This from Grist:
How Green Is Your Candidate?
Where the presidential candidates stand on climate and energy issues
All of the Democratic presidential candidates put energy independence and climate change among their top-tier issues. They all support carbon cap-and-trade systems of varying strengths. They all at least gesture at renewable energy and hybrid cars. Most support ethanol and "clean coal." The aggressiveness of their climate and energy plans rises inversely with their chances of winning -- the better the chances, the weaker the plan.
Click here for the complete text.
***
If I were a one-issue voter, Richardson would most likely grab my vote, here. Of course, I'm not -- so I'd want to know lots more about his stands on other things before making up my mind. Given the splash he hasn't made among the rest of the population, it's probably a moot point, anyway.
September 28, 2007
September 26, 2007
Look Busy, Do Nothing -- Again
Katrina was all over the news for a few days at the beginning of the month. Remember? What has happened since? The Administration, Congress and the populace at large have slipped back into their peaceful slumbers. Meanwhile, the victims continue to live in concentration camps.
xxx
Katrina Musings: What About All of Our Other Vulnerable Coastal Cities? by Chris Mooney -- The Huffington Post
Today, the two year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina's landfall, my hometown of New Orleans is getting some much needed attention. And rightly so: It's a scandal that in the years since the disaster, all too little has changed. Time magazine recently blazoned the word "pathetic" on its cover to describe the lagging efforts to re-defend the city. Residents are reoccupying and rebuilding willy-nilly, including in the most vulnerable, flood-prone areas. Meanwhile, the agency whose failures drowned the city to begin with, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, lurches into a series of projects that still won't protect against the deadliest hurricanes the Gulf of Mexico can spawn--
^^^
If, as Mooney's article predicts in one of his worst-case scenarios, St. Pete, Florida suddenly becomes an island, my home will almost certainly be underwater.
When I lived in Kansas City, Missouri [about as far inland as you can get], the Army Corps of Engineers blew into town after a minor flash flood hit one of the wealthiest parts of town -- as well as many poorer areas. They widened Brush Creek [that skirted the rich section the flood had hit] and created a bottle-neck downstream [in the poorer section] while assuring us we would be protected, too.
Uh-huh-- you don't have to be an engineer to realize that pouring more water down the creek and leaving the downstream area untouched doesn't help the folks living downstream from the work-area.
I imagine it helps you ignore the physics if you've been ordered to protect the Plaza [the wealthy area] by the folks whose campaigns are in debt to those who own it.
All of this smacks of the current plan to protect NOLA from a level 3 hurricane -- after being hit by one that registered as a level 5 -- with more numerous and more severe storms predicted for the near future.
Good going, Corps of Engineers.
xxx
Katrina Musings: What About All of Our Other Vulnerable Coastal Cities? by Chris Mooney -- The Huffington Post
Today, the two year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina's landfall, my hometown of New Orleans is getting some much needed attention. And rightly so: It's a scandal that in the years since the disaster, all too little has changed. Time magazine recently blazoned the word "pathetic" on its cover to describe the lagging efforts to re-defend the city. Residents are reoccupying and rebuilding willy-nilly, including in the most vulnerable, flood-prone areas. Meanwhile, the agency whose failures drowned the city to begin with, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, lurches into a series of projects that still won't protect against the deadliest hurricanes the Gulf of Mexico can spawn--
^^^
If, as Mooney's article predicts in one of his worst-case scenarios, St. Pete, Florida suddenly becomes an island, my home will almost certainly be underwater.
When I lived in Kansas City, Missouri [about as far inland as you can get], the Army Corps of Engineers blew into town after a minor flash flood hit one of the wealthiest parts of town -- as well as many poorer areas. They widened Brush Creek [that skirted the rich section the flood had hit] and created a bottle-neck downstream [in the poorer section] while assuring us we would be protected, too.
Uh-huh-- you don't have to be an engineer to realize that pouring more water down the creek and leaving the downstream area untouched doesn't help the folks living downstream from the work-area.
I imagine it helps you ignore the physics if you've been ordered to protect the Plaza [the wealthy area] by the folks whose campaigns are in debt to those who own it.
All of this smacks of the current plan to protect NOLA from a level 3 hurricane -- after being hit by one that registered as a level 5 -- with more numerous and more severe storms predicted for the near future.
Good going, Corps of Engineers.
September 23, 2007
The Red Herring
All the recent talk of a National Language is not the real point at all, of course. It’s just another way to disenfranchise immigrants [in this case the Mexicans who have the double whammy of being both immigrants AND not of Northern European stock.]
Can you tell the difference, today, between the descendants of Irish immigrants who came over during the early 19th century and those who arrived after WWII? Me neither. It’s likely that Irish was spoken in the homes of both families. It’s likely that the parents in both cases resisted learning English. [If you’ve ever studied a foreign language, I imagine you can sympathize—it’s hard, slogging work that consists, basically, of rote memorization.]
Their children, however, if they got here before the age of ten or so, learned English fairly easily. They were immersed in the language at school, they were teased by their peers for not speaking ‘correctly’ and probably grew up without even a trace of an accent. At home, they translated any government forms or other necessary paperwork for their parents and their families got along just fine, thankyouverymuch. Yes, the family probably remained below the poverty level until the 2nd generation grew up. By then, they had the advantage of having been educated here and of having thoroughly assimilated.
This language issue has come up before. I remember similar rhetoric after the Viet Nam war when lots of folks from Asia were arriving. Then, there was a triple whammy to contend with: the Asian’s didn’t look like us, the parents didn’t speak English and their kids had begun growing up in a culture that taught respect for education. The Europeans in this country were living in terror that the Asians would beat us at our own game: get good grades in high school, crowd out our kids in the best colleges and out-perform us in the workplace. THEN what would happen to America???
Surprise—we weathered the storm, absorbed the Asians and America is stronger for their having arrived on our shores. And, many of the parents who arrived in the 1970’s still speak halting English and need help from their kids when it comes time to sign important documents.
And-- look around --does this country look like Asia to you?
So, those of us whose parents arrived from England, Ireland, Scotland, France, Germany, Holland, Denmark et al can relax. We’re still the majority in this country and will be for a while yet. There’s no need to try to make it harder for future immigrants. No one did that [though some did try] when our parents arrived.
And if, by chance, the complexion of America DOES change—well—who’s to say that’s necessarily a Bad Thing?
