You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Lotus Eaters’ category.

This state bill was to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill.   It achieved a roadblock when the idea was broached that mentally ill people would not seek help if it meant the loss of their guns… 

The bill was voted down on this fallacy.

If someone is mentally ill and has guns, there are four possibilities…   Four….

 

Mentally ill with guns and bullets // Mentally ill without guns and bullets.

======================================================================================================

Mentally healthy with guns and bullets // Mentally healthy without guns and bullets

 

 

Of those four possibilities stretching across the plateau of human existence, only one is dangerous to fellow human beings…

A mentally ill person who has guns and bullets….

Now that we have isolated the problem… Let us look at it more closely….. we again divide by the four possibilities…

Mentally ill will get help and use his arsenal // Mentally ill will get help and not use his arsenal
==========================================================================================================
Mentally ill will not get help and use his arsenal // Mentally ill will not get help and not use his arsenal.

Of those four possibilities we now have two that are dangerous to innocent human beings.

Mentally ill who will get help and still use his arsenal, and Mentally ill who do not get help and will still use their arsenal….

Therefore across the panel of humanity, all races, all genders, all classes, every non-accidental shooting death is caused by the hand of a mentally ill person owning a firearm, whether under treatment or not…

Most of the more famous murderers in history have had treatment for their psychosis. Most of those being treated still had access to their firearms, and for what ever reason, choose to use them….

As of this point in history,… as far as I can find on today’s search engines,… there has never been a gun-caused mass murder by someone who had no access to guns…

Again, people in psychiatric care have blown other people away; people without guns, have never done so…..

Only one conclusion from this logical exercise can be gleaned….

If you voted to allow the continence of mentally-ill people owning guns, no matter what flimsy reason you used to assuage your guilt, you cast a vote for an upcoming future mass-murder.

If you voted to disallow the continence of mentally-ill people from owning guns, you took the only step in the right direction that would do anything to stop its re-occurrence…..

People in treatment still kill when they have guns. Without guns, one rids oneself of the problem….

The bottom line: to allow a crazy person to have a full blown arsenal, is madness. To think that allowing him to have a full blown arsenal will make him more likely to seek treatment, is not thinking straight….

There is only one solution; redo HB 88….

In passing I acknowledge that this is an emotional issue for those on both sides. When we use emotions to think, none of us think straight. If ever the time should arise where we as a society make that choice to think straight, then keeping guns out of the hands of mentally ill goes a long way to preventing mass murderers from happening: …. Logically speaking of course.

Advertisements
  • One:  This is Gate’s retirement:  it needs to be big.
  • Two:  if this was a praise Obama book, it would sell very few copies.
  • Three:  Releasing the name-callings did it’s job:  this book is now hyped.
  • Four:  We are only seeing the parts released by the book’s propagandists.
  • Five:   Most of the statements are not news.
  • Six:  The Afghanistan Story was already told by Bernstein.  Gates replays the same conversations.
  • Seven:  It’s a book.  It’s about money. And we know that Gates did work well with Obama as he did with Bush W.
  • Eight:  We now know that Biden-Obama get along far better than did Bush-Cheney….

What is amazing is how quickly the extremists in the media raced to hype the slurs, as if they were given bonuses to make Obama look bad…   As for the rest of us… Yawn.  Based on what I’ve heard,  I don’t think I’m buying the book.  Are you?

it is probably time to discuss this.

For years we have quietly known and accepted the negatives of having an NSA. Things like we need it for our protection, or it makes things safer, tended to overide our fears that they know too much already, and I can’t do anything in private anymore…

We accepted that as progress.

However, when you have an organization so secret, that members of Congress are shocked to find out what it is doing, that no one knows who is authorizing who gets spied upon and what, that when brought before the courts for overstepping the Constitution, it can’t be prosecuted because a) it operates under “secret” laws, b) with “secret operations”, c) authorized by “secret courts” …. it is time to shut the entire operation down.

Why do we have the NSA when we have the CIA and the FBI. The FBI covers domestic spying. The CIA covers international spying. So, unless we find out that there are aliens and the NSA is really running the world while we think otherwise, then it probably ought to go.

