Am I Missing Something?

Because when I hear the term "net neutrality", what I'm hearing is along the lines of "everyone's car should have the same features."

In short, some internet service providers want to fundamentally alter the way the internet works and collect money from companies like Netflix and Facebook to guarantee their data can continue to reach users unimpeded.

The above video is something of an ad for a VPN service, but it also fits net neutrality into the analogy of cars traveling down a freeway. Under a neutral internet, this flow of traffic is constant and unaffected. If ISPs like Comcast continue to get their way, companies will need to pay "tolls" where there previously were none. If they don't pay, their ability to send data to their users will be limited.

So, internet service providers want companies like Netflix that use a lot of bandwidth to pay extra for faster internet. Is that about right? Companies like Facebook that have made its founders billionaires several times over, all by selling your personal data to every company under the sun. Oh, and ads.

But when an ISP - and I yield to no one in my undying hatred of Comcast - wants to charge more for companies that use more bandwidth, that's a bad thing. The service they provide - that costs them money to provide - should be unfettered regardless of how much people are using it.

You know, like all those unlimited cell phone plans.

Dunno. Maybe there's something I'm missing. The idea that "the Internet has operated as an unregulated, competitive free market" is a false dichotomy - conflating the *content* of the internet with how the internet reaches the consumer. Force the ISPs to continue to provide the same access regardless of cost, what's to say they won't *only* issue 2400 baud modems with their basic service? You can have 50 MbPS service, but at the entry-level rate internet service you can only have the lowest modem.

One thing's for certain: whenever big business (and let's be realistic here; Netflix, Facebook, etc. are very big business) and the federal government want the same thing, bad things happen. GM bailout? Banks too big to fail? Cash for clunkers? Every time the government has acted to make things "fair," the end result is someone takes it in the shorts. I trust this no further than I can throw it.

You know what these businesses want? They want to make as much money as possible. That another party might cut into that revenue stream has them running to big nanny government for laws. That should send up giant red flags. Big nanny government will do *anything* for more power - and doing things in the interest of "fairness" lets the government stick its greasy mitts ALL over the place.

So change my mind. Give me one reason we should support "net neutrality" - beyond "I want to stream unlimited everything for the same price I've always paid. The linked article relies heavily on the status quo - using the "we've always operated that way" excuse, but a lot has changed over the internet in 20 years. We've gone from slow modems that took minutes to render a simple picture to lightning-fast cable internet capable of streaming video on the fly. Why shouldn't ISPs charge more money for customers that use more of the service?

It sounds suspiciously like "everyone gets a Ferarri." It's not *fair* that some car manufacturers make cars that are faster than others. It's not *fair* that some cars are more luxurious than others. Why is there no "Car Neutrality"? Why is "net neutrality" different than demanding that everyone get a Cadillac Escalade for the price of a Chevette? Look, I get it. We don't want to pay more for the services we've gotten used to having. Well, I hated it when gas went from $1 a gallon to $4 in the span of only a few years. Still happened.

Asking the government to step in to ensure "fairness" is a horrible idea. Every single time the government has acted to make things more "fair", it seizes control, makes the product worse, and causes huge headaches for all parties. See ObamaCare for a prime example - that really made healthcare more "fair," didn't it? Let the .gov succeed in wrestling control of the internet from the ISP and you'll have the same effect - if you like what they did to your health care, you'll love how they'll handle your internet.

And just wait until it takes control and offers "auto neutrality" - say hello to the Trabant 2.0...

That is all.

A Word Or Two About Ebola...

Man, this is just turning into a complete and utter goat-rope, isn't it? I mean, we're seeing actual news articles out there that would have been rejected by the staff at the Onion for being too far-fetched:

First, we have a cleanup crew powerwashing the outside of an apartment where the first ebola patient was staying in the US after he vomited all over the sidewalk. Notice the distinct lack of anything even remotely resembling protective gear, caution tape, or anything that might indicate folks should stay away.


A nurse who treated the first ebola patient called the CDC to see if she should fly, even though she had begun to exhibit signs. The CDC cleared her to fly on multiple occasions. Now, it's bad enough that the CDC told someone that DIRECTLY INTERACTED WITH AN EBOLA PATIENT that it was okay to get on a plane despite running a fever, but for a gorram nurse to STILL GET ON THE PLANE???

We have a "supervisor" overseeing the transfer of someone stricken with ebola shown in immediate proximity to the patient with zero protective gear. The official Ishityounot explanation is that he needed to be able to see the transfer. Folks, if you believe that, I have oceanfront property in Kansas to sell you.

