I agree that the nickname "Redskins" is offensive. People can argue that it isn't, "But we don't mean it that way," but the fact remains that, historically, it's an offensive term. Now whether or not government should step in and remove trademark protections is a far different matter. First, by doing so, the federal government has made access to this "offensive" term/mascot even greater. Second, this is not the business of government, to tell people what is and what isn't offensive. People are able to do that for themselves. The way to combat this is to boycott, to avoid, to shun. And, for that matter, if it is so offensive, how about players from that team refusing to play or opponents refusing to play against such a named team? It harkens back to the NBA owner, so many players offended by their owner's words, but not so offended to give up money to protest.
I haven't read the column George Will wrote that purportedly says coeds on campuses have used claims of "rape" as status symbols--or something like that. I am not even sure he suggested that, although many of the protesters have said as much. That's not my point here. My point is there are far more people up in a dither over Will's column--and he may not even have written what others claim, I confess ignorance--than Bill Clinton's behavior toward women, lots of them. Clinton is still the darling of the Democrats, the Left, the Media, women's groups even.
In reading the novels of Vince Flynn, Brad Thor, Robert Crais, Lee Child, et al, I wonder if there are really guys out there like Mitch Rapp, Scot Harvath, Joe Pike, Dewey Andreas, and Jack Reacher. I know there are bad guys out there, like those depicted in the books. But are these good guys also doing things we will never know about? Are they just creations of these authors? But there is so much that seems factual, with training, weapons, etc., I still wonder.
What a mess in Iraq? We not only seem to have wasted the lives of several thousand good Americans, but also billions and billions of dollars. Recent audits show that maybe as much as 25% of the money we sent there is unaccounted and an even greater percentage has been wasted. I guess that's what happens when those in government are allowed to freely spend other people's money.
BTW, can anyone keep a straight face when seeing John Kerry? I think back to his Presidential campaign and his "gravitas" gambit. He had it, it was implied, while his opponent W Bush didn't. Looking at Kerry, I think the implications were way off the mark.
Monday, June 23, 2014
Friday, June 20, 2014
el Bloggo
I sometimes wonder if I just talk/write to myself or if anyone actually reads this stuff. I get an occasional comment, but not many. But I noticed a couple of newspaper op-eds last week that were curiously (is that a real word?) similar to my blogs of earlier.
One had to do with the gasoline tax and bad roads. It said what I said, that the state government must tell us where our gasoline taxes (the excise and the sales taxes!) are going before we will grudgingly agree to higher taxes. Until the last year, the sales tax on gas didn't go to the roads at all, not a penny of it. At the same time, the governor, who favors a gas tax increase, now has a budget for this year with a 7.3% increase in spending, about three times what he asked for in increased taxes on gasoline. Why can't 1/3 of that increase be used for the roads? Or what about the corporate and agrarian subsidies? The state doesn't subsidize me; why should it give my (and other taxpayers') money to selected groups? There are many places to find the money to fix the roads and keep them in good shape--without raising taxes. If the governor thinks it's good to cut taxes on businesses, why doesn't he also think it's bad to raise them on consumers? Hmmm...... Do I smell a rat here? The state government just lacks the integrity, courage, intelligence, or whatever to do the right thing.
I also received an e-mail asking me to sign a petition favoring right-to-work legislation. It acknowledged that Michigan has passed such a law, but fears that there is a movement to overturn it. Well, two things. First, it should be overturned. Second, I'm not an advocate of right-to-work and never have been. OK, readers know I've been critical of unions, almost exclusively because they protect members who don't deserve protection. That is, they prevent people from getting fired who deserve to get fired. But, as I noted in an e-mail I sent off in reply, despite all of the faults of unions, I appreciate that they can protect decent employees from stupid or incompetent bosses. Employees who point out the stupidity or incompetence shouldn't face dismissal. I certainly appreciate that, believe me. And, something that really upsets me about those union members who are looking to opt out is that they still want all the benefits negotiated by the unions, but don't want to pay for them. If they don't want the responsibility of paying for them, then at least have the integrity and honesty to negotiate on their own, as individual. No doubt many of these same people gripe and grouse about "entitlements" that other get. But it's OK for them to mooch off the efforts and money of others.
