chuck kottke

Wallaby Day!!;) If the wallaby sees her shadow, then 6 more weeks of broiling hot weather?:P

Favorite Junk Food? Well, that could only be one thing. Chocolate!:P Favorite Veggie?

:rolleyes:What??

Another message to the President: more on basic rights & less on the U.S. Supreme Court.>> Dear Mr. President, When asked what sort of government has been created, Benjamin Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it." But as George Mason insisted, the inclusion of guaranteed rights is an essential element of protecting our natural rights as citizens, given the historically proven track record of abuses of power at the hands of tyrant kings & majorities over individuals & minorities. If we look at what protects the whole foundation - all our cherished rights, all the cornerstones of government laid out in the Constitution - it is but one thing - the Right to Fair Elections. That includes the right to vote, the right for all votes to be counted on an equal basis and by impartial means, and the right to fair contests for office. Of the founding documents which most clearly explains the basis for our rights, the Virginia Declaration of Rights stands out as the blueprint for the Bill of Rights. Section 15 makes it clear in its assertion "That no free government, or the blessing of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles." With the interests of the nation and citizens in mind, I am asking you to protect with good measure our right to fair contests for office. For without a secure safeguard against the undue influence of a moneyed few, our remaining rights and institutions will become ever closer to instruments of tyranny, as we become peasants in a feudal system of hierarchical control. What this Supreme Court has decided under its 5-member majority is a strike against our basic right to fair elections. To restore justice within the process, I feel we all must support and defend equitable races for office, and inherent in that is the need to limit the influence of money on outcomes. Office seekers should be supported by broad swaths of the American public, and thus beholden to the will of the people, not to a limited few with the means to tip the outcomes in their favor, and garner special privileges in the process. Please put your full weight into measures to prevent this decision from eroding our democracy, and reverse the undue influence of money in candidate races. We are counting on you like never before. With All Sincerity, -Chuck.

:(Sorry to hear that Nick! I know what that feels like - all that work, and *poof*, gone in a flash.. Keep the thoughts handy - I'll gladly ponder what you have to say next time around.;)

Thoughts.. Well, by mid century is soon enough, and what will solve the problem in Japan then? Money is a fluid in the economy - fair exchange makes sense, but when there's more older people than young people, then unless efficiency and automation goes up a lot, it seems that too few young and too many older citizens means breakdowns in the social fabric somewhere.. Cutting government expenditures makes sense if the same service can be rendered more inexpensively to the citizens of Japan, distributed equitably, and with the same or better quality.. but there is a limit to savings there as well. The more balance in population replacement there is, the more stable the economy and country would be. - Or that's what I am thinking - my suggestion wasn't intended to be immoral Nick, just practical. Perhaps, as they are attempting to do, the Japanese will have robots serving their elders, and thus the problem will be abated that way..? Sounds 'sci-fi' too much to me, but perhaps it can be made to reduce the need for family members to be pulled away from other productive work, as that is part of the problem with the economics in other nations already.. I only know the question, and possible answers - but the whole picture is a bit of a mystery to me as well.. Like most things, it's a nuanced answer that is needed, with great sensitivity to those affected. If there's one thing we need more of in this world, it's sensitivity and sensibility towards one-another. :laugh3:Yes, if the Japanese government starts to sell treasury bills like we do, we would run out of buyers in China! Then what?? Maybe if we get enough medicines and nets to African states' citizens, invest in their economies, drive a better bargain with the IMF and the world bank (I'm dreaming at this point) so they get a fairer trade deal, and then they'll start to grow and prosper, buying market investments.. If China can do it, why not the whole of Africa? I don't see any real shortages in the world, only shortages of real solutions and assistance to the impasses presented by poverty and inequity. Japan, for instance, could be the leader in robotic mining technology to retrieve ocean-floor minerals - if done properly, the few necessary uses for rare resources can be supplied in ample quantity from the ocean bottom, and Japan would no longer feel insecure in terms of natural resource availability. Makes sense actually in terms of expertise as well - robotics, process expertise, ocean vessels, ocean harbor access, and manufacturing base demands to be met - things Japan does well in! .. Just musings..

Fair Elections Fair Elections - where we need to start to get our government back.

>> So, the solution then is to have more children! By then, they will be a vibrant part of the work force, making all those problems less extreme.. ?

