Sustained outrage

What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority.

Molly Ivins

Education Begins With Reading

Sounds simple, right? If you can’t read your ability to learn becomes severely handicapped. As a parent I want my kids to have every benefit this life can give us, and judging by the direction our education system is headed, the earlier we get started the better.

You cannot and should not expect public education to motivate our children to learn. That is the responsibility of the parent and it needs to be taken on starting from the day a child is born. Some people say it can start before the child is born. I’m no expert in this so I’ll leave the accuracy of statement to them to prove.

The desire to learn beyond basic survival instincts must be taught. And developing the desire to learn begins with reading. Simply showing children that there is a world beyond the four walls of their home is one of the greatest first steps they can take. But it is up to the parent to get them started.

Reading to your children will spark their imagination. Exposing them to a wide variety of topics will ignite that spark to the point it will never be extinguished.

Our library system is stocked full of every type of book you can imagine. And every book, magazine, CD and computer in it is free for us to use. Please utilize this resource to show how much we appreciate having it made available to us.

Libraries are not there only for entertainment. You can receive a complete and well-rounded education just from reading books from our public libraries.

Show your children the value of reading. For some fun exercises, assign your child the task of writing an essay on whatever topic you can think of. Make it a fun topic. They may protest they may rebel but in the end it will another one of the greatest memories they have of their childhood. It could be the very earliest steps of creating a career path for them. It’s possible.

Reading unlocks so many possibilities like nothing else can.

I have to admit that my writing this post is more than just for the sake of kids I don’t even know. I have my selfish reasons too. Just think for a moment that every person in the country, in the world, could read and did so on a regular basis. How much more educated do you think we would all be? Do you agree that a better educated person has more opportunities to succeed than an under-educated person? If more people were educated can you agree with me that there would be far less poverty, far more self-reliance, far less need of a government to care for us and therefore far less financial strain on our entire economic system. So you see I do plead with everyone to become better educated so that all of us can enjoy a better quality of life.

It is a world that is possible to create. Think about some of the reasons people do not learn to read. Certainly there are medical reasons, but putting those aside, I believe the single most inexcusable reason for not being able to read is a lack of conviction that reading is necessary.

While I am on the subject of education, I have to say a few things about writing. We are losing our ability to write because of the computer. I think everyone can agree with this. I don’t think that we should throw away our computers just to save writing, but I do believe that we need to work on spelling and grammar. We can get by fine without the need to write letters, we have many other ways of communicating, but when I hear an adult utter this phrase “I ain’t got no . . .” it makes me cringe. I don’t consider myself a grammar nazi, but my God, please try to take some pride in yourself and get an education.

If you have children, please read to them. They deserve as good a chance at a good education as anyone. Those children who are being read to are going to fair much better than those children who are not read to. Reading really is that important.

Teaching adults to read is also very rewarding. Their gratitude and excitement at being able to read on their own is genuine and much appreciated. When I see them read on their own knowing I played a part in teaching and encouraging them to do so is very exhilarating.

 

Some people state that when foreigners some to America to live they should speak our language. I agree, but not all of them can. We can step up and help them learn to speak English. There are programs in every large city that offer facilities to help adults learn to read as well as speak English. Volunteer and know that you are doing something instead of just complaining.

Comcast takes over control of NBC, kiss another American Icon goodbye

Like it or not, and the current pulse is ‘not’, Comcast is the new majority holder of NBC. Their first order of business was to replace one of the most well-known American icons with a ‘unifying’ symbol that goes to show their lack of imagination. In doing so they mimic what every corporation is saying: America’s past means nothing. In the relentless march towards ‘one global market’, remaining attached to one nation spells weakness.

The corporate rhetoric was sickeningly thick – they actually said “We aren't a family of two favorite sons, rather one filled with talented people and companies all tied for first”.

Another image of ‘one big happy family all tied for first’’. Who comes up with this drivel?

Top Comcast executives were introduced to employees via a video feed to locations in New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and London. After listening to pre-recorded and carefully worded interviews of these executives the employees were given a chance to ask questions. A chance to ask questions? The executives talked their company line while the most pressing question from the audience – are there going to be layoffs - was not discussed. You can see what employees only concern was. And I don’t blame them, corporations do not have a history of benevolence towards employees no matter what their public face says.

The welcome ‘gifts’ were laughable and stingy given the estimated value of this bloated conglomerate creeping ever so steadily towards total monopoly. Each employee received 25 Comcast shares, worth $23.31 each; a family pass to one of the Universal theme parks; and other materials, including a "Big Idea Book" in which they were to record their own. Can’t you just feel the love? I’d like to see if any of those ideas ever end up on the boss’s desk.

The business of wealth and power building just took another end run at sucking the American consumer dry.

Their new logo should be a video camera focused on a glittering and bloated dollar sign propped up by couch potatoes.

People Who Prey on Others Only Add to Our Struggle

I cannot for the life of me understand why people prey on other people who are struggling to make a living just as they are. It seems if we all help each other with taking advantage of each other then we will all win.

 If you are not helping others in the same situation then you are part of the problem.

My wife and I manage a small apartment complex – eight units – in Orem Utah. Her mother owns them but she lives out of state and depends heavily on us to manage and care for these units. Having three of these apartments empty puts a strain on the bank account because the mortgage is just barely covered by the rent from the other five. And trust me, the mortgage company always gets their cut out of this situation regardless of how many are rented.