The apparent imminent fall of Iraq to the radical insurgents (al-Qaida?) is very disturbing. Does that mean that the US lives lost there, several thousand, have been in vain? Thinking of those who died in light of recent events turns my stomach. And think of the billions and billions of dollars we spent there and have nothing to show for much of it. No, I'm not blaming Bush for everything. But how could he and Obama continue to give so much money--again, billions!--to the Iraqis with little or no oversight? Much of it is unaccounted for; that is, there's no record of where tens of billions of dollars went. This doesn't include even more that has been wasted. I'm tempted to say there's a lesson here, but I also know that the Bozos in DC--politicians, appointees, bureaucrats--don't learn lessons. After all, it's not their money. The lives aren't theirs. They remind me the story of the guy who walked past a pier and noticed another guy drowning. "I can't swim! I can't swim!," the drowning man cried. So, the walking guy located a life buoy/ring, with a long line attached to it, and tossed it out to the drowner. "Reach out and grab the ring," he shouted. When the drowner did so, the walker nodded to him, said, "Good," then dropped his end of the line and moved on to do another good deed.
Imagine Tony Gwynn, the hitter. He batted about 107 times against Greg Maddux, who only won about 350 Major League games. Gwynn struck out, well, he never struck out against Maddux and had a .415 batting average against him. A few weeks back, some guys were marveling that Al Kaline struck out only 63 times in one season. That's an incredible number, a great testament to Kaline's hitting ability. But the most number of times Gwynn struck out in a season was 40-something and had several years where his strikeout total was in the teens! (OK, just a chance for me to preen a bit. My sophomore year in college, I had about 130 at-bats and only whiffed once. The story behind that is funny--now. In fact, in my college baseball years, I think I struck out fewer than ten times--and I played every inning on the varsity and most, I think, on the freshman team. Freshmen were ineligible for varsity sports back then--which tells people how old I am!) I did hear Kaline say that, although he didn't/hasn't see/n as much of the National League, Miguel Cabrera is the best American League hitter he's seen. And Kaline played against Ted Williams among others. Wow!
One had to do with the gasoline tax and bad roads. It said what I said, that the state government must tell us where our gasoline taxes (the excise and the sales taxes!) are going before we will grudgingly agree to higher taxes. Until the last year, the sales tax on gas didn't go to the roads at all, not a penny of it. At the same time, the governor, who favors a gas tax increase, now has a budget for this year with a 7.3% increase in spending, about three times what he asked for in increased taxes on gasoline. Why can't 1/3 of that increase be used for the roads? Or what about the corporate and agrarian subsidies? The state doesn't subsidize me; why should it give my (and other taxpayers') money to selected groups? There are many places to find the money to fix the roads and keep them in good shape--without raising taxes. If the governor thinks it's good to cut taxes on businesses, why doesn't he also think it's bad to raise them on consumers? Hmmm...... Do I smell a rat here? The state government just lacks the integrity, courage, intelligence, or whatever to do the right thing.
I also received an e-mail asking me to sign a petition favoring right-to-work legislation. It acknowledged that Michigan has passed such a law, but fears that there is a movement to overturn it. Well, two things. First, it should be overturned. Second, I'm not an advocate of right-to-work and never have been. OK, readers know I've been critical of unions, almost exclusively because they protect members who don't deserve protection. That is, they prevent people from getting fired who deserve to get fired. But, as I noted in an e-mail I sent off in reply, despite all of the faults of unions, I appreciate that they can protect decent employees from stupid or incompetent bosses. Employees who point out the stupidity or incompetence shouldn't face dismissal. I certainly appreciate that, believe me. And, something that really upsets me about those union members who are looking to opt out is that they still want all the benefits negotiated by the unions, but don't want to pay for them. If they don't want the responsibility of paying for them, then at least have the integrity and honesty to negotiate on their own, as individual. No doubt many of these same people gripe and grouse about "entitlements" that other get. But it's OK for them to mooch off the efforts and money of others.
The apparent imminent fall of Iraq to the radical insurgents (al-Qaida?) is very disturbing. Does that mean that the US lives lost there, several thousand, have been in vain? Thinking of those who died in light of recent events turns my stomach. And think of the billions and billions of dollars we spent there and have nothing to show for much of it. No, I'm not blaming Bush for everything. But how could he and Obama continue to give so much money--again, billions!--to the Iraqis with little or no oversight? Much of it is unaccounted for; that is, there's no record of where tens of billions of dollars went. This doesn't include even more that has been wasted. I'm tempted to say there's a lesson here, but I also know that the Bozos in DC--politicians, appointees, bureaucrats--don't learn lessons. After all, it's not their money. The lives aren't theirs. They remind me the story of the guy who walked past a pier and noticed another guy drowning. "I can't swim! I can't swim!," the drowning man cried. So, the walking guy located a life buoy/ring, with a long line attached to it, and tossed it out to the drowner. "Reach out and grab the ring," he shouted. When the drowner did so, the walker nodded to him, said, "Good," then dropped his end of the line and moved on to do another good deed.
