During President Obama’s first presidential physical exam last month, the navy physicians recommended among other things that the President reduce his fat intake and cholesterol by modifying his diet. The doctors also encouraged the President to completely stop smoking and moderate his alcohol consumption. (That last recommendation oddly enough, failed to make it into any U.S. media reports.) The week after his physical, while in Savannah, Georgia the President stopped for lunch at "Mrs. Wilke’s Dining Room". Before he began dining on fried chicken, bowls of beans, sweet potatoes, greens and macaroni and cheese, the President told reporters he didn't want to hear any lectures about his cholesterol. "And above all," the President said, "don't tell Michelle about this."
Mr. President, now you know how all of us feel about you and your buddies nagging us about everything we eat or drink!
I truly do not care how much the President smokes or eats. If the President decides to gorge himself on pastry or fried foods, fine. Just don’t tell me what I can or can’t eat. (I am however a tad concerned that we may have another problem drinker in the White House, it’s those darn nuclear bomb firing codes.)
Mr. President, Ralph Nader, members of Congress, esteemed Senators and other elected officials far and wide; leave my peanuts, MSG, popcorn popped in coconut oil, trans fats, soft drinks, caffeine, salt and everything else alone!
You and whole lot of folks just like you obviously have way too much free time on your hands.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently succeeded in outlawing the use of trans fats in New York City restaurants. Salt is apparently the next target. A bill recently introduced by New York State Assemblyman, Felix Ortiz, a Brooklyn Democrat states in part, ""No owner or operator of a restaurant in this state shall use salt in any form in the preparation of any food for consumption by customers of such restaurant, including food prepared to be consumed on the premises of such restaurant or off of such premises,"
The bill hasn’t been debated or passed as I’m writing this, but right now there’s a 2,700+ page monstrosity of a health care reform bill in the US House of Representatives. I haven’t read the entire bill, but I’ll bet there are some similar surprises in that bill just waiting to be discovered.
Do you remember that annoying kid in third grade, the one who’d come up with such classics as, "Mrs. Anderson, you forgot about our spelling quiz?" When did we start to elect people like that to office?
Monday, March 15, 2010
Chicago on the Potomac
At the outset of today’s column I must categorically state that Scott Matheson’s legal resume’ is very impressive. I believe that Mr. Matheson will and should be confirmed by the US Senate. However, the announcement last week regarding Mr. Matheson’s appointment to the Tenth US Circuit Court of Appeals was totally bungled. The White House’s timing was, to put it mildly, flawed. It was quite natural that local and national political writers would question the propriety of such an appointment. Considering the President’s political roots, Representative Matheson’s scolding of local and national media is laughable.
Jim, wake up and smell the coffee!
With the possible exception of Louisiana and New Jersey, nothing quite says corrupt, political machine like Chicago. I won’t bore you with the past history of Mayor Richard Daley Sr. and the 1960 Presidential election; let’s just keep it within the last ten years or so. The President was a part of Illinois machine politics for years. Tony Rezko, convicted on several counts of racketeering and bribery, arranged a sweetheart real estate deal for the President’s Chicago home. Convicted Viet Nam era terrorist William Ayers mentored the President’s political career; a career launched in Ayer’s Chicago home. The impeached and convicted governor of Illinois tried to sell the President’s former Senate seat. The President’s wife was given a "no need to show up" $300,000 a year job. Mrs. Obama was not replaced when she stepped down in 2007 to campaign with the President. The position was eliminated shortly thereafter.
Healthcare reform is the President’s signature issue. His press secretary has promised, "Whatever it takes" to get healthcare reform passed. In the Senate we’ve been treated to the "Louisiana Purchase" and "The Cornhusker Kickback" to name the two largest taxpayer funded bribes to date. When congressional leaders are willing to spend BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to buy votes, why wouldn’t we be suspicious of the odd judgeship or political appointment. It’s the Chicago way!
In an email to Mr. Matheson the day after his brother was nominated, I told the congressman I did not envy his position. It seems to me that the President has put the congressman in a "can’t win" situation. After voting against healthcare reform twice, changing his vote now would be political suicide with the voters in Utah’s Second Congressional District. I believe that a vote for the Senate bill currently before the House would almost certainly mean defeat in the fall. On the omnipresent other hand, a vote against the Senate bill will almost certainly incur the wrath of both Speaker Pelosi and the President. Maybe Representative Matheson should just pull an Obama and cast a principled vote of "Present". Now that’s the Chicago way.
Jim, wake up and smell the coffee!
With the possible exception of Louisiana and New Jersey, nothing quite says corrupt, political machine like Chicago. I won’t bore you with the past history of Mayor Richard Daley Sr. and the 1960 Presidential election; let’s just keep it within the last ten years or so. The President was a part of Illinois machine politics for years. Tony Rezko, convicted on several counts of racketeering and bribery, arranged a sweetheart real estate deal for the President’s Chicago home. Convicted Viet Nam era terrorist William Ayers mentored the President’s political career; a career launched in Ayer’s Chicago home. The impeached and convicted governor of Illinois tried to sell the President’s former Senate seat. The President’s wife was given a "no need to show up" $300,000 a year job. Mrs. Obama was not replaced when she stepped down in 2007 to campaign with the President. The position was eliminated shortly thereafter.
Healthcare reform is the President’s signature issue. His press secretary has promised, "Whatever it takes" to get healthcare reform passed. In the Senate we’ve been treated to the "Louisiana Purchase" and "The Cornhusker Kickback" to name the two largest taxpayer funded bribes to date. When congressional leaders are willing to spend BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to buy votes, why wouldn’t we be suspicious of the odd judgeship or political appointment. It’s the Chicago way!
In an email to Mr. Matheson the day after his brother was nominated, I told the congressman I did not envy his position. It seems to me that the President has put the congressman in a "can’t win" situation. After voting against healthcare reform twice, changing his vote now would be political suicide with the voters in Utah’s Second Congressional District. I believe that a vote for the Senate bill currently before the House would almost certainly mean defeat in the fall. On the omnipresent other hand, a vote against the Senate bill will almost certainly incur the wrath of both Speaker Pelosi and the President. Maybe Representative Matheson should just pull an Obama and cast a principled vote of "Present". Now that’s the Chicago way.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Some updates and a few observations...
Shortly after I submitted last week’s column regarding President Obama’s deficit commission, I heard a clip from a campaign speech the president delivered in Colorado in September of 2008. Senator McCain had proposed a blue ribbon, bi-partisan deficit reduction commission. Then Senator Obama reacted by labeling such blue ribbon commissions as the oldest trick in the Washington playbook and as an example of passing the buck. It doesn’t happen that often, but, Mr. President, in September of 2008, you were right.
Confession time, even though the law that created the base closing commission was signed by President Reagan, I was against it.
Over the last few weeks the Chinese have given the United States a lesson in the "Golden Rule". The Chinese government is threatening to sanction and punish American corporations that participate in the upgrade of the Nationalist Chinese Air Force. The Chinese military is also urging the government to punish the United States by selling part of their US T-Bill portfolio on the secondary market. Increasing the supply of US government debt will depress prices and raise interest rates. Does anyone else remember when the stuff you bought at Wal Mart was made in the United States?
The President has complained bitterly about executive compensation throughout his presidency. When the federal government bailed out Chrysler the first time in 1979, Lee Iacocca agreed to be paid $1 a year until Chrysler turned a profit. Fast forward to this past week and the President’s hand-picked head of GM will be paid $9,000,000. And GM hasn’t repaid its government loans or turned a profit. And, Mr. Whitacre isn’t even a car guy; at least Iacocca was a car guy.
Updating the "Little District that Cried Wolf"; sources tell me that unless you’re a teacher who has been laid off by the Jordan District, all other school districts in the valley have imposed a hiring freeze. So even if you wish to substitute teach in the, for example, Granite District, you will not be hired until laid off Jordan teachers have been absorbed by the system.
A new tactic in the ongoing healthcare bill fight. Using reconciliation to pass the healthcare bill is OK because the Republicans used the process to pass Welfare Reform in 1996. What they conveniently fail to mention is that the American people favored welfare reform, a solid majority have consistently opposed both the President’s plan and the two bills produced by House and Senate Democrats.
Next week new information regarding the Court Martial of two Navy SEALS and more on the whittling away of more of your constitutional rights by the Obama Justice Department.
Confession time, even though the law that created the base closing commission was signed by President Reagan, I was against it.
Over the last few weeks the Chinese have given the United States a lesson in the "Golden Rule". The Chinese government is threatening to sanction and punish American corporations that participate in the upgrade of the Nationalist Chinese Air Force. The Chinese military is also urging the government to punish the United States by selling part of their US T-Bill portfolio on the secondary market. Increasing the supply of US government debt will depress prices and raise interest rates. Does anyone else remember when the stuff you bought at Wal Mart was made in the United States?
The President has complained bitterly about executive compensation throughout his presidency. When the federal government bailed out Chrysler the first time in 1979, Lee Iacocca agreed to be paid $1 a year until Chrysler turned a profit. Fast forward to this past week and the President’s hand-picked head of GM will be paid $9,000,000. And GM hasn’t repaid its government loans or turned a profit. And, Mr. Whitacre isn’t even a car guy; at least Iacocca was a car guy.
Updating the "Little District that Cried Wolf"; sources tell me that unless you’re a teacher who has been laid off by the Jordan District, all other school districts in the valley have imposed a hiring freeze. So even if you wish to substitute teach in the, for example, Granite District, you will not be hired until laid off Jordan teachers have been absorbed by the system.
A new tactic in the ongoing healthcare bill fight. Using reconciliation to pass the healthcare bill is OK because the Republicans used the process to pass Welfare Reform in 1996. What they conveniently fail to mention is that the American people favored welfare reform, a solid majority have consistently opposed both the President’s plan and the two bills produced by House and Senate Democrats.
Next week new information regarding the Court Martial of two Navy SEALS and more on the whittling away of more of your constitutional rights by the Obama Justice Department.
The Little District that Cried Wolf!
I have been politically active or aware since the mid ‘70s. At one time a very good friend of mine and I would wager on the outcome of national elections. (I won lunch at Dee’s on North Temple when the Republicans took the Senate during the Reagan years. Admittedly, I lost a few too.) I worked for Jimmy Carter during the summer of 1976 and for Gary Hart’s short lived campaign in 1988.
