Why Just The TSA?

Once upon a time long, long ago I worked for my living. In an office. For a major corporation. We began work at 8 a.m. and finished at 5 p.m. Not 4:30 or 4:45. Five. We had a 15 minute coffee break in the morning and another in the afternoon. Staggered with other employees so the office was always manned. Lunch was one hour. Period. Personal calls were discouraged; if the privilege was abused we heard about it. Computers were unheard of except for huge mainframes doing work that had nothing to do with mine. As I said. A loooong time ago!

Today I read where the TSA is to block "controversial opinion" on the web. It's a very misleading headline. Actually they're planning on blocking access of certain types of websites on agency computers.

Shouldn't it be standard procedure in every office of every company in the nation? Of course Facebook, Twitter and blogs would suffer, but productivity might improve. What a novel idea.

Just what is meant by "controversial opinion" isn't clear, but the other categories make a lot of sense. Chat and messaging, criminal activity, extreme violence including cartoons, gruesome content and gaming. They neglected to include a real biggie. Porn.

I blurk a local newspaper's blog and am always amazed at how many of the participants making comments are people who are at work. Sometimes the conversations are quite lengthy. These people are being paid for what?

If one wants to Twitter away their time during their own hours, fine. Heaven knows I do enough of it myself regardless of the constant nagging from Hub to get a life. He's right. I'm trying to cut back. Especially on Facebook but I'm not doing too well. No one is paying me for my time that should be spent on other activity, however.

So to the TSA? Cheers! And to every other office that has similar restrictions. If it's too much to ask I'm sure there are some of the 14.6 unemployed who would be more than happy to take those jobs!

One Whale Of A Mistake

Nah. That's not Jonah sitting atop his whale. That's what the Taiwan oil skimmer, A Whale is going to look like after the Coast Guard and EPA are done 'inspecting' her!

Granted, we don't want to make matters worse, but some things my mind just refuses to grasp. Like why Obama has yet to suspend the Jones Act which would allow for foreign help aplenty. Why Washington State won't send it's skimmers. The reason given is they need them in case they have a spill in their waters. Excuse me? They don't have one now and the gulf coast does!

Finally, after 70 some odd days, the Taiwan vessel is in Norfolk. The EPA and Coast Guard are inspecting her to make sure she meets our standards. Some water returned to the sea may have traces of oil remaining. Wouldn't a trace be better than what we have now?

Wouldn't anything be better than what we have now! Why, when an entire region of the country is suffering ecologically and economically, does the government have to study everything to death? The time to do that is before we engage in a war rather than during a time of crisis that grows daily!

It isn't just our government, granted. BP has been inexcusably slow on the uptake also. It would seem common sense and a sense of urgency have been misplaced. To say workers have to wear haz mat suits and can only work in 20 minute stretches seems ridiculous if you actually want some work done! Consider those making an effort to save the wild life. They are under no such regulation. Are they not equally as important?

And just where is our President, our Secretary of Interior and our Secretary of Homeland Security? I'm sure those trying to get something accomplished are just as glad they are nowhere to be seen, but where is their leadership?

While ships are being inspected to see if they are worthy of helping our mess, there is one more that needs inspected. It's our ship of state ~ and it's commander in chief!

Readdressing Independence Day!

Ever since our founding fathers wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence this country was on an upward march to become the most powerful nation in and leader of the free world. We have taken tremendous pride in that and well we should. Now I find myself wondering how we've managed to elect a President who does not have maintaining that achievement as his goal. He wants us to be an equal among equals - or less.

While we were swooning over a young man with a silver tongue and patting ourselves on the back that we had reached a level where we could comfortably elect a minority President, world leaders wise in the way of politics on their level, saw naivety and inexperience. While people around the world turned out in mass to see our President many of their leaders were warming to opportunities newly available for exploitation.

