that they are using dishonestly to make money.
Of course I sent off an email to Chase customer service. I was assured the bank would reply in one business day. It's been more than one business day. Not only are they dishonest in using my money but also lie on their website about how long they take to reply.
This is just a small fraction of practices the banks can use to earn dishonest profits.
Basically banks look to make the most amount of money with the least amount of effort.
Take my case for instance. I went to the dentist Monday morning. I paid $280 for the visit. Then the receptionist noticed I had a credit due to insurance payments. She asks me if I want to apply the $280 to future visits or refund to my debit card. Of course I decided for the refund.
I get home to check my balance. Sure enough the amount online showed the bank happily subtracted the amount from my checking account. They weren't so quick to refund my money. I called Chase and asked why they deducted but didn't refund. The customer service rep kindly told me that they didn't refund accounts right away. It took 3-5 business days for the credit to appear.
At first I left it at that. Then I started thinking about it. Basically the bank uses my money for free. The money never changed hands. It was refunded less than an hour from when it was deducted. The bank never paid it out. They have free access to my money to earn interest and what other evil things banks to do make money.
I'm a free market capitalist. I have no problem with banks, business and individuals making money. I only have one requirement and that is they make money honestly. Things like trade secrets and company information that's proprietary is fair to keep secret. A business is entitled to keep anything they discover or invent confidential.
What Chase has done to me is at best unethical and at worst criminal. You might think that $280 is no big deal or that it is. To me it's not the amount but how they handle it. The money is rightfully mine. The bank has no right to use it and not credit my account right away. That money is still with the bank. It's money I can't use to pay a bill, buy a book or rent a movie. It's money I can't invest or save. It's free money for the bank to use for 3-5 days. At least they could return some interest to me.
In the grand scheme of things, what is $280. For some people it's a huge amount. For others it's pocket change. But the money belongs to them and not the bank. Think also of how many times in a day, week, month and year a bank does this practice. My guess is that it amounts to millions of dollars if not billions that they are using dishonestly to make money.
Of course I sent off an email to Chase customer service. I was assured the bank would reply in one business day. It's been more than one business day. Not only are they dishonest in using my money but also lie on their website about how long they take to reply.
This is just a small fraction of practices the banks can use to earn dishonest profits.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Yale University 0, Terrorists 1
Yale University Press decided not to reprint the cartoons of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad in an upcoming book.
Now for the absurd part. The book is about the cartoons and the ensuing violence they allegedly caused.
"The Cartoons That Shook the World" by Jytte Klausen explores the fallout that took place after the cartoons were published by a Danish newspaper.
The university honchos decided not to run the cartoons out of fear that violence and death would follow publication. Frankly it's a cowardly stance to take. The cartoons were published in 2005. Everyone who wanted to see them has already seen them. I'm almost positive that those who were insulted have burned and killed all they plan on doing. Events that happened in 2005 are dictating what is published today. The idiots and zealots who were enraged will riot over something else if the pictures aren't publish. If Yale withholds the cartoons, the fanatics will just wait for the next perceived insult to carry out their crazy acts of violence.
A university should be a place for free exchange of information. Hiding the cartoons stops that free flow. It also stifles debate on whether or not the cartoons are insulting.
In this case, the terrorists have won. Yale is a private institution and may choose what to publish. First Amendment rights and censorship laws don't apply to Yale. However Yale is allowing the past acts of terrorists to control what they publish. As a nation we should stand up to these threats and live our lives despite the
terrorists. We should show that yes we may be vigilant against attack but we will not allow terrorist acts to undermine our core values as a culture and nation.
Yale instead took the low road and decided that a group of terrorist may or may not carry out violence. In fear, Yale decided that the prospect of violence outweighed the American values of free speech and free flow of information. Yale allowed past terrorist acts to dictate policy.
Thank you Yale. Fear and intimidation won while Yale cratered.
Now for the absurd part. The book is about the cartoons and the ensuing violence they allegedly caused.
"The Cartoons That Shook the World" by Jytte Klausen explores the fallout that took place after the cartoons were published by a Danish newspaper.
The university honchos decided not to run the cartoons out of fear that violence and death would follow publication. Frankly it's a cowardly stance to take. The cartoons were published in 2005. Everyone who wanted to see them has already seen them. I'm almost positive that those who were insulted have burned and killed all they plan on doing. Events that happened in 2005 are dictating what is published today. The idiots and zealots who were enraged will riot over something else if the pictures aren't publish. If Yale withholds the cartoons, the fanatics will just wait for the next perceived insult to carry out their crazy acts of violence.
A university should be a place for free exchange of information. Hiding the cartoons stops that free flow. It also stifles debate on whether or not the cartoons are insulting.
In this case, the terrorists have won. Yale is a private institution and may choose what to publish. First Amendment rights and censorship laws don't apply to Yale. However Yale is allowing the past acts of terrorists to control what they publish. As a nation we should stand up to these threats and live our lives despite the
terrorists. We should show that yes we may be vigilant against attack but we will not allow terrorist acts to undermine our core values as a culture and nation.
Yale instead took the low road and decided that a group of terrorist may or may not carry out violence. In fear, Yale decided that the prospect of violence outweighed the American values of free speech and free flow of information. Yale allowed past terrorist acts to dictate policy.
Thank you Yale. Fear and intimidation won while Yale cratered.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Pay Compensation Restrictions, Cash for Clunkers, Health Care Reform
Are the power mad Democrats over reaching? Don't get me wrong, President George W. Bush helped create the mess. The Dems are just adding fuel to the fire.
The federal government shouldn't have bailed out financial institutions to begin with. They made bad business decisions and took on dumb risks. They got exactly what they paid for. A mess. But Uncle Sam's deep pockets lent them the money to stay afloat. High risk, bad decisions were still rewarded.
Don't get me wrong. I think there must be some government regulation of banks, business and capital. The beauty of free market capitalism though is that good decisions and business ideas are rewarded. If someone creates a service or product others are willing to pay for then they are rewarded with sales and profit. If they come up with something folks don't want then the business fails. It's almost that simple.
Government regulation now is trying to go to far. The Democrats want to limit Wall Street pay and bonuses. I think this is just a bad idea. According to the article:
The problem becomes who in government gets to decide what's risky and what's not? Also the $1 billion number is more than likely an arbitrary number the picked because it sounds so big. There is no economic theory to suggest limiting risk by companies over $1 billion in assets would improve or prevent the current mess. There really is no rhyme or reason for the House's bill.