The director of the CDC is apparently telling people you can give - but not get - ebola on a bus. Because that makes ALL kinds of sense. If someone shouldn't get on a bus if they think they have the virus, then clearly you *could* catch it on a bus. Or a plane.

And speaking of planes, airports are now screening travelers arriving from West Africa. There's no word on what they're going to do if they do find someone with an ebola-like fever. $20 says they'll admit the person to a hospital, but not quarantine the entire plane.

---

And of course, there's the blame game:

Ebola is the fault of the NRA. Because the NRA opposes Vivek Murthy as the US Surgeon General, and is apparently the sole reason he has not been approved, the ebola outbreak happened. Or something like that.

Ebola is the fault of the GOP-led Congress. Apparently we're not shoveling money at ebola research fast enough. We can sponsor studies into why certain protected groups get fat and others don't, and waste allll kinds of money attempting to treat firearms like a disease, but cut funding even the slightest and ZOMG EBOLA.

---

Now, don't misunderstand me. I'm not panicking about ebola, far from it. What I am doing, though, is taking note of how pathetic our response has been. We haven't stopped people from coming to the US from infected areas, even though Europe has done exactly that, we haven't taken any serious measures whatsoever, and our policy appears to be little more than "run around like a decapitated chicken reacting poorly to every new twist in the crisis." I'm not filled with anything resembling confidence at how this administration would handle ANY crisis after watching their laughable response to the ebola situation.

Another thing that gets me, though, is that *both* sides have crackpot conspiracy theories out now. The loony left is represented above, while the crazy right is running around babbling about FEMA concentration camps and Obama canceling the mid-term elections using ebola as a cover. When both sides start coming out with batshit insane conspiracy theories, that's rather worrisome. I fear it's because the truth is almost scarier: This administration is in WAY over its head, has no f**king clue what it's doing, and hasn't the faintest idea how to deal with any of this. It appears their plan is nothing more than "hide under a pile of blankets and hope this all goes away."

I think I'd go for conspiracy theories, too.

That is all.

My Shocked Face Is Around Here Somewhere...

Fortunately, this story doesn't surprise me in the least, so I don't need it...

Homeland Security botched pandemic preparedness : U.S. report

The Department of Homeland Security failed to assess the supplies it needed to deal with a potential pandemic and now has expired stockpiles including medications, 200,000 respirators and 4,184 bottles of hand sanitizers, an inspector general report showed.

The department bought 16 million surgical masks and 350,000 white coverall suits without establishing the need for them, according to its inspector general's report, which included photographs of stacks of unopened boxes piled high in a storeroom.

More than 80% of the antivirus medication will expire in less than one year. Hear that? That's the sound of our tax dollars being pissed away. Any bets on whether or not anyone will be disciplined for this gross dereliction of duty?

Okay, okay, stop laughing.

And yet this is the same federal government that some feel is the only entity qualified to entrust with our health care. The same people that can't perform basic tasks like rotate stock on medicine - vital medicine necessary to the security of the nation, mind you - are going to magically become competent and not-shiftless and lazy when it comes time to administer health care.

I see you've stopped laughing, now...


That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Complete and Utter (Humorous) BS

Police: Jacksonville woman faces felony charges for stealing sex toy

A Jacksonville woman is facing felony charges after she removed an anti theft device from a sex toy, according to arrest warrants.
...
She removed the anti theft device from the sex toy valued at $60 then took the toy from the store, according to warrants.

According to the friend who posted this on Facebook, this woman is pretty much a deranged lunatic. With that said, we can't rule out that this is some kind of odd "three strikes" deal. However, this part made my hair stand on end:

Mccarver was arrested by the Jacksonville Police Department on Tuesday and charged with felony conspiracy and felony larceny by anti inventory device.

You're kidding me. It is a FELONY to remove an inventory device on a $60 item? Really? This is why I have no respect whatsoever for the justice system, and also why I think that "felons shouldn't be allowed to own guns after they get out of jail" is meaningless drivel. This woman may be a lot of things, but a dangerous felon ain't one of them. At least not from the meager report listed here...

But that's the thing. It is a FELONY to remove an anti-theft device. Mull on that. They get away with it by claiming conspiracy. That is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Patently absurd on its very face. Yet the law was twisted and permuted to come to this point. Think about that the next time someone bleats on and on about felons and guns. When "felon" could mean anything from "multiple murderer that frightens Charles Manson" to "someone that swiped a pair of Levis after yanking off the inventory control tag, the term is completely and utterly meaningless.

