thumpaliver's Blog

The continual barrage of  excuses continues.  This morning
on television they played a clip of some Meacham Park Moron
pontificating on how they need  to be left alone to chart their
own course.  We had the immediate offering by the brother
of the madman--himself a convicted felon having done a
stint in the graybar hotel for manslaughter--insulting every
warrior who went to war for his NATION and his FELLOW
MAN (not for personal revenge like an animal would)  suggesting
that part of the blame lies with a taxing authority "picking on"
some poor beleaguered citizen who's only trying to make
a living and be left alone...

Hey, aren't  burglars just trying to make a living and wanting
to be left alone?  And since when are convicted felons allowed
on television to insult every veteran who ever saw action  on
a battlefield by comparing  a murderous spree-killing for personal
revenge to such honorable and valorous service?

The whole "buzz" around this incident is starting to make me
more and more angry.

But if there's any doubt  as to why this guy could kill as many
as he did, it was all removed for me by looking on page 10A
of the Sunday Post-Disgrace.  There it was, THE SIGN.

You know the one--you see it almost everywhere  you go
in this county.  Here's the between-the-lines version of it,
the verbose version (and wouldn't you know I'd know the
verbose version?)

We Trust You to Drive Here in a Vehicle Which is a Readily
Capable of Deadly Force and Which is Impossible to Operate
Without Constantly Aiming it at Other People, but We Don't
Trust You With a Firearm Concealed on Your Person Which
is Only Aimed at Another Person During the Volitional Act of
Threatening or Attacking Said Person.

Short Version:    No Guns.

Often as not they even put a pictogram up for the illiterati's sake.

One thing we can glean from our recent experience:  The five
victims couldn't have been any deader if someone had had
a personal defense firearm concealed on his or her person
in those chambers. The assailant was readily able to identify
those legally in possession of firearms in that chamber and
to deal with any possibility of their interdictory suppressive
fire preemptively.  That's precisely what he did.  We can
know from the fact this ravening murderer performed this
evil deed that he was no genius.  Someone with any brains
intent upon revenge would have found some way to  ruin
these people's reputations and careers in revenge--and in
the process would have  probably done the rest of society
a favor if he could find any skeletons in their closets to
expose.

Barring being able to accomplish that,  at least he could have
just spent his hard-earned to support their opponents and
sent his wife and kiddies to work in the campaigns of the
opponents.  There are all sorts of opportunities for legal
socially-acceptable revenge in this world. Further, only
the stupid employ disproportionate force in seeking revenge.

These people hadn't murdered any of his loved-ones after-all.

So while mad-dog  Thornton was no rocket scientist, the tactical
advantages of taking out the known armed-defenders before
continuing with his murder spree were not lost even to his dim-
witted mind.

This principle does seem to be lost on the people who try to
oppose the principle of having a concealed-carry permit
available to people capable of engaging in strategic  thought
in their own self-defense before they're attacked.  How often
have you heard some such opponent loudly wonder aloud
"why have them concealed if the person's not up to no good--
just carry them openly!"

I think the last person I heard using that argument was Ray Hartman
on Donnybrook on PBS.

Well, for Ray's benefit and that of so many others, this incident
illustrates the obvious reason to carry your defensive weapon
concealed.  It gives you a tactical advantage against these
types of attackers.

If you were carrying a defensive weapon openly and a
miscreant was intent upon robbing you,  likely he'd shoot
you first and then rifle your dead body for  swag.

If he doesn't know you're A&D, he's going to use what
he feels is superior force to demand you "stand and
deliver". If you have any sense you will give up your wallet
even if you are armed---it's way cheaper than the possible
civil suit later from the robber's surviving dependents who
lived off his life-of-crime proceeds.

Only when it's evident life is being seriously threatened
does the careful  defensive gun carrier bring his defensive
weapon into play.  Of course, those who would go to the
trouble to obtain the license and take the training required
could be counted on to  exercise such care.

Obviously the signs banning firearms from public venues
only work on those who are law-abiding.  This has been
proven over and over.

And I'd like to suggest here for the benefit of any survivor
of a victim of this most recent result of the "if guns are banned
we're safe"  insanity that it's not necessary for you to prevail
in a suit against Kirkwood for banning the law-abiding
defensive  gun carriers from carrying  in that building
for your loved-one to have been a licensee.  If you know
of anyone in that gathering being a concealed-carry licensee
you should sue Kirkwood, because anyone who was armed
unbeknownst to Mad-man Thornton  could have taken him out.

I've whipped a can of pepper-juice out and hit a running
rotweiler while maintaing my equilibrium on a moving bicycle
MANY TIMES--and a can of pepper juice doesn't even have
sights or a "barrel" to aim it along.  If I can do that, someone
sitting  in that gathering  "strapped" could easily have shot
down Thornton.  Only if Kirkwood is sued successfully for
wrongful death on account of their stupid signs can we stave
off an inevitable onslaught of mot such stupid prohibitions.
It's got to look more expensive to exclude the defensively-armed
citizenry than it might be expensive if there was an accidental
discharge liability "resulting" from not putting up the signs.

And what are the odds of that? The only person I've ever
actually known  to have blown a hole in a wall while "cleaning"
a gun is an idiot.  Even at that, he's never harmed anyone
with a firearm, or even his car.

This nonsense where authorities who cannot be held accountable
for not protecting you when they're standing there with a
firearm and the legal right  to use it then wish to make you
totally dependent for your survival upon them has got to stop.

If you go in a library, a church or  a school, there's all sorts
of deadly dangerous things.  There are toilet bowls in which
people may be drowned. While this is most often a problem with
tots who are not being adequately supervised, I know of at
least one case where it was  a volitional act  of violence--the
murder of Christine Smetzer at McCluer North HS.

There are electric receptacles.  How hard would it be to use
one of those to step up the voltage  with an easily-obtained
xformer and electrocute someone in a murder?

Many buildings have gas piped in, and some even have
steam boilers.

Do you know what happens when a steam boiler "goes off"?
You probably don't because safety controls are so good
now and steam heating becoming increasingly rare that
 it doesn't happen much.  I've heard a steam heating boiler
in a building  could take out a whole block.

Every city which is terrified of allowing skateboarding in their
parks or (oh no! not that!) even of having a skate park
then actively encourages children to play with aluminum
or hard-wood clubs which are READILY CAPABLE OF
LETHAL USE.  There have been cases where a kid was
taking practice swings before a game and doing it
behind people sitting on a bench and one stood up at
just the wrong moment and was  killed.

What's next--should we make everyone wear an aqualung
into public meetings and replace the air with nitrogen so
nobody can set someone on fire for revenge?  I know it
sounds ridiculous, but at one time it would have sounded
so to ban  people carrying pistols into public places.

When such idiocy reigns supreme it's no wonder muslim
extremists  looked at our society and figured we'd sit
still for them flying airliners into the WTTs,  the Pentagon
and possibly  the Whitehouse.

The only way this "we're going to make you safe"  insanity
will ever be made workable will be when the way you
enter any public gathering or venue is to have the thugs
at  Checkpoint Baumruk strap you into your straight-jacket,
tie you to  the hand-truck and install the goalies' mask on
you and wheel you into the meeting to "participate".  Nothing
short of that is going to be effective and I don't know about
you, but I'm just not ready for that.