I think to take from what's causing more problems, amassing too much concentrated power (per Eisenhower's recommendation), and diverting a portion of that money to really addressing global poverty, inequity, and building real human relationships will change the equation, since we're talking about a whopping 57% of the Federal budget! Cutting some in the waste or inefficiency of other areas makes sense as well, but I differ as to degree. Knowing people who are truly disabled and unable to get social security disability, it seems that the easiest to cut will be the truly needy, as their voices are ineffective in government (because they are not a bloc, and do not contribute to political campaigns). True - the Japanese people are incredibly good savers, and very careful with their money. But the suggestion I keep hearing is that the Japanese government did not spend enough to get the Japanese economy working again, which might make sense if consumer confidence were down, and there was excess unused capacity in the economy. I think spending on things that eventually improve economic efficiency will actually increase tax revenue beyond what they cost, if the spending is done intelligently. President Obama speaks about investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency, and if he has the will and support to make good on that promise, spending in that area would translate into an enormous boost in the economy, due to much less need to spend on energy. Efficiency gains to be had are enormous, and the only real loss is less heat. But we shall see what happens! I cannot fathom the super-wealthy needing to keep that much money from the government, if the consequences in the past were a sudden deficit at the hands of President Bush, causing us to sell more bonds to investors in China, incur a huge debt load, etc. If the extremely wealthy paid a bit more, the 99% of everyone else paid less, & we cut defense spending in half, there would suddenly be that many more consumers dollars to spend, if we concurrently cut the working classes taxes. Then, with businesses strong and confidence in the economy strong, I think everyone would profit more in the long run. Y/N? Government has been able to do things cheaply and efficiently. Medicare and Social Security, and the Postal Service are three examples, despite their flaws, that are run with good comparative efficiency. I think it all depends on whether or not there are duplications of services, lack or presence of incentives (merit being one incentive in government sector jobs), good management, and a generally good plan from the start. But where there seems to be graft and corruption are in those areas where massive profits can be made on no-bid contracts, kick-backs, and overcharging for products or services. Which leads to defense contracts, which calls into question how our campaigns are financed, and what is expected in return.. hmm.. For example, Representative Kagen was on a committee to hear testimony concerning a ship built by a contractor for the Navy. The problem was, the ship broke in two. The contractor didn't want to pay for the mistake, and other congressmen were reluctant to ask for the contractor to return the money. Kagen did ask, and got the money back - but he doesn't owe anybody any favors, and there's no really big military contractors in his district. Hence, the central problem of campaign finance.. So, in which areas are there inefficiencies, and why? Realistically we cannot shrink the government down to nothing, so we have to make it workable, equitable, and as efficient as is possible..

It's just them being silly to spook ya out!:laugh3: Besides, it's great music - I wouldn't worry about some 'backwards' message things... I think what they were trying to get across is that anyone trying to buy their way to heaven is really not going to heaven - hence the subliminal messages.. it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a fat man to get to heaven..

I thought about that, but then I think he is comfortable in his position as President, so I try and communicate on a more "human" level.. Perhaps you are right - it all depends on how he feels about it.. When I communicate with my Senator he prefers to be called Russ, but then that's an individual choice on the matter. I will give it more thought next time I write.;) Thanks!

Hello Nick! Got busy writing Senator Feingold, the co-author of campaign finance reform law which, diluted as it was, is now complete melt water. He does read his letters, sometime aloud on the floor of the Senate, so perhaps at least the clubby Senate will have to listen to what the Citizens have to say (even if it does only one thing - to shame them into some sort of action..). Obama - yes, he says the right stuff, and then attenuates his actions. I wish he would fight harder on our behalf, and then compromise at a level where real progress can be made - but you're right - he needs to carry the staff of progress forward, and let the rest sort out their part in it. But who knows - I do get responses with the official embossed letter-head, so maybe some of our letters are getting read? That alone would be a shocker! You're right too on the reason why he's getting hammered in the polls - to fight with all your might and fall short from the resistance of others is one thing, but to not press harder for reform & justice (regarding Wall Street) is part of what has lowered those numbers. The poor economy doesn't help, and he's not to blame for that imho., but the repair of the problem falls short - if even it could be called "repaired". Once again, those that caused the problem perpetuate it.. Budget freeze - 17% - hmm. Sounds like NASA will take a hit on their lunar missions. I just think the problem there again is the money-kickback business - the more power, the less likely it will be trimmed - so then they trim everything else quite often, damaging those areas that do us the most good. The squeaky wheels get the grease - the rest loose their bearings. Maybe government spending helps, but more needs to be put into things that in the end will improve the economy - bridges and rail upgrades are fantastic - I have to give him credit there - but spending heavily on military pork-barrel projects makes no sense at all - but that's one of those "squeaky wheels".. Lots of power to contend with. A renegotiating of trade agreements makes sense too - if we loose / have lost much of our middle class, then the consumers loose their ability both to find gainful employment, and to buy products, slowing the economic recovery. But I'm no economic expert - only what I see happening here with piston plants, paper mills, farms, ship building, etc. The gambling markets were rigged so obviously - you could see this all coming right down the pike, and yet nothing ever happens until the train derails..

