Blindsided

Before the previews for what is supposed to be a feel good movie, my family was exposed to what I consider an insidious, dangerous, and an immoral uninvited attempt of trying to tap into the young fresh minds of those among the audience. From those that brought us the Patriot Act, which makes it a felony to exercise your rights of liberty. Yes - euphemisms are fun. It's not Global Warming, it's Climate Change. But I digress. There on the big screen was an advertisement for the National Guard. It was slick. Dramatically showing how in the darkest of nights, during a bad storm - perhaps after a hurricane, the National Guard could use you. If you have what it takes. Once there, perhaps YOU could be there to rescue that kitten still hiding. Maybe you will find that wedding picture album only gently touched by rain among the heaps of wreckage and gently hand it to the grieving family. You will see words on the screen talking of citizenship reminiscent of Starship Troopers taken out of the context and of course, for the wrong reasons. You will hear music that makes it sound glorious, rewarding, and honorable.

I worry. It seems to me the person who is responsible still has yet been held legally responsible. Where is the justice? The moron who got us into mess did not need to concern himself with being sent overseas to defend another contrived boondoggle that Ike himself would not support. This person did not uphold the Constitution and put the country as risk, morally, and fiduciary. His own experience? That war, the one Ike would not support? That was the other one that dragged on. He hid out in then what was exclusively the National Guard and when sober (not necessarily from drinking) he showed up. He played it 'safe'. I just wonder, If Nixon had decided to send the National Guard to Vietnam, would he had made the same choices? Would he even remember after bender lasting that long? By comparison - Nixon knew where his authority ended.

Today, we have a new President. Our chickens are roosting. Face it. Just one of them - Bin Laden was not a chicken. He was a rooster of our own making because we were having a dust up with the former USSR and when they bailed, we did too. That particular rooster did not like that much. Yet, we silence those who would embrace the true American way of decency on truth? Now we have ads to deal with these chickens to recruit via trickery? Shame. They were roosting while our poster child for attention deficit disorder in chief focused on nonsense in Operation Contrived War on Iraq and created more terrorists, more debt, and more chickens. Cause and effect.

Yet, W. is gone and here we are with slick ads pandering to young adults which I doubt the SEC will be investigating these types of ads for false or being misleading. What is the likelihood the target audience of the 18 year kid would actually be doing National Guard duty as portrayed? There was not disclaimer saying Results not Typical. At least they should change the name and call it International Guard. That's the danger of a single source, single payer, single anything. Maybe they should have a voice over of likelihood causes of death, including poor policy? Congress declares war. Something we have seemed to have forgotten.

Yet, the movie left the audience with an important message as the hero sought to write his final high school essay about Courage and Honor. He found that one can have courage and die a pointless death, one without meaning. But to have honor when doing so gives courage meaning. One can only hope that our leaders have honor and we know our previous leadership were in short supply of this. We should not be so complacent. We should question our leadership. That is distinctively American.

Update on Texas Board of Education

Our elected school board chairperson responds to email query on Neil Armstrong with suggestion to take it up with the teachers. Considering that certain members from the Houston area on the board consider public education an abomination to God and ironically are on the board to only support only home schooling and the majority would be more comfortable in a private school where truth is let us say, more malleable, I find it incredible the current chair person - who succeeds the guy who uttered the phrase Someone needs to stand up to these experts! in the context of the science in the classroom debate vs. creationism in the classroom can suggest without a giggle to take it up with the teachers that bring ideas to the board by way of the TEA? I wonder if I were to ask any given teacher about who sets content of the textbooks and curriculum? You cannot have it both ways. Leadership is sometimes about leading. People in responsible positions need to behave responsibly. Period. Not sneaking your craptastic agenda into the public domain. You see no one should have to debate this nor should we need to have a discussion on this type of topic. We still have a Constitution?

Meanwhile, my follow-up response went answered. I expect nothing less from such cowards who try to indoctrinate with dogma incessantly. If one path fails, find a proxy to seek another to method to succeed with a thinly veiled agenda. It's a sad day for Texans and liberty.