But manipulation of the public by elected officials has always angered me. Why is it that city, county and state officials always threaten the public with the loss of public safety first. Agree to a tax increase or we’ll have to fire all of our police and firefighters. School districts and teachers’ unions are just as bad. If we don’t get more money, we’ll have to cancel art, athletic programs, math, reading and science and fire all the teachers!
In the late ‘80s if Proposition A, B and C were passed, our children would surely become Neanderthals and the education system and state would collapse. The fight over vouchers three years ago was met with the same dire predictions.
Every year for as long as I can remember, when class size and per pupil spending numbers have been released, our imminent destruction has been eagerly foretold by the UEA and the PTA. Any increase in education spending was met with cries of inadequacy. Any cuts to the budget were met with the inevitable and predictable, "there’s no fat left to cut."
Well, after more than twenty years of crying budgetary wolf, the Jordan School District has a real wolf. They’ve had a real wolf for the past two years. In addition to the current economic conditions, much of the blame is directed at the split with the Canyons School District. The Salt Lake Tribune’s front page banner headline last week told of 500 layoffs this year. The district, UEA and PTA just may be telling the complete truth for once.
Late last year the hearings required for a tax increase were packed with opposition and the district eventually backed away from a tax increase. But the tax increase is back on the table and according to the PTA is supported by parents. I think a tax increase might be necessary, but in my mind, neither the district nor the UEA have any credibility.
If props A, B and C and vouchers had passed; would we be in the same situation we find ourselves in now?
I don’t know. But if vouchers and the props had passed, I don’t think things would be as bad as they’re represented to be.
I know that it’s the Granite School District that covers the area served by this paper. But, the lesson behind the fable, "The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf" is valid here as well.
Did Peter Corroon threaten to eliminate his "Green Building" programs or fire deputies?
Think about it, won’t you.
But manipulation of the public by elected officials has always angered me. Why is it that city, county and state officials always threaten the public with the loss of public safety first. Agree to a tax increase or we’ll have to fire all of our police and firefighters. School districts and teachers’ unions are just as bad. If we don’t get more money, we’ll have to cancel art, athletic programs, math, reading and science and fire all the teachers!
In the late ‘80s if Proposition A, B and C were passed, our children would surely become Neanderthals and the education system and state would collapse. The fight over vouchers three years ago was met with the same dire predictions.
Every year for as long as I can remember, when class size and per pupil spending numbers have been released, our imminent destruction has been eagerly foretold by the UEA and the PTA. Any increase in education spending was met with cries of inadequacy. Any cuts to the budget were met with the inevitable and predictable, "there’s no fat left to cut."
Well, after more than twenty years of crying budgetary wolf, the Jordan School District has a real wolf. They’ve had a real wolf for the past two years. In addition to the current economic conditions, much of the blame is directed at the split with the Canyons School District. The Salt Lake Tribune’s front page banner headline last week told of 500 layoffs this year. The district, UEA and PTA just may be telling the complete truth for once.
Late last year the hearings required for a tax increase were packed with opposition and the district eventually backed away from a tax increase. But the tax increase is back on the table and according to the PTA is supported by parents. I think a tax increase might be necessary, but in my mind, neither the district nor the UEA have any credibility.
If props A, B and C and vouchers had passed; would we be in the same situation we find ourselves in now?
I don’t know. But if vouchers and the props had passed, I don’t think things would be as bad as they’re represented to be.
I know that it’s the Granite School District that covers the area served by this paper. But, the lesson behind the fable, "The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf" is valid here as well.
Did Peter Corroon threaten to eliminate his "Green Building" programs or fire deputies?
Think about it, won’t you.
it's more of a guideline...
Last week President Obama appointed a bi-partisan commission to tackle the problem of the current budget deficit.
As every school child and student of American history should know, the Constitution is rather specific about separation of powers. In fact Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 specifically states, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
Apparently the founders wanted to keep taxing and spending as close to the people as possible. All spending bills, by law, originate in The House of Representatives. (It should be noted that up until 1913 U.S. Senators were appointed by the various state legislatures and not directly elected by popular vote. On April 8, 1913 the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution changed that process to direct election of Senators by popular vote.)
The purpose of the President’s bi-partisan commission is to address the deficit. When the commission was announced the President stated that they would address taxes and spending. Mr. President, it ain’t your job to tell the Congress, specifically The House of Representatives, how or where to tax and spend. It’s not the job of a commission that you appoint either; especially a commission that like all of your innumerable czars is not confirmed by the Senate.
Even if the Deficit Commission is powerless to act it’s not the President’s job to pass the buck to a commission. If you’re serious about the deficit Mr. President, show some leadership; submit a budget with real spending cuts. Through members of the Congress in your party propose reforms to some or all of the numerous entitlement programs. Mr. President, you’ve complained endlessly about President Bush’s Medicare prescription drug benefit; work with The Congress and repeal it, you’ve claimed your reform of healthcare can be paid for by addressing fraud in Medicare and Medicaid; well, what are you waiting for, do it now!
Mr. President you’re not a Senator anymore, you’re the President of United States, now act like it. Stop legislating from the Oval Office with 13,000 word Executive Orders. The Constitution already enumerates your duties; read them. The Constitution has separation of powers; pay attention to them.
The Secret Service’s initial code name for President Obama was, "Renegade". Since that code name is now out in the public, I’d like to suggest a new one, how about, "Captain Jack". After all, in so many ways this administration and this President seem to view the Constitution as, "more of a guideline."
As every school child and student of American history should know, the Constitution is rather specific about separation of powers. In fact Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 specifically states, "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
Apparently the founders wanted to keep taxing and spending as close to the people as possible. All spending bills, by law, originate in The House of Representatives. (It should be noted that up until 1913 U.S. Senators were appointed by the various state legislatures and not directly elected by popular vote. On April 8, 1913 the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution changed that process to direct election of Senators by popular vote.)
The purpose of the President’s bi-partisan commission is to address the deficit. When the commission was announced the President stated that they would address taxes and spending. Mr. President, it ain’t your job to tell the Congress, specifically The House of Representatives, how or where to tax and spend. It’s not the job of a commission that you appoint either; especially a commission that like all of your innumerable czars is not confirmed by the Senate.
Even if the Deficit Commission is powerless to act it’s not the President’s job to pass the buck to a commission. If you’re serious about the deficit Mr. President, show some leadership; submit a budget with real spending cuts. Through members of the Congress in your party propose reforms to some or all of the numerous entitlement programs. Mr. President, you’ve complained endlessly about President Bush’s Medicare prescription drug benefit; work with The Congress and repeal it, you’ve claimed your reform of healthcare can be paid for by addressing fraud in Medicare and Medicaid; well, what are you waiting for, do it now!
Mr. President you’re not a Senator anymore, you’re the President of United States, now act like it. Stop legislating from the Oval Office with 13,000 word Executive Orders. The Constitution already enumerates your duties; read them. The Constitution has separation of powers; pay attention to them.
The Secret Service’s initial code name for President Obama was, "Renegade". Since that code name is now out in the public, I’d like to suggest a new one, how about, "Captain Jack". After all, in so many ways this administration and this President seem to view the Constitution as, "more of a guideline."
Friday, February 12, 2010
Dancing with Gratitude
I stayed up late last night writing a column about President Obama’s State of the Union address and how the President just doesn’t get it. But just as I was drifting off to sleep I decided it just wouldn’t do.
You see on Saturday we went to the Ririe-Woodbury dance concert at the Capitol Theatre. During the last week of January, Ririe-Woodbury’s dancers presented the same show we saw to 9,000 elementary school children. This was all done courtesy of The Eskuche Foundation, Larry H. Miller Charities, Wells Fargo and a grant from the Utah Office of Education and the Legislature.
I believe that out of music, dance and drama, dance is the most difficult of the arts to master. I marvel at the strength and flexibility it requires as well as a dancer’s ability to perform the movements in a precise sequence in coordination with other dancers on the same stage at the same time. Utah is blessed both by the number of dance troupes and by the fact that we have a nationally recognized school of dance at the University of Utah. Over the last two television seasons the Emmy award winning Fox TV show, "So You Think You Can Dance" has been in Salt Lake City for auditions and this past season three of the top six dancers were from Utah.
But this isn’t about dance. It’s about gratitude. Gratitude is a virtue that seems to be increasingly rare in our modern society. I think all of us like to be on the receiving end every now and then. More important is that we demonstrate gratitude in our everyday lives.
I’m a member of a facebook group whose goal it is to keep arts in the public schools. On behalf of the members of that facebook group I’d like to ask you to express your thanks and gratitude to The Eskuche Foundation, Larry H. Miller Charities, Wells Fargo and to the Utah State Legislature. Ririe-Woodbury is a wonderful group that offers innovative choreography and high quality entertainment.
I don’t know of any other city our size in the United States with three professional modern dance companies. But, the point of all of this is to recognize the good in others as well as the courage of the legislature to use a few tax dollars to give school children a little something extra during difficult economic times. A little something to expand their life experience. On behalf of the facebook group dedicated to keeping the arts in public schools, thank you. And, if you paid any Utah state taxes or fees, bought or had your car serviced at a Larry H. Miller dealership or bounced a check at Wells Fargo, thank you. (I don’t know where the money from the Eskuche Foundation originates, but a special thank you to them too)
If you’re looking for something a little out of the ordinary, say thank you to Ririe-Woodbury, RDT, Ballet West or Odyssey Dance Theatre by attending one of their performances. Sit with your child or grandchild and marvel at the skills and wonder at the dedication and then just one more time say thank you.
And finally, I’d like to thank you too.
You see on Saturday we went to the Ririe-Woodbury dance concert at the Capitol Theatre. During the last week of January, Ririe-Woodbury’s dancers presented the same show we saw to 9,000 elementary school children. This was all done courtesy of The Eskuche Foundation, Larry H. Miller Charities, Wells Fargo and a grant from the Utah Office of Education and the Legislature.
