Pigs in Space!

In all of the hysterical opinionating over the recent Naval exercise to test our ability to shoot down space based vehicles, or rather the "emergency" shoot down ao a horribly toxic satellite that threatened life itself on our planet, Rich Lowry of the National Review takes the cake. There are times that I feel that Lowry is an editor of The Harvard Lampoon rather than the National Review. His essay on "Weapons in Space", which I read in The Oregonian newspaper, is one of those times. When he refers to the " 1,000-pound tank of toxic fuel" he fails to realize that while hydrazine will form a chlorine-type gas, you would have to stand over it and breath deeply a number of times to get the full toxic effects.
When he states that we "have resisted...getting pushed into an unenforceable treaty against weapons in space" is he referring to the "Outer Space Treaty" of 1967 to which we are already bound. The only thing I see that might make it "unenforceable" would be our recalcitrance in following it's dictates.
As for ICBM's, for the most part, the part at which we would be able to try to shoot them down, they are sub-orbital, and thus not space weapons.
Finally, the V-2 reached a height of 50 miles before shutting off it's engine, much lower than the spy satellite the Navy shot down and, again, hardly an example of the weaponization of space that Mr. Lowry so deeply fears.
In all, Mr. Lowry is a prime example of the old saying about opinions. Every one has an opinion and an asshole, yet for the most part we don't really want to hear them. Still, someone pays him none the less. What a cool gig.

The Real Credit Crisis

I'm sure that in the coming years we will be given some glimpse of the real shenanigans behind this so-called credit crunch, but it is fun to see a few obvious signs. On January 16 Citigroup takes an $18.1 billion write-down on the value of the mortgages in their portfolio. This leaves them with a quarterly loss of $10 billion. Since a write-down is not actually spending the money, and we have no earthly notion, other than Citi's word, that this amount is necessary, let's do the math. $18.1 billion minus $10 billion equals $8.1 billion in earnings now protected from paying taxes upon. They then can take that money, now tax-free, and put it in the reserves that they are required by law to have been maintaining just for this purpose. Wow, we the tax-payers get to subsidize Citi's creating the cushion against loss that they should have had all along.
On January 17th, JP Morgan Chase wrote down $1.3 billion, reducing their taxable income by 34%. I wish I could be fiscally and legally irresponsible, then stick the tax-payers with the bail-out for my irresponsibility. Oh, yeah. I used to be able to do something similar by declaring bankruptcy, but Citi and JPMorgan Chase lobbied long and hard to clear up that loophole.

Good Bye to Old Friends

I have been driving a delivery route in the early AM for two years now, and the only entertainment I get is "The Young Turks" on Air America, from 3-6 in the morning. I now find out you are going off the air and going completely on-line. I will miss you guys.

Where else can you get the low down on Republican sex-capades, the latest O'Reilly craziness or the truth about everyones political games.

I am sorry that I probably will only make time once or twice a week, as I spend as little time as possible on-line. Good luck with your new format, Cenk, keep up the good work

Law and Order

OK, so I was wrong on my last post. I'm apparently a blabber-mouth. I forgot the cardinal rule of blogging, "blogging means never having to say you're sorry!". Anyway, I have stumbled upon some fascinating quotes in my Intro to Law textbook.Calm down, I am merely studying to be a paralegal, not F. Lee Bailey. Here is a shout out to GW.

"We are going to have to decide what kind of people we are-whether we obey the law only when we approve of it or whether we obey it no matter how distasteful we find it."
-Harry S. Ashmore, "On Integration of Little Rock High School", Arkansas Gazette 4 Sept, 1957

And this, from Robert Bolts "A Man for All Seasons":

Sir Thomas More: The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal, and not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal.

William Roper: Then you set man's law above God's?

More: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact-I am not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate.

Roper: So... you'd give the Devil benefit of the law!

More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

More: Oh? And when the last law was down and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.

Oh, if only Bush had read more in college. Or at least gone to see the movie. Although I am sure that we all would like him to be a little more like Roper in his pursuit of Bin Laden. Wasn't he the devil there for a while?