Or how 'bout this? Are you ready to have a stun-gun hooked
to a radio-control strapped onto your neck before you're allowed
to enter a public gathering so someone sitting behind a steel
plate watching through a peep-hole can push a button if anything
seems to be going wrong and send everyone in the room
into convulsions?   Is that how you want things? Because if
you let these Big-Brother types have free rein, you'll wind
up like that. I  could see them making it a requirement of
being anywhere in public.

We're at a xroads now. It's time to fish or cut bait. The
legislature has gone half the way down the right road. Let's
start pushing to go all the way and have them repeal
de facto prohibition of  the  concealed weapon licensees
from *any* public  venue. Of course private property
owners should always have the right to exclude anyone
on *any* basis--it's their property and what's the point
of  paying all those taxes if you can't control who does
and does not enter your premises as per your preferences?

I don't have a kid. If I did, I'll guaranty you that unless the
public school  had armed teachers to protect my child
in one of those oh-so-attractive-to-desperate-nut-balls
revengortunities, my kid would be home-schooled.

Nuts still have a modicum of respect for a locked door
of an occupied dwelling in this nation--not so in those
nations which have denied their citizens "easy access
to firearms".

Recent posts on other 'blogs:

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx?
entry_id=215722&blog_id=36589

The idiocy of the local "news" media surpasseth all understanding.

In the aftermath of the Kirkwood City Council Chambers Massacre,
all the stations scrambled to get to the relatives of the miscreant
who did the latest "AA" -related outrageous act of heinous violence
and give them their chance to spew.

Earth to relatives of all idiots: just because you have been given
an opportunity to air the emptiness of your cranium and the evilness
infesting your heart you are not required to acquiesce to your never-
ending urge to do so!

To characterize the recent murder-spree in Kirkwood as "going to war"
is to, in some sense, legitimize it. It's also sure to encouRAGE any similar
nit-wit with a bone to pick with some authority to be even more likely to
act on the impulse.

For these news venues to pass this dangerous and useless viewpoint
out over the public airwaves is surely grounds for having their license
pulled by the FCC, if we'd want to be brutally honest about it and
assess the relative merits accurately.

Be honest now. What would you rather have your imressionable
child hear, some dick-weed with homicidal insanity as a familial trait
be allowed to represent a craven act of self-absorbed monomaniacal
violence alongside honorable service to one's nation as if the two were
on the same level, or to have them see a full frontally naked human
torso? Which would you believe more likely to bend the little twig of
your loins into a danerous tree-of-destruction hanging over the home
of your family's good name?

For the standards and practices people of these stations to have allowed
this dangerously irresponsible crap to be broadcast by those paying
them to protect them from their own stupidity should be grounds
for termination.

Meanwhile, the web site of *one* of them doesn't like me calling certain
county and one city officials the liars and wasters of pubilc funds they
are...

If I had a loved-one killed at a public meeting and something of this
nature recurred, so help me DOG I would sue every damned
television and radio station I could prove the person who killed
my loved-one had listened to during this time frame for being partly
responsible for encouRAGEment of it's happening. I'm not saying
I think I'd prevail, but I'd do it anyway--if I had to stand on a streetcorner
in south st. loser doing "Monicas" for $5-a-blow to pay for the lawyer.

I'm getting fed up with these jokers getting to do any irresponsible
crap they feel will keep them even in the stupidity-brinksmanship
profession.

Compare what they've done with a hypothetical. Let's say i decide,
as a form of protest, to go to lots of public meetings and every time
some negro gets up and behaves in a loud and out-of-control
manner when it's turn at the podium arrives I shout "it's got a gun!
Hit the deck!". I would be charged and found guilty of something
for doing that on the strength of the idea that it *might* result
in one of the armed cops present getting out his weapon and firing
and hurting someone with no good reason.

Well, as far as I'm concerned the reporting of the opinion that the
violence in Kirkwood had some causative factor other than that some
people named Thornton ought to have thought twice before
reproducing themselves is just as irresponsible. It should be
punished accordingly, but it won't.

Why?

Because they have the lobby, they have the ability to dig up the
ugly little secrets on the politicians, and they have something
else to boost ratings if what they've done *does* precipitate
a tag-along incident.

And for certain individuals posing as responsible leaders of the
"black community" to incite incidence after incidence of this
sort of emotional and impulsive disruptive behavior simply
to inflate their own importance is truly despicable. Remember
all those St. Loser School Board meetings where the chaos-agents
following the daily incitations of Lizz Brown were disrupted like
this Kooky Thornton did the council meetings? They were just
lucky something of this nature didn't ensue out of that.

One of the school board members did *try* to harm another one
during those times through the use of a "voodoo curse". Luckily
such nonsense doesn't work. No harm was done for lack of
wanting it done though.

Shame on any reporting agency which propagated the disreasoning
of the relatives of "Kooky" Thornton.

And for any of you out there having similar troubles being picked on
by your local officials, here's a hint: If you raise "ned" and they eventually
tell you that if you agree to STFU they'll erase your tickets---YOU'VE WON.
At that point, you're not going to do any better than that. If they've told
you not to come to meetings anymore and you've sued and lost,
that's beause you carried on beyond what your original issue with
them was. Get someone else to go in there and raise hell for you
instead. City's hate bad publicity. Find out everything they do wrong
and turn them in to whatever authority is over *them*. If they advertise
as a "nice place to live" and you know better, call up the places
where they advertise and point out they could be held liable if their
part in mis stating the safety of that place leads someone to move
there and then they're harmed. This sort of thing gets back to
your city fathers. They don't *like* it. There's a million ways to
bite the ankles of these legends-in-their-own-minds, but you also
must accept that from time to time they're going to step on you
and squash you a little bit---it's what they do. But you'll never win
by doing some overtly/seriously illegal act and giving them the
opportunity of saying "see, we told you our detractor was deranged/
evil./dangerous/mean&nasty".

People like "Kooky" Thornton call that "a trick-bag". You don't want
to put yourself in one. They're measuring "Kooky" for his down at
the mortuary--they're going to bury him in his.

Unless you just won the Powerball... I just bought my ferguson-will-be
-sorry ticket, did you?

Good luck, and may the best lucky-man win.

Other recent posts elswhere:

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/Weird/2008/02/07/Ki
llings_in_Kirkwood?page_no=2
http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx?
entry_id=214629&blog_id=48993

Now it's time for thumpaliver's exit poll---I'll show you mine if you show me yours...

I'm republican and voted the democrap  ballot. I voted for Barack Hussein Obama.

There were several reason. First, there wasn't anyone running on my party's ticket
I liked enough to vote for.

It was a better use of my vote to vote to hamstring the opposing party.  They picked the
one afro-person candidate who will be "gone after", should he become the nominee,  from
a variety of disparate directions.

Those who fear the muslims because they have a vested interest in  our "ally" in the middle
east will attack him.  While they never would have dared mention that Romney is  a member
in one of the most dangerous cults known to man at this time, they will suggest that
Obama was indoctrinated and that the muslim indoctrination cannot be counted on to have
been overcome by other countervening  indoctrination he's undergone as well.

