Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Just Wondering

Saw a headline that said, "Virginia Mother and Two Kids Who Disappeared Under Suspicious Circumstances Found Safe, Police Say."

Can one "disappear" under non-suspicious circumstances?

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

About last week...

Hello...hello? Is this thing on.

Due to the events of last week, I may be dusting this thing off and beginning anew.

Not a situation I am happy about.

More to follow.


Thursday, August 01, 2013

In Memorium

I return to this neglected outpost to note with sadness the passing of Hoosier blogger Doghouse Riley, proprietor of Bats Left/Throws Right. Doghouse, the nom de blog of Douglas M. Case, passed away Saturday in Indianapolis, at the unconscionably young age of 59. The interwebs will miss him.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Today in Casual Sexism

Can you spot the sexism in this article that, ironically enough, is about racism? The lede says: "A black police officer and his family said they fled their upscale Orange County community after rocks were thrown through their windows, their tires were slashed and racial taunts were shouted by passing motorists." Four paragraphs down we get a bigger description of the family: "The father is a police officer in Inglewood. His wife is a Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy. They and their two children moved to Yorba Linda in 2011." So, it's a family of a police officer...the male police officer in the family. The wife is just part of his family. Is it really 2012?

Labels: , ,


Thursday, August 23, 2012

Before Occupy

Wow, this seems pretty prescient... "Unions are finding it increasingly difficult to establish themselves in the "new economy." I think they are widely viewed by the working public as being irrelevant or, worse, a hindrance to America's economic expansion. The American worker is a strangely optimistic creature. As individuals, they want to believe that they are exceptional, that through perseverance and hard work they can rise to the top. They think that through this they will eventually rise to the top 20, or 10, or 1% of American wage earners. They think that what prevents them from doing this is a stagnant economy unnecessarily and unfairly hampered by labor unions, too much government regulation and frivolous lawsuits. Once all that clutter is cleared away, free enterprise will thrive, producing a rising tide that will float all boats. They have a President and a pundit class that persistently work at polishing and pushing this myth. They want to believe that just by being exceptional individual workers they could gain on their own in a market competing for their services those benefits unions have won through collective bargaining and years of struggle. This is true only in limited highly competetive industries and, even there, usually only for brief periods of time. They want to believe that government regulation of business has been born out of the fevered dreams of vile overreaching bureaucrats intent on killing the American dream, not out of the need to contain the rapacious greed of business men and women who have no concern for the health and well-being of America or its people or, often, even the long-term health of their own companies and will trample on any right and break any law for their own short term gain. The savings and loan scandals of the eighties, Michael Miliken, Ivan Boesky, Enron, et al, belies this belief. They want to believe that trial lawyers are always greedy self-interested leeches drawing their sustenance from the honest work of others, and not that they may be our last guardians, when those running our government have formed common cause with the worst of the robber barons to ignore, undermine, and undo the restraints experience has shown us must be placed on their rapaciousness, at the expense, and with the deliberate intent, of permanently subjugating the working class." I can't believe I wrote that in January 2005.

Labels: , ,


Monday, January 30, 2012

Emancipated Compensation

For those, like Ron Paul, who believe that the Civil War could and should have been avoided by means of compensated emancipation, I ask, how much should this slave’s owner have been compensated for being deprived of the ability to further inflict this kind of punishment on a human being? What would be a just amount?

If the cost in human lives that it took to end slavery in America was too great, as Paul believes, what is the cost of this? How to you weigh further immiseration in this equation? And, finally, why would you believe, as Paul does, that a society that so valued its enslavement of others that it would be willing to wage war against its own country and sacrifice the lives of hundreds of thousands of its own in that endeavor would be willing to give up that “privilege” for mere money?

After I posted this at Tumblr, somebody who reposted this wrote, “And you do know the Civil War wasn’t fought to free the slaves, right?” That’s an interesting non-sequiter, no? The paradox in the question is that he or she is correct; the Civil War was not fought by the north to free the slaves, while it was fought by the south to preserve slavery.

(Picture stolen from The Atlantic)

Labels: ,


Friday, March 05, 2010

Administration Preparing to Cave on Civilian Trial for KSM

I just sent the following email to the White House:

"I see in the news today that 'President Obama’s advisers are nearing a recommendation that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, be prosecuted in a military tribunal.'

I can't begin to tell you how disappointing this is to me. I knew from your cave-in on telecom immunity during the campaign that you had no commitment to the Bill of Rights, that you considered them something that could be pragmatically bargained away whenever it suited you. Even with that, though, the craveness of this is stunning. You had previously stated that the choice between our security and our ideals was a false choice, and you were right. It's such a shame that you don't have the courage of your convictions. Or perhaps you just really have no convictions."

What adds to the frustration of this is that the President has caved into right wing pressure to abandon his previous position and doing so will not only gain him any points politically, it will hurt him. The Cheney crowd will announce that they had to school the President on how to do the right thing and that this once again proves that he can't be trusted with our nation's security, yadda yadda yadda... In the meantime, he will have taken our country a significant step farther toward a bi-partisan rejection of the constitutional right to due process.
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by