Another war lost

Technorati Tags: War on Drugs,Law Enforcement,LA Times

The Los Angeles Times has an interesting lead story today, with a fascinating headline: “Jail bars are no barrier to drug traffic” (print edition). It’s a fascinating read which brings up many questions. For instance, how is it that a guard whose divorces eat up “70%” of his salary stays on the job? (A recent attempt by LAPD to monitor certain officers’ bank accounts met with howls of protest.) Or, how is it that a 19-year-old was assigned to guard hardened drug criminals? (He’s served a 180 day sentence for providing drugs to an inmate.)

Fans of crime stories, though, should not be surprised that guards provide drugs to prisoners. Without that device of corrupt prison workers, writers would be stuck.

For now, it is obvious to everyone but those making a profit off of it (including, but not limited to, DEA bureaucrats and drug cartels) that we’ve lost the war on drugs. Really! We have.  If law enforcement is part of the problem, what chance to we have?  So it’s time to declare victory and turn the fight over to the United Corporations of America, you know, the folks who really run the country. It won’t take them long to get things right.

If we legalize the drug industry, we will obtain some worthwhile benefits.  We will save money wasted on armaments; we will gain some needed tax revenue through the controlled sale of drugs; we will be able to regulate the drug industry; we will cut down on deaths caused by impure street drugs; and we will have a boatload of money to double down on anti-drug education.

Once Wall Street gets its hands on the business, everyone, especially those people in Central and South America whose lives are in jeopardy every day this senseless War on Drugs lasts.

It is more intelligent than what we’re doing now.

And Juan can get back to growing coffee beans.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

2nd step in reading

Technorati Tags: Doonesbury,Censorship,Palin,Reading,JoeMcGinnis

The current brouhaha regarding the Doonesbury comic strip is a good example of distraction as a metaphor for sleight of hand.

The strip is being censored in a few newspapers for its political content. At least that’s alleged reason.

If you look at the strips in question, though, it’s easy to see that Gary Trudeau isn’t being critical of Sarah Palin so much as he’s taking some shots at Fox News and the sort of newspapery being touted as journalism by right wing news outlets.

The panels quote from Joe McGinnis’s new book, to be sure, but the punch lines are aimed directly at the journalist who’s reading the book and then spinning the quoted material in absurd terms. He is the object of ridicule, not the former 1/2 governor (see the distraction?).

The sleight of hand comes in when the censoring newspapers allege it’s the political content which merits the removal of the strip, but actually those newspapers don’t want the public to think about what the comic journalist is doing. That might call too much attention to what the papers, themselves, are doing in reporting the political news.

It’s time for the English teachers of the world to point out to their students that calling words is only the first step in reading. The second step is thinking about the content of those words.

If there were more thought in the reading process, we’d’ve learned long ago that individual politicians are transitory, but institutions are more permanent. And there’s more danger to a flawed journalism institution than there is in a single pol.

Trust, but verify. 

 

Sphere: Related Content

Frum-a-dumb-dumb

Technorati Tags: David Frum,Newt Gingrich,Paul Ryan,The Dish,Medicare

There isn’t much from David Frum with which I agree; this quote, lifted from Andrew Sullivan’s The Dish, is one.

Writing about the Gingrich-vs-Ryan-Medicare-suggestion kerfuffle, Frum pens:

[T]he American public will not accept this kind of reform and will smash any politician who tries to force it upon them. There are ways to reduce the fiscal burden of Medicare, but telling seniors to buy their own damn healthcare is not going to be one of them. I wish it were somebody other than the Kenyan-anticolonialism-sharia law candidate making that argument, but it’s an important argument from any source.

Of course this proposal of Ryan’s is right wing social engineering. How can anyone not see that?

For once in his strange little life, Gingrich gets it right and has to apologize. Where’s the justice?

And I’m loving it.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Best phrasing of the day…

Technorati Tags: New York Times,Bob Herbert,Gun violence,Language,Politics,Political commentary

Here’s the opening para of Bob Herbert’s piece in today’s New York Times:

By all means, condemn the hateful rhetoric that has poured so much poison into our political discourse. The crazies don’t kill in a vacuum, and the vilest of our political leaders and commentators deserve to be called to account for their demagoguery and the danger that comes with it.

Here’s a nominee for best phrasing:  “The crazies don’t kill in a vacuum.”

There are a lot of commentaries holding that the rhetoric of the right wing cannot be proven to have been related to the shooting in Tucson last Saturday.  See, for instance, David Brooks in the same issue of the Times.

Point taken…if you’re looking for specific, direct-line relativity.

Herbert, though, takes the argument; there is no social vacuum in today’s world.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Time for an e-mail interview, Ma’am?

Technorati Tags: Salon.com,Time,Alex Pareene

If Time didn’t foresee the fallout from this boondoggle, it deserves the loss of respect it will surely get from this.

“This” is an item in Salon.com by Alex Pareene.

Time gave she-who-will-not-be-named a cover and an interview conducted by e-mail?!?!

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

A quick question

Technorati Tags: Elections,Money,Politics,Corporate Accountability

It’ll never catch on, Dear, Gentle Reader(s), but what do you think would be the result if, at every Congressional committee hearing which allowed, or requested, non-Federal government testimony, to have the very first question for each testifier be, “How much money, and to whom, have you contributed to a Federal election campaign, either at the general election level or the primary election level, in the past five years?”

That would be one way to keep track of monies expended in political campaigns, as well as to whom it was directed.