At best those who are interested in the war on terrorism and the extent to which it's
really  a crusade/jihaad  will feel they can't be *sure* of him.

Then there are the racists. No matter whether they came by it honestly or were
brainwashed into  it by some racist authority figure or *wherever* it came from--
built in to the beast and hard to overcome, whatever--they will not feel they can
trust a "negro"---one who, had he grown up in many "black" neighborhoods he would
ahve had to become a world-class track star to keep from getting constantly beaten for
looking "too white"...

Of course conservatives will hate him.

Those who build walls to keep people not of their culture out of their "nation"  but shove
"diversity" down our throats at every turn will feel free to attack him  merely for having
the name Hussein and having had a muslim father.  Their butt-kisser, the conservative
white xian   protestants   will take up that charge  double-time---that's their  lot in life, after
all,  as carefully crafted Golems--scroll firmly implanted under their tongues.

I think McCain has paid his dues and  should get his chance.  I don't like him though--every
time I see or hear him on television I want to scream. I can't bring myself to vote to have him
be the only candidate I feel I have to vote for in the general election.  I felt he was the most likely
winner and the rest of the republicans all had something I didn't like about them.  I will say that
if Huckabee does turn out to have been the "spoiler" who kept the cultist from becoming the
possible next president,  his stock has gone up for me.  He wasn't going to pander for
my vote by overtly presenting himself as that though, so I thought  I  could do more good
by  trying to help select an opposing-party candidate I feel is un electable and if somehow
elected  will be done-in by the same people who did-in JFK--him for being a catholic president and Obama for being a possible muslim sympathizer.

That's right--I said that I think if Obama would get elected he'd be assassinated by the shin-bet
or mossad.  No doubt they'd arrange to do it where some muslim has a good sniper-nest on his
job and will plant some hunk-of-junk italian  bolt-action rifle where he normally hides and
goofs-off while he's supposed to be working and then some guy with a nick-name that
doesn't sound  "tribal" (tribish?) will  "get mad and kill him" before he can be interrogated.

So if  the worst case scenario happens and the demonrats actually do profit from undercutting
the war so many soldiers have voluntarily lost life and limb fighting, I feel we won't have to
worry about him long.  And whoever takes over probably will be such a turkey he couldn't
get a bill passed. If Obama's smart as I suspect he is  he'll know he needs a V"P who would make anyone think twice about elected him  president by casting a vote of copper-clad lead.

But since the shooters will (once again) not be directly affected by our having an ineffective
president who can't lead---and one who will have just gotten a big object-lesson in don't-irk-
irgunistan  to keep  him   "on the right track" from their viewpoint--they'll happily pull their
triggers.

I'll never forget how sickened I was to have read in Assault on the Liberty how that scoundrel,
LBJ, called back the only F-4 which could be scrambled to come to the aid of the U.S.S.
Liberty when she was under attack from the zionazis.  It was the only plane in the area which
could get there in time to at least observe while the frenchie-made Mirage fighters strafed, napalmed and rocketed the  very lightly-armed NSA spy ship  after they'd blown a huge hole in the side
of the ship with a torpedo--a ship clearly flying a US flag which was clearly visible by the
weather conditions on-record for that location--a wind sufficient to have blown the flag out
where it was plainly  visible to the intentionally-attacking "allies". 

Yep---old  LBJ knew who
elected him president with a bullet.  He knew what they'd have done to him had that F-4 shown
up and had the pilot got so incensed over what he'd seen that he headed for Haifa or Tel Aviv
and loosed his prometheun fire on the oh-so-deserving---it was a "ready jet"; one equipped with
nuclear weapons  and kept running all the time on a carrier in the mediterranean  in order to
be able to hit high-value  targets in eastern-block countries in the event of  "hot" WWIII
breaking out.

Lyndon Butt-hole Johnson had it called back--it was already enroute.

He was a  hick, but he wasn't stupid...

Now it's your turn----who did you vote for and what led you to the conclusion that's
what you should do?

It's not a real poll--nobody's tabulating anything here, more like show-and-tell.

DTV 101

Here's thumpaliver's mini-course on DTV.

I guess I'm what PBS wants to call an "early adopter".
I've leapt in where angels fear to tread and bought
a DTV/HDTV/LCD set because we needed a new
set in a bedroom and I wanted to rotate the main
television into there and replace it with something
which could recieve DTV. At first I was going to
resist DTV by just keeping the analog sets and
making my viewing habits entirely recorded material
and just to stop viewing broadcast. I'll *never* pay
to watch television.

Never.

When I found out there would be vouchers for DTV
converters it softened my hard heart and I started even
looking into what DTV entails. What I found out made
me believe DTV has the potential to encroach heavily
on the dish and cable television industries--there's a
potential for a huge proliferation of channels in every
market. That's an end I personally find desirable.

At the very least I would expect that where these pirates
are charging a fee to get HDTV they will be forced by DTV
broadcast competition to offer it for free.

I've seen the mini-course or whatever they're calling
it on PBS trying to prepare the way for the mandated
change next year. Here are some things I don't think
they're accentuating which have become evident from
my experience so-far.

If you're assuming that if you get the current analog station
at a usable signal strength you're going to be able to
acquire that same station's digital broadcast, think again.

KETC has 2 DTV stations, one subdivided into 3 sub-channels.
As I understand it they could have one more sub-channel
out of their second station license.

You can subdivide one HDTV bandwidth station into
up to four stations broadcasting television with the
resolution used in current analog NTSC television
signals now, as I understand it.


I can orient my antenna one way to get all their channels on
one day and the next day I'm going to have a big pixelated
mess, if even that--it changes that much from day-to-day.

The antenna I was originally successfully using to acquire
their analog channel would not even acquire *any* of their
DTV broadcasts. Sometimes I can get one of their DTV
UHF signals and not others.

Here's something you people planning to get a converter
(and where are those, I wonder?) to put on their VTR for
time-shifting programs might want to consider. Sometimes
when interference corrupts the bitstream being broadcast
the reception electronics are sufficiently confused that
the entire rest of the program continues to be unveiwable
until the channel is changed and changed back. On occasion
I've had the DTV receiver become so fouled-up with some
corruption of the bitstream that it would receive not *one*
DTV broadcast until the set was turned off and back on.

I'm not the only one this happens to--I know someone who's
had this happen to them on their satellite television too.

Maybe some sets are more or less prone to this--from what
I've seen nobody is giving a figure-of-merit for any specification
in their literature which would relate to this problem. It may be
something dependent upon the amount of memory used
for buffering or the OS used to process signals.

I can foresee that this could be even worse to the extent
you'd have to unplug the set (probably requiring a new
channel-scan to reset your list of channels, no doubt).

You see folks, when you're buying one of these DTV
sets you're buying a rudimentary computer that's being
tasked to do one of the most demanding multi-media
tasks some full-blown computers can have problems
doing correctly, and then you're compounding the problem
by having the xmission of the bitstream subject to all sorts
of line-of-sight propagation problems such as when
an airliner taxies away from where it's vertical stabilizer
*was* reflecting a strong signal to your antenna...

