Here in Oregon, Public Employees have nearly become the ruling class. Hopefully, you and I can do something about it:
Please take action today to support transparency in the Public Employee Retirement System in Oregon!
It is in public’s interest to ensure fiscal discipline and transparency in how the underfunded PERS system operates with full disclosure of individual retiree information. Courts across America have agreed, as judges have rejected the weak arguments of the unions. Even Oregon Attorney General Kroger agrees and has forced PERS to release information that any taxpayer can access.
Click here to send a message to the House Business and Labor Committee Co-Chairs Reps.
Oregon legislators are proposing to limit the public transparency of the Oregon retirement program in LC 43. If introduced and passed as a bill, citizens would no longer have the capability to review who is receiving taxpayer-funded pensions. Full government transparency is imperative. Taxpayers have the right to track where and how their tax dollars are being spent, so that government can be held accountable for the distribution of those dollars.
While the rest of the Country continues to create more transparency in government, Oregon seems to be willing to limit the ability for citizens to hold our government accountable. Please take action now!
Thank you for taking time to take action.
Sincerely,
Karla Kay Edwards
State Director
AFP Oregon
h/t Eugene Rant.
Ten Mile Island
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Thursday, January 26, 2012
I Don't Have A Bubble
One of those quizzes I found at Ace's.
"Result
"On a scale from 0 to 20 points, where 20 signifies full engagement with mainstream American culture and 0 signifies deep cultural isolation within the new upper class bubble, you scored between 13 and 16.
"In other words, you don't even have a bubble."
I'm not sure if this is good or bad. I think I want a bubble.
"Result
"On a scale from 0 to 20 points, where 20 signifies full engagement with mainstream American culture and 0 signifies deep cultural isolation within the new upper class bubble, you scored between 13 and 16.
"In other words, you don't even have a bubble."
I'm not sure if this is good or bad. I think I want a bubble.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Boobies!
For those of you who spend time worrying about reality television, I've decided that I need to assuage those concerns, here.
Presto. Boobies.
My name is Joe Biden.
.
Presto. Boobies.
My name is Joe Biden.
.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Can Anyone Make Sense Of This Statement?
I received the following from Senator Wyden's office.
“The Keystone Pipeline is an environmentally risky and economically dubious project that would have boosted the balance sheets of oil producers at the expense of American families. If the pipeline had been approved and Canadian tar sands oil producers had been able to sell their oil to customers throughout the world instead of here in the United States, the already high cost of oil would have gone up for Midwest consumers at a time when budgets are tight as it is. I commend the Obama Administration for siding with the American consumer over the oil industry and not approving a pipeline that would have been painful to the wallets of American families and not in our national interests.”
Wha...?
“The Keystone Pipeline is an environmentally risky and economically dubious project that would have boosted the balance sheets of oil producers at the expense of American families. If the pipeline had been approved and Canadian tar sands oil producers had been able to sell their oil to customers throughout the world instead of here in the United States, the already high cost of oil would have gone up for Midwest consumers at a time when budgets are tight as it is. I commend the Obama Administration for siding with the American consumer over the oil industry and not approving a pipeline that would have been painful to the wallets of American families and not in our national interests.”
Wha...?
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Time To Send In The Nerds
We've already sent in the clowns. That would be our elected officials.
There was a time when I had respect, generally, for those elected to Congress. Now that respect is left to a certain few. These people don't deliberate. They, generally, posture. "Stop on-line piracy." Hey, that sounds good. Environmental Protection Agency. Hey, protecting stuff is good, isn't it? Consumer protection. You bet. (Thanks to Rick Santilli.)
And now, we must protect ourselves from the nets. Why? (Sputter.)
Watch this.
There was a time when I had respect, generally, for those elected to Congress. Now that respect is left to a certain few. These people don't deliberate. They, generally, posture. "Stop on-line piracy." Hey, that sounds good. Environmental Protection Agency. Hey, protecting stuff is good, isn't it? Consumer protection. You bet. (Thanks to Rick Santilli.)
And now, we must protect ourselves from the nets. Why? (Sputter.)
Watch this.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Monday, January 16, 2012
Free Speech and Dita Beard
1972 was an amazing year.
For those of us who lived in Portlandia, thiis was the year that Mayor Schrunk beat Ivancie. This was a time when I was involved in politics in Oregon, but only as an organizer. It would be later that I became a vocal advocate for politics, and the problem is, by the time I became aware, the landscape had changed.
What had occurred has been a quantum shift in politics. And, the defining moment had to do with Dita Beard. There aren't any moments that can be defined with names. We do have several names. Names like Burr. Aldrich Ames. Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. Not many. But, who would want to be a traitor to this country?
And, in 1972, Dita Beard's name was added to the list of enemies. Not Mayor Schrunk. For a white boy, living in the 'burbs, the idea that the mob could control politics in the city was silly. The people I knew, as a young, white boy, looking at the city, corruption was the last thing I'd ever think of. Corruption belonged in big cities, like Chicago. There never has been an anti-corruption movement in Oregon. The closest we came to anti-corruption occurred when Governor Goldschmidt was found to have been a child molester. And, there are names of other Democrats who also abused children, and the fight to bring them to justice hasn't ended. Just because you publish a newspaper in Oregon, doesn't mean that folks aren't willing to bring you to justice.
Oregon.
My Oregon.
I worked on the Governor's re-election campaign. Tom McCall. One-ball. Etc. And, I was there, when the Governor and Democrat Rat and Union Boss L.B. Day revealed the proposed bill, Senate Bill 100.