Cui bono—who benefits?  Until we know that, we don’t know enough.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

DWF (Driving while floating)

Technorati Tags: Drug War,Gainesville FL,Driving,ColumbiaTN

Perhaps it’s different for others, but from my personal experience, driving home after  a couple of tokes at a friend’s house some 35 years ago was a slow-motion experience.  I found myself stopping for stop signs in the middle of the block, and deciding to move forward after much deliberation of the pros and coms with myself.

And I know it was slow-motion because it took me 20 minutes to make the 5 minute drive—there’s almost no place in Gainesville, Florida (Go Gators!), that’s more than 5 minutes away from any place else.  (Of course, I haven’t been back in 35 years.)

When I taught speech to police and sheriff officers in Columbia, Tennessee, they would often joke about the local “hippies” who were blocking traffic on local roads with their road scorching speeds of 25 miles per hour.

When people show you a picture of a smashed-up car and speak of the dangers of driving under the influence of weed, look askance.  That car could well have been hit by an alcoholic-influenced driver—which trumps a marijuana-influenced driver.

Cui Bono--Follow the money, Dear, Gentle Reader(s), it will tell you who will benefit with the continued “drug wars.”

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

ALEC—and Arizona and Prisons

Technorati Tags: NPR,Arizona,ALEC

There’s a new corporation acronym on the block, and it’s not a comic actor, by a long shot.  Meet ALEC, Dear Gentle Reader(s), and be afraid.  Be very afraid.  (Good tie-in for Halloween, eh wot?)

Here’s a rather chilling excerpt from NPR’s website:

NPR spent the past several months analyzing hundreds of pages of campaign finance reports, lobbying documents and corporate records. What they show is a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to help draft and pass Arizona Senate Bill 1070 by an industry that stands to benefit from it: the private prison industry.

According to NPR, the genesis of Arizona’s immigrant law, SB1070 occurred last December at a conference of the American Legislative Exchange Council—ALEC.  An Arizona pol was at the conference, and the rest of the story we all well know.

Admittedly, Capitalism has brought us to a very good life, but every once in a while we surely have to wonder about making profit off of the misery of those who are less fortunate.

Or not?

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Reading Comprehension Test

Technorati Tags: Justice Kennedy,New York Times,Politico,Citizens United,Republican Party,Democratic Party

Wow!  Here’s a headline from The New York Times: Democrats Retain Edge in Spending on Campaigns; and this one is from the website Politico: Dems getting outspent? Not so fast.

So, the Democrats are outspending the Republicans?  Isn’t that counter-intuitive to what we’re hearing about all those millions being spent on negative ads against Democratic candidates?

Well, yes and no.

The stories go on to say that the Democratic Party has more money than the Republican Party. 

Really, though, what would be the point of the Republicans trying to gather money when there are others, secret others, doing the work for them?

And why would anyone who wants to keep their wealth bother to contribute large sums to “regulated” political fund raisers when they can get a possibly bigger bang for their buck by giving without having to admit publicly their largesse?

There can be little comfort for Democratic candidates with the headlines this morning.

Ah, Mr. Justice Kennedy.  What have you wrought?  (And how long will it be before you admit your error in judgment?)

So, what have we learned today, Dear Gentle Reader(s)?  Read beyond headlines; sometimes they don’t accurately reflect the whole story.

Trust, but verify.

p.s. Gold Star to those who can spot the spelling error at the Politico website!

Sphere: Related Content

Um…Say what? (Or, do words have meaning?)

Technorati Tags: NPR,Juan Williams,Michelle Malkin,Townhall.com

Dear, Sweet Juan Williams has found a new permanent home, and good luck to him.

His firing from NPR, and subsequent commentary about that firing, however, raises an old question: do words have meaning?

For instance, when Williams worked for NPR, as little as three days ago, he was a “reporter.”  Now, Michelle Malkin, in a column published in Townhall.com, begins with “commentator Juan Williams.”

And that, Dear Gentle Reader,* is the problem.

In NPR’s eyes, Williams’ “I get nervous” moved him into the category of commentator and out of the category of reporter.

Reporters need to be as objective as possible so that those of us relying on them have the sense that facts are being offered for our edification and consideration.

Otherwise we have entertainment, but not material with which we can make informed decisions.

Listening to some clips of Williams on O’Reilly’s show last night (Sorry, no citation available at this time), one might think Williams was ready for the change in title.

NPR had good reason to let Mr. Williams move on to more lucrative pastures (a lot more money is made bloviating than reporting…alas).

Ladies and Gentlemen, we present the erstwhile reporter, Juan Williams.

Trust, but verify.

Sphere: Related Content

Chauvinism?

Jonathan Alter on "Countdown" this evening had a questionable moment or two on this evening's broadcast. He said that Senator Clinton had, in effect, exaggerated her role in the Kosovo peace talks during the tenure of President Clinton.

Really? Perhaps Mr. Alter should re-read Paradise Lost, Dear Gentle Readers), and the part about "they also serve who stand and wait." Can the importance of a finely tuned dinner, or the setting of a conference dealing with war and peace, be denigrated? The comfort of the delegates' physical needs is to be dismissed?

Foolishly blinkered viewpoint is the hallmark of a person with limited vision. Perhaps Mr. Alter, and Mr. Olberman, who offered no resistance to Alter's remarks, should re-think the comments. While Mrs. Clinton might not have had "clearance," it is incomprehensible to think that a person with the experience in Washington politics which Mr. Alter has would think that she had no input. Or that her work as a help meet was inconsequential.

Trust, but verify.

Jonathan Alter
Hillary Clinton

Sphere: Related Content