An online search revealed (when I was having problems
acquiring the most desirable DTV broadcasts and the
company which marketed the rushed-to-market-before-
fully-functional---I said it was a computer--POS was
not helpful, and yours probably won't be either unless you
opt to tack another "C" note or so onto the cost of the
purchase for their *real* product support) that in my
location---FERGUSON FOR THOSE WHO DIDN'T
LOOK AT MY PROFILE--the reception of PBS broadcast
DTV would require more than the lowest-level of antenna
and antenna siting sophistication. That was just what
I'd determined through trial-and-error.

There are amplified/directional antennas one can buy
as an add-on. I have no experience with their performance.
What I did was make a very simple monopole UHF antenna
with a corner reflector behind it which could be sited in
different places around the room. With UHF very small
changes in position can make all the difference.

So what I'm telling you is that you may have to invest in
more than just the set to get the full benefits of the damn
thing.

That said, if you *can* acquire a signal it's going to be
totally free of any of the common degradations in image
such as multi-path ("ghosts") or "snow"--noise. The main
complaint I think I have now is this issue that after the
interfering phenomenon is no longer present the picture
degradation may continue until the viewer takes action--
changing the channel and returning. With analog television
broadcasting after the plane was out of your airspace, the
picture did return to normal. I can see where people will
be recording some program off-air to watch at their leisure
and they're going to find that someone walking up the street
keyed-up their cell phone or just a car went up the
street (or a schoolbus or panel truck) and that will have
caused the entire rest of the program they were recording
to be a stuttering mess of random pixels and stuttering
sound.

This would be similar to what one sometimes would
see on the analog broadcast channels near the time
of the autumnal and vernal equinoxes when the sun
is nearly in the same position in the sky as the geosynchronous
communications satellites the local affiliates get their
signals off of. The industry calls this "solar fade".

This will be quite an annoyance to those who "time shift"
programming.

I would like to suggest that the viewing public who intend to
remain broadcast viewers bombard their elected representatives
and those who sit on the committee dealing with broadcast
issues *and* the FCC itself with demands that if this
DTV mandate is going to be shoved down our throats,
at the very least they need to also mandate all the broadcasters
in a market pool their resources to built one REALLY BIG
tower and they all site their broadcast antennas on that one
tower. This would put more viewers in an area of practical
reception conditions and also simplify antenna installations for
those who still might be in the position of having to employ some
sort of higher-gain directional antenna array in order to receive
the signal--they'd all be coming from the same place and
(theoretically) all would suffer from the same interfering
phenomenon and overcoming the reception problem for
one would overcome it for all. There may be technical RF
issues precluding this of which I'm unaware.

On the good side I'll say that I've never seen 24 clearly before
viewing their DTV broadcast. No matter what I tried I couldn't
get the analog broadcast. That said, though I was able to
acquire the analog signal for KETC far better than that for
KNLC (24) but acquiring the DTV broadcasts from KETC/PBS
has been far more problematical at my location.

I'm *assuming* that putting a slightly more sophisticated
antenna outdoors/higher will probably solve all my problems,
but be forewarned you may have to re-engineer your
antenna installation.

If anyone has seen a DTV adapter to convert an analog television
or video recording device for sale I'd like to hear about it. When I did
online searching there was a circular wild-goose-chase.

Don't get your vouchers early! They're only good for a limited
time and so far I haven't seen any converter on sale anywhere.

Good luck.

And remember--non-backward-compatibility sucks! You can
take one of those ancient "candlestick" telephones with the
carbon microphone, stationary armature/steel diaphragm "reciever"
and make-or-break mechanical dialing mechanism, hook it to
your telephone wall jack and dial anywhere in the world. That
didn't just happen, that was mandated by law. An FM radio
will receive every bit of the waveform of an FM-stereo broadcast.
That didn't happen by accident, the FCC mandated it by
law.

The DTV mandated incompatibility is post-microsoft. They've
been allowed to get away with colluding with hardware
manufacturers to render perfectly functional machines and
software useless when it could continue to function if provision
were made for it to. After seeing the consuming public sit
still for that, the "kick me" sign was clearly perceived.

Your buying power is no longer a force to be reckoned with,
it's merely a presumed factor. It is presumed that you
*will* buy, and you will.

Bend over, drop "trou", and get what's coming to you, sheople.

Other recent posts:

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx?
entry_id=25223&blog_id=121029

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx?
entry_id=23325&blog_id=133543

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/Avette21/2008/01/27
/Red_Light_Cameras?page_no=2

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/Johnpertzborn/2008/
01/25/IN_POLITICS_WATCH_WHAT_YOU_SAY_AND_REMEMBER?page_
no=2

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx?
entry_id=211959&blog_id=81709

Gosh!

Here's a big surprise:

"Ball-pork Village" remains nothing but a vacant lot and an eyesore.

You could knock me down with a feather.

Happy belated MLK Day...

I'm kidding, of course.

That's the guy, for those who haven't been listening for decades, who wanted
all to be judged by the contents of their characters, not the melanin content
of their skins.

There was a big MLK-day confabulation recently in St. Loser. All the usual
suspects were there. It 's the sort of thing where mayors are expected to
show up. This time when the mayor showed up, the people who supposedly
are celebrating the life and times of the man who supposedly wanted all to
be judged by the content of their characters showed they didn't have
any character by shouting the mayor down when he tried to address the crowd.

Now, if they didn't agree with the actions of the mayor in demoting the malfeasant
and insubordinate fire chief, we could allow you to speak and then speak in opposition
to what you'd said or what you'd done, if you had some character.

No character was in evidence at this gathering of MLK fans though. Instead after
coming to try to pour oil on the waters and be a peacemaker, the poor mayor
was shouted down by rude obsterporous people who would then expect to
go apply for a job and be accepted into a workplace where people of many demonations,
religions, sub-species and national origins might be expected to be trying to cooperate
together for a common goal.

The Man of the Hour had claimed he wished to see a nation where people
could be judged soley on the basis of the content of their characters. Well, if his
current-day fans are any indication, they have no character as a group--and everything
they do is as a group--a group for mutual benefit, profit, and un-earned privilege.

Thanks King-Fishers, for showing us all, once again, why it is you have been the
eternal pariahs of the world ever since people of a different type ever discovered
your dog-forsaken continent.

Poor Francois Slay... you were only trying to show some character and to go
where you knew many would be against you to try to be a unifier, a peacemaker.
You did display some character by going there and giving your character-less
detractors their chance to "have at" you. You had to go, because if you didn't,
you would be a "racist". And if you did go, it turns out, you were also labeled
a "racist". You just couldn't win.


Hey! There' s someone running for president at least partially on that particular issue/
supposed qualification. Let's see--who was he again? He wants to be a unifier and
a peacemaker, which is a good ploy since that was the successful first campaign of the
man he's hoping to replace in office.

And why not? It was another famous peacemaker which played a pivotal role
in the development of this nation! That one marketed by Colt.


I forget what the modern supposed would-be peacemaker's name is, but I know most of those jerks who showed they had no character Monday will probably be out there stumping for him---not because of his character's content, but merely because of the melanin content of his father's skin.

Shame on you racists!