I'm not even sure why there is a Cash for Clunkers program funded by the federal government. The program is supposed to help subsidize cars purchases for those who purchase a new car with significantly higher mileage. The House has approved $2 billion more for the program. Then again with a $1 trillion deficit what's another $2 billion among friends?
Finally, this health care overhaul needs to slow down drastically. In my idealistic youth I believed everyone should have access to health care. I still do but we have to figure out a way to pay for it. Sensibly. President Barack Obama and the Congress wanted to have a bill signed into law before the summer Congressional recess. Reportedly the bill was over 1,000 pages. Can anyone honestly say they've read it, understand it and know the true cost of it? Absolutely not. It's probably a hodgepodge of ideas piled on top of one another. Every legislator more than likely put in his request for favorite ideas and programs. I truly doubt a bill so hastily put together will improve the health care system or lower costs. Something this mammoth needs a good study by experts in the field and in economics and not a bunch of Congressional aides piece mealing a bill into law.
The federal government shouldn't have bailed out financial institutions to begin with. They made bad business decisions and took on dumb risks. They got exactly what they paid for. A mess. But Uncle Sam's deep pockets lent them the money to stay afloat. High risk, bad decisions were still rewarded.
Don't get me wrong. I think there must be some government regulation of banks, business and capital. The beauty of free market capitalism though is that good decisions and business ideas are rewarded. If someone creates a service or product others are willing to pay for then they are rewarded with sales and profit. If they come up with something folks don't want then the business fails. It's almost that simple.
Government regulation now is trying to go to far. The Democrats want to limit Wall Street pay and bonuses. I think this is just a bad idea. According to the article:
The legislation's ban on risky compensation would apply to any firm with more than $1 billion in assets, including bank holding companies, broker-dealers, credit unions, investment advisers and mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The problem becomes who in government gets to decide what's risky and what's not? Also the $1 billion number is more than likely an arbitrary number the picked because it sounds so big. There is no economic theory to suggest limiting risk by companies over $1 billion in assets would improve or prevent the current mess. There really is no rhyme or reason for the House's bill.
I'm not even sure why there is a Cash for Clunkers program funded by the federal government. The program is supposed to help subsidize cars purchases for those who purchase a new car with significantly higher mileage. The House has approved $2 billion more for the program. Then again with a $1 trillion deficit what's another $2 billion among friends?
Finally, this health care overhaul needs to slow down drastically. In my idealistic youth I believed everyone should have access to health care. I still do but we have to figure out a way to pay for it. Sensibly. President Barack Obama and the Congress wanted to have a bill signed into law before the summer Congressional recess. Reportedly the bill was over 1,000 pages. Can anyone honestly say they've read it, understand it and know the true cost of it? Absolutely not. It's probably a hodgepodge of ideas piled on top of one another. Every legislator more than likely put in his request for favorite ideas and programs. I truly doubt a bill so hastily put together will improve the health care system or lower costs. Something this mammoth needs a good study by experts in the field and in economics and not a bunch of Congressional aides piece mealing a bill into law.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Paris Palin, Senate Super Majority, Hope for Obama
Alaskan governor and former Vice-Presidential candidate Paris Palin announced her resignation effective at the end of the month. (Note: I credit FoxSports.com's Jason Whitlock for the Paris Palin moniker). All I can say is don't let the door hit your cougar wannabe ass on the way out.
That Palin was on the presidential ticket still amazes me. She has the intelligence of a box of rocks (my apologies to the rocks).
My opinion of her was pretty much shaped by the Tina Fey faux interviews. I saw the Fey bit before the actual Katie Couric interviews. The first thing that stuck out was how much Fey resembled Palin. I laughed, of course, and thought man that was a bit overboard. Then I saw the real interviews. Wow. Fey was dead on. She didn't go overboard at all. She mimicked Palin to the bone.
My opinion went from being amused to appalled. I started thinking do I really think Palin should be the literal one heart beat away from the presidency. It's not being morbid. It's being realistic. Her ticket mate isn't exactly a spring chicken. This is the first election that a VP candidate influenced my vote. For the record, I voted for Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party.
Palin didn't announce the reasons she resigned. Some speculate it's her political swan song. Others think it's a precursor to a presidential run in 2012.
My assumption, based on the wind direction, is that Paris Palin is gearing up for a behind the scenes presidential run. She's going to spend time working the power brokers and money people. She doesn't have to work the GOP right wing to hard. They are firmly in her back pocket. It's the moderates and independents she must win over. My guess is she'll keep herself in the public eye. It's easy to criticize when you don't have any say in the game. She'll be able to run her mouth at the Democrats and President Barack Obama. What she won't do is leave a voting record behind for others to scrutinize.
As the 2012 election cycle gears up, my guess is she re-evaluate her chances based on polls, the party power brokers and the money bags. Unless she has a strong hand, she won't run. Failing at that, she'll fade to the Alaskan wilderness and return to putting lipstick on bull dogs or pitbulls or whatever it is they do back there.
Super Majority
Al Franken will finally take his seat in the Senate. His arrival gives the Democrats the 60 votes they need to shut down any Republican filibuster. What scares me is the potential for damage the Donkey party has to inflict before 2010. My hope is the moderates and conservative state Democrats can keep things in line.
Nothing scares me more than when one party has so much control. The GOP seems to be reeling with scandal and disunity. The Democrats seem drunk with the new found power. Remember it wasn't to long ago during the Bill Clinton administration and Newt Gingrich's revolution that the Democrats were being written off. Fortunes can change quickly for the parties. If the economy is still in the doldrums, health care reform tanks and terrorism or one of the wars goes bad, I can see the public turning the Dems out. If the nation is suffering still then historically the ruling
party is on the outs.
Hopes for Obama
Only time will tell. I'm no Obama supporter but I hope he does well enough. I hope he brings the war in Afghanistan close to an end. I hope he finds Osama Bin Laden. I hope there is some way to flip the tables on North Korea and Iran. I definitely hope he turns the economy around.
There are things I hope he doesn't do either. I hope he doesn't run wild with tax hikes. Tax hikes are the bane of a free market. The more capital at work the better the economy. Free markets definitely spend money more efficient than the government. Taxes are a necessary evil but they should be kept to a minimum.
I hope the Dems can find a reasonable way to reform health care. If not they should leave it alone until someone smarter can do it. I think it's better to leave a bad system, and I don't believe it's bad, in place than let the government come in and make it worse.
Update Frequency
I usually have plenty of topics to weigh in on. The problem is finding the time to write. I used to do a lot of my writing at work. I don't have as much time anymore due to a transfer. I hope to update at least once a week on one of the websites blogs. Right now is just a slow time in sports. Football season is my big time for writing the sports blog and the Houston Texans Bull Site. I really haven't made any financial moves so I haven't updated the Monkee Portfolio. I found a few things I want to put up on the main web page.
