What America Needs: A Leader

RIP, New Orleans

How the Appologists Do It

So thousands of people languished in downtown New Orleans, 4 days in the hot summer sun, with no food, little shelter and no water.

In the middle of the United States, thousands in a huge urban area did not recieve a single shipment of water for over 3 days. How the American military managed to ignore such a simple task -- airdrop of bottled water -- for 3 whole days following the largest natural disaster in the history of the United States -- boggles the mind.

An entire metropolitan area of over 500,000 people has to be abandoned for the next 2-6 months.

How does this happen? Well, I can tell you how the Bush appologists do it: ignore it.

CNN, The Washington Post, the New York Times, Bloomberg, Reuters, BBC.. the list goes on... The headlines read, "New Orleans Issues SOS".

What's George Will think of how Bush is handling this disaster? Hard to tell. His Washington Post opinion piece for Sept 1, 2005 is: The Value of 'Activism', as in "do we need activist judges?". Other Washington Post Opinion headlines:

"Chipping Away at Campaign Reform"
"Greenspan's Humility"

Even NPR gets into the act. Famous for its hour-long shows devoted to a single subject, Fresh Air continues its 5-segment series "Hip Hop Week".

I called a friend to ask what he thought about the disaster, he replied, "Oh yeah, the hurricane that hit New Orleans. I heard about it in the sports news."

New Orleans, LA is slipping into the ocean and somehow, many are still glued to Martha Stewart updates.

Wonder how these elections keep coming out so wierd?

It's Important to Keep Your Priorities Straight

Hurricane Katrina wreaked horrible devastation on a large swath of land from Lousina to Coastal Alabama, with coastal Mississippi appearing to have taken the brunt of the damage. Rescue workers in New Orleans, for example, are still "pushing aside the floating bodies in order to rescue the living". Meanwhile, less than two days after the storm, casino executives are wondering how they can turn the disaster to their advantage by lobbying the Mississippi legislature for emergency changes to the law that will allow them to move their casino onto land rather than barges.

I mean, we all *know* how important it is to get the casino back into operation amidst a disaster with so much human carnage.


The Jackson Channel
POSTED: 3:00 pm CDT August 30, 2005

Casinos Want Emergency Legislation

A top casino executive is calling on the Mississippi Legislature to enact emergency legislation to keep the state's coast gaming industry alive.

Treasure Bay Casino President and CEO Bernie Burkholder said Tuesday most of the casino hotels on the coast survived the hurricane, but several gambling barges suffered extensive damage.

Reconstruction could take years, Burkholder said.

State law doesn't allow land-based casinos, so lawmakers would have to draft legislation that would allow casinos to operate on land.

Burkholder today walked around the Treasure Bay property in Biloxi, surveying the damage. He said it would take about $100 million to replace what was lost.

Also in Biloxi, the President Casino was swept from its beach moorings and tossed across U.S. 90 into the parking lot of the Mississippi Coast Coliseum.

Just so we don't lose perspective here:

Emergency Workers Expect Grim Body Count
Mississippi Officials: More Than 80 Dead


UPDATED: 4:37 pm CDT August 30, 2005

JACKSON, Miss. -- It's clear the death toll on the Mississippi Gulf Coast will rise sharply in the days to come.

One Hurricane Katrina survivor after another told stories Tuesday of friends and loved ones who floated off or disappeared as the floodwaters rose around them.

American Medical Response Operations Supervisor Mark Williams said paramedics on the scene said the devastation is so great that they won't quit counting bodies for days.

AMR operates ambulances along the Mississippi coast.

The only evidence of the Quiet Water Beach apartments in Gulfport is a concrete slab. Officials say as many as 30 people died there. Red bricks which were once its walls are scattered around the area, which is located just across U.S. Highway 90 from the beach.

In the debris is a crushed red child's play wagon, jewelry and clothing.

Behind the slab, a wall of debris is washed up against homes. The nearby U.S. 90 is buckled and covered with debris -- twisted boards, pieces of wall, bricks and the possessions of those who lived there.

People are digging through the rubble, trying to salvage any possessions not washed away by the storm.

There Is No Housing Bubble

Just ask the housing industry:

Yahoo News

By Jerry Howard Thu Aug 25, 7:17 AM ET

It's big box office this summer in the national media, but paraphrasing Mark Twain, reports of an impending housing price collapse are greatly exaggerated.

Demographic and economic fundamentals support today's housing expansion.