Three felonies a day, indeed, when the word means nothing.

That is all.

Your Government at "Work"...

Hold onto your hats, folks. It's going to get a lot worse before there's any chance it might get better...

Social Security's $300M IT project doesn't work

After spending nearly $300 million on a new computer system to handle disability claims, the Social Security Administration still can't get it to work. And officials can't say when it will.

Six years ago, Social Security embarked on an aggressive plan to replace outdated computer systems overwhelmed by a growing flood of disability claims. But the project has been racked by delays and mismanagement, according to an internal report commissioned by the agency.

Ah, yes. "Six years ago." You do realize, of course, that this is instantly chalked up as "Bush's fault!!!111" because it started during his administration. Now, they're leftists, so we don't expect consistency, but it's especially bitter to note the same people that pin 9/11 on Bush - even though the vast majority of planning occurred under Clinton - will pin anything that happened up to the day Bush left office on him, regardless of how long Obama let it continue.

But I digress. And wait! It gets better...

Today, the project is still in the testing phase, and the agency can't say when it will be operational or how much it will cost.

Got that? They've already pissed away $300 million, the "upgrade" doesn't work, and they have no idea how long it will take to fix or how much it will eventually end up costing. This is after six years, mind you. If these cretins had been in charge of the space program, we'd never have gotten a single rocket off the ground. They'd have spent several trillion dollars and created nineteen new agencies, all with six-figure heads, assistants, etc., but would have laid off most of the civilian engineers.

And that would still be a vast improvement over what's happening in some places in government right now...

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Diametrically Opposed Edicts...

Well, now, ain't this something...

California drought doesn't end brown lawn warnings

Laura Whitney and her husband, Michael Korte, don't know whether they're being good citizens during a drought or scofflaws.

On the same day the state approved mandatory outdoor watering restrictions with the threat of $500 fines, the Southern California couple received a letter from their city threatening a $500 penalty for not watering their brown lawn.

Now, my first thought reading this was, WTF, the town gives tickets for not watering your lawn? This is the nanny-state paradise, man. They've got everything so well under control that they've got the time, manpower, and money to devote to driving around town, spotting who has brown lawns, and writing up notices. I certainly hope this town has a 0% crime rate.

Secondly, WTF? The state has mandated water restrictions which allow watering only once every other week, which pretty much precludes having the lush, green lawn that the city mandates. In order abide by one mandate, they have to break another. Talk about Scylla and Charybdis! They're either going to be fined $500 by the town for having a brown lawn, or hit for excessive water use by the state.

I wonder how that works, I really do. Being the suspicious sort, I can't help but wonder if the city is using the water ban to its advantage to fatten the town's coffers. They know that residents can't water their lawn often enough to prevent browning, as per order from the state, so they send out notices to a certain number of people. I'm sure not everyone contested the notices, so the town probably raked in a good payday for limited work...

I mean, it's not like this would be the first time something shady like this happened, right?

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Crime Does Pay...

If you're a thieving public employee in Jersey, as this story sent in by Joseph in IL tells us...

Probation for official who stole $460K in quarters

The former public works inspector for a northern New Jersey town who admitted stealing $460,000 in quarters over two years has been spared a prison term.

A judge instead sentenced Thomas Rica on Wednesday to five years of probation.

Rica had worked in Ridgewood for 10 years before his arrest in January 2013. He pleaded guilty in March to four counts of theft as part of a plea deal that called for probation and restitution.

Okay, now first, a little math. Assuming that this guy split the take pretty evenly, he was bringing home $4600 a week in stolen money. In stolen quarters. That's 18,400 quarters a week. According to the US Mint, a quarter weighs 5.67 grams, or 0.035 ounces. That's 649 ounces of quarters a week, or over 40 pounds of quarters every week.

That's a lot of work, stealing that money...

Here's the best part, though. He doesn't go to jail, and he doesn't have to pay all the money back. He's on the hook for $250K, meaning that he cleared over $200K from out-and-out theft. Wonderful, isn't it? Personally, I'd have offered him a deal: pay the money back, with interest and damages, or we send you away for the maximum amount of time allowed by law.

