Humor for Today.....
SondraK found this "
white men can't dance" video at YouTube. I love physical humor and this guy is pretty good. At some point must go sign up and figure out how to splat these things in the middle of my blog rather than pointing.
Back to work.
Enjoy!
US alerting Mexico to Minuteman patrols
From the "you have got to be $%#^@! kidding me" file, it was confirmed today that the
US border patrol is informing the Mexican government of the time and location any time a non-law-enforcement person is involved in any way in the apprehension of illegals.
What moron came up with this idea? Put aside for a moment the fact that we know the corrupt Mexican government will tell their military to steer their potential border crossers elsewhere, this is akin to putting a target on the heads of these folks.
Look, we are all free to agree or disagree with what the MinuteMen are doing. But at the moment, they are American citizens who are on American soil doing absolutely nothing illegal. Are we next going to publish the home addresses of people who surf the net pretending to be kids and turn in potential child molesters? The Mexican military "accidentally" comes onto US soil on a regular basis according to some sheriffs in Texas. We know the drug lords often use the same routes that illegals seeking honest work use.
Do you know what the Mexican drug cartels could easily do with this information? Do you have any serious doubt that if the Mexican government gets this information that the drug cartels don't have it within hours, if not minutes?
If some of these people wind up getting murdered or kidnapped because the border patrol has this asinine policy, who should the family sue?
Some days, it just doesn't pay to read the news. I hope somebody asks Tony Snow about this tomorrow morning. Our beloved President needs to either force the head of the border patrol to change this policy or fire him and hire somebody with a clue.
Congrats go out down under
The miners trapped in the small mine elevator for two weeks have been rescued.
Brant Webb, 37, and Todd Russell, 34, wearing yellow jackets and mining helmets with their lamps shining brightly, walked confidently to a large board and removed their name cards -- declaring they had ended their shift underground.
The Aussies are a proud and heartly people. Congratulations on the success of your effort and God speed to Brant, Todd, and their families.
Somebody should have told me!
Apparently, the city of Boulder City, NV has some undeveloped land that it owns, as in 167 square miles of it, really close to Las Vegas. Some daring souls decided to
put on the ballot a measure that would sell that land and split the profits among town residents. The land is worth billions of dollars and there are only 15,000 residents in the city. The city officials aren't happy (why, I have no idea). It is too late to move there and become an instant millionaire. Damn!
Economics 101
First, I want to point you to the ever brilliant Walter Williams' latest article "
Minimum wage, maximum folly". If you are too lazy to go read it, here are a couple of highlights:
The U.S. Department of Labor reports: "According to Current Population Survey estimates for 2004, some 73.9 million American workers were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.8 percent of all wage and salary workers. Of those paid by the hour, 520,000 were reported as earning exactly $5.15."
520,000 out of 73.9 million is 0.7% for those of you without a calculator. So .7% of 59.8% of American workers currently work for minimum wage. That is 0.4186 % of the working population. Or to put it in terms that your average house plant could understand, for every 240 workers in the US economy there is one poor soul working for minimum wage.
The U.S. Department of Labor also reports that the "proportion of hourly-paid workers earning the prevailing Federal minimum wage or less has trended downward since 1979."
So the market has naturally lifted once-minimum-wage workers to higher wages over time?
Professor Williams then goes on to make a brilliant point about how South African racists figured out what the effect was of having and moving a minimum wage and wonders how Oprah missed it.
It is well worth a read.
Next,
Right Wing Wackos found this chart:
If you look closely at the Social Insurance numbers you will see the folly in this idea that "while the economy may be growing, wages are not". Truly "Rich People" don't pay much in the way of Social Insurance taxes. Their money is made off of investments which are classed as "unearned income". You could explain away the Corporate and Individual Income taxes by saying that the upper middle class and "Rich People" are making out like bandits but the little guy is getting hammered. That cannot explain a 7.2% increase in Social Insurance taxes paid. Those are disproportionately paid by lower and middle class workers as a percentage of income. Above the cutoff point in the middle class range the tax falls from ~16% to less than 3%.
Think about this chart the next time someone tells you that people aren't getting raises. I say this as someone who made less last year than a few years ago. Some market trends are too high, some too low, but in terms of general economics you have to look at overall trends.
Eleanor Clift compares Hillary to Reagan
I am not kidding you! You have got to
read this drivel to believe somebody could actually write this with a straight face.
"He was a grade-B movie actor," she said, failing to mention Reagan's two terms as governor of the nation's largest state. "He had orange hair. And a lot of Republicans worried that he couldn't be elected."
"And look what happened," Clift said, referring to Reagan's two electoral landslides
One key difference, she said, would be Bill Clinton.
Another key difference might be that in one case "the party" was worried about whether their candidate, having been a two term Governor of California, would be slaughtered for having once been an actor and being old, particularly among midwestern and southern conservatives. In the other case "the party" is worried whether a candidate who is utterly hated by 40% of the public, all of whom "know" her, can be elected.
In all general elections "the party" worries about how their potential candidate of choice will fare in the general election. I am sure there were people worrying about FDR and his illness. Will some member of the press harp on it and ask the uncomfortable questions? How will middle America react? I wouldn't compare that to either Reagan or Hillary and to compare the two of them to each other is laughable.
I have to renew my appeal to my friends in the Democratic party to send Hillary up as the nominee. It is the greatest gift you could give us, unless you will reconsider Kucinich or Dean or Gore. There is a theme here, don't you think? Carter seems to be a leading "thinker", can we have him as the Democratic nominee?
Have another drink Eleanor, then bum a ride from a Kennedy.
Eleanor Clift compares Hillary to Reagan
I am not kidding you! You have got to
read this drivel to believe somebody could actually write this with a straight face.