That's all for now,
Unkle Monkee
That Palin was on the presidential ticket still amazes me. She has the intelligence of a box of rocks (my apologies to the rocks).
My opinion of her was pretty much shaped by the Tina Fey faux interviews. I saw the Fey bit before the actual Katie Couric interviews. The first thing that stuck out was how much Fey resembled Palin. I laughed, of course, and thought man that was a bit overboard. Then I saw the real interviews. Wow. Fey was dead on. She didn't go overboard at all. She mimicked Palin to the bone.
My opinion went from being amused to appalled. I started thinking do I really think Palin should be the literal one heart beat away from the presidency. It's not being morbid. It's being realistic. Her ticket mate isn't exactly a spring chicken. This is the first election that a VP candidate influenced my vote. For the record, I voted for Bob Barr of the Libertarian Party.
Palin didn't announce the reasons she resigned. Some speculate it's her political swan song. Others think it's a precursor to a presidential run in 2012.
My assumption, based on the wind direction, is that Paris Palin is gearing up for a behind the scenes presidential run. She's going to spend time working the power brokers and money people. She doesn't have to work the GOP right wing to hard. They are firmly in her back pocket. It's the moderates and independents she must win over. My guess is she'll keep herself in the public eye. It's easy to criticize when you don't have any say in the game. She'll be able to run her mouth at the Democrats and President Barack Obama. What she won't do is leave a voting record behind for others to scrutinize.
As the 2012 election cycle gears up, my guess is she re-evaluate her chances based on polls, the party power brokers and the money bags. Unless she has a strong hand, she won't run. Failing at that, she'll fade to the Alaskan wilderness and return to putting lipstick on bull dogs or pitbulls or whatever it is they do back there.
Super Majority
Al Franken will finally take his seat in the Senate. His arrival gives the Democrats the 60 votes they need to shut down any Republican filibuster. What scares me is the potential for damage the Donkey party has to inflict before 2010. My hope is the moderates and conservative state Democrats can keep things in line.
Nothing scares me more than when one party has so much control. The GOP seems to be reeling with scandal and disunity. The Democrats seem drunk with the new found power. Remember it wasn't to long ago during the Bill Clinton administration and Newt Gingrich's revolution that the Democrats were being written off. Fortunes can change quickly for the parties. If the economy is still in the doldrums, health care reform tanks and terrorism or one of the wars goes bad, I can see the public turning the Dems out. If the nation is suffering still then historically the ruling
party is on the outs.
Hopes for Obama
Only time will tell. I'm no Obama supporter but I hope he does well enough. I hope he brings the war in Afghanistan close to an end. I hope he finds Osama Bin Laden. I hope there is some way to flip the tables on North Korea and Iran. I definitely hope he turns the economy around.
There are things I hope he doesn't do either. I hope he doesn't run wild with tax hikes. Tax hikes are the bane of a free market. The more capital at work the better the economy. Free markets definitely spend money more efficient than the government. Taxes are a necessary evil but they should be kept to a minimum.
I hope the Dems can find a reasonable way to reform health care. If not they should leave it alone until someone smarter can do it. I think it's better to leave a bad system, and I don't believe it's bad, in place than let the government come in and make it worse.
Update Frequency
I usually have plenty of topics to weigh in on. The problem is finding the time to write. I used to do a lot of my writing at work. I don't have as much time anymore due to a transfer. I hope to update at least once a week on one of the websites blogs. Right now is just a slow time in sports. Football season is my big time for writing the sports blog and the Houston Texans Bull Site. I really haven't made any financial moves so I haven't updated the Monkee Portfolio. I found a few things I want to put up on the main web page.
That's all for now,
Unkle Monkee
Monday, June 8, 2009
What Do You Mean I Can't Like Up in Here?
I've really had a lot to say lately but I just haven't written it.
I'll start with a book I read last week called Nanny State: How Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists, and other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children by David Harsanyi. The subject had been something I'd been discussing with some coworkers. What Harsanyi writes is not much of an eye opener as to what is going on. What is eye opening is the lengths people are going to in order to try and achieve the hive mentality.
The smoking bans, pet protectors, moral puritans and tree huggers all have their little niche they want to protect. The only means they believe in using is the government at all levels. City ordinances, state and federal laws as well as suing to achieve the goals are all weapons in the arsenal. These people don't believe humans have the ability to use reason and morals. Instead they try to regulate it.
The teetotalers believe the end justify the means. They've used flawed logic, questionable tactics to down right lies and junk science to bolster their claims.
Up In Smoke
Take the smoking issue. Yes smoking is annoying and I prefer not to be around people smoking. The fact remains that if a business owner wants to let customers smoke that is his choice. If I wish to eat there in spite of the smoking, I have made a choice. If I choose not to eat there because of the smoke, I have made a choice. The bottom line is the business owner made a choice and I made a choice. We have choices. If people don't want to be around the smokers they can take their business else where. If enough people choose non-smoking environments then the smoking establishments will eventually go out of business. It's called free market capitalism and human free will.
The smoking banners instead rail against any kind of smoking. They make claims it's a drag on the health care system, second hand smoke is cancer causing and they are only protecting us from our harmful habits. I'm not going to even address the health care issue. Our system is being dragged down by more than just smokers. Second hand smoke doesn't cause cancer or illness. The smoking banners have resorted to junk science and screaming headlines to dupe the public and politicians into believing the health risks of second hand smoke. Finally, since we can't be left to our own devices, they must take away our ability to make choices and ban us from making the choice to smoke.
Blow Me
Then there is the ultimate in Nanny State ideas. New Mexico state Ken Martinez introduced a bill requiring all vehicles to be equipped with alcohol interlock devices. All cars. Not just cars of offenders or repeat offenders. He wanted everyone who drove a car bought in New Mexico to have to blow into an alcohol detection device in order to start the car.
It may sound like a good idea but it isn't. On the very basic level, it presumes everyone is guilty and must prove his innocents every time he starts his car. It is also a gross intrusion and burden on those who don't drink and those who do drink but don't drive. Martinez likens it to seat belt laws and insurance requirements. Of course I believe seat belt law are invasive too. Insurance laws I agree with. At least they are protecting people from my stupidity.
The book illustrates point after point of the absurdity of the laws and regulations. It also makes the case of how these ideas chip away at our basic freedoms and civil liberties.
