As Iraq government collapses, US deaths are surging - AMERICAblog: A great nation deserves the truth
I have a plan for Iraq, that is better than any I have heard so far.
First of all, take a look at the situation on the ground. There is violence inside Iraq, but it isn't everywhere in Iraq. There are some places that are more dangerous than others. Make a list, with the most dangerous at the bottom of the list and the least at the top.
Start at the top of the list, and working with local leaders, and state level leaders develop a plan to move forces into the area to eliminate remaining threats. With a peace settled, hand the power over to local control, and with it the security of that state. Then pull out of it completely.
Take those troops and send most of them to the next state on the list. In the same pattern, mop up remaining terrorists or insurgents and turn over control to the local leaders. One by one as you do down the list, and each state is cleaned of violence and handed over to local authorities troops pull out of those areas. If there is a flare up, and the locals are pinned down, resources may be used to assist them - but no more troops should be sent back to those areas. As you go down the list, send some home every time a state is cleared and send some to the next state.
As the states get more violent towards the end of the list, the troops available will increase since they have been relieved of security duty in more peaceful states. While this is taking place, encourage the local leaders to start to work together, it should be remembered America was not a union at its birth. America was 13 different colonies who came together to form a government. As each state is cleared and troops pull out, elections can begin to appoint someone not only to serve in the local offices, but a representative to a Iraq convention that would begin to form a new government. This representative must be elected by the citizens on a state by state basis.
When the last state is cleared, pack the bags and bring the troops home. We can't make the Iraqis talk, and we can't make them solve their problems. We can give them the space to work in and this seems like the best way to do that. It serves to secure the country and to show them they have to step up and take control of their own destiny.
Showing posts with label Spin Zone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Spin Zone. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
The Spin Zone
I haven't done a spin zone in a while. But I am watching CNN Pipeline, and there is an African-American, talking about the racial aspect of the Michael Vick dog fighting trial. The man on CNN said that black men are most likely to be on TV if they are breaking the law or playing sports. Is it just me, or is it ironic to talk about black people not being on TV, while you are doing an interview for a major news network. I think his presumption is clearly false.
He does on to talk about why the most hated athletes in America are always black men. He goes on to list a number of athletes over the last couple years that have found themselves in legal trouble and gotten a lot of news coverage. He may have a point here, but it should be noted that African-Americans are the majority of professional athletes.
The last thing is that he talks about the discussion that another African-American on the show brought up about African-American culture. The first speaker claimed that you don't have people talking about the culture of while womyn when Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan get DUIs. This is false, a number of people have asked what the condition of our young womyn are, and are they in danger.
CNN is claiming that there is a racial divide between those who support Vick and those who are for him being kicked off the team.
He does on to talk about why the most hated athletes in America are always black men. He goes on to list a number of athletes over the last couple years that have found themselves in legal trouble and gotten a lot of news coverage. He may have a point here, but it should be noted that African-Americans are the majority of professional athletes.
The last thing is that he talks about the discussion that another African-American on the show brought up about African-American culture. The first speaker claimed that you don't have people talking about the culture of while womyn when Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan get DUIs. This is false, a number of people have asked what the condition of our young womyn are, and are they in danger.
CNN is claiming that there is a racial divide between those who support Vick and those who are for him being kicked off the team.
Friday, June 1, 2007
The Spin Zone
Hugh Hewitt: Can Any Immigration Bill Be Saved?
As a nation I think we stand a long way from an agreement on what we want and expect from immigration. There are people who are afraid of the lose of the American culture, you might call them racists, and some of them might be, but some are just afriad of the unknown. There are people who don't want to see masses of spanish speaking people coming across the border because they fear that what is American, will never be the same. They are right, every new group changes who America is, until now most of the new groups have come from Europe, and even then they were feared.
There are also those who want the workers to be able to work, and then send them home. I think for them the fear is that a flood of low skilled workers coming into America will take away the jobs of Americans. There are a couple points to be made about this. When more people come into a community, it is true that they enter the job market as competitors. What people seem to miss is that they also enter the community in the form of shoppers going to the stores and buying houses. They don't only take jobs, they create jobs as they shop and live.
There is an honest concern for the people who are coming here. When you make it criminal to cross borders, only criminals cross borders. Many of the people who come across the desert face hardships from nature. On top of that they are being used by trafficers to make money, and the migrants have often been harmed by the people they trusted to bring them here. They will abandon them in the middle of the desert alone, steal from them and kill them if it suits their needs. It isn't fair to make people have to engage in this just to do what all of our families did.
Terror is a concern, how do we allow those into the country who are hard workers and want to build up the community and block those who would harm us. The problem is harder when you take into consideration that many of these people come from countries with little of a record keeping system. They may not have the paper work that is standard amond Americans. Is it fair to block someone from entering the country just because they came from a poor village with no hospital. On the other hand these are people who could be hiding who they are. There have been reports of migrants from the middle east using embasies in arab countries to gain access to Latin America and then coming north to the US.
