Improvements, I'm Sure
Just FYI, the Blogger service that we use to post this blog has been undergoing major changes for the past few weeks. You might have noticed inconsistent fonts, double-spacing between paragraphs -- the user interface for posting has changed drastically, too, it's even worse from this side!
I see that the most recent post is in a tiny font. I don't know why that is, apparently they have decided that is our "new look." I can't say I'm happy with Google products' recent hard-to-see scroll bars, wordy screens with too many options, and other so-called improvements, but that's what you get for free. I will try to work on our template and see if we can maker it readable again. Bear with us.
I see that the most recent post is in a tiny font. I don't know why that is, apparently they have decided that is our "new look." I can't say I'm happy with Google products' recent hard-to-see scroll bars, wordy screens with too many options, and other so-called improvements, but that's what you get for free. I will try to work on our template and see if we can maker it readable again. Bear with us.
posted by JimK at 10:37 AM
8 Comments:
Obama really doesn't likre the Constitution:
"SAN DIEGO — A sergeant will be discharged for criticizing President Barack Obama on Facebook, the Marine Corps said Wednesday.
Sgt. Gary Stein will get an other-than-honorable discharge and lose most of his benefits for posting his opinion of the President, the Corps said.
The San Diego-area Marine who has served nine years in the Corps said he was disappointed by the decision. He argued that he was exercising his constitutional rights to free speech.
"I love the Marine Corps, I love my job. I wish it wouldn't have gone this way. I'm having a hard time seeing how 15 words on Facebook could have ruined my nine-year career," he told The Associated Press."
"...Tom Umberg, a former Army colonel and military prosecutor, said Stein persisted even after being warned.
"The Marine Corps gave him the opportunity to think about his actions, yet Sgt. Stein continued to undermine the chain of command," said Umberg, who was not involved in Stein's case. "I think his purpose was to leave the Marine Corps in a dramatic fashion in order to begin a career in talk radio or what have you."
Umberg believes the decision to discharge Stein will have limited impact because the vast majority of Marines would never consider such postings.
"I think 99 percent of the soldiers and Marines currently on duty understand the duties of supporting the chain of command and understand their rights of free speech are limited," he said. "To that 1 percent who don't know their rights to free speech are limited once they take the oath, this is a loud and clear message."
During a hearing, a military prosecutor submitted screen grabs of Stein's postings on one Facebook page he created called Armed Forces Tea Party, which the prosecutor said included the image of Obama on a "Jackass" movie poster. Stein also superimposed Obama's image on a poster for "The Incredibles" movie that he changed to "The Horribles," military prosecutor Capt. John Torresala said.
At the hearing this month at Camp Pendleton, Torresala argued that Stein's behavior repeatedly violated Pentagon policy and he should be dismissed after ignoring warnings from his superiors about his postings.
The military has had a policy since the Civil War limiting the free speech of service members, including criticism of the commander in chief.
Pentagon directives say military personnel in uniform cannot sponsor a political club; participate in any TV or radio program or group discussion that advocates for or against a political party, candidate or cause; or speak at any event promoting a political movement.
Commissioned officers also may not use contemptuous words against senior officials."
Just like Romney and the GOP want to do for America.
"Europe is in recession.
Britain’s Office for National Statistics confirmed on Wednesday that in the first quarter of this year Britain’s economy shrank .2 percent, after having contracted .3 percent in the fourth quarter of 2011. (Officially, two quarters of shrinkage equal a recession.) On Monday, Spain officially fell into recession for the second time in three years. Portugal, Italy and Greece are already basket cases, and it seems highly likely France and Germany are also contracting.
Why should we care? Because a recession in the world’s third-largest economy (Britain), combined with the current slowdown in the world’s second-largest (China), spells trouble for the world’s largest.
Remember – it’s a global economy. Money moves across borders at the speed of an electronic impulse. Wall Street banks are enmeshed in a global capital network extending from Frankfurt to Beijing. That means that, notwithstanding their efforts to dress up balance sheets, the biggest U.S. banks are more fragile than they’ve been at any time since 2007.
Meanwhile, goods and services slosh across the globe. If there’s not enough demand for them coming from the second- and third-largest economies in the world, demand in the U.S. can’t possibly make up the difference. That could mean higher unemployment here as well as elsewhere.
What’s the problem with Europe? Don’t blame it on the so-called “debt crisis.” There was no debt crisis in Britain, for example, which is now experiencing its first double-dip recession since the 1970s.
Blame it on austerity economics – the bizarre view that economic slowdowns are the products of excessive debt, and so government should cut spending in a slowdown. Germany’s insistence on cutting public budgets has led Europe into a recession swamp.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has led the austerity charge, and the other European policymakers who have followed her have forgotten two critical lessons.
First, that the real issue isn’t debt per se, but rather the ratio of the debt to the size of the economy.
In their haste to cut the public debt, Europeans have overlooked the denominator of the equation. By reducing public budgets, they’ve removed a critical source of demand — at a time when consumers and the private sector are still in the gravitational pull of the Great Recession and can’t make up the difference. The obvious result is a massive slowdown that has worsened the ratio of Europe’s debt to its total GDP and is plunging the continent into recession...