These three apartments have only been empty since the first of the month and they could have been made ready if we lived closer and could attend to them on more than a weekend basis. This past Saturday L went to the apartments by herself because lately it seems that any amount of exertion or exposure to the outside cold sets me off on a coughing fit. This is beginning to worry me as it has been a constant companion for several months now. Anyway, I went with her Sunday, but only in a moral support capacity.  Her tireless efforts keeps these apartments in a clean and well maintained condition and they never fail to receive favorable comments from people searching for an apartment to rent. They say things like “these are the cleanest apartments I have seen yet”.

While it is true the building is showing its age it takes only a little effort to keep them looking better than any place else in the neighborhood simply because the other owners don't do anything to clean or maintain their apartment buildings. And they get away with charging the same amount. I can understand their position, the general attitude of renters is that the property they are renting is not theirs so why take care of it. It just doesn't seem to mater to renters in general that even though they signed a contract to keep the building clean and undamaged, they don’t honor that commitment. This is most likely based in a general lack of concern for other peoples property. And where does this attitude come from? The home. If they were taught from an early age to care for their parents home then they would learn to take care of places they rent. I cannot find any falsity in believing this assumption.

I dare say that if they are taught this simple truth then every aspect of their lives would improve and therefore the general condition of mankind would improve. Its called respect. Not the kind of ‘respect’ that street thugs and wannabe’s lavish on their ‘weapons’ and false ‘ownership’ of a neighborhood, but the only true respect that means anything: Respect for your fellow man, which begets respect on yourself and on and on until we can actually live together in greater harmony than what is evident in today's society.

Anyway, let me step off my soapbox, because it mainly falls on deaf ears anyway.

It never fails to amaze me how slovenly some people can live. And how they will force their children to live in filth without a seconds thought. Forcing children to live like this is what really burns me up. We have also learned the extent that people will lie to get what they want.

We have spent far more money than we make on these apartments just repairing damage done by the handful of true lowlife scum bags who have learned how to prey on the good nature of people who truly want to believe in the good in humanity.

They are all on their best behavior when asking for something from us (a place to live), while they lie about employment history, they lie about current income, they lie about criminal records, and then in the end, once they get what they want, they think nothing of screwing over the ‘good’ person who gave them a chance. Then after loosing several months rent and having to pay their utilities while trying to force them out with hands tied by the letter of the law, they get to slither off into the protection of like-minded people never to be heard from again and never being made to face up to their responsibilities. Why these people are protected by the legal system is beyond me.

There really needs to be a DO NOT RENT list so that other landlords do not have to go through what we have. I’m willing to bet that the previous owner we called to get reference from also lied to us about them just to get rid of them. Unethical, you bet your ass it is. These people also should be made to answer for their lies.

Is there anyone out there willing to share their horror story of renting to lying scum bags? I would love to hear from you. Maybe something can be done to get the laws changed so we don’t have to lose so much time and money on kicking these deadbeats out.

Does Your State Have an Official ‘State Gun’?

Utah state lawmakers are currently debating whether to designate a semiautomatic pistol as the official gun of Utah, the Browning M1911 pistol. The motivation is to honor Utah native John Browning, the guns inventor.

Pennsylvania wants to do the same thing. But they don’t want to settle for some pistol, they want to heap their honor on a rifle. And their reasoning for doing so is that it provides a celebration of history and a contribution toward America’s independence.

Sounds a little too much like honoring the National Rifle Association. If we follow the line of the often used reasoning that ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people’ then people are the “contribution toward America’s independence”, not firearms.

Anyway, how is it that these representatives have enough time on their hands to work on this type of legislation? There must be something of a more ‘pressing nature’ for these guys to work on other than something that only amounts to ‘busy work’.

Now I suppose this means there is going to be a race between these two states to see which is first to have an official firearm.

Where is this coming from anyway? And who is benefiting from it?

Utah Republican Representative Carl Wimmer said of Browning "He invented a firearm that has defended American values and the traditions of this country for 100 years."

Sounds like a load of rhetoric that just happens to overlook the fact that the ‘American values’ he refers to killed a lot of native American Indians and stole their land from them. Are those the ‘values’ you are referring to Mr. Wimmer?

I’m not a gun control nut, in fact, I believe everyone should have the choice to have one if they deem it necessary, but John Browning can be honored in other ways without declaring such a polarizing device as a weapon to be a state symbol.

Gun Violence Prevention Center board member Steve Gunn told The Associated Press honoring the M1911 is wrong because the people who opened fire in most recent U.S. mass shootings used semiautomatic pistols. That includes the Jan. 8 Arizona shooting in which six people were killed and 13 — including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords — were wounded with a Glock pistol.

I can almost agree with his reasoning except it’s like saying we should not drive cars because they can kill. And I don’t believe that demonizing a weapon is going to convince people to not own one, just like honoring a weapon is not going to lead to an increase in gun sales. I just don’t think a government body should promote something that holds so much potential for abuse that can lead to such horrific and devastating effect.

Celebrating family, high moral character, and ethical standards, while rewarding education and promoting mutual respect, now these are things that are worth honoring.

Why We Don’t Vote

Why do we have such a large number of people who do not participate in the democratic process? In a typical Presidential election voter turnout was recorded as anywhere from as low as 26% (in 1824) to as high as 81% (1876). Voter turnout between 1840 and 1916 was consistently over 60%. 1968 was the last time turnout hit a high of 60%.

These are dismal numbers. It goes a long way to explain why there is such a deafening hush across the land.