There is even an enviromental issue to be considered. It isn't often talked about but if there were a fence that was built from the gulf to the ocean along the border a number of migratory animals (the nonhumyn kind), would face difficulties. As humyns we forget that there are other animals that live on this planet and we should think about them when we take actions.
This bill is dead, to be honest I didn't like it so I am glad. I have little faith that the nation can find the balance that is dearly needed to bring peace to this issue.
"Another day of interviews and calls, and my overwhelming sense is that the
immigration bill as drafted is as dead as dead can be. The president's speech on
Tuesday had the effect of throwing gas on the flames, and the anger has
multiplied, and it isn't nativist in the least.
Could the bill be saved?
Only if the Republican leadership comes back with a package of amendments which
it announces beforehand and insists be voted on serially and all of which must
be adopted if cloture is to be invoked on the final amended version. The choice
before the Democrats is whether they will accept genuine enforcement (the whole
fence first, big hikes in federal law enforcement beyond the Border Patrol, a
burden of proof requirement on non-Spanish speaking immigrants from countries
with jihadist networks and perhaps even for gang-age Spanish speakers etc.) What
happened over the past ten days was a huge shift against the bill so that the
amendment package must be real reform of the reform or the dead end will be
reached. John McCain knew what he was doing when he demanded a jam down --the
bill has lost support with every day of scrutiny."
As a nation I think we stand a long way from an agreement on what we want and expect from immigration. There are people who are afraid of the lose of the American culture, you might call them racists, and some of them might be, but some are just afriad of the unknown. There are people who don't want to see masses of spanish speaking people coming across the border because they fear that what is American, will never be the same. They are right, every new group changes who America is, until now most of the new groups have come from Europe, and even then they were feared.
There are also those who want the workers to be able to work, and then send them home. I think for them the fear is that a flood of low skilled workers coming into America will take away the jobs of Americans. There are a couple points to be made about this. When more people come into a community, it is true that they enter the job market as competitors. What people seem to miss is that they also enter the community in the form of shoppers going to the stores and buying houses. They don't only take jobs, they create jobs as they shop and live.
There is an honest concern for the people who are coming here. When you make it criminal to cross borders, only criminals cross borders. Many of the people who come across the desert face hardships from nature. On top of that they are being used by trafficers to make money, and the migrants have often been harmed by the people they trusted to bring them here. They will abandon them in the middle of the desert alone, steal from them and kill them if it suits their needs. It isn't fair to make people have to engage in this just to do what all of our families did.
Terror is a concern, how do we allow those into the country who are hard workers and want to build up the community and block those who would harm us. The problem is harder when you take into consideration that many of these people come from countries with little of a record keeping system. They may not have the paper work that is standard amond Americans. Is it fair to block someone from entering the country just because they came from a poor village with no hospital. On the other hand these are people who could be hiding who they are. There have been reports of migrants from the middle east using embasies in arab countries to gain access to Latin America and then coming north to the US.
There is even an enviromental issue to be considered. It isn't often talked about but if there were a fence that was built from the gulf to the ocean along the border a number of migratory animals (the nonhumyn kind), would face difficulties. As humyns we forget that there are other animals that live on this planet and we should think about them when we take actions.
This bill is dead, to be honest I didn't like it so I am glad. I have little faith that the nation can find the balance that is dearly needed to bring peace to this issue.
Friday, May 25, 2007
The Spin Zone
r blog:
I will tell you why they are terrorists and we are not, and it is a simple answer. The answer is intentions.
I would agree that Iraq has turned into a deadly place for Americans and for Iraqis, I dispute your numbers, but numbers aren't that important. You are claiming in your statement that the American troops in Iraq operating under the orders of the men who sent them there are terrorists. I know you say that it is only the people who sent them, but that would be like saying the Ussama Bin Laden is a terrorist, but the men who flew the planes into the twin towers aren't. Either way, if the leaders are terrorist or the troops are terrorist or both in your view, you are wrong.
When America invaded Iraq, it did so with the intention of setting the Iraqis free and eliminating a threat in the region. There was a concern in a number of countries and the UN about the presence of weapons of mass destruction, the intention of the leadership was to stop Saddam and these weapons from being a threat. I didn't support the start of the war, because I don't think that they went through the right steps. Taking down Saddam was something that needed to be done, not only for American interests, but the region as a whole and Israel. Saddam was sending aid to the families of bombers who killed Israelis. Our intentions were not to go there and create chaos and kill Iraqis. That has happened and it is sad that it has happened.