To begin with, strong household formations, fueled by population growth and immigration, are pushing average annual demand for new housing into the 2 million-unit range for the decade ahead, about today's production level. Equally important, the U.S. economy is fueling enough new jobs and income gains to support brisk housing demand even as interest rates inch upward.

Second, the unusually steep price gains provoking much of the speculation over a housing bubble are mainly in California, Nevada, Florida and the Northeast corridor, and aren't the norm for most local markets.

Third, builders are running into serious obstacles, such as excessive growth controls or moratoria, in lining up land for development in the fastest growing housing markets. In the face of unrelenting housing demand, this is making housing shortages even worse, increasing the cost of building and persistently increasing house prices.

Fourth, unlike trading in stocks and bonds, buying a home is a costly and time-consuming process that is not susceptible to the kind of run on the market that occurred in the dot.com collapse. Also, the vast majority of families live in the homes they buy for a long time and don't flip them for a profit after a few months.

Finally, history shows that most unsustainable house price booms end quietly, as house price appreciation slows while ongoing increases in household income and housing supply help restore balance to local markets. A recent Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. study shows that house price booms lead to price busts only when local economies stumble for other reasons, such as a national recession. With the U.S. economy in the midst of a strong expansion, those risks are quite low for the foreseeable future.

It doesn't take a Ph.D. in economics to conclude that short supply and high demand do not add up to a housing bubble.

So buy away! Just be sure not to miss this footnote:

Jerry Howard is executive vice president and CEO of the National Association of Home Builders.

I'm sure Mr. Howard is providing a fair, balanced and unbiased assessment. After all, if there's anyone in this world you can trust, unquestionably it's someone trying to sell you something.

How to Increase Customer Loyalty

From the 25 Aug '05 "theregister.co.uk"
The Register

AOL has agreed to reform its customer service operation following complaints that led to legal action by Elliot 'the Blitzer' Spitzer, New York's attorney general. In a settlement announced Wednesday, AOL will be obliged to remove obstacles US consumers faced when seeking to switch or cancel their internet service.

Spitzer’s office began an inquiry of AOL's customer service policies in response to around 300 consumer complaints from 2000 onwards. The investigation revealed that the net giant had an elaborate system for rewarding employees who succeeded in keeping subscribers who had called to cancel their internet service. In many instances, such retention was done against subscribers' wishes, or without their consent, it was alleged.

Service reps could earn bonuses of tens of thousands of dollars if they could successfully dissuade or "save" half of the people who called to cancel service. Consumer reps were expected to meet minimum retain or save percentages. This led to instances where workers failed to honour cancellations or otherwise made cancellation unduly difficult for consumers. Many consumers complained that AOL personnel ignored their demands to cancel service and stop billing.

Under an agreement with Spitzer's office, America Online (AOL) will alter the incentives it offers to customer representatives who seek to persuade subscribers to stay with the firm. It agreed to set up an independent monitoring auditing regime. The net service giant also agreed to pay $1.25m to New York State in penalties and costs. Lastly AOL agreed to provide refunds to New York consumers who claim harm based on improper cancellation procedures, with compensation of up to four months worth of service.

"This agreement helps ensure that AOL will strive to keep its customers through quality service, not stealth retention programs," Spitzer said in a statement welcoming the settlement.

Who would Jesus assassinate?

Seems "muslim nations" aren't the only ones that have to deal with Religious Extremists.

From VOA:

A prominent U.S. Christian broadcaster has called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Speaking Monday on his television program, The 700 Club,, Pat Robertson said the United States has the ability to "take out" Mr. Chavez, and said he thinks the time has come to use that ability.

Mr. Robertson accused Mr. Chavez of supporting communism and Muslim extremism, and said that killing him would be a "whole lot cheaper" than starting a war.

There was no immediate reaction from U.S. or Venezuelan officials.

Mr. Robertson has a history of controversial statements. In 2003, he suggested that a nuclear bomb be dropped on the U.S. State Department.

...

Top 11 right-wing excuses for US's "Catastrophic Sucess" in Iraq

Well, it's looking like only a matter of time before Iraq will slide into civil war. I humbly propose the following "explanations" for use by Right-Wingers to pass on to their constituents while they stump for re-election:

11 - Communists...er, I mean "terrorists"
10 - Janet Jackson's breast exposed during SuperBowl
9 - Jane Fonda
8 - Colin Powell left
7 - Creationism not taught in American schools
6 - Too much religion in Iraqi schools
5 - All Iraqi schools blown up
4 - Too many "boots on the ground" in Iraq
3 - Constitutional delegates kept slipping on rose petals meant for US soldiers
2 - Democratic "parlimentary maneuvering" in US Congress
1 - The French

Health Care as a utility?