Citizens worry more about the struggle for daily survival than about the struggle for world power, much as we did in 1900. As well we should. World power is the realm of the power elite, I dare say the rest of us could not care less as long as we survive comfortably. Very little has changed since 1900 except where we live and who holds political power. Sixty percent of the nation was rural in 1900 and the home was the primary unit of production. That number has steadily decreased over the years as immigrants migrated to the U.S. seeking industrial jobs in the East and the Midwest.

As urbanization grew and primary household income shifted to factory jobs, convenience became increasingly important. This is where the role of corporations grew. What was once a nation of small farmers, shopkeepers, and mill owners had become a land of industrial giants whose size dwarfed every other social and political institution. Many of us today see the power shift from the individual to those industrial giants as crippling our ability to obtain and hold onto the American Dream.

We now long for a simpler time, a time of less government involvement in our lives, a time of higher moral standards, and a time when what was best for the family unit went hand-in-hand with what was best for the nation.

Corporations now hold the primary focus of our government. That focus lies in bolstering the global marketplace. A marketplace where the role of the American worker has been systematically lessened to the point that we no longer have any real political power. Power lies in the accumulation of money, and that money is in the hands of corporations. Small businesses struggle, the family unit struggles, corporations flourish.

More and more citizens have come to realize that their vote really amounts to very little. Many of us can no longer comprehend, nor wish to contribute to, the massive amounts of campaign dollars required to participate in presidential elections when we know everything runs in favor of corporations vs. the individual.

If, by some miracle, someone steps up and can turn things around to where the American voter can regain the power we once had to make a difference, others may follow and voters may return to the polls. What are the chances of this happening?

We citizens see the writing on the wall. We are no longer a part of this political system. This is why we don’t vote.

The reason democracy doesn’t work is that, while bribing of individual voters is illegal, the bribing of whole classes of voters is not.

The Dublin Opinion

Homegrown Terrorism: An American Way of Life

Violence has dominated the media in this country since before we violently broke away from our mother country England. Violence is daily brought into every American home through televised news and prime time programming. Violence is what drives moviegoers to part with ten bucks to see the latest R-rated block buster.

Children practice violence on the school playground, our children are killing each other and their parents, their parents are killing their children, their parents are killing each other, drugs are peddled openly on our city streets under the threat of violence.

We are a violent nation.

Presidents have been assassinated, judges have been murdered, threats are reported against our political leadership weekly.

The Iraq and Afghan war’s have created a level of international terrorism so great that has become a threat to the security of us all.

The recent tragedy in Tucson, Arizona has brought the nation’s attention on the state of our collective mental health and, once again, on our gun laws.

Our steady erosion of values, our alarming lack of respect for human life, our lust for more money and power have placed the value of human life a distant second or even third place. These are the true root issues of violence that need to be addressed. We have created a division in this country between those people in power promising they will bring change to our once proud but now failing American way of life and those who are struggling to survive the increasing cost of everything, the loss of our jobs to foreign countries, and the realization that our American dream is being sold wholesale to illegal immigrants.

Homeland Security – working under orders to protect us from terrorism - thinks nothing of stripping ‘all’ us of our dignity through invasive airport searches in the name of political correctness. Every level of law enforcement has adopted the private policy that ‘everyone is guilty until proven innocent’ despite their public policy that the opposite is in effect.

Judicial ‘discretion’ allows such widely diverse sentences that prejudice seems to rule over the Constitutionally given “equal justice for all”.

Homegrown terrorism is being narrowly applied to Muslims in a short-sighted attempt to bolster control over the American people. It cannot be denied that “radicalization is taking place in America”, to quote North Carolina Representative Sue Myrick, a member of the House Intelligence Committee. But radicalism is something we have been practicing in America long before Islam ever stepped foot on our shores. It exists and thrives in many forms: domestic violence, road rage, rape, child predation, workplace violence.

The continued existence of these horrible actions we take against our brothers, sisters, sons and daughters reflects our leaders' inability to make honest assessments about the true threats to America's security. The causes of terrorism leads to the root causes of violence. Addressing and reducing violence, as well as inequality, on an individual basis is needed to reduce the true security threat to all of us.

The myth of homegrown terrorism as in pertains to Muslims serves the interests of loudmouths on both ends of the ideological spectrum. To the right, the threat of homegrown terrorism helps to perpetuate the notion of a ceaseless, civilization-wide struggle against Islamic extremism. To the left, the prospect of American Muslims taking up jihad fits with the idea that the U.S.'s foreign policy is creating a new generation of terrorists.

We are not doomed to be a violent nation, a better course of action for Americans to take, if we truly want to protect ourselves is to teach methods of anger management, make people feel their voices are not falling on deaf ears, show them how violence only brings about more violence. Show them how violence is selfish and unproductive. Take TSA out of our nations airports. The better way to protect us from outside sources of violence is to increase security on our shores and international ports of entry. Let’s take care of ourselves, not by lumping all of us in with some trumped up terrorist master plan, but by education and putting the welfare and security of the American people us first.

I want to close with this plea from Rodney King of “can’t we all just get along”. It gets laughed at for its naiveté but there still remains a part of each of us that wants this question answered.

Further Reading:

Teachers are powerless to stop schoolyard violence

Culture of schoolyard violence

Michigan boy, 13, accused of point blank killing

Parents killing children is an alarming trend

Why we Americans are so violent

American Spirit – Geraldine Doyle: Rosie the Riveter

I’m starting a new series to re-introduce unknown or forgotten American men and women from our past who, have, in some way, epitomized the American spirit. It is my hope that by focusing on the patriotic spirit that these individuals embodied we can breathe new life into that same spirit. I’m not suggesting that the American spirit is dead, it just needs to be dusted off and more openly displayed.