Now lets look at the terrorists in Iraq and around the globe. What are their intentions. They have said that they intend to extend the rule of Islamic law to all lands that have ever been ruled by Islam. They have strove to create chaos and death in Iraq, so that America will fail. The number of people died not because Americans attacked them, but because they were attacked by terrorists. The intentions of the terrorists when the flew the planes into the world trade center was to kill as many people as they could. The intention of the terrorists reminds me of a line in a Leonard Cohen song, "what eve makes a soldier sad, will make a killer smile". Well the soldiers in Iraq which are American and Iraqi are saddened by the death and the chaos. The killers in Iraq, which are the terrorists are happy about it, they smile, because it makes them feel important, like they are winning.
American stands for freedom, and it does a poor job of doing so sometimes. Terrorists stand for fear and control and the extermination of those who stand against them. I don't see how you can be so blind to think that there is any connection between the terrorists, and American troops. I don't even think that the President of the United States, who I don't agree with, should be called a terrorist because his intentions have never been death and chaos. When you come out with questions of this nature it inflames the public debate and does nothing to assist us in finding truth.
"O’DONNELL: …… I just want to say something. 655,000 Iraqi civilians are
dead. Who are the terrorists?
HASSELBECK: Who are the terrorists?
O’DONNELL: 655,000 Iraqis — I’m saying you have to look, we invaded –
HASSELBECK: Wait, who are you calling terrorists now? Americans?
O’DONNELL: I’m saying if you were in Iraq, and the other country, the United
States, the richest in the world, invaded your country and killed 655,000 of
your citizens, what would you call us?
HASSELBECK: Are we killing their
citizens or are their people also killing their citizens?
O’DONNELL: We’re
invading a sovereign nation, occupying a country against the U.N."
I will tell you why they are terrorists and we are not, and it is a simple answer. The answer is intentions.
I would agree that Iraq has turned into a deadly place for Americans and for Iraqis, I dispute your numbers, but numbers aren't that important. You are claiming in your statement that the American troops in Iraq operating under the orders of the men who sent them there are terrorists. I know you say that it is only the people who sent them, but that would be like saying the Ussama Bin Laden is a terrorist, but the men who flew the planes into the twin towers aren't. Either way, if the leaders are terrorist or the troops are terrorist or both in your view, you are wrong.
When America invaded Iraq, it did so with the intention of setting the Iraqis free and eliminating a threat in the region. There was a concern in a number of countries and the UN about the presence of weapons of mass destruction, the intention of the leadership was to stop Saddam and these weapons from being a threat. I didn't support the start of the war, because I don't think that they went through the right steps. Taking down Saddam was something that needed to be done, not only for American interests, but the region as a whole and Israel. Saddam was sending aid to the families of bombers who killed Israelis. Our intentions were not to go there and create chaos and kill Iraqis. That has happened and it is sad that it has happened.
Now lets look at the terrorists in Iraq and around the globe. What are their intentions. They have said that they intend to extend the rule of Islamic law to all lands that have ever been ruled by Islam. They have strove to create chaos and death in Iraq, so that America will fail. The number of people died not because Americans attacked them, but because they were attacked by terrorists. The intentions of the terrorists when the flew the planes into the world trade center was to kill as many people as they could. The intention of the terrorists reminds me of a line in a Leonard Cohen song, "what eve makes a soldier sad, will make a killer smile". Well the soldiers in Iraq which are American and Iraqi are saddened by the death and the chaos. The killers in Iraq, which are the terrorists are happy about it, they smile, because it makes them feel important, like they are winning.
American stands for freedom, and it does a poor job of doing so sometimes. Terrorists stand for fear and control and the extermination of those who stand against them. I don't see how you can be so blind to think that there is any connection between the terrorists, and American troops. I don't even think that the President of the United States, who I don't agree with, should be called a terrorist because his intentions have never been death and chaos. When you come out with questions of this nature it inflames the public debate and does nothing to assist us in finding truth.
Friday, May 18, 2007
The Spin Zone
Rainbow Woman looking for her man for travel/gatherings/life!:
Hello
You sound like a beautiful womyn, and if I were still at the point in my life that I were free to travel I assure you I would love nothing more than to wake up in your arms every morning. However I am at a different stage in life now.
I would advise you though that Rainbowland is the wrong place to look for what you claim to be seeking. At the next gathering pay attention to all the single mothers. I am not saying that it is wrong to be a single mother, but that it is wrong for a man to have children that he does not support. The philosophy of the rainbow family is hedonistic, and really does not support the meaningful love the you are talking about. I know at this point I sound like a Christian, I am not, I have just found like you that free love isn't love and love shouldn't be free.
To be honest I don't know what my intention is in writing you, except I feel that in some way we are looking for the same thing. For me I found that the culture of sex that is the Rainbow Gathering is the culture of live for the moment. The men that fathered all the children you see around the gathering had no concern for the lives of those children or the lives of the womyn who gave birth to them.