"In the 1973 legislature, essential help came from Senator Ted Hallock of Portland, Representative Nancie Fadeley of Eugene, and L.B. Day, a Teamster's Union official representing Willamette Valley cannery workers and a former director of the state Department of Environmental Quality. Hallock and Fadeley chaired the Senate and House committees on Environment and Land Use. Day was the dominant influence among a task force of lobbyists whom Hallock called together to hammer out necessary compromises." (http://oep.research.pdx.edu/entry/view/senate_bill_100/)
How did all this become acceptable, within months of President Nixon's re-election?
If you weren't there, you wouldn't know. Within weeks of the discovery of the Dita Beard memos, the world changed. The fact that the Democrat Party was a corrupt organization was trumped by revelations that a private company used its influence to achieve an outcome that was beneficial to that corporation.
"Syndicated columnist Jack Anderson receives a memo written by International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) lobbyist Dita Beard; the memo goes a long way towards proving that in return for hefty campaign contributions to the GOP, the Justice Department dropped its antitrust suit against the corporation (see 1969 and July 31, 1971). The memo, written on June 25, 1971 by Beard to ITT vice president Bill Merriam, is entitled “Subject: San Diego Convention.” Beard indicated her distress at the possibility of someone leaking the fact that ITT had quietly contributed $400,000 to the GOP for its 1972 convention in San Diego.
"Two of the few who know of the contribution, Beard wrote, were President Nixon and Attorney General John Mitchell. She asked whether the $400,000 should be donated in cash or in services, then wrote: “I am convinced because of several conversations with Louie re Mitchell that our noble commitment has gone a long way toward our negotiations on the mergers eventually coming out as Hal wanted them. Certainly the president has told Mitchell to see that things are working out fairly. It is still only McLaren’s mickey-mouse that we are suffering.”
"Anderson doesn’t know who “Louie” is, but he is sure “Hal” is Harold Geneen, ITT’s president. ITT had announced a $100,000 contribution, but the real amount is four times that. One of Anderson’s aides, Brit Hume, interviews Beard, and during a night of heavy drinking and Beard’s emotional outbursts, finds out that in May 1971, Beard had gone to a party hosted by Kentucky governor Louie Nunn, the “Louie” of the memo. Mitchell was at the party, and Beard was there to prime Mitchell as to what exactly ITT wants in return for its contribution and its assurance that it can secure San Diego as the GOP’s convention site.
"According to Beard, the deal was hatched between herself and Mitchell at Nunn’s party.
"Anderson quickly publishes a column based on the memo that causes a tremendous stir in Washington and the press. [Anderson, 1999, pp. 194-200] (In his book The Secret Man, Bob Woodward will give the date for Anderson’s column revealing the Beard memo as February 19. This is apparently a typographical error.) [Woodward, 2005, pp. 37] The White House will successfully pressure Beard to disavow the memo (see Mid-Late March, 1972).
Entity Tags: Jack Anderson, Dita Beard, Brit Hume, Bob Woodward, Bill Merriam, Federal Bureau of Investigation, International Telephone and Telegraph, Richard M. Nixon, Harold Geneen, John Mitchell, Louie B. Nunn
I'm not trying to hide anything here. When this broke, and remember, Jack Anderson had just about every newspaper in America, these were damning comments.
The Nunn in these comments is Sam Nunn, Democrat. What we learned was, Republicans who exploited corporate interests in order to gain an advantage with campaign fund-raising was wrong. Democrats who exploited corporate interests in order to gain an advantage with campaign fund-raising was blessed. And most of what has passed as campaign reform has followed this pattern. Large companies have no right to have their corporate interests expressed. Small companies have no right to have their corporate interests expressed. Why? Corruption. And yet we know that Democrats have more corporate ties, more corrupt corporate ties, than any other political party. Why?
Don't know. This should be a no-brainer.
Fortunately, we don't remember shit. Having a memory that exceeds twenty minutes is a diagnosis of brain failure.
Corruption, and the roots of corruption, have been there, for all of us to see, for decades, if not centuries or epochs. We fight the corruption, since that is what keeps us growing. Dita Beard was both an icon and emblematic of something else. What that something else may be, depends upon you.
For those of us who lived in Portlandia, thiis was the year that Mayor Schrunk beat Ivancie. This was a time when I was involved in politics in Oregon, but only as an organizer. It would be later that I became a vocal advocate for politics, and the problem is, by the time I became aware, the landscape had changed.
What had occurred has been a quantum shift in politics. And, the defining moment had to do with Dita Beard. There aren't any moments that can be defined with names. We do have several names. Names like Burr. Aldrich Ames. Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. Not many. But, who would want to be a traitor to this country?
And, in 1972, Dita Beard's name was added to the list of enemies. Not Mayor Schrunk. For a white boy, living in the 'burbs, the idea that the mob could control politics in the city was silly. The people I knew, as a young, white boy, looking at the city, corruption was the last thing I'd ever think of. Corruption belonged in big cities, like Chicago. There never has been an anti-corruption movement in Oregon. The closest we came to anti-corruption occurred when Governor Goldschmidt was found to have been a child molester. And, there are names of other Democrats who also abused children, and the fight to bring them to justice hasn't ended. Just because you publish a newspaper in Oregon, doesn't mean that folks aren't willing to bring you to justice.
Oregon.
My Oregon.
I worked on the Governor's re-election campaign. Tom McCall. One-ball. Etc. And, I was there, when the Governor and Democrat Rat and Union Boss L.B. Day revealed the proposed bill, Senate Bill 100.
"In the 1973 legislature, essential help came from Senator Ted Hallock of Portland, Representative Nancie Fadeley of Eugene, and L.B. Day, a Teamster's Union official representing Willamette Valley cannery workers and a former director of the state Department of Environmental Quality. Hallock and Fadeley chaired the Senate and House committees on Environment and Land Use. Day was the dominant influence among a task force of lobbyists whom Hallock called together to hammer out necessary compromises." (http://oep.research.pdx.edu/entry/view/senate_bill_100/)
How did all this become acceptable, within months of President Nixon's re-election?