Break the public trust and you *make* $200K. Then again, how much do congresscritters make? At least this guy had to lug 8 pounds of quarters every single day. Congresscritters take "fact-finding" junkets to the Carribean. He did also give up his $30K/year pension, so assuming he lives more than 7 years, the remaining money will be made up.

I still think he should at least be put in the stocks so the townspeople can pelt him with rotten fruit.

That is all.

Fourth Amendment? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Fourth Amendment

Apparently today is "hide the breakables day." This one comes to us from #1 blogdaughter.

EPA claims it has the power to garnish wages without court approval

The Environmental Protection Agency has quietly claimed that it has the authority to unilaterally garnish the wages of individuals who have been accused of violating its rules.

According to The Washington Times, the agency announced the plan to enhance its purview last week in a notice in the Federal Register. The notice claimed that federal law allows the EPA to "garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order."

Got that? The EPA - the agency that, may I remind you, was paying one of its employees a full time salary, even thought that employee only worked four days a week, because the employee claimed to be a CIA operative - can, without anything resembling due process, just start garnishing your wages over fines they levied. This, mind you, is after they select the venue and decide who's going to hear the case.

Now, one thing I don't get - and I haven't seen any news reports that delineate this - is how the EPA actually gets around to fining *people*. It would seem to me that for an individual to be fined, they'd have to be charged with a crime, right? Wouldn't, then, the process for collecting such fines reside in the court system? I don't see how an individual would be in a position to be fined by the EPA, but not facing legal action?

I mean, I understand why a company might get a fine, since it's not like you can just arrest an entire corporation for violating the Clean Air Act or something like that. But in order to garnish wages - as opposed to earnings - that implies that it's an action aimed at a particular individual, in which case my question above stands. Maybe there's something I'm missing, but it sure seems like the EPA's on a big 'ol power grab here.

Of course, the EPA's shakedown take going from $96 million to $250+ million over the course of Obama's administration is purely a coincidence, right?

That is all.

Wait. HOW MANY Billions?

Holy s**t.

Improper payments by federal government top $100B

Tax credits for families that don't qualify. Medicare payments for treatments that might not be necessary. Unemployment benefits for people who are secretly working. Federal agencies reported making $100 billion in payments last year to people who may not have been entitled to receive them.
...
"The amounts here are absolutely staggering," said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla. "It's over $100 billion each of the last five years. That's a staggering half a trillion dollars in improper payments."

One. Hundred. Billion. Dollars. A F**KING YEAR. We hear a lot about how much money the US spends on defense. The amount of money we OVERPAID is one-sixth the total defense budget. We WASTE one-sixth of the money people complain so much about - yet no one ever wants to force the GAO to hold a bake sale to have money to throw away.

It gets even better, though. Hide the breakables.

Federal agencies recovered more than $22 billion in overpayments last year, she [Beth Cobert, deputy director of the White House budget office] said.

"We have taken an aggressive approach to attacking waste, fraud and abuse within federal agencies, and we will continue to seek out new and innovative tools to help us in this fight," Cobert told the subcommittee.

Ah, yes. Your "aggressive" approach has brought the waste down from a high of $121 billion to its current $106 billion. You've managed to stop wasting $15 billion less, or somewhere between 10 and 15 percent. Forgive me if I don't exactly feel filled with confidence. Especially when you tell me that you recovered LESS THAN A QUARTER of the wasted money. You pissed away ONE SIXTH THE DEFENSE BUDGET on fraud and incompetence, were only able to recover one-fifth of that money, and you're PROUD of this?

We're often told that we need to devote more money to various causes, or global warming, or education, or [insert whatever other the pet social project of the month is]. I think this story should be brought up the next time the Social Warriors start talking about taking funding away from defense - you need money for your pet project? Work on cutting the fraud and waste, first. You'll find plenty of money to fund whatever you want.

While I'm dreaming, I'd like a pallet of .22 LR...


That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

File Under "N"...

...For "No S**t Sherlock"...

Unions representing government workers are gaining

Unions representing government workers are expanding while organized labor has been shedding private sector members over the past half-century.

A majority of union members today now have ties to a government entity, at the federal, state or local levels.

Roughly 1-in-3 public sector workers is a union member, compared with about 1-in-15 for the private sector workforce last year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Overall, 11.3 percent of wage and salary workers in the United States are unionized, down from a peak of 35 percent during the mid-1950s in the strong post-World War II recovery.

So, basically, union membership is five-fold higher among the ranks of government employees. You know, the ones that shouldn't need to be union? I mean, we are told over and over, ad nauseum, about how unions came about because eeeeeevil big business was exploiting workers and how that forming unions was the only way to stop that from happening, right?