Can you tell the difference, today, between the descendants of Irish immigrants who came over during the early 19th century and those who arrived after WWII? Me neither. It’s likely that Irish was spoken in the homes of both families. It’s likely that the parents in both cases resisted learning English. [If you’ve ever studied a foreign language, I imagine you can sympathize—it’s hard, slogging work that consists, basically, of rote memorization.]
Their children, however, if they got here before the age of ten or so, learned English fairly easily. They were immersed in the language at school, they were teased by their peers for not speaking ‘correctly’ and probably grew up without even a trace of an accent. At home, they translated any government forms or other necessary paperwork for their parents and their families got along just fine, thankyouverymuch. Yes, the family probably remained below the poverty level until the 2nd generation grew up. By then, they had the advantage of having been educated here and of having thoroughly assimilated.
This language issue has come up before. I remember similar rhetoric after the Viet Nam war when lots of folks from Asia were arriving. Then, there was a triple whammy to contend with: the Asian’s didn’t look like us, the parents didn’t speak English and their kids had begun growing up in a culture that taught respect for education. The Europeans in this country were living in terror that the Asians would beat us at our own game: get good grades in high school, crowd out our kids in the best colleges and out-perform us in the workplace. THEN what would happen to America???
Surprise—we weathered the storm, absorbed the Asians and America is stronger for their having arrived on our shores. And, many of the parents who arrived in the 1970’s still speak halting English and need help from their kids when it comes time to sign important documents.
And-- look around --does this country look like Asia to you?
So, those of us whose parents arrived from England, Ireland, Scotland, France, Germany, Holland, Denmark et al can relax. We’re still the majority in this country and will be for a while yet. There’s no need to try to make it harder for future immigrants. No one did that [though some did try] when our parents arrived.
And if, by chance, the complexion of America DOES change—well—who’s to say that’s necessarily a Bad Thing?
September 21, 2007
Hey all,
There's a very special true story just posted over at scattershot thoughts.
It gives me hope for the human race at a time when I've been running low on that commodity.
There's a very special true story just posted over at scattershot thoughts.
It gives me hope for the human race at a time when I've been running low on that commodity.
September 20, 2007
One Third of the Country is Still Living Under a Rock
Once again, I shamelessly lifted something [with permission, of course] from a fellow traveler's blog.
This came from franIAM. Check her out, why don'tcha?
^^^
Here are the House districts throughout the country whose majorities are in favor of staying- the- course in Iraq.
HELLO, PEOPLE!!! Other people are dying while you remain complacent. Since you're so gung-ho, why don't YOU grab your body armor, suit up and get your asses to Iraq?!?
The numbers break down as follows: 12% want to increase the number of troops [Where will we get them, one wonders? Perhaps this 12% will volunteer?] 15% want to maintain the current troop levels [Oh, yes! Since this 'strategy' is working SO well!] 7% are unsure how to proceed [Well, at least they admit to being clueless.] 30% want to decrease the number of troops on the ground [While their hearts may be in the right place, it seems, to me, a futile move. The ones who are there now are overwhelmed -- how can FEWER do anything at all -- other than act as targets?] And 36% want to pull out completely.
Oh, and here's the map for the Senate:
Way to go, Utah!
So, a note to the rest of us. Check out how your reps and senators are voting. Obviously, if they're not clamoring for a pullout, they're ignoring their constituents and deserve to be benched -- unless, of course, you're one of the 36% who are ready to lay YOUR lives on the line-- in which case, get your butts to Iraq! NOW!
^^^
Click here for the original post at Open Left.
This came from franIAM. Check her out, why don'tcha?
^^^
Here are the House districts throughout the country whose majorities are in favor of staying- the- course in Iraq.
HELLO, PEOPLE!!! Other people are dying while you remain complacent. Since you're so gung-ho, why don't YOU grab your body armor, suit up and get your asses to Iraq?!?
The numbers break down as follows: 12% want to increase the number of troops [Where will we get them, one wonders? Perhaps this 12% will volunteer?] 15% want to maintain the current troop levels [Oh, yes! Since this 'strategy' is working SO well!] 7% are unsure how to proceed [Well, at least they admit to being clueless.] 30% want to decrease the number of troops on the ground [While their hearts may be in the right place, it seems, to me, a futile move. The ones who are there now are overwhelmed -- how can FEWER do anything at all -- other than act as targets?] And 36% want to pull out completely.Oh, and here's the map for the Senate:
Way to go, Utah!So, a note to the rest of us. Check out how your reps and senators are voting. Obviously, if they're not clamoring for a pullout, they're ignoring their constituents and deserve to be benched -- unless, of course, you're one of the 36% who are ready to lay YOUR lives on the line-- in which case, get your butts to Iraq! NOW!
^^^
Click here for the original post at Open Left.
This from the Huffington Post:
Why Does Commercial News Suck? -- by Daniel Brook
This week, I watched the same piece of information reported on commercial TV and PBS. At 6:30, NBC's Brian Williams went into shocked-and-breathless mode to announce that American life expectancy had hit a whopping 77.9 years. Then at 7:00, I heard Jim Lehrer calmly announce the same fact and put it in context. While this is the highest life expectancy the US has yet achieved, it falls behind 40 other nations. The context changes everything. If you were watching Brian Williams, you'd be popping the champagne corks. If you were watching Jim Lehrer, you'd be contemplating moving to Costa Rica--one of several third world countries with longer life expectancies than the US.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Mannycongo, one of the folks who commented on the article had this to add:
'How we got to the point where our "mainstream" media is a mouthpiece for the State is a little less important than the fact that IT IS A MOUTHPIECE FOR THE STATE. And that, my friends is an attribute of fascism.'
Why Does Commercial News Suck? -- by Daniel Brook
This week, I watched the same piece of information reported on commercial TV and PBS. At 6:30, NBC's Brian Williams went into shocked-and-breathless mode to announce that American life expectancy had hit a whopping 77.9 years. Then at 7:00, I heard Jim Lehrer calmly announce the same fact and put it in context. While this is the highest life expectancy the US has yet achieved, it falls behind 40 other nations. The context changes everything. If you were watching Brian Williams, you'd be popping the champagne corks. If you were watching Jim Lehrer, you'd be contemplating moving to Costa Rica--one of several third world countries with longer life expectancies than the US.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Mannycongo, one of the folks who commented on the article had this to add:
'How we got to the point where our "mainstream" media is a mouthpiece for the State is a little less important than the fact that IT IS A MOUTHPIECE FOR THE STATE. And that, my friends is an attribute of fascism.'