I believe that out of music, dance and drama, dance is the most difficult of the arts to master. I marvel at the strength and flexibility it requires as well as a dancer’s ability to perform the movements in a precise sequence in coordination with other dancers on the same stage at the same time. Utah is blessed both by the number of dance troupes and by the fact that we have a nationally recognized school of dance at the University of Utah. Over the last two television seasons the Emmy award winning Fox TV show, "So You Think You Can Dance" has been in Salt Lake City for auditions and this past season three of the top six dancers were from Utah.
But this isn’t about dance. It’s about gratitude. Gratitude is a virtue that seems to be increasingly rare in our modern society. I think all of us like to be on the receiving end every now and then. More important is that we demonstrate gratitude in our everyday lives.
I’m a member of a facebook group whose goal it is to keep arts in the public schools. On behalf of the members of that facebook group I’d like to ask you to express your thanks and gratitude to The Eskuche Foundation, Larry H. Miller Charities, Wells Fargo and to the Utah State Legislature. Ririe-Woodbury is a wonderful group that offers innovative choreography and high quality entertainment.
I don’t know of any other city our size in the United States with three professional modern dance companies. But, the point of all of this is to recognize the good in others as well as the courage of the legislature to use a few tax dollars to give school children a little something extra during difficult economic times. A little something to expand their life experience. On behalf of the facebook group dedicated to keeping the arts in public schools, thank you. And, if you paid any Utah state taxes or fees, bought or had your car serviced at a Larry H. Miller dealership or bounced a check at Wells Fargo, thank you. (I don’t know where the money from the Eskuche Foundation originates, but a special thank you to them too)
If you’re looking for something a little out of the ordinary, say thank you to Ririe-Woodbury, RDT, Ballet West or Odyssey Dance Theatre by attending one of their performances. Sit with your child or grandchild and marvel at the skills and wonder at the dedication and then just one more time say thank you.
And finally, I’d like to thank you too.
The Golden Rule
Shortly before the 9/11 terrorist attacks President Bush was attempting to reform Social Security. One of the main components of that reform was to give people a choice between the current system and private accounts or super IRAs. Predictably the Democrats in congress opposed giving people a choice. Eventually, some Democrats claimed they would consider allowing a small portion of the employee share of Social Security to go into three or four government approved funds. I was very leary of that plan. I could see a time or circumstance when those fund managers would be brow beat into "Politically Correct" choices such as the boycott of firms who were doing business in South Africa in the early ‘80s. In my mind it was the "Golden Rule" in its worst form.
When I speak of the "Golden Rule" I’m not talking about Christ’s teaching during his ministry in Palestine, I’m speaking of a modern interpretation; he who has the gold, makes the rules.
When President Clinton introduced his version of health care reform in 1993, one of the provisions called for the federal government to dictate to medical students not only what branch of medicine they would be allowed to practice, but if, when and where they would attend medical school. Once again, the tyrannical version of the "Golden Rule" raised its ugly head.
That particular part of "Hillary Care" is the first thing that came to mind last summer when I heard that the student loan program had been taken over by the government. I wondered then and I wonder now how long before some government bureaucrat dictates where and what people are allowed to study, or even if certain studies are allowed.
Of course the "Golden Rule" applies to more than student loans and health care. Ford is the only American car company that did not take bail out money and Ford also reported a profit for the fourth quarter of 2009. I hope Ford is taking note of Toyota’s recent treatment. Ford has just as big a target on their back as Toyota. I freely and readily admit that Toyota could not have done a worse job handling its recent problems. Toyota bungled it from an engineering and safety standpoint as well as on the public relations front. The Toyota acceleration problem will probably be a business school case study of what not to do for years to come. That said, the Federal government in the guise of the President’s Car Czar and Secretary of Transportation were very heavy handed while administering the Golden Rule. They have the gold and I believe used and abused their power over Toyota to promote Government Motors, formerly known as General Motors. The Secretary advised people to stop driving their Toyotas and later claimed he was misquoted. Mr. Secretary, I saw and heard the video, you weren’t misquoted.
Last summer health insurance companies were threatened with the loss of Medicare reimbursement if they opposed the President’s health care reform plan. Banks were cowed into silence and bullied when they attempted to repay unwanted bailout funds. Just more examples of heavy, ham handed bullying or if you will, he who has the gold, making the rules.
Is this the "Hope and Change" you expected and maybe even voted for or is this just Chicago style politics at its worst?
"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise."
Luke 6:31
When I speak of the "Golden Rule" I’m not talking about Christ’s teaching during his ministry in Palestine, I’m speaking of a modern interpretation; he who has the gold, makes the rules.
When President Clinton introduced his version of health care reform in 1993, one of the provisions called for the federal government to dictate to medical students not only what branch of medicine they would be allowed to practice, but if, when and where they would attend medical school. Once again, the tyrannical version of the "Golden Rule" raised its ugly head.
That particular part of "Hillary Care" is the first thing that came to mind last summer when I heard that the student loan program had been taken over by the government. I wondered then and I wonder now how long before some government bureaucrat dictates where and what people are allowed to study, or even if certain studies are allowed.
Of course the "Golden Rule" applies to more than student loans and health care. Ford is the only American car company that did not take bail out money and Ford also reported a profit for the fourth quarter of 2009. I hope Ford is taking note of Toyota’s recent treatment. Ford has just as big a target on their back as Toyota. I freely and readily admit that Toyota could not have done a worse job handling its recent problems. Toyota bungled it from an engineering and safety standpoint as well as on the public relations front. The Toyota acceleration problem will probably be a business school case study of what not to do for years to come. That said, the Federal government in the guise of the President’s Car Czar and Secretary of Transportation were very heavy handed while administering the Golden Rule. They have the gold and I believe used and abused their power over Toyota to promote Government Motors, formerly known as General Motors. The Secretary advised people to stop driving their Toyotas and later claimed he was misquoted. Mr. Secretary, I saw and heard the video, you weren’t misquoted.
Last summer health insurance companies were threatened with the loss of Medicare reimbursement if they opposed the President’s health care reform plan. Banks were cowed into silence and bullied when they attempted to repay unwanted bailout funds. Just more examples of heavy, ham handed bullying or if you will, he who has the gold, making the rules.
Is this the "Hope and Change" you expected and maybe even voted for or is this just Chicago style politics at its worst?
"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise."
Luke 6:31
Thursday, January 28, 2010
The Vote Heard Round the World...
Tuesday January 19, 2010 was not exactly the "shot heard round the world," more like the "vote heard round the world." That was the day a special election was held in Massachusetts to fill the vacancy created in the US Senate by the death of Edward M. "Ted" Kennedy. Kennedy held the seat for 47 years. Before the election on the 19th, the last Republican elected to the US Senate from Massachusetts was Edward Brooke, ironically Brooke was the first African-American elected to the US Senate.
The election of Scott Brown to the US Senate breaks the "Super Majority" held and created by Senate Democrats, Independent Joe Lieberman and Socialist Bernie Sanders. The White House was quick to pronounce that Brown’s election was not a referendum on the President or his policies. The White House instead chose to blame Democratic candidate Martha Coakley for running a poor campaign. The White House conveniently forgot that Coakley won the office of Attorney General (also a statewide election) with 73% of the vote a little over two years ago.
I vigorously disagree with the White House point of view and although I don’t often agree with Virginia’s Senator Jim Webb, I believe his statement shortly after Brown’s victory is appropriate. Senator Webb said, "In many ways the campaign in Massachusetts became a referendum not only on health care reform but also on the openness and integrity of our government process. It is vital that we restore the respect of the American people in our system of government and in our leaders. To that end, I believe it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated."
Recent polls have shown that the President’s health care reform efforts are backed by only 36% of the country and opposition has been well over 50% since August of 2009. During the campaign then Senator Obama promised government transparency and bipartisanship. Speaker Pelosi too promised transparency. In spite of these promises and commitments reconciliation talks between the House and Senate have been held in secret and Republicans have been virtually locked out of the process. Legislation has been written and passed without being read.
"What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?" That was Michigan Representative John Conyers in an interview discussing the health care bill July 27, 2009. By the way, Representative Conyers is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and a lawyer.
Throughout the summer of 2009 the President and Congressional Democrats ignored the will of the electorate. Thousands called, emailed and wrote letters of protest against Obama style health care reform. Thousands more attended and demonstrated at town hall meetings. Rather than listen, the Democrats cancelled many of the remaining meetings set in their districts. The protests culminated on September 12, 2009 when more than 1.2 million Americans gathered on the Washington Mall to let their views be known. Their protests and views were ignored.
Only time will tell if the election of Scott Brown was a wake-up for the President and Congressional Democrats. If not, then maybe Tuesday January 19, 2010 will, like April 19, 1775 become another red letter day in American history.
The election of Scott Brown to the US Senate breaks the "Super Majority" held and created by Senate Democrats, Independent Joe Lieberman and Socialist Bernie Sanders. The White House was quick to pronounce that Brown’s election was not a referendum on the President or his policies. The White House instead chose to blame Democratic candidate Martha Coakley for running a poor campaign. The White House conveniently forgot that Coakley won the office of Attorney General (also a statewide election) with 73% of the vote a little over two years ago.
I vigorously disagree with the White House point of view and although I don’t often agree with Virginia’s Senator Jim Webb, I believe his statement shortly after Brown’s victory is appropriate. Senator Webb said, "In many ways the campaign in Massachusetts became a referendum not only on health care reform but also on the openness and integrity of our government process. It is vital that we restore the respect of the American people in our system of government and in our leaders. To that end, I believe it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated."
Recent polls have shown that the President’s health care reform efforts are backed by only 36% of the country and opposition has been well over 50% since August of 2009. During the campaign then Senator Obama promised government transparency and bipartisanship. Speaker Pelosi too promised transparency. In spite of these promises and commitments reconciliation talks between the House and Senate have been held in secret and Republicans have been virtually locked out of the process. Legislation has been written and passed without being read.
"What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?" That was Michigan Representative John Conyers in an interview discussing the health care bill July 27, 2009. By the way, Representative Conyers is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and a lawyer.
Throughout the summer of 2009 the President and Congressional Democrats ignored the will of the electorate. Thousands called, emailed and wrote letters of protest against Obama style health care reform. Thousands more attended and demonstrated at town hall meetings. Rather than listen, the Democrats cancelled many of the remaining meetings set in their districts. The protests culminated on September 12, 2009 when more than 1.2 million Americans gathered on the Washington Mall to let their views be known. Their protests and views were ignored.