Do they mean to insinuate that, absent the power of the union, the Federal government would start exploiting their workers?

Honestly, can anyone explain this to me? Other than self-perpetuation, what, exactly, does a union comprised of Federal employees offer to its members? Other than making them basically impossible to fire, demote, or otherwise discipline for anything short of capital murder, that is. Look, unions had their place in history. There may even be some modicum of use for them in unskilled labor pools (very doubtful, but a case could be made).

But when you're talking about, by and large, professional people working for the Federal government? It is positively mind-boggling to believe that, without the unions, that the government would take advantage of the employees, it really is. With the myriad of rules, regulations, and other hoops that government agencies have to go through to do *anything*, it's highly doubtful that "exploit those that work for us" is anywhere near the top ten worries...

Why would they take advantage of those they can already fleece?

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Nothing Fixes Recidivism Like a 230-Grain JHP...

#1 Blogdaughter sends in a story that reminds us that the "justice" system very often has nothing to do with, you know, actual justice.

Release of 'Pillowcase Rapist' to force new neighbor to relive childhood horror

Nearly 60 years after a neighbor snatched toddler Sharon Duvernay from her family's backyard and raped her, the now-retired school teacher is getting a new neighbor -- the infamous "Pillowcase Rapist," a serial sex offender responsible for at least 40 attacks in the 1970s and 1980s.

Christopher Hubbart, 63, who confessed to raping at least 40 women in Los Angeles and San Francisco between 1971 and 1982, will be released from a state psychiatric facility and placed in a home in Lake Los Angeles by July 7, Capt. Don Ford of the Palmdale Sheriff’s Station, a subdivision of the Los Angeles County Sheriff, told FoxNews.com Wednesday.

I'm trying to figure out the exact chain of events here. From this line in the article:

"The proof is in the pudding," said Ford, alluding to repeat assaults by Hubbart after he was released from a state hospital in 1979. He was later convicted for assaults in the San Francisco area and readmitted to a mental health facility. Following his parole in 1990, he attacked a female jogger and was imprisoned again.

It sure sounds like he was arrested at some point in the 1970s, released in 1979, arrested again at some point between 1979 and 1990, and then paroled in 1990. And then arrested *again*. That's three separate times by my reckoning. And now they're about to let him go. For the third time.

At some point, someone really needs to introduce his insides to the outside.

Do they think this third time is going to be the charm? Is this guy magically going to stop trying to rape women *this* time? The past three times he's failed to rehabilitate. But this time is magically different! He'll behave differently this time because ... well ... something!

And, best of all, since this is lovely California, with the best Brady rating, chances are pretty good that when - not if - this guy decides to get his rape on again, he'll meet with little resistance. 

That is all.

Not Sure How I Feel About This...

Clean Air Act plea in Ohio air conditioner thefts

An Ohio man has pleaded guilty to violating the Clean Air Act by releasing a refrigerant into the air during the theft of dozens of air conditioning units.

Federal prosecutors say Martin Eldridge and others stole at least 49 units between August and October last year, releasing the refrigerant when tubing that connected units to houses and businesses was cut.

Actually, I am sure how I feel about this. I don't like it. I don't like it one bit. You see, at first, I thought, hey, great. They caught this scumbag stealing people's air conditioners last summer. I'll take a WAG that, since he was just cutting them loose, he was selling them for scrap metal, most likely to fuel a drug, alcohol, or gambling problem. Cops finally catch him, and they really want to nail him good, so they start digging, and bingo.

I mean, I like putting away thieving scumbags as much as the next guy.

Problem is, I don't like the precedent this sets. I really don't think the Clean Air Act was designed to be an add-on charge to some lowlife stealing air conditioners. Is it much of a stretch to say that someone that steals a car and then wrecks it is also guilty of releasing refrigerant into the atmosphere? Or, extrapolating, that if you glance down at the radio for a second, rear-end the guy in front of you and break your AC condenser, that they won't be hauling you off for a stint in FedPen over a violation of the Clean Air Act?

I think this hands the FedGov *WAY* too big of a sledgehammer to deal with an ant problem...


That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Unsurprising.

#1 Blogdaughter sends in a story that reaffirms everything I had heard about this particular organization from my dad when he was a MA State Police officer...

The FBI maintains an 83-page glossary of Internet slang. And it is hilariously, frighteningly out of touch.