...A large debt with faster growth is preferable to a smaller debt sitting atop no growth at all. And it’s infinitely better than a smaller debt on top of a contracting economy.
The second lesson Merkel and others have overlooked is that the social costs of austerity economics can be huge. It’s one thing to cut a government budget when unemployment is low and wages are rising. But if you cut spending during a time of high unemployment and stagnant or declining wages, you’re not only causing unemployment to rise even further. You’re also removing the public services and safety nets people depend on, especially when times are tough.
And with high social costs comes political upheaval. On Monday, Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte was forced to resign. U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron is on the ropes. The upcoming election in France is now a toss-up; incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy might well be unseated by François Hollande, a Socialist. European fringe parties on the left and the right are gaining ground. Across Europe, record numbers of young people are unemployed – including many recent college graduates – and their anger and frustration is adding to the upheaval.
Social and political instability is itself a drag on growth, generating even more uncertainty about the future.
What European policymakers should do is set a target for growth and unemployment — and continue to increase government spending until those targets are met. Only then should they adopt austerity.
What are the chances that Merkel et al. will see the light before Europe plunges into an even deeper recession? Approximately zero.
The danger here for the United States is clear, but there’s also a clear lesson. Republicans have become the U.S. party of Angela Merkel, demanding and getting spending cuts at the worst possible time – and ignoring the economic and social consequences.
Even if the U.S. economy (as well as President Obama’s reelection campaign) survives the global slowdown, we’re heading for a big dose of austerity economics next January – when drastic spending cuts are scheduled to kick in along with tax increases on the middle class. But the U.S. economy isn’t nearly healthy enough to bear this burden.
If nothing is done to reverse course in the interim, we’ll be following Europe into a double dip."
Yesterday 31 GOP US Senators voted against the Violence Against Women Act.
Those GOP warriors who cast their NAY votes against the Violence Against Women Act are:
1. Barrasso (R-WY)
2. Blunt (R-MO)
3. Boozman (R-AR)
4. Burr (R-NC)
5. Chambliss (R-GA)
6. Coburn (R-OK)
7. Cochran (R-MS)
8. Cornyn (R-TX)
9. DeMint (R-SC)
10. Enzi (R-WY)
11. Graham (R-SC)
12. Grassley (R-IA)
13. Hatch (R-UT)
14. Inhofe (R-OK)
15. Isakson (R-GA)
16. Johanns (R-NE)
17. Johnson (R-WI)
18. Kyl (R-AZ)
19. Lee (R-UT)
20. Lugar (R-IN)
21. McConnell (R-KY)
22. Moran (R-KS)
23. Paul (R-KY)
24. Risch (R-ID)
25. Roberts (R-KS)
26. Rubio (R-FL)
27. Sessions (R-AL)
28. Shelby (R-AL)
29. Thune (R-SD)
30. Toomey (R-PA)
31. Wicker (R-MS)
Both GOP Senators from Kansas voted against VAWA. Apparently they approve of Topeka's decision to legalize domestic violence there and want domestic abusers everywhere to escape penalty for their actions.
On October 12, 2011, the SunGazette reported Quite likely the most disgusting news you'll read this week
"Due to budget constraints, Shawnee County, Kansas, and its largest community, Topeka, are refusing to file charges against suspects in domestic violence cases. No matter how strong the evidence or the potential threat violent criminals may pose to the public, prosecuting attorneys now are - as a matter of policy - derelict in performing the responsibilities for which they are paid. In the course of a month, 18 suspects have been freed, the New York Times reports. Topeka's city council on Tuesday, in an effort to duck any expectation they may attempt to verify accusations and hold the violent accountable, repealed a city ordinance against domestic violence - in effect, legalizing domestic violence.
One may ask how Shawnee County and the state of Kansas found themselves incapable of fulfilling their responsibilities regarding public safety. Thomas Frank, in his book "What's the Matter with Kansas" - a title that seems more appropriate today than ever before - detailed Kansas' commitment to corporate welfare during the past 20 years. About a month to six weeks before beating your spouse or child became legal in Topeka because enforcing laws against it were "too costly," Kansas spent about $47 million in incentives to attract the headquarters of a movie-theatre chain from nearby Kansas City, Missouri.
How does Kansas Governor Sam Brownback explain prioritizing corporate welfare above the safety of families in the very capital city where he works? He doesn't. His official website as governor hasn't been updated since an Oct. 6 item about drought conditions. But the New York Times notes Brownback continues to draft legislation to further cut state taxes, but had no response from his office to this travesty, and neither did Associated Press reports.
While Brownback's silence on the matter and the failure of the state to intervene with funding is reprehensible, it is not as reprehensible as Topeka and Shawnee County freeing 18 suspects and decriminalizing interfamily violence. Few things could be."
Evidence of GOP Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker's success in his one man war against creating jobs in his state.
Karl Rove: Obama Poised For Electoral Triumph
Post a Comment
<< Home