Only time will tell if the election of Scott Brown was a wake-up for the President and Congressional Democrats. If not, then maybe Tuesday January 19, 2010 will, like April 19, 1775 become another red letter day in American history.
Call Northside 777
Recently I watched "Call Northside 777". In the film Jimmy Stewart portrays a newspaper reporter who’s assigned to follow up on an ad in the personals section of his newspaper. The mother of a convicted cop killer is offering a reward for information that proves her son is not guilty. Initially Stewart patronizes the old woman and is very cynical. Talking to her is a chore. Only after his assignment editor forces him to interview the convicted killer in prison does he slowly begin to change his mind about the whole situation. Stewart goes after each lead with energy and tenacity in spite of roadblocks at every turn. In the end, Stewart and the paper prove the man’s innocence and he’s released.
The film is based on a true story. Both in the film and in real life the paper put its reputation on the line by championing an unpopular position. They sought out and fought for the truth. The paper used its lawyers, influence and political capital to right a wrong. I think at one time most newspapers and other news organizations were interested in the truth. Reporters investigated tips, followed up on leads and reported the news. The truth mattered. The truth wasn’t subordinate to the popularity of the position. Editors were principled and fought for values.
Sadly it seems far too many members of the press today are satisfied to merely sit by the fax machine or wait for the latest press release to show up in the inbox of their email account. They’ve become echo chambers of each other; they’re repeaters, not reporters.
In far too many cases, objectivity is a casualty in the war of what passes for journalism in early 21st century America. Statements from reporters such as Chris Mathews of MSNBC when he said, "I felt this thrill going up my leg" while covering one of the presidential debates in 2008 and Newsweek’s Managing Editor Evan Thomas deifying President Obama when he said, "in a way, Obama’s standing above the country, above the world. He’s sort of God. He’s going to bring all different sides together." are too common.
And now we have a reporter advocating voter fraud. During his radio show last week MSNBC’s Ed Schultz commenting on the special election in Massachusetts to fill the late Senator Kennedy’s seat stated, "I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I'd try to vote 10 times. I don't know if they'd let me or not, but I'd try to. Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are."
Many newspapers and television network news programs are losing circulation and ratings. They’re explaining their losses by blaming the Internet. The answer to their ratings and circulation problem can be found in a quote from the late CBS news reporter and journalist Edward R. Murrow when he said, "To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful."
What a concept, truth and objectivity in the news.
The film is based on a true story. Both in the film and in real life the paper put its reputation on the line by championing an unpopular position. They sought out and fought for the truth. The paper used its lawyers, influence and political capital to right a wrong. I think at one time most newspapers and other news organizations were interested in the truth. Reporters investigated tips, followed up on leads and reported the news. The truth mattered. The truth wasn’t subordinate to the popularity of the position. Editors were principled and fought for values.
Sadly it seems far too many members of the press today are satisfied to merely sit by the fax machine or wait for the latest press release to show up in the inbox of their email account. They’ve become echo chambers of each other; they’re repeaters, not reporters.
In far too many cases, objectivity is a casualty in the war of what passes for journalism in early 21st century America. Statements from reporters such as Chris Mathews of MSNBC when he said, "I felt this thrill going up my leg" while covering one of the presidential debates in 2008 and Newsweek’s Managing Editor Evan Thomas deifying President Obama when he said, "in a way, Obama’s standing above the country, above the world. He’s sort of God. He’s going to bring all different sides together." are too common.
And now we have a reporter advocating voter fraud. During his radio show last week MSNBC’s Ed Schultz commenting on the special election in Massachusetts to fill the late Senator Kennedy’s seat stated, "I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I'd try to vote 10 times. I don't know if they'd let me or not, but I'd try to. Yeah, that's right. I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. 'Cause that's exactly what they are."
Many newspapers and television network news programs are losing circulation and ratings. They’re explaining their losses by blaming the Internet. The answer to their ratings and circulation problem can be found in a quote from the late CBS news reporter and journalist Edward R. Murrow when he said, "To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; credible we must be truthful."
What a concept, truth and objectivity in the news.
General Observations
Nearly two weeks after the "Panty Bomber" attempted to blow Northwest flight 253 with 279 passengers and 11 crew members on board out of the sky, the US State Department announced that they’d cancelled his visa. How quick would they have acted if he'd been successful?
When the "Stimulus" bill was barreling through Congress, the President told us that without it, the unemployment rate would climb above 8%. We were also told that it had to be done now or the sky would fall. Well, the Democrats passed the stimulus and to this point in time only 30 percent of the money has been spent and the unemployment is definitely above 8%. If it was so important, why have we only spent 30% of the funds? I guess the unemployment rate in all those non-existent congressional districts and phantom zip codes (fourteen in Virginia alone) is less than 8% now.
Former Democratic Presidential Nominee and current Massachusetts’ Senator John Kerry’s office recently announced he was, "getting a hip replacement." I thought that’s what Obama was supposed to be.
If the Federal Government can’t quickly and efficiently distribute H1N1 Vaccine, what makes anyone think they can run the entire healthcare delivery system?
If you didn’t get the John Kerry hip replacement joke, look at the word "hip" as an adjective instead of a noun.
Maybe there’s some honesty in the ACLU after all, the director of the ACLU is now referring to the Illinois prison the Obama Administration wants to purchase for Guantanamo detainees as "Gitmo North".
When the "Stimulus" bill was barreling through Congress, the President told us that without it, the unemployment rate would climb above 8%. We were also told that it had to be done now or the sky would fall. Well, the Democrats passed the stimulus and to this point in time only 30 percent of the money has been spent and the unemployment is definitely above 8%. If it was so important, why have we only spent 30% of the funds? I guess the unemployment rate in all those non-existent congressional districts and phantom zip codes (fourteen in Virginia alone) is less than 8% now.
Former Democratic Presidential Nominee and current Massachusetts’ Senator John Kerry’s office recently announced he was, "getting a hip replacement." I thought that’s what Obama was supposed to be.
If the Federal Government can’t quickly and efficiently distribute H1N1 Vaccine, what makes anyone think they can run the entire healthcare delivery system?
If you didn’t get the John Kerry hip replacement joke, look at the word "hip" as an adjective instead of a noun.
Maybe there’s some honesty in the ACLU after all, the director of the ACLU is now referring to the Illinois prison the Obama Administration wants to purchase for Guantanamo detainees as "Gitmo North".
The Panty Bomber or Fruit of Kaboom!
The attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day and the Obama administrations initial response to that incident proves among other things that the President is either incapable or unwilling to recognize terrorism as the national security threat that it is.
Early on in his administration (March 23, 2009) the president ordered the phrase "war on terror" be eliminated. It was replaced with the softer, gentler phrase, "man caused disaster"
The president needs a twelve-step program for terrorism. One of the first steps in any good twelve-step program is to recognize you’ve got a problem. (If you’ve never gone through a twelve-step program and if you’re a member of the locally predominant religious faith, then think the "five Rs of repentance" or however many Rs of repentance there are.) Either way you’ve got to recognize you have a problem.
The Fort Hood shootings were a terrorist attack. All signs point to the fact that Fort Hood was a terrorist attack. The administration insisted for several days that it was a case of one lone soldier going berserk and turning on those around him. The administration has dug in their heals about their theory of the attack by refusing to award Purple Hearts to the soldiers wounded at Fort Hood.
Isn’t it ironic that the same Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who recruited the Northwest Airlines Panty Bomber (the bomb was smuggled on board in the guy’s underwear) and arranged for his training in Yemen was "suspected" Fort Hood terrorist Major Nadal Hasan’s Imam in Washington DC.
And speaking of terrorist training, what total nincompoop in the Bush Administration recommended the release of two Guantanamo detainees for art therapy in Saudi Arabia. If you haven’t heard, the Panty Bomber was trained by two former residents of Guantanamo, released in 2007 and sent to Saudi Arabia for art therapy and rehabilitation.
The administration’s initial solution to the type of threat posed by the Panty Bomber was to keep you and me in our seats for the last hour of every flight, not allow us to use the restroom or have anything in our laps. That bit of stupidity was done away with almost immediately. Their next step was to order 150 of the full body scanners that would expose, well, expose everything.
An article in the UK Independent, quoting sources in Britain’s Home Office states that the full body scanners would not have detected the Panty Bomber’s explosives.
The 911 Commission stated that, ‘al qaeda was at war with us before we were at war with them.’ The Obama Administartion, when they do address terrorism, is treating terror as a criminal matter, not the war that it is and all of us will be the losers for it.
Early on in his administration (March 23, 2009) the president ordered the phrase "war on terror" be eliminated. It was replaced with the softer, gentler phrase, "man caused disaster"
The president needs a twelve-step program for terrorism. One of the first steps in any good twelve-step program is to recognize you’ve got a problem. (If you’ve never gone through a twelve-step program and if you’re a member of the locally predominant religious faith, then think the "five Rs of repentance" or however many Rs of repentance there are.) Either way you’ve got to recognize you have a problem.
The Fort Hood shootings were a terrorist attack. All signs point to the fact that Fort Hood was a terrorist attack. The administration insisted for several days that it was a case of one lone soldier going berserk and turning on those around him. The administration has dug in their heals about their theory of the attack by refusing to award Purple Hearts to the soldiers wounded at Fort Hood.
Isn’t it ironic that the same Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who recruited the Northwest Airlines Panty Bomber (the bomb was smuggled on board in the guy’s underwear) and arranged for his training in Yemen was "suspected" Fort Hood terrorist Major Nadal Hasan’s Imam in Washington DC.
And speaking of terrorist training, what total nincompoop in the Bush Administration recommended the release of two Guantanamo detainees for art therapy in Saudi Arabia. If you haven’t heard, the Panty Bomber was trained by two former residents of Guantanamo, released in 2007 and sent to Saudi Arabia for art therapy and rehabilitation.
The administration’s initial solution to the type of threat posed by the Panty Bomber was to keep you and me in our seats for the last hour of every flight, not allow us to use the restroom or have anything in our laps. That bit of stupidity was done away with almost immediately. Their next step was to order 150 of the full body scanners that would expose, well, expose everything.
An article in the UK Independent, quoting sources in Britain’s Home Office states that the full body scanners would not have detected the Panty Bomber’s explosives.