Recent message posted on other ppl's 'blogs
http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/mr_wildflower/2008/
01/21/What_happened_to_the_friendly_cop?page_no=5

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/TroyTim/2008/01/21/
SHAME?page_no=2

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/snoopydad24/2008/01
/24/I_HATE_INSURANCE_COMPANIES?page_no=3

Congratulations to the justice system!

Rockhead the cop-killer got a fair trial.

According to morning news I just heard a jury has ruled
that the undisclosed "relationship" between one of the
jurors who convicted him and some cop or prosticutor
was of no consequence. There's a big surprise.

One of the jurors on a trial I was juror on disclosed
a nodding acquaintence with someone in the prosticutor's
office and neither attorney had any problem with it.

Now we can all sit back and listen to the inevitable whining
from the professional whiners.

I'll never forget hearing some imbecile call in on a radio talk-show
and take up for this lawless scoundrel. There have probably
been few cases of murder tried here locally which were any
more open-and-shut than this one. Rockhead the Cop-Killer
is a murderously violent example of someone who is unable to
control violent outbursts. I'm glad to know he'll be off the
same streets I have to use for a long long time--if not permanently.

If he'd kill a cop on as thin a pretext as supposedly precipitated
this incident, then he'd kill any one of us for merely looking at him
crossways.

I hope that woman I heard taking up for him has daughters and
they all marry someone just like Rockhead the Cop-Killer---unfortunately
there are plenty of them still out there undiagnosed, untried and unincarcerated.

Below the waterline on the iceberg that will sink this ship-of-state.


   

I was up late and they announced some poor little 8yr-old girl
had been grabbed right out of her school.

Later it was revealed an alert neighbor had seen the abductor on top
of the child near some dumpsters and intervened somehow. Lucky luck
child to have been within eye-spy distance of someone who doesn't say
what the mother of that little girl who'd told her mother she'd seen the
Hornsbeck boy she recognized from a milk-carton "have you seen me"
shot when they observe or hear about something that's a matter for the
immediate attention of the police.

It's turned out the abductor was wearing an ankle bracelet already which
is supposed to alert authorties--I freely admit I don't know which ones---when
the bracelet goes beyond a certain distance from where the bearer is supposed
to stay...

School officials are blaming the lapse in security on someone neglecting to make
sure a self-latching door which may only be exited was not latched when they
exited. There's a lesson for all of us! When we're using doors like that if they're
intended only to be gone out for security reasons or if they need to be latched
because internal air currents in a burning building could blow them open and
provide oxygen to a fire and exacerbate it, let's close those doors folks! It doesn't
take that long!

And if that wasn't really the cause in this abduction and it's really a case of someone
who was supposed to be watching the only unlocked door talking on the phone
in a private call instead, then SHAME ON YOU.

Fortunately this time no children were harmed in the creation of this story.

We're not always so lucky.

Update: Between the time we first heard of this incident and when I read about it in
the paper the hero of this case has decided to (or possibly had this decided for him by
the media) no longer remain anonymous. I won't print his name here, but you can
find it out. My personal thanks to this alert and responsible person for standing up
for what is best for all of us and doing his little bit to make this world a better place.

As I said before: "lucky luck(y) child"



My latest observations on other 'blogs:

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx?
entry_id=208351&blog_id=10138
http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/Johnpertzborn/2008/
01/16/BIGGEST_BABY_BOOM_IN_45_YEARS?page_no=2

http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/ViewBlogEntry.aspx
?entry_id=22470&blog_id=102939

Well,

it was the great debate.

I've become somewhat familiar of late with some of the issues the
master debaters were dealing with---particularly the debates regarding
health care costs and insurance.

Many who like to think themselves someone who can "think outside the
box" seem to favor Ron Paul. If Ron Paul were to be elected I think I might
just as well go get a gun and stick it up to my temple and blow *my*
brains out too---when in Rome, after all...

The man actually seems to believe we don't have affordable health care
because of "the war". Well, this was a big issue when Her-lary was  tasked
to solving it and came up with what the press called "The Nixon Plan".

We weren't fighting "the war" then---though we certainly were pouring
$6X10 down the rat-hole of the intenational zionazi conspiracy---something
all these bozos  managed to side-step when trying to explain the origins
of "the war"...   That's not even a patch on the problem of affordable health
care, just as what's now spent on "the war" is in any way "on the table" when
looking for a source of funding or relief for the problem of the affordability
of health care.

One of the bozos didn't even understand that the inflation under consideration
was that inflation specifically related the the cost of health care, not generalized
inflation.

Almost all seemed to agree that the big solution is to get more people
insured.

When I go  to a doctor to try to pay for medical costs I have, the first and
last and largest impediment to my paying for it myself is the inflated
"they have deep pockets" insurance price of whatever it is. These
witch-doctors feel quite complacent in presenting people with "estimates"
for their costs which they can't possibly afford to pay based on what
insurance will allow them  to charge---which they drive up by setting an
artificially high cost to be "bargained dow" by the big insurance companies
to what they will actually pay.

But it's not cost containment or bargaining down--it ought to be called
"padding down".  I don't know the ins-and-outs, but I suspect those quacks
even get to take money off their taxes as a "loss" at not getting paid by
the insurance industry what they have initially overcharged.

The fact is, insurance gets between the doctor and his patient in more
ways than just what drug the leech-jokey is going to be allowed to
prescribe.  They take the personal tragedy out of these little bill padding
tricks the insurance industry facilitates.  If the pill-pusher is doing this
"negotiation" with the insurance industry he's doing it to fellow
"professionals" who have "professional ethics" regarding dealing
with his patients and  that is, in his view, his patient's negotiator and
they're getting good measure from their premiums.

Bull-Obama!

If instead most of the patients these jokers dealt with had *no* insurance
the companies for those who did would not *need* to try to engage in
"cost control". The prices of procedures and treatments would then have
to reflect what an individual making a typical income could really
afford.  The "cost containment"  then would rest with the medical profession
actually making some effort to come up with treatments and such which
are affordable---they'd have to face those they denied cures
to on a daily basis if they didn't and believe me, they'd be pressuring
the R&D folks whose cures they prescribe to have this first and foremost
on their minds.

All these bozos at this mutual photo-op either didn't understand this or didn't
dare say they did. I do and I will say it. I've seen the bills the saw-bones
submit, what the insurers will allow and what they then accept.

Somehow these guys manage to stay in business and from what I've
seen they drive damn nice cars and they sure in hell don't live
in *my* neighborhood so I know they're living in nice houses too.

Back  when I used to be able to actually afford to go to a doctor or
dentist and pay out-of-pocket on  very meager earnings,  these little
princes did live in our midst.

Maybe you think when you go to  a hospital and see all the atriums,
landscaped courtyards and so-on as well as the really nice furnishings
and other amenities it's for your benefit. Wrong. These things are provided
to the people who work there---a "nice work environment"  where the
human resources people assure those making decisions this sort of thing
must be done in order to attract the best people.

Those things cost money, and you're paying for it.

It was pretty obvious that though they all seemed to understand
pill costs are highe here than in canada, none seemed to "get it" as
to why. The  argument was whether or not we should  do something
canada does or not and the reasons for or against were something
cloaked in  generalities about whose economic system is better.