The last note I want to add, is that drugs themselves are an obstacle to your goal. How can you know what your feelings are if you are high on pot or Ecstasy. How many times have do people make mistakes that have had profound effects on our relationships and our lives because it "felt" right at the time. A solid relationship is built on a solid foundation and drugs have no place in the life of a solid person. Again I know this sounds preachy, that isn't my point, I doubt that you would change your life because of an e-mail from a person you never met. It is something you should think about.
The universe is such a great loving place, when you are honestly open to all the love it has for you, drugs are a distraction. When you understand the power of the universe, and the power that you have in the universe and in your own life, I think using wanting to use it wisely is a responsible conclusion.
Maybe we can be friends. Also talking about how big your breasts isn't the best idea.
Dante
"Hey whats up??? Im Kat....I am currently living in Salt Lake City, UT (BOOO)
and getting ready to end my job and head out on the road.
I am posting
this ad in hopes that I will find my perfect rainbow brother to love and vice
versa. I have met some good people in rainbow land but never anyone that I
wanted to travel or have a relationship with. I know the appeal of free love and
I am not looking for that anymore, I need someone that will be there in the
morning and hold me.
I want to find a brother that likes to party, but
appreciates the beauty of untainted and true love that exists in the universe.
Lets take a psychedelic journey together and hold eachother while we explore
eachother and the ever changing world.
I want someone to travel with
this summer. Go straight deep into rainbow land and not come out unless
absolutely necessary. I want to love deeply and party and enjoy life with
someone that I find intellectually and physically beautiful.
Where is my
beautiful dready brother that wants the same things I do. Id love to meet the
person that wants the same things that I want.
Have a VW bus?? Got 420??
Got family love??? Got the road itch???
Email me!!! lets get to know one
another and see if we would be good roaddawgs/lovers
im blonde hair,
blue eyes, 5'4, big breasted, animal lover....love to eat fungus, LSD and my
friend MOLLY occasionally.
Where are you?? Contact me"
Hello
You sound like a beautiful womyn, and if I were still at the point in my life that I were free to travel I assure you I would love nothing more than to wake up in your arms every morning. However I am at a different stage in life now.
I would advise you though that Rainbowland is the wrong place to look for what you claim to be seeking. At the next gathering pay attention to all the single mothers. I am not saying that it is wrong to be a single mother, but that it is wrong for a man to have children that he does not support. The philosophy of the rainbow family is hedonistic, and really does not support the meaningful love the you are talking about. I know at this point I sound like a Christian, I am not, I have just found like you that free love isn't love and love shouldn't be free.
To be honest I don't know what my intention is in writing you, except I feel that in some way we are looking for the same thing. For me I found that the culture of sex that is the Rainbow Gathering is the culture of live for the moment. The men that fathered all the children you see around the gathering had no concern for the lives of those children or the lives of the womyn who gave birth to them.
The last note I want to add, is that drugs themselves are an obstacle to your goal. How can you know what your feelings are if you are high on pot or Ecstasy. How many times have do people make mistakes that have had profound effects on our relationships and our lives because it "felt" right at the time. A solid relationship is built on a solid foundation and drugs have no place in the life of a solid person. Again I know this sounds preachy, that isn't my point, I doubt that you would change your life because of an e-mail from a person you never met. It is something you should think about.
The universe is such a great loving place, when you are honestly open to all the love it has for you, drugs are a distraction. When you understand the power of the universe, and the power that you have in the universe and in your own life, I think using wanting to use it wisely is a responsible conclusion.
Maybe we can be friends. Also talking about how big your breasts isn't the best idea.
Dante
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
The Spin Zone
This is an essay I wrote as part of a class I am taking, I thought I would share it here to see if there were any thoughts on it.
-----
I think that one myth that is bad for society is the myth of the soldier. The myth of soldiers who are driven by love of their country to fight to defend it. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that there are some soldiers out there that fit this myth – I think every myth has some truth. The truth of the matter is that people join the Army for a number of reasons, patriotism only being one of them. Another major reason that recruits will join, is financial, either they cannot find another job or they want money for school.
Then there is the aspect of how often they are really fighting to protect America in the most honest sense. Going back through history, it could be said that even the World Wars were not fought to defend America. I am not arguing that we should not have fought in those wars, but the true threat to America was unclear. More recently the war in Iraq- again not making judgments about its rightness – is not clearly being fought in defense of America.