The 911 Commission stated that, ‘al qaeda was at war with us before we were at war with them.’ The Obama Administartion, when they do address terrorism, is treating terror as a criminal matter, not the war that it is and all of us will be the losers for it.
An Economics Lesson for The President...
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result."
This quote has been attributed to sources as wide and varied as Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Fred Zamberletti former trainer and current Minnesota Vikings team historian and former New Orleans Saints’ Nose Tackle Tony Elliot.
The quote, "Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it" has just as many attributions; Winston Churchill, Santa Ana and Aristotle to name a few.
The Obama administration’s economic policies have not worked in the past and from all appearances are not working now. So why does President Obama believe his stimulus plan and economic policies will revive the U.S. economy?
As early as January 27, 2009, more than two hundred economists argued against the administration and congress’ massive stimulus plan. As time and the debate went on, that number only grew. Apparently economists study history.
Keynesian economics; the practice of putting more dollars into the hands of consumers, should in theory work. When the dollars come from tax cuts, conservative Keynesian economic theory does work. President Kennedy first proposed tax cuts in 1962. Shortly after his death, his proposals were enacted into law and the economy grew. The economy grew after the Reagan tax cuts in the ‘80s and after President George W. Bush’s tax cuts as well.
Keynesian economics don’t work when they take the form of economic stimulus plans such as President Obama’s, President Hoover’s, Franklin Roosevelt’s and the Japanese government’s multiple stimulus efforts in the 90s.
The Obama stimulus plan is compounded by the fact that the President is monetizing much of the debt. Monetizing the debt is when money is printed rather than borrowed to cover the debt. President Obama, in just 38 DAYS, grew the national debt by over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, an amount that exceeded the EIGHT YEAR total of President George W. Bush’s administration.
The fledgling "recovery" is an illusion. What little growth that has occurred is almost exclusively growth of government. Recent reported growth in income is also almost exclusively an increase in Federal government wages. Earlier this month The Commerce Department reported an uptick in consumer spending. If you read the entire report you’ll learn that the uptick is entirely a product of increased gasoline prices. And finally, the "Real Unemployment Rate", also known as the Bureau of Labor Statistics U-6 is over 17.5%. Real economic growth; sustainable economic growth will only come from the private sector. The President’s policies are not and will not revive the U.S. economy.
The Chinese government both in public and private is lecturing and warning the Obama administration about our government spending and unsustainable national debt. They have a 3,500 year written history. It would seem they not only read their own history, but the history of the West as well. In May of 2009 China held 44% of foreign held U.S. Government debt. If China were to stop buying U.S. Treasuries, the result would be hyper-inflation and interest rates not seen since the days of Jimmy Carter. (The prime interest rate when Jimmy Carter left office in January of 1981 was 20.5%, today it is 3.25%) Maybe we should pay attention.
Currently the Democratic leadership in the Congress is cobbling together a second stimulus package. Apparently Congress neither reads history nor learns from past experiences.
So why does President Obama think his stimulus plan and economic policies will work?
Is the President ignorant of history or so arrogant that he thinks it doesn’t apply to him?
This quote has been attributed to sources as wide and varied as Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Fred Zamberletti former trainer and current Minnesota Vikings team historian and former New Orleans Saints’ Nose Tackle Tony Elliot.
The quote, "Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it" has just as many attributions; Winston Churchill, Santa Ana and Aristotle to name a few.
The Obama administration’s economic policies have not worked in the past and from all appearances are not working now. So why does President Obama believe his stimulus plan and economic policies will revive the U.S. economy?
As early as January 27, 2009, more than two hundred economists argued against the administration and congress’ massive stimulus plan. As time and the debate went on, that number only grew. Apparently economists study history.
Keynesian economics; the practice of putting more dollars into the hands of consumers, should in theory work. When the dollars come from tax cuts, conservative Keynesian economic theory does work. President Kennedy first proposed tax cuts in 1962. Shortly after his death, his proposals were enacted into law and the economy grew. The economy grew after the Reagan tax cuts in the ‘80s and after President George W. Bush’s tax cuts as well.
Keynesian economics don’t work when they take the form of economic stimulus plans such as President Obama’s, President Hoover’s, Franklin Roosevelt’s and the Japanese government’s multiple stimulus efforts in the 90s.
The Obama stimulus plan is compounded by the fact that the President is monetizing much of the debt. Monetizing the debt is when money is printed rather than borrowed to cover the debt. President Obama, in just 38 DAYS, grew the national debt by over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, an amount that exceeded the EIGHT YEAR total of President George W. Bush’s administration.
The fledgling "recovery" is an illusion. What little growth that has occurred is almost exclusively growth of government. Recent reported growth in income is also almost exclusively an increase in Federal government wages. Earlier this month The Commerce Department reported an uptick in consumer spending. If you read the entire report you’ll learn that the uptick is entirely a product of increased gasoline prices. And finally, the "Real Unemployment Rate", also known as the Bureau of Labor Statistics U-6 is over 17.5%. Real economic growth; sustainable economic growth will only come from the private sector. The President’s policies are not and will not revive the U.S. economy.
The Chinese government both in public and private is lecturing and warning the Obama administration about our government spending and unsustainable national debt. They have a 3,500 year written history. It would seem they not only read their own history, but the history of the West as well. In May of 2009 China held 44% of foreign held U.S. Government debt. If China were to stop buying U.S. Treasuries, the result would be hyper-inflation and interest rates not seen since the days of Jimmy Carter. (The prime interest rate when Jimmy Carter left office in January of 1981 was 20.5%, today it is 3.25%) Maybe we should pay attention.
Currently the Democratic leadership in the Congress is cobbling together a second stimulus package. Apparently Congress neither reads history nor learns from past experiences.
So why does President Obama think his stimulus plan and economic policies will work?
Is the President ignorant of history or so arrogant that he thinks it doesn’t apply to him?
UPD, Bad Idea or Just Poorly Implemented?
I have been an advocate of a valley wide unified police department for a long time. I was introduced to the concept in either the late ‘70s or early ‘80s. The economies of scale and smaller administrative bureaucracies of a Unified Police Department appealed to me. Candidate Winder, now Sheriff Winder made the Unified Police Department (UPD) one of the main components of his election campaign.
So last week when it was announced that a NEW fee would be needed to fund UPD, I was forced to rethink my position. When I learned that if the fee wasn’t imposed 100 deputies would be laid off; I was REALLY forced to rethink my position. I’d like to pose some questions for you to consider.
According to a Salt Lake County press release the UPD will save money. So if the county is saving money, will property taxes be reduced to compensate for the new fee?
No, property taxes will not be reduced. Funds for police and fire primarily come from sales tax revenues and sales tax revenues have dropped during the recent economic downturn. The new fee will be imposed on both businesses and homes. Some of the monthly fees for businesses are rather hefty. Businesses are not only taxed based on the type of business, but they’re taxed based on the number of employees too. Some businesses will either fire people or simply not fill positions when employees retire or quit. Oh, by the way, your church will be taxed too. So, the new fee will damage an already weak economy.
Funds for the deputies who patrol and serve in the UPD participating cities and towns were already budgeted. Where are the additional funds generated by the NEW fees being spent?
If the fee is not imposed and the Sheriff actually fires 100 deputies, the cities and towns affected by the layoffs won’t just sit idly by, they’ll use funds already budgeted for law enforcement and hire officers to police their communities. Logically, you’d hire the previously trained and experienced county deputies.
If the funds generated by the fees are for startup, then either bond and retire the bonds with the anticipated savings or make it clear that the fees are temporary and build in a hard and fast sunset clause.
If the funds generated by the fees are to hire more deputies or purchase new equipment, then don’t. Wait until the savings generated by UPD have been realized to increase the force and buy new equipment.
If the new fee is required to fund the UPD, then it would seem the entire concept and projected savings of a Unified Police Department are flawed. Either the wrong people put it together or it’s the wrong time to implement the idea.
If the fee is to fund the UPD, then it would seem that the UPD is just a way to free up other tax funds for other county priorities and was simply a ruse to raise taxes. In other words, tax funds that would have gone to the Sheriff’s office were spent elsewhere and a fee was created to fund the UPD. A new tax extorted by playing on people’s fears. If you don’t pay the fee 100 deputies will be laid off.
The UPD is a good idea, but it’s either the wrong time or it’s being implemented by the wrong people.
Shame on Sheriff Jim Winder, Mayor Corroon and the County Council.
So last week when it was announced that a NEW fee would be needed to fund UPD, I was forced to rethink my position. When I learned that if the fee wasn’t imposed 100 deputies would be laid off; I was REALLY forced to rethink my position. I’d like to pose some questions for you to consider.
According to a Salt Lake County press release the UPD will save money. So if the county is saving money, will property taxes be reduced to compensate for the new fee?
No, property taxes will not be reduced. Funds for police and fire primarily come from sales tax revenues and sales tax revenues have dropped during the recent economic downturn. The new fee will be imposed on both businesses and homes. Some of the monthly fees for businesses are rather hefty. Businesses are not only taxed based on the type of business, but they’re taxed based on the number of employees too. Some businesses will either fire people or simply not fill positions when employees retire or quit. Oh, by the way, your church will be taxed too. So, the new fee will damage an already weak economy.
Funds for the deputies who patrol and serve in the UPD participating cities and towns were already budgeted. Where are the additional funds generated by the NEW fees being spent?
If the fee is not imposed and the Sheriff actually fires 100 deputies, the cities and towns affected by the layoffs won’t just sit idly by, they’ll use funds already budgeted for law enforcement and hire officers to police their communities. Logically, you’d hire the previously trained and experienced county deputies.
If the funds generated by the fees are for startup, then either bond and retire the bonds with the anticipated savings or make it clear that the fees are temporary and build in a hard and fast sunset clause.
If the funds generated by the fees are to hire more deputies or purchase new equipment, then don’t. Wait until the savings generated by UPD have been realized to increase the force and buy new equipment.
If the new fee is required to fund the UPD, then it would seem the entire concept and projected savings of a Unified Police Department are flawed. Either the wrong people put it together or it’s the wrong time to implement the idea.