September 19, 2007
Fake Good News—The Only Kind We’re Likely to Get
Heard on NPR this morning:
The Florida Everglades has been taken off the Endangered Areas List.
Sounds like good news, right? Don’t leap to conclusions.
It seems the
Here’s the reasoning of the administration:
- It’s a black-eye to this country to have an endangered area within its borders.
- A PLAN has been set up.
- Some [very minor] steps have begun being put into practice, but the more long-range and expensive steps on the list haven’t been begun yet and there is no timetable for their implementation.
- But they’ve BEGUN taking action, so there’s no need to be on the list any longer.
So now Bush has something he can point to with pride: the
Thus, Bush BELIEVES it’s no longer endangered. And that’s what matters, right?
September 18, 2007
This from the Huffington Post:
Dept. of Misdirection: With Iraq a Disaster, GOP Goes Crazy Over a Newspaper Ad -- Arianna Huffington
AP
Does anybody really believe the problem with the war in Iraq is too much questioning of those in authority, too much bluntness, and not enough deference to those who have been in charge of the war for the last four years?
That's apparently the feeling of all the conservative talk-show hosts and GOP presidential candidates who came down with the vapors over the MoveOn ad that had the temerity to question Gen. David Petraeus.Click here for the complete text.
The Iraq War in Context
Being a student of history definitely has its downside. The parallels I'm seeing are truly terrifying.
Here are three civilizations that met brutal ends. We've managed to follow all three of their tragic examples simultaneously.
Sparta built up a huge military presence. So long as it concentrated on sabre rattling it was perceived as unbeatable-- and it thrived. It was finally seduced into actually fighting a major war. It lost and Athens became the sole super-power in Attica.
Athens overreached in the Syracuse wars [unprovoked invasions designed to bring treasure home] and Rome filled the void it left behind.
Rome never met a war it didn't like, eventually over-taxing its citizens to pay for them and over-stretching its troops. The Vandals, the Gauls and, finally, the Franks took over.
Who will fill the void we leave in our wake?
Here are three civilizations that met brutal ends. We've managed to follow all three of their tragic examples simultaneously.
Sparta built up a huge military presence. So long as it concentrated on sabre rattling it was perceived as unbeatable-- and it thrived. It was finally seduced into actually fighting a major war. It lost and Athens became the sole super-power in Attica.
Athens overreached in the Syracuse wars [unprovoked invasions designed to bring treasure home] and Rome filled the void it left behind.
Rome never met a war it didn't like, eventually over-taxing its citizens to pay for them and over-stretching its troops. The Vandals, the Gauls and, finally, the Franks took over.
Who will fill the void we leave in our wake?
Call For A General Strike
Sunday, September 9, 2007
From Us To You-- The Challenge To Organize...
Click here for the text.
xxx
Hey! Nothing else has worked. But this method has been shown to work in Poland when the Soviets didn't listen to the Poles; in India when Britain refused to listen to the Indians; in France when the gov't refused to listen to its own people; in South Africa when the Afrikaners and the rest of the world refused to listen to the very real grievances of the Black population.
It's certainly worth a shot in the most capitalistic country on the planet where the almighty dollar is the one, true god.
Being retired, there's not much I can do to make it happen [even when I was working, given the profession I was in, I couldn't have done much.] BUT, there's one thing I can do and I'm asking all the folks I know to do what we can.
Do you want an end to the Iraq war? Do you want health insurance for our country's poorest children? Do you want US jobs to stay in the US? Do you want reasonable funding for our country's infrastructure and an end to the pork barrel buffet for Congress? Do you want our gov't to stop and listen to our needs for a change?
If you work for someone else, don't go to work on October 17. That's all. Just call in sick on that one day. If you work for yourself, send this to everyone you know who works for someone else. Just spread the word.
General strikes have been shown to work in numerous countries from France to India. Why shouldn't one work here, as well? Let the 'big bosses' know, 'There're more of us than you, fellas! So, you'd better pay attention to us!'
From Us To You-- The Challenge To Organize...
Click here for the text.
xxx
Hey! Nothing else has worked. But this method has been shown to work in Poland when the Soviets didn't listen to the Poles; in India when Britain refused to listen to the Indians; in France when the gov't refused to listen to its own people; in South Africa when the Afrikaners and the rest of the world refused to listen to the very real grievances of the Black population.
It's certainly worth a shot in the most capitalistic country on the planet where the almighty dollar is the one, true god.
Being retired, there's not much I can do to make it happen [even when I was working, given the profession I was in, I couldn't have done much.] BUT, there's one thing I can do and I'm asking all the folks I know to do what we can.
Do you want an end to the Iraq war? Do you want health insurance for our country's poorest children? Do you want US jobs to stay in the US? Do you want reasonable funding for our country's infrastructure and an end to the pork barrel buffet for Congress? Do you want our gov't to stop and listen to our needs for a change?
If you work for someone else, don't go to work on October 17. That's all. Just call in sick on that one day. If you work for yourself, send this to everyone you know who works for someone else. Just spread the word.
General strikes have been shown to work in numerous countries from France to India. Why shouldn't one work here, as well? Let the 'big bosses' know, 'There're more of us than you, fellas! So, you'd better pay attention to us!'
September 16, 2007
Two Cases of Hubris
WHY do we call ourselves Homo sapiens [the wise man] when we, so obviously, ARE NOT?
It’s amazing to see my point made as clearly as this:
This morning I came home from swimming and turned on the TV. I joined a program in progress on the Science Channel. A narrator was describing a tentative plan to build a tunnel to carry human traffic across the Atlantic Ocean: a body of water humans haven’t yet explored thoroughly, don’t even have a map of yet but know enough about to know it’s seismically active.
I said, ‘Huh?’ dubbed the whole project ‘hubris’, changed to a History Channel and ran smack into another one.
It seems Henry Ford tried to buck the Amazon Forest and failed miserably. He was manufacturing cars during the 1930’s and needed rubber. Rubber trees grow in the Amazon Forest—so he bought a huge acreage and set about planting rubber trees without doing even the most basic research.
The Amazon naturally produces approximately 20 rubber trees per acre of land. Ford tried to plant 200 trees per acre. Now, rubber trees are prone to a leaf-blight. If their leaves touch, they spread the blight among themselves—rather like rot spreading through bushels of apples when they’re stored together. Not surprisingly, blight got loose in Ford’s rubber tree forest and the trees died.