The danger of this myth is it gives the public the wrong image of our troops and why they fight. In creating an ideal of virtue that isn’t complete in reality, it prepares the country to believe that the men and womyn who fight for us could do no wrong. When this trust is broken we forget that they are just people working under extreme situations and demean them for their actions. This image is bad for the troops because the image it creates of the troops is that they choose to fight and that their reward is achieved through the battle. I think if we took an honest approach to the occupation of soldier the way we do Police Officers, it would change the way we think about and treat our troops. An example of this would be a new discussion about the amount that we pay our troops, how does the pay compare to other dangerous and important jobs.
To be honest I don’t think that there are any positive myths in our society, or that this is possible. If we are talking about a myth as a way of talking about a subject in way that is different than it is. Truth is always the best, we cannot deal with things that we do not understand and we cannot understand what is not honestly expressed. I agree with Kennedy that myths are an enemy of the people. If there is a myth of racial tension, and the reality is racial harmony, the myth can change reality and create conflict. On the other hand there are situations where we assume that things are better than they are because we don’t want to deal with the conflict that it implies. In this regard I think with Samuelson that myths are maintained out of laziness and fear. The danger in this is that conflicts that are ignored do not solve themselves, and problems that need solutions are often pushed out of the public awareness because of confusion and the lack of courage to confront them.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The Spin Zone
ABC News: A Daughter Who Succeeded, a Son Who Found Trouble
Surfing around YouTube today I have found an alarming trend. There are a number of videos that appear to have been highly watched, that are very racist. One calls the shooter an invader and lists a number of incidents that have been crimes by what appear to be Korean men. As sad as the deaths of these students is, it will be even sadder if this is turned into a racial issue.
The first thought I had when I heard about the shootings was, please don't let this be a black/white race issue. With the end of the Duke case and the Imus scandal in the news, I knew another incident would be too much. While I hate to put it in these terms, the fact it was an Asian was at first good news for me.
My fear now, is how much of the racial tension around the recent incidents spreading to other races. I would hate to see the energy that has been held by some on the immigration issue, and the general race climate in this country to spark anti-Asian or Anti-Korean sentiments.
I would like to remind everyone that even with this crime, the vast majority of school shootings have been white and not black or Asian. To be honest I don't understand the logic in going on the attack racially in this case. Not understanding it is what scares me, because it makes me think this is a backlash caused by fear. I implore those of you reading this who may think I am wrong about this not being a racial issue, to think really hard about what I am saying.
If we don't embrace each other, all races, and heal from this violent act. If instead we turn to violence to defend ourselves from an enemy that isn't there. If we go down the road of violence, more innocent people will be hurt.
(note: The Videos are on YouTube, I will not post them to this blog because I will not support such hatred in fashion)
Surfing around YouTube today I have found an alarming trend. There are a number of videos that appear to have been highly watched, that are very racist. One calls the shooter an invader and lists a number of incidents that have been crimes by what appear to be Korean men. As sad as the deaths of these students is, it will be even sadder if this is turned into a racial issue.
The first thought I had when I heard about the shootings was, please don't let this be a black/white race issue. With the end of the Duke case and the Imus scandal in the news, I knew another incident would be too much. While I hate to put it in these terms, the fact it was an Asian was at first good news for me.
My fear now, is how much of the racial tension around the recent incidents spreading to other races. I would hate to see the energy that has been held by some on the immigration issue, and the general race climate in this country to spark anti-Asian or Anti-Korean sentiments.
I would like to remind everyone that even with this crime, the vast majority of school shootings have been white and not black or Asian. To be honest I don't understand the logic in going on the attack racially in this case. Not understanding it is what scares me, because it makes me think this is a backlash caused by fear. I implore those of you reading this who may think I am wrong about this not being a racial issue, to think really hard about what I am saying.
If we don't embrace each other, all races, and heal from this violent act. If instead we turn to violence to defend ourselves from an enemy that isn't there. If we go down the road of violence, more innocent people will be hurt.
(note: The Videos are on YouTube, I will not post them to this blog because I will not support such hatred in fashion)
Monday, April 16, 2007
The Spin Zone
Everyone has been asking the question, is America ready for a black president, or is America ready for a womyn president. Let me tell you what I think.
I think that America is not ready for a black president and never will be. What America is ready for is a president that is black. However talking about a black president and a president who is black are different terms. America needs a president that is president for all Americans, and not a president for black issues. I think the reason that both Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have not had more success is that they are seen less as leaders and more as black leaders. Barack Obama has shown so far in this race that he can address the needs of the whole nation, and lead the nation, this isn't an attack on Obama. What this is an attack on are those who would promote Obama as a black man for president, or those that would use the issue of his race to scare voters.
This goes for womyn as well, American is not ready for a womyn president, and never will be. America is ready for a president that is a womyn though. When one is a leader, I don't think that one can respond to the world by responding as a womyn, or a man, or any label. While one cannot take these parts of oneself and leave them some where, we can think beyond ourselves to the country as a whole. Being a womyn, or black is part of who one is, and it informs the choices one might make, but at the end of the day one must act as humyn and nothing else.