Hi Gail,

We have not met in person. However, I have had the opportunity to speak to you on a few occasions regarding the science in the class room vs. faith is a private issue best left out of a science class room. As the board did have basic confusion over the essential meaning of the word 'theory' in that specific case, the board has demonstrated that it has lack of understanding of the basics of science. If we do have teachers in our system making such Orwellian suggestions on revising historical context, well - that is truly terrible. If you do not know, the central character in the novel, 1984 had a job. This job was to take historical figures and turn them into 'unpersons' by removing them from any documents or literature because they conflicted with the 'party' agenda. The board should be objective and balanced. It should also have the scruples to discern between nonsense and legitimacy. For that very reason, instead of entertaining such nonsense, the person(s) who suggested it should have been challenged on whom else fails to meet 'these standards' and by what exactly are these? Then apply them universally. Followed up by a review of their own credentials. There has to be some merit. There has to be some standard. I believe the Texas public education received when I exited the system is far stronger than one being offered today and I am in my mid 40s. That should not be the case. We have better tools, better information available, yet our system is falling down. You do have a leadership position on the board? We were taught critical thinking skills. If our teachers and board lack this basic skill - what hope do we have? I expect more. Our kids deserve more. We cannot be forever importing talent into the state while our recently educated students best hope is to get jobs at Wal*Mart because they were ill prepared and non-competitive, beyond being overly prepped on TAKs because our system failed them due to our board being busy with obscure nonsense right out of a fictional book. But it does make sense if your proposing teacher is teaching to the test. Remove info and facts and have a smaller test.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:42 AM,
SBOESUPPORT <sboesupport@tea.state.tx.us>
wrote:

Mr. Best:

I'm not sure we've met before, although you seem quick to blame me for the removal of Neil Armstrong from the social studies curriculum standards. A panel of classroom teachers that was named by the Texas Education Agency to review our standards has recommended the removal of Neil Armstrong, apparently because he is not a "scientist." The State Board of Education has instructed the review panel that we believe Armstrong should remain in our history standards, as his walk on the moon marked a significant contribution to American space exploration. The issue will come back to us for further discussion in November. You might have to ask the teachers of Texas to stop making such embarrassing recommendations to the elected board.

Gail Lowe State Board of Education

Just too Damn Funny: ACORN Sues Hidden-camera Filmmakers

Just when it could not get any funnier, the group somewhat known creating their own bit of distress is actually suing for emotional distress imposed on them? Even the IRS has severed ties with Acorn. I do not know if this is baffling, stunning, or the height of self importance. However, it would be fun to be the rational judge and hear this case. To say the words: Now let me get this straight. Followed up by orders to make them pay court costs. Interesting how if your bias is certain way, it is public service and free speech, regardless of the fact it is disruptive or personal in nature. This is not even playing by your rule book Acorn. The apparent distress here is you were caught on tape and lost a tactic.

BALTIMORE (AP) - Community activist group ACORN is suing the makers of a hidden-camera video that showed employees of its Baltimore office giving tax advice to a man posing as a pimp and a woman posing as a prostitute. The liberal group contends that the audio portion of the video was obtained illegally because Maryland requires two-party consent to create sound recordings. The two employees seen in the video were fired after it was posted online. The lawsuit says the employees, Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams, suffered "extreme emotional distress." The multimillion-dollar lawsuit seeks damages from James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, who played the pimp and prostitute in the videos, and from conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart, who posted the videos on his Web site.

Texas Bored of Edukation - Houston Problem? Duh?

These religious nut cases are at it again. Apparently not ever satisfied until everyone subscribes to their ideas of what makes a good society are once again blurring the lines with confusion over whom should be in a 5th grade social studies book regarding the topic of science and scientists. Yes, these are the same mindful people who wanted to be the deciders on what should be in a science book and tackled [once] again the issue of evolution vs. creationism. Never really paying attention to one was science and the other one, well was a belief system and not a science. So now, they want to remove Neil Armstrong from mention because he technically was not a scientist. Well, by that measure neither was Thomas Edison, depending how you define scientist. Are these people to be taken serious? How can we tolerate that our elected officials allow Texas to be the source of ridicule to the rest of the nation and the world? It is just embarrassing. Below is an excerpt from SciGuy Eric Berger.