Belatedly, Ford called in a botanist who did the research and explained the problem to him. Ford, like so many rich men, was used to having his own way. He seized on one portion of the report by the botanist which said the trees didn’t like the hilly location and the blight did. So, Ford bought ANOTHER plantation on flatter terrain and tried again. Again, he planted trees so closely together their leaves touched and, again, the trees all died.
Finally, in 1945, after he’d been trying to grow rubber for 14 years, DuPont produced synthetic rubber and Ford gave up trying. Without ever having set foot on either plantation, he had spent $40 million—the equivalent of $200 million in today’s money.
Ford’s folly cost him several millions. Cheap compared to the hundreds of billions proposed for the Atlantic tunnel [assuming it were to come in on budget (and when is the last time THAT happened?)] not to even mention the lives that will, inevitably, be lost if the plan goes forward.
Lessee -- we've got ships. We've got airplanes. What the hell do we need a tunnel for?
I'll bet I know: Britain and France built the Chunnel. And the US can't STAND the fact that somebody else did such a great engineering job. So, we've got to go them one better -- and damn the consequences, full steam ahead!
I don’t know about you, but MY definition of the word, ‘wise’ includes the ideas of 1] using reason to reach decisions and 2] learning from past mistakes.
So, where the hell do we get off calling ourselves Homo sapiens?
It’s amazing to see my point made as clearly as this:
This morning I came home from swimming and turned on the TV. I joined a program in progress on the Science Channel. A narrator was describing a tentative plan to build a tunnel to carry human traffic across the Atlantic Ocean: a body of water humans haven’t yet explored thoroughly, don’t even have a map of yet but know enough about to know it’s seismically active.
I said, ‘Huh?’ dubbed the whole project ‘hubris’, changed to a History Channel and ran smack into another one.
It seems Henry Ford tried to buck the Amazon Forest and failed miserably. He was manufacturing cars during the 1930’s and needed rubber. Rubber trees grow in the Amazon Forest—so he bought a huge acreage and set about planting rubber trees without doing even the most basic research.
The Amazon naturally produces approximately 20 rubber trees per acre of land. Ford tried to plant 200 trees per acre. Now, rubber trees are prone to a leaf-blight. If their leaves touch, they spread the blight among themselves—rather like rot spreading through bushels of apples when they’re stored together. Not surprisingly, blight got loose in Ford’s rubber tree forest and the trees died.
Belatedly, Ford called in a botanist who did the research and explained the problem to him. Ford, like so many rich men, was used to having his own way. He seized on one portion of the report by the botanist which said the trees didn’t like the hilly location and the blight did. So, Ford bought ANOTHER plantation on flatter terrain and tried again. Again, he planted trees so closely together their leaves touched and, again, the trees all died.
Finally, in 1945, after he’d been trying to grow rubber for 14 years, DuPont produced synthetic rubber and Ford gave up trying. Without ever having set foot on either plantation, he had spent $40 million—the equivalent of $200 million in today’s money.
Ford’s folly cost him several millions. Cheap compared to the hundreds of billions proposed for the Atlantic tunnel [assuming it were to come in on budget (and when is the last time THAT happened?)] not to even mention the lives that will, inevitably, be lost if the plan goes forward.
Lessee -- we've got ships. We've got airplanes. What the hell do we need a tunnel for?
I'll bet I know: Britain and France built the Chunnel. And the US can't STAND the fact that somebody else did such a great engineering job. So, we've got to go them one better -- and damn the consequences, full steam ahead!
I don’t know about you, but MY definition of the word, ‘wise’ includes the ideas of 1] using reason to reach decisions and 2] learning from past mistakes.
So, where the hell do we get off calling ourselves Homo sapiens?
Democrats: Be Careful How You Emulate the Losers
This from the Washington Post Back to School for The GOP -- By Peter Beinart
In the past few years, Democrats have gotten pretty good at mimicking Republicans. They've been training college activists, establishing think tanks and, more generally, trying to turn their party into a movement -- just what conservatives did during their years in the pre-Reagan wilderness. As John Podesta, head of the left-leaning Center for American Progress, told the New York Times Magazine a while back, "I describe myself as having a master's degree in the right-wing conspiracy."
Imitation may be flattering, but in this case, it comes with a large scoop of irony. Because while Democrats are enrolling in GOP 101, the GOP itself is in free fall.
Here is the complete text.
xxx
Meanwhile, Democrats must be careful not to rest on their laurels.
After all it was only two years ago that Democrats were, rightly, being derided for being disorganized and without direction. They must, at all costs, avoid going back to the days when they couldn't decide where to have lunch let alone how to develop plans on how to govern the country effectively.
So, Democrats be careful you don't learn better than the Republicans how to be Republican.
In the past few years, Democrats have gotten pretty good at mimicking Republicans. They've been training college activists, establishing think tanks and, more generally, trying to turn their party into a movement -- just what conservatives did during their years in the pre-Reagan wilderness. As John Podesta, head of the left-leaning Center for American Progress, told the New York Times Magazine a while back, "I describe myself as having a master's degree in the right-wing conspiracy."
Imitation may be flattering, but in this case, it comes with a large scoop of irony. Because while Democrats are enrolling in GOP 101, the GOP itself is in free fall.
Here is the complete text.
xxx
Meanwhile, Democrats must be careful not to rest on their laurels.
After all it was only two years ago that Democrats were, rightly, being derided for being disorganized and without direction. They must, at all costs, avoid going back to the days when they couldn't decide where to have lunch let alone how to develop plans on how to govern the country effectively.
So, Democrats be careful you don't learn better than the Republicans how to be Republican.
September 14, 2007
On Criminology
Yesterday, I wrote this comment on a post in another blog. I liked it, so I posted it here:
xxx
People just keep wanting simplistic answers to life's complex problems.
Back in the 70's it was all nurture, nurture, nurture.
Now, it's all nature, nature, nature.
**sigh**
I've long been an advocate of complex reasons behind complex results though with something like crime I come down much more squarely on the nurture side.
Do you want to create a criminal? Simple: send the child to a school where the building is deteriorating, where the student/teacher ratio is 30+/1, where the teachers, themselves, are uneducated, where parents are not recruited to be involved in their children's education.