The author does point out that he isn't for anarchy. Government regulations and laws are necessary to protect property, rights and secure the country from threats. Obviously crimes like murder, drunk driving, cruelty to animals and such should be illegal. Some crimes, like prostitution and drugs, have come over time such an affront to humanity over the centuries that he has no problem keeping those illegal.
I think it's a great read. You will find that you don't agree with everything in the book but it's good to see how are civil liberties are slowly being chipped away by those who think the general public is to stupid to make choices.
I'll start with a book I read last week called Nanny State: How Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists, and other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children by David Harsanyi. The subject had been something I'd been discussing with some coworkers. What Harsanyi writes is not much of an eye opener as to what is going on. What is eye opening is the lengths people are going to in order to try and achieve the hive mentality.
The smoking bans, pet protectors, moral puritans and tree huggers all have their little niche they want to protect. The only means they believe in using is the government at all levels. City ordinances, state and federal laws as well as suing to achieve the goals are all weapons in the arsenal. These people don't believe humans have the ability to use reason and morals. Instead they try to regulate it.
The teetotalers believe the end justify the means. They've used flawed logic, questionable tactics to down right lies and junk science to bolster their claims.
Up In Smoke
Take the smoking issue. Yes smoking is annoying and I prefer not to be around people smoking. The fact remains that if a business owner wants to let customers smoke that is his choice. If I wish to eat there in spite of the smoking, I have made a choice. If I choose not to eat there because of the smoke, I have made a choice. The bottom line is the business owner made a choice and I made a choice. We have choices. If people don't want to be around the smokers they can take their business else where. If enough people choose non-smoking environments then the smoking establishments will eventually go out of business. It's called free market capitalism and human free will.
The smoking banners instead rail against any kind of smoking. They make claims it's a drag on the health care system, second hand smoke is cancer causing and they are only protecting us from our harmful habits. I'm not going to even address the health care issue. Our system is being dragged down by more than just smokers. Second hand smoke doesn't cause cancer or illness. The smoking banners have resorted to junk science and screaming headlines to dupe the public and politicians into believing the health risks of second hand smoke. Finally, since we can't be left to our own devices, they must take away our ability to make choices and ban us from making the choice to smoke.
Blow Me
Then there is the ultimate in Nanny State ideas. New Mexico state Ken Martinez introduced a bill requiring all vehicles to be equipped with alcohol interlock devices. All cars. Not just cars of offenders or repeat offenders. He wanted everyone who drove a car bought in New Mexico to have to blow into an alcohol detection device in order to start the car.
It may sound like a good idea but it isn't. On the very basic level, it presumes everyone is guilty and must prove his innocents every time he starts his car. It is also a gross intrusion and burden on those who don't drink and those who do drink but don't drive. Martinez likens it to seat belt laws and insurance requirements. Of course I believe seat belt law are invasive too. Insurance laws I agree with. At least they are protecting people from my stupidity.
The book illustrates point after point of the absurdity of the laws and regulations. It also makes the case of how these ideas chip away at our basic freedoms and civil liberties.
The author does point out that he isn't for anarchy. Government regulations and laws are necessary to protect property, rights and secure the country from threats. Obviously crimes like murder, drunk driving, cruelty to animals and such should be illegal. Some crimes, like prostitution and drugs, have come over time such an affront to humanity over the centuries that he has no problem keeping those illegal.
I think it's a great read. You will find that you don't agree with everything in the book but it's good to see how are civil liberties are slowly being chipped away by those who think the general public is to stupid to make choices.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Hurricane Preperations
After Hurricane Rita hit, I vowed I wouldn't leave Houston unless a Cat 4 or 5 is barreling up the Houston Ship Channel. Even then I'm not so sure I'd leave.
Rita evacuations were a disaster. Houston issued a general evacuation with no real plan in place. I got lucky. I was released from work a day earlier than most people. It still took me six hours to drive to San Antonio. That's because I know the back ways. Had I waited another day the drive was closer to twenty hours. It was so bad people were running out of gas on the road. Others were still on the highways with the hurricane only a few hours to land fall. It was an absolute mess.
When Ike came rolling through I stayed put. Some what. I rented a five star hotel in the Galleria area and rode the storm out there. This time I'll ride it out at my luxurious Midtown Houston apartment. This building is sturdy. I can't even drive nails into the wall to hang stuff.
Instead I'm stocking up on hurricane supplies. I'm building an inventory of water. I have a couple of cases of bottled water. I need to buy at least a few gallons of bottle stuff. I have plenty of canned goods.
I'm also adding MREs to the inventory. I have four left over from Ike and just ordered another case from Ebay. I might buy one more case before the summer hits. In the event of a power outage I have plenty of propane to cook any perishables first. I will eat those first and if ice is available from the PODs after the storm, I can use that to try and make it last a little longer. If nothing else I can use the propane to boil water if my supplies run out. At the very worst, I'll be eating cans of corn and green beans heated on my gas stove.
As for gasoline, I need to figure something out. I have a ten gallon can. Maybe get one more and have them in stand by. Rotate them frequently and keep fresh gas in them. I need to look up how long gas can last in a can. Hate to put some bad stuff in my car or truck.
I hope others are starting to take the storms more serious to. I was fortunate the last one. This year I'll be prepared. Only thing I ask God is to keep the building off my head.
Rita evacuations were a disaster. Houston issued a general evacuation with no real plan in place. I got lucky. I was released from work a day earlier than most people. It still took me six hours to drive to San Antonio. That's because I know the back ways. Had I waited another day the drive was closer to twenty hours. It was so bad people were running out of gas on the road. Others were still on the highways with the hurricane only a few hours to land fall. It was an absolute mess.
When Ike came rolling through I stayed put. Some what. I rented a five star hotel in the Galleria area and rode the storm out there. This time I'll ride it out at my luxurious Midtown Houston apartment. This building is sturdy. I can't even drive nails into the wall to hang stuff.
Instead I'm stocking up on hurricane supplies. I'm building an inventory of water. I have a couple of cases of bottled water. I need to buy at least a few gallons of bottle stuff. I have plenty of canned goods.
I'm also adding MREs to the inventory. I have four left over from Ike and just ordered another case from Ebay. I might buy one more case before the summer hits. In the event of a power outage I have plenty of propane to cook any perishables first. I will eat those first and if ice is available from the PODs after the storm, I can use that to try and make it last a little longer. If nothing else I can use the propane to boil water if my supplies run out. At the very worst, I'll be eating cans of corn and green beans heated on my gas stove.