I know that you are going to say that for the last 200 years men have ruled this country as men, and you have a point. I would counter with the fact that there have been great moments in our history, and in those moments men led as humyn. It is in the weakest moments of our history that you can see how men have lead as men. Regardless, changing from a country that is lead be men as men to a country led by womyn as womyn is only changing the sheets.
Friday, April 6, 2007
The Spin Zone...
But she conceded a point that many experts have made: This "is a problem that is going to have to be addressed. If we drive these offenders so far underground or we can't supervise them because they become so transient, it's not making us safer."
Source
This is a point being made about laws that are growing more popular across the country, limiting where sex-offenders can live. I am not suggesting that we should treat sex offenders lightly, and allow them to live next to schools, but I think we need to put more thought into the consequences of the actions we are taking. Statistics show that a majority of children who are molested are molested by people they already know. Changing where people live doesn't solve the issue if parents that know these offenders are either unaware, or uncaring of the threat that they present to their children.
There are loop wholes in this strategy as well, the biggest threat isn't where these people live, but where they go, and how they gain the trust of their victims. Living miles from the nearest person could serve to protect offenders and their crimes if it means that no one will hear the victims screams, or that victims have little ability to escape. If a offender is able to access victims at a park or a school, the offender doesn't have to live near either, just to have access.
You can go that one step further and limit their access to parks, and under most circumstances they have no reason to be on a children's school campus. What you can't do is prevent them for waiting near the park or the school and watching for an opportunity. Again I am not arguing against these laws, my point is two fold. One that these laws are not as strong at protecting children as those who support them may believe. Two that it could make offenders harder to track.
There are loop wholes in this strategy as well, the biggest threat isn't where these people live, but where they go, and how they gain the trust of their victims. Living miles from the nearest person could serve to protect offenders and their crimes if it means that no one will hear the victims screams, or that victims have little ability to escape. If a offender is able to access victims at a park or a school, the offender doesn't have to live near either, just to have access.
You can go that one step further and limit their access to parks, and under most circumstances they have no reason to be on a children's school campus. What you can't do is prevent them for waiting near the park or the school and watching for an opportunity. Again I am not arguing against these laws, my point is two fold. One that these laws are not as strong at protecting children as those who support them may believe. Two that it could make offenders harder to track.
There are some cities where the area that offenders can live in is extremely restricted. While I understand the concept behind limiting an offender from living across the street from a school or a house. At a distance of a half-mile or more the threat seems to be as equal as one mile. If our goal is to find a solution to this crime, we need to find a balance. These laws could backfire by not only pushing offenders into the streets, but they could choose to not register, which would push them out of the system that could help them and track them.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
The Spin Zone...
Circuit City has a bold new plan for saving money as it faces loses. While some companies can relocate jobs to other countries, retailers cannot do this for sales clerks. Circuit City on the other hand is trying to bring out-sourcing benefits to its stores across the country. It is doing that by laying off 3,400 of its highest paid cashiers and replacing them with lower paid workers. As someone who has worked a great deal in the guest service industry in a variety of ways, and my readers who have done so may agree, this is a bad idea. In the new market, the thing that is going to make your business stand out from the rest more than anything else is top level customer service. Wal-Mart and K-Mart are doing a great job of cornering the market on sales based on income, by which I mean that those who are looking for low prices are likely to head to one of these well known chains. In order to put your brand into someones mind, and to encourage customer traffic, the image of the brand is becoming more and more important. The best way to polish a brand that is weak, is to bring in a level of customer service that attracts customers. As a shopper I have been to Circuit City, and I have been to Best Buy, when I went to Circuit City I got little help when I was attempting to purchase a lap-top. When I went to Best Buy, I got a great deal of help in selecting the camera that was best for me. What Circuit City has done in laying off its high paid workers, and replace them with lower paid workers, is to take workers that have experience, developed skill and training in customer service, with workers that will provide lower quality service. The electronic industry is an industry that is very reliant on customer service, when I go to buy a lap-top, or a camera, there is a lot of information that is confusing to me (and I know a good deal), when a customer is confused they are less likely to buy. With high quality customer service helping customers to understand the products that they are searching for, and what was best for them, they are more likely to buy something and feel good about doing it. According to MSNBC, my experience could be justified in the fact that Best Buy is the number one seller, and Circuit City is number two.
On the other hand there is a company that is making what I think it a good choice, and a choice long in coming. The Post Office is now selling what are labeled "forever" stamps. These stamps, that will go on sale April 14th, will sell for 41 cents. The stamps will be good forever, even if the price of stamps goes up. What the hope is that it will prompt sales of stamps, since it removes the concern that stamps purchased today may not be enough postage to mail a letter on a later date. In the past, as stamp prices have increased it meant the purchase of new stamps, or the purchase of one and two cent stamps and putting them on the letter with the lower value stamp.