When school lets out, put the children out on streets with no adult supervision and where the only role models are pimps, prostitutes and drug pushers. Make sure the only people with any real influence and money who look like them are the basketball players they see on TV. And don't explain to the children what the odds of growing up to be a professional basketball player are.
Sit back and allow the mix to ferment for 16 years or so.
Oh, one more thing: while you're waiting, build more and bigger prisons. You're going to need them.
September 11, 2007
The country has been misled -- again -- this time by General Petraeus as well as the Bush Administration.
President Bush has counseled the country to have patience, that he would 'listen to the general' when it came time 'make a decision' regarding bringing the troops home or staying in Iraq.
President Bush was able to say all this with confidence because he knew ahead of time what 'General Betrayus' report would consist of.
Petraeus stated that his report is his alone. However he and his staff have been phoning the White House politicos daily to coordinate their messages. He used what the Washington Post has called, 'Funny Math' to compile his figures. For instance, car bombs don't count as acts of war and such deaths are not counted among the war dead. Bullets to the back of the head count as assassinations, however bullets to the front of the head do not. This sounds like the games I used to play when I was seven years old and the playground echoed with shouts of, 'No fair! Didn't count! Do over!'
But Iraq, tragically, is not an elementary school playground.
Here is some math that is not funny:
On September 11, 2001, Osama bin Ladin killed 2,974 US citizens. Twenty four people went missing that day and are presumed dead. One person, so far, died of lung disease which has been attributed to breathing the dust at Ground Zero. The total official number dead due to bin Ladin’s actions is: 2,999.
Since then, the war in Iraq, a country which had nothing to do with 9/11 and had no stockpiled WMD's, has killed 3,774 US citizens and over one million Iraqis.
Therefore, I respectfully ask, ‘Who are the terrorists?’
President Bush has counseled the country to have patience, that he would 'listen to the general' when it came time 'make a decision' regarding bringing the troops home or staying in Iraq.
President Bush was able to say all this with confidence because he knew ahead of time what 'General Betrayus' report would consist of.
Petraeus stated that his report is his alone. However he and his staff have been phoning the White House politicos daily to coordinate their messages. He used what the Washington Post has called, 'Funny Math' to compile his figures. For instance, car bombs don't count as acts of war and such deaths are not counted among the war dead. Bullets to the back of the head count as assassinations, however bullets to the front of the head do not. This sounds like the games I used to play when I was seven years old and the playground echoed with shouts of, 'No fair! Didn't count! Do over!'
But Iraq, tragically, is not an elementary school playground.
Here is some math that is not funny:
On September 11, 2001, Osama bin Ladin killed 2,974 US citizens. Twenty four people went missing that day and are presumed dead. One person, so far, died of lung disease which has been attributed to breathing the dust at Ground Zero. The total official number dead due to bin Ladin’s actions is: 2,999.
Since then, the war in Iraq, a country which had nothing to do with 9/11 and had no stockpiled WMD's, has killed 3,774 US citizens and over one million Iraqis.
Therefore, I respectfully ask, ‘Who are the terrorists?’
September 10, 2007
Technology Gone Mad
It's amazing how much tv I ingest while wallpapering.
Now, I'm watching the Science Channel. A program about robots. A robotocist says, 'Our goal is to create sentient beings.'
And my antennae begin quivering.
The scientist quickly assures the audience that WE have nothing to fear from these entities.
That may be true -- or not.
But, what have they to fear from US?
Why are we interested in creating them -- beyond the idea of proving we can?
To do tedious jobs we don't want to do ourselves? To do dangerous jobs, ditto? To go into combat in our steads?
If they're sentient, might they not recognize their own 2nd class citizenship? Might they not resent it? Wouldn't you? I sure as hell would.
Even if I'd been programmed not to do anything about it -- maybe especially if I'd been so programmed -- what would that make me? In a word, it would make me a slave.
Do we truly want to go down that road?
Brave New World, here we come-- once again without thinking through the consequences of our actions.
Now, I'm watching the Science Channel. A program about robots. A robotocist says, 'Our goal is to create sentient beings.'
And my antennae begin quivering.
The scientist quickly assures the audience that WE have nothing to fear from these entities.
That may be true -- or not.
But, what have they to fear from US?
Why are we interested in creating them -- beyond the idea of proving we can?
To do tedious jobs we don't want to do ourselves? To do dangerous jobs, ditto? To go into combat in our steads?
If they're sentient, might they not recognize their own 2nd class citizenship? Might they not resent it? Wouldn't you? I sure as hell would.
Even if I'd been programmed not to do anything about it -- maybe especially if I'd been so programmed -- what would that make me? In a word, it would make me a slave.
Do we truly want to go down that road?
Brave New World, here we come-- once again without thinking through the consequences of our actions.
The History Channel As Bush's Dupe
Once again, we see the media parroting Bush's message.
I just saw a documentary/propaganda program on the History Channel. Does anyone really think that it was a coincidence that Saddam's chemical attack on the Kurdish city of Halabja in 1998 was broadcast on 9/10/07?
The next time I hear someone going on and on about the 'liberal media', I think I'm gonna vomit.
I just saw a documentary/propaganda program on the History Channel. Does anyone really think that it was a coincidence that Saddam's chemical attack on the Kurdish city of Halabja in 1998 was broadcast on 9/10/07?
The next time I hear someone going on and on about the 'liberal media', I think I'm gonna vomit.
September 8, 2007
Finally! The MSM Asks Questions!
Last night, Bill Moyers Journal on PBS ran a story about the illegal wire tapping by Bush:
After Congress hurriedly passed the enlargement of the FISA Act last month before adjourning and going home where they got an earful from their constituents, they began having second thoughts. They’ve launched a hearing about the law they, themselves, had passed less than a month before. Moyers mentioned the fact that bloggers left and right came out screaming. The ACLU published an ad depicting Pelosi and Reid as sheep.
The guests at Moyers’ table were:
Mickey Edwards, former Representative [R-OK], a founding member of the Heritage Foundation and a member of the Constitution Project [a non-partisan group whose mission is to defend the Constitution] and Anthony Ramero, the Executive Director of the ACLU who took office on September 7, 2001 [what timing!] and has presided over it as it has taken on numerous suits in regards to the President’s steps to gather more and more power into the Executive Branch.
What follows is a somewhat loose but pretty accurate transcript of the part of the program that dealt with this situation—the gist of what was said has not been altered. ‘Uh’s and phrases that, if written literally, would have changed the meaning of a sentence have been cleaned up.
I also deleted some of the introductory content.
We join the program already in progress :)
Edwards: [very passionately]:
“He’s not the head of gov’t. He’s not head of the branch that can declare war. He’s not the head of branch that has power to decide what to do with prisoners of war.
“All those powers belong to Congress. Congress is the branch of the people.
“What we have here is a presidenCY that is seeking to change the entire system of gov’t we have in order to accrue more power into the hands of the few individuals and say, ‘It’s none of your business.’ Even though the Congress, the law-making branch, is the branch that’s supposed to represent the American people. ‘We’re not going to tell you anything.’
“You create a new bill, you tell a Federal agency to do this and file a report with Congress and they say, ‘We don’t have to.’”
Moyers:
“The President wants to give these big telecommunications companies complete immunity [Ramero: “Big mistake.”] from criminal prosecution and from civil liability if they help the government spy on Americans. What concerns you about that?”
Edwards:
“Well, first of all, any time you start taking away from the American people the right to go to court to FIND OUT whether their rights have been violated, then you START with a serious problem.
“I don’t know what the court would find in any case. The same with suspending Habeous Corpus. Taking away the right to be HEARD in court. That’s a heck of a big step away from the Constitution.”
Ramero:
“And the point for the telecommunications companies in particular, for the FIRST TIME, you would be giving the telecommunications the immunity for their consumers to challenge them. For the FIRST TIME, you would give the government direct access to people’s private data through the telecommunications.”
Edwards:
“I think that when you sign up with AOL for an email account, or you sign up with Verizon to be your phone company, it never occurs to you that what you’re doing is giving them the permission to turn over the records of who you call and who you email and then you have no recourse. You’ve lost your ability to go after them.”
Moyers:
“No one wants another 9/11 and the fact remains, someone must be doing something right. We haven’t been attacked again. If you two guys have your way, will that make us more vulnerable?”
Ramero:
“What we want to make sure is that there are rules of the road that are followed as the government conducts good, lawful intelligence gathering.”
Moyers:
Who makes the rules?
Ramero:
“I think the rules have to be made by Congress, and the Judicial branch—but the idea that the Executive Branch, on its own, has the power to bypass the Judicial Branch—as it did now with this new FISA Bill—or to completely bypass Congress as the President did when authorizing the
National Security Act spying program really robs the country of the basic tenets of our Democracy.”
Edwards:
“Did you ever see the shell game at the fair where you put the pea under the shell and you move it around? That’s what the President is doing. The issue is not about protecting us against terrorism. The issue is about how it’s done. Whether you have to do it lawfully. Whether you have to get a warrant. The old FISA act said, ‘Hey, do it! If there’s a big rush and you have to surveil in a hurry, go ahead and come back and get the warrant retroactively.’
“What the President wants to do is cut the Congress out of it, cut the Court out of it, get rid of the requirement in the Constitution to get a warrant.”
Moyers:
“This is a very important question because, when they went to Congress, and asked Congress for what they wanted, they got it! Congress has been going along! So, isn’t there a greater fear that in a time of terror that both branches are willing to go over the edge in the terms of civil liberties?
Ramero:
“Exactly. The reason we’re so angry with the House and Senate is that they didn’t have to go along with this bill so quickly. They acted like sheep. We need leadership— not ‘leadersheep’ as the ad said.”
Edwards:
“I think there are too few people in Congress —of either party— who understand that the Congress is the equal branch, [Ramero: "Exactly."] not just separate and independent—but equal.
“So, when the President requires, in his view, these additional powers, that should be grounds for a very serious set of hearings, debate, serious discussion by the Congress. . . .”
Ramero went on to describe a 20-year-old college student who was protesting —handing out leaflets and so on— and then discovered that he had been listed by a Federal agency as a ‘credible threat’ to the security of the country.
Edwards went on to make the point that, yes we are under threat. But, when the founding fathers created the Constitution we were under a much more serious and profound threat. The British and the French had the power to wipe us out as a nation—not just kill a few thousand people. Nevertheless, they sat down together and drafted a Constitution that refused to create a Presidency that had total power. He stated that this President doesn’t get that. He believes he’s the boss and is answerable to no one and to no law— and that simply is not true.
Both guest also made the point that this ‘War on Terror’ is not like a war that will, one day, end. It has the potential to become an ongoing threat. So, the question arises: Do we want our country to become a totalitarian state under the guise of fighting terrorism when, in reality, it will simply become a totalitarian state with no end in site? The issue is power—not fighting terrorism.
The program put the issue front and center and laid out the facts clearly and succinctly.
^^^
By the way, this segment was followed by a lawyer who, [so he says], was instrumental in helping Bush and Cheney skate just this side of the law in order to do what they wanted to do when ‘fighting terrorism.’ He even admitted to having second thoughts when he saw a video of a prisoner at Gitmo shivering, in fetal position, in his bunk. He seemed to view these second thoughts as a sign of weakness on his own part.
If, within the next day or two, I’ve recovered sufficiently from this transcript, I’ll do a follow up— but not right now. **pant pant**
^^^
The good news, though, is that the MSM is finally sitting up and taking notice! Well, PBS is at least KINDA the MSM, isn’t it?
After Congress hurriedly passed the enlargement of the FISA Act last month before adjourning and going home where they got an earful from their constituents, they began having second thoughts. They’ve launched a hearing about the law they, themselves, had passed less than a month before. Moyers mentioned the fact that bloggers left and right came out screaming. The ACLU published an ad depicting Pelosi and Reid as sheep.
The guests at Moyers’ table were:
Mickey Edwards, former Representative [R-OK], a founding member of the Heritage Foundation and a member of the Constitution Project [a non-partisan group whose mission is to defend the Constitution] and Anthony Ramero, the Executive Director of the ACLU who took office on September 7, 2001 [what timing!] and has presided over it as it has taken on numerous suits in regards to the President’s steps to gather more and more power into the Executive Branch.
What follows is a somewhat loose but pretty accurate transcript of the part of the program that dealt with this situation—the gist of what was said has not been altered. ‘Uh’s and phrases that, if written literally, would have changed the meaning of a sentence have been cleaned up.
I also deleted some of the introductory content.
We join the program already in progress :)
Edwards: [very passionately]:
“He’s not the head of gov’t. He’s not head of the branch that can declare war. He’s not the head of branch that has power to decide what to do with prisoners of war.
