Weak AND corrupt

Or Tea-Nado?

cross posted from MNPP:

Republicans, unable to do the math

What the GOP loos like, running scared

Friday Fun-Day

I like to change up the pace a little on Fridays, to highlight fun things heading into the weekend.

My eclectic interests reminded me of this very retro game circa 1970, still in production as a variant of tiddlywinks.  The reference to the game occurred to me after reading in the City Pages about a gentleman flying from the Netherlands to Utah by way of Minneapolis who ran afoul of the FBI for taking his private parts out of his trousers on the flight from MSP to his final destination.

His explanation for his behavior was that he had accidentally gotten peppermint oil on genitalia, and that the oil had caused those parts to become irritated. Apparently when he rubbed peppermint oil on his forehead in an effort to cure a headache, his brain became similarly disturbed, although he made no mention to the FBI as to the efficacy or lack thereof on his claimed headache.

Whether efficacious or not for headache - I prefer plain old school aspirin myself - I can attest that peppermint oil or other forms of peppermint like the curiously strong Altoid mints IS highly effective in removing or discouraging ants and other unwanted household intruders, up to and including mice and other rodents.  But use it carefully anywhere else, or you might find yourself facing the FBI terrorist task force!

The FBI seems less than satisfied with the gentleman's explanation, although it does appear truthful, as peppermint and other essential oils were found in his luggage.  The FBI suggested he should have repaired to the bathroom for......repairs....rather than exposing himself, regardless of the degree of real or imaginary discomfort.

I can only be amused at the incidental aspect of the poor guy having at the very least discouraged ants from inhabiting his pants.  Our word antsy used to describe someone who is restless or agitated comes from the metaphor of someone having ants in his (or her) pants.

Offered up as a small bit of trivia  for our readers to save up for the weekend in case you find yourself in need of small talk.

Red states with lax gun laws have far worse gun death rates than places like Chicago

From IFLS

Next time you hear a conservative boasting about the right wing work ethic, remember this!

Are we fighting the wrong battles? What should be easy and what should be hard?

Australia has compulsory voter registration at age 18, and compulsory voter participation. Those who don't vote pay a fine. We should follow their example. Instead of having to wage a constant opposition against right wing efforts to suppress voter participation, we should be mandating that participation.

We should be more proactive.

In a typical election cycle, we consider it a badge of honor when Minnesota has one of the highest voting rates; most states average around 50% - less in off-year elections.  Minnesota has had the highest voter turnout in twelve of the last sixteen elections, and THE highest in the past eight, averaging around 67.6% voter turnout, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Even that turnout is poor, compared to other similarly developed nations, wealthy nations, with representative governments. Why? Many of them have compulsory voter participation.  We should consider it as well. 

Looking at studies of before-and-after comparisons of legally requiring voter participation, we see a big improvement.  An excellent comparison was done in this study on  before and after compulsory voting in Australia.  As we could expect here, the libertarian leaning 'you aren't the boss of me' crowd objected.  The legislation passed anyway - and here in MN, with our exemplary voting participation, we should be looking at new ways to lead the nation, including passing such laws, and seeking to have them passed on a national level.

It makes much more sense than fighting pitched battles to prevent every new instance of voter suppression by the right.

Compulsory voting in Australia: Turnout with and without it

Jonathon Louth, University of Adelaide

Lisa Hill, University of Adelaide

Australia has, it can be argued, the most efficient, effective and equitable compulsory voting system in the world and it enjoys turnout levels that are the envy of the industrial-ised voluntary voting world. It would be hard to find another system with such high levels of voter turnout coupled with such low transaction and opportunity costs to voters. Compulsory voting was introduced at the federal level in 1924 to address the problem of low voter turnout. It proved an extremely effective and well-tolerated remedy. The 1903 federal election turnout had only been 46.9 per cent of registered voters (RV) (Australian Electoral Commission [AEC] 1999), and at the last federal election held before the introduction of compulsory voting (1922) the average turnout of registered voters had been 58.7 per cent.

But turnout at the first federal election after 1924 (in 1925) surged dramatically, to an average of 91.4 per cent (RV). Data taken from the nine elections preceding and the nine following the introduction of compulsory voting shows that average voter turnout increased by 30.4 per cent (RV) (Jackman 2001). Turnout rates among the voting age population in Australia have remained consistently high, against the trend of steadily declining voter participation in advanced democracies (Blais 2000; Gray & Caul 2000). In thepostwar period, the average turnout rate has been around 83 per cent of voting age population (VAP) and 94.5 per cent (RV).In fact compulsory voting has been so effective at maintaining high turnout here that it has ‘rendered the study of turnout in Australian elections virtually irrelevant’ (Jackman 1997, p. 5).

Other well-administered systems in established democratic settings have enjoyed similar results. For the period 1946–2003, Belgium has had an exemplary turnout rate, of around 93 per cent (RV). Similarly, in The Netherlands, for the 53 years when compulsory voting was in force (1917–70), turnout was consistently above the 90 per cent (RV) mark. In 1970, the Dutch Parliament voted 91–15 to repeal the legal compulsion to vote (Irwin 1974, pp. 292–93). A drop in turnout followed immediately. Between 1946 and 1967, the average turnout had stood at 94.7 per cent (RV). The overall average in the post-compulsory voting era dropped to 81.4 per cent—and it continues to decline. The last four national elections (1994–2003) showed an average turnout of 77.8 per cent (RV). From this data we can see that there has been a 12–15 per cent reduction in turnout (using both RV and VAP data) and as much as 20 per cent for individual elections.

The Daily Show makes some good suggestions, borrowing from the Aussies

They have it all, down under, right down to their stupid woman who gets the facts wrong, like our Palin and Bachmann candidates. The difference is that in the land down under they don't prevent people from voting, they require the to do so, and they don't waste nearly as much time on the silly and stupid aspects of politics, by reducing the coverage of it with a shorter campaign.

Oh, the other thing they do better is they do NOT elect their stupid power hungry women who are wildly fact averse.  We could only do better by emulating THAT example.

Killer Santa Claus: don't judge a book by its cover

Rockne Newell looks like an off-season Santa Claus, but that only illustrates that killers can come in all sizes and shapes and ages. Newell is another gun nut, an old, white, flabby and crabby man who believes that having a weapon provides the only necessary authority to use it, given his apparent actions earlier this month in Pennsylvania. While the NRA, who's primary constituency is old, white, flabby and crabby men with a hankering to shoot someone for some pretext that makes sense to them, but is not necessarily lawful, claims we need good guys with guns, they neglect the better logic that argues we should have fewer guns, resulting in fewer incidents like this mass shooting.

Newell was a guy who had a gun, who prior to (allegedly) going on a shooting rampage, was the kind of person to whom the NRA appeals, whom the NRA seeks out for support.

But having a gun turned Newell into a bad guy with a gun, a bad guy who was NOT stopped by another gun wielding man, but by an unarmed man who stopped him. 

Newell NOT having a gun in the first place would have stopped him sooner, as might universal background checks, limits on ammunition and certain weapons, like assault style weapons.  The mini-14 used by Newell was the same weapon that was used by Anders Breivik in the Norway mass shooting, referred to as the poor man's assault rifle, modeled after a military weapon.  It is a favorite of mass shooters.

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for a week from today.

From the Sentinel:This photo taken May 22, 2013 shows Rockne Newell talking about his trials and tribulations with Ross Township, Pa., over junk on his property. State police identified 59-year-old Newell as the suspect in a shooting Monday, Aug, 5, 2013 in which three people were killed and at least two others injured in Ross Township. Witnesses say he barged into a municipal meeting room and began shooting before being tackled by a local official and possibly another person. (AP Photo/Pocono Record, Keith R. Stevenson)

Pa. man charged with killing 3: Town stole my home

A disabled junk dealer feuding with local officials over his debris-strewn property packed a rental car with guns and ammunition before opening fire at a town meeting and killing three men, authorities said Tuesday.

Rockne Newell, 59, had lost his property this year in a court fight over complaints that he lived in a storage shed, built an illegal culvert and used a bucket outside as a toilet.

At his arraignment on homicide charges Tuesday morning, a judge asked Newell if he owned any real estate.

"They stole it from me. That's what started all this," he replied.

Newell allegedly used a Ruger Mini-14 rifle to blast a barrage of gunfire through a wall into the meeting room Monday night in Ross Township, about 85 miles north of Philadelphia, before entering the room and shooting a supervisor and four residents, two of whom survived.

Newell then retreated to the car and picked up a revolver, authorities said. When he returned to the meeting room, the 5-foot-10, 240-pound suspect was tackled by two men and shot in the leg during the scuffle, officials said.

Right Wing Mass Shooters

In the last 12 months, three of the worst mass attacks on Americans have come from Americans who were right wing extremists.  Additionally, the the most destructive act of terrorism in the United States other than 9-11, was the Oklahoma City Bombing, which was also perpetrated by a white, right-wing extremist. 

Not more than a year ago this week, there was the Sikh Temple shooting in Wisconsin which was committed by a white supremacist.  The Newtown Shooting in Connecticut was committed by a right wing sympathiser who wanted to emulate Anders Brevik in Norway. Family and friends reported him to be a right wing survivalist like his mother.  Most recently, the Boston Bombing appears to have been committed by two lone wolves who appear to be more influenced by the right wing conspiracy theories and white supremacist ideal than Islam.

The Far right presents a three part problem: a fearful mindset that embraces conspiracy theories, a willingness to commit violence without a factual basis justifying it, and obsession with accumulating weapons combined with paramilitary organisations. 

The right needs to repudiate their extremist fringe, especially the violent segment, and acceptance of violence as a political tactic--the same way William F. Buckley repudiated the John Birch Society.  Until then, they have lost credibility and have become just dangerous.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Refineries in the Sky

I remember when, in 2003 and 2004, gasoline went from about $1.40/gallon to over $3 and then over $4/gallon, my conservative friends and their blog-o-sphere echo-chamber complained loudly and for a long time that the genesis of this pricing spike was NOT related to the increase in the price of oil, a price driven in part by the threat to our oil supply caused by the Iraq War, but rather was due to a lack of refining capacity.  That lack of capacity, so the echo-chamber, tin-foil hat theory went, was due to the fact that no new refineries had been built in the US in 25 years, and that was because of "over-regulation" by the US government.

From time to time, even today, you will hear this meme'.

And it's just that, a meme', a false-faced argument indicative of either ignorance or frankly, sophistry (willful disinformation).

In 2003, I pointed out to my friends across the aisle, that in fact the head of the what I recall was the US Petroleum Association (a woman who was the head of Texaco at the time if I recall correctly), said that in fact the number of US oil refineries hadn't been increased not because of regulation, but quite simply because they predicted demand well into the future and saw that after the "baby boom" generation died off, there simply wouldn't be sufficient on-shore demand to warrant the capital investment in creating new refineries.  Further, that while the number of refineries hadn't changed, the refining CAPACITY overall had increased by 25% since 1980.  She also said (iirc) that anyone who claimed a lack of refining capacity was driving the pricing in gasoline simply didn't understand the market.  To his credit, President Bush (W, not HW), never used this meme' as an excuse, and simply said the pricing for gasoline was "complex", apparently so complex that simple people couldn't possibly conceive of how it worked.  That was the line oil executives used when asked to testify before Congress - that the price of oil depended upon many things - most of which were so complex it wouldn't be possible to provide a full explanation.  That said though, there was and has been since, at least one executive who DID say that the price of oil speculation was quite significant.

At that time and since, oil (per barrel) has topped $125.  IIRC at that time, and I know since, the price of speculation was quoted as being responsible for probably $25-$40 of that overall price.  Not a lack of refineries, but instead the same issues of money manipulation and unregulated purchases driving the market needlessly and artificially higher than actual consumption-based demand warranted, much like the housing market in the same period.  The cost to US consumers was massive, tens of billions of dollars which otherwise could have been spent on food, clothing, vacations, etc.. but instead went into the pockets of speculators who did nothing other than purchase and sell futures contracts.  They never intended to take delivery, they had no refining capacity, and they certainly never intended to distribute.  They just "got paid" for recognizing a market which they could manipulate.  Among the worst offenders were the large investment banks.  If you can tell me how an investment bank was a "value-add" to the delivery process for oil, I'll be surprised.

Now there comes this.. http://www.cnbc.com/id/100943620

US oil refining capacity has become so prolific that in fact, as part of handling shale oil production, we have excess refining capacity, and sufficient excess refining capacity that we are becoming the "refining center for the world" as the article in the link quotes.

My question is, "How is this possible?"  Isn't it the case that US governmental regulation keeps us from having sufficient capacity.  Obviously the problem with the price of oil has been over-regulation keeping us from having this capacity, so where and how could this possibly have happened?

Perhaps these refineries and this capacity magically appeared DESPITE regulation.  I know, that must be it, it was aliens who gave us this capacity.  These refineries and this capacity clearly were floating on clouds.  These aliens built these refineries in the sky and DESPITE the most vigorous attempts by tree-hugging liberals, those darned aliens delivered those refineries to US based oil producers JUST in time to allow them to handle the refining of shale oil.

That must be it.  Good thing I was wearing my tin-foil hat, or I'd have never noticed.

Too Stupid to Run for ANything

From the Daily Show

ThE R Word

From the Daily Show:

About that unacceptable double standard and erroneous expectations

"Perhaps, someday, blacks will win the right to be treated like volitional human beings. But not yet."
 - Ann Coulter

(Trayvon Martin) was "an enraged black man-child"..."dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy."
- Ted draft-avoiding pants-pooping Nugent

The question needs to be asked, why is it that conservatives feel entitled to demand a different standard of behavior from people just because they CHOOSE to see them as 'other'?  Why do they EXPECT that their irrational, unfair, and ludicrous prejudices should be indulged just because it makes them feel more comfortable?

Every one of us who has ever attended a block-watch meeting with police, or a self-defense class, has been taught by law enforcement and other safety experts that we should view being followed as threatening behavior.  But I have yet to see one of the white conservative racists acknowledge that when a stranger - as George Zimmerman was - does this to someone, that it is threatening, provocative behavior.

Instead, we see conservatives accusing Trayvon Martin of dope smoking. We don't have any evidence that he did so; the trace amount of chemical in his body was too small to identify how it was ingested.  As we know, it is possible to have trace amounts to substantial amounts of the active chemical in marijuana, even a contact high, from being around other people who are smoking pot, without a person themselves smoking it.

We have ZERO evidence that Trayvon Martin EVER sold marijuana to anyone.  We have ZERO evidence that Trayvon Martin was a gangsta-wannabe either.  That 'gangsta-wannabe' accusation is inconsistent with a kid who is making plans to go to college, who is participating in school sports, who is a good student, who is active in their church and who has a happy, close, supportive family life.

"skittles hoodie-boy"......Is there anything inherently wrong with either skittles or hoodies? NO, of course not, so therefore criticizing Trayvon Martin for wearing a hooded sweatshirt on a rainy night in February, where even in Florida it can become uncomfortably chill after dark is not justified, much less the 'crime' of bringing candy to a future step-brother.  Let's call that what it is - kind, considerate, thoughtful and polite behavior.

dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

an enraged black man-child” and a “dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.”
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

an enraged black man-child” and a “dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.”
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

an enraged black man-child” and a “dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.”
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

an enraged black man-child” and a “dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.”
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

an enraged black man-child” and a “dope-smoking, dope-peddling, gangsta wannabe, Skittles hoodie boy.”
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/868450/ted-nugent-stevie-wonder-is-brain-dead-for-defending-trayvon/#pbG8SU25ZJZafetg.99

Stephen Colbert calls it, and calls it out, demonstrating why the hoodie meme is a stupid stereotype:

The white majority would never accept having to tell their sons they can't wear hoodies, can't go to buy ice tea and candy after the sun goes down, or that they can't run to catch a movie if they're late, as was the example given by AG Eric Holder, describing an incident when he was stopped by police, earlier in his career as a federal prosecutor.  Why would anyone then think it is acceptable that black people, or people of any other race or ethnicity should do so?  If people, including male black teens, cannot go make a legal purchase, and walk home, without someone accusing them of being drunk, high, dangerous or criminal, they are not equally free people, the same as the white majority. Rather, they are second class Americans.

The real question remaining, the one which should be asked of all conservatives who think blaming the victim for not "dressing appropriately" (according to their own standards for blacks), is this.  Would you put up with being told how to dress, when to run, when not to run?  We think you wouldn't.  We think, just like if you were told you can't wear a gun on your hip you would not accept it.  Yet, wearing a gun is obviously far more threatening and dangerous than a "hoodie."  If you would not permit it to you, why do you feel it is fair to demand from something similar from an entire race of people?  Are all blacks to be personified by the likes of Willie Horton?  Are you personified by Timothy McVeigh?  More to the point, would you, will YOU, put up with your children's lives being held at risk if they simply run down the street?  If not, and to be clear you SHOULD not have to, why is it OK for you to expect it of others?  You have blamed the victims here (Mr. Nugent).  You have said they have to genuflect to your own varying standards of conduct for an entire race, standards you'd never accept for yourself.  You've said they have to bow and scrape - small wonder they are outraged.

If we believe these stereotypes are not reasonable, and we do believe they aren't, then we should also understand the behavior of George Zimmerman in following Trayvon Martin was not reasonable.  It lead to precipitating an argument between a 17 year old boy (many of whom are a little mouthy), one who was probably and reasonably afraid, and a 33 year old man  - the 33 year old who was the "adult in the room" and responsible to keep his head.  That confrontation between one boy who was reasonably afraid, and a 33 year old who in-part profiled this boy because of his clothing and the weather led to the boy being killed - in what some have referred to as a "murder." (namely, those on the jury who said Zimmerman, "Got away with murder" - even though they could not vote that way due to the way the law is written).  The bottom line here is simply this, no one, not any race, not age, not any gender, should be expected to dress a certain way or have their lives or liberty be held in jeopardy by ANYONE, right-wing pseudo-civil libertarians or actual sane people.  The under-reported story here is that we, a significant percentage of mainstream society has accepted that Trayvon, by virtue of his attire, was somehow to blame and the important follow-on point, that we have failed to see the massive injustice that exists in our society when we have an entire race of people who feel the need to teach their children to behave to a double-standard just to stay alive.  It is morally outrageous, and we, as a nation, should be ashamed it is so.

The Anniversary of the 2011 England Riots: What can we learn about this and other protests and riots? - part 1

photo of burned builing, above, burning double decker bus, below
(both photos from wikipedia.org)

On August 4th, 2011 police in a norther area of London, England shot an unarmed black man, Mark Duggan, leading to protests, which in turn were followed by outbreaks of incredibly destructive looting and burning, sometimes referred to as the Blackberry riots, aka the 'English Spring'.

While these events were given some coverage back in 2011, the subsequent analysis of events is insightful, not only in understanding those events, but in a different insight into our own protests and rioting in the U.S., covering events as disparate as the Occupy protests and the Trayvon Martin shooting protests to the Huntington Beach, California Surfing event riots, as well as looking at protest and rioting in movements internationally, like the ongoing Arab spring unrest.

Very little national/mainstream media attention, either broadcast or print, has been given to the information that the investigation into these events is ongoing. Taking a look at these events is important to understand both similarities and differences between them, in more careful analysis, in place of superficial coverage.

In August 2011, the events that began on August 4th continued to August 15th, resulting in the burning of 100 homes and businesses, and the arrest of more than 3,100 people, the identification of more than 3,500 crimes, 6 deaths, double digit injuries, and more than 200 million pound sterling in property damages, like the burned out building in the above photo. Half of that damage was in London, half in other parts of the country.

The Tottenham area of London was the site of riots in the mid-80s, the Broadwater Farm riots, which was attributed to racial components, as well as police distrust focused on unpopular policies, including specifically search policies as well as outrage over violence directed at black citizens by police, including different instances of shooting unarmed men. In this respect, although there was not widespread rioting, there were protests in events like the Oscar Grant III shooting, that was the subject of the Fruitvale Station movie.

There continue to be on-going investigations and court cases in both the Fruitvale station shooting by police, in the U.S., and in the police shooting of Mark Duggan in the UK. In the U.S., on July 30th, 2013, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals approved that suit could move forward against the BART officers involved in the 2009 shooting of Oscar Grant.

Likewise, investigations and court cases continue in the Mark Duggan shooting in the UK. An inquest has been postponed several times, and an investigative report has been pending since 2011. The most recent postponement of the inquest from the 2011 death is now scheduled for September 2013.

In my completely unscientific and casual survey, people seem to generally be unaware of the continuing investigation and litigation relating to these instances of civil unrest, as well as being unaware of what there is for us to learn from them that applies to other unrest, including some surprising statistics about differences in incidence by ethnicity, age, and gender, as well as the extensive role played by social media that makes these events different in the U.K., the U.S., and other parts of the globe, from similar events in previous decades, and similar but earlier movements. In exploring the topic, I'm going to examine what we know, what we think we know (but don't), and what we have wrong in our understanding and information, and the role of the media in contributing to those categories.

Stay tuned!

Yet Conservatives use this to bash Obama? GOP/Tea Party = Hypocrisy (and ignorance)

Because it IS wrong!

White Violence, Black Violence, and Bigoted Double Standards

Cross posted from MNPP:
The Huntingdon Beach Riot was real, the footage of rioting was real, the arrests were all real. Both public and private property was damaged extensively.  Tear gas was used by riot police to stop it.

Where is the Hannity rant, the O'Reilly scream of anger, not just for the Huntington Beach Riot, but all the other white European riots? It's not like there aren't plenty of them, so why is a similar finger of blame not pointed, why no similar claim of inferiority not made?

DOUBLE STANDARD MUCH on the right?

Below - Euro-riots 2000 and Canada riots as well as the Huntington Beach California riot.



and this riot, in Vancouver in 2011 - the one that was claimed to be in Miami after the Zimmerman trial:



and Huntington Beach, California:


But this is how the conservative white racists view themselves, while conveniently ignoring every indication of white violence, pretending to themselves it doesn't exist. It does. We saw it in Huntington Beach, California, and we see it to our usually very peaceful neighbor to the north, and we see it in Europe, in the original countries of origin for white Americans.  There is as much violence and anti-social facets to white culture as any other.



The reality is that if white people were viewed the way people of color are viewed, he would be outraged, he would not be speaking so smugly and so ignorantly. There would be an incredible push for change, for fairness, if the relative status were reversed. White people would not tolerate directed to them  the racism they show to other people.