As we Americans spend more and more of our waking moments engaged in the struggle to survive, as we learn to live with what now passes for morality and ethics in today’s society, as our American Dream slips further and further out of reach, there is a tendency to become disillusioned over what it means to be American.

The steady erosion of personal freedoms, the wholesale loss of once high paying jobs to foreigners, the crumbling condition of our infrastructure, and the realization that we have become disenfranchised by our political representatives in favor of the corporate dollar, it is no wonder our future is looking more dismal by the day.

Hardships for Americans are nothing new, our grandparents and their grandparents before them faced similar trials, and they managed to turn things around. In every case, when times went sour there was someone, through some sacrifice or rally cry, who acted as a lightning rod to spark the American spirit and helped pull this country together as one.

This is what is needed today. Until that person or persons come forward to speak for all Americans, I want to share the lives of those individuals who helped turn things around for previous generations.

I believe our American spirit can be revived, let’s hope it will happen soon.

First, allow me to introduce to a woman who became an icon during World War II.

Geraldine Doyle

Before World War II, 12 million American women worked outside the home. Typically, these ‘occupations’ were service oriented, poorly paid and reserved for females. The remainder of the female population generally married, raised children and, if they were 'allowed' to, they ventured outside the home to do volunteer work for social and religious organizations.

When fighting in Europe and Japan called men away from their jobs, 6 million additional women left the home and supported the war effort by entering the work force.

One woman who answered the call was Geraldine Hoff Doyle of Lansing, Mich. After graduating from high school, the 17-year-old cellist took a job at the American Broach & Machine Co., a metal-processing plant in Ann Arbor, and is still in business today. Doyle was wearing a red and white polka-dot bandanna and leaning over a piece of machinery one day when a United Press International photographer took her picture. That image inspired J. Howard Miller, a graphic artist at the U.S. War Production Coordinating Committee, to illustrate a poster featuring a woman wearing a similar bandanna and the motto: "We Can Do It!".

The woman in the poster became known as a "Rosie the Riveter," after a 1942 song of the same name, and she helped to encourage women to find jobs and achieve their economic independence. When the war ended and the men returned home, women were generally expected to return to their domestic lives, but Doyle's famous poster empowered some to buck tradition and take control of their own destiny.

Doyle actually left her factory job shortly after the photograph was taken because a co-worker had badly injured her hands while toiling at the machines. Fearing a similar fate, Doyle took safer jobs, like working at a soda fountain and a book store. She wed Leo Doyle, a young dental school student, and together they raised six children. Over the course of their 66-year marriage, the couple also ran a successful dental practice in Lansing. He died in February 2010.

Doyle didn't realize her place in women's history until the early 1980s when she saw an article in Modern Maturity magazine, and connected the UPI photo of her younger self with the iconic "We Can Do It!" poster. The image also appeared on the cover of the Time-Life book "The Patriotic Tide: 1940-1950." The "We Can Do It!" poster was later used by the feminist movement of the 1970s and 1980s and appeared on a 33-cent stamp issued in 1999 by the U.S. Postal Service.

Doyle died on Dec. 26 from complications of severe arthritis. She was 86.

To China: America is Here to Serve

Is anyone in this country under the mistaken illusion that America is number one in anything?

For some startling facts designed to wake us all up to the fact that we are becoming financial slaves to China, here is a partial list copied from Permaculture & Regenerative Design News.

The United States has lost approximately 42,400 factories since 2001. 

In 2008, 1.2 billion cellphones were sold worldwide.  So how many of them were manufactured inside the United States?  Zero.

As of the end of July, the U.S. trade deficit with China had risen 18 percent compared to the same time period a year ago.

In the United States today, consumption accounts for 70 percent of GDP. Of this 70 percent, over half is spent on services.

In 2001, the United States ranked fourth in the world in per capita broadband Internet use.  Today it ranks 15th.

Put the American People Back on Top

What I read about the looming tax-cuts that Republicans are gunning for, is that social services and education will take the biggest hit. My question is: Why do these two areas have to be cut? Is it because these are areas where the recipients have the smallest voice? Tax cuts to these areas represent the ‘easy way out’ of tax reform pressure and by taking this route our leadership is turning its back on the American tax payer.

I agree taxes need to be cut. Our government has become bloated with the income it brings in from taxes and whenever there is more than enough money waste is more likely to be the result. Judging by how much money is being spent on research grants, pork barrel projects, politicians salaries and the military, we are wasting a lot of money.

Tax payers recognize that this country already collects more than enough money to cover its expenditures and judging by how much money is spent on research grants, pork barrel projects, politicians salaries and the military, we also know where the real cuts should begin.

There are many people who may think that any talk of cutting spending to these areas is heresy. Spending on these sacred cows far outstrip the rate of return we should expect for the investment.

Tax payers feel the harsh reality of the financial crisis this country has fallen under. Politicians, with their above average salaries and perks do not feel the reality of it as we do.  State governments are defaulting, citizens are losing their homes, and now we are facing forced healthcare which promises to take even more money from our already over-burdened paychecks.

Medicare and Medicaid fraud and corporate welfare are two major areas where funding could be reduced to counter-balance any tax cuts Republicans want to make.

Social programs are necessary to help us get back on our feet. They are not permanent. Allow them to do what they are intended to do.

Part of the reason tax-backed public education is failing is because the administration is top heavy. Examine how administrative spending on such areas as salaries and unnecessary, frivolous expenditures are taking money away from classrooms and teachers salaries.

I am pleading with our leadership to not take the easy way out by increasing the burden on American citizens who have fallen on hard times. Dig deeper into where the true waste is. Social programs and education, if administered correctly are far too valuable to this country’s future and the welfare of the American worker.

Politicians need to stop taking away from the people who pay their salaries. Politicians need to put the American public back on the top of the list of reasons they are in the political arena. They need to cut their salaries and forego their perks to show the American people they understand the hardships being faced in order to keep food on our tables and a roof over our heads.

Return the balance of power to the American citizen. Show them they are valuable to our economic recovery and are more than ATM’s for when you need more money.

Where is the Anti-War Movement?

Does such a thing exist? Are we all going to remain complacent accomplices? You can come out and at least voice your opinion on March 19, the eighth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Street demonstrations are scheduled in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. You can find details at Answer: Act Now to Stop War and End Racism.

Since declaring a moratorium on anti-war protests in 2004, we have experienced both major political parties. Neither one of them are truly interested in ending these wars. It is up to us, the people to end thse wars. Are you against war or not? Working within the system has not worked. We must start a new anti-war movement. The Democratic Party has proven its willingness to remain enslaved to Wall Street and it turned its back on the working men and women of this country in doing so.

This attitude of ‘let’s play nice’ and ‘you can attract more flies with honey instead of vinegar’ is allowing corporations to dictate our national mores. By allowing these wars to continue we are taking part in allowing the traumatizing, maiming and killing of tens of thousands of Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistani civilians, as well as U.S. soldiers and Marines.

Can we really afford to numb our collective conscience while allowing these atrocities continue? What is this saying about our character?

We are spending nearly nearly a trillion dollars a year to pay for these wars while we have more than 30 million people unemployed, some 40 million people living in poverty and tens of millions more in a category euphemistically called “near poverty.” Our federal government, in order to remain functioning is slashing social services while the profits of weapons manufacturers and private contractors have quadrupled since the invasion of Afghanistan.

The corporations, no matter how badly the wars are going, make huge profits from the conflicts. They have no interest in turning off their money-making machine. Let Iraqis die. Let Afghans die. Let Pakistanis die. Let our own die. And the mandarins in Congress and the White House, along with their court jesters on the television news shows, cynically “feel our pain” and sell us out for bundles of corporate cash.

Does anybody really know what time it is? It is time to stop these wars. The people, you and me, American citizens hold the true power in this country. Politicians think they have it but they are working for corporations. The press think they have it but they also are run by corporations. Corporations have it only because we have allowed it to be shifted to them. Speak with your wallets and your purses. Cut your spending to the bare necessities.

We are not in Iraq to protect them. We are there to put in place a permanent military occupation. Talk of leaving that country is a sham. The U.S. military is used to conquer countries for the rich, to seize markets, land, resources and labor for Wall Street. This is what drives U.S. foreign policy. Julian Assange of Wikileaks tried to get the American people to see this and he was labeled a traitor by the people who stood to lose the most.

During the election of 2008, we voted for Obama because he promised to end the war.  But, U.S. soldiers are still being killed, wounded and psychologically traumatized, especially those on their third, fourth and fifth deployment who were traumatized in previous deployments and are being re-traumatized. The reasons that led people to oppose the war in 2003 are still in effect.  All of the horrors we heard shortly after the invasion of Iraq are still there. Iraqi’s still have no electricity, they  still live with constant violence, have no functioning government, have occupying forces still in their country and suffer rampant birth defects from the depleted uranium.

Why don’t we continue to hear of these awful conditions? Media is being paid off so we don’t see them. How can we continue to trust in a news media that is owned by corporations and refuse to present the news of atrocities we are allowing to exist?

The reason people are joining th military is because of the abysmal job market and tuition rates are skyrocketing. If a fraction of the money spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was used to meet human needs, our kids would be able to go to college at affordable rates. We would be able to create jobs for young people when they get out of high school. Vast amounts of wealth, which we create, are poured into these wars and the military while people here are facing increasing hardship. We have to demand and fight for change, not ask for it.

Where is the seemingly progressive president that was going to end this war? Where did that Obama go? Spending more money on the military is not progressive. Sending more of our citizens into the military and on to foreign countries is not progressive. The war has become progressive, it is now spreading into Pakistan and Yemen.

We need to build an independent political movement that is outside of the Establishment. This is the only way we have ever won real victories in our history.

Supreme Court gets the chance to review police action without warrant

I learned of this story through a Washington Post report written by staff writer Robert Barnes. The tale is based in Kentucky, much later in the report we are told this took place in Lexington. The first paragraph tells us that the police were following a man who had just sold drugs to an undercover informant. We are not told that the police knew this man, he is only identified as ‘a man’.

I’m going over this story trying to make some sense out of it and I am not having any luck without jumping to conclusion, much in the same way the story is being told. The story leaves me with unanswered questions. And that does not bode well for the reporter. There are too many holes and leaps of conclusion that no well-written story should have. This reason I am focusing on this aspect of this story ahead of the subject is because this type of sloppy reporting is becoming all too common in today’s main stream media. One can expect this from what these so-called professionals refer to as street reporters. But I have read many street reporters who do a much more thorough job than Robert Barnes.