As part of the process a Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills review team composed of parents and teachers has suggested removing Neil Armstrong from a "science strand" in a 5th grade social studies book. Effectively this would remove the mention of Armstrong has a figure of historical significance from 5th grade textbooks. I asked board spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe why this change was made and she explained: The team said they made this proposal because he was not a scientist. The State Board of Education has not voted for or against that proposal yet. It won't vote on the social studies proposal until January.

I did write a letter to to Gail Lowe. Whom I have spoken to many times. I requested them to stop this nonsense. I suggested they really need to read [or re-read] 1984 and Fahrenheit 451. I also enquired if these two books are still available or if they have banned them? Perhaps, too few members of the board are smarter than a fifth grader? For those of you in Rio Linda, in the book 1984, the government strives to reduce the amount of words available to be used in an effort to force everyone to be politically correct. We would not want these fresh young minds to get dangerous ideas at tender young ages, would we? Freedom is Slavery after all. Plus, just as in 1984, our Board of Education is acting as the Winston Smith character who's job was defined to rewrite actual events to fit the [interpreted] historical narrative to serve the party.

I really laugh at these so-called family values social conservatives. The only difference between them and [social] conservatives in the middle east seems to be attire and geography. The ideology is strikingly similar. Both would be perfectly happy doing a reset of the clock by about 5000 years.

By the way, George Washington said, In no way is the is the United States founded upon the Christian doctrine. Besides, I do not recall Christianity ever proposing or endorsing willful ignorance. That is an invention of foolish men with less than selfless agendas. Get over it.

Today's NEA: LBJ Would Be Proud!

Most people who know LBJ, know he was successful [at getting his way] because he managed through intimation. We often hear about a new era of FDR and JFK. I believe there is the shadow of LBJ, not JFK nor FDR taking shape here. However, I wonder how LBJ would have liked the idea of using his NEA as a tool? The NEA? Always, a curious observation, many of us in this county kick and scream when we see tyranny and abuse of power. An old cliche comes to mind: The ends justify the means. Too often, the problem is people only consider the opposing side tyrannical. They cannot fathom the idea that their own action may itself be an abuse of power. When President George W. Bush reduced the liberties afforded by the Constitution, which is the law, there was outcry by some. There was indifference by others. Some people would trade security for liberty. Ben Franklin suggested that if you gave up the first, you deserved neither. However, these safety minded soccer moms could sleep knowing Big Brother was protecting them from evil doers. Whether or not this was actually true or not, or whether one could actually determine this, or if one could even ask was beside the point. One simply felt better and that was all that mattered. Today, in our current administration, we are building and establishing of state owned enterprises, state sponsorships, and even state owned student loans. Irritate the government and risk your entitlement and future. It's a damn slippery slope. We have the current administration with two standards. One for their own outreach of information and one that will investigate those that will oppose it. Equal and fair enforcement of the law is not occurring. Ironic. However, under the previous administration in 2003, congress did make changes to Medicare for prescription drugs, which are unfunded to the tune of something in the neighborhood $725 billion for 10 years, depending on who's numbers are to believed. Ten Years. How will we cut costs and increase benefits simultaneously? Yet this administration is investigating Humana for scaring seniors? Perhaps more than seniors should be outraged rather than scared for not being leveled with in the first place? At least the insurance companies, such as Humana are compelled by law to set aside cash reserves to pay for their obligations. Does the treasury do this for Medicare? Who will pay for these programs and how? But on to the truth police and the dispensing of information and how best to do it. There was this conference call and some things were said.

Consider Buffy Wicks — former Obama campaign activist, now White House staffer:

We won and that’s exciting and now we have to take all that energy and make it really meaningful. I’m in the White House now and what I’ve learned is that change doesn't come easy, but now that I’m actually in the White House and working towards furthering this agenda, this very aggressive agenda, I’m really realizing that… we’re going to need your help, and we’re going to come at you with some specific asks here.