I find it interesting that those on the far right, and those on the far left are the most outraged by this disclosure. We’ve been stating that news on this blog after the story was broken back in 2007-8 and not one press person cared. I supposed the AP Story opened their eyes this time. Struggling to put a finger on why, I came up with the theory primarily by looking at Congress, that it is the libertarians on left and right who are against, and the conformist, primarily in the center who are acceptive. So this gives us a split where the bottom third and the top third of the political body are opposed to the middle third… If you look at Congress that is exactly how it splits up. Moderates are pro domestic spying, the libertarians are not.

Probably similar is the theory that those beholden to corporate interests are pro-spying, after all, that is normal in the corporate environment; interoffice spying is not limited by any judicial system because it is deemed to be private. Those aghast, tend to fight corporate intrusion from their original political perspective, either left of right.

What the NSA does, watch everything to discern what is happening to increase its chances of survival, is not new. Intelligence has been the secret success of many an empire. Knowing what someone will do before they do it, is pretty comfortable in a world where in a day, we probably pass within 10 feet of 10,000 people (that includes inside our vehicles).

That is what all governments with the capacity, do. The biggest argument against it, is that it is un-American. Sure we have the “ability” to do it, but do we have the restraint, not to…

America has always been ruled by restraint. When Washington was entreated to be the King, he restrained and said no. When the heads of Europe all bet that Washington would invent a method to stay in power, he restrained, and government turned over peacefully. When the US was left in charge of a broken Europe, it put it back together and went home. The only country to invade another and give it back willingly to its original owners.

We had a scare in Boston a while back. Did the NSA protect us then? It’s a secret, no one knows. In Newtown 26 bodies littered the floor of an elementary school. Did the NSA protect us then? When a gunman burst into Aurora firing into the audience, did the NSA protect us then? When Gabby Gifford took a bullet, where was the NSA? Did the NSA protect us then?

That is the point. We are always in danger. But our personal lives are more at risk if our private information should fall into a competitors hands, than being victim of a terrorist. In Boston just 2 people died. In Newton 26. But each and every one of us, is at risk that selective information from ones past, can be used in secret to smear each and every one of us, should it fall into the wrong hands.

What would happen if we shut the entire agency known as the NSA down? A big nothing. They overstepped. It is not knee-jerking anger to respond “Shut them down right now!” It it calm, cool reasoning tipping the balance, that points out simply that is the right way to go.

Just reading about Nancy’s excellent piece on the trouble brewing in Pleasant Hills.  Not so pleasant these days it seems…

Methanol does explode with one spark in the presence of oxygen.  One explosion lifted a similar tank to these 40 feet into the air… That’s as tall as a four story building!  Or the tallest radio cell phone fake tree in Delaware.

Nancy points to another fact.  This was sneaked in without anyone knowledge.  How? Someone during holiday season put the wrong address on the permit… which was duly approved without being checked out….

Well that rung a bell.  “That was how Lehman Brothers used to operate…”  I guess not being diverted by Christmas trimmings makes one aware of how lax regulatory agencies are during that week of Christian merriment….

Anyways, intrigued.. I looked… Could there possibly be a connection?  Or was this simply a random duplicity?  Most likely a random duplicity.. for sure…. But curiosity would never be satiated, if one never looks…

Nancy reports the company with the permit is TwinCo-Romax.  The Business Week dossier states that they specialize in  the manufacture and distribution of automotive aftermarket products…

The company was incorporated in 2005 and is based in Medina, Minnesota. It has distribution centers in Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, as well as a production plant in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. As of August 31, 2012, Twinco Romax, LLC operates as a subsidiary of DYK Automotive, LLC.

First of September 2012?  Not yet a year… 

So who is DYK Automotive?

Again the Business Week snapshot…. 

DYK Automotive, LLC operates as a automotive aftermarket distributor. The company offers branded and private label packaged oil, chemicals, parts, and accessories. The company was incorporated in 2009 and is headquartered in Memphis, Tennessee….

This appears that this Memphis run automotive business recently bought out the Minnesota based automotive business.  However on their website, the acquisition of  TwinCo- Romax takes place on August 13, 2012, not August 31, 2012.  One also sees they more recently acquired another company this past February.  February 13th, incidentally.  They took control of Robert Elgart & Son, Inc., in neighboring Philadelphia.  Robert Elgart has been servicing the automotive industry since 1948 and is a wholesale distributor of automotive supplies. The company sells primarily to medium independent automotive supply stores, as well as carwash, marine, industrial and aviation customers.