Let me 'splain something to you.  Canada sells drugs cheaper because
they use the market size they represent to bully the drug companies
into selling at their preferred price AND PASSING THE COST ON TO
US BECAUSE WE SEEM TO HAVE THE MONEY TO  PAY FOR OURS
AND PART OF THEIRS TOO.

There is no such thing as "cheap drugs from canada".   If we weren't paying
the high prices, they couldn't get them at those low prices.

If we did what they do there would then be nobody for the drug companies
to pass the costs on to.

We're all familiar with this process.  The $500 hammer we all heard so
much about in military spending was really the defense contractor hiding
the costs of some other  military miracle the military needed performed
in cost-shifting to something else because the congressional appropriation
committee  would *never* appropriate the requisite funding it really does
cost to develop those types of miracles--ever.  They have to under-charge
for them to get the contracts  and then hide the real cost in a footlocker full
of $500 hammers.

When you go to the hospital and pay as much for one common antibiotic
pill in the ER as your whole subsequent prescription in after-care costs
at the pharmacy, there's a reason.  It's because the costs of everything
in that hospital have been INFLATED  by the cost-setters feeling comfortable
doing that to some big faceless insurance companies who hire lawyers and
negotiators instead of breaking down and crying right in front of them.

Then when someone who doesn't deal with the cost-inflating insurance
company conspiracy  does need treatment, they have to eat the bill and
all those  tragedy-exploiters who expect to continue being paid the
insurance-company "cost containmnet" inflated wage   have to get it
from somewhere.  That's how they get it----the cost of every little thing
in the hospital--referred to specifically by one of the bozos while he
apparently didn't understand where it came from.

Because, once again, they all seemed to agree that the "answer" is
to force everyone to deal with the insurance industry.

One wonders how many dollars their campaigns expect to see
from  the insurance industry--and the PACs that support their
campaigns.

So none understands where the health-care cost inflation is coming
from, and none of them understands or will publicly admit where
the islamic jihaad against our nation is coming from--supprot of "israel".

When it was trying to be explained to the senile nitwit running which
other nations were attacked besides us--in other words why we're not
unilaterally responsible in our "imperialism"  for our own attack, I heard
at least one of the drones say "israel".  

None ever mentioned spain, one of the best examples of how the actual
attack, though set-off by our support of "israel", is now aimed at all non-
lslamic  nations because the jihaadist are the only ones in the part of
the world upset by the foisting of "israel" into their midst who actually
have the stomach for war--so they get to control the nature of the war.

Jihaad.

Ron Paul needs to take a box full of overpriced neuro-xmitter antagonist antagonists.
 
If he's the outside-the-beltway cure for what ails our nation, we're in deep
Obama indeed.

Romney  can't seem to figure out there's little difference between making
the state the insurer and making the state the insurance agent.

If none of these people can understand it's the insurance industry behind
our health-care cost inflation or that it's zionazism responsible for our
not being on the friendly terms we ought and need to be  on with the
portion of the world influenced by islam, then they do not have the
courage necessary to become our president.

We are in deep trouble.  The last possible leader we could have who
could present the strong stern face toward those who would tear our
nation down while pretending to do so in order to rebuild it in their
own images is on the way out and there's no functional replacement
on the horizon. Someone should be trying to out-Bush Bush, but the
foment in the press caused by the demonrat  insiders conspiring to
give the loser party a shot at reinventing itself and trying to find
some problem for their poor solutions *after* regaining undeserved
power have succeeded in  making just what this nation needs
off-limits for the voters to vote for.

If Bush *could* have been reelected, then the focus for his party would
have been to effectively fight the anti-Bush modalities of the demonrat
attempts to re-steal power.  As it is, term limits have forced the issues away
from real issues to phony issues given to the candidates to wave around
in place of real ones.

And we lose.

Of course the demonrat candidate debate isn't even to be considered. They
have no issue and no solution.  To them the problem is reestablishing
demonrat political control. Period.

Evidently the St. Loser fire department is to be made the battleground in the war to
prove all things bad come from the White Debbils...

It's amusing now to see all the usual suspects trying to rearrange their local figureheads
into a   configuration that will not dredge up a lot of the past history of these
whining  "babies"  (quotes to indicate an old WGNU insider joke)  regarding the
asinine nature  of their constant  ass-ertion  that a glass ceiling is constantly falling.

"To arms! To arms!----the glass ceiling is falling!"

Let's all catch larks.

Well, they're not fooling me--I know what they are and what's on their beady little minds.

Sherman George wanted to continue not promoting until that time he could be sure of
promoting mostly negroes to the position of fire captain.  That's the long, short and
in-between of it and anyone who says otherwise is  either kidding himself, or trying
to kid us.

The latest secret weapon in this war is some organization of negro  professional engineers.

On the last Donnybrook and Donnybrook Your turn  (for the sake of those who don't
know this is a locally-produced panel show on the PBS affiliate here--probably their
only real claim to fame in the greater PBS world)  this issue was front-and-center. It was
clear nobody wanted to embrace the tar-baby of whether or not George himself was
worthy of protection, praise or scorn. They wished to deal exclusively with the issue
of the recently announced strategies to try to strong-arm  Francois Slay into  meeting
their    afro-economic terrorist demands.

Someone called George a racist and the agent provocateur  and his organ-grinder-monkey
side-kick both bristled. I tend to agree. Racism is a sociological theory about which groups
may be better or less suited to certain sociological tasks and why.  What we're seeing from
Sherman George and his phalanx of promoters is simple race-greed.  It's not titled the national
association for the *advancement* of colored people for nothing--that's their agenda,
advancement above and beyond what's called for by the merits or content of their
individual characters as encountered in the workplace, the political arena or other areas
of community foment.

Racism is a theory held largely now by those who perceive a problem and seek the solution
both for the sake of their society and for the sake of those whose vexatious group
characteristics threaten it and *them*. It's not generally hate-based at all, nor is is
based in trying to get special privileges for *any* group involved--just a total improvement
for all by reexamination of discarded precepts which may not be so flawed after-all...

So now the jerks are trying to rearrange themselves to make their flawed and
always disproved assertions and the numbskulls  who assert them  seem less
odious and corrupt. Good luck.  as I said the spectacle is amusing.

It's sort of like turning over a hognose snake that's trying to convince you he's
dead and watching it flop back over on it's back.

They will insist on  making their various demonstrations and trying to prove
their point.

Well, there will be a point proved, but it won't be their desired point.  If  the negro
professional engineers pull their convention business  they and those supporting
that and other attempts to nickel-and-dime  the St. Loser "leadership" into
compliance will prove this:  They and those supporting that boycott approve
of insubordination in the workplace.

I want that engineers organization to consider this carefully. They are, in many
cases, the exception to the rule for their mutually-identifying-for-unearned-gain-and
-special-privilege-group, but if they do this everyone in future considering
employing the services of one of their members or a consulting-engineer firm
comprised of their members, or even just a negro-owned business that's innocent will
see this as hiring those who support insubordination.

There was no valid excuse for Sherman George to continue refusing to promote.

He was insubordinate, got demoted and then punked-out and quit.