As for gasoline, I need to figure something out. I have a ten gallon can. Maybe get one more and have them in stand by. Rotate them frequently and keep fresh gas in them. I need to look up how long gas can last in a can. Hate to put some bad stuff in my car or truck.
I hope others are starting to take the storms more serious to. I was fortunate the last one. This year I'll be prepared. Only thing I ask God is to keep the building off my head.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
A Deal with the Devils, A Rebellion Defeated
A Deal with the Devils
Pakistan is paying a heavy price for the deals they've made with militant extremists and the Taliban. In exchange for "peace" and holding off further advances, Pakistan allowed militants to impose Sharia law. The deal has failed miserably.
The militants are showing the world exactly why the only way they can be dealt with is through force. The extremists are terrorists who don't keep their word. They are vile, disgusting lowlifes who pervert Islam to justify their brutal means. They respect no rule of law and wish to impose their sick ways on all.
The weak civilian government of Pakistan sought to keep the wolves at bay. Now the wolves are at the gate; they are in the Swat Valley and trying to advance further than the deal called for. Now the military is trying to root them out and civilians are caught in the cross fire. Hundreds of thousands of people are refugees in their own country.
The vile dogs want to put those who oppose them to the sword in the name of Allah. The only way to deal with them is to purge them from this world by doing us and them a favor. Send them to Allah and let them discover if Paradise awaits.
A Rebellion Defeated
The Sri Lanka government finally defeated the Tamil Tigers rebellion.
For years the LTTE fought for a homeland for the ethnic Tamil minority of Sri Lanka. They carved up a chunk of territory and ruled as a de facto government. They had their own legal system, banking system, civilian police force and courts in addition to their military and political wings.
In the last several months, the Sri Lankan military routed the LTTE armed forces and dislodged them from their territory. They completed a military victory by annihilating the the LTTE rebels and killing the leadership of the movement.
Sadly there is nothing noble on either side of the finished war. While the Tamils claimed to be discriminated and marginalized by the ruling ethnic Sinhalise government. LTTE used conventional war and terrorism tactics in their attempt to achieve independence. They attacked civilian as well as military targets. Assassinations of political leaders were also used.
The government forces were accused many times of abusing Tamil civilians. Human rights violations of were also a common charge. The government seemed to pull out all the stops to put an end of the rebellion.
In the end the Sri Lankan government was victorious. It puts an end to the fighting but the cost was heavy. 80,000 people are listed as dead due to the conflict. Who really knows the true number. Many more probably will remain uncounted.
The best outcome, besides the fighting ending, would be those that died didn't do so in vain. Hopefully those who lived and survived can sit down and figure out a way to ensure the peace and that the minority Tamils are no longer marginalized.
Pakistan is paying a heavy price for the deals they've made with militant extremists and the Taliban. In exchange for "peace" and holding off further advances, Pakistan allowed militants to impose Sharia law. The deal has failed miserably.
The militants are showing the world exactly why the only way they can be dealt with is through force. The extremists are terrorists who don't keep their word. They are vile, disgusting lowlifes who pervert Islam to justify their brutal means. They respect no rule of law and wish to impose their sick ways on all.
The weak civilian government of Pakistan sought to keep the wolves at bay. Now the wolves are at the gate; they are in the Swat Valley and trying to advance further than the deal called for. Now the military is trying to root them out and civilians are caught in the cross fire. Hundreds of thousands of people are refugees in their own country.
The vile dogs want to put those who oppose them to the sword in the name of Allah. The only way to deal with them is to purge them from this world by doing us and them a favor. Send them to Allah and let them discover if Paradise awaits.
A Rebellion Defeated
The Sri Lanka government finally defeated the Tamil Tigers rebellion.
For years the LTTE fought for a homeland for the ethnic Tamil minority of Sri Lanka. They carved up a chunk of territory and ruled as a de facto government. They had their own legal system, banking system, civilian police force and courts in addition to their military and political wings.
In the last several months, the Sri Lankan military routed the LTTE armed forces and dislodged them from their territory. They completed a military victory by annihilating the the LTTE rebels and killing the leadership of the movement.
Sadly there is nothing noble on either side of the finished war. While the Tamils claimed to be discriminated and marginalized by the ruling ethnic Sinhalise government. LTTE used conventional war and terrorism tactics in their attempt to achieve independence. They attacked civilian as well as military targets. Assassinations of political leaders were also used.
The government forces were accused many times of abusing Tamil civilians. Human rights violations of were also a common charge. The government seemed to pull out all the stops to put an end of the rebellion.
In the end the Sri Lankan government was victorious. It puts an end to the fighting but the cost was heavy. 80,000 people are listed as dead due to the conflict. Who really knows the true number. Many more probably will remain uncounted.
The best outcome, besides the fighting ending, would be those that died didn't do so in vain. Hopefully those who lived and survived can sit down and figure out a way to ensure the peace and that the minority Tamils are no longer marginalized.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Capt. Richard Phillips' Rescue & Sharpshooter
We all know that the Somali pirates are out of control. Several navies are patrolling the area off the Horn of Africa. They haven’t deterred the attacks. Instead the pirates adapted tactics. They are using bigger ships to carry skiffs out to sea and then using the skiffs to attack the ships. The tactic allows them to make raids further out to sea and away from the heavy patrol areas.
When the pirates tried to seize the ship the Maersk Alabama, the captain of the ship, Richard Phillips, surrendered himself in order to secure the safety of his crew. The crew also fought back and captured one of the pirates. In exchange for the captured pirate and safety of the crew, Phillips gave himself to the pirates.
What followed was a high seas standoff. The pirates were surrounded and monitored by the U.S. Navy.
The onsite commander ordered nave sharpshooters to take out three of the pirates on the skiff when one raised an AK-47 to Phillips’ back. The fourth pirate was onboard a ship negotiating. Just like that, three dead pirates. The fourth was arrested and Phillips was rescued. Incredible!
President Barack Obama left standing orders that the navy should use force if Phillips’ life was in danger. When that AK-47 was pointed at Phillips the commander issued the order to shoot.
I fully applaud the actions of all involved, from the President to the commander to the sharpshooters and to Phillips.
Phillips exchanged himself and potentially his life when he agreed to become the pirate’s hostage. He put himself before others. On ships and navies, the captain is responsible for the ship. And that means responsible for everything. Someone else’s mistake can cost a captain his career. Phillips took that responsibility to the highest level. He was willing to put himself in danger so that the ones under his command could leave safely.