If the fee is to fund the UPD, then it would seem that the UPD is just a way to free up other tax funds for other county priorities and was simply a ruse to raise taxes. In other words, tax funds that would have gone to the Sheriff’s office were spent elsewhere and a fee was created to fund the UPD. A new tax extorted by playing on people’s fears. If you don’t pay the fee 100 deputies will be laid off.
The UPD is a good idea, but it’s either the wrong time or it’s being implemented by the wrong people.
Shame on Sheriff Jim Winder, Mayor Corroon and the County Council.
A Day That Will Live In Infamy...
June 12, 1974 a day that will live in infamy. (Well at least in Utah Democrat Party politics.) I know I’m showing my age, but this all has a point. On that day first term U.S. Congressman Allen Howe solicited a Salt Lake City PD decoy prostitute and gave the November 1974 election to a Republican to be named later.
Approximately two years later the powerful Democratic Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; Wilbur Mills was re-elected AFTER being caught drunk with a stripper, ER, pardon me, exotic dancer.
Florida Republican congressman Mark Foley resigned after sending dirty text messages to an underage congressional page. THIRTY YEARS earlier, Massachusetts Democrat Congressman Gerry Studds had an affair with a page, was finally censured ten years later and was still re-elected for another seven terms AFTER the censure.
Were you angry about any of the above incidents?
When the Allen Howe and Wilbur Mills incidents took place, I remember commenting to a friend of mine, that both of them should have just put someone on their staff. I was a rather cynical teen. That said, I was, and still am angry at the media and Democrats over the different standards applied to Foley versus Studds. Representative Studds was given a standing ovation after his censure, Representative Foley was practically run out of town on a rail.
How many of them were you aware of or are they all just minor footnotes in history?
Today, if your angry about powerful men and their sexual adventures, who are you angrier with; Tiger Woods, Republican Governor Terry Sanford of South Carolina or Democrat Senator Max Baucus of Montana?
Even though Governor Sanford and Senator Baucus used taxpayer funds for their sexual peccadilloes, I’d wager you’re angrier with Tiger. I know I am and I think I know why you may be angrier with Tiger.
We’ve all been betrayed. You can choose to believe the rumors about the media, PGA (Professional Golf Association) officials and Tiger’s sponsors knowing about Tiger’s vices for years. You can also believe they’ve all been complicit in a massive cover up of the real Tiger Woods. But, even if you don’t believe those rumors, Tiger’s image is still something that was carefully crafted beginning with his first appearance on the "Tonight Show with Johnny Carson" so many years ago.
We’re angry because we’ve been duped. We WANTED to believe in this well-spoken, well-mannered man who is an incredible golfer. I think we wanted to believe in this guy with such a stunningingly beautiful wife and the gazillions of dollars we all threw at him when he sold us Nike shirts, Buicks and Gatorade. We may even have lived vicariously in his accomplishments as he shattered the glass ceiling of the racial barriers of golf and became arguably the greatest golfer of all time.
Tiger Woods is still a great golfer. But the public’s admiration and respect was built on a false image. So really, who should we be angrier with, the man who created the false image or those who kept the real Tiger hidden from the public?
Why choose just one, you can be angry with the whole kit and kaboodle.
I wonder how many more Tiger like false images are out there being protected by the media and/or politicians.
UPDATE
Shortly after last weeks edition went to press Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s lawyer announced they will use a justification defense in his trial. Seems this guy was justified in taking down the World Trade Center and
Approximately two years later the powerful Democratic Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; Wilbur Mills was re-elected AFTER being caught drunk with a stripper, ER, pardon me, exotic dancer.
Florida Republican congressman Mark Foley resigned after sending dirty text messages to an underage congressional page. THIRTY YEARS earlier, Massachusetts Democrat Congressman Gerry Studds had an affair with a page, was finally censured ten years later and was still re-elected for another seven terms AFTER the censure.
Were you angry about any of the above incidents?
When the Allen Howe and Wilbur Mills incidents took place, I remember commenting to a friend of mine, that both of them should have just put someone on their staff. I was a rather cynical teen. That said, I was, and still am angry at the media and Democrats over the different standards applied to Foley versus Studds. Representative Studds was given a standing ovation after his censure, Representative Foley was practically run out of town on a rail.
How many of them were you aware of or are they all just minor footnotes in history?
Today, if your angry about powerful men and their sexual adventures, who are you angrier with; Tiger Woods, Republican Governor Terry Sanford of South Carolina or Democrat Senator Max Baucus of Montana?
Even though Governor Sanford and Senator Baucus used taxpayer funds for their sexual peccadilloes, I’d wager you’re angrier with Tiger. I know I am and I think I know why you may be angrier with Tiger.
We’ve all been betrayed. You can choose to believe the rumors about the media, PGA (Professional Golf Association) officials and Tiger’s sponsors knowing about Tiger’s vices for years. You can also believe they’ve all been complicit in a massive cover up of the real Tiger Woods. But, even if you don’t believe those rumors, Tiger’s image is still something that was carefully crafted beginning with his first appearance on the "Tonight Show with Johnny Carson" so many years ago.
We’re angry because we’ve been duped. We WANTED to believe in this well-spoken, well-mannered man who is an incredible golfer. I think we wanted to believe in this guy with such a stunningingly beautiful wife and the gazillions of dollars we all threw at him when he sold us Nike shirts, Buicks and Gatorade. We may even have lived vicariously in his accomplishments as he shattered the glass ceiling of the racial barriers of golf and became arguably the greatest golfer of all time.
Tiger Woods is still a great golfer. But the public’s admiration and respect was built on a false image. So really, who should we be angrier with, the man who created the false image or those who kept the real Tiger hidden from the public?
Why choose just one, you can be angry with the whole kit and kaboodle.
I wonder how many more Tiger like false images are out there being protected by the media and/or politicians.
UPDATE
Shortly after last weeks edition went to press Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s lawyer announced they will use a justification defense in his trial. Seems this guy was justified in taking down the World Trade Center and
Who's Constitution is this?
The Obama Administration was wrong when Attorney General Holder elected to try terrorists in Federal court in New York City or for that matter anywhere in the United States. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 was created specifically to address the unique situation of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay and received overwhelming bi-partisan support. In several rulings the Supreme Court signaled what would and would not be acceptable in the act. Attorney General Holder’s decision will have numerous long-term negative consequences both at home and abroad and I believe will weaken the Constitution and many long established rights e.g., Miranda, Habeas Corpus, representation during questioning and the right to a speedy trial to name only a few.
Before I lay out my arguments I will state for the record I am not an attorney, I don’t even play one on TV. Usually when I’m on TV I play a physician or college professor. but, I digress. My legal education comes from years of watching Judge Judy, Judge Joe Brown, Judge Alex and all of the various incarnations of Law and Order. If there is any attorney who is admitted to practice before the federal bar and especially if you have tried criminal cases in federal court, please write to me in care of this paper and tell me where my facts and or logic are wrong.
The following are the legal flaws and pitfalls I see in this decision. There are numerous other philosophical problems I choose not to pursue.
Attorney General Holder should have recused himself from making this decision. The Attorney General has at least two conflicts of interest. Before taking his current office as Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder was a senior partner in the Washington DC law firm of Covington & Burling. His firm is representing 17 terrorists pro bono (Providing legal services free of charge). Furthermore, in February of 2000, then Deputy Attorney General Holder engineered and pushed the pardon of 16 Puerto Rican FALN terrorists. The pardon was opposed by the FBI, the US Attorneys who prosecuted them and the NYPD officers maimed by them. I don’t think terrorists should be pardoned. I also think you shouldn’t decide how and where to prosecute people your firm still represents.
If these cases ever make it to a courtroom, I don’t believe a fair trial is possible. I think President Obama and Attorney General Holder made a fair trial by jury impossible when they GUARANTEED a conviction and execution. You might argue that all prosecutors guarantee convictions and it’s their way of showing confidence in their case. Agreed. However, Eric Holder is no ordinary prosecutor, he is the Attorney General of the United States. He didn’t make his guarantee at a news conference or in a TV interview. He gave his guarantee during SWORN TESTIMONY before the Senate Judiciary Committee. President Obama GUARANTEED a conviction and execution in a press conference. With a guarantee like that, when or if a conviction takes place, rightly or wrongly, our judicial system will immediately be labeled as a Kangaroo Court.
NOTE: Re-read the previous two paragraphs. It seems the Attorney General is playing both sides of the fence. Defending terrorists on the one hand and guaranteeing conviction and execution on the other.
But, I’m already getting ahead of myself. You cannot guarantee how a presiding judge is going to rule in what will surely be a large number of pre-trial motions and hearings. When Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, "the Blind Sheik," was arrested, tried and eventually convicted after the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the FBI, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Manhattan and the NYPD bent over backwards to cross every "T" and dot every "I", as they should have. Even so, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals had to reinstate the indictment after the presiding judge threw it out. Considering the importance of these trials, I think justice is better served by a three judge Military Commission than by one, possibly rogue, judge.
The cases against the subjects of this new round of criminal terrorist trials will not be nearly so neat and tidy as the case against "The Blind Sheikh". These men were captured on the field of battle. There weren’t any Miranda warnings given and until the US Supreme Court stepped in, no habeas corpus either. Habeas corpus is a Writ seeking relief from unlawful detention. Because all of these men have been held at Guantanamo since their capture I don’t think they’ll get a speedy trial under any definition of a speedy trial. Finally, whether or not you believe the interrogations which took place were or were not torture, none of them had lawyers present during questioning.
These men were captured on the battlefield so initially the rules of evidence, Miranda, habeas corpus, the right to a speedy trial and the right to representation were ignored. If these men are now tried and convicted and if their convictions are allowed to stand, what does that say?
It says that yours and my Miranda rights, habeas corpus and right to representation and our 6th amendment right to a speedy trial can be ignored as well.
On to Discovery; the legal process where both sides show what evidence they have and reveal their witness list. How much of our intelligence gathering techniques, technology and sources will the government be compelled to disclose to insure a fair trial?
Oh, and then there’s the witness list, this would include the names of CIA interrogators and case officers. It might even include undercover informants within Al Qaeda or other governments’ undercover intelligence agents. I’m sure the Mossad (The Israeli Secret Service) would love to have their agents covers on the front page of the New York Times or on CNN. If we’re lucky none of this evidence will be produced, but then without evidence, there can’t be a trial, and without a trial there’s no conviction or execution.