It's an old story with losers.

That will be the point proved by these losers----"hi! we're losers, please hire us!"

I can't think of any better self-evident proof for racist theories.

Another related story--the blue-eyed white-faced monkey-doll found hanging
in  a firehouse was investigated at great expense to the taxpayers by  the Federal
Bureau of Immolation and found not to be a "hate crime".

What a surprise.

The only message given to thinking man by this latest assertion of "racism" by the
little minority that's always crying wolf?  "We ourselves associate our group
identity with anything  related to sub-human simians".

They're "owning" this  association themselves--nobody in this case was trying
to foist it upon them.  They will continue to insist upon it even after the government
bureau they're always running to every time a negro pastor burns down his own church
for the insurance or to cover up  misappropriation of funds as the ultimate arbiters of
what is and is not "racism" has told them not to...

Okay! Have it your way!  You're all monkeys.

My apologies to the actual monkeys.

Well, I suppose it was predictable.

Bill Haas is at it again--he's running for elective office.

This time he seems to be centering his campaign around
the  40 shutdown.

One wonders whether Haas is going to threaten
suicide again if not elected...

 
I remember Haas from years ago. He actually had a little
night-time radio show on WGNU. One night he brought
his date for that night in the studio with him and during
the course of his show he actually put the poor woman
"on the spot" about whether or not he was "getting any"
that night, right there on-air  in front of "gawd and everyone".

That incident ranks amongst the lousiest things I've ever seen
or heard on broadcast media.

What's next--J.  C. Corcoran for congress?

I doubt any district exists with a constituency of  the low
quality-of-character for which Haas could be representative.

If there is, please don't show it to me.

 

Well, the results are in....

A former U.S. senator has expended something on the order of $2*10^7 to determine what everyone already pretty-much suspected---adult men playing a children's game and expected to do so at a superhuman level of athletic performance  (because the sheople, bless 'em, WILL be entertained!) have used  anabolic steroids and preparations designed to cause their bodies to produce more androgens.

A long time ago a politician named Dirkson said  "$1*10^6 here, $1*10^6; pretty soon you're talking about some real money".  That's had to be upgraded long ago to $1*10^9, but you can still waste money at the old order-of-magnitude--It's galling.

What do people expect? They thrill to see these big bull-men get up there and crack the bat into
the ball and do something  they've never seen, or that was seldom seen in the past, or whatever. They
demand this. The players have insisted on being paid salaries that would suggest they perform at this level--superhuman salary (especially considering the value of the job being done)/superhuman performance level.

Maybe people who love this game should have turned their nose up at this brinksmanship back when the moneygrubbing players ruined one whole season for them over the issue of not being overpaid enough.  Maybe they should have invested their love of the game into teams and leagues which now play  on fields that would have been the envy of any professional franchise when the game was originally becoming the National Passtime, or even  in supporting/watching and caring about the game as played by those toward whom the whole subject seems to be directed anyway--the children who play in the little-leagues.  After all, isn't that the big upset with grown men taking substances which, after all, are only designed to keep their own bodies from eating up as much of their own muscle tissue as might ordinarily be eaten up in catabolysis were it not for the feared effect upon the psyches of the little children who idoloize these professional  players?

Why anyone continued to follow or care about baseball after that season of greed I cannot imagine. Maybe this recent baseball-doggle  is the delayed karma for that--the other foot finally fell.

One thing is sure though,  this was an exercise in wasted time, resources, effort and the public attention.  How many high-level drug dealers  of  extremely dangerous (by almost everyone's reckoning, apparently save mine and Bill McClelland's) could have been ferreted out and convicted with an investigation  of that magnitude into something almost anyone could deem truly important?

How much closer to the effective treatment of Alzheimer's and other dementias--an issue which is surely soon to bankrupt the health-care system of this nation all on it's own soon if nothing more effective is done--could we be with that amount of money spent effectively  on that problem?

This whole exercise is nothing more than a red herring to lead people's attention away from far more important issues.  I just listened  to the replay of Donnybrook Your  Turn and someone called in and said almost exactly what I've said here--much more concisely.

What horrible weather and how nice to be able to stay indoors and not go out with an ice-storm in progress!

Sympathies to all those out there experiencing power out[r]ages.

The central story in the St. Loser Pravda-Dispatch  front page is that the hasslewood school district is having a race problem.

The story goes on to parrot the blitherers regarding there being nothing for the white-flighters to worry
about since the socio-economics of the influx of  negroes into the district would seem to indicate there
is nothing to worry about--that is, if you buy into the nonsense that human behavior is all nurture instead of nature...

Ever since the end of WWII the idea that human behavior is largely heritable has been out of favor. It was, after-all, "hitlerian", literally.

Odd isn't it  how obviously practical ideas like improving the defense profile of one's nation by instituting a change-over from rail to surface road shipping  can be embraced, even though it's source was what the allies saw in germany when they conquered it. Odd too that the hitlerian idea of CBMs and later ICBMs  could be strongly embraced, as well as the idea of  submarines which could run fast submerged for long distances--there was evidently a program in WWII germany to power submarines on hydrogen peroxide which would have given  fast submerged travel--our version  was the nuclear submarine.

But when  it comes to defending the homeland and keeping our communities secure from criminal thuggery which will kill you just as quick as a ColdWar era soviet MIRV, we're not allowed to use perfectly valid models of how this occurs and the obvious countermeasures because, well, it's "hitlerian".

Sorry hassle-wood school district officials--your white-flighters are doing just what is prescribed for their and their families'  safety no matter *what* level of incomed-job your new influxers have managed to bull and bully their ways into.   Even if your model were correct, they have acquaintences and family from the old neighborhoods who will follow after them  as the predator always follows the prey herd.

Further, we're talking about a school district in this morning's sermon.  Schools are populated by children, not adults with middle class incomes.  Children are just as much in poverty as any inner-city ghetto dweller.  They have the same psychology--in fact, the prevalent psychology of the typical criminal thug could very easily be called retarded or undeveloped--in other words the adult with a mind of a child.

Young folks have no power.  They yearn for all the rights and none of the responsibilities of the adults they see around them in their lives. Further, their time-scale is skewed. They've not lived long and cannot even have the experience of waiting a long time for something they've wanted. These and other factors are the prescription for disaster if there are disastrous predispositions added to all the rest of the dangers of youthful indiscretion.  Therefore,  pronouncements of safety based on the socioeconomics of the *parents* of the youth population  in the schools is a canard at best.

Last, also independent of the socioeconomics of the recent influxers is the overlay of politically motivated  racism against the white majority which will accompany these people no matter what their socio-economic situation. It's rampant in this society and it's mostly aimed at the less dysfunctional negroes--those who might actually be expected to get out and vote.  It's also aimed at whites--witness the article I'm referring to wherein the whites are (once again) painted as the culprits; the statement that wherever there's been "white flight" in the past "districts have failed".