Anyway, I will try to wade through this mess and along the way I will point out the inadequacies of this reporter’s writing style.

Still in the first paragraph, we are told that the police entered a breezeway and heard a door slam and that they now had two choices. So far I am lead to believe that the police don’t know which door slammed or if it was even slammed by the as yet to be identified man they were following.

The second paragraph informs us that behind door number one (leap of faith, because how do they know which door he was behind since they only ‘heard’ a door slam?) and behind door number two is another person named Hollis King along with two people smoking marijuana.

Paragraph three tells us that after smelling ‘the drug’ (are we still talking about marijuana or some other drug?) they banged loudly on King’s apartment door and identified themselves as police and after hearing what they thought was evidence being destroyed they kicked the door down. Several questions arise here, since they are pursuing the dealer and they ‘know’ he is behind door number one, why are they pounding on door number two? Are they abandoning the pursuit of the guy who they have hard evidence against? Plus, by yelling out that they are police didn’t the dealer just become alerted and most likely did get rid of evidence? This sounds all very rookie-ish to me.

In the fourth paragraph the reporter has abandoned any reference to the dealer the police were pursuing. Instead he states that King was sentenced to 11 years in prison.

Kentucky Assistant Attorney General Joshua Farley backed the police decision to kick down the door. Of course he would. And this is part of the problem. He claims to believe the story from his officers that they ‘heard noises’ that led them to believe ‘evidence was being destroyed’. I have to laugh at this claim. What ‘noises’ did they hear, a toilet being flushed? A match being struck to burn the evidence? This is beyond the realm of ridiculous. I cannot for the life of me imagine what ‘evidence being destroyed’ in this situation would sound like. They chose to use this lame excuse because of the three reasons for entering without a warrant this is the only one that they had a half-assed chance of getting away with. There was not a life being endangered, they were not concerned with the suspect escaping because as we read in this stellar report these were not even the guys they were chasing.

This Assistant Attorney General Joshua Farley should be ashamed of himself for using such a flimsy basis for taking this case to trial in the first place. By doing this only shows me that he along with many other legal system lackeys are emboldened by what the police are allowed to get away with.

The point of this Washington Post report is that the U.S. Supreme Court heard this case on Jan 12, 2011 and is in the process of deciding whether or not police can abandon the Fourth Amendment and kick down a door because the police claim they smelled marijuana.

I am in agreement with justices Ginsberg, Kagan and Sotomayor on this that police would indeed roam the halls and sniff for ‘reasons’ to kick in a door. Justice Scalia said the police did nothing wrong and that the occupants could have told police they could not enter without a warrant. Where has this guy been living? He is clearly out of touch with what law enforcement has been getting away with.

Police departments all across this nation have a growing reputation for abusing the ‘probable cause’ tenet. Therefore, I see this as a good opportunity for the Supreme Court to finally define police powers in similar situations. However, I realize that given the current atmosphere of law and order in this country, chances are good that the police will be given a free ride on this issue.

I must say here that I am in complete agreement that the illegal drug issue needs to be addressed. Drug abuse in this country has cost Americans untold billions of dollars in lost productivity and tax revenue, years of freedom in the ridiculously unbalanced and unfair prosecution, and the waste of lives alone should make this issue a top priority.

I admit I am being hard on the police. They need to do things the right way. If, as Justice Scalia says, criminals are stupid, they will eventually be caught at their illegal activity. There have been many instances where police have busted down the wrong door. In some of those cases innocent law-abiding citizens have been terrorized and killed. Given this environment, of course people are going to panic when they hear that thunderous pounding on their door followed by “Open Up”, “Police.”

Listen, drugs need to be removed from our streets. Criminals need to be punished. I object to the citizenry becoming victims due to over-zealous police forces who would rather bust heads and let God sort it out.

Oh, and as far as this reporter goes, how about giving us some hard facts and stop leaving out information like what happened to the dealer the police were originally pursuing.

Articles of Confederation

Agreed to by the Second Continental Congress November 15, 1777 and in effect after ratification by Maryland, March 1,1781, the Articles of Confederation served as a bridge between the initial government by the Continental Congress of the Revolutionary period and the federal government provided under the Constitution for the United States in effect March 4, 1789.

U.S. Constitution

The Federal Convention convened in the State House (Independence Hall) in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of Confederation. Because the delegations from only two states were at first present, the members adjourned from day to day until a quorum of seven states was obtained on May 25. Through discussion and debate it became clear by mid-June that, rather than amend the existing Articles, the Convention would draft an entirely new frame of government. All through the summer, in closed sessions, the delegates debated, and redrafted the articles of the new Constitution. Among the chief points at issue were how much power to allow the central government, how many representatives in Congress to allow each state, and how these representatives should be elected--directly by the people or by the state legislators. The work of many minds, the Constitution stands as a model of cooperative statesmanship and the art of compromise.

Read the full text.

Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishment. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause applies to the states.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment codifies the right to a jury trial in certain civil trials. Unlike most of the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has not incorporated the amendment's requirements to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. The Supreme Court has applied the protections of this amendment to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment protects against abuse of government authority in a legal procedure. Its guarantees stem from English common law which traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215. For instance, grand juries and the phrase “due process” both trace their origin to the Magna Carta.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Third Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment prohibits, in peacetime, the quartering of soldiers in private homes without the owner's consent. It makes quartering legally permissible in wartime only, and then only according to law.