Everyone want's good health care, but no one really wants to pay for it. Ok, some are willing to pay for theirs, but no one elses.

My observations lead me to believe that this was the same situation we faced at the turn of the century regarding such modern staples as roads, electricity, natural gas and telephones.

Much like electricity, people view health care as unnecessary... until you need it.
Those that deny their need of health care simply haven't gotten older yet. Just like electricity, health care brings benefits not just to individuals but to society as a whole.

Sure, there are obvious ways that people could "cheat" a health utility. Smokers would drive up costs unreasonably for everyone. So why not treat smokers, alcoholics, drug-abusers, etc. just like we do people who use too much water: charge them a premium.

I'm not advocating that participation in the health-care utility would be mandatory. Far from it. If someone chooses to live "off the grid" so be it. But there should be a system that rewards people for staying in the system during good times and bad and not simply joining when they get sick.

Granted it is difficult to codify and regulate the application of health care. But it can't be impossible. A private health care system, mated with a public regulatory body modeled on our current regulation of monopolies should be able to make health care a utility available to more, if not all.

LFH: Bush's Commitment to Iraqi Victory

GWB has shown his determination to win in Iraq, despite the sacrifices that means for America's armed forces. ( Unfortunately his committment doesn't involve a determination to provide good leadership, planning or implementation.)

I'm not the first to point this out, but if GWB is so committed to sacrificing American soldiers for Iraqi Victory, why hasn't he encouraged Jenna and Barbara to enlist?

To paraphrase Bill Maher, "Do they not believe in Freedom or do they just hate America?"

LFH: Corporate welfare

America's right-wing is famous for its fanatical obsession with Laissez Faire "Free Markets". A lesser-trumpeted obsession is Free Government Money.

When GWB signed the National Energy Bill into law Monday (8th Aug 05), the oil industry had been reporting record profits for at least three quarters due to the huge increase in crude prices (touching $64/bbl and climbing).

With such staggering increases in energy prices, one thing becomes apparent: we need to give more money to Big Oil to find more reserves.

Only a tiny bit of research turns up Exxon's reported profits:

Worth $372B as of 4 Aug 05

4th 3 mo 2004: $5,680M
1st 3 mo 2005: $7,860M
2nd 3 mo 2005: $7,640M

Here's how CNN described the bill:

The legislation was a big win for the Bush administration, which proposed an overhaul of national energy policy four years ago.

But the president didn't get everything he wanted in the bill.

The administration's controversial plan to allow oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will be taken up by Congress in separate legislation this autumn.

Big winners in the bill that passed Friday were oil, gas, coal and nuclear power companies, which will get a large share of the legislation's $14.5 billion in tax credits and financial incentives.

The measure will do little to tackle high energy prices in the short term, but the new policy in the years ahead aims to boost domestic energy supplies.

Nuclear Engineering International (www.neimagazine.com) wrote:

Designed to reduce domestic dependence on foreign oil, the bill will cost $14.6 billion over 10 years, double the cost the administration was seeking, and this mostly goes to nuclear and fossil companies. Of the provisions set out in the bill, electric utilities will save $3.1 billion over 10 years, the coal industry $2.9 billion, and the oil-and-gas business $2.7 billion.

Republicans hailed the bill for its free-market principles and support of less polluting energy sources, while Democrats criticised the bill, calling it corporate welfare for already wealthy industries.

With record profits, how can the industry justify a need for tax incentives to do its job? Does capitalism require such a crutch?

LFH: America's obsession with sex

The brouhaha over RockStar's "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" highlights an intersting facet of American Life: their fear of sex.

GTA:SA created a rumble in popular culture due to its unabashed portrayals (some argue glamorization) of drugs, violence, crime and "urban" stereotypes. A rumble, but one that resulted mainly in increased interest and sales. Drugs, violence, crime and glorification of the same was unliked, but tolerated.

But when it leaked to the popular media that a slight modification to the game (The Hot Coffee modification changed one bit in a configuration file) unlocked hidden sex scenes, the morality police swung into full force.