The Internet is full of strange and bewildering neologisms, which anyone but a text-addled teen would struggle to understand. So the fine, taxpayer-funded people of the FBI — apparently not content to trawl Urban Dictionary, like the rest of us — compiled a glossary of Internet slang.

An 83-page glossary. Containing nearly 3,000 terms.

The glossary was recently made public through a Freedom of Information request by the group MuckRock, which posted the PDF, called “Twitter shorthand,” online. Despite its name, this isn’t just Twitter slang: As the FBI’s Intelligence Research Support Unit explains in the introduction, it’s a primer on shorthand used across the Internet, including in “instant messages, Facebook and Myspace.” As if that Myspace reference wasn’t proof enough that the FBI’s a tad out of touch, the IRSU then promises the list will prove useful both professionally and “for keeping up with your children and/or grandchildren.” (Your tax dollars at work!)

Dad had two acronyms for the Feds. The first was "Fumbling, Bumbling Idiots" (the second was "Forever Bothering Italians" FWIW), and this story certainly confirms that impression. Read the whole article. Drink in the idiocy of this 83 page guide (for reference, Hemingway's "The Old Man and the Sea" is 127 pages, meaning this "guide" is only 50 pages shorter than a novel). 83 pages of outdated internet slang, apparently much of which was never very popular.

If these guys are so out of touch--and have such poor powers of observation that they can't figure these out--I think they need to be in a different line of work. If you can't reason out "LMAO"--or find, using Google or some other search engine, what it stands for in less than 5 seconds--perhaps you'd be better suited for a job where you wear a nametag. And push buttons with pictures on them.

No, I take that back, really. Fast food workers actually serve a useful purpose. This guide--and the  dolts it was aimed at--does not. I find it unconscionable that functioning adults--let alone allegedly highly trained investigators--couldn't figure out this shorthand without an 83 -age guide, I really do. I also wonder just how much this guide cost us. Not just printing costs, which were most likely substantial, but in manpower hours. And overtime. I'm sure something of this magnitude took overtime pay.

I do have to wonder if they refer to the internet as a truck, though...

That is all.

Chicago Doesn't Mess Around

Not only do the dead vote in Chicago, but - according to this article sent in by Gerry - they also have great health insurance...

Audit: State paid $12 million in health costs — for dead people

Cook County has long been ridiculed for allowing dead people cast votes, but the state may have just garnered a new distinction.

It paid $12 million in health care for people who were already dead — including in one case, for a person who had died in 1989.

But don't worry! They're going to get that money back! They've already recovered more than half the money - although there's no documentation of any recovered money. Just take their word for it. Why would they lie to you?

I liked this:

“We expect to have it all back. The organizations and providers who were overpaid acknowledged that it was a mistake,” von Alroth said. “This was disclosed to us more than a month ago, and we immediately addressed it. The auditor general made us aware of the findings. As soon as we were made aware of it, we took immediate action. We began recovering the payments right away.”

Really? You've been paying for health benefits for someone that passed away in 1989. That means 25 years. I'm pretty sure that you're not going to recover that money. The other possibility here - and it doesn't exactly cover the county in glory here - is that someone who died in 1989 was signed up for this "Managed Care" program in the last couple of years. In other words, more than 20 years after they died, they were still on the rolls for health care.

Hey, if you're gonna vote, you might as well get sick time for it, right?

That is all.

Lovely. Just Lovely.

Ex-official leaves huge debt for California city

A former city official who became a symbol of municipal greed was sentenced Wednesday to 12 years in prison — less than half the time it will take the nearly bankrupt Los Angeles suburb of Bell to dig itself out of the estimated $150 million in debt he left behind.

A judge also ordered former Bell city manager Robert Rizzo to make $8.8 million in restitution, but prosecutors say that only covers the money he illegally took for himself.

Dude was pulling down a $1.5 MILLION a year salary in a city of 35,000 people. I'd really like to know where the bloody hell that money was coming from, folks. There's got to be one hell of an industrial or commercial base there, because unless all 35,000 residents are MicroSoft millionaires, there's simply not enough tax revenue to cover those kinds of salaries.

His assistant was making over half a million dollars a year. In a city that is half the size of the city next to the town I lived in up in MA. Oh, and while Bell City has a quarter of the population below the poverty line, the city next to my old hometown has 7%. Something tells me the mayor of Haverhill, MA doesn't make a million and a half a year.

I just don't understand how that kind of money can get pissed away and no one notices. In my little hometown of 6K people there's a town manager, accountants, etc. who oversee the town budget. It boggles my mind that such a huge amount of money - especially in a city with such a large number below the poverty line - could just vanish and no one would be curious.

I guess, in this case, everyone that would have noticed it was on the take...

That is all.

Look Ma, No Camera...

All mirrors.

Parking space at work. There's a concrete post marking the expansion joints, and as a result, there's extra room in those parking spots. I like to pull in tight to one side to avoid door dings (both incoming and outgoing) and aim for these spots whenever possible. As I backed into this spot, I checked the mirrors carefully to make sure I didn't hit the concrete post.

I didn't even have to move the mirror - which I could have - and managed to get the truck less than an inch from the post.  I also didn't hit the concrete wall behind me, although to be fair that had more to do with knowing exactly where it was given the ~ 1' square pillar jutting out from it. Backing up - especially with another vehicle behind me - is one of the times I wish I had a camera.

Mandatory cameras are no replacement for paying effing attention. They're a poor substitute for knowing your vehicle. And unless they're broadcasting directly to smartphones, they will be unused by the people that need them the most. By snapping their royal fingers and decreeing that the peasants shall have backup cameras, they have done precisely ZERO to fix the problem, and instead just cost us extra money.

In other words, exactly what they do about everything else...

That is all.

Air Bags All Over Again...

I honestly can't even begin to tell you how angry this makes me.

NHTSA to require backup cameras on all vehicles

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a proposed rule Monday requiring all new light vehicles — including cars, SUVs, trucks and vans — to have "rear-view visibility systems," in effect, requiring backup cameras.

The rule -- which would be final in 60 days -- would start phasing in on May 1, 2016 models and be at 100% May 1, 2018.

Allegedly, 200 people a year are killed when people back up without looking behind them. Now, I'll buy that for a certain percentage, maybe it is a small child that broke free from a watchful parent and just happened to dart behind a car. I don't think that percentage is very large, though. I think for the VAST majority of those 200 incidents, it's people not paying attention.

Guess what? Mandatory back-up cameras aren't going to make people pay better attention. They'll just be able to see the person they're about to run over.

Waving the magical government mandatory wand doesn't make problems go away. By forcing car manufacturers to include another complicated piece of electronic equipment (they claim the cost is $150. Try to get one installed for that little. Seriously), all they're doing is kicking the can down the road. I'll wager the cameras don't make a statistically significant dent in the number of people run over.

The problem isn't that drivers can't see the people behind them, it's that the drivers aren't looking. The video that plays in the accompanying story is a very sad one indeed - a woman out for a walk was backed over by a teenaged driver. It's terrible, certainly, and 100% avoidable. But to think that a backup camera would make a teenager pay better attention? REALLY?

What bothers me the most, though, is that we once again take the blame away from where it belongs - the driver not paying attention - and put it on something else - the car not having a camera. Rather than say, hey, that driver did something negligent and should be punished (funny, the story doesn't mention if the 16 year old that hit the woman went to jail...), we mandate cameras for all cars, clap our hands together, and declare the problem solved.

Until the next time someone gets run over because a driver failed to devote proper attention to the task at hand...

That is all.

Hope He Didn't Have Any Gibsons...

#1 Blogdaughter sends in this rather odd story...

FBI seizes trove of cultural artifacts at 91-year-old Indiana man's home

FBI agents seized thousands of artifacts Wednesday from a 91-year-old man’s private collection at his home in rural central Indiana and says it will return the items that were wrongfully in his possession

Donald Miller, from Waldorn, amassed the collection over eight decades, the FBI said. The items include artifacts from Native Americans, Russia, China, and other nations.

What's odd about this? Well, for starters, there's this:

"The cultural value of these artifacts is immeasurable," FBI Special Agent Robert Jones said at a news conference. He refused to disclose details of any of the individual items taken from Miller's property.

I'd feel a lot less icky about the whole process if a) the government hadn't shown a propensity for using 20,000 pound hydraulic presses to kill flies when it comes to dealing with antiques and such; and b) they had listed a couple of items that Mr. Miller stole or possessed without proper permits/whatever. Where they didn't, it strikes me that this is probably a giant fishing expedition.

