As a possible conversation-starter, I share LBJ’s infamous “Daisy” ad, because the WashPost noted today that this week is its 50th anniversary (actually it was Sunday — and it only aired once).
Beyond that, it’s up to y’all to come up with topics. I’m really busy today…
Related Posts
Since I wrote a long rant about hypocrisy on the Ray Rice and NFL thing on my own blog, I’m just going to link it here.
There. Consider yourself warned – it’s a rant.
Bryan – don’t you understand? When it comes to Benghazi, IRS deleting emails, the VA, and any other example of Obama administration incompetence/malfeasance, the appropriate course of action is “Move on!”. What amuses me is how many people bought into the Obama b.s. in 2008 that everything was going to be different. Little changes in politics except who’s scamming who.
1) Anyone lining up to get the new iPhone or iWatch?
2) The Greenville News notes that SC’s transportation maintenance shortfall is up to $42B, or about $1.5B annually from now until 2040. We’d basically need to triple the gas tax, at current levels of consumption. I guess.
3) Anyone else notice that the fiancee pushed/struck Ray Rice prior to him throwing her a haymaker? Not that it makes it OK, just wondering if anyone noticed it?
1. No to Apple products.
2. Yet it takes the Richland County road crew FIVE MONTHS to fix a quarter mile section of Rimer Pond Road in Blythewood – missing their target date by two months – and causing at least a thousand cars a day to detour five miles. How about we have some performance guarantees before throwing more money at the roads?
3. She tapped him. He decked her. And then dragged her around like a sack of potatoes.
My iPhone 5C does me just fine.
Foreign Powers Buy Influence at Think Tanks… via NYT http://goo.gl/cYmsJF
“The money is increasingly transforming the once-staid think-tank world into a muscular arm of foreign governments’ lobbying in Washington. And it has set off troubling questions about intellectual freedom:
Some scholars say they have been pressured to reach conclusions friendly to the government financing the research.”
We had already been alerted to the IPCC’s corrupted integrity and intellectual dishonesty regarding Global Warming >> Climate Change >> Climate Dispruption >> Climate Pollution.
Caveat Taxpayers!
By, the way, on the “Daisy” ad…
It’s fascinating that it is so famous when it only ran once — in an era before YouTube or blogs or any other means for going viral.
Here’s how it happened, according to Wikipedia:
SO much used to depend on those nightly network news shows…
Of course, I missed it entirely. I was living in Guayaquil, Ecuador, where there was one TV station, and it was only on the air for a few hours each evening. I don’t remember any news programming, but since I was a kid, I wouldn’t have watched it. I mainly just remember Felix the Cat cartoons…
The legacy of LBJ continues to weigh on us, dragging us down each and every day.
I would rank LBJ up there with Carter and Obama as our three worst presidents.
Also add Woodrow Wilson to the worst list.
But not Clinton? What did he do to make you like him so much more than all other Democrats from the past 50 years?
PRWORA? Welfare reform? Also, if it wasn’t for Clinton, we’d have never had the Contract with America, now would we?
I clicked on that link about the movie that was on when the ad aired, “David and Bathsheba.” That was a Gregory Peck and Susan Hayward vehicle from 1951.
Think about that for a second: There were only three networks, and one of them spent two hours of prime time airing a forgotten movie that was already 13 years old — made two years before I was born.
The networks could get away with that, because what were you going to do? If you wanted to watch TV, you had to watch whatever low-cost junk they chose to show you…
As opposed to the high-cost junk we have today?
I just got through watching the first two episodes of Breaking Bad. I might watch a few more but frankly this is pretty boring so far. Not sure what the huppla is all about.
Ok, new topic. How about this? With the midterm elections coming up, Americans by a 10-point margin, 52-42 percent, see the Obama presidency more as a failure than a success.
In related news, the President will be making a big-time, prime-time address tomorrow to talk about his plans to take us to War in Iraq and Syria. I, for one, am waiting to hear with baited breath as to how we are going to defeat an army of jihadists with only surgical strikes and with no boots on the ground.
All presidents rate pretty low in their second term. George W left with a stunning 22% approval rating, lowest ever. (My question would be who were the 22% who approved?) Facts are facts. And when facts rather than Fox New chatter is used to assess a president Mr. Obama ain’t too bad. Consider:
Unemployment is down to 6.1% (peaking at 10% at the height of the Bush recession) as jobs are added for 50 straight months.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm
Inflation and interest rates remain low
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.t01.htm
Obamacare is proving to be a HUGE success. This is becoming a problem for the GOP as more and more Republican governors are opting to accept Medicaid money
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/09/ted-cruzs-obamacare-nightmare-comes-to-life.html
The annual budget deficits have declined each year since Ws last budget in 2009:
U.S. Federal Budget Deficits by Year Since 1960:
• FY 2014 – $649 billion.
• FY 2013 – $680 billion.
• FY 2012 – $1.087 trillion.
• FY 2011 – $1.299 trillion.
• FY 2010 – $1.294 trillion.
• FY 2009 – $1.413 trillion.
And finally, POTUS understands how important it is to think twice and bomb once, if at all, when it comes to foreign policy. This was underscored today by the political gift that keeps on giving to the Democrats, Dick Cheney. This bombastic, five-deferment, chickenhawk reminds us just how important a measured policy is so that we don’t create the nightmare that the previous administration stuck us with and Obama is working hard to fix.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/09/dick-cheney-iraq_n_5791770.html
Remember, a year ago, the Republicans, led by John McCain, were pushing for assisting the rebels in Syria. As it turns out that assistance would have likely aided ISIS. And even if we could find “moderates” in the region they may not turn out to be the panacea the warmongers would have you believe. There is a new report out that suggests Steven Sotlof was handed over to ISIS by moderates in Iraq.
http://www.ibtimes.com/sotloff-sold-isis-so-called-moderate-rebels-claims-family-spokesperson-1682452
So before all the handwringing about the Obama administration gets too out of hand remember that things are improving. Given the horrors we suffered through under the Bush administration it’s important to reflect on just how far we’ve come.
My TV comment posted immediately but my comment about POTUS is awaiting moderation. What gives?
bud, did you use one of the REDACTED banned words?
Anyone else see this article: CPD: 7 charged in undercover prostitution investigation
Whoa, scary pictures! Woof woof!
Who did they harm? Like drug use, this should not be a crime. People make choices. These people need help, not jail time. Cops should focus on actual criminals.
That wasn’t my point. My point was: LOOK AT THE PICTURES, OMG! KILL IT WITH FIRE!
Better yet:
Nuke it from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
Oh, I get your point… but the way they look is likely a result of drug abuse. And they likely are prostitutes to support the drug habit. They aren’t harming anyone but themselves.. so spending resources to arrest, prosecute, and jail these people has little benefit. They’ll get out of jail and go back to the same behavior.
Seriously, do we need an “undercover operation” for this? These people aren’t harming anyone but themselves.
I’ll never understand how anyone could believe in the “victimless crimes” canard. The interconnectedness of human beings, the impact that each person’s actions has on other people, is so obvious to me.
We are responsible to other people for what we do with our lives. And our actions have consequences for other people. I doubt you’d have to look very hard into the lives of these individuals to find the people, other than themselves, that they are hurting…
If you spend the rent money, or the grocery money, or whatever on hookers and drugs, your family might just be the victim. From the looks of these pro’s, you might be leaving with something that penicillin can’t cure, too…
As opposed to spending the rent money on tattoos, Gamecock tickets, or a filet mignon?
So, by your standard, Brad, we should be arresting people who are emotionally distant from their families, or are alcoholics, or are adulterers – right? They are hurting other people.
I want to see these people helped not incarcerated or targeted by undercover police operations. Putting people in jail for personal behaviors doesn’t help anyone either – and it probably makes matters worse.
A criminal record is a career killer. Should someone be put at such a disadvantage going forward because of a personal decision? You are effectively guaranteeing them a bleak future.
Definitely not advocating Gamecock tickets (Caskey) or tattoos. The filet mignon doesn’t victimize anyone, except the tender loins of an all-American grass fed steer.
If you are prostituting yourself around MLK Park, over on Two Notch, Millwood, or in Lower Waverly – your future is already guaranteed to be bleak.
I’ll never understand how anyone could believe in the “victimless crimes” canard.
-Brad
Like drinking beer or selling stuff on Sunday. Seriously Brad I’ll never understand the illogic of allowing some vices and sending people to prison for others. It’s totally outrageous. Let’s allow people the free use of their bodies as THEY deem appropriate, not some government nanny.
Without going into great editorial detail, I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of their looks.
I have to admit, I did a double-take.
I was struck by their less than conventionally attractive looks, but these a mug shots, after all. Surely you’ve been standing in the grocery store check out line and seen the tabloid photos of beautiful stars’ mug shots, or “stars without makeup”… Also, one thinks they might be far more attractive than their clientele.
Isn’t a double-take supposed to be when you see an attractive lady?
Seems like a one-take would have been enough for these ladies. 🙂
“less than conventionally attractive looks” — now THAT’S what I call tactful…
Nice “Aliens” reference.
Prostitutes in reality don’t look anything like the movies – too hard of a life.
What does look like the movies IRL?
There are no “victimless” crimes. That’s why society has made them crimes. Yes, sometimes stuff gets criminalized for reasons that don’t make sense, or don’t make sense in an evolving world. Unfortunetely, we also have a long history of making laws based upon deeply flawed religious beliefs and racial attitudes. However, tamping down prostitution is one of the things that all societies have understood is in the public good.
I just think we, as a society, would decide that it would be better, in the end of the day (to use a Sanfordism), to prosecute those who seek out prostitutes at two or three times the rate of the prostitutes themselves.
It seems sort of pointless to only go after those who are already at rock bottom, without also taking actions (maybe not always criminal) against those who equally contribute to the situation. We shouldn’t forget that our “freedoms to do what we want” usually have consequences for other people.
Mark – please compare prostitution to adultery. Which one does more harm to other people? Should adultery be a crime worthy of jail time?
If a single man and a single woman want to engage in sex and the woman wants to charge a fee for that transaction, who is harmed? If a young woman marries an old rich guy just for his money, is that a crime?
Maybe it’s not so great for his kids – or his favorite charities.
Weak answer, Mark. And maybe a prostitute’s kids end up getting fed instead of going hungry… that would be a benefit.
Doug, you just made my larger point. All our actions have consequences on others.
And, yeah, I was being flip above.
Every choice we make in life has a consequence on other people. Life is about the intersection of lives. Intersection is a benign way of saying there will be damage done.
Personally, every time I think “nobody is going to get hurt by this”, that’s a great time to realize somebody, somewhere, probably will (or could be) badly hurt as a result.
To me, prostitution and adultery are not comparable. They aren’t in any way the same, conceptually. I just don’t have a binary outlook on things.
Amen to all that brother Mark has said.
But you are ignoring the fact that we are putting people in jail for some behaviors and not others. Does that work? Is there any evidence that jailing someone for prostitution or drugs helps people?
Adultery is worse than prostitution.
I agree with Doug. (Shock)
Adultery destroys families. Prostitution is far less likely to. Voluntary sex workers do little harm. Coerced sex workers are victims, not perpetrators. If we legalized voluntary sex work, we could devote scarce resources to real crimes.
I don’t think we should imprison adulterers, but some community service would be nice!
Voluntary sex workers – that’s sort of funny.
I don’t think there is such a thing as voluntary professional sex. But I agree many sex workers are far more coerced victims than perpetrators.
Adultery is a symptom of a dysfunctional (or at least not then functioning) marriage. It may, or may not, mark a bad actor. Or it may simply highlight that other deeper and more intractable issues personal and relationship issues are at work.
I am not saying that it is not straight up betrayal, however.
You keep skirting the questions, Mark. Do you think prostitutes and drug users should be in jail? Should there be specific undercover operations executed to address prostitution? What is the benefit to society in placing these types of people in jail?
“I don’t think there is such a thing as voluntary professional sex.”
There was a long running show on HBO about the Bunny Ranch in Nevada. Those women were absolutely voluntary sex professionals. They were able to choose or reject clients… and it appeared that they made a very good income and enjoyed their jobs.
I think some women do voluntarily decide to sell the use of their bodies, perhaps out of lack of options, but also for other reasons. Some own their own sexuality rather than choosing to adhere to a tribal view of chastity that their male relatives do. If you own it, you can sell it. (Except for certain digital licenses)
Adultery is per se a symptom of a dysfunctional marriage, or course, but with no fault divorce now available in fifty states, those who choose adultery are bad actors, trying to have their cake (which may simply be inertia or lack of assertiveness skills) and eat it, too.
Doug, providing commentary is not skirting questions. I see things differently.
How does one provide a black and white answer to “should prostitutes and drug users be sent to jail? It’s far more complex than that. I didn’t really think many people go to jail for drug use. They go to jail for committing the crimes that they commit to feed their drug habit, or for other things related to their abuse of drugs. I imagine not many prostitutes are likewise held in jail beyond their arraignment.
But, yes, there should absolutely be undercover police activity to thwart prostitution – it is a very corrosive neighborhood activity with huge collateral effects. The benefit of placing anyone in jail for society is the same for these or any other crimes: we want to punish, rehabilitate and simply remove temporarily (or permanently) some people from “normal” society – always in varying proportions.
Are you talking about being convicted of a crime, or of actually serving time in jail – I am still unsure which you mean.
I don’t have sort answers to the complex, morally ambiguous problems facing greater society. Sorry.
Some crimes on the books are artifacts of a more puritanical, tribal society. We have an interest in regulating intoxicants, for public safety. What interest do we have in regulating how one may sell sex?
public health?
Which is why a regulated, tested, voluntary sex workforce would be better than what we have now.
Yup.
So how does that work exactly?
I guess I don’t think of prostitution as a profession for business-minded people. I am sure that there is a small percentage of prostitutes would do well being able to legally hang their shingle out. But they are the ones who fly under the radar now.
All the others are the ones with other real problems. And the ones who cause society at large problems.
Even if we create a sanitized, regulated sex industry we do nothing about the real problem: the intractable issue of addicts and the destitute hustling.
Well, lots of professions are peopled by disturbed people. Corporate finance, say, or professional football, but few call for the illegalization of these. Selling sex is not any more dysfunctional. Why do we give trophy wives a pass?
I don’t, personally. It would be awesome if great sex were legally and culturally as available to purchase as a nice meal. I just don’t see that happening any time in the future of humanity. The costs to others are just too high.
In the world we live in, the actual transaction for sex is often punished because people understand that prostitution is linked to all sorts of other kinds of criminal activity that occurs in connection with it. As I said earlier, we should be far harsher on the johns and pimps than on the prostitutes themselves; socially as well as legally.
Without taking a position on prostitution or drug use, I absolutely believe that if a law is on the books it should be strictly enforced, without exception. To have a law on the books that is not enforced (or is selectively enforced) encourages disrespect for the the law and/or corruption.
If law enforcement/society/whatever doesn’t have the will to enforce a law, then the law should be repealed.
Brian, it seems to me that you’re assuming that things are a lot more black-and-white, and society is more monolithic, than they in fact are.
You can have a societal consensus that a certain thing shouldn’t be countenanced, even if almost everyone agrees that there are other things that have a more urgent demand on the finite time and resources of law enforcement.