Even Hillary Clinton pounced on the opportunity to make noise about outlawing the game. Granted, Rock Star did not label the game as containing sex (that would have given it an "adult" rating and therefore banned it from the shelves of most big-box retailers) but the issue wasn't punishment for mis-labeling. It was to be punishment for including sex scenes.

Rock Star -- to its discredit -- lied about the scenes until it could not longer find even a lawyer that could keep a straight face while disavowing the obvious.

But why do we insist on making laws to punish the inclusion of sex scenes? Surely a law against intentional deceit would make more sense. But would that outlaw politics instead of video games?

Learning from History: Media spotlights

The idiot box produces a commercial every 10 minutes. With almost the same frequency, "The Media" produces the next "trend".

The latest trend (Aug 2005) seems to be Boy Scout related deaths.

When four scout fathers were killed at the 2005 National Scout Jamboree in Virginia, it made headlines across the country. A bit later at the same Jamboree, two other people suffered heat-related heart attacks in incidents unrelated to the electrocution.

Unusual to be sure, but not "a trend".

Now, almost two weeks after the event, the news has seized on what could be a trend: The Dangers of Boy Scouting.

New York Times: UTAH: LIGHTNING KILLS BOY SCOUT Lightning killed one Boy Scout and injured three others while they slept in a shelter at a mountain scout camp

UPI: Scout camp oak tree falls, kills girl

WSTM.com : Man pleads guilty in Girl Scout's death

Now, granted, the media isn't making a case about this (yet?). Scouting is seen as an "All American" pastime (unless you're gay) so there's no real upwelling or backlash going to form soon.

But the uptick in scout-related tragedy reporting can be instructive when the next broughah does get started. These usually revolve around anything that the public can consider to be "scary", such as airline crashes, military plane crashes, gun deaths, drugs, etc.

Given the "special attention" scout deaths can garner, its all to easy to imagine what will happen the next time some random series of more media-friendly tragedies occurs.

Solution to Airline Financial Woes

With stories of airline's woes in the papers every day, I think it's high-time we do something to change it.

My suggestion? Let's outsource the airlines!

Name one good reason an airline should even *be* in the US! Heck, their main product - an airplane - can be flown into the country any time its needed.

Airlines based in the US are mired in miles of government red tape and beauracracy. Do you have any idea how much it costs just to get an airplane certified for flight here in the US? Its astronomical! Why, an airline could save *millions* every year in maintenance costs alone!

Moving American airlines overseas makes sense on many other levels as well. Most countries that have taken American jobs don't even have decent bicycles, let alone roads. Airplanes are an excellent alternative. By flying their American-citizen CEOs directly to each jobsite, their managers can deliver much needed inspiration and leadership without all the hassle of staying for more than an hour in any one cesspool.

My plan also makes it easier to move low-paid workers from foreign lands into the US to take over those low-paying jobs that American don't want to perform, like automobile manufacturing, engineering and medicine.

I say its high time we move our airlines to other countries in order to stay competetive in the global marketplace.

Carly's Corporate Welfare

Many conservatives eagerly bash welfare. Curiously, corporate executives and boards are big fans. To wit:

Carly Fiorina was recently fired from HP. Presumably the board was not happy with her performance. After being told to clean out her desk, she was escorted to the door by armed guards. But unlike when you or I get fired, the guards escorting Carly were carrying her bags of money:


- Severance package of 2 1/2 timers her salary -- $14 million in cash, payable within six months.

- $7.4 million as part of a performance incentive program

- An extra $1 million early last year as part of a performance plan for executives.

- Another bonus of $567,000.

- $50,000 for financial counseling

- She also gets to keep her computer equipment

- "technical support" for three months

- administrative support for six months

- maintenance on her home security for a year


Now if this isn't corporate welfare, I don't know what is. If she was performing so poorly, why all the bonuses? Is $14M not enough to buy an HP computer with 3 month technical support? Maybe that would be a clue to why HP's not selling many computers.

Numbers from:
http://www.dhonline.com/articles/2005/02/15/news/opinion/edit01.txt

Bush Should Show Faith in His Own Program

In order for George Bush to show the viability of his Social Security Initiative, I propose that he lead by example.

Every president receives a $400,000 per year lifetime stipend. If George believes so strongly in the "Ownership Society", then he should agree to "investing" the same portion of his future proceeds as he's asking Americans to invest theirs.

As Mr. Bush is already a millionaire and very likely to remain one for the rest of his life, this action would be purely symbolic. It would however demonstrate one aspect of leadership: not asking your troops to do anything you wouldn't do yourself.