This guy had a huge private collection of odd items, and the FBI swoops in and takes it all without telling why? Sounds to me like they're going to cart everything off and spend the next year or so rifling through it, looking for anything they can charge Mr. Miller with. Also, I'm not exactly filled with confidence over this:

Some items were acquired improperly, but Miller, who traveled extensively, obtained others legally or before laws affecting them were on the books, Jones said. Federal authorities will attempt to repatriate items with their rightful owners, he said.

So, if he's got ivory, or some exotic wood, or perhaps something that used to be legal to import/acquire/etc., how much do you want to bet they put the onus on Miller to prove he had it prior to the ban/etc.? Wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that he had ivory, or Guatemalan rain forest wood, or some other item that is regulated out the gills now but not 60 years ago.

I'm curious to know how the FBI knew that he had these items. Was it someone Miller let into his home? Someone with a grudge? The FBI doesn't out of the blue decide to bring a bunch of trucks to some eccentric dude's house in Indiana if they don't think they're going to score something important. It's fishy as hell, IMHO, that they didn't give some pretext, flimsy or no, for the raid.

Then again, it stopped being about justice a long time ago, didn't it?

That is all.

Don Corleone Would Be Proud...

Stretch sends this story in with a simple question:

And the difference between Maryland pols and … gangsters is?

That’s right! NOTHING!

Maryland House zings 'House of Cards' over tax break threat

Responding to a threat that the "House of Cards" television series may leave Maryland if it doesn't get more tax credits, the House of Delegates adopted budget language Thursday requiring the state to seize the production company's property if it stops filming in the state.

Media Rights Capital, the Beverly Hills, Calif., company producing the popular Netflix show, wrote Gov. Martin O'Malley that it was putting off work on its third season until it could be assured that sufficient tax credits would be approved. If those weren't forthcoming, it said it would break down its film stage and move it to another state.

So, basically, the TV show has to continue to film in Maryland or they lose all of their property. I hope it's a good show and doesn't get canceled. I hope Hollywood is paying very close attention here, because this really ought to be a one-time deal - you know, fool me once, shame on you. If there is ever another TV or movie shot in Maryland, they deserve everything that's coming to them.

Take notice, too. The tax incentives and credits were offered to the studio specifically in order to get the production to take place in Maryland rather than on a sound stage in LA made to look like Maryland. There are many reasons to bring a Hollywood production to your area: local artisans and businesses see a sharp uptick in business, tourism flourishes as people flock to see the area where "Hollywood Show X" is based, your city/state's cred rises for other ventures. There's a lot of reasons to want to pull a production company to your area.

Which is why it's rather puzzling for the Maryland House to play this kind of hardball. The folks that run and bankroll Hollywood aren't stupid; they're watching this battle intensely and are taking notes. I suspect it will be a *very* long time before *any* company does any sort of business with Maryland after this disgusting display of wanton thuggery.

In fact, I don't think it's fair to compare the Maryland House to gangsters, because it's unfair to the mobsters...

That is all.

Dial 911 And... Wait.

Joseph in IL sends in this story, which should be brought out as Exhibit A any time someone states you don't need a gun because you could just dial 911.

Family calls 911 when intruder tries to enter home, waits hours before police show up

On March 16, Terri Bice of New Orleans and her family were woken up at 2 AM, when they heard their dog Molly barking and someone trying to break into theirhome through the front door. Bice immediately made a call to 911, but as WWL Eyewitness News reports, that didn’t wind up being too useful.

As it would turn out, Molly’s barking scared off the would-be burglar, who probably left to escape being seen. However, feeling reassured they would be ok quickly evapatored when calls to 911 were unanswered. Bice took note of her calls. She made two to 911 and didn’t get an answer. She then called New Orleans Police Department’s (NOPD) non-emergency line twice and, again, wound up getting no answer. It wasn’t until she made a call to NOPD’s Second District that she finally got an answer. That wasn’t the end of it, though. Bice and her family had to wait nearly two hours before an officer came to their home.

Four different calls. Two to 911, then two to non-emergency lines. She finally got through to police officials, and the wait was nearly two hours before an officer came out to investigate. Now, granted, we don't know if maybe they told the police that the goblin had left or something, but even at that, someone should have been out to check out and see if maybe the guy was still hanging around.

It's a damn good thing she wasn't huddled in a closet while some drug-addled lunatic rifled through her belongings, or worse. Two hours is a very long time to wait for someone to come help you when there's an unknown assailant breaking into your house. Yet there are still people out there who think that firearms should be outlawed, that there are no uses for the best tool possible for defense.

The next time you engage one of these numbskulls, remember this story.

That is all.