“All those powers belong to Congress. Congress is the branch of the people.
“What we have here is a presidenCY that is seeking to change the entire system of gov’t we have in order to accrue more power into the hands of the few individuals and say, ‘It’s none of your business.’ Even though the Congress, the law-making branch, is the branch that’s supposed to represent the American people. ‘We’re not going to tell you anything.’
“You create a new bill, you tell a Federal agency to do this and file a report with Congress and they say, ‘We don’t have to.’”
Moyers:
“The President wants to give these big telecommunications companies complete immunity [Ramero: “Big mistake.”] from criminal prosecution and from civil liability if they help the government spy on Americans. What concerns you about that?”
Edwards:
“Well, first of all, any time you start taking away from the American people the right to go to court to FIND OUT whether their rights have been violated, then you START with a serious problem.
“I don’t know what the court would find in any case. The same with suspending Habeous Corpus. Taking away the right to be HEARD in court. That’s a heck of a big step away from the Constitution.”
Ramero:
“And the point for the telecommunications companies in particular, for the FIRST TIME, you would be giving the telecommunications the immunity for their consumers to challenge them. For the FIRST TIME, you would give the government direct access to people’s private data through the telecommunications.”
Edwards:
“I think that when you sign up with AOL for an email account, or you sign up with Verizon to be your phone company, it never occurs to you that what you’re doing is giving them the permission to turn over the records of who you call and who you email and then you have no recourse. You’ve lost your ability to go after them.”
Moyers:
“No one wants another 9/11 and the fact remains, someone must be doing something right. We haven’t been attacked again. If you two guys have your way, will that make us more vulnerable?”
Ramero:
“What we want to make sure is that there are rules of the road that are followed as the government conducts good, lawful intelligence gathering.”
Moyers:
Who makes the rules?
Ramero:
“I think the rules have to be made by Congress, and the Judicial branch—but the idea that the Executive Branch, on its own, has the power to bypass the Judicial Branch—as it did now with this new FISA Bill—or to completely bypass Congress as the President did when authorizing the
National Security Act spying program really robs the country of the basic tenets of our Democracy.”
Edwards:
“Did you ever see the shell game at the fair where you put the pea under the shell and you move it around? That’s what the President is doing. The issue is not about protecting us against terrorism. The issue is about how it’s done. Whether you have to do it lawfully. Whether you have to get a warrant. The old FISA act said, ‘Hey, do it! If there’s a big rush and you have to surveil in a hurry, go ahead and come back and get the warrant retroactively.’
“What the President wants to do is cut the Congress out of it, cut the Court out of it, get rid of the requirement in the Constitution to get a warrant.”
Moyers:
“This is a very important question because, when they went to Congress, and asked Congress for what they wanted, they got it! Congress has been going along! So, isn’t there a greater fear that in a time of terror that both branches are willing to go over the edge in the terms of civil liberties?
Ramero:
“Exactly. The reason we’re so angry with the House and Senate is that they didn’t have to go along with this bill so quickly. They acted like sheep. We need leadership— not ‘leadersheep’ as the ad said.”
Edwards:
“I think there are too few people in Congress —of either party— who understand that the Congress is the equal branch, [Ramero: "Exactly."] not just separate and independent—but equal.
“So, when the President requires, in his view, these additional powers, that should be grounds for a very serious set of hearings, debate, serious discussion by the Congress. . . .”
Ramero went on to describe a 20-year-old college student who was protesting —handing out leaflets and so on— and then discovered that he had been listed by a Federal agency as a ‘credible threat’ to the security of the country.
Edwards went on to make the point that, yes we are under threat. But, when the founding fathers created the Constitution we were under a much more serious and profound threat. The British and the French had the power to wipe us out as a nation—not just kill a few thousand people. Nevertheless, they sat down together and drafted a Constitution that refused to create a Presidency that had total power. He stated that this President doesn’t get that. He believes he’s the boss and is answerable to no one and to no law— and that simply is not true.
Both guest also made the point that this ‘War on Terror’ is not like a war that will, one day, end. It has the potential to become an ongoing threat. So, the question arises: Do we want our country to become a totalitarian state under the guise of fighting terrorism when, in reality, it will simply become a totalitarian state with no end in site? The issue is power—not fighting terrorism.
The program put the issue front and center and laid out the facts clearly and succinctly.
^^^
By the way, this segment was followed by a lawyer who, [so he says], was instrumental in helping Bush and Cheney skate just this side of the law in order to do what they wanted to do when ‘fighting terrorism.’ He even admitted to having second thoughts when he saw a video of a prisoner at Gitmo shivering, in fetal position, in his bunk. He seemed to view these second thoughts as a sign of weakness on his own part.
If, within the next day or two, I’ve recovered sufficiently from this transcript, I’ll do a follow up— but not right now. **pant pant**
^^^
The good news, though, is that the MSM is finally sitting up and taking notice! Well, PBS is at least KINDA the MSM, isn’t it?
September 7, 2007
Just One More Quick Note
The desk is finished! The puter is back up and running.
Of course, the room is a wreck. **sigh**
C U after the bulldozer has been through.
Of course, the room is a wreck. **sigh**
C U after the bulldozer has been through.
Bill Maher May Be On To Something!
Now, why didn't we think of this before? :)
Click here for Maher's take on how we can survive the Bush era.
Click here for Maher's take on how we can survive the Bush era.
No Conscience
The Rove Goes on Forever -- by James Moore
"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
When I first started reporting on Karl Rove in the late 1970s, I was impressed by his singularity of purpose and his willingness to say or do whatever was necessary to succeed. This amorality, a complete lack of concern for right or wrong or harm done, will be his legacy in the American political process. Lives and careers might be destroyed, great institutions compromised, the truth sullied until it is unrecognizable, but all of that will be acceptable collateral damage to Karl as long as he and his party and candidates have won the day.
Click on the article's title for the complete text.
^^^
Here we see a sociopath at the highest level of government.
And he is leaving the White House for even greener pastures.
God help us all.
"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
When I first started reporting on Karl Rove in the late 1970s, I was impressed by his singularity of purpose and his willingness to say or do whatever was necessary to succeed. This amorality, a complete lack of concern for right or wrong or harm done, will be his legacy in the American political process. Lives and careers might be destroyed, great institutions compromised, the truth sullied until it is unrecognizable, but all of that will be acceptable collateral damage to Karl as long as he and his party and candidates have won the day.