The population moving into that district are steeped in the idea that their problems are somehow somewhere rooted in something evil having been done to them by the white majority.  If they accept this view it's their own fault, individual by individual, but the sad fact remains this idea is all too widely-accepted by blacks in this nation of every stripe and every socio-economic strata.  It's a loser outlook, and it's the type of outlook which will cause a new neighbor to misinterpret normal intolerance for insufferable rudeness or obnoxiousness as  "racism" and make neighborhood and interstudent  parental  relationships---already difficult enough--impossible.   It's not only the fear of having an interracial out-of-wedlock  grandchild or of having your daughter  Christine-Smetzer-ed which drives the whites out.  The types of extreme incidents referred to in the article are simply the trigger to set off  something which is brewing in the back of the white parents' minds already. They know if their kid gets in a dust-up with a black kid there's going to be a guilty-until-proved-innocent aspect of  suspected  "racism", as well as they also know that there's going to be an increased incidence of their kid  getting involved in such incidents.  A highly publicized extreme incident  is simply a nucleus for the thoughts they were already having to crystalize   around into action.

If quoted in the paper correctly, I'll give  the school principal  devil's due--they do indeed have a race problem, not a gang problem (though I'm sure they have that problem too to far greater a degree than the district would like  to admit--just because your gangbangers couldn't  "hang"  with the worse gangbangers in  neighborhoods where  gang crime is more maturely developed doesn't mean you don't *have* gangbangers).  I will argue with  the implications  in admitting that fact though--and those implications, as usual, are that the real problem is white racism/white flight. White flight is simply a reasonable response to the race problem admitted to.

Now there's a new controversey with stem-cell research.

Other more-reliable researchers have apparently found a way to make the
adult stem-cells---or at least non-fetal stem-cells---behave more like
the fetal lines and to be more useful in eventually (with the emphasis on
EVENTUAL) effecting cures for human maladies.

Of course we all remember the big let-down with the faked-up
research purporting to prove the same thing in Korea.

I am not an anti-abortionist. In fact, I see the living noise-making
foul-mouthed crotch-grabbing proof all around me every day
that there ought to be much much more abortion. However, if
politics makes strange bedfellows the scientific search for cures
and the truth makes for even stranger ones. A patriotic love of
one's own nation makes for stranger bedfellows yet...

That's a subject for another 'blog.

I have to admit that the anti-abortionites who tend to oppose the
research in stem-cell lines from fetuses not already in-play
are correct when they've pointed out that in the camaign to constitutionally
protect one tiny little start-up nascent industry the Damnforthites
lied shamelessly in suggesting their desired end did not include
human cloning. It does. Those cells can be turned into every type of
tissue in the body of a clone of the original individual, and they're
also cloned. Of course lots of things are cloned and identical twins
are clones, but we won't talk about that. The point is they went
out of their way to suggest a lie was the truth just to get their
way.

What else are they lying about that I as a layman am not sophisticated
enough to detect? One thing's for sure, the literature that was sent
to my mailing address was geared towards turning out a segment of the
population who are always sure that because they have a ton of melanin
in their skin someone's trying to do them out of something.

(see controversies about the recent canning of the former fire chief posted
on Ladyfireman 'blog, and likely many others)

The literature sent to my home by the proponents of the constitutional
amendment were totally geared towards getting the 'fros out to vote for
it on the suggested idea that if this didn't pass, it was because someone
wanted to deny them, especially, cures for maladies they feel affect them
at an inordinate rate. The whole appeal, from pictures of individuals
hoping for a cure (probably models anyway) to the researchers who
were going to get [Richard]ed out of a grant was a totally racist appeal.

Yes, ex-sentaor, i said you were endorsing a  campaign which at-least partially
depended on RACISM..

And that was what it was all about--where's the grant money headed?

So now we have more-reliable information/research regarding the possibility
of turning mature stem-cells, like those found in bone marrow (or in this case
I believe it was foreskins from circumcisions) into the functional equivalent of
the suppoosedly-far-more-useful fetal cells.

And watch the grant-applicants scrambling for "higher ground" from which
to attack all that might threaten their grant or future applications along their
current line of investigation (fetal-cell).

I heard a discussion of this topic on the recent PBS-affiliate local-produced
panel show Donnybrook and then Your Turn later, to an extent.

I heard a discussion of it on the NPR affiliate run by our state's university
system.

I actually heard some nay-sayer to the recent supposed discovery bring
up the insane issue that just as their are people with principled objections
to abortions against his corner on this market (and make no mistake,
what we're really talking about here is getting in on the ground-floor of a
very very hoped-to-be-lucrative MARKET here...) then there are some
people who would oppose the new (hopefully) breakthrough because the
cells were derived from circumcised foreskins and some people have a
principled objection to *that*...

Yeah, I've seen a lot of human chain protest/obstructors assaulting people
trying to go into hospitals which have obstetrical units and which perform
circumcisions all right. Why, it's got so bad that the government is about
to hunt them all down using RICO statutes as corrupt organizations it's
so bad with the anti-circumcision people.

That's how desperate supposed scientific researchers get when their
little hegemon is threatened.

Here's hoping the recent announcement of non-fetal-fatal stem-cell
cure/research stock proves fruitful and the politics of abortion/sex/
puitanism can be factored out of the possibility of cures ever
arising from what is certainly a fascinating area of research.

I am *so* tired of the fetus-lovers and their rhetoric intruded into
almost everything under the sun, and I'm tired of having to climb
in bed (politically, don't get excited!) with them all the time because
they're almost always on the side of what's going to be good
for this society (abortion issue excepted). I wish I could think
the pseudo-liberal leftists were going to have learned any lessons
about what the great unwashed masses do and do not trust
from the last eight years, but they won't. They'll take a victory handed
them on a platter of warmed-over anti-Vietnam War sentiment and
turn it into almost instant decades of defeat--and the nation may
not survive it this time.

More's the pity

Well, we can all heave a huge sigh of relief... It seems that Detroit has now surpassed St. Loser as "most dangerous place".

Let us not be lulled into a false sense of security! As the winter solstice and it's close-in-time mid-winter festival of intemperate spending approaches, violent crime, particularly murder, will rise to a yearly crescendo, to fall precipitously in the early months of 2008. Am I some mystical seer possessed of clairvoyance or prescience?

No, I'm just aware of a yearly pattern. You be aware too. If there's someone out there who really hates your guts or who you know you particularly annoy, en-garde! Vigilance might well save your life or that of someone near and dear to you.

If it's going to happen, the coming weeks will be the worst chances of it--outside of several hot summer days above a certain critical temperature in a row.

While we all congratulate ourselves on the extra added criminality in Detroit (apparently), let's not allow ourselves to be lulled into a false sense of security right at this particular time.

Those who are universally loved by all and never ever go where violent thugs might also go return to your knitting.

OBTW: It's to be noted that shopping centers often have crime rates similar
to notoriously bad inner city neighborhoods.  Naturally, this is partly     because there are a lot of people there to spend money, so they have
money on them.  Bear in mind however this is also a place where people expect to "rub elbows" with any and every sort of other person they might normally be highly suspicious of were they to show up walking down the sidewalk in front of their home.  That means they're forced to let down their guard and this is a  situation those bent on humbling/degrading others might be expected to recognize and try to exploit.

 Be careful.  Many have been "taken" economically shopping online, but they're rarely if ever mugged, abducted and raped or killed. I don't advocate
shpping online--far from it. Still, you give the devil his due.