We wanted folks to connect with local nonprofit organizations in their community. We wanted them to connect with local city council members or local elected officials. We wanted them to connect with federal agencies, with labor unions, progressive groups, face groups, women’s groups, you name it.

Then we have Yosi Sergant, the NEA offical who is perfectly in sync with our President's pledge of no lobbyists. If this is not illegal, it is at least sleazy. But he was apparently the sacrificed lamb so to speak, and as a result of this call? Well, he got re-assigned. You can read this link. All that effective work doing community outreach with MoveOn, RockTheVote - gone. Apparently over a conference call. Makes you wonder who is not corrupt. Those means are being justified.

We fought for a chance to be at the table and not only at the table but we’re setting the table. And now [we're setting] the official rule of the National Endowment for the Arts, as director of communication and say, we here at the NEA are extremely proud to participate in the president’s United We Serve initiative.

This is a chance to partner with the White House. … This is just the beginning. … We are just now leaning how to really bring this community together to speak with the government. What this looks like legally, we’re still trying to figure out the laws...

Whether it is an Evangelical christian visiting the White House for prayer or an artist receiving funding and being shaken down, there has to be limits. There is right from wrong after all? Where have our standards gone?

You can read the transcript here.

The Return of Jimmy Carter

It did not work out for the Chinese Navy Long ago. They built a nice modern Navy. They sent it out to sea and burned it only to escape into a self imposed world of protectionism and isolationism. Jimmy Carter tried it too. He did it a little more figuratively. He tried price controls and punitive budgets. He tried windfall profits taxes and budgets that punished a generation. He tried lousy taxation policy which led to double digit inflation. He is a smart man. He meant well. He was an educated man. Yet, he had no basic concept of economics. He had insufficient understanding of supply and demand and equilibrium. Surprising for someone who had a clear understanding of Nuclear physics and peanut farming. The basic concept is if you force the price lower than the market demands, supplies dwindle. Just as if there excess supplies, prices drop. The item, whatever it is, is yesterday's news. It's human nature. Get over it. But it was beyond his grasp. It seems we are at the the there we go again, phase to paraphrase a certain B movie actor, who seemed to grasp certain concepts better than others.

Now, in an effort to pander to steel workers, a 35% wholesale tariff (a tax) is being imposed on tires being imported from China. This supposed to give US tire companies an advantage by encouraging the purchasing of US made steel, produced by US steel workers. Who does this help? Who does this hurt? China will retaliate with their own tariffs on items we wish to sell them, such as food. Plus, we need their products and their money. Generally, poor to middle class people are purchasing Chinese made tires, so it clearly hurts them. Not to mention, by punishing China does anyone actually believe this makes US Steel more competitive than any other place in the global workplace? Global or US based tire companies will simply source from India or other countries with lower labor rates, so the tarriff will not restore or create any jobs on idled plants, perhaps at best - shift them from China. The only option would be reduce the labor rate and the operational costs of doing business within this country. That would be taxes, labor cost, and insurance. Tariffs, protectionism, and isolationism can only lead to bad things. More. The short term advantage of courting union support for election purposes is short sighted and bad for this country. It took China 500 years to recover from such mistakes and they are just now rebuilding that burned down Navy.

Ironically - though President Obama seems to have no issue subsidizing GM, which does direct business with China in terms of manufacturing and parts sourcing. Yet - I keep coming back to NASA and Constellation. He cannot afford that and the American jobs and American contractors associated with the program - or the tires.

ISP Diagnosis: The Cisco Phone Burned Out the Router

Working for an Internet Service Provider has to be easiest job on the face of the Earth. It seems you need not actually do any work. You simply must lay blame elsewhere, come up with excuses, and clear your board of tickets. There once was the day the excuse had to be at least plausible. Now, it is just plain silliness. This is a prime example of the dangers protectionism and a little too much job security. Here, in the comfy confines of ISPville there is apparent little concern of the consequences of losing a customer due to the monopoly power of the workforce and the monopoly power of the provider. The threat of "Gee, if do not do a good job, someone else may do it better" does not necessarily occur to members in the Communication Workers of Amerika union. Is it any wonder those of us who still want to keep a job, have to fight the outsource urge of management?