One thing I think most people fail to appreciate is what an incredible shot the sharpshooters made. Making a kill shot is no easy feat on land. A shooter must take a ton of factors before the shot. In addition to factoring in the usual shot checklist, the navy sharpshooters have to account for one more item. They must account for the roll of the sea. Their ship is rolling with the waves and so was the lifeboat the pirates were on. That is a lot of side to side and up and down motion to consider. To make one shot like that is incredible. That three sharpshooters were able to do it and not hurt Phillips is beyond my comprehension. On top of it, they had to all do shoot near simultaneously to prevent a pirate from hurting Phillips. It was an incredible feat. My hat off to them.
When the pirates tried to seize the ship the Maersk Alabama, the captain of the ship, Richard Phillips, surrendered himself in order to secure the safety of his crew. The crew also fought back and captured one of the pirates. In exchange for the captured pirate and safety of the crew, Phillips gave himself to the pirates.
What followed was a high seas standoff. The pirates were surrounded and monitored by the U.S. Navy.
The onsite commander ordered nave sharpshooters to take out three of the pirates on the skiff when one raised an AK-47 to Phillips’ back. The fourth pirate was onboard a ship negotiating. Just like that, three dead pirates. The fourth was arrested and Phillips was rescued. Incredible!
President Barack Obama left standing orders that the navy should use force if Phillips’ life was in danger. When that AK-47 was pointed at Phillips the commander issued the order to shoot.
I fully applaud the actions of all involved, from the President to the commander to the sharpshooters and to Phillips.
Phillips exchanged himself and potentially his life when he agreed to become the pirate’s hostage. He put himself before others. On ships and navies, the captain is responsible for the ship. And that means responsible for everything. Someone else’s mistake can cost a captain his career. Phillips took that responsibility to the highest level. He was willing to put himself in danger so that the ones under his command could leave safely.
One thing I think most people fail to appreciate is what an incredible shot the sharpshooters made. Making a kill shot is no easy feat on land. A shooter must take a ton of factors before the shot. In addition to factoring in the usual shot checklist, the navy sharpshooters have to account for one more item. They must account for the roll of the sea. Their ship is rolling with the waves and so was the lifeboat the pirates were on. That is a lot of side to side and up and down motion to consider. To make one shot like that is incredible. That three sharpshooters were able to do it and not hurt Phillips is beyond my comprehension. On top of it, they had to all do shoot near simultaneously to prevent a pirate from hurting Phillips. It was an incredible feat. My hat off to them.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
The Big Muddle
Note: Once again I'm late in posting something I wrote. Between packing, working, moving, working, unpacking and assembling furniture, I've had very little time to write or update my website lately.
The following article from the Motley Fool pretty much sums up how I feel about the federal government dipping its nose into my business: Bring Back Our Free Markets.
As I’ve gotten older (and coincidentally earned more), I’ve become more fiscally conservative. My social views are completely independent of my fiscal views. The thing the two have in common is that less government is a good thing. Government’s job is to ensure defense of the people, ensure rights are protected and to provide infrastructure. These come in the form of the military, the courts and public roads and utilities. After that the free markets forces rule.
That’s not to say I’m completely against government regulation. Some regulation is required but within reasonable limits. One area that was somewhat deregulated with disastrous results was allowing banks to leverage themselves and get in over their heads. I think regulation is such areas keep a check on the human nature of greed. Just because I believe in free markets doesn’t mean I believe that people who run business should run wonton over their customers and clients.
In the current bailout plan, the government is delaying the inevitable. GM and Citigroup should be allowed to fail and reorganize under bankruptcy laws. It will be one giant suppository for the economy but it will eventually lead to a better system. There is no sense in propping up failing businesses. GM has been a black hole for years and throwing money down that black hole will not help. Time to let the patient die.
How will this all shake out is still a big question. Despite all the gloom and doom the American economy will emerge from this mess.
No one knows the answer to the $64,000 question: When will the economy bottom out and start rising? The answers, according to self appointed experts and the lot, run all over the place. The predictions run from the end of the year to decades. My guess? Some where in between. In other words, I don’t know and neither does anyone else. We just keep on, to use John Mauldin’s term, muddling through.
Speaking of Mauldin, the article Reality Bites by Michael Lewitt comes via Mauldin’s “Outside the Box” newsletter. It paints a bleak picture. In my opinion, it probably is the most realistic scenario playing out. Then again, what do I know?
All I know is I will continue to invest my money in what I believe are companies that are wrongly undervalued and that will rebound in the long term. My time horizon for my personal portfolio is nil. I’m not counting on it for my retirement. It’s something I do with a little bit of my income. I hope to earn money on my investments but I won’t be devastated if I lose it.
That’s it for now. I’d like to update my blog more often but I’m balls to the wall at work and trying to move. It’s a bitch. I can start moving on March 21st but I don’t have to be out of my current place until the end of the month. I’ve started packing now so the end of the month won’t sneak up on me. Now if I can just get away from work long enough.
The following article from the Motley Fool pretty much sums up how I feel about the federal government dipping its nose into my business: Bring Back Our Free Markets.
As I’ve gotten older (and coincidentally earned more), I’ve become more fiscally conservative. My social views are completely independent of my fiscal views. The thing the two have in common is that less government is a good thing. Government’s job is to ensure defense of the people, ensure rights are protected and to provide infrastructure. These come in the form of the military, the courts and public roads and utilities. After that the free markets forces rule.
That’s not to say I’m completely against government regulation. Some regulation is required but within reasonable limits. One area that was somewhat deregulated with disastrous results was allowing banks to leverage themselves and get in over their heads. I think regulation is such areas keep a check on the human nature of greed. Just because I believe in free markets doesn’t mean I believe that people who run business should run wonton over their customers and clients.
In the current bailout plan, the government is delaying the inevitable. GM and Citigroup should be allowed to fail and reorganize under bankruptcy laws. It will be one giant suppository for the economy but it will eventually lead to a better system. There is no sense in propping up failing businesses. GM has been a black hole for years and throwing money down that black hole will not help. Time to let the patient die.
How will this all shake out is still a big question. Despite all the gloom and doom the American economy will emerge from this mess.
No one knows the answer to the $64,000 question: When will the economy bottom out and start rising? The answers, according to self appointed experts and the lot, run all over the place. The predictions run from the end of the year to decades. My guess? Some where in between. In other words, I don’t know and neither does anyone else. We just keep on, to use John Mauldin’s term, muddling through.
Speaking of Mauldin, the article Reality Bites by Michael Lewitt comes via Mauldin’s “Outside the Box” newsletter. It paints a bleak picture. In my opinion, it probably is the most realistic scenario playing out. Then again, what do I know?