Regarding The New Lincoln Bedroom

I received the following via e-mail today:

Subject: A Different Observation From USS Lincoln...
No Relief in Sight for the Lincoln
Soldiers for The Truth ^ | January 20, 2005 | "Ed Stanton"

It has been three weeks since my ship, the USS Abraham Lincoln, arrived off the Sumatran coast to aid the hundreds of thousands of victims of the Dec. 26 tsunami that ravaged their coastline. I'd like to say that this has been a rewarding experience for us, but it has not: Instead, it has been a frustrating and needlessly dangerous exercise made even more difficult by the Indonesian government and a traveling circus of so-called aid workers who have invaded our spaces.

What really irritated me was a scene I witnessed in the Lincoln's wardroom a few days ago. I went in for breakfast as I usually do, expecting to see the usual crowd of ship's company officers in khakis and air wing aviators in flight suits, drinking coffee and exchanging rumors about when our ongoing humanitarian mission in Sumatra is going to end.

What I saw instead was a mob of civilians sitting around like they owned the place. They wore various colored vests with logos on the back including Save The Children, World Health Organization and the dreaded baby blue vest of the United Nations. Mixed in with this crowd were a bunch of reporters, cameramen and Indonesian military officers in uniform. They all carried cameras, sunglasses and fanny packs like tourists on their way to Disneyland.

My warship had been transformed into a floating hotel for a bunch of trifling do-gooders overnight.

As I went through the breakfast line, I overheard one of the U.N. strap-hangers, a longhaired guy with a beard, make a sarcastic comment to one of our food servers. He said something along the lines of "Nice china, really makes me feel special," in reference to the fact that we were eating off of paper plates that day. It was all I could do to keep from jerking him off his feet and choking him, because I knew that the reason we were eating off paper plates was to save dishwashing water so that we would have more water to send ashore and save lives. That plus the fact that he had no business being there in the first place.

My attitude towards these unwanted no-loads grew steadily worse that day as I learned more from one of our junior officers who was assigned to escort a group of them. It turns out that they had come to Indonesia to "assess the damage" from the Dec. 26 tsunami.

Well, they could have turned on any TV in the world and seen that the damage was total devastation. When they got to Sumatra with no plan, no logistics support and no five-star hotels to stay in, they threw themselves on the mercy of the U.S. Navy, which, unfortunately, took them in. I guess our senior brass was hoping for some good PR since this was about the time that the U.N. was calling the United States "stingy" with our relief donations.

As a result of having to host these people, our severely over-tasked SH-60 Seahawk helos, which were carrying tons of food and water every day to the most inaccessible places in and around Banda Aceh, are now used in great part to ferry these "relief workers" from place to place every day and bring them back to their guest bedrooms on the Lincoln at night. Despite their avowed dedication to helping the victims, these relief workers will not spend the night in-country, and have made us their guardians by default.

When our wardroom treasurer approached the leader of the relief group and asked him who was paying the mess bill for all the meals they ate, the fellow replied, "We aren't paying, you can try to bill the U.N. if you want to."
In addition to the relief workers, we routinely get tasked with hauling around reporters and various low-level "VIPs," which further wastes valuable helo lift that could be used to carry supplies. We had to dedicate two helos and a C-2 cargo plane for America-hater Dan Rather and his entourage of door holders and briefcase carriers from CBS News. Another camera crew was from MTV. I doubt if we'll get any good PR from them, since the cable channel is banned in Muslim countries. We also had to dedicate a helo and crew to fly around the vice mayor of Phoenix, Ariz., one day. Everyone wants in on the action.

As for the Indonesian officers, while their job is apparently to encourage our leaving as soon as possible, all they seem to do in the meantime is smoke cigarettes. They want our money and our help but they don't want their population to see that Americans are doing far more for them in two weeks than their own government has ever done or will ever do for them.

To add a kick in the face to the USA and the Lincoln, the Indonesian government announced it would not allow us to use their airspace for routine training and flight proficiency operations while we are saving the lives of their people, some of whom are wearing Osama bin Ladin T-shirts as they grab at our food and water. The ship has to steam out into international waters to launch and recover jets, which makes our helos have to fly longer distances and burn more fuel.

What is even worse than trying to help people who totally reject everything we stand for is that our combat readiness has suffered for it.