Imagine Tony Gwynn, the hitter. He batted about 107 times against Greg Maddux, who only won about 350 Major League games. Gwynn struck out, well, he never struck out against Maddux and had a .415 batting average against him. A few weeks back, some guys were marveling that Al Kaline struck out only 63 times in one season. That's an incredible number, a great testament to Kaline's hitting ability. But the most number of times Gwynn struck out in a season was 40-something and had several years where his strikeout total was in the teens! (OK, just a chance for me to preen a bit. My sophomore year in college, I had about 130 at-bats and only whiffed once. The story behind that is funny--now. In fact, in my college baseball years, I think I struck out fewer than ten times--and I played every inning on the varsity and most, I think, on the freshman team. Freshmen were ineligible for varsity sports back then--which tells people how old I am!) I did hear Kaline say that, although he didn't/hasn't see/n as much of the National League, Miguel Cabrera is the best American League hitter he's seen. And Kaline played against Ted Williams among others. Wow!
Sunday, June 15, 2014
Musings
I just read a poll that showed the President of the past 25 years most admired by Americans is Bill Clinton. Granted, there aren't a whole lot of stellar choices from which to pick, but...... Perhaps that is the only reason he was selected, by 42% of those polled. I find that appalling, that a person with the lack of scruples and integrity of Bill Clinton is "admired" at all, let alone "most." Of course, equally bad is that B. Obama came in as the next "most admired." Have we really fallen that far??????
It reminds me of a little league game, actually 13- and 14-year olds, last week. A player caught an easy pop-up, which surprised a lot of people, including himself. But he was backing up a couple of steps and, in catching the ball, fell over backward. He held on to the ball, for a long time, as a baserunner on second base kept running around to score. The fielder made no attempt to stand up, to throw, to do anything except sit there. Remember, 13- and 14-year olds...... And, three of the four coaches were wildly yelling, "Good play! Good play!" I chuckled and thought, is this what we've come to--a player actually catches a very routine pop-up, but falls down and fails to realize that runners are advancing, not one but two bases and the coaches are yelling "Good play?" I think this is a propos to the "most admired" President poll.
And an article I read identified the "worse foods" to have at a barbecue. Whoa! Get a load of these. One was hamburgers and another hot dogs. Didn't hamburgers and hot dogs invent BBQs? Also on the list were well-marbled steaks and fried chicken! C'mon, what are we supposed to have at our next BBQ--tofu burgers, bean sprouts, and grass clippings from when I mow the lawn??????
How great that Eric Cantor was defeated in the primary in his VA Congressional district! First, he outspent his opponent, the one who defeated him pretty handily, by about $5 million to $250,000. The amounts have changed, but the gap was enormous. Second, Cantor has shown himself to be an Establishment Republican, allowing the same-old, same-old to continue in DC. OK, no doubt, his supporters (and those of the status quo) will cite his willingness to compromise, work with Democrats, "reach across the aisle" (Boy I dislike that term!), etc. I say he was unwilling to confront the wrong that is being perpetrated in DC, by both parties. Let's unseat the biggest campaign spenders and the bozos intent on spending our money to perpetuate big government.
And I'm glad the state Senate didn't vote to raise the gasoline tax. I know the roads are in terrible shape, but before these bozos race to increase taxes yet again, instead of seeking other solutions, we need to have some questions answered. Unless multiple sources, including CNN online, Comcast online, etc., are lying, Michigan has the fifth highest gasoline taxes in the US. And, Michigan also has the lowest per capita spending on roads. Hmmm...... There seems to be a disconnect, a major one, there. Can this question be answered: Where is the money we now pay--fifth most in the country--going if not for roads?
It reminds me of a little league game, actually 13- and 14-year olds, last week. A player caught an easy pop-up, which surprised a lot of people, including himself. But he was backing up a couple of steps and, in catching the ball, fell over backward. He held on to the ball, for a long time, as a baserunner on second base kept running around to score. The fielder made no attempt to stand up, to throw, to do anything except sit there. Remember, 13- and 14-year olds...... And, three of the four coaches were wildly yelling, "Good play! Good play!" I chuckled and thought, is this what we've come to--a player actually catches a very routine pop-up, but falls down and fails to realize that runners are advancing, not one but two bases and the coaches are yelling "Good play?" I think this is a propos to the "most admired" President poll.
And an article I read identified the "worse foods" to have at a barbecue. Whoa! Get a load of these. One was hamburgers and another hot dogs. Didn't hamburgers and hot dogs invent BBQs? Also on the list were well-marbled steaks and fried chicken! C'mon, what are we supposed to have at our next BBQ--tofu burgers, bean sprouts, and grass clippings from when I mow the lawn??????