All I know is I will continue to invest my money in what I believe are companies that are wrongly undervalued and that will rebound in the long term. My time horizon for my personal portfolio is nil. I’m not counting on it for my retirement. It’s something I do with a little bit of my income. I hope to earn money on my investments but I won’t be devastated if I lose it.
That’s it for now. I’d like to update my blog more often but I’m balls to the wall at work and trying to move. It’s a bitch. I can start moving on March 21st but I don’t have to be out of my current place until the end of the month. I’ve started packing now so the end of the month won’t sneak up on me. Now if I can just get away from work long enough.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Baby Grace Trial, Curious Case of a Former Porn Star
Baby Grace Trial
Rarely does a story rock me to my foundations. One such case was the rapes and murders of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Peña.
The other story that has shocked me just as hard has been the Baby Grace trials in session in Galveston, TX.
During the trial, detailed descriptions emerged of the beating and abuse the little girl went through on her final day on earth.
I'll never comprehend how someone can abuse a defenseless child. Even worse is that his little girl's own mother subjected her to this abuse. The mother, Kimberly Dawn Trenor, stayed home from work on the request of her husband, Royce Clyde Zeigler, in order to discipline Riley Ann Sawyers aka Baby Grace.
What happened wasn't just abuse. They systematically inflicted pain on the little girl. The beatings started with a thin belt and progressed to a thicker belt in order to inflict more pain. Her head was held under water at one point every time she screamed. They threw her three times on the floor and one resulted in a loud crack. Riley even resorted to telling her mother "I love you" in hopes that the beatings would stop.
When they passed the point of no return they gave her a Tylenol. When she couldn't swallow it they knew they were in trouble. I have to just wonder what was going through their minds. They beat her to near death and think a Tylenol would help.
The details I read in the article were mind numbing and horrible. Like one of my coworkers said, it was probably one of the hardest things he ever read. Another one said she almost started crying. That's cause we were just reading the accounts. In court I'm sure more detail was giving. The jurors were reportedly in tears during testimony. I'm not sure I could sit through listening to something like that.
I think all crimes against children are the worst thing possible. The criminals are the lowest of the low. I like to think that most people have hope of some kind of redemption. Not in this case though. Like the Eartman and Peña murders, I think Riley's mother and stepfather are beyond redemption. Even if they weren't, the crimes are so horrendous that they shouldn't be given a second chance.
Curious Case of an Ex-Porn Star
I debated revealing her identity. She's out there and makes no bones about being a former porn star. I've even exchanged a few emails (which will remain private) with her. In the end though I decided not to reveal her name. She has a website and posts things about her life, her past and where she hopes to head. I found her site accidentally and figured if someone else does that's fine but I'm not going to direct traffic toward her just because she's out there and talking about it.
Miss Ex-Porn star states that she was in the porn industry not for money or fame. She was looking for love. She came from a broken home and didn't know what love was. The only way she could relate to love was through sex and the only sex she knew about was porn.
She then had a revelation if you will. She found God and realized that she didn't have to sell herself for love. She left the porn business and moved on with her life. For that I applaud her. If she wasn't happy and felt used and abused by doing sex films, then she needed to get out. If God and religion helped her get then she did what was right for her. In finding faith, she found a source of strength greater than herself and used it to her advantage.
Now if you read my blast of Kurt Warner and his religion, you are probably wondering why I'm praising Miss Ex-Porn star for her religion?
Big difference between the two. Warner is an athlete on top of the world. He's a multimillionaire with a husband (I swear Brenda Warner is really a man) and seven kids. He's happy. I really don't mind his religion and thanking God for his success but wearing it on his sleeve and praising God at every turn just comes off as smug and arrogant. Plus he uses the wrong forums for it. Miss Ex-Porn star uses it as a source of strength. She used that new found strength to get out of job and business that had started to disgust her. She was not happy. She couldn't get out on her own. She found a way. On her website, which IS an appropriate forum to discuss religion, she tells all and she gives credit to God for digging her out of her situation. Warner just flaunts it on network TV.
So why the Curious Case of an Ex-Porn Star? Simple. She really doesn't hide anything about herself on her website.
She says she's found the love of her life. I also applaud him. How many men would go for a woman with her past and love her for what she is now and not what she was? Not many. The curious part is she's lost her job, found a new one and then never got paid for it. She barely got through December with food and rent. She's struggling to meet rent in January. Yet Mr. Boyfriend is off during the holidays with his family while she struggles alone.
While I did applaud him for claiming to love her, I do wonder how true that is. If my woman were struggling and I claimed to lover, she wouldn't be struggling to make rent or buy food. I know they both profess to be Christians and most churches don't like the idea of the unmarried living together. That said, if it's a matter of survival, you live together. If he genuinely loved her, he'd marry her to meet the requirement of the church. Then they could live together and survive.
Ultimately it's their business how they handle things. However, if they put it out there for everyone to see then they are open to the second guessing and questions.
Rarely does a story rock me to my foundations. One such case was the rapes and murders of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Peña.
The other story that has shocked me just as hard has been the Baby Grace trials in session in Galveston, TX.
During the trial, detailed descriptions emerged of the beating and abuse the little girl went through on her final day on earth.
I'll never comprehend how someone can abuse a defenseless child. Even worse is that his little girl's own mother subjected her to this abuse. The mother, Kimberly Dawn Trenor, stayed home from work on the request of her husband, Royce Clyde Zeigler, in order to discipline Riley Ann Sawyers aka Baby Grace.
What happened wasn't just abuse. They systematically inflicted pain on the little girl. The beatings started with a thin belt and progressed to a thicker belt in order to inflict more pain. Her head was held under water at one point every time she screamed. They threw her three times on the floor and one resulted in a loud crack. Riley even resorted to telling her mother "I love you" in hopes that the beatings would stop.
When they passed the point of no return they gave her a Tylenol. When she couldn't swallow it they knew they were in trouble. I have to just wonder what was going through their minds. They beat her to near death and think a Tylenol would help.
The details I read in the article were mind numbing and horrible. Like one of my coworkers said, it was probably one of the hardest things he ever read. Another one said she almost started crying. That's cause we were just reading the accounts. In court I'm sure more detail was giving. The jurors were reportedly in tears during testimony. I'm not sure I could sit through listening to something like that.
I think all crimes against children are the worst thing possible. The criminals are the lowest of the low. I like to think that most people have hope of some kind of redemption. Not in this case though. Like the Eartman and Peña murders, I think Riley's mother and stepfather are beyond redemption. Even if they weren't, the crimes are so horrendous that they shouldn't be given a second chance.