An aircraft carrier is an instrument of national policy and the big stick she carries is her air wing. An air wing has a set of very demanding skills and they are highly perishable. We train hard every day at sea to conduct actual air strikes, air defense, maritime surveillance, close air support and many other missions - not to mention taking off and landing on a ship at sea.

Our safety regulations state that if a pilot does not get a night carrier landing every seven days, he has to be re-qualified to land on the ship. Today we have pilots who have now been over 25 days without a trap due to being unable to use Indonesian airspace to train. Normally it is when we are at sea that our readiness is at its very peak. Thanks to the Indonesian government, we have to waive our own safety rules just to get our pilots off the deck.

In other words, the longer we stay here helping these people, the more dangerous it gets for us to operate. We have already lost one helicopter, which crashed in Banda Aceh while taking sailors ashore to unload supplies from the C-130s. There were no relief workers on that one.

I'm all for helping the less fortunate, but it is time to give this mission to somebody other than the U.S. Navy. Our ship was supposed to be home on Feb. 3 and now we have no idea how long we will be here. American taxpayers are spending millions per day to keep this ship at sea and getting no training value out of it. As a result, we will come home in a lower state of readiness than when we left due to the lack of flying while supporting the tsunami relief effort.

I hope we get some good PR in the Muslim world out of it. After all, this is Americans saving the lives of Muslims. I have my doubts.

Ed Stanton is the pen name of a career U.S. Navy officer currently serving with the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group. Send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.

The writer has a lot of valid points.

He also has every reason to be grumpy, considering what the armed forces are put through every day. One of the few pleasures allowed is bitching.

The situation he describes truly is a lousy one. Many of the "guests" that the Lincoln is putting up with are truy self-centered, unappreciative and boorish.

However, the writer never volunteers to trade places with a tsunami victim. He does imply that he'd rather be "fighting". I do not see him mention that he'd rather be comforting a close friend dying from a battle wound.

The writer seems to be playing to a certain demographic here. He seems to be attempting to "rile" up the "God, Guns and Country" folks and try to remind them "Dammit -- we're the Navy! Leave us alone, we should be tooling around the ocean, practicing carrier landings and oh, don't forget to send money because these ships don't fuel themselves, you know." He's suffering from the same self-righteousnous of the aid worker he quoted.

The writer is being paid to serve his country, in whatever method that country deems fit. As for the "indignity" he's trying to instill in his audience, these folks need to remember that two out of their three mottos are "God" and "Country".

If that audience wants to stand with their communal hands over their hearts and claim that this is the most _self-centered_ country on Earth, then they need to start now and fully enjoy reading this article again and again.

But they don't. They stand up and proclaim that America is the *greatest* country on Earth. Well then, we've put ourselves in a quandary, haven't we?
Claiming to be the greatest, strongest, most generous country on earth sure makes us look like a bunch of dolts when we don't live up to our grand ideals. If one wants to bitch about this aid costing too much, then stop announcing our greatness at the top of your lungs while patting yourself on the back.

As for "God" part of the motto, I should need only to paraphrase Jesus's words, "As you do unto the least of my creation, you do unto me." Again, many of the folks getting all wound up over this go to church every Sunday and profess their "Godliness". Get off of your self-righteousness and stop bitching -- or at least, for heaven's sake, stop telling everyone how moral you are and how moral everyone else should be.

So to the sailor who wrote this: Get back to work. If you complete your mission as your are being asked by your country, you and your ship's dignity will be increased, not diminished.

To the audience who's seething over this: either stop telling the world you're its moral compass or send in enough tax money that we can build another carrier to keep those beloved fly-boys in constant practice.

Supporting Our Troops

Troops asking for armor are told to make do with spin. I guess D. Rumsfeld rides in an armored limousine because he's not as resourceful as our troops. Don't really understand why. Even an armored limousine can be blown up.

We have the finest military in the world for several reasons. We try to provide our troops with the best equipment and the best training. The military tries to develop the best leaders and is successful the vast majority of the time. We develop effective, complex logistics programs to make sure our troops are supplied with what they need, when they need it -- everything from food, weapons, and ammunition to tanks, trucks, and Humvees.

One of the important reasons that our military is the finest in the world is the resourcefulness of our troops. When confronted with problems, our troops find solutions. When confronted with obstacles, our troops come up with ways to work around the obstacles. Our troops don't sit on their hands and whine about problems, they find innovative and creative ways to do the best they can with what they have, while waiting for the leadership to come up with a permanent solution.