How great that Eric Cantor was defeated in the primary in his VA Congressional district! First, he outspent his opponent, the one who defeated him pretty handily, by about $5 million to $250,000. The amounts have changed, but the gap was enormous. Second, Cantor has shown himself to be an Establishment Republican, allowing the same-old, same-old to continue in DC. OK, no doubt, his supporters (and those of the status quo) will cite his willingness to compromise, work with Democrats, "reach across the aisle" (Boy I dislike that term!), etc. I say he was unwilling to confront the wrong that is being perpetrated in DC, by both parties. Let's unseat the biggest campaign spenders and the bozos intent on spending our money to perpetuate big government.
And I'm glad the state Senate didn't vote to raise the gasoline tax. I know the roads are in terrible shape, but before these bozos race to increase taxes yet again, instead of seeking other solutions, we need to have some questions answered. Unless multiple sources, including CNN online, Comcast online, etc., are lying, Michigan has the fifth highest gasoline taxes in the US. And, Michigan also has the lowest per capita spending on roads. Hmmm...... There seems to be a disconnect, a major one, there. Can this question be answered: Where is the money we now pay--fifth most in the country--going if not for roads?
Friday, June 6, 2014
Lunch, Anyone?
A few months ago, I noted how anecdotal evidence showed that kids were just throwing out the healthy food now being served in schools due to federal regulations. C'mon, what kid is going to eat carrot sticks when he's used to pizza at lunch? And so on. It reminds me of what the economic planners in the former Soviet Union did back in the '70s. Instead of letting the Russian men decide for themselves what kinds of suits they wanted to buy/wear, the commie planners determined that only blue, baggy, and otherwise ugly suits would be made and the Soviet men would have no choice but to buy/wear them. Well, it turned out that the Soviet men wouldn't/couldn't be coerced into buying the ugly garments. They didn't buy them, but the planners, not wanting to look stupid, kept the suits on the racks for a long time. Finally, it became an embarrassment and the suits were quietly removed to warehouses, where they remained hanging for years and years before they were destroyed. American school kids are doing the same. They aren't buying what they don't want, but what the federal gov't insists they be served.
Of course, many students get free lunches (and breakfasts) from federally-funded programs. So, they get the food, but they aren't eating it. And now there are some statistics to back up the anecdotal evidence. An op-ed in today's newspaper reveals some of the numbers.
In the first school year after the federal "healthy food" regulations were put into place, more than 1.1 million fewer students bought lunches. Presumably, these are the students who don't get the free lunches, but pay from their own (or their parents') pockets. Oh, the free lunchers get the food, but they don't eat it. Fully 48 states have indicated "widespread" waste of the so-called "nutritional food." A Michigan Dept of Ed official who backs the federal guidelines seemingly dismisses this with, "We're seeing some of those issues here." Yeah, right, "some of those issues."
The op-ed also points out how the federal gov't is squandering even more money, besides that wasted on food kids aren't eating, but continue to get. There's a federal program that provides money for all students in schools where 60% of the students qualify for free lunches. So, theoretically, in those schools, 40% of the students who don't need free lunches, have them paid for anyway. One of the silly lines of reasoning goes like this: Students who get free lunches shouldn't have the stigma that might be attached to getting free lunches. Ah, self-esteem rears its head again. In the fall, this program is scheduled to go nationwide, too.
And states and local districts are gobbling up all of this. After all, it's "free money" and "If we don't get it, someone else will." Isn't that an immature attitude? But it's typical in the schools.
Hey, its not their money. What do they care?
Of course, many students get free lunches (and breakfasts) from federally-funded programs. So, they get the food, but they aren't eating it. And now there are some statistics to back up the anecdotal evidence. An op-ed in today's newspaper reveals some of the numbers.
In the first school year after the federal "healthy food" regulations were put into place, more than 1.1 million fewer students bought lunches. Presumably, these are the students who don't get the free lunches, but pay from their own (or their parents') pockets. Oh, the free lunchers get the food, but they don't eat it. Fully 48 states have indicated "widespread" waste of the so-called "nutritional food." A Michigan Dept of Ed official who backs the federal guidelines seemingly dismisses this with, "We're seeing some of those issues here." Yeah, right, "some of those issues."
The op-ed also points out how the federal gov't is squandering even more money, besides that wasted on food kids aren't eating, but continue to get. There's a federal program that provides money for all students in schools where 60% of the students qualify for free lunches. So, theoretically, in those schools, 40% of the students who don't need free lunches, have them paid for anyway. One of the silly lines of reasoning goes like this: Students who get free lunches shouldn't have the stigma that might be attached to getting free lunches. Ah, self-esteem rears its head again. In the fall, this program is scheduled to go nationwide, too.
And states and local districts are gobbling up all of this. After all, it's "free money" and "If we don't get it, someone else will." Isn't that an immature attitude? But it's typical in the schools.
Hey, its not their money. What do they care?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