If you weren't there, you wouldn't know. Within weeks of the discovery of the Dita Beard memos, the world changed. The fact that the Democrat Party was a corrupt organization was trumped by revelations that a private company used its influence to achieve an outcome that was beneficial to that corporation.
"Syndicated columnist Jack Anderson receives a memo written by International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) lobbyist Dita Beard; the memo goes a long way towards proving that in return for hefty campaign contributions to the GOP, the Justice Department dropped its antitrust suit against the corporation (see 1969 and July 31, 1971). The memo, written on June 25, 1971 by Beard to ITT vice president Bill Merriam, is entitled “Subject: San Diego Convention.” Beard indicated her distress at the possibility of someone leaking the fact that ITT had quietly contributed $400,000 to the GOP for its 1972 convention in San Diego.
"Two of the few who know of the contribution, Beard wrote, were President Nixon and Attorney General John Mitchell. She asked whether the $400,000 should be donated in cash or in services, then wrote: “I am convinced because of several conversations with Louie re Mitchell that our noble commitment has gone a long way toward our negotiations on the mergers eventually coming out as Hal wanted them. Certainly the president has told Mitchell to see that things are working out fairly. It is still only McLaren’s mickey-mouse that we are suffering.”
"Anderson doesn’t know who “Louie” is, but he is sure “Hal” is Harold Geneen, ITT’s president. ITT had announced a $100,000 contribution, but the real amount is four times that. One of Anderson’s aides, Brit Hume, interviews Beard, and during a night of heavy drinking and Beard’s emotional outbursts, finds out that in May 1971, Beard had gone to a party hosted by Kentucky governor Louie Nunn, the “Louie” of the memo. Mitchell was at the party, and Beard was there to prime Mitchell as to what exactly ITT wants in return for its contribution and its assurance that it can secure San Diego as the GOP’s convention site.
"According to Beard, the deal was hatched between herself and Mitchell at Nunn’s party.
"Anderson quickly publishes a column based on the memo that causes a tremendous stir in Washington and the press. [Anderson, 1999, pp. 194-200] (In his book The Secret Man, Bob Woodward will give the date for Anderson’s column revealing the Beard memo as February 19. This is apparently a typographical error.) [Woodward, 2005, pp. 37] The White House will successfully pressure Beard to disavow the memo (see Mid-Late March, 1972).
Entity Tags: Jack Anderson, Dita Beard, Brit Hume, Bob Woodward, Bill Merriam, Federal Bureau of Investigation, International Telephone and Telegraph, Richard M. Nixon, Harold Geneen, John Mitchell, Louie B. Nunn
I'm not trying to hide anything here. When this broke, and remember, Jack Anderson had just about every newspaper in America, these were damning comments.
The Nunn in these comments is Sam Nunn, Democrat. What we learned was, Republicans who exploited corporate interests in order to gain an advantage with campaign fund-raising was wrong. Democrats who exploited corporate interests in order to gain an advantage with campaign fund-raising was blessed. And most of what has passed as campaign reform has followed this pattern. Large companies have no right to have their corporate interests expressed. Small companies have no right to have their corporate interests expressed. Why? Corruption. And yet we know that Democrats have more corporate ties, more corrupt corporate ties, than any other political party. Why?
Don't know. This should be a no-brainer.
Fortunately, we don't remember shit. Having a memory that exceeds twenty minutes is a diagnosis of brain failure.
Corruption, and the roots of corruption, have been there, for all of us to see, for decades, if not centuries or epochs. We fight the corruption, since that is what keeps us growing. Dita Beard was both an icon and emblematic of something else. What that something else may be, depends upon you.
The Upcoming Race Riots
The last, notable, race riot that comes to mind follows the antics of a gentleman known as Rodney King.
What sparked the riots were, in the way I see things, dependent upon a video tape showing Los Angeles policemen using force to control a situation created by Mr. King and his buds.
I'm an old guy.
Not only do I remember the Watts Riots and the Harlem Riots, all of these riots have a single, common thread. Police.
Add in the Detroit Riot of 1967, and you have a perfect trifecta. Cops, cops, cops. Cops are pigs. So, riots are okay, since, well, cops are pigs.
Our President is going to lose his office this coming election. The numbers are too large. A President who doesn't have a clue about the role an executive must play is on dicey ground; just re-visit the tenure of 39. Jimmah was clueless, but driven by a combination of Baptist zeal, but a repugnance of the dominant politics of the period, the Republicans. I don't think that a review of the media and Left establishment of the time will be helpful, since too many of us have failed to put on the wall any of the trenchant facts that led to the break-in of Larry O'Brien's office at Watergate. The kicker to all this has been the re-deification of Republican turncoat, John Dean. You probably don't remember the Watergate hearings, but trust me, Mo Dean captured the dicks of any male alive in the world. I mean, duh.
(Credit to some Asian guy.)
So, you've a situation when the entire apparatus of media, politics, the intelligentsia (read college professors and public school teachers) see the inherent wrongness of one crime, and fail to ask the question, why?
Why would anyone attempt the break-in of an office in downtown Washington, D.C.? To the guys who were involved in the break-in, the answer was easy. The corruption of the Democrat Party didn't begin out of thin air. By the 1960's, the Democrat Party really was a pimp organization. So, when Republican counsel John Dean got his dick in a wringer over Mo Binder, there was never a question over how he would flip. I mean, come on; look at her. Her background? Who was she living with before becoming the amusingly Mrs. Dean? Do any of you question whether or not there is a Mob? Are there unions? Didn't you watch On The Waterfront?