Mea Culpa

As if anyone reads my little rant-fest, but if someone does, I'm sorry that I have had nothing to say lately. I have started school and appear to be too busy to have an opinion on anything. Sure, Rush Limbaugh is reprehensible but what else is new? Mr. Bush again is either so out of touch or so hypocritical that he can declare October 1st National Children's Health Day, and then veto S-CHIP a few days later, which would have insured four million children for their...health.
On Air America there is a radio program that airs in Portland at 3AM, while I am doing my deliveries. It's called "The Young Turks" as it is hosted by a Turkish-born American named Cenk Yugar (I probably got that last name mis-spelled but the first is pronounced Jenk). A few weeks ago he had a discussion about Bush, as to whether he was stupid or evil. I vote for both. He is stupid enough to do a great deal of evil by listening to truly evil advisers like Cheney and Rove. There might be a few parallels to a certain central european country in the 1930s here. I can truly see a middle class couple sitting in Munich in 1939 commenting on the need to invade Czechoslovakia or Austria. Sure, they might be able to justifiy it, but then Hitler wants to invade Poland? Wait a minute. They might write a letter to the editor, or their local representative in government, but they discover they have no way to stop this idiot. I feel that way about the talk about invading Iran. There seems to be nothing we can do to stop these guys.
I have a sick feeling that we have fifteen months for Bush/Cheney to start an incident in the middle east, nuke Iran and then reveal themselves on national television, in ermine lined robes and gold crowns, as the representatives of Christ on Earth, sent here to bring about the Revelations of St. John the Babtist.... and then I wake up and towel off the cold sweat.

Two Sizes Too Small.

There is a wonderful success story in the health-care industry. The federal government and the states and the industry all get together and treat children under the poverty line for free. The law is called SCHIP, the State Childrens Health Insurance Program. It is one of those few programs that is a win-win-win for everyone. The kids get subsidized health insurance. The families don't have to worry about their kids health, even the health-care industry gets paid for their services instead of seeing these kids in the emergency room and not getting paid for it.
After months of negotiating, the Congress has a bill everyone agrees with to increase funding for this program. The Democrats wanted fifty billion more for five years, the Republicans far less, and they agreed on thirty-five billion more for the program over five years. Hmmmm, I'd almost forgotten how politics is supposed to work, this strange thing called negotiating.
Still, it is a substantial increase, enough to offer the program to people slightly over the official poverty line, which we all know is a joke. The official poverty line hasn't changed much in years and barely reflects the increased cost of housing over the last five years. Offering this program to people right at the poverty line is not a luxury, it could mean the difference between living in an apartment or living in a car.
This bill has been so skilfully written that advocates for the poor, health-care providers and even an insurance industry group have come out in favor of it. And of course, George Bush has threatened to veto the bill. He is so afraid that it will work, and people might get the idea that a single payer health plan might be a good idea, that he is willing to throw four million kids under the bus. He is so afraid that his insurance industry buddies might not make their bonuses this year that he is willing to stand by while these kids get sicker and sicker and finally, when their families take them to the emergency room the hospital and the rest of us get stuck with another avoidable bill.
Mr. Bush, it is time to put up or shut up. Is your heart really two sizes too small, and like the Grinch, will you veto this bill and throw those kids off the train just in time for Christmas?

"General Betray-us?"

What is the most over-looked part of the Moveon.org advertisement that the above quote comes from? Can you see it? Isn't it obvious? It is a common punctuation mark, right? Yes, clever reader, it is the question mark. The advert does not call the general "Betray-us", it asks, before his testimony, if he will "betray-us" by testifying for a failed policy or actually tell the American people the truth. The only truth he told was his response of "I don't know" when asked if the Iraq war was making America safer. Mr. Bush has no problem answering this question in the affirmative, but his main enforcer of his policies in Iraq will not, or can not answer the question.
Very few media have made the distinction of the question mark, not even NPR, thus allowing the right to frame the debate once again. I have not even heard any Congress-person make this distinction. No, not just make the distinction, but many of them voted for a bill that condemned the ad for something it didn't even say. I can commend Sen. Wyden for voting the right way, but must condemn Sen. Obama for ducking it. What a profile of courage that was. Not only didn't Obama vote on the Moveon issue but he didn't even show up for the AARP debate to defend his health-care platform, if he even has one. I'm about ready to remove my Obama sticker from my car. Where can I get an Edwards sticker?