Here's one I've just sent off - I would appreciate a dialog, to better understand the matter, and for the synthesis of more coherent communications with all three main branches of government (writing the Supreme Court, I would want to be more tactful, and less ambiguous - perhaps some of the letters may even get read!):laugh3: Dear Barack, Congratulations on delivering an excellent speech, and for setting down in unambiguous form your dissatisfaction with the Supreme Court's judicial activism, it's decision considering corporations virtual persons, and the parlaying of that into allowing campaign as spending by special interests, especially corporate soft money. It is clear that corporations are not persons, and as Justice Stevens put it, "although they make significant contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it." and he goes on to say, "Because they may be managed and controlled by non-residents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters." - "Our lawmakers have a compelling Constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races." What the 5 member majority has done is engage in judicial activism - the case was a narrow question centered around whether 'Citizen's United' had a right to use the funds in its treasury to pay for broadcasts during the 30-day period before an election. What they have done in expanding the scope of the question is clearly a political move, and an unconstitutional one at that. In looking back at the origin of our Bill of Rights - through the Virgina Declaration of Rights - Section 7, which makes it clear in my mind that what this court's majority has done is in defiance of our natural rights as humans. As it is written, "That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without the consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights, and ought not be exercised." "That no free government, or the blessings of Liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. No matter what those 5 "conservative" justices say, corporations are not people with the right to speak in our public square any more than alligators are people. In considering our rights as free men and women, we have inherently, in the collective sense, a right to fair elections and fair contests for office. As crucial as the right to vote, the right to a fair elections process is essential in obtaining, for all citizens, honest governance & honest courts. The product of fair elections ultimately is the protection of those rights we hold so dear, including the right to speak freely, to publish freely, and to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. The ninth amendment clearly states, "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Clearly, the right to fair contests for office is a right not enumerated in the Constitution, but it is a very basic and essential right underpinning the Republic, our democratic institutions, and those Liberties we all hold so dear. And inherent in protecting that right to fair contests for office is a guarantee that all qualifying candidates have equal opportunity to be heard in the modern public squares of our time - whether that be on the radio, on TV, or over the Internet. Since the persuasive power of money, both in purchasing broadcast time & content, and in financing candidate campaigns affects election outcomes, and since a wealthy minority of citizens have the ability to contribute, either directly or indirectly, well above what the average citizen can afford to contribute, clearly then that influence translates (on average) into election success for any candidate receiving more of these major contributions, assuming all other funding being equal. It is all but a foregone conclusion that, in return for financing campaigns, preferential treatment is desired by & given to these contributors, many of whom are corporately backed. This would be fine if it were just for galas and cocktail parties, but it is not. It has deeply affected our government and its ability to govern justly and properly. It is for this reason that greater and equal public access to the airwaves during an election year should be granted. The broadcast spectrum is part of the commons - it belongs to all of us. Broadcasters have the privilege of using certain frequencies of the spectrum, and for that privilege they owe ample airtime back to the community and to this nation, especially for candidate messages, on an equal basis, and without charge, during an election year. In the end, even they benefit from this returned air time, as protecting natural rights via honest candidate races & the resulting improvement in honest legislators helps the broadcasters just as it helps all citizens in the United States. Thanks for giving this letter some thoughtful reading on your part, and I am looking forward to your insightful reply! With Many Thanks, -Chuck.

Carla, that's a great quote! How true it is..

It's lovely outside! 0 degrees Fahrenheit, and a FULL MOON! HOOWWWOOOO!!:)

The 5 member majority of the Supreme Court is acting daffy - as in daffy duck! Corporations are not people - they're alligators!! (some nice alligators exist, but they all need to feed, and boy, look out when they do!). I'm thinking I will send the letter, and send it to the rest as well - chance favors the prepared mind, and even an electron occasionally quantum tunnels through solid steel..

Hot, Sunny, 36F today. Way too hot for January!!:P

To win over people, all it takes is being real, being understanding, and doing what is right on a human level. Maybe splitting the Defense Dept. into the Department of Peace, and another department of Defense, would really help? Not novel, but sounds more plausible every day.. 57% of the budget by one estimate for defense, war, and veterans affairs.. One 'Apache' helicopter @43 million smackaroos could buy a lot of basics for Afghan reconstruction, and offering aid, respect, jobs, and training, and getting to know Afghans is the best way, I think. And ending poverty, assisting those in need everywhere makes so much more sense. Haitians need more help, and a complete chance at a new lease on life. Given better circumstances and a chance, improvement with we citizens usually happens naturally. If trillions have gone into defense over the decades, imagine what that could be doing if it were focused on solving global poverty? But the problem seems to center around getting honest representation, education, and a movement to bring people together to work on it.. If in each district, we started with a BIG carrot - an organization that gathered numerous small donations, and offered this big 'carrot' to any taker, if they didn't take big lumps of money from a powerful few; or a huge movement at the grass roots with watchdogs, so that the issue could not be thwarted, and by the need to win over such a large voting block, the political candidates couldn't dodge the issue?? Or both simultaneously? It's at the core of everything, and affects many nations, especially ours.. We believe in a new policy; it's not a matter of if, but when will we make it happen.

Dark and cool, about -11C.:cool: Sounds like someone's in a roasting environment!!:rolleyes:

Sleep - make sure you get plenty of rest - that's when we solve problems!!

Wild Rice!

Thanks Cresty Tree Panda!:) I think you're sweet, and I hope you start feeling better real soon.;)

Well did you take an aptitude test? That might help. Also, look at where future employment is headed, and take an educated guess - lots of things to choose from, but when you start at the university, usually there's general courses before you need to choose a major (US at least). Just express your true feelings and appreciation for the generous scholarship money, and that you will do your very best to excel in whichever field you choose. ? It's a good start - is this scholarship from some group, from the university, from a company, or a private institution?

Aww.. :sleep: Get lots of rest, drink plenty of fluids, and you'll get better.. :hug: