Asking Questions With Loaded Answers

State Representative Matt Shea, District 4-R, is asking anyone on his mailing list to take his online survey.  I don't think he would care if anyone pointed out to him that his answers could influence how people answered. But I find this sort of thing interesting. 

Here's one example:

Hmm, I'm 100% sure that prosecutors do not determine sentences. Regardless, I came up with another set of answers to this question that may or may not serve his survey well.

Yes - I believe in the sanctity of live.

No - The people should be able to have a choice in meting out punishment.

Never Again--On Delta Airlines

I'm sure lots of people have seen the video of the Trump supporter being a disruptive asshole on a Delta flight. Now Delta Airlines apologizes for not ejecting him from the plane, is refunding every passenger's air fare, and is permanently barring the guy from flying on their airline.

I don't condone the guys behavior but that's kind of harsh. He was being a disruptive asshole. But so are extreme sports fans and other people with strong feelings for one thing or another that they feel they need to make public. You get one of those people on a flight every once in a while. You see people like that in public all the time. Usually all it takes is a crew member to tell the person or persons to stop or they'll be removed from the aircraft and then remove them if they don't comply. End of story and everybody gets on with their life.

The disruptive asshole in this case was removed from the aircraft and given a talking to. He was allowed back on the plane and he stopped being a disruptive asshole.

Then the video of the guy being a disruptive asshole went viral and everybody is outraged. This guy is being a disruptive asshole! Yes, he was. And he stopped being a disruptive asshole after the crew pulled him from the aircraft and talked to him. But that's not good enough so the airline overreacts and makes sure the guy is not going to be recorded being a disruptive asshole on one of their planes again.

Everybody's blood lust is satisfied now.

A Contributing Factor To The Misinformed Electorate

NPR did some snooping and tracked down one of prime creators of fake news web sites, Jestin Coler. Coler owns a company appropriately named Disinfomedia.

"The whole idea from the start was to build a site that could kind of infiltrate the echo chambers of the alt-right, publish blatantly or fictional stories and then be able to publicly denounce those stories and point out the fact that they were fiction," Coler says. 

He was amazed at how quickly fake news could spread and how easily people believe it.

One site, nationalreport.com, is still active. I've seen it before and you don't have to look at it for more than two seconds before realizing it's obviously fake.

During the run-up to the presidential election, fake news really took off. "It was just anybody with a blog can get on there and find a big, huge Facebook group of kind of rabid Trump supporters just waiting to eat up this red meat that they're about to get served," Coler says. "It caused an explosion in the number of sites. I mean, my gosh, the number of just fake accounts on Facebook exploded during the Trump election." 

I noticed. Hence I stopped following a bunch of people on Facebook who kept parroting this crap. On the bright side, my news feed doesn't get me riled up any more.

Coler says his writers have tried to write fake news for liberals — but they just never take the bait.

There's little comfort in knowing that many people didn't fall for the fake crap when you consider how many did.

I Live This All The Time

He's referring to the Dunning-Kruger effect. When you’re incompetent, the skills you need to produce a right answer are exactly the skills you need to recognize what a right answer is. In logical reasoning, in parenting, in management, problem solving, the skills you use to produce the right answer are exactly the same skills you use to evaluate the answer.

At work I'm in charge if IT and I'm the most cautious and conservative person when it comes to technology I'm not familiar with. I think that bothers some people but I can live with it. I try to be smart enough to know when I'm not smart enough to know.

Oh, and I love the Fox News viewer zinger.

Soon To Be Erased Comments

Regarding an article in the Spokesman Review this morning about the soldier returning home in return for the release of five Taliban detainees being held in Guantanamo since 2002. The detainees – Muhammad Fazl, Mullah Norullah Noori, Mohammed Nabi, Khairullah Khairkhwa and Abdul Haq Wasiq – were mostly high-ranking officials during the decade before 2001 when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan. Set aside, for the moment, that Guantanamo is hardly the poster child for human rights, that many detainees there had nothing to do with terrorism, and that the Taliban, as horrible they may be in Afghanistan and Pakistan, had nothing to do with 9/11.

A guest commenter – a troll – has chimed in, playing the role of the Islamofascist Taliban Al Qaeda terrorist. Waiting to see how many people take the bait before the comments are removed.

She's Blinded By Science

In other Cathy McMorris Rodgers news, our fair congresswoman voted for an amendment--it passed on party lines--that prevents the Department of Defense from studying how climate change will affect our national security.

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to implement the U.S. Global Change Research Program National Climate Assessment, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, the United Nation’s Agenda 21 sustainable development plan, or the May 2013 Technical Update of the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order.

Denying reality must take a lot of energy. Or really dark glasses.

His Concern For Cynicism Brings Out The Cynic In Me

George Nethercutt whiffs again as he swings for the fences in his latest commentary published in The Inlander. He feigns concern about "Millennials" not voting and their lack of trust in government. I say feign because Republicans don't want young people to vote anyway. Their base consists of elderly white people.

But George Nethercutt wants to make a point about public cynicism.

Likewise, Americans have generally lost faith in President Obama. His "trustworthiness" scores have diminished due largely to Obamacare promises unfulfilled, perceptions of dishonesty relating to the IRS and Benghazi controversies, and his drawing of false "red lines" internationally.  

What promises were unfulfilled? He does not say. He only makes an unsupported assertion and treats it as a fact. The Affordable Care Act was definitely not the best implemented legislation, but millions more of Americans have health care now and millions have more affordable health care. What negatives have outweighed the plusses? As for perceptions of dishonesty relating to the IRS and Benghazi controversies, these were perpetrated by Republican House members, especially Rep Darrell Issa, and Fox News. Leave it to George to allow the perceptions to stay in the forefront and ignore the facts that show that conservative organizations were not singled out by the IRS, there was no White House involvement, and there is no Benghazi cover up.

But George Nethercutt wants to make a point about public cynicism.

When a Republican congressman was recently photographed passionately kissing a staffer who was not his wife, public disgust ensued. When another Republican congressman was arrested and indicted on multiple fraud and tax evasion charges, the public was again let down. When a Democratic congressman claimed that opposition to Obama's policies are simply race-related, the public took issue and cynicism increased.

I'd like to add that public cynicism also increased when a certain Republican congressman, who now writes commentary for The Inlander, violated his self-imposed limit of three terms.

But George Nethercutt wants to make a point about public cynicism.

Researchers from Princeton and Northwestern universities recently suggested that the U.S. political system is an oligarchy, dominated by special interest organizations and the economically elite, instead of the majority of voters. President and Mrs. Obama haven't helped that perception by vacationing lavishly and spending extravagantly while the rest of America is hurting.

Vacationing lavishly? Spending extravagantly? What is the basis for those statements? What the researchers were referring to was the monied interests who get their way politically through their influence on legislation and the legislators. Elected leaders are not the oligarchy. It's the people and companies who purchase their influence.

So what does he recommend to get young people engaged?

For starters, the quality of congressional leaders needs improvement. Leaders should be elected to serve the public good, not personal ambitions.

Another baseless statement implying that congressional leaders are only interested in personal ambition. Unless, of course, you take into account that for many of them their primary concern is getting re-elected and so they spend an extraordinary amount of time raising money.

Members of Congress should convene advisory groups of young voters to advise them through social media outlets regarding their views on policy matters — and then those members should produce results by giving progress reports on suggestions implemented. Voters also should demand that their public officials periodically explain how their service has improved the public good and offer young people hands-on projects that achieve a public or policy objective. Fair competition also means frequent candidate debates.

If a politician is able to effectively communicate their message and their views, why would they need an advisory group of young people? Also, just because a politician uses social media, doesn't mean it they communicate effectively. Have you seen anything of substance in Cathy McMorris Rodgers' Facebook and Twitter accounts?

Progress reports? Really? I'm way too cynical to think any elected leader would give themselves anything but an A+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.

Overall, I think George Nethercutt makes a valid point about public cynicism.

Proving George Carlin Right

In one of his later routines, the late George Carlin talked about who is really in charge of our country. Bad language alert!

Because the owners of this country don't want that. I'm talking about the real owners, now. The real owners, the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying,­ lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else. 

But I'll tell you what they don't want. They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago.

Proving Carlin's point, The Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank that helped the Philip Morris tobacco company question the risks associated with second hand smoke and now is heavily funded by oil and gas companies and promotes studies and conferences that dispute man-made climate change, changed George Carlin's words just a bit and posted them with a photo on their Facebook page.

Do you see what is different? "Governments" replaced "They", which changes the entire meaning. The "they" that George Carlin referenced is the owners. The big wealthy business interests. They are the ones who don't want well-informed, well educated people capable of critical thought.

And if you did your homework you'd find that in this case, George Carlin was right.

An Incredible Level Of Conceit

This morning I stumbled across a strange piece on a site called Western Journalism, which is run by The Western Center for Journalism otherwise known as Floyd Brown. Do just a smidgeon of research and you'll find it's nothing but rightwing hit pieces that have little or nothing to do with actual journalism.

Anyway.

This article describes how Tea Party darling and Freedom Agenda architect Matt Shea, 4th Legislative District Representative, has come under attack. Allegedly, Ben Oakley, Chair of the Spokane GOP, and Kevin Parker, 6th Legislative District Representative, have recruited an establishment Republican opponent for Matt Shea's seat. And who is this person?

They are identified as none other than "Matt Shea's primary opponent."

Damn!

If there's anything that gives an elected politician the shivers, it's a personalized primary opponent. Small wonder, then, that the publishing of this article was found necessary in order to set the record straight on just how great Matt Shea is. Complete with links to Matt Shea's Freedom Agenda Facebook page, and Matt Shea's radio show, and Matt Shea's LinkedIn page, the supporting text in support of Matt Shea clearly establishes the beyond-awesomeness persona that is Matt Shea. How far beyond awesome?

So beyond awesome that among the awards he lists on his rather lengthy LinkedIn page, he includes "1st Place, Ponderosa Young Writer's Fair," all the way back from his elementary school days.

My guess is that if you view Matt Shea's complete profile on LinkedIn (sign up for LinkedIn today...It's free!), you'll find out how Matt Shea did in a baby photo contest, when he started walking, and how many years it was before he was weaned.

As with any rightwing critically thought out news article, it's just not complete without knocking someone down. Ben Oakley and Kevin Parker, therefore, as recruiters of the fear-inducing "Matt Shea's primary opponent," must endure the feces-flinging chimpanzees otherwise known as the champions of true conservative values. Or in this article's case, the author "Guest Writer".

Guest Writer tells us that Oakley is resigning as Chairman of the Spokane GOP Committee in a scandal that "rocks" the Spokane County Republicans, at the request of Susan Hutchinson, the state committee chair, for recruiting "Matt Shea's primary opponent." To help us see what kind of person Ben Oakley is, Guest Writer includes a link to a Salon article in which Oakley, who was a sophomore a Columbine High School, made disparaging remarks about the two shooters being gay.

I can't find anything to support that Oakley is resigning in scandal. But I did learn he was moving to the Seattle area. Maybe if he's not living in Spokane, he can't be the chair of the committee any more and would have to resign. Just maybe.

Guest Writer smears Kevin Parker as an "establishment Republican" with a Washington Conservative Union rating of 79%, nearly twenty points below Matt Shea's rating. And he's an anti-freedom elitist. And he may be under the control, if not heavily influenced, by Karl Rove.

Here's the latest (2012) ratings from the Washington Conservative Union. As you can see, both Parker and Shea have identical "+" marks across the board and a 100 in the percent column. The last column is labeled Cum% and that is where the difference between the two lies. However, there's no explanation for how these numbers are calculated or what they mean. But higher is better and Matt Shea has a near-perfect score, which is nearly twenty points higher than Kevin Parker's.

Guest Writer has to wrap it up at some point and and what better way for Guest Writer to conclude the article than this.

Shea went on to show his ability as a statesman. “I have personally spoken with Rep. Parker to ask him why he is a part of this. He told me that I have ‘character issues.’ Well there they go again…character assassination is a favorite Rove tactic.

Hmmm, not unlike what Guest Writer is doing in this so-called piece of journalism. And not unlike the character issues that motivate the conservatively-principled Guest Writer to hide in anonymity.

I Almost Made A New Friend

This morning I got a phone call from someone who sounded like he was from India and in a room of other guys who sounded like they were from India telling me he was with the Windows Technical Department.

We had a nice long conversation.

This is a cold call scam in which the caller tries to convince the target, me, that my computer has been infected with all sorts of malware, which is threatening to divulge my personal information.

Here's how he tried to establish his credibility. He walked me through opening the Run command box and typing in the command "assoc".

Of course, this took 20 minutes because I repeated things back incorrectly, when he started to talk I would interrupt with a question or comment about all the background noise, I would misunderstand the simplest instructions, and did what I think was a successful job at making this a most frustrating experience for the scammer.

Back to establishing credibility.

The "assoc" command simply lists the file associations on the Windows computer. They all go scrolling by and one of the last entries is this:

.ZFSendToTarget=CLSID{888DCA60-FC0A-11CF-8F0F-00C04FD7D062}

This entry is identical on every Windows PC. So he was trying to make me believe he was on the up and up by reading the CLSID number to me and verifying that it matched the one on my computer. Hence, it would be infected and need to be cleaned up.

It took five minutes of him rattling off characters and me interrupting:

"You said O. Mine looks like a zero? Are you sure that matches?"

"Wait, this one kind of looks like an O, but you said zero."

"I couldn't understand you because there's a lot of noise in the background."

"Mine has a bunch of dashes in between. You didn't say any of the dashes."

"Mine has a D there and it sounded like you said B. Oh, that's a D? Okay, that was 888..."

"Was that an F or an S? It sounded like S. How many S's are supposed to be there?"

And me repeating each of the above statements and talking over him each time he tried to respond.

He finally got fed up and told me to hang on while he transferred me to a senior technical advisor. I had enough fun for the morning and hung up.

I forgot to ask his name.

Bad Bill Or Bad Matt?

District 4 Representative Matt Shea's latest email newsletter has him asking us to help him "advance The Freedom Agenda of lower taxes, less government, and more freedom." Hmmmm, advancing the freedom agenda of more freedom. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that.

Anyway.

As a part of his red-meat-tossing rant Mr Shea also warns us about the BAD BILL OF THE WEEK!

"Democrats aren’t stopping the assault against our freedom with tax increases. They also want every law abiding citizen who owns a gun to have a background check.... Initiative 594 would require background checks whenever a firearm is sold or transferred between licensed dealers or private parties, with few exceptions. Any sale or transfer of a firearm must be completed through a dealer. If you gave a firearm to your son, a brother or other family member, the proposed law would require them to have a background check or be in violation. It would criminalize law-abiding citizens people, such as Gonzaga University students Erik Fagan and Dan McIntosh, who used a gun last year to scare off a six-time convicted felon when he tried to break into their on-campus house for money.

I have to wonder if the Democrats have been so successful in their assault on our freedoms that they have taken away Matt Shea's freedom to read. (And shouldn't this be the bad initiative of the week?)

Anyway.

Yes, the initiative would require background checks. But there are exceptions, one of them being:

(4) This section does not apply to:
(a) A transfer between immediate family members, which for this subsection shall be limited to spouses, domestic partners, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles, that is a bona fide gift;

So contrary to what Matt Shea says, you would not be in violation if you gave a gun to your son, brother, same-or-different-sex spouse, your granddaughter, and many other family members. Nor would a background check be required.

As for how this would criminalize law-abiding citizens like Erik Fagan and Dan McIntosh, that remains to be created by Matt Shea's fertile imagination. The incident with Fagan and McIntosh had nothing to do with transferring a gun from one person to another or background checks. It involved displaying a weapon and possessing a weapon on presumptively university-owned property. But there were gun--and freedoms!--involved and that's what matters most.

Besides. You never know when you might be targeted due to your work. All you need is the freedom to use your imagination.I'd also like to point out that Matt Shea was presumably a law abiding citizen up until he was cited and prosecuted.

Personal Foul - Unsportsmanlike Conduct

George Nethercutt's latest commentary in The Inlander started out so great. His description of Peyton Manning was becoming truly inspirational. And then he made this hard what-the-hell-is-that turn into bizarro land and spoiled it all.

Peyton Manning was raised in a privileged atmosphere as the gifted son of a superstar quarterback. By all accounts, his family recognized the value of humility and respect and passed on those standards to their three sons. While Peyton is a multimillionaire, he fully respects those less fortunate, also recognizing the value of support staff and personnel — and they revere him for his genuine friendship, conduct befitting of someone possessed of humility and a caring heart. He pens handwritten notes to thank others for kindnesses and to acknowledge their accomplishments or particular struggles.

Mr Nethercutt continues telling us how awesome Peyton Manning is. He doesn't blame others. He accepts responsibility for his mistakes and failures. He doesn't act like a prima donna. He is someone to be looked up to. A model for us to follow.

The Mannings have had a good life, full of success and wealth, yet it seems that their heads are not turned by their well-earned money and fame. Any professional athlete with as much money in the bank or as many records in the books as Peyton and Eli Manning — or their famous dad, Archie — might find it easy to have a swelled head and be elitist. But the Manning family has a remarkable knack for steadiness and equanimity in the face of emotional situations that might make ordinary mortals behave differently.

Cool. I get it. I'm an ordinary mortal. Payton Manning doesn't let fame and money go to his head. And then Mr Nethercutt follows that with this.

About the time the Manning documentary ran, a companion documentary highlighting the life of Tennessee Titans quarterback Steve McNair was also on the airwaves. It told the story of an equally gifted and famous professional athlete, and by all accounts, a good guy. McNair had plenty of fame and fortune, and a family of young sons, but an absent dad. His mother was prominent in the documentary, but not his father. Tragically, McNair made some mistakes and became involved with a mentally deranged woman, who shot him to death before killing herself. McNair was survived by his wife and sons, who will go through their lives without the husband and father they idolized.

A different famous quarterback, by all accounts a good guy, grew up without a dad and was killed by a mentally deranged woman he was involved with. What the hell does this have to do with the rest of the article? Mr Nethercutt tells us.

We're all influenced by the kind of upbringing we have and the values that are instilled in us early. Those without enough positive early influences may not have the tools to cope when challenges touch their lives. 

Oh, so it was the kind of upbringing he had. Steve McNair didn't have a dad to tell him, "Son, don't ever mess around with a mentally deranged woman. She will kill you." What Mr Nethercutt is implying is that the single most important cause of McNair's behavior and murder was his absent father. All those other family members, teachers, friends, team mates, coaches, and countless other people he interacted with obviously had little or no effect on him and the choices he made.

I didn't know much about McNair, but a quick look with a search engine gave me plenty to read. Mr Nethercutt essentially slams Mrs McNair and Steve's older brother Fred who helped raise him. If he should slam anyone it should be McNair's father for leaving. And yet that doesn't relate to the rest of his commentary either.

No, for Mr Nethercutt, the father's presence (Manning) or lack thereof (McNair) was the key difference here. Next he'll tell us a young man raised by a single mother has no chance of going to Harvard or becoming President of the United States. Oh, wait.

It's On The Internet So It Must Be True

This morning I stumbled across a quote attributed to Senator Dianne Feinstein of California.

All vets are mentally ill in some way and government should prevent them from owning firearms.

Depending on which site you find this references, the senator said these words at during Senate Judiciary Committee meeting in April, July, August or September.

So I did a little searching and found a site that actually addresses what was said, whereas most sites just blindly repeat the statement as if it's true, probably because it fits their confirmation bias. This is what she had to say when Senator John Cornyn of Texas offered an amendment that would have exempted military veterans from the assault weapons ban.

If I understand this, this adds an exemption of retired military. As I understand our bill, no issue has arose in this regard during the 10 years the expired ban was in effect and what we did in the other bill was exempt possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States. So that included active military. 

The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transferrer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member, or a veteran, and that there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this. 

So, you know, I would be happy to sit down with you again and see if we could work something out but I think we have to– if you’re going to do this — find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally don’t have access to this kind of weapon.

While she was incorrect that PTSD is a new phenomenon, she did not say that all vets are mentally ill and that the government should prevent them from owning firearms. But that did not stop Senator Cornyn from misrepresenting what she said:

I think it’s a mistake to paint so broadly as to say that any active duty military or veterans can’t use these kinds of weapons or any other lawful weapons for self-defense, and certainly I wouldn’t want to suggest that we think people who served in the military all suffer from some debilitating illness that would prohibit them from being able to defend themselves.

Influenced By What We Learn After The Fact

Spokane has had a couple of gun-related incidents that have me wondering if our reaction to them relies on viewing them through the prism of the outcome. For example, last March Gail Gerlach left his SUV unoccupied with the engine running in his driveway. When he came outside he saw his vehicle being driven away. He thought he saw the thief, Brendan Kaluza-Graham, point a weapon at him. He fired one shot through the dark, tinted rear window and killed Kaluza-Graham. Kaluza-Graham had a lengthy criminal record, which included car theft. He was not armed.

Between the book ends of "He got what he deserved" and "You can't kill someone who poses no danger to yourself", there is, written in a footnote in the back of your mind, a strangely comforting annotation, "Well, he was bad guy." It's there even if you believe Gerlach was wrong.

Let's change the situation a little. Let's say a neighbor had chided Gerlach several times about leaving his vehicle running unattended in the driveway and warned him it would be easy for someone to steal. And let's say that on this particular morning the neighbor decided to play a joke on Gerlach and teach him a lesson and drive off in the car, go around the block, and bring it back with a, "See, I told you someone could take this." As he drives away he sees Gerlach coming out of the house and he waves at him. And Gerlach, thinking the thief was pointing a weapon at him, shoots his neighbor through the dark, tinted rear window and kills him.

Under that set of facts would you have the same opinion? The facts are the same. Someone stole the vehicle. They were driving away. Gerlach thought the person pointed a weapon at him and shot him. Whether you think he was right or wrong, what would that footnote be replaced with? How do you reconcile this within your mind?

Why does it matter that we later learn that the thief had a criminal record or was a neighbor pulling a prank? Gerlach had no way of knowing either way and yet it has such a strong influence of what we think of his actions.

I have the same question for a recent incident that took place at the Gonzaga University-owned apartments that are off campus. Erik Fagan answered the door to find an apparently homeless man demanding money. Erik offered a can of food and a blanket instead of cash. The man allegedly became agitated and combative and showed what appeared to be an ankle bracelet saying, "You don't want to do this." The man advances into the doorway and Fagan calls for his roommate, Dan McIntosh. Dan comes downstairs with his handgun and points it at the man who then runs away. (Disclosure: I know Dan. He was a class mate of my son, Josh.) They report the incident to the police who arrest John Taylor, a six-time felon, not far away. The university police return later in the night to confiscate the weapons in the apartment--Fagan owns a shotgun that was not involved in the incident--because the two students are in violation of the Student Policy, which states that weapons are not allowed in university-owned buildings. They find themselves in danger of being expelled.

There's a huge public outcry against the university and the students are found guilty of violating the student policy but are placed on probation instead of expelled.

Whether Fagan and McIntosh were aware of it or not, the policy is quite clear and they were definitely guilty of violating that policy. But since you know they defended themselves against an intruder in what they perceive to be a bad part of town, it seems more acceptable, doesn't it?

Current Events

Between work at work and work at home I've been slammed lately so I haven't been bringing up much besides cyclocross. Now that I've had a breather, there are a couple of subjects I've been wondering about.

60 Minutes used to be well respected for its reporting on CBS. Heck, it was so good I watched it when I was a kid. I loved watching Mike Wallace figuratively rip into people. But I don't watch it much any more. Most television news leans more towards entertainment. The so-called news today consists of lots of teasers, sensationalism, and over-dramatization. It's something I blame on the consolidation of the media that taken place over the last couple of decades. Anyway, 60 Minutes recently exposed just how far off the journalism track their train has gone with their report on the attack in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, one of whom was the ambassador to Libya. The story was based on a book written by a security contractor, Dylan Davies, whose official statements about the attack contradict everything he wrote in the book. Laura Logan has since sort-of-apologized for the program's "mistake." In the meantime, the book, which was published by a CBS subsidiary, Threshold Editions, is yanking the book back. Maybe if they listed it as fiction.

What's with this special session Governor Inslee called to pass a $10 billion transportation package that had no chance of being passed but was really all about more tax breaks for Boeing so they'd build the 777X in Washington? In 2003, Washington State gave Boeing a $3.2 billion, 20-year tax break for building the 787 here. Six years later, Boeing built another 787 manufacturing plant in South Carolina thanks to an incentive package offered by that state. So when does the tax break war end and how will that benefit the state that wins when Boeing pays little or nothing in taxes, less in salaries, and profits even more immensely than it is already? Our state legislators fell all over themselves to pass this enticement using the justification of keeping the jobs here. In the meantime, the machinists union, the people who hold those jobs, are being asked to approve an eight-year contract that replaces the traditional pension with a defined-contribution retirement plan, increases health care premiums and co-pays, and restructures the wage scale so it takes 16 years instead of 6 to reach the top. Boeing will give everyone a $10,000 signing bonus if the union accepts and says they will move the jobs elsewhere if they don't. So what we have is the government looking out for the corporation and the workers looking out for themselves. In the long run the state and the workers get screwed and Boeing gets bank.