And then there’s jury selection. In this case I believe the jury can go to either of two extremes. It will either be impossible to find an impartial jury or in spite of Attorney General Holder and President Obama’s assurances to the contrary we could get a hung jury or worse yet an acquittal. Jury’s sometimes goober. Does anyone remember that guy who played football for USC and the Buffalo Bills, I think his name was O.J. Simpson.
We went through years of judicial, political and legislative wrangling to get to a solution of the problem of Guantanamo detainees. The overwhelmingly bi-partisan solution was the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Why are we now trashing that solution?
Does anyone out there, besides Attorney General Holder and President Obama see an upside to this?
In my opinion Attorney General Holder’s decision is illogical and criminally irresponsible.
Before I lay out my arguments I will state for the record I am not an attorney, I don’t even play one on TV. Usually when I’m on TV I play a physician or college professor. but, I digress. My legal education comes from years of watching Judge Judy, Judge Joe Brown, Judge Alex and all of the various incarnations of Law and Order. If there is any attorney who is admitted to practice before the federal bar and especially if you have tried criminal cases in federal court, please write to me in care of this paper and tell me where my facts and or logic are wrong.
The following are the legal flaws and pitfalls I see in this decision. There are numerous other philosophical problems I choose not to pursue.
Attorney General Holder should have recused himself from making this decision. The Attorney General has at least two conflicts of interest. Before taking his current office as Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder was a senior partner in the Washington DC law firm of Covington & Burling. His firm is representing 17 terrorists pro bono (Providing legal services free of charge). Furthermore, in February of 2000, then Deputy Attorney General Holder engineered and pushed the pardon of 16 Puerto Rican FALN terrorists. The pardon was opposed by the FBI, the US Attorneys who prosecuted them and the NYPD officers maimed by them. I don’t think terrorists should be pardoned. I also think you shouldn’t decide how and where to prosecute people your firm still represents.
If these cases ever make it to a courtroom, I don’t believe a fair trial is possible. I think President Obama and Attorney General Holder made a fair trial by jury impossible when they GUARANTEED a conviction and execution. You might argue that all prosecutors guarantee convictions and it’s their way of showing confidence in their case. Agreed. However, Eric Holder is no ordinary prosecutor, he is the Attorney General of the United States. He didn’t make his guarantee at a news conference or in a TV interview. He gave his guarantee during SWORN TESTIMONY before the Senate Judiciary Committee. President Obama GUARANTEED a conviction and execution in a press conference. With a guarantee like that, when or if a conviction takes place, rightly or wrongly, our judicial system will immediately be labeled as a Kangaroo Court.
NOTE: Re-read the previous two paragraphs. It seems the Attorney General is playing both sides of the fence. Defending terrorists on the one hand and guaranteeing conviction and execution on the other.
But, I’m already getting ahead of myself. You cannot guarantee how a presiding judge is going to rule in what will surely be a large number of pre-trial motions and hearings. When Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, "the Blind Sheik," was arrested, tried and eventually convicted after the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the FBI, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Manhattan and the NYPD bent over backwards to cross every "T" and dot every "I", as they should have. Even so, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals had to reinstate the indictment after the presiding judge threw it out. Considering the importance of these trials, I think justice is better served by a three judge Military Commission than by one, possibly rogue, judge.
The cases against the subjects of this new round of criminal terrorist trials will not be nearly so neat and tidy as the case against "The Blind Sheikh". These men were captured on the field of battle. There weren’t any Miranda warnings given and until the US Supreme Court stepped in, no habeas corpus either. Habeas corpus is a Writ seeking relief from unlawful detention. Because all of these men have been held at Guantanamo since their capture I don’t think they’ll get a speedy trial under any definition of a speedy trial. Finally, whether or not you believe the interrogations which took place were or were not torture, none of them had lawyers present during questioning.
These men were captured on the battlefield so initially the rules of evidence, Miranda, habeas corpus, the right to a speedy trial and the right to representation were ignored. If these men are now tried and convicted and if their convictions are allowed to stand, what does that say?
It says that yours and my Miranda rights, habeas corpus and right to representation and our 6th amendment right to a speedy trial can be ignored as well.
On to Discovery; the legal process where both sides show what evidence they have and reveal their witness list. How much of our intelligence gathering techniques, technology and sources will the government be compelled to disclose to insure a fair trial?
Oh, and then there’s the witness list, this would include the names of CIA interrogators and case officers. It might even include undercover informants within Al Qaeda or other governments’ undercover intelligence agents. I’m sure the Mossad (The Israeli Secret Service) would love to have their agents covers on the front page of the New York Times or on CNN. If we’re lucky none of this evidence will be produced, but then without evidence, there can’t be a trial, and without a trial there’s no conviction or execution.
And then there’s jury selection. In this case I believe the jury can go to either of two extremes. It will either be impossible to find an impartial jury or in spite of Attorney General Holder and President Obama’s assurances to the contrary we could get a hung jury or worse yet an acquittal. Jury’s sometimes goober. Does anyone remember that guy who played football for USC and the Buffalo Bills, I think his name was O.J. Simpson.
We went through years of judicial, political and legislative wrangling to get to a solution of the problem of Guantanamo detainees. The overwhelmingly bi-partisan solution was the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Why are we now trashing that solution?
Does anyone out there, besides Attorney General Holder and President Obama see an upside to this?
In my opinion Attorney General Holder’s decision is illogical and criminally irresponsible.
You Deserve a Break Today...
This past week has offered an overwhelming bounty, no, a veritable cornucopia of material and stories for a column like mine. From a pizza delivery driver in Sandy "allegedly" attempting to bribe a police officer with pizza, (I didn’t know pizza came in donut flavors) to the Mayor of Stockton taking nepotism to new heights when he fired an officer for writing his son a ticket. And, my personal favorite, rapping your order at McDonalds.
The McDonalds incident alone provides 2-3 weeks worth of material; there’s racism, (several different degrees of racism) not to mention the always popular, "people with too much time on their hands" and, what I’ve chosen to address…
Hmm, I haven’t come up with a clever name for the particular human sub-species I’m thinking of, think of him this way, remember the guy or girl in second grade who on Friday afternoon at 2:19 (the bell at my school rang at 2:20) would raise their hand and loudly pronounce, "Miss Jensen, you forgot to give us our homework."
In one man’s opinion, that’s who the McDonalds employee who called the police last week is. As I’m writing this McDonalds has released a statement saying that the, "employee felt threatened".
Four teenagers were being teenagers and rapped their order. My sympathy was decreased when I learned one of them dropped an "F" bomb, however, they left when they were asked to leave and as far as I know, did not do any property damage. I think if there had been property damage the charges would most certainly be, "Felony Rapping or Aggravated Hip Hop".
If there is any common sense left in the world, the city attorney will ask the courts to dismiss the citations, if madness and idiocy reign in early 21st century America, then I guess normal teenaged pranks will soon be upgraded from misdemeanors to felonies.
Has the statute of limitations run on my teenage years?
The McDonalds incident alone provides 2-3 weeks worth of material; there’s racism, (several different degrees of racism) not to mention the always popular, "people with too much time on their hands" and, what I’ve chosen to address…
Hmm, I haven’t come up with a clever name for the particular human sub-species I’m thinking of, think of him this way, remember the guy or girl in second grade who on Friday afternoon at 2:19 (the bell at my school rang at 2:20) would raise their hand and loudly pronounce, "Miss Jensen, you forgot to give us our homework."
In one man’s opinion, that’s who the McDonalds employee who called the police last week is. As I’m writing this McDonalds has released a statement saying that the, "employee felt threatened".
Four teenagers were being teenagers and rapped their order. My sympathy was decreased when I learned one of them dropped an "F" bomb, however, they left when they were asked to leave and as far as I know, did not do any property damage. I think if there had been property damage the charges would most certainly be, "Felony Rapping or Aggravated Hip Hop".
If there is any common sense left in the world, the city attorney will ask the courts to dismiss the citations, if madness and idiocy reign in early 21st century America, then I guess normal teenaged pranks will soon be upgraded from misdemeanors to felonies.
Has the statute of limitations run on my teenage years?
Freedom of Who's Speech?
I am a proud Reagan conservative and in my opinion the ACLU is a left-of-center liberal organization. With those facts in mind, whenever I find myself on the same side of an issue as the ACLU, I check my moral compass, beliefs and bearings.
When the ACLU defended the free speech rights of Nazis in Skokie, Illinois in the late 1970s, as repugnant as their views are and were, I understood the value of free political speech.
When the ACLU filed a "friend of the court" brief during the NRA’s challenge of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Laws, I cheered loudly from the sidelines.
So as the Obama administration and the Democrat controlled congress has introduced legislation calling for free speech curbs on the Internet, the ACLU’s silence has been deafening.
On November 10th a story on the CBS News website caught my eye: A federal grand jury in Indianapolis had served a supoena on a self-described, left-of-center blog and news website, Indymedia.us. The supoena demanded, "IP addresses, (the unique, largely unknown address every computer carries) times, and any other identifying information including email addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts" of Indymedia site visitors. The supoena did not seek information on writers or contributors of information to the site; it wanted this very private and personal information about the site’s visitors. The supoena further demanded, "Indymedia’s readers’ Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers and so on."
If Indymedia had instructions for making truck bombs or suicide vests on it’s site, the supoena would be reasonable. That’s not the case. The site is a site about OPINION and ADVOCACY. Agree or disagree with their views, opinion and advocacy is a large part of political free speech.
Oh, just one more thing, I originally found the link to this story on drudgereport.com. Even though the supoena was eventually withdrawn, the Department of Justice threatened to charge the site’s administrators with obstruction of justice for disclosing the existence of the supoena. In one man’s opinion, the ACLU’s complete silence on this issue and on the issue of federal control over political free speech on the Internet speaks volumes.
When the ACLU defended the free speech rights of Nazis in Skokie, Illinois in the late 1970s, as repugnant as their views are and were, I understood the value of free political speech.
When the ACLU filed a "friend of the court" brief during the NRA’s challenge of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Laws, I cheered loudly from the sidelines.
So as the Obama administration and the Democrat controlled congress has introduced legislation calling for free speech curbs on the Internet, the ACLU’s silence has been deafening.