It was introduced on September 5, 1789, and then three quarters of the states ratified this as well as 9 other amendments on December 15, 1791.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment prohibits the making of any law “respecting an establishment of religion”, impeding the freedom of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as erecting a wall of separation between church ans state.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

This amendment guards against unreasonable searches and seizures when the searched party has a reasonable expectation of privacy. The amendment specifically also requires search and arrest warrants be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the  writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and arrest should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Broken Market for Consumer Privacy

An essay by Barton Gellman of Times magazine presents the current state of what we consumers can expect from companies who we give our ‘permission’ to just by simply using their services.

The federal governments loose interpretation of the Fourth Amendment allows them to consider anything American citizens put onto the internet via websites, blogs, and emails are considered public.

Christopher Soghoian, describes the available legal and technical tools in rich detail. In general, the companies could keep fewer records that could be subpoenaed, insist that data requests be narrowly tailored to the asserted purpose and ask courts to life restrictions on customer notice.

When it comes to protecting your right to privacy or ensuring they stay in business, companies will give you up in a heart beat. As long as we all know this truth, we can edit what we say and do on the internet. What the Founding Fathers envisioned protecting with the Fourth Amendment was our “houses, papers, and effects”. Clearly, they did not have the benefit of a crystal ball that would have undoubtedly lead them to include cyber-sphere in their list of protections. Too bad our current leadership does not see things they same way. Surveillance-happy authorities have effectively legally squashed that argument.

Mr Gellman tells of directing “carefully framed questions” to Verizon Wireless, Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Facebook, MySpace and Skype. What I find particularly troublesome, but not surprising, is the responses he received, and did not receive. According to Mr. Gellman, none replied to most of the questions. Partial answers, when given, “were mostly homilies about how seriously they take privacy and how carefully they review each request.”

I like his analogy of how consumer laws force companies to reveal ingredients in our food but don’t force the privacy market to fully disclose their position.

Here’s the questions Mr Gellman asked of the above named companies:

How many times in 2010 they were served with government demands for non-public information about their customers, and whether they (1) try to narrow those demands; (2) insist on compulsory legal orders before complying; (3) ask courts to allow them to notify their customers; (4) tell customers who inquire, if legally permitted, whether their private data has been obtained by authorities; (5) follow stronger or weaker interpretations of their customers' rights in areas of disputed law, such as the pro-privacy holdings in the Sixth Circuit and Ninth Circuit that do not bind other jurisdictions. I further asked them, if they declined to answer these questions, why they believed their customers did not deserve to know.

Here are their responses:

Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, Google and MySpace simply ignored the questions. No response at all.

Microsoft said "we take our responsibility to protect our customers' privacy very seriously, so have specific processes that we use when responding to law enforcement requests.” No hint on what those processes might be. As for the rest: "We appreciate your questions and, unfortunately, this statement is the extent of what Microsoft can provide at this time."

Skype “does not comment on law enforcement matters" but "cooperates with law enforcement agencies where legally required... Though we'd like to help you with your story, I'm afraid we're going to have to decline offering any further details." Skype's privacy policy is said to be "very transparent," although it answers exactly none of my questions. The closest it comes is to say Skype "may" disclose your personal information "to respond to legal requirements, to protect Skype's interests, to enforce our policies or to protect anyone's rights, property, or safety." That is the kind of language that lawyers write to justify almost any conceivable disclosure.

T-Mobile "complies with all relevant federal and state laws, including privacy laws. We take our customers' privacy very seriously, and carefully control the circumstances under which we disclose customer information to any governmental or non-governmental entity." How so? T-Mobile leaves itself even more wiggle room than Skype does. It hands over your private information "when compelled or permitted" by law," and this includes, but is not limited to, circumstances under which there is a declaration from law enforcement of an exigent circumstance, as well as other valid legal process, such as subpoenas, search warrants, and court orders."

Yahoo "responds to valid law enforcement demands." Its lawyers "carefully review all incoming legal demands," and "take very seriously our dual responsibilities to abide by US law and to protect our users' privacy." The company "is committed to protecting user data." The privacy policy says disclosures come in response to "subpoenas, court orders," or unspecified "legal process," or "to establish or exercise our legal rights or defend against legal claims," or when "we believe it is necessary to share information in order to investigate, prevent, or take action regarding illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of Yahoo!'s terms of use, or as otherwise required by law."

Sprint manages to be the most responsive and the least reassuring. It gets "thousands of record requests a year" from authorities -- other published hints have suggested tens of thousands -- and requires a "valid legal request," which is not the same thing as a compulsory request. “We act as good stewards of our customers' personal information while also meeting our obligations to law enforcement agencies." Sprint "usually" requires a subpoena or court order but in other cases "Sprint can provide information without requiring this supporting documentation." Sprint notifies its customers only when "ordered buy a judge to do so," which in practice is almost never, rather than as legally permitted, which would be often, because "we do not seek to interfere with the progress of law enforcement investigations." Then comes the boilerplate that "we are  ardent about addressing privacy in our products and services and then clearly communicating those policies and practices to our customers." On the whole, this answer is not terribly specific, but the company's priorities are pretty clear. It values cooperation with authorities more than the privacy of its customers, and notifies them only when compelled to do so.

Comcast makes "every reasonable effort to protect subscriber privacy," and the rest of the answers amount to "maybe." Disclosures of personal information "may be made with or without the subscriber's consent, and with or without notice, in compliance with the terms of valid legal process such as a subpoena, court order, or search warrant." It gives the greatest protection to customer's television viewing habits because the Cable Act requires notice and an opportunity for customers to contest release of their personal information. For internet customers, "we are usually prohibited from notifying the subscriber of any disclosure of personally identifiable information to a government entity by the terms of the subpoena, court order, or search warrant." There is no mention of contesting gag orders, or of notifying customers when permitted to do so.