Curious Case of an Ex-Porn Star
I debated revealing her identity. She's out there and makes no bones about being a former porn star. I've even exchanged a few emails (which will remain private) with her. In the end though I decided not to reveal her name. She has a website and posts things about her life, her past and where she hopes to head. I found her site accidentally and figured if someone else does that's fine but I'm not going to direct traffic toward her just because she's out there and talking about it.
Miss Ex-Porn star states that she was in the porn industry not for money or fame. She was looking for love. She came from a broken home and didn't know what love was. The only way she could relate to love was through sex and the only sex she knew about was porn.
She then had a revelation if you will. She found God and realized that she didn't have to sell herself for love. She left the porn business and moved on with her life. For that I applaud her. If she wasn't happy and felt used and abused by doing sex films, then she needed to get out. If God and religion helped her get then she did what was right for her. In finding faith, she found a source of strength greater than herself and used it to her advantage.
Now if you read my blast of Kurt Warner and his religion, you are probably wondering why I'm praising Miss Ex-Porn star for her religion?
Big difference between the two. Warner is an athlete on top of the world. He's a multimillionaire with a husband (I swear Brenda Warner is really a man) and seven kids. He's happy. I really don't mind his religion and thanking God for his success but wearing it on his sleeve and praising God at every turn just comes off as smug and arrogant. Plus he uses the wrong forums for it. Miss Ex-Porn star uses it as a source of strength. She used that new found strength to get out of job and business that had started to disgust her. She was not happy. She couldn't get out on her own. She found a way. On her website, which IS an appropriate forum to discuss religion, she tells all and she gives credit to God for digging her out of her situation. Warner just flaunts it on network TV.
So why the Curious Case of an Ex-Porn Star? Simple. She really doesn't hide anything about herself on her website.
She says she's found the love of her life. I also applaud him. How many men would go for a woman with her past and love her for what she is now and not what she was? Not many. The curious part is she's lost her job, found a new one and then never got paid for it. She barely got through December with food and rent. She's struggling to meet rent in January. Yet Mr. Boyfriend is off during the holidays with his family while she struggles alone.
While I did applaud him for claiming to love her, I do wonder how true that is. If my woman were struggling and I claimed to lover, she wouldn't be struggling to make rent or buy food. I know they both profess to be Christians and most churches don't like the idea of the unmarried living together. That said, if it's a matter of survival, you live together. If he genuinely loved her, he'd marry her to meet the requirement of the church. Then they could live together and survive.
Ultimately it's their business how they handle things. However, if they put it out there for everyone to see then they are open to the second guessing and questions.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Israeli Invasion of Gaza
Military action is something that never should be taken lightly. It is the last resort when all other means of achieving a political objective have failed. Most wars aren't necessary. Somebody once said war isn't necessary or justifiable. I think it is when defending one's own country against hostile actions.
Hamas militants continue to fire rockets targeting Israeli civilian targets. The rockets are able to reach deeper into Israel than ever before. The missiles are landing 25 miles from Tel Aviv. Sooner or later Tel Aviv maybe hit.
Israel has every right to defend itself and citizens from such attacks.
Civilians shouldn't live in fear of random attacks. Israel is right to take military action in defending itself and try to incapacitate the rocket launchers.
However Gaza is already a poor faltering state. Hamas controls the territory and has stated that the destruction of Israel is a political objective. Hamas, however, doesn't have the military or economic means to destroy Israel. Part of the rhetoric serves to united the Gazans and keep their minds off the current economic state. It serves Hamas well to have an enemy they can point to. They blame Israel for all Gaza's problems.
Not that Israel is completely innocent in the current mess. Israel's settlements helped paint them as occupiers and therefore an enemy. Israel maintains a blockade of goods that continues to cripple the Gaza and other Palestinian economies.
What is created is a vicious cycle. Israel blockades, Hamas attacks, Israel blockades and retaliates, Hamas hits back again and so on. There is no end to this cycle.
Israel is trying to put an end to it. They are sending troops into Gaza to dismantle the ability to launch rockets into Israel. How much force is necessary though? Should Israel continue to destroy Hamas infrastructure or is the ground invasion justifiable? Israel should take every means needed to incapacitate the ability to launch rockets. They should obviously avoid civilian casualties when they can. Sadly civilians will suffer in this action whether through direct action or by destruction of infrastructure. Hamas is entrenched in Gaza and they have to be rooted out. Civilians will bare the brunt of the action.
The mess on the ground built up over the years though will continue to fester. No matter what Israel achieves militarily the situation will not change. Hamas and other terrorists will continue to find ways to attack Israel. Somehow, some way a new state and strong economy must be built up in the Palestinian territories. How though is beyond my scope or abilities.
Hamas militants continue to fire rockets targeting Israeli civilian targets. The rockets are able to reach deeper into Israel than ever before. The missiles are landing 25 miles from Tel Aviv. Sooner or later Tel Aviv maybe hit.
Israel has every right to defend itself and citizens from such attacks.
Civilians shouldn't live in fear of random attacks. Israel is right to take military action in defending itself and try to incapacitate the rocket launchers.
However Gaza is already a poor faltering state. Hamas controls the territory and has stated that the destruction of Israel is a political objective. Hamas, however, doesn't have the military or economic means to destroy Israel. Part of the rhetoric serves to united the Gazans and keep their minds off the current economic state. It serves Hamas well to have an enemy they can point to. They blame Israel for all Gaza's problems.
Not that Israel is completely innocent in the current mess. Israel's settlements helped paint them as occupiers and therefore an enemy. Israel maintains a blockade of goods that continues to cripple the Gaza and other Palestinian economies.
What is created is a vicious cycle. Israel blockades, Hamas attacks, Israel blockades and retaliates, Hamas hits back again and so on. There is no end to this cycle.
Israel is trying to put an end to it. They are sending troops into Gaza to dismantle the ability to launch rockets into Israel. How much force is necessary though? Should Israel continue to destroy Hamas infrastructure or is the ground invasion justifiable? Israel should take every means needed to incapacitate the ability to launch rockets. They should obviously avoid civilian casualties when they can. Sadly civilians will suffer in this action whether through direct action or by destruction of infrastructure. Hamas is entrenched in Gaza and they have to be rooted out. Civilians will bare the brunt of the action.
The mess on the ground built up over the years though will continue to fester. No matter what Israel achieves militarily the situation will not change. Hamas and other terrorists will continue to find ways to attack Israel. Somehow, some way a new state and strong economy must be built up in the Palestinian territories. How though is beyond my scope or abilities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