Click on the article's title for the complete text.
^^^
Here we see a sociopath at the highest level of government.
And he is leaving the White House for even greener pastures.
God help us all.
September 5, 2007
Musing
Hey, folks --
Sorry I've been out-of-pocket -- have been phenomenonly busy.
Will be posting the whole sordid story on scattershot later.
Meanwhile, I just had a thought: I'm getting a tiny taste [ about 1 part per 300,000] of what folks in Iraq are going through.
My community is on a boil-water ordinance for the next 3 days. Water was turned off for several hours today and we SHOULD be back to normal sometime on Friday.
So, what did I do today? Spent the day out on my patio building a desk. Came in covered in sawdust and filthy and smelly and I can't take a shower. ewwwww! just be glad you can't smell me.
Of course, I had ample warning and filled bottles with water in advance. And I know when to expect this all to end. And I've still got electricity and A/C and lights and stuff. And, while I was outside I didn't see one soldier or one gun or see anyone blown up in the street.
OK -- forget I said anything. This isn't like Iraq at all.
Sorry I've been out-of-pocket -- have been phenomenonly busy.
Will be posting the whole sordid story on scattershot later.
Meanwhile, I just had a thought: I'm getting a tiny taste [ about 1 part per 300,000] of what folks in Iraq are going through.
My community is on a boil-water ordinance for the next 3 days. Water was turned off for several hours today and we SHOULD be back to normal sometime on Friday.
So, what did I do today? Spent the day out on my patio building a desk. Came in covered in sawdust and filthy and smelly and I can't take a shower. ewwwww! just be glad you can't smell me.
Of course, I had ample warning and filled bottles with water in advance. And I know when to expect this all to end. And I've still got electricity and A/C and lights and stuff. And, while I was outside I didn't see one soldier or one gun or see anyone blown up in the street.
OK -- forget I said anything. This isn't like Iraq at all.
Decider? Nope, Reviser.
From the Washington Post:
Good Morning, Vietnam! By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
The most fascinating aspect of George W. Bush's no-holds-barred campaign to keep Congress from meddling in his foolish and tragic war is the way he has begun invoking the Vietnam War -- not as a cautionary lesson about hubris and futility but as a reason to push ahead (whatever "ahead" might mean) in Iraq.
Say what you want about the man, but he's full of surprises . . . .
But seeking support for the war in Iraq by reminding the nation about Vietnam? I'd feel better if I thought this was just some exquisitely subtle, deeply cynical gambit, yet I have the sinking feeling that Bush actually believes the nonsensical version of history he's peddling. I fear the man is on a mission to rewrite the past. . . .
Click here for the complete text.
^^^
Bush's revisionist history unmasked as only Robinson can do it.
Good Morning, Vietnam! By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
The most fascinating aspect of George W. Bush's no-holds-barred campaign to keep Congress from meddling in his foolish and tragic war is the way he has begun invoking the Vietnam War -- not as a cautionary lesson about hubris and futility but as a reason to push ahead (whatever "ahead" might mean) in Iraq.
Say what you want about the man, but he's full of surprises . . . .
But seeking support for the war in Iraq by reminding the nation about Vietnam? I'd feel better if I thought this was just some exquisitely subtle, deeply cynical gambit, yet I have the sinking feeling that Bush actually believes the nonsensical version of history he's peddling. I fear the man is on a mission to rewrite the past. . . .
Click here for the complete text.
^^^
Bush's revisionist history unmasked as only Robinson can do it.
September 3, 2007
From The Huffington Post:
Five Reasons to Engage Iran by Nathan Gonzalez
It seems that with every news cycle comes yet another attempt by the Bush administration to pave the way for a war with Iran. As if we weren't facing enough problems in Iraq, there seems to be a degree of laziness across the political spectrum when it comes to understanding Iran's political culture and finding ways to engage diplomatically. . . .
. . .Iran is a much more complicated (and potentially friendly) country than our media would like to portray it. Here are just five reasons to engage Iran diplomatically sooner, rather than later:
^^^
Gonzalez makes exceedingly good sense, here.
So, his logic will be ignored and the bombs will fall.
In fact, for insight into why BushCo is so gung-ho to bomb Iran, check out reason # 3.
Five Reasons to Engage Iran by Nathan Gonzalez
It seems that with every news cycle comes yet another attempt by the Bush administration to pave the way for a war with Iran. As if we weren't facing enough problems in Iraq, there seems to be a degree of laziness across the political spectrum when it comes to understanding Iran's political culture and finding ways to engage diplomatically. . . .
. . .Iran is a much more complicated (and potentially friendly) country than our media would like to portray it. Here are just five reasons to engage Iran diplomatically sooner, rather than later:
^^^
Gonzalez makes exceedingly good sense, here.
So, his logic will be ignored and the bombs will fall.
In fact, for insight into why BushCo is so gung-ho to bomb Iran, check out reason # 3.
September 2, 2007
I'm Ho-ome!
Didja miss me? :)
Once again, I was reminded of the joys of living in the lightning capitol of the country and the 2nd highest in the world.
Yesterday morning when I got up the modem was working. Then, suddenly, it wasn't. So, my ISP scheduled an emergency call and I just received my 3rd modem during the 6 months I've lived in Florida. At this rate, I should go through about 9 per year.
Why these outages affect only the modem and nothing else, I have no clue. [Note to the computer gods -- I'm not complaining about that! Being clueless is NOT the same as being upset or anything related to it -- I promise!]
Anyway-- I'm off now to answer any comments that may have come in while I was gone and check and see what online news I may have missed.
May you have a wonderful Sunday -- what's left of it. . . .
Once again, I was reminded of the joys of living in the lightning capitol of the country and the 2nd highest in the world.
Yesterday morning when I got up the modem was working. Then, suddenly, it wasn't. So, my ISP scheduled an emergency call and I just received my 3rd modem during the 6 months I've lived in Florida. At this rate, I should go through about 9 per year.
Why these outages affect only the modem and nothing else, I have no clue. [Note to the computer gods -- I'm not complaining about that! Being clueless is NOT the same as being upset or anything related to it -- I promise!]
Anyway-- I'm off now to answer any comments that may have come in while I was gone and check and see what online news I may have missed.
May you have a wonderful Sunday -- what's left of it. . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
