Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

We're about to go through a major Federal Election!

No one cares...? That's alright neither do we, it's our 4th federal election in just 7 years, and this one happens to fall right in the middle of hockey playoffs.
 
Why when the economy is in the toilet would the state government give ANYONE, and especially the rich a tax break? Are these guys mentally deranged?

They should tell everyone that they are up a brown river with not much of a paddle, and it is time for everyone to help get the state out of the mess.

The key word is everyone - something our bloke (Chancellor of Exchequer of Ukania - the money man dude) seems to have failed to do really.
 
Last edited:
They are in the pockets of the rich and for rent cheaply.
 
Here is some video of protesters in London being lied to, then kettled and arrested. These were truly peaceful and the police had no right to arrest them.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2011/mar/28/fortnum-mason-protesters-uk-uncut-video

That is the kind of behavior that quite simply work against the fabric of what most people would call justice.

It seems like there's some handbook with written examples that the Met use.

Q: What do I do as a Chief Inspector if I have peaceful protesters being cheerful?
A: The best cause of action is to kettle, and then arrest on arbitrariy charges.

Q: If someone starts a fight in a pub, what is the best cause of action?
A: First and foremost, kettle. Then place everyone in the pub under arrest on arbitrary public order offenses.

Q: If someone runs a red light, what should I do?
A: Get at least three officers to instigate a kettle, then arrest someone else.

Q: If someone asks me what I'm doing, what do I do?
A: First, hit with baton or shield, either center mass or head. Then kettle, and arrest for breach of the peace.

Q: If someone living in the street where a protest is going on tries to get to the newsagent to get a newspaper, what do I do?
A: First and foremost, kettle the person, then arrest for trespassing.

Q: If a mother pushing a baby takes my photo, what should I do?
A: Kettle the mother and the baby individually, place mother under arrest for kattle russling, toddler for stealing James May's television.

I've got respect for police. But I have to say I understand those who flip out when kettled for no good reason. It's a moronic tactic, it's inhumane and in most cases, it's liable to escalate the situation. You couldn't make this shit up.
 
More on the Wisconsin debacle. One of the Republican Congress critters whining about his salary of $174,000 and how tight things are for him. Follow the link for the clip.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...y-salary-tape-be-pulled-from-the-internet.php

GOPers Demand Sean Duffy Salary Tape Be Pulled From The Internet (VIDEO)

First the Republican Party in Polk County, Wisconsin, pulled the tape of Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI) fretting about making ends meet on his $174,000 a year salary from its own website. Now they want it gone from the whole Internet.

For a couple hours, the local county GOP was successful. But we've put an excerpt of the video back up.

A day after TPM posted the video we obtained of Duffy talking about his salary at a Polk County town hall meeting earlier this year, the Polk County GOP contacted the video provider we used to host the video, Blip.tv, and demanded the video be taken down.

The tape caused a stir for Duffy, a first-term conservative best known for his past as a reality TV show star on MTV's The Real World. Democrats flagged the comments about his taxpayer-funded salary (which is nearly three times the median income in Wisconsin) and criticisms began to flow Duffy's way.

In the clip, Duffy is asked whether he'd support cutting his own salary. Duffy says he would, but only as part of a plan where all public employees' salaries would be cut. He then said that the $174,000 in salary (not including benefits) he receives is a squeeze for his family of seven to live on:

I can guarantee you, or most of you, I guarantee that I have more debt than all of you. With 6 kids, I still pay off my student loans. I still pay my mortgage. I drive a used minivan. If you think I'm living high on the hog, I've got one paycheck. So I struggle to meet my bills right now. Would it be easier for me if I get more paychecks? Maybe, but at this point I'm not living high on the hog.

Duffy's office said any Democratic criticism of his response was "a misleading attack." For more on Duffy's finances, see this post.

The county GOP took down the video from its blog after the Washington Post posted a short clip of it yesterday morning.

An official with the Polk County GOP, which posted many other clips of the town hall on its YouTube channel, told TPM yesterday that the video was taken down because it was "was being republished without our consent."