I operate on the theory that most people will obey the law because it is the law. Just by banning something bad (jaywalking, say) or requiring something good (wearing seatbelts), you create a better situation than you’d have without those laws, even if not everyone complies. Even if I’m wrong about “most” people complying, some people will — unless the law is SO unjust or ill-advised or simply unpopular that yes, it should be (and most likely will be, under the circumstances) repealed. But that would only apply in rare cases…
I don’t expect 100% compliance – with any law. There’s no law that has 100% compliance, whether it’s seat belt laws, DUI laws, or laws against rape. I’m not arguing that you shouldn’t have a law if people don’t follow it 100% of the time. If that were the rule, you wouldn’t have any laws.
I would agree with your idea that most people will obey the law because it is the law, but that’s beside the point I’m making here.
My point is that if you are observed by law enforcement to have broken a law – you should be cited for it. For instance, take the seat-belt law. If you get stopped by a police officer, and you aren’t wearing your seat-belt, you should get a ticket. The cop shouldn’t let you off. If we’re going to have a law that requires wearing seat belts, our law enforcement should enforce it.
If we have a law against drug use, we should enforce it. If that motivates people to say “Hey, this is stupid to get arrested for a little bit of marijuana.” Then that will likely spur them to call their elected officials and advocate for a change in the law. That’s how it’s supposed to work. Otherwise, you have a situation where people just say “Oh yeah, that law about marijuana possession is just a joke; no one pays attention to it.” And that’s bad.
Now that you’ve qualified your statement so that I understand your position better, I agree with you.
See, THIS is how the deliberative process is supposed to work, people!
Sure, I agree with you, Rule of Law. Except that cops selectively enforce every day. Everybody knows you get at least 5 MPH over the speed limit, except in South Congaree. When is the last time you got stopped for failing to timely signal a lane change? Jaywalking?
Prostitution and drug arrests are easy. Stopping gangs is hard. Speeding tickets are just for revenue purposes and don’t really affect driving habits (as anyone who has driven I77 between Columbia and Charlotte can attest).
Would we have a better society if all the money spent on enforcement of “personal behavior” crimes was instead spent on treatment and education? Wouldn’t it be better for our courts and jails to be full of real criminals instead?
Speeding tickets DO affect driving habits, as anyone who has ever been on certain stretches of the Autobahn can testify.
Except that cops selectively enforce every day. Everybody knows you get at least 5 MPH over the speed limit, except in South Congaree. When is the last time you got stopped for failing to timely signal a lane change?
You’re illustrating my point. You know that you can break the law (in regards to speeding) in most places. Accordingly, people basically disregard the speed limit as a silly thing because it’s selectively enforced. If the speed limit was strictly enforced, you would likely see (1) people driving within the speed limit; and (2) people advocating for higher speed limits. Both of these things would be good. We would probably have better driving habits (like the turn signal) and people would know that the law means what it says.
But that’s just me. I’m a stickler because I like rules. I love Civil Procedure, and it frustrates me to NO END when I’m arguing a rule of civil procedure that mandates something as in “the Court SHALL…” and the Judge just kind of give me the Well, I know that’s the rule, but we’re going to cut Mr. Senior Lawyer good-ole-boy some slack here.
Drive me Bananas. But now I’m probably coming across like Walter in “The Big Lebowski”.
There are RULES!
Maybe it should bother me more than it does that we have an UNDERSTOOD de facto speed limit, which is 10 mph over the de jure limit — which the police can enforce strictly if they decide to.
But as things stand, if we get stopped for doing 2 or 3 mph over the posted limit, we all feel that the social contract has been breached. But if we’re stopped going 12 over, we figure them’s the rules.
I got stopped once, on I-40 between Jackson, TN, and Memphis, for going 2 mph over the limit.
This was in 1975. I had been to Jackson to apply for what would turn out to be my first real, professional newspaper job after college. A day fraught with destiny.
I told the trooper that I guess I had lost track of my speed because I was so anxious to get back to Memphis, because I was supposed to cover a prep football game that night for the (now defunct) Memphis Press-Scimitar. That was one of a number of part-time and freelance things I was doing at the time while I hunted for a real job.
He let me go with a warning. So the social contract remained intact….
People go 5-10 MPH over, not 25, in most cases.
My nephew got clocked at 105 on I-126….yes,by the zoo.