Facebook: "We have no comment at this time" on Wikileaks. On the policy questions, "Will get back to you." I'm still waiting.

It is in our best privacy interest to know exactly how our right to privacy is viewed by companies we do business with. Just because the internet has proven to be a handy tool for connecting with others and as a source of entertainment, to share videos of ourselves and our loved ones, to share information about our daily lives, to share our most intimate personal information to others through emails that we think no one else will ever see, does not mean that information will not be used either against us or someone we know. The federal government has already exhibited its ability to access anything it wants and these companies have already exhibited their willingness to go along with them.

The companies listed here are in effect privacy-information storehouses containing anything and everything we have ever put out in cyberspace. How much trust do you have in the people who are monitoring the intelligence-gathering network we are unintentionally building?

Cancer

taken from America's Retarded:  http://americaisretarded.com/cancer.html

Technology Can Be Such a Pain

I had a wrestling match with my new HP OfficeJet 6500 All-in-One printer a couple of days ago and it won. That round. I will prevail though. It prints and copies fine. Great print quality although I do have a problem with the software that came with it. More on that later.

My biggest problem with it is that I cannot fax or scan. It has done both intermittently and that is almost worse than not doing anything at all. The documentation for this printer absolutely sucks. I give it the poorest grade possible for a company this size. It would be better if there just wasn’t any at all. Hooking it up was easy and as I said the printer and copy functions work great.

Now, to the scanner, first the only option I have for scanning is to send the document to PDF. I did see in the software, on the occasion I could get it to work,  there are options to send the document to several other destinations, such as file, printer, etc. But the software will not work without problems so those options may not be available at all.

The reason I want to use the scanner is to post handwritten text and hand drawn sketches to my blogs. I figured out how to extract this stuff from the PDF but it is cumbersome and totally ridiculous that I should have to go through that many steps. I finally gave up on it and will deal with it again later after my frustration level has cooled a bit.

Well, I revisited the problem with my wife’s assistance and we figured out how to send and receive faxes. It was operator error. I had one of the phone lines crossed.

As far as the scanner, I don’t know how the mis-inserted phone line would affect this but I can now scan every document I attempt. I am still faced with a couple of issues. One being the fact that I can only send the document to PDF. It remains the only option from the printer panel.

The second issue is mostly an inconvenience. After pressing the start scan button on the printer, I begin getting a message on the computer monitor that I need to insert the disk to install the option to scan. I did this the very first time I ever tried to scan on this so now I just cancel it. I immediately get another window giving me an error because no disc was found. Well, it seems to me that if I canceled it a disc should not be searched for, so that error message is bogus. Then I get a series of repeating messages telling me that windows is configuring the requested device. Again, I canceled this so I should not be getting this message. I said it was a repeating series, it flashes three times after canceling the first message to load from disc. And I cancel it each time. Now, the truly frustrating part is that this process I just described, canceling the disc load, the error message, cancel three windows telling me Windows is configuring, occurs eleven times! Eleven Times!

All the while I am canceling all eleven of these series of messages the HP scanner window appears and the scanner works. I get my scan, in PDF form, but I am required to cancel everything surrounding the process telling me that the scanner is not going to work.

There is absolutely no documentation what so ever concerning this procedure. None. It is as if this situation could never possibly happen.

Back before my wife and I finally got the scanner to work, I would get the error message, on the printer panel, that no scan option was available. But, if I pressed cancel and waited about 10 seconds, I might get the message again and I might get my scan. There was no guarantee as to which was going to happen. Keep in mind that every time I started the process of starting the scan I would have to go through all eleven cycles of cancellations as described earlier.

That message I would get saying no scan option is available, this message is not in the trouble-shooting section of what they laughingly call the help section. Nor does it direct me to some other place where I might find a more complete list of error messages.

I followed their online process to determine what the problem with the scanner is. It started by having me download a bit of software called a diagnostic. I ran that diagnostic and was told that everything is working great.

The scanner function worked great after running this. And I ran the scanner four times to make sure it wasn’t just a fluke (I still had to go through all eleven cancellation routines, each time).

So, I turned the printer off, restarted my computer. Tried the scanner again, and was immediately told ‘no scanner option available’. Now I ask you, is this enough to send a sane person over the edge?

The only workable solution I can come up with is to turn the printer on and let it sit for about a half hour before trying to scan. I still have to go through all eleven cycles of canceling and I still can only scan my document to PDF, but at least I get a scan.

After all of this experience I think it is entirely safe to say that Hewlett Packard holds very little regard for their customers.

Thank you, if you read this post all the way through. Even if no one reads it, at least I feel better getting it off my chest. I would send this to Hewlett Packard but I am doubtful I would ever hear from them.

Which brings up another point of contention concerning dealing with problems over the internet. All companies have isolated themselves so completely from their customers that the first thing any of them tell you to do is to go discuss the problem with other users. I guess they reason that IF someone has had this same problem, and IF that someone happens to be on this user forum, and IF that someone so chooses to respond to your problem, you can get help.

This is not customer service. Maybe as the older generation dies out, you know the people who actually remember what it was like to actually talk to a knowledgeable person face to face or even over the phone, then this ‘customer service’ system will be the only system known. In the meantime though, this really sucks.