So, why are our troops scouring the landfills looking for scrap metal to armor their Humvees? Because they are smart, innovative, and creative. They know that it takes time for the manufactured armor to be delivered and installed. They recognize that they need to find a temporary solution to protect themselves. They have found their temporary solution in the landfills. The solution isn't perfect, but it beats doing nothing but complaining.

Excerpted from:
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1204/1204rumsfeldchallenge.htm

Bush's Social Security Reform

Social Security's "running out of money". How do we "save" it?

Why we allow people to divert their money somewhere else!

Social Security was designed to lower risk by providing everyone with a basic retirement. As much as one ingnores or even appreciates risk as a 20 year-old, most are not entertained to wake up on their 62nd birthday to find out someone else just "appropriated" his or her lifetime nestegg.   (Any Enron retirees in the audience?)

Keep in mind that the stock market crash in 1937 and its resulting disasterous impact on American's "savings" was one of the arguments for Social Security.

So how to save Social Security? Putting the money into more risky investments only moves us closer to the original problem.

As much as the Far Right's proposed solution degrades the position of the general populace, moving people into more "lucrative" investments (curiously?) solves two pressing Far Right goals:

1) It will help lessen taxes on the well-off.

In order to pass, it also must spun to appear as a benefit to those far from retirement as well as having no effect on those close to retirement.

A possible upside to the plan is that it will make it more difficult for Congress to dip into our retirement money. Congress is infamous for replacing cash with IOUs.

The likely downside is the solution to the Far Right's second problem:

2) How to get Wall Street's grubby hands into Social Security. Wall Street has been lusting after a piece of Social Security's huge asset pools for years.



I predict a tough fight for what will be in the end very little progress. Hmm... sorta sounds like my prediction for Iraq.

As an experiment, I'll be keeping track of Bush's SS Reform "progress" as reported in the press. I'm interested in tracking his "flip flopping".


Starting out from Rueters we have the first stake in the sand:

http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle.jhtml?type=bondsNews&storyID=7042222
UPDATE 1-Bush says no payroll tax hike for Social Security
Thu Dec 9, 2004 11:09 AM ET
(Adds details)

WASHINGTON, Dec 9 (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Thursday ruled out raising payroll taxes to help pay for Social Security reform, a transition experts have estimated will cost $1 trillion to $2 trillion.
"We will not raise payroll taxes to solve this problem," said Bush, rejecting a solution advocated by some experts.
Bush wants to add personal retirement accounts to Social Security to let younger workers have the option of investing of some their own money to pay for retirement.
Experts believe the transition cost $1 trillion to $2 trillion over 10 years.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina had recommended a payroll tax increase on upper-bracket workers to help finance the transition.
Bush made the comment during an Oval Office meeting with Social Security experts.
The White House said this week the transition costs might be borrowed, but Bush said he would not prejudge any solution and would work with members of Congress.
"I think what's really important in the discussions is to understand the size of the problem, and that is we are faced with a present value of unfunded liabilities of about $11 trillion," he said.

Activist Judges

After Bush's Tort Reform legislation goes into effect we'll see fewer of these rediculous payout amounts

From the 10.12.04 New Zealand Herald:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=9002483

A Chicago court has ordered three United States Islamic organisations and a man accused of bankrolling the Palestinian group Hamas to pay US$156 million ($224 million) in damages over the death of a US-born student, David Boim, gunned down in the West Bank in 1996.

Lawyers for the student's parents, who brought the suit, had said in advance that no money might ever be collected, but the real point of the case was to set a precedent for going after "the domestic enablers of terrorism".

The case was brought under a 1992 US law that permits victims of terrorism to seek civil damages against groups deemed responsible for such acts.

America's "War" on Drugs

Are we winning?

Every TV show these days has 5 minutes of story punctuated by 6 minutes of ads by Big Pharma.

Hungry? Eat too much? Eat this pill!

Worried? Anxious? Worried that you may be too anxious? Take a pill!

Shy? Want to be popular? Swallow this magic potion.

Even Viagra and every one of its competitors is not even bothering to be circumspect in their ads. Take this and your wife/girlfriend/secretary will get a huge grin on her face and totally forget that Viagra still does nothing for her sex drive that your pot belly and continuous snoring hasn't already killed. If Viagra isn't a "recreational" drug, what is?

So my question is this: Can we ever be sucessful in our "war against drugs" when our very society is looking to solve their every problem with a magic pill?