On November 10th a story on the CBS News website caught my eye: A federal grand jury in Indianapolis had served a supoena on a self-described, left-of-center blog and news website, Indymedia.us. The supoena demanded, "IP addresses, (the unique, largely unknown address every computer carries) times, and any other identifying information including email addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts" of Indymedia site visitors. The supoena did not seek information on writers or contributors of information to the site; it wanted this very private and personal information about the site’s visitors. The supoena further demanded, "Indymedia’s readers’ Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers and so on."
If Indymedia had instructions for making truck bombs or suicide vests on it’s site, the supoena would be reasonable. That’s not the case. The site is a site about OPINION and ADVOCACY. Agree or disagree with their views, opinion and advocacy is a large part of political free speech.
Oh, just one more thing, I originally found the link to this story on drudgereport.com. Even though the supoena was eventually withdrawn, the Department of Justice threatened to charge the site’s administrators with obstruction of justice for disclosing the existence of the supoena. In one man’s opinion, the ACLU’s complete silence on this issue and on the issue of federal control over political free speech on the Internet speaks volumes.
Grounded
The New York Times reported last week that a mother and her two-year old son were forced to deplane from a Southwest airline flight before it even left the ground.
While the flight was waiting in line for permission to takeoff, the tiny tot repeatedly shouted, "Go Plane Go!" and "I want Daddy!"
The reporting typifies poor journalism. We don’t know if the other passengers gave the crew a standing ovation for their actions, or simply passed the hat to collect a well-deserved tip.
At one time my job required as many as three flights a week. Invariably I’d wind up on a Delta flight on Sunday night that left Atlanta at 11:00 P.M. and arrived four hours later in Salt Lake at 1:00 A.M. Initially it was a great flight. It wasn’t crowded and quite often I had an entire row of seats to myself. I could stretch out and get a good nap.
But then one Sunday night a child (and I use the term loosely) boarded the flight. The kid was probably the spawn of Satan specifically put on the flight to torment and punish me for my sins. Anyway I digress, we weren’t even off the ground and the kid started to wail. No, not wail, it was what I have since come to call "The Chainsaw Cry".
Have you ever heard the sound a two-cycle small gas engine makes when you attempt to start it and it won’t quite start? That incessant, aggravating nerve wracking, staccato, "Uh, Uh, Uh…"
A typical flight between Atlanta, Georgia and Salt Lake City, Utah would have a flying time of about 4 hours. This assumes an average flight speed for a commercial airliner of 500 mph, which is equivalent to 805 km/hr or 434 knots. Not this time.
On that particular dark and dreary night, the flight wasn’t the only thing that was non-stop. I’ve never come closer before or since to committing child abuse. It was 1,584 miles, 1,584 long miles of Hellish torment.
I’ve been flying long enough to remember when people were allowed to smoke on planes. I’d choose a 747 with 250 Japanese businessmen smoking their particularly pungent cigarettes non-stop for 10 hours between Seattle and Tokyo over a single 35 pound snot nosed, tow headed American kid any day of the week. (But especially on Sunday.)
We have non-smoking regulations, how about child free flights?
Or instead of fuel surcharges and checked bag fees, a "Toddler Tariff" or a "Child Charge". Put the money towards earplugs or group therapy for the other passengers.
Or, in addition to defibrillators on all domestic and overseas flights, a federal Benadryl mandate.
While the flight was waiting in line for permission to takeoff, the tiny tot repeatedly shouted, "Go Plane Go!" and "I want Daddy!"
The reporting typifies poor journalism. We don’t know if the other passengers gave the crew a standing ovation for their actions, or simply passed the hat to collect a well-deserved tip.
At one time my job required as many as three flights a week. Invariably I’d wind up on a Delta flight on Sunday night that left Atlanta at 11:00 P.M. and arrived four hours later in Salt Lake at 1:00 A.M. Initially it was a great flight. It wasn’t crowded and quite often I had an entire row of seats to myself. I could stretch out and get a good nap.
But then one Sunday night a child (and I use the term loosely) boarded the flight. The kid was probably the spawn of Satan specifically put on the flight to torment and punish me for my sins. Anyway I digress, we weren’t even off the ground and the kid started to wail. No, not wail, it was what I have since come to call "The Chainsaw Cry".
Have you ever heard the sound a two-cycle small gas engine makes when you attempt to start it and it won’t quite start? That incessant, aggravating nerve wracking, staccato, "Uh, Uh, Uh…"
A typical flight between Atlanta, Georgia and Salt Lake City, Utah would have a flying time of about 4 hours. This assumes an average flight speed for a commercial airliner of 500 mph, which is equivalent to 805 km/hr or 434 knots. Not this time.
On that particular dark and dreary night, the flight wasn’t the only thing that was non-stop. I’ve never come closer before or since to committing child abuse. It was 1,584 miles, 1,584 long miles of Hellish torment.
I’ve been flying long enough to remember when people were allowed to smoke on planes. I’d choose a 747 with 250 Japanese businessmen smoking their particularly pungent cigarettes non-stop for 10 hours between Seattle and Tokyo over a single 35 pound snot nosed, tow headed American kid any day of the week. (But especially on Sunday.)
We have non-smoking regulations, how about child free flights?
Or instead of fuel surcharges and checked bag fees, a "Toddler Tariff" or a "Child Charge". Put the money towards earplugs or group therapy for the other passengers.
Or, in addition to defibrillators on all domestic and overseas flights, a federal Benadryl mandate.
Bambi Encounter
I had the radio on the other day and heard the words; "animal encounter" and "stimulus money" in the same news story.
"Animal encounter." My thoughts immediately turned to a vacation in Florida a few years back and the disappointment from certain family members when I chose not to spend $79 a head for a 30 minute swim with Flipper. Everyone else thought it was a good deal, but seven of us times $79 for 30 minutes plus souvenir photos, tee shirts, dolphin safe tuna sandwiches…
Well, it was a good deal more than I cared to spend at the time.
My kind of animal encounter is the San Diego Zoo’s 1,800-acre wild animal park. You ride around the perimeter in the little open-air train and watch African Plains animals in a relatively natural setting. It’s great, I loved it, and the kids loved it too.
"Animal encounter." The words bring to mind soft music, soothing calm and gentleness like tiny kittens or warm puppies. Imagine my surprise when I learned that "animal encounter" is the new term for hitting and wounding, if not killing an animal as well as quite possibly yourself. This is what was once called "AN ACCIDENT!"
Yes, UDOT (Utah Department of Transportation) applied for and received federal stimulus funds to build a fence in Parley’s Canyon so that our 2,654 pound Ford hurtling down Parley’s at 65 (er uh, 70?) miles an hour doesn’t have an "encounter" with Bambi and convert the deer boy into 300 pounds of venison burger!
I’m not against the project. In my youth I came close to having an "animal encounter" when horses got loose on I-15 one night. Several years later a German Shepherd leapt in front of my German car and in addition to killing himself, killed my wallet to the tune of $1,400 American dollars.
So it’s a good project. We can argue the merits or lack thereof of the Stimulus Bill another time. Bambi probably thinks it’s a good project too. I just think that the English language is quite nice and words mean things. So it’s not an "animal encounter", IT’S AN ACCIDENT!
"Animal encounter." My thoughts immediately turned to a vacation in Florida a few years back and the disappointment from certain family members when I chose not to spend $79 a head for a 30 minute swim with Flipper. Everyone else thought it was a good deal, but seven of us times $79 for 30 minutes plus souvenir photos, tee shirts, dolphin safe tuna sandwiches…
Well, it was a good deal more than I cared to spend at the time.
My kind of animal encounter is the San Diego Zoo’s 1,800-acre wild animal park. You ride around the perimeter in the little open-air train and watch African Plains animals in a relatively natural setting. It’s great, I loved it, and the kids loved it too.
"Animal encounter." The words bring to mind soft music, soothing calm and gentleness like tiny kittens or warm puppies. Imagine my surprise when I learned that "animal encounter" is the new term for hitting and wounding, if not killing an animal as well as quite possibly yourself. This is what was once called "AN ACCIDENT!"
Yes, UDOT (Utah Department of Transportation) applied for and received federal stimulus funds to build a fence in Parley’s Canyon so that our 2,654 pound Ford hurtling down Parley’s at 65 (er uh, 70?) miles an hour doesn’t have an "encounter" with Bambi and convert the deer boy into 300 pounds of venison burger!
I’m not against the project. In my youth I came close to having an "animal encounter" when horses got loose on I-15 one night. Several years later a German Shepherd leapt in front of my German car and in addition to killing himself, killed my wallet to the tune of $1,400 American dollars.
So it’s a good project. We can argue the merits or lack thereof of the Stimulus Bill another time. Bambi probably thinks it’s a good project too. I just think that the English language is quite nice and words mean things. So it’s not an "animal encounter", IT’S AN ACCIDENT!
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Zac Efron is Still 17
I saw "Me and Orson Welles" at the Broadway this afternoon. While I don’t totally agree with Rolling Stone’s opinion of Zac Efron’s acting abilities, it was a good movie and I’d see it again.
The film was shot in New York, London and The Isle of Man. The locations, costuming and production values were superb. I thought it was well written and a superb example of a look backstage. It would probably work quite well as a stage play.
My only problem with the film was trying to decide who was portraying the lead character. Was Troy Bolton the lead or Zac Efron?
The gestures, speech patterns and expressions were all Troy Bolton. Maybe Troy Bolton and Zac Efron are the same person. Has anyone ever seen Troy Bolton and Zac Efron together?
I can honestly say that Efron did a superior job as Link Larkin in "Hairspray". He wasn’t Zac Efron playing himself as a character named Link Larkin, he was an actor who developed a character.
After Efron backed out of Kenny Ortega’s production of "Footloose" last Summer, an acquaintance commented that he probably didn’t want to be typecast and wanted to stretch his acting abilities. I immediately retorted, "Oh, a project like,"Seventeen Again"?"
The problem with "Me and Orson Welles" is that Zac/Troy/Richard is "Seventeen Again", or is that still 17?
Before I agree with "Rolling Stone’s" pronouncement that "Me and Orson Welles" proves Zac Efron can act, I’d like to see Mr. Efron portray a character who isn’t 17 and doesn’t sing, dance or play basketball.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