So DYK has bought up two of America’s primary markets in the automotive aftercare business in less than half a year.  Certainly those are not cash transactions.  They involve leveraged financing.

A search for DYK in Newark Delaware points to their giant warehouse on Pencader Blvd, in Glasgow, (Nancy’s backyard).  This is DYK’s fourth distribution center and the first in the Northeast.  It brags upon its location as being close to 95, and being in Pencader Plaza, I’m sure it pays zero Delaware tolls for its use of that road…. It’s trucks get off at Newark exit in Maryland, and get on at the Newark exit in Delaware.  The Pencader plant, listed as a “manufacturing and distribution center”, has been operating since late 2011.

On February 21st of this year, DYK announced the opening of its Wilmington manufacturing plant.  That would be the storage tanks in Pleasant Hills.  Ernest Felici and John Birmingham of the Wilmington, Del. office of Cushman & Wakefield were principals in the arrangements.  Cushman & Wakefield specialize in surreptitious acquisitions. . “Given the product storage, it became difficult to find municipal cooperation in our initial search. Newark, Del. provided the right combination in terms of the right building and the ability to meet local code requirements.”

If one looks the corporate roster of DYK one sees its principal is Don Youngblood, CEO and President. He is listed as having no cross relationships.  However his Vice President, Chris Crosby, does have one relationship and that is with Dobbs Management Service, LLC.

Dobbs Management, just like DYK, Cushman & Wakefield, is also based in Memphis. Chris Crosby is also Vice President of Dobbs Management. This person is connected to 3 Board Members in 3 different organizations across 5 different industries.

In his brief bio, is this statement…

“Mr. Crosby joined Dobbs Management Service in August 2005. Mr. Crosby has a combination of investment banking, strategy consulting and operations experience. He worked in the Mergers and Acquisitions Group at Lehman Brothers..”

Ah ha. and there you have it… Thought so.

Did You Ask Me What It Was Like?
Right Click for Full Image.

Reading a recent critique of the debates, it focused on a fact. Millions of Americans are not enjoying the benefits of this economy. Romney had the lucky position to point out all that was wrong, without the responsibility of finding any solution to fix it.

His line, “bring down the rates, broaden the base.” simply has not worked. It didn’t work in Reagan’s time. It didn’t work for Bush HW. It didn’t work for Bush W. It is called: “trickle down”.

Clinton, who practiced kavipsian Economics, raised the rates, causing profits to revert back into the economy stimulating even more growth; that growth grew people’s incomes. That is the key. People will take lower wages if they know they will grow out of them. But ever since Republican Tax Rates went into effect, wage growth immediately stopped. 99% of Americans are earning exactly what they did in 2000. It’s been twelve years since wages for the 99%, increased. Higher taxes takes away all incentive for any employer to pay his people more.

Here is the funny part. To actually do something about the economy, President Obama has to eradicate the Republicans. Get rid of them. Make them a non player. Republicans and republicans alone, are the reason the economy is in such a slump.

Let’s review.

Republicans fought the stimulus.
Republicans fought the car buying incentive.
Republicans fought infrastructure development.
Republicans fought giving Veterans jobs upon returning to USA after fighting for years.
Republicans fought lowering insurance rates.
Republicans fought lowering gas price legislation.
Republicans fought regulating big banks from literally stealing your money.
Republicans fought against balancing the budget.
Republicans fought against payroll increases for all Americans.
Republicans fought against lowering medical costs.
Republicans fought against a better economy.
Republicans fought against hiring more policemen.
Republicans fought against hiring more fireman.
Republicans fought against hiring more school teachers.
Republicans fought against building roads and bridges that were sorely needed.
Republicans fought against not defaulting on the US Dollar.
Republicans fought against strengthening America Abroad.
Republicans fought against stopping corporate corruption.
Republicans fought against fighting wealthy tax cheats.
Republicans fought against closing the loopholes Romney used to get rich.
Republicans fought against raising wages for all Americans.
Republicans fought against legislation that allowed workers to ask for more money without being fired.

yeah. There is a reason the economy is bad. It is called the Republican Party.

Having “No Republicans” equals massive investment back into our economy. The formula for a successful America is…..