Eight days ago, Christian historian David Barton, who now is no longer considering running against Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) next year, explained that weather disasters were man-made. But it's not because of climate change. It's because we voted in politicians who supported abortion rights. According to Barton we're all suffering because we've lost God's protection over our environment. That certainly explains why the Philippines, a predominantly Catholic country where abortion is illegal, just got slammed by the strongest typhoon ever recorded.

Well, When You Think About It

There is an interesting article about cycling safety over on the New York Times Health and Wellness blog. There are no definite conclusions presented, but I was struck by this.

Dr. Rochelle Dicker, a trauma surgeon at the University of California, San Francisco, does not see it that way. She cares for victims of the worst bicycle injuries, people who might need surgery and often end up in intensive care. So she decided to investigate those crashes.  

She and her colleagues reviewed hospital and police records for 2,504 bicyclists who had been treated at San Francisco General Hospital. She expected that most of these serious injuries would involve cars; to her surprise, nearly half did not. She suspects that many cyclists with severe injuries were swerving to avoid a pedestrian or got their bike wheels caught in light-rail tracks, for example. Cyclists wounded in crashes that did not involve a car were more than four times as likely to be hurt so badly that they were admitted to the hospital. Yet these injuries often did not result in police reports — a frequent source of injury data — and appeared only in the hospital trauma registry.

Dr. Dicker is not a cyclist, but she said, “Lots of my colleagues do not want to ride after seeing these injuries.”

When her colleagues treat people who've been mangled in vehicle collisions, do they not drive? When they treat gunshot victims, do the doctors who own guns get rid of them? Do they not swim after treating a shark attack victim? And so on.

Just wondering.

Cathy McMorris Rodgers - The Marionette

How ironic that she speaks of leadership. This manufactured crisis started because extremists within the Republican party decided now was the time to stop the Affordable Care Act. Speaker Boehner, more interested in keeping his job than showing any leadership, bowed to the extremists. Thanks to the Hastert Rule, Republicans prevent bipartisanship by only bringing up bills for a vote that have the support of the Republican majority. Thanks to the extremists for whom she is carrying water, that majority doesn't exist. Consequently, the House did not vote on a Senate-passed continuing resolution that funded the government at the level the Republicans wanted simply because it did not defund the Affordable Care Act. Now Cathy McMorris Rodgers and her party have escalated this manufactured crisis and threaten to put our country in default, which extremists in her party are saying would be a good thing.

Don't talk to us about leadership, Congresswoman. We can see the strings controlling you.

Wait--What?

Best viewed in full screen.

How Frightening

Imagine, for just a moment, not being able to document your life with a phone. Wasn't there a Twilight Zone episode about that?

Behold, The Power Of Fear

In today's Spokesman Review we have an article about arming District 81 Resource Officers by January 2014.

What better way to demonstrate the power of fear than to have armed resource officers within your public schools?

We're telling our children that school is a dangerous place that requires armed guards. Yet the presence of armed guards is no guarantee for preventing a mass shooting. The expense of such security to counter a highly unlikely threat is illogical and wasteful. And if this is a must, why aren't we protecting shopping malls, churches, and other locations where mass shootings have taken place?  

Newtown triggered the recent changes, “but there have been other reasons for considering arming our resource officers,” said Jason Conley, the district’s safety, security and transportation director. “It’s those outside threats that are driving us to this next level of safety. In a criminal’s mind, a school resource officer would be the first target to eliminate to get into the school.”

What are these outside threats? What is their likelihood of happening?

The goal of arming the school resource officers, district officials say, “is to assist in better protecting the safety of students and staff … and provide a greater level of safety for the District’s School Resource Officers.”

We have to arm the resource officers for their own safety? How often have District 81 Resource Officers been in a school situation where they needed a firearm?