McDonalds has taken a number of steps recently to reach out to a market of consumers more concerned about the health of the food that they eat. Now with its new product it is taking aim at a market on the other end of the dietary scale, aiming at those who seem less concerned about the amount of fat and red meat that they eat. The newest product that it is putting out is bigger than its quarter pounder, at a third of a pound. The Angus Third Pounder, will be the largest burger that it has ever served. McDonalds is actually following the crowd on this, Carl's JR, and Burger King, already have similar product that is doing well for those companies.
On the other hand there is a company that is making what I think it a good choice, and a choice long in coming. The Post Office is now selling what are labeled "forever" stamps. These stamps, that will go on sale April 14th, will sell for 41 cents. The stamps will be good forever, even if the price of stamps goes up. What the hope is that it will prompt sales of stamps, since it removes the concern that stamps purchased today may not be enough postage to mail a letter on a later date. In the past, as stamp prices have increased it meant the purchase of new stamps, or the purchase of one and two cent stamps and putting them on the letter with the lower value stamp.
McDonalds has taken a number of steps recently to reach out to a market of consumers more concerned about the health of the food that they eat. Now with its new product it is taking aim at a market on the other end of the dietary scale, aiming at those who seem less concerned about the amount of fat and red meat that they eat. The newest product that it is putting out is bigger than its quarter pounder, at a third of a pound. The Angus Third Pounder, will be the largest burger that it has ever served. McDonalds is actually following the crowd on this, Carl's JR, and Burger King, already have similar product that is doing well for those companies.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
The Spin Zone
This is the twat post.
First of all a commenter posted that 'Buck' is a twat. I agree that he is a twat, but for the time being I am going to continue to post his videos because he is funny. I also think he does a good job of putting the pieces of the reality TV shows together in an interesting way.
The second twat of today is Sanjaya. I have this theory that people don't like Sanjaya. I know this isn't a shock to a lot of people, but why do so many people keep voting for him. I think it is because America hates American Idol. I think that there is a subconscious hope that if a crappy singer wins, the show will be shown for the farce that it is. Imagine if Sanjaya wins, and he puts out that album all winners, even bad ones like Ruben Studdard put out, and it bombs. Sales rank low in the thousands, as it is the worst collection of musical attempts since The Backstreet Boys stopped making music. American Idol will go on, but if the same process is continued next year, and we get another Sanjaya as a winner, then the show will fall apart. Already I think more viewers watch American Idol to see the bad singers than the good, the tipping point may have been as far back as William Hung.
Now for twats on an international level. I can see how this incident in the gulf between the UK and Iran is going to come down to an issue of terms. The UK is going to insist that the soldiers are hostages, which implies that they were taken without cause. The Iranians on the other hand are going to insist that they are prisoners, with the implication that they are being held for breaking the law. It is too soon to see how this will end, it could be pushed into a full scale conflict, if that is what the UK, US or Iranian governments want to happen. It could also just as easily be solved through diplomacy, or a raid of a small force of troops, in a snatch and run. I think that Iran is playing with fire, and that any of the players in this drama that obstruct a peaceful resolution are doing the world a disservice.
Also who ever started the big rumor, or to-do about the kiss between Jennifer Aniston and Courtney Cox as being such a hot lesbian kiss is a twat. The video of the kiss is now making the rounds of the gossip sites, and it is hardly hot or lesbian.
Ok that is enough for now, if you read my site, you are probably not a twat.
Now for twats on an international level. I can see how this incident in the gulf between the UK and Iran is going to come down to an issue of terms. The UK is going to insist that the soldiers are hostages, which implies that they were taken without cause. The Iranians on the other hand are going to insist that they are prisoners, with the implication that they are being held for breaking the law. It is too soon to see how this will end, it could be pushed into a full scale conflict, if that is what the UK, US or Iranian governments want to happen. It could also just as easily be solved through diplomacy, or a raid of a small force of troops, in a snatch and run. I think that Iran is playing with fire, and that any of the players in this drama that obstruct a peaceful resolution are doing the world a disservice.
Also who ever started the big rumor, or to-do about the kiss between Jennifer Aniston and Courtney Cox as being such a hot lesbian kiss is a twat. The video of the kiss is now making the rounds of the gossip sites, and it is hardly hot or lesbian.
Ok that is enough for now, if you read my site, you are probably not a twat.
The Spin Zone...
Now for a wrap up of some of the days news. I am doing this all inside of the new google online word program, which makes it easy to blog directly from. It is however slow on my computer because my computer is just a slow computer. I have used it on other computers and the program works great. At any rate, I only bring that up, to say that if I have typos, you can blame the speed of which this program operates on my computer. Why use it you ask, I am trying to look at the good side of this and I think that while I need to work on typing faster, I also need to work on typing slower and learning where the keys are, this a way of doing that.