NO REPUBLICANS EVER ELECTED AGAIN = MASSIVE AMERICA ECONOMIC GROWTH

So Obama, you are at fault according to Mitt Romney and the Conservative Cheer-leading squad… Because you didn’t get rid of Republicans… Shame on you!!!!

I guess it is up to us, to do so if we EVER want our economy back.

If not… I guess every vote for a Republican is a vote in support of Communist China…..


Right click to open full image… Pictograph Courtesy of Viral..

So, can someone tell me again, why we shouldn’t tax the rich, and instead, balance the budget on the backs of everyone else?…….

I seem to be missing that little detail where that all makes sense……

.

WTF?photo by SUCHAT PEDERSON, News Journal

Pulled this comment out from a response to Mike’s Merit Bound Alley, regarding the War on Drugs. I’ve noticed this topic, particularly Mandatory Drug Sentencing , has been getting attention lately. Below is the comment. My apologies to those who have seen it before.

I have been working on this problem for a while.

The solution came to me in a Wal*mart. To keep myself from falling asleep while shopping with my wife, i challenged myself to think through our drug policy and find a workable solution.

For some reason I decided to look around and create a thought model that said, what if everything here was a recreational drug, how would that work……….

Simply put. ( the real argument is much fuller) Q & A style.

Q: Drugs are addictive. Addicts MUST have it
A: So is food. We don’t kill for it.

Q: Would you kill for food if someone was preventing you from getting it?
A: Hell yes.

Q: Drugs are bad. They distort reality.
A: So does mixing alcohol and television. But we survive.

Q: What is the fastest way to stop smuggling.
A: Take away the profit from it.

Q: How can one do that?
A. Put the government in control of selling drugs below cost.

Q: How would that help?
A: Which would you prefer, driving down to Market and 25th and buying from some hooded undesirable, or standing forever at a Wal*mart checkout line?

Q. That’s crazy. You would sell crack, coke, heroin, weed in a store?
A. Not only that, we would sell it for CHEAP

Q Then everyone would be an addict.
A. Does everyone sniff glue? It’s cheap. Does everyone inhale hairspray? it’s cheap. Does everyone smoke banana peels? They are not expensive. Price or accessibility are not the reasons fewer people use drugs.

Q. What about those who become addicted…….
A. That will be part of the social cost, funded by taxes. They want treated, we treat them.

Q Drugs will weaken our society.
A And alcohol won’t.? Man has survived on alcohol since the original drink. Society still functions. Many today survive on illegal substances. Their lives, jobs, reputations are not in jeopardy.

Q if drugs are free, why would someone work………Just lay around and have someone bring you food, clean you up, sort of like Tennyson’s “Lotus Eaters.”
A. Currently the one’s who lay around and get high, are the ones without jobs or responsibilities. Those with responsibilities still use drugs, but impose their own restraints. “No, I got to work tomorrow.”

Q: What makes you so sure that society will not collapse if the government sponsors drugs real cheaply.

A. Suppose I overdo it and one day get fired. I’m a loser. But everyone else who sees me get fired, tells themselves they need to keep their habits under control. Society will survive because someone will always be there to replace a loser

Q. Drugs are bad for health.
A And tobacco isn’t. This is America.

Q You must use drugs to want to legalize them so much?
A. No, they scare me. My gut emotional response is to keep doing what we have been doing. Keep them out. This is a thought process designed at solving a problem using a series of models and predicting the outcomes.

Q So you are ignorant of the effect that drugs have on people since you abstain from them?
A. I am the last real person in “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” Everyone else uses drugs in society but me, and I have to accept it and fit in to survive. (Excuse me, I have to go check out that discordant shrieking noise outside……….)

Q How will this plan stop violence, smuggling, murders, police corruption currently associated with drugs?
A. Imagine you own a cartel and have 3 Billion dollars tied up in drugs. The next day and forever more you can’t sell it for a penny……How do you pay off the cops, how do you pay your thugs, how do you pay your runners, how do you pay your assassins? More likely they will turn and come after you.when they realize you cannot pay them.

Q: How much would this cost.
A Much less than we are spending now.on prevention.

Q What bothers you most about this idea.
A It is too conservative for it uses the market place to solve a social problem. And that scares the hell out of me…………………