Hey. Leaders of the country. Can we get a little help, here? . . .

September 28, 2006

You can be asked and denied service for refusing to show picture identification when you rent a car, or buy beer, or fly on a plane or cash a check.  So why is it that “certain people” object to the notion that you could be required to show identification in order to vote?  Or should we just tolerate voter fraud?
Hmmmm.

Oh, and another thing.  When you are driving, I can see what you are doing.  I need some clue what you intend to be doing.  That means, if you are waiting at a stoplight to turn left, put your damn turn signal on while you wait, not when you are already halfway through youir turn.  It’s kinda like planning ahead, even if only a little bit.   Is that too much to ask?
Hmmm.

Oh, and the problem isn’t whether Clinton, Carter, and the Ds screwed up more than the the Rs, or the Rs screwed up more than the Ds when it comes to preventing 9-11.  It’s long been time to get over that.  The fact that 9-11 happened at all means   they   all  screwed   up.  And they screwed up with the active and enthusiastic collaboration of the press and assorted self-important academic types whose direct knowledge of crisis amounts to yellow highlighters rolling off and under their desks.   Or do we have to be hit again before these dunces begin to consider effective security?

Hmmm.
Evolution may be ruthless but it isn’t nearly selective enough.


A bankruptcy judge has illustrated the meaning of the Shakespearean expression, “Hoisted upon his own petard.”

September 20, 2006

Looking at the new bankruptcy law, a judge has applied the language of the law in a way contrary to what the creditors thought they were getting when they lobbied ferociously to get the law changed in their favor.

I just love this.

The judge says new law took away the discretion judges originally had to review the facts and the totality of circumstances, leaving in its place a formula, which in some applications could lead to unsecured creditors getting nothing, even if the debtor has the actual ability to pay them a little something.

The judge said, “If this was not Congress’ intent, then it is up to Congress to rectify the situation.”

This is legal jargon for, “You broke it. You fix it.”

Actually, the language of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention Act was probably largely the work product of credit company lobbyists.

Ha!


Bumpersticker wisdom . . .

September 11, 2006

If the message you have to share with the world will fit on a bumper sticker, then chances are what you have to say will only appeal to the simple-minded. It worked once, didn’t it?


If you’re so smart, how come you’re not rich . . .

September 8, 2006

Here’s an interesting question and answer.  Americans always seem to do less well on tests of education than students in other countries.  But America is still leads in innovation and generation of wealth and comfort.  How do we do this if we are such boneheads, comparatively?

Here’s why.

When you measure academic accomplishments in high school and traditional college, you aren’t looking at the entire education system in the U.S.  There’s a whole alternative to going to the state college for a bachelor’s degree in liberal arts.  A place where the emphasis is not on the ability to discuss values until late at night, but on the doing of stuff.  And doing stuff turns out to be more important than test scores.


All Senators smell equally as sweet to me.. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it for as long as I have to . . .

September 6, 2006

Modern democracy in action!

What would you say if I told you that there is a modern democratic society where for two months just before an election, the major news media is forbidden by law from accepting and publishing any paid political advertising critical of any incumbent politician? I’d say that this wasn’t much of a democracy, and the poor citizens of that miserable place needed a stout law protecting freedom of speech, just as we do.

I mean, if you were attempting to argue that a sitting politician didn’t deserve to be re-elected and a reform candidate would be a better choice — well, you just couldn’t. So much for freedom of speech and the notion that a democracy needs to have an informed electorate, right?

The only thing is — that place is here. Beginning this week, I think, the campaign reform law kicks in and prevents just negative commentary about incumbents running for re-election.

Betcha one of the sponsoring politicians is gonna run for president some day soon.  I wonder how I’ll vote.