Kirk Anderson, who manages the county GOP website filed the complaint with Blip.tv, claiming that posting the video was a copyright infringement and demanding that the video be taken down. You can view that request here.

County party Chair Sandy Fretwell did not respond to a request for comment. Duffy's office did not respond to a request either.

Here's a one-minute clip, excerpted from roughly 45 minutes of video of the public Duffy townhall, that the Polk County GOP doesn't want anyone to see:
 
Gah I hate the way the politicians do this to us...

Went to renew my road tax today because it ran out. I get to the post office to find its been raised by ?10. Now I didnt pay much attention to the budget, but road tax was raised starting today. I knew only about the petrol tax reduction. Anyway Im not bothered that if I bought yesterday I would of saved a tenner I'm bothered that the government reduced, by a tiny amount, a tax that we can easily opt out of paying by not using the car as much (and a tax that Im sure was pre-empted by the oil companies anyway negating its benefit) and hiked up a tax thats less easy to opt out of.

What I mean is, with fuel duty you can kinda dictate how much you pay because you can decide to use the car less. In todays world its pretty handy to have a car even for occasional use.... you almost need to have a car if you want to get anywhere distant in any kind of good time for example.... but no matter how little you use the car, you have to pay that road tax, so you cant really opt out unless you stop driving altogether and waste even more money using rubbish public transport.

And I suppose thats another thing.... they tax the crap out of the car user to try curb emissions and reduce fuel consumption yet basically leave you with a service you couldnt class as an alternative even with the best pair of rose tinted glasses. For example I had to go to wales at the weekend. 4 of us went down, in comfort, in a 1.6 TDCi focus and it cost us ?12 each for the 400mi round trip. The same trip on the train would of cost each of us, over 6 x more and taken 17 hours rather than the 6 it took us. Thats just flat out rubbish.

Same thing for getting to work, when I worked in rugby, If I ditched the car for the train I would of been paying twice as much per day and because I would of had to travel diagnally across the country ment that it would of taken twice as long as well. Its just not value for money, not to mention any kind of adverse weather makes the whole system pack up completely.

All this because some cunts in this country cant balance their cheque books and spend way too much money they dont have.
 
BTW:
Road fund licence = not used for roads.
National Insurance = not used to pay welfare benefits nor look after the National Health
Income Tax = Not a temporary tax to pay for the Napoleonic wars.
 
I just assumed all taxes go into one pot from which everything is paid. But I wasnt complaining about where the tax money is spent. I was just saying they've done the gold old "giveth with one hand" and "taketh away with the other". I'd of rather they left it as it was and maybe even put 1p onto fuel duty. At least that way I can easily avoid the tax by not driving as much, whereas by mere fact of owning a car I have to deal with the increase no matter what.
 
I just assumed all taxes go into one pot from which everything is paid. But I wasnt complaining about where the tax money is spent. I was just saying they've done the gold old "giveth with one hand" and "taketh away with the other". I'd of rather they left it as it was and maybe even put 1p onto fuel duty. At least that way I can easily avoid the tax by not driving as much, whereas by mere fact of owning a car I have to deal with the increase no matter what.


generally taxes would go into consolidated revenue and it's distributed out from there
 
Yes they do - but that was not the justification for those taxes. The ones I listed above are as I have outlined.

An additional point with respect to National Insurance was, it was a bit like a flat tax originally, a single weekly level premium was paid via a card and stamp paid for at the Post Office (Yes that long ago).

Well Harold Wilson decided that they would make it a sliding scale - generally most people paying more. To justify this they introduced ERS (Earnings Related Supplement) that meant when you went on the dole you got an increased amount for a short time (6 months) that reflected the additional payments put in to the system - everyone with me - most of you will be foreign or too young to remember this.

Well a later (I think it was a Tory) government got rid of the ERS but kept the increased payments into the system. There are loads of things like this where a government decides something which looks sensible then as we change governments another change is made and when anyone complains they say that was the last governments promise. ...

People wonder why I hate Politicians. Grrrrrrrr
 
You conveniently left something out. Here, I'll highlight it for you.

Screen-shot-2011-03-17-at-12_39_55-AM.jpg


Can you generate electricity from tidal motion? Yes. But to date, every single tidal energy project that I am aware of has run afoul of issues such as maintenance and replacement of the apparatus as needed running the price up beyond any savings or profit the unit would generate. PG&E in California wanted to construct one just like the Rance installation about fifteen years ago, but the operating numbers didn't work. So, to date, the answer to "can you generate electricity from tidal motion economically" has been "no". And remains no. And therefore it doesn't work as a commercial source of power. Need I remind you that France's electrical generation is all nationalized, with *everything* that implies? Including lack of accountability? They're pushing 'reforms' now, but still...

There are some new and radical tidal projects being tried in Maine and San Francisco (and unless it got swept away in the recent tsunami, Japan) among other places, but until and unless those prove out, the answer is still no. By the way, we've been trying tidal for over a century now, so it's not a new idea in America, and it's not 'the eeeeeeeevil nuclear lobby that blocked it' all these years. Especially not in California, where they tore down a brand new nuclear reactor in about the same time frame and the nuclear industry has next to zero influence.

You would also think that rabidly anti-nuke countries (or countries that are not now and will likely never be allowed nuclear power plants) that have extensive ocean coast line would be all over tidal power tech if it was even vaguely economically sensible, or that more would have been built in those countries that have them.

As it is, there are... Six. Total. Seven if you include the one in South Korea that's been delayed and may never be finished.

Perhaps someday tidal will make economic sense, but until some of the newer concepts prove out (which I have my doubts), the answer is 'no it doesn't work.'
Not definitive but interesting none the less.

http://stophinkley.org/EngRevu/SHResponseNPS18Feb2010.pdf

One interesting bit:

"One person asked what would happen if uranium supplies were to run out due to the number of new nuclear plants being planned or constructed world-wide. He was told by a DECC official that market forces would come into play and that higher prices for uranium would enable a market economy to go to greater expense in extracting uranium from lower grade
ore or even from the sea. He said this had been the case in the seventies when oil prices had gone up, enabling oil companies to exploit more difficult oil-fields.

The disturbing thing about this logic is that the massive carbon cost of this more difficult extraction was not even referred to by the official who had worked for the oil company Shell before coming to DECC. Uranium extraction from low grade ores requires extensive use of fossil fuels. Indeed the open-cast uranium mine in central Australia contributes ten
percent to their national carbon emissions. It is also, incidentally the largest man-made hole on earth.

People employed in key positions of the UK department responsible for mitigating Climate Change should have an altogether different mind-set, which should be generally helpful to the climate issue. This point applies equally to the more parochial question described earlier of of locating venues which reduce the need for travelling or at least allow access
by public transport instead of by car."

So what they are saying is that when the loads of Nuclear Power-stations planned are built there 'may' be a shortage of 'Uranium' and lower grade of ore will be used that is both more costly and has a much higher carbon footprint to extract from the base rock. Well that means that the whole life KwHr cost of electricity is going to be significantly higher than Governments are planning.​
 
Last edited:
More to the point - how the hell did Wisconsin end up in so much debt? It's ludicrous and all too prevalent - ask the Irish/Greeks/Spanish/Ukanians.

People voted for these loosers too.

It's simple. Unions collect mandatory dues from government employees (in the case of teachers, for example, $1,000 per year), spend that money on massive campaign contributions to elect the very people that then vote on the union demands for pay, benefits, and working conditions. It's amazing what a simple, relentless 2 or 3 percent per year adds up to over time -- something along the lines of a 40% increase in wages for the same position since 2000. Couple that with all the optimistic estimates of what those nice pension packages would really cost, and you end up with massive financial issues.

There's a reason even FDR and Fiorella LaGuardia were against public (not private) unions. This result was entirely foreseeable.

Steve
 
And on another subject...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704474804576222561887244764.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Norway to Jews: You're Not Welcome Here
Anti-Semitism doesn't even mask itself as anti-Zionism.

By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ

I recently completed a tour of Norwegian universities, where I spoke about international law as applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But the tour nearly never happened.

Its sponsor, a Norwegian pro-Israel group, offered to have me lecture without any charge to the three major universities. Norwegian universities generally jump at any opportunity to invite lecturers from elsewhere. When my Harvard colleague Stephen Walt, co-author of "The Israel Lobby," came to Norway, he was immediately invited to present a lecture at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim. Likewise with Ilan Pappe, a demonizer of Israel who teaches at Oxford.

My hosts expected, therefore, that their offer to have me present a different academic perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be eagerly accepted. I have written half a dozen books on the subject presenting a centrist view in support of the two-state solution. But the universities refused.

The dean of the law faculty at Bergen University said he would be "honored" to have me present a lecture "on the O.J. Simpson case," as long as I was willing to promise not to mention Israel. An administrator at the Trondheim school said that Israel was too "controversial."

...

note that the welcomed speakers -- Walt and Pappe -- are virulently anti-Isreal and much of the "research" about the Middle East has been panned by academics.

Way to go Norway, a true symbol of open and fair discussion....NOT.
 
Last edited:
As far as I've been able to gather, it's a question of his oposition to an accademic boycot of Israel. Personally, I'm not convinced on it, and even if I was, I still would think of it as stupid and silly.

However, this is not the Norwegian government saying no. It is Norwegian universities and colleges saying no. Another point I'd like to make is that the title of that story is completely false. It indicates that Norway won't allow you into the country if you're jewish. Now, that might had been true in 1845, but it isn't any more. We don't really care about your opinions with regards to entry. Funnily, the same article you quote first attempt to paint it like the Norwegian government denied him entry, then they openly refer to Ilan Pappe doing a talk at Norwegian universities. He's Jewish.

They're free to invite whatever scholar they want. They didn't want this one. I think it's stupid, but it's still their choice. I'm not all that sure that professor of journalism Sigurd Allern, long time editor of Norwegian maoist newspaper Klassekampen, would be all that welcome at some US universities. And when you apply for a visa to Norway, we pose no questions regarding your political views. Now, let's think about it, do we know about a nation that does pose such questions to people wishing to apply for a visa?
 
UN staff killed during protest in northern Afghanistan
1 April 2011 Last updated at 16:31 ET

At least seven foreign UN workers have been killed after protesters stormed a UN compound in the Afghan city of Mazar-e Sharif, officials say.

The compound was set alight as hundreds protested over the burning of the Koran in a US church last month. Several demonstrators have also been killed.

Witnesses said the protest began peacefully but suddenly turned violent.

A local police spokesman told the BBC the city was now under control and a number of people had been arrested.

Dan McNorton, spokesman for the UN mission in Afghanistan, said: "Three international UNAMA (United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan) staff members were killed, and four international armed security guards were killed."

Initial reports said eight foreign UN workers had died.

Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt later confirmed that one of the dead was a Swede, 27-year-old UN worker Joakim Dungel.

The guards are reported to be from Nepal.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described it as "an outrageous and cowardly attack".

US President Barack Obama also condemned the attack "in the strongest possible terms", saying the work of the UN "is essential to building a stronger Afghanistan".

The top UN representative in Afghanistan, Staffan De Mistura, has flown to the area to handle the matter.

Weapons seized

Witnesses said a crowd of several hundred staged a protest outside the Blue Mosque in the city after Friday prayers.

The crowds moved to outside the UN compound, where a small group broke away.

Munir Ahmad Farhad, a spokesman for Balkh province, said the group seized weapons from the guards and opened fire before storming the building.

Local police spokesman Lala M Ahmadzai told the BBC the attackers had used guns and knives.

He said that the situation was under control and a number of suspected attackers had been arrested.

Officials have declared an emergency in the city - major roads in and out have been blocked.

'Hunted down'

Kieran Dwyer, director of communications for the UN mission in Afghanistan, said the UN workers had been trapped inside the compound and "hunted down" in what was an "overwhelming situation".

"These are civilian people, unarmed, here to do human rights work, to work for peace in Afghanistan - they were not prepared for this situation," he told the BBC.

Mr Dwyer said it was too early to tell how the attack happened or why the UN was targeted, but that the organisation would now take extra security measures.

But he added: "The UN is here to stay. We're here to work with the people to help them achieve peace, and this sort of thing just highlights how important that is."

On 20 March, Pastor Wayne Sapp set light to a copy of the Koran at a church in Florida.

The burning took place under the supervision of Terry Jones, another US pastor who last year drew condemnation over his aborted plan to burn copies of the Koran on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

Protests were held in several other Afghan cities on Friday - which demonstrators in Herat had called a "day of anger", Afghanistan's Noor TV channel reports.

The BBC's Paul Wood in Kabul says Mazar-e Sharif is known to be a relatively peaceful part of the country, but that the Florida incident will raise questions of whether the city will be able to make the transition from foreign to Afghan security control later this year.

Our correspondent says that in a deeply religiously conservative country such as Afghanistan, that act has the power to inflame passions in otherwise peaceful areas.

Mr Jones told the BBC he was not responsible for the actions of the protesters.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12940014

I know some of you will be tempted to blame the pastor, don't. The only people at fault here are the murderers who killed the UN workers.
 
It's simple. Unions collect mandatory dues from government employees (in the case of teachers, for example, $1,000 per year), spend that money on massive campaign contributions to elect the very people that then vote on the union demands for pay, benefits, and working conditions. It's amazing what a simple, relentless 2 or 3 percent per year adds up to over time -- something along the lines of a 40% increase in wages for the same position since 2000. Couple that with all the optimistic estimates of what those nice pension packages would really cost, and you end up with massive financial issues.

There's a reason even FDR and Fiorella LaGuardia were against public (not private) unions. This result was entirely foreseeable.

Steve

The unions are not the only reasons for this happening. And the Unions already agreed to a pay cut and to pay a larger share of their health costs. Why is it ok for them to pass through a tax cut for the rich and then try to screw over the little guy? Don't you think that the taxes lost would go farther to pay down the debt than the pay cuts alone?
 
Jetsetter, we lost an officer. A 53 year old Norwegian officer became the first femal Norwegian combat casualty in war since.. well.. God knows.

Think what you want about the war. But don't knock the troops. They're beyond reproach, generally speaking.

Every death is a tragedy. No matter what or where, more or less.

Pardon my clich? language. I'm drunk.
 
I have never knocked the troops. Those who I knock are the ones pointing their finger at the pastor.
 
Last edited:
I know some of you will be tempted to blame the pastor, don't. The only people at fault here are the murderers who killed the UN workers.

For once, I agree. Partially. If the UN workers were killed, the true responsible are the murderers. If they're actually gone on a killing spree out of a burned book, their mind is simply so perverted that they are beyond any possible human help. For that reason, I think that the motives of the murder were probably more complicated than a bunch of inked sheets of paper, and that the Quran was just a pretext.

However, that doesn't magically cancel the pastor's responsibility. He actually spreaded hate, and now he's getting back what he sowed. Think about it: if someone had killed 20 people with the pretext of a humour sketch, everybody would immediately blame the murderer for being mad, but because the pretext involved was burning a "holy" book (whatever kind of holy might be), then people will shout and scream and argue and get angry, and not among those people that the pastor wanted (in his stupid scheme of things) to annoy, but among those who should be their "allied in the faith".

The pastor has given a credible pretext to a bunch of murderers and spreaded hate among other people, without getting anything good out of his actions if not some cheap temporary relief to his self-built frustrations. BTW, that behaviour is also the exact opposite of what he, as a christian, claims to believe in.

Ending with a quotation (sort of), this story tells me that "morons like" that pastor "should try reading books instead of burinng them".
 
I have never knocked the troops. Those who I knock are the ones pointing their finger at the pastor.
I didn't say you did either. What you saw there was the nomix doctrine. The nomix doctrine is to always support the troops that are out there, even if you don't support the cause. People being killed is never a good thing.

It disheartens me to see people accuse the troops for the mistakes of politicians, like what happened after Vietnam. Even if there were probably a lot of war criminals among those who returned home, most were not. But I digress.

I was just trying to say how tragic the deaths are.
 
Top