"He was a grade-B movie actor," she said, failing to mention Reagan's two terms as governor of the nation's largest state. "He had orange hair. And a lot of Republicans worried that he couldn't be elected."
"And look what happened," Clift said, referring to Reagan's two electoral landslides
One key difference, she said, would be Bill Clinton.
Another key difference might be that in one case "the party" was worried about whether their candidate, having been a two term Governor of California, would be slaughtered for having once been an actor and being old, particularly among midwestern and southern conservatives. In the other case "the party" is worried whether a candidate who is utterly hated by 40% of the public, all of whom "know" her, can be elected.
In all general elections "the party" worries about how their potential candidate of choice will fare in the general election. I am sure there were people worrying about FDR and his illness. Will some member of the press harp on it and ask the uncomfortable questions? How will middle America react? I wouldn't compare that to either Reagan or Hillary and to compare the two of them to each other is laughable.
I have to renew my appeal to my friends in the Democratic party to send Hillary up as the nominee. It is the greatest gift you could give us, unless you will reconsider Kucinich or Dean or Gore. There is a theme here, don't you think? Carter seems to be a leading "thinker", can we have him as the Democratic nominee?
Have another drink Eleanor, then bum a ride from a Kennedy.
Blazing Saddles Banned at LA High School
While I agree that many high school students are not prepared to deal with "Blazing Saddles", the solution to that problem must not be to ban it. We have made them so politically correct that they cannot wrap their heads around satire? "Blazing Saddles" is my absolute favorite Mel Brooks movie for two reasons. First, it is amazingly funny. I look down my nose at anyone who doesn't get Mongo (played brilliantly by Alex Karras) jokes and I still don't get why we didn't see Clevon Little in a lot more leading roles.
But more importantly, as
Professor Bainbridge aptly points out, the movie isn't racist, it is an anti-racist parody. What makes the movie work is how well it uses racist ideas to poke fun at racists.
What really got me about the story, however, was the reporter's description of Blazing Saddles as a "racist film." Nonsense. While Blazing Saddles pervasively uses ethnic slurs and stereotypes, it does so to lampoon racism. The worst thing you can do to bigots is to laugh at them, which is precisely what Mel Brooks does in this hysterical film.
There is indeed a problem with "Blazing Saddles" being shown in public high schools, but the problem is not with the movie. The problem is with the pitiful education these students have been given.
Robert's Court Brings New Demeanor
An
article in the NYT says that the quickness and frequency of interruption (both of the presenting lawyers and each other) has consistently subsided compared to recent years during oral arguments in the SCOTUS. I had the pleasure of sitting in the galley of SCOTUS for about an hour when I was in high school and even at that young age it struck me that the justices seemed to be making arguments rather than letting the presenters do so. I am not a lawyer, but this change would seem to be a good thing to me. (HT:
BenchMemos)
Carter G. Phillips, one of the most active current practitioners, said the change had been so abrupt as to be a trap for an unwary counsel. "You have to be ready now to make some kind of affirmative presentation" in the opening minutes of an argument, he said.
When former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was on the court, he recalled, she asked the first question so quickly and so predictably that there was little point in preparing an elegant opening argument. "Now you might get three or four minutes" without interruption, he said.
Maybe I am missing something but even ideologic lefties would have to agree that this seems like a change for the better even if only in style and not substance. It will take a while to figure out how the substance has changed.
Bilingual Ballots - Bone-Head alert
A bunch of Republic House members are being bone-heads.
They have announced a proposal to ban bilingual ballots. There are two reasons why this is stupid, one of which is political and the other practical.
The political problem is that this will piss off a lot of legitimate US Citizens, some of whom only speak English.
The practical problem is ballot measures and initiatives. To become a naturalized US Citizen you are supposed to speak at least rudimentary English. I believe this is a good thing. But the practical reality is that even educated native English speakers have trouble parsing these things we are asked to vote on. To expect someone who learned English as an adult to be able to understand these things in English is simply not reasonable. I would rather print ballots in Spanish and wind up with more voters having the possibility of being able to express their will than be all nativist and have people voting for things they can't possibly understand.
Build a wall, fine employers, kick out people who rob/steal/rape/murder, figure out some reasonable solution to increasing legal immigration and leave the bilingual ballots alone.
General Hayden is a good pick
I am not sure if General Hayden is the most qualified guy in the country to run the CIA at this point. I am sure that the reporters, Congresscritters, etc don't know any more about that question than I do. I am also sure that I like the fact that he was chosen.
- We get to see the spectacle of moron Senators attacking a 61 year old 4 star while trying to appear properly respectful. This will be televised live for free. I would subscribe to pay-per-view for this one.
- There is probably nobody better than the head of the NSA to finally put these stupid attacks about the terrorist surveillance program to bed, making the need to have a separate Senate inquiry moot and showing the detractors of this program look the fools that they are.
- The CIA has failed the country more times than we can count over the last few decades. The result of these failures most directly impact the military. Having a 4 star General around to remind them of the consequences of their failed policies and reports must be a good thing.
- Coordination between military intelligence and the CIA are reported to be poor. Who better to assist in fixing that problem than one of the military's own, much less a guy who was most recently running the NSA? There is an argument that this will result in the military intelligence guys gaining too much power from the CIA. I can see that argument in peace time, but my feeling is that would be a good thing.
- I am not concerned about "undue influence from Rumsfeld". First, both men must follow the lead of the President. Second, what exactly can Rumsfeld do to a 61 year old 4 star? Block his future promotions? This argument seems completely without merit on its face.
Now, can we please have a reasonable proposal on immigration?