There was a time when allies would not have been openly contemptuous of our President and his ideas. Look at them now. He tells them he wants to be like them yet he tries to dictate how they handle their own business. The message is mixed and weak.

The most egregious, however, is the constant tension between the Chinese and the U.S. The U.S. is angry they won't condemn the sinking of a South Korean ship purportedly by the North Koreans. Of course, to date, there is no proof the suspicion is true. As a retaliation of sorts the U.S. plans joint naval exercises with the South Koreans as a show of solidarity. In response the Chinese are going to conduct their own.

Perhaps it would have been wise to take the comment by the Chinese foreign ministry spokesman when he said, "China borders on the Korean peninsula and we have our own feeling on the issue, different from that of the countries tens of thousands miles away...We have more direct and intense concerns."

Isn't this always the point? Our reality isn't always that of another country and our suggestions are often not appreciated.

At the very least we should get our goals in line. I vote for regaining our status as leader of the free world. Of course to do that we'll need a different administration with clear cut goals and a Congress willing to compromise among themselves to get there. It will be a long climb back.

Of all countries to be sniping at however, China would not be on the top of my list. After all, they own us.

Well, Duh!

I had to laugh when I read the headline for a story in The Wall Street Journal yesterday: Corruption Suspected in Airlift Of Billions in Cash From Kabul. We are well aware that we are supporting a very corrupt government headed by Hamid Karzai. We are well aware that his brother is one of the biggest offenders with his connections to the opium trade.

So why is it that suddenly officials are surprised that the millions of U.S. dollars packed in suitcases and stacked on pallets at the airport for transfer elsewhere might just be tied to corruption? Especially when much of it is slated for banks in Dubai?

What really frosts me and seems to be forgotten by the powers that be, this is U.S. taxpayer money. Yours and mine! You know, the money sent to create the jobs we don't have here, to build the infrastructure there while ours is falling apart, schools, hospitals.

It goes into Afghanistan as aid. It goes out as bribes. It's all perfectly legal with no accountability. They are shocked, shocked that it might be due to corrupt activity!

There is a new general in charge now to fight this useless war. We're told the ambassador, the special emissary and the State Department will no longer butt heads with the military and that the soldiers may again be permitted to defend themselves. That's all fine and dandy but it will be meaningless if in the end Karzai and his ilk will follow the money, our money, to their secret accounts in Dubai and elsewhere and ultimately leave the country to the Taliban.

Should that happen our entire government should be charged with aiding and abetting the enemy. After all it is our money making it all possible!

Animals At Risk In Their Own Home!

I hate to say I told you so, but I did. Often. Before legislation passed allowing people to carry guns in our National Parks. My fear was the animals, and at some point other humans, will be at risk of being shot.

I was right. Friday a grizzly was shot and killed by hikers in Denali National Park. By a .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol.

According to the law you are allowed to carry them but not discharge them. What kind of law is that? Anyone feeling threatened, justified or not is likely to pull the gun and use it as easily as the police taser old ladies confined to bed!

That has happened too. In Glacier a woman discharged a .357 magnum into the ground to frighten off what she deemed an aggressive white tail deer. Being attracted to salt including that in human sweat, the deer probably only wanted a taste! She was given a warning because she wasn't facing imminent danger.

It's nearly July. Vacation season is in full swing. The National Parks, which I believe are a haven for wild life, will be full of enthusiastic people wanting to experience the adventure. Great scenery. Exhilarating fresh air. Wild life in their natural setting.

Somehow guns on the hips of these people is offensive to me. It encourages carelessness. They don't have to bother knowing why a deer might be aggressive or that there may be better ways to avoid a confrontation with a bear when you've but heard a rustle in the bushes!

The estimated population of bears in that part of the park is between 300 and 350. Now there is one less. The incident is being investigated. I just hope it wasn't a female trying to protect her cubs.

What a bad piece of legislation. I absolutely dread the body count. Deer, bears. Rabbits may be next. They rustle the bushes too.