Bob Woodward. Deepthroat. These are iconoclastic names. But, did anyone, ever, tell you that Bob Woodward was in the Navy, serving in the White House, at the time these alleged crimes took place? Did anyone, ever, talk to you about his serving Admiral Moorer? Of course not. Nor did they talk about Mo Binder's past.
A lot of water has passed under the bridge, since 1973. A lot of it has been good. We've had some healing attempted by President Ford. We had a moment, under President Ronald Reagan, where we returned to the fundamentals of America. We've had questionable periods, under Presidents Bush and Bush. (I will tell you, I'm a big fan of 41. I believe that we are a part of his Thousand Points of Light. He shouldn't have broken his pledge.)
Burn, baby, burn. A theme recently echoed by Occupy Oakland. Testing the waters. Do you believe that the Van Joneses of America will allow the failure to re-elect the President to go unnoticed? Will they accept the peaceful election of someone other than President Obama to go unnoticed? Will the unions, the environmentalists, the animal rights activists, the violent Left, allow us to elect anybody but Obama?
No one wants to contemplate the eruption of violence that has been hinted at by our current President. No one wants to contemplate the violence being advocated by the Occupy Movement. No one wants to contemplate the anemic response our largest cities mayors have had, in the face of the Occupy Movement. No one wants to contemplate the thuggery of the Left.
Why is that?
There are racialist attacks happening all over the country. It is happening now, and it's happening today. Check the major cities' newspapers. Check the Oregonian. People are getting beaten up because they are of a different colour than the victim. Have you heard of it? No. Newspapers aren't reporting the basics. Radio and television stations don't report the facts. There is increasing violence against persons of different colours, creeds and religions, but we don't get the facts. Why is that?
I think it is because, it's hard to write that the oppressed in this country are becoming the oppressors. That simple liberty and freedom are easy to discard, when the promise of social justice is at hand. The anger of the oppressed is understandable. The victimization of normal is to be expected. The normal is oppressive.
Don't you get it?
What value does law have, if it only serves to serve the status quo?
Don't you get it?
This is the line being drawn. Either to serve the status quo, or to destroy the status quo. Or didn't you actually read any of the OWS literature?
The stage is being set.
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side,
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
What sparked the riots were, in the way I see things, dependent upon a video tape showing Los Angeles policemen using force to control a situation created by Mr. King and his buds.
I'm an old guy.
Not only do I remember the Watts Riots and the Harlem Riots, all of these riots have a single, common thread. Police.
Add in the Detroit Riot of 1967, and you have a perfect trifecta. Cops, cops, cops. Cops are pigs. So, riots are okay, since, well, cops are pigs.
Our President is going to lose his office this coming election. The numbers are too large. A President who doesn't have a clue about the role an executive must play is on dicey ground; just re-visit the tenure of 39. Jimmah was clueless, but driven by a combination of Baptist zeal, but a repugnance of the dominant politics of the period, the Republicans. I don't think that a review of the media and Left establishment of the time will be helpful, since too many of us have failed to put on the wall any of the trenchant facts that led to the break-in of Larry O'Brien's office at Watergate. The kicker to all this has been the re-deification of Republican turncoat, John Dean. You probably don't remember the Watergate hearings, but trust me, Mo Dean captured the dicks of any male alive in the world. I mean, duh.
So, you've a situation when the entire apparatus of media, politics, the intelligentsia (read college professors and public school teachers) see the inherent wrongness of one crime, and fail to ask the question, why?
Why would anyone attempt the break-in of an office in downtown Washington, D.C.? To the guys who were involved in the break-in, the answer was easy. The corruption of the Democrat Party didn't begin out of thin air. By the 1960's, the Democrat Party really was a pimp organization. So, when Republican counsel John Dean got his dick in a wringer over Mo Binder, there was never a question over how he would flip. I mean, come on; look at her. Her background? Who was she living with before becoming the amusingly Mrs. Dean? Do any of you question whether or not there is a Mob? Are there unions? Didn't you watch On The Waterfront?
Bob Woodward. Deepthroat. These are iconoclastic names. But, did anyone, ever, tell you that Bob Woodward was in the Navy, serving in the White House, at the time these alleged crimes took place? Did anyone, ever, talk to you about his serving Admiral Moorer? Of course not. Nor did they talk about Mo Binder's past.
A lot of water has passed under the bridge, since 1973. A lot of it has been good. We've had some healing attempted by President Ford. We had a moment, under President Ronald Reagan, where we returned to the fundamentals of America. We've had questionable periods, under Presidents Bush and Bush. (I will tell you, I'm a big fan of 41. I believe that we are a part of his Thousand Points of Light. He shouldn't have broken his pledge.)
Burn, baby, burn. A theme recently echoed by Occupy Oakland. Testing the waters. Do you believe that the Van Joneses of America will allow the failure to re-elect the President to go unnoticed? Will they accept the peaceful election of someone other than President Obama to go unnoticed? Will the unions, the environmentalists, the animal rights activists, the violent Left, allow us to elect anybody but Obama?
No one wants to contemplate the eruption of violence that has been hinted at by our current President. No one wants to contemplate the violence being advocated by the Occupy Movement. No one wants to contemplate the anemic response our largest cities mayors have had, in the face of the Occupy Movement. No one wants to contemplate the thuggery of the Left.
Why is that?
There are racialist attacks happening all over the country. It is happening now, and it's happening today. Check the major cities' newspapers. Check the Oregonian. People are getting beaten up because they are of a different colour than the victim. Have you heard of it? No. Newspapers aren't reporting the basics. Radio and television stations don't report the facts. There is increasing violence against persons of different colours, creeds and religions, but we don't get the facts. Why is that?