I have a number of news links that I will make an effort to post tomorrow. I have had a hard last couple days, getting a lot of things I need done, while working extra hours.
There is big news the world of gossip. James Blunt, and his model girlfriend, Petra Nemcova, have split. This news has been officially recognized by both of their reps. What is not official, is that Blunt has been dating wonder girl, Lindsay Lohan. They have been seen out and about together, and while it may be nothing it is setting off rumours that they are a hot new couple.
Talking of big break-ups. Wynnona Judd must be asking herself why. She is getting a divorce from her husband of five years, while he is being arrested for sex crimes against a minor.
In other gossip news, it is official, Nicole Kidman is with child. There have been rumours going around for a couple months that she was pregnant, but this is the first official word to be released. One blogger commented, that since stars have no privacy they should just come right out and tell everyone - "I'm Pregnant". This will be the first natural child for Kidman who has two adopted children with former husband Tom Cruise.
People are talking about the interview between Katie Couric and the Edwards family, that many thought she was aggressive in. When asked about the interview, during a round table discussion, John Edwards defended Couric for her questions. He told the audience that Couric was asking the questions that America was asking, and that they wanted answers for. It could be that this is very true, and that the backlash comes the very fact that we have those questions and we feel we shouldn't When Couric asks those questions, we project our shame onto her.
The Onion, the funnest news source in print and on the web that I have found, is making a move to get into the TV business with its own news channel. Following the brand it has become known for of course, this news channel is not going to be covering real news, satire news. If you are unaware of what The Onion is, you should check it out. Some are asking how this will be different than the comedy channel news shows with Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert. I can only saw that from my own experience, The Onion has a totally different brand of humor than any of the current shows on TV right now.
A lawsuit against the actresses Denise Richards and Pamela Anderson, turns out to have been placed by the owner of one of the big photo agencies in Hollywood. The suit relates to an incident on the set of blonde and blonder where Richards found photographer taking pictures and threw their laptop off a ledge. The laptop ended up hitting an elderly womyn, who is the only person who should be suing in my book. The photo agency in Hollywood is a source of not only an endless stream of photos of the stars, but a source of money for those who take and those who sell the photos. All that money appears to be attracting attention, to an industry that would rather not have it. I expect this is not the last we will be hearing about these agencies, as someone sooner or later is going to turn the camera on them and tell their story.
Thank you for your time, have a good day. Hey if you like this site please tell a friend about it. It would be great if one day I could make a little money off it and buy a computer that was not shit.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
The Spin Zone...
It is my goal to move away from depending on videos to fill my site with content, and move more towards what I think of actual content, or news. My goal right now, is to post a wrap up of the days news, everyday.
The scandal about the fired prosecutors seems to be taking the same route as the previous scandals. That is questions are raised, The White House first dodges, then blocks attempts to get to the truth. Hiding behind the same powers that Nixon attempted to use to protect him, saying that not only should the questions not be asked, they will not be answered.
In the fired prosecutor scandal, an aide has now said through a lawyer, that they would not testify, based on the fifth amendment. Why is it that simple questions, can not be worked out between the branches of government?
I do not know if anything was done wrong here, but I believe congress has the right, and the responsibility to find out. The balance of powers is intended to prevent one branch from gaining too much power. President Bush doesn't understand that, and he doesn't understand why we don't trust him.
This isn't a new thing, with the democratic congress either. Remember the same blocking was done with the 9-11 commission. Even earlier than that, the same arguments were used to defend Cheney and his energy policy. This administration really doesn't seem to understand how our system of government works to protect liberty.
Again, I am not claiming that anything was done wrong, except what seems to that once again we see key players in the Bush administration going into cover-up mode. Note that Libby was convicted of cover-up. It could be that there is nothing to hide here, but they hide because they hate the idea of their actions being questioned.
The issue of the UK sailors being held by Iran could lead to come scary ends. I do not know what Iran stands to gain in this evil game, unless they feel they are standing up to the west. Forces inside the UK government and the US government, are eager to take action against Iran. This could be an easy way to get both countries to accept that action. I am not claiming that this incident was staged, it doesn't have to be for it to be used as a political tool. I am watching this closely.
People are talking about John Edwards and his run for office, while his wife has cancer. Katie Couric, took them both to task for what she clearly thought was a bad choice. I don't ask why he is running while he wife has cancer, I wonder why he is running while he has no chance to win. I think it is clearly at this point a race between Clinton and Obama. Speaking of Clinton, while Obama did well in Hollywood and got people talking about Obamamania; Clinton has doubled the amount he got at a fund raiser of her own.
Thank you for reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