I think it is because, it's hard to write that the oppressed in this country are becoming the oppressors. That simple liberty and freedom are easy to discard, when the promise of social justice is at hand. The anger of the oppressed is understandable. The victimization of normal is to be expected. The normal is oppressive.
Don't you get it?
What value does law have, if it only serves to serve the status quo?
Don't you get it?
This is the line being drawn. Either to serve the status quo, or to destroy the status quo. Or didn't you actually read any of the OWS literature?
The stage is being set.
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side,
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
What Does Freedom Mean?
I visited Moscow in the 1990's and spent time talking with Russians.
One particularly smart and well-educated woman, who I hired as a translator and guide, revealed to me her hope and wish for a return of the Communist Party.
(This was my hotel, the Cosmos. Below, the view from the main entry. Russians love their statues, and this was dedicated to,what else, the Russian Space Program.)
My hotel was built as part of the Olympic Village, intended for foreign visitors, and access to the grounds involved a simple walk to ramble through the grounds that had been the site, itself. One thing you don't want to do is attempt to cross any of the streets in this part of the world, without an assurance of traffic control. So, pedestrian sub-street crossings were built, similar to the subway where you watched Harry and his cousin attacked by a Dementor. After the fall of the Soviet Union, these became the area where new entrepreneurs were setting up shop, selling anything and everything of value. And some of it was quite pathetic. Most had next to nothing. One man had a shallow box with a neck-strap, selling parts from plumbing fixtures. Here and there were beggars. At another spot, three men with jeans.
(Kiosks were set up on a first come, first served basis. If you were in a building, there was no permanent landlord-tenant contract. You moved in and hoped that the Mafia left you alone.)
Finally making it through, you're there. The Olympic site. Ticket sheds converted into sales outlets, offering drinks. Typically, vodka. And men, in an amazing level of cold, standing and sitting around drinking. Moving from building to building, swarms of squatters had set up shops, carving up buildings into individual kiosks, the only architectural consideration imposed was available space, and leaving enough space unused as to allow shoppers access to the stalls populated by hopeful merchants.
(When someone had something special to sell, it could draw a crowd. But, normally, when I saw groups of people standing around, they were simply drinking.)
One vendor I spoke with had family outside of the city, who manufactured the nesting dolls and chessboards that were his greatest money-makers. Another had come from a village where his cousins sculpted rocks into art; from eggs to crocodiles. One man had found a hoard of high-tensile wire, and was selling wire toys that changed shapes as you manipulated them. All of these men and women were happy and excited to see me. American. Cash. Rubles and dollars. I was lo-o-o-o-oaded-d-d-d.
(Guy snags a Korean-made T.V. Transportation meant planning, and everyone in this picture has one or more plastic bag in their pockets.)
It's important to point out, that prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, the Ruble had been pegged to the dollar. For purposes of commerce, you could purchase any item in any store with either a ruble or a dollar. By law, they were equivalent. Another economic fact, because Capitalism was the enemy of the People, there were no banks. So people kept their cash. Individuals with millions of rubles saved up, their retirement plan. And then, overnight, rubles were exposed to market pricing. All across Russia, millionaires were reduced to poverty. How rich was I? As I recall, I was able to trade $600.00 for a million rubles.
(Wearing mink isn't just a status symbol, though it is. Anyone living there would prefer mink to anything else.)
So, if you had a pension that promised you 15-hundred rubles a month, you had to learn to live on a buck a month. Sure, you still got the fifteen hundred, but these were rubles. I was tempted to purchase both a mink coat and/or mink chapka. The coats were ridiculous. I found one at GYM for $450.00 that would sell in this country for thousands. Quality mink. But the culture in Russia is quite different from our quaint culture. The utility of mink becomes apparent when one finds oneself walking through Red Square on a brilliant December day. Our anemic, polyester-wear is a joke. And while looking successful in Moscow, wearing a chapka at the beach is just too affected for the ordinary American. And I am ordinary.
(I'd love to have these last two edited side-by-side. If you can do it, I'll repost these photos as a single photo. And, Inno did it.)
Everywhere you looked in Moscow, you saw signs of entrepreneurship. Outside GYM were street vendors, with carts or boxes with shoulder-straps.
(Taken, standing in Dzerzhinsky Square, opposite the headquarters of the former KGB. To the left, out of picture, is McDonald's and Children's World.)
Across from KGB headquarters was a McDonalds. Next door, Children's World, converted into a hodge-podge of vendors. It looked more an automobile showroom than the mythical place of the Soviet child's dreams. (By the way, that McDonald's had the best fries I've ever eaten at a McDonald's in years.) I could order a Big Mac, fries and Coke for around eight bucks. Watching Russians, they would come in and order froocktii, apple or cherry pies. Yep. Hot and tasty, just like here in the States.
So, back to my guide/interpreter. We were sitting in a restaurant across the street from the Aftobus, eating American quality salads from a salad bar that cost me about thirty dollars per person. It was a good salad bar. I pulled out a five dollar bill and a 10-thousand ruble note and asked which she would prefer?
(On August 21, 1991, this bus formed part of the barricade that stopped infantry fighting vehicles from entering the city, in order to storm the White House, and depose Mikhail Gorbachev. By Boxing Day, the Communist Party would no longer run Russia. Boris Yeltsin would move into Gorbachev's old office.)
She said she would prefer the five dollar bill. Okay.
Then I asked, if she had both, which would she prefer to spend?
She said she would prefer to spend the ruble note. Okay.
She was a college student, her English was superiour to my Russian, and so I asked if she had ever heard of Gresham's Law? Okay. I said, now you have.
She was young and idealistic. Living in Moscow following the demise of the former Soviet Union was frightening. She, and her family, had been driven to poverty by the collapse of the ruble. She was living in an apartment building that was owned by the state, rent-free. But the condition of the building was terrible. There was water, more of a lake, in the entryway. Condensate was dripping everywhere. Her room was a twelve by twelve foot space she shared with a room mate. They relied upon a communal bathroom. Thankfully, palettes can serve dual-duty. They can keep you from walking in wet stuff. Of course, the notion that the building should repair drains and leaks seemed to have left the consciousness of management and staff. And this was a nice building, close to a Metro station, in a nice part of town.
We continued to talk over lunch. "You and your fellow Russians are now free. You can choose to do the work you choose to take up, earn your own bread, make your own name. You weren't allowed any such freedom, just months ago. You are now free to speak your mind. Tell others the truth. You have a chance to live freely, with the freedom to speak, to choose for yourself, what you wish to do, and avoid that which you choose to avoid."
This, she told me, terrified her. Okay.
I asked her to remember some of the people we had seen and spoken with. Standing behind makeshift counters, selling bogus bluejeans or crafts and wares from their home villages. Disorganized, opportunistic and most importantly, optimistic.
Moscow at the time was a case-study in market economics and capital formation. Yes, I have several friends who invested in Russia at the time, and made some money. It was almost impossible not to. I helped a Russian friend set up the first privately-owned radio station in Vladivostok. The problem, of course, was the Mafia. Squatters rights move in both directions. If you can take it, you most hold it. And the mob bosses in Vladivostok, like all mob bosses, like bright, shiny things. After her brother was killed, friend lost interest in defending the fruit of her labours. When you have the power to take, you take.
Russia is quite different today. And the same as it was eighty or two-hundred years ago. Thuggery doesn't make for stability. Quite the contrary. Most of you are unaware of the election shenanigans that took place recently. If it isn't the Kardashians, it isn't interesting. Likewise, most Americans aren't really aware of what is taking place, right now, under our own noses. When all people are protected, when their property is protected, equally, societies like ours can grow and prosper. When the thugs move in and begin to claim rights as "stakeholders," then the little guys like you and me are up a rope.
How words are used, and what they mean, are important. Just recently it was pointed out that when The Media talks about Republicans, the words Republicans choose to utter are "claims." As in, "Republicans claim that reducing regulations will result in increase private sector investment and jobs." When reporting on Democrats, the words Democrats choose to utter are "beliefs." Such as, "Democrats believe such claims are false." Pretty neatly done, that.
Choosing liberty, economic, political and religious liberty, can be frightening to the young. It can be frightening to the old. From polling I remember, a majority of Russians over sixty would prefer a return to Communism. It's what they were accustomed to, not so much for what you lacked, but for what it provided. Not much, but that dependably.
What a horrid existence. But one many, I fear, would choose today.
One particularly smart and well-educated woman, who I hired as a translator and guide, revealed to me her hope and wish for a return of the Communist Party.
My hotel was built as part of the Olympic Village, intended for foreign visitors, and access to the grounds involved a simple walk to ramble through the grounds that had been the site, itself. One thing you don't want to do is attempt to cross any of the streets in this part of the world, without an assurance of traffic control. So, pedestrian sub-street crossings were built, similar to the subway where you watched Harry and his cousin attacked by a Dementor. After the fall of the Soviet Union, these became the area where new entrepreneurs were setting up shop, selling anything and everything of value. And some of it was quite pathetic. Most had next to nothing. One man had a shallow box with a neck-strap, selling parts from plumbing fixtures. Here and there were beggars. At another spot, three men with jeans.
Finally making it through, you're there. The Olympic site. Ticket sheds converted into sales outlets, offering drinks. Typically, vodka. And men, in an amazing level of cold, standing and sitting around drinking. Moving from building to building, swarms of squatters had set up shops, carving up buildings into individual kiosks, the only architectural consideration imposed was available space, and leaving enough space unused as to allow shoppers access to the stalls populated by hopeful merchants.
One vendor I spoke with had family outside of the city, who manufactured the nesting dolls and chessboards that were his greatest money-makers. Another had come from a village where his cousins sculpted rocks into art; from eggs to crocodiles. One man had found a hoard of high-tensile wire, and was selling wire toys that changed shapes as you manipulated them. All of these men and women were happy and excited to see me. American. Cash. Rubles and dollars. I was lo-o-o-o-oaded-d-d-d.
It's important to point out, that prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, the Ruble had been pegged to the dollar. For purposes of commerce, you could purchase any item in any store with either a ruble or a dollar. By law, they were equivalent. Another economic fact, because Capitalism was the enemy of the People, there were no banks. So people kept their cash. Individuals with millions of rubles saved up, their retirement plan. And then, overnight, rubles were exposed to market pricing. All across Russia, millionaires were reduced to poverty. How rich was I? As I recall, I was able to trade $600.00 for a million rubles.
So, if you had a pension that promised you 15-hundred rubles a month, you had to learn to live on a buck a month. Sure, you still got the fifteen hundred, but these were rubles. I was tempted to purchase both a mink coat and/or mink chapka. The coats were ridiculous. I found one at GYM for $450.00 that would sell in this country for thousands. Quality mink. But the culture in Russia is quite different from our quaint culture. The utility of mink becomes apparent when one finds oneself walking through Red Square on a brilliant December day. Our anemic, polyester-wear is a joke. And while looking successful in Moscow, wearing a chapka at the beach is just too affected for the ordinary American. And I am ordinary.
(If it looked like Levi's, they were close enough. Except for the quality, of course.)
(This pic is a composite of the next two, courtesy of our friend, Inno.)
(I'd love to have these last two edited side-by-side. If you can do it, I'll repost these photos as a single photo. And, Inno did it.)
Everywhere you looked in Moscow, you saw signs of entrepreneurship. Outside GYM were street vendors, with carts or boxes with shoulder-straps.
Across from KGB headquarters was a McDonalds. Next door, Children's World, converted into a hodge-podge of vendors. It looked more an automobile showroom than the mythical place of the Soviet child's dreams. (By the way, that McDonald's had the best fries I've ever eaten at a McDonald's in years.) I could order a Big Mac, fries and Coke for around eight bucks. Watching Russians, they would come in and order froocktii, apple or cherry pies. Yep. Hot and tasty, just like here in the States.
She said she would prefer the five dollar bill. Okay.
Then I asked, if she had both, which would she prefer to spend?
She said she would prefer to spend the ruble note. Okay.
She was a college student, her English was superiour to my Russian, and so I asked if she had ever heard of Gresham's Law? Okay. I said, now you have.
She was young and idealistic. Living in Moscow following the demise of the former Soviet Union was frightening. She, and her family, had been driven to poverty by the collapse of the ruble. She was living in an apartment building that was owned by the state, rent-free. But the condition of the building was terrible. There was water, more of a lake, in the entryway. Condensate was dripping everywhere. Her room was a twelve by twelve foot space she shared with a room mate. They relied upon a communal bathroom. Thankfully, palettes can serve dual-duty. They can keep you from walking in wet stuff. Of course, the notion that the building should repair drains and leaks seemed to have left the consciousness of management and staff. And this was a nice building, close to a Metro station, in a nice part of town.
We continued to talk over lunch. "You and your fellow Russians are now free. You can choose to do the work you choose to take up, earn your own bread, make your own name. You weren't allowed any such freedom, just months ago. You are now free to speak your mind. Tell others the truth. You have a chance to live freely, with the freedom to speak, to choose for yourself, what you wish to do, and avoid that which you choose to avoid."
This, she told me, terrified her. Okay.
I asked her to remember some of the people we had seen and spoken with. Standing behind makeshift counters, selling bogus bluejeans or crafts and wares from their home villages. Disorganized, opportunistic and most importantly, optimistic.
Moscow at the time was a case-study in market economics and capital formation. Yes, I have several friends who invested in Russia at the time, and made some money. It was almost impossible not to. I helped a Russian friend set up the first privately-owned radio station in Vladivostok. The problem, of course, was the Mafia. Squatters rights move in both directions. If you can take it, you most hold it. And the mob bosses in Vladivostok, like all mob bosses, like bright, shiny things. After her brother was killed, friend lost interest in defending the fruit of her labours. When you have the power to take, you take.
Russia is quite different today. And the same as it was eighty or two-hundred years ago. Thuggery doesn't make for stability. Quite the contrary. Most of you are unaware of the election shenanigans that took place recently. If it isn't the Kardashians, it isn't interesting. Likewise, most Americans aren't really aware of what is taking place, right now, under our own noses. When all people are protected, when their property is protected, equally, societies like ours can grow and prosper. When the thugs move in and begin to claim rights as "stakeholders," then the little guys like you and me are up a rope.
How words are used, and what they mean, are important. Just recently it was pointed out that when The Media talks about Republicans, the words Republicans choose to utter are "claims." As in, "Republicans claim that reducing regulations will result in increase private sector investment and jobs." When reporting on Democrats, the words Democrats choose to utter are "beliefs." Such as, "Democrats believe such claims are false." Pretty neatly done, that.
Choosing liberty, economic, political and religious liberty, can be frightening to the young. It can be frightening to the old. From polling I remember, a majority of Russians over sixty would prefer a return to Communism. It's what they were accustomed to, not so much for what you lacked, but for what it provided. Not much, but that dependably.
What a horrid existence. But one many, I fear, would choose today.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Greta Again
Tonight, Rick Perry was on Greta's show.
I'll look for video, but really, Governor. Reducing waste in the Pentagon by reducing the number of civilian staffers?
What was that old show? "Not Ready for Primetime"?
The introduction of civilian staff into the Pentagon was one of the most successful cost controls ever introduced. I know, it was a long time ago. But, before you proffer a change in policy, shouldn't you do at least some minimal research into the topic?
Our candidates are revealing themselves. Ron Paul is nuts, even if his concerns about sound money may end up by our simply asking ourselves questions about how our banking system, and our government's fiscal and monetary policies affect us. It isn't bad. It's a good thing. Few of us can handle the kind of level of examination that macro-economic theorists work in, every day. Esoterica is not a trait of the fundamental American. Is it fast? That's good. Is it easy? That's good, too. Is it cheap? Bingo!
But, when a candidate drives down into questions of policy, don't you expect something that approximates some level of considered evaluation? Cost cutting, by reducing the civilian workers in the Pentagon is a ridiculous idea. Maybe, the idea of Private Beetle Bailey conducting at $47.00 a week doing the job of a civilian contractor at $123-thousand a year is a common sense solution to the task at hand; reducing the government payroll.
But this isn't good thinking, or serious thinking.
Sorry Governor. But please, don't assert a knowledge of how our federal government works without some idea of how it works.
It looks bad.
UPDATE: Transcript here.
I'll look for video, but really, Governor. Reducing waste in the Pentagon by reducing the number of civilian staffers?
What was that old show? "Not Ready for Primetime"?
The introduction of civilian staff into the Pentagon was one of the most successful cost controls ever introduced. I know, it was a long time ago. But, before you proffer a change in policy, shouldn't you do at least some minimal research into the topic?
Our candidates are revealing themselves. Ron Paul is nuts, even if his concerns about sound money may end up by our simply asking ourselves questions about how our banking system, and our government's fiscal and monetary policies affect us. It isn't bad. It's a good thing. Few of us can handle the kind of level of examination that macro-economic theorists work in, every day. Esoterica is not a trait of the fundamental American. Is it fast? That's good. Is it easy? That's good, too. Is it cheap? Bingo!
But, when a candidate drives down into questions of policy, don't you expect something that approximates some level of considered evaluation? Cost cutting, by reducing the civilian workers in the Pentagon is a ridiculous idea. Maybe, the idea of Private Beetle Bailey conducting at $47.00 a week doing the job of a civilian contractor at $123-thousand a year is a common sense solution to the task at hand; reducing the government payroll.
But this isn't good thinking, or serious thinking.
Sorry Governor. But please, don't assert a knowledge of how our federal government works without some idea of how it works.
It looks bad.
UPDATE: Transcript here.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Gingrich Lost
There's a difference between candidates.
They aren't all bad.
Last month, taking my car in for a new top, I had the chance to spend the day with my mom. Mater was, as always, looking forward to her time with me, since I'm the only one of my siblings who has an ounce of sense. She wanted to talk about Romney. I didn't talk to her about my reservations, since contradiction tends to diminish openness. She talked. I listened.
She liked Romney. She liked his family values. We aren't Mormons. Not even close. The Mormon Church is an adversary in many regards, like ownership of farm lands. It's a lot easier to make money farming when you don't have to pay property tax.
But she liked Romney, and his belief, and the Mormon Church's belief, in the sanctity of the family.
It struck a note.
Catholics like talking about things like family, Catholics don't like being described by others--Protestants--as a cult. I have a better sense about Catholics, and that is, that there is a certain sophistication that Catholics are blessed with, that Mormons aren't. Like most things, when end points are concerned, I like to view process versus product.
The product, faith in family, the sanctity of human life, political and economic liberty, all these are part of faith, for Catholics, Mormons and Christians.
But it also applies to anyone of any type of faith, even that of a mustard seed, that there are going to be disagreements over what is the appropriate article of faith for each specified belief system. And, while we're worrying about internecine squabbles, the battle is being lost due to triviality. Who the *8ck cares whether you're a Mormon, Catholic or Christian? If you were Jewish and running for President, would you worry about whether, or not, you attended a reformed synagogue? You know how many Americans know about the divisions that exist within the Jewish faith? And trust me, you don't know about the divisions within the People of Israel.
But, yet, and wait for it...tonight Speaker Gingrich lost me.
Here's the difference between Republican sects: some actually have experience in the real world, where paychecks are signed, people are hired and fired; and those who have not and don't.
Professor Gingrich was revealed tonight. And a lot of tumblers clicked, when listening to him on Greta's show. Romney's take on hiring and firing is more in line with my day-to-day experience; I rely upon my service to others for my paycheck. Trust me, if I fail, I lose and account. They are hard to re-gain. Getting fired is a big deal. That's why I'd rather not be hired for a bad client. If I cannot meet or exceed the requirements of my "new" account, I'm better off not asking for his business. It's better for both of us. Likewise, if I hire you, you better meet or exceed my expectations. If you don't, guess what happens?
You're fired.
Newt's reaction tonight to Greta's questions was appalling. The old college prof shown through. Sure, he's glib. Yes, he's bright. But he don't know s*it. Would you hire this guy to run your business?
Would you hire Mitt?
Well?
UPDATE: Transcript of interview here.
They aren't all bad.
Last month, taking my car in for a new top, I had the chance to spend the day with my mom. Mater was, as always, looking forward to her time with me, since I'm the only one of my siblings who has an ounce of sense. She wanted to talk about Romney. I didn't talk to her about my reservations, since contradiction tends to diminish openness. She talked. I listened.
She liked Romney. She liked his family values. We aren't Mormons. Not even close. The Mormon Church is an adversary in many regards, like ownership of farm lands. It's a lot easier to make money farming when you don't have to pay property tax.
But she liked Romney, and his belief, and the Mormon Church's belief, in the sanctity of the family.
It struck a note.
Catholics like talking about things like family, Catholics don't like being described by others--Protestants--as a cult. I have a better sense about Catholics, and that is, that there is a certain sophistication that Catholics are blessed with, that Mormons aren't. Like most things, when end points are concerned, I like to view process versus product.
The product, faith in family, the sanctity of human life, political and economic liberty, all these are part of faith, for Catholics, Mormons and Christians.
But it also applies to anyone of any type of faith, even that of a mustard seed, that there are going to be disagreements over what is the appropriate article of faith for each specified belief system. And, while we're worrying about internecine squabbles, the battle is being lost due to triviality. Who the *8ck cares whether you're a Mormon, Catholic or Christian? If you were Jewish and running for President, would you worry about whether, or not, you attended a reformed synagogue? You know how many Americans know about the divisions that exist within the Jewish faith? And trust me, you don't know about the divisions within the People of Israel.
But, yet, and wait for it...tonight Speaker Gingrich lost me.
Here's the difference between Republican sects: some actually have experience in the real world, where paychecks are signed, people are hired and fired; and those who have not and don't.
Professor Gingrich was revealed tonight. And a lot of tumblers clicked, when listening to him on Greta's show. Romney's take on hiring and firing is more in line with my day-to-day experience; I rely upon my service to others for my paycheck. Trust me, if I fail, I lose and account. They are hard to re-gain. Getting fired is a big deal. That's why I'd rather not be hired for a bad client. If I cannot meet or exceed the requirements of my "new" account, I'm better off not asking for his business. It's better for both of us. Likewise, if I hire you, you better meet or exceed my expectations. If you don't, guess what happens?
You're fired.
Newt's reaction tonight to Greta's questions was appalling. The old college prof shown through. Sure, he's glib. Yes, he's bright. But he don't know s*it. Would you hire this guy to run your business?
Would you hire Mitt?
Well?
UPDATE: Transcript of interview here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)