Our Water Broke

Our backyard has a new water feature.

It's called rain, I think. After a high temp of 101° and probably around 30 days of 100+ temps, we are finally getting a deluge. The satellite TV is out (damn it! NoBama speech!) and I'm hoping our power stays on long enough to finish dinner.

Oops, there went a power surge right there.

The Poor Pityful Patriarchy

Pity da menz. Because dim menz can't be havin' da wimminz all runnin' around abortin' babies and shit not havin' permissions from Da Man, ya know. How dare them bitchez actin' like they own their bods -- Da Man does, ya know! It's right 'cher da BIBLE.

If this asshole had he way, women would need to get permission from the biological father before being allowed to have an abortion.

And what if the woman isn't sure?

In cases where the identity of the father is unknown, women would be required to submit a list of possible fathers. The physician would be forced to conduct a paternity test from the provided list and then seek paternal permission to abort. Claiming to not know the father's identity is not a viable excuse, according to the proposed legislation.

How's that for being worthy of the Asshole of the Day Award?

State Rep. John Adams (R-OH)

I loved Pam's additional commentary:

So otherwise, a rape survivor would need to find her rapist and see if he's willing to sign off on the whole deal. Jesus H. Christ.

Yes, Jesus H. Fucking Christ on a cracker. How in the hell do these pricks get elected to public office?

That is not a rhetorical question.

The Sheriff Is a Nigge...r

Contrary to popular opinion, I love my country. I really do. Minus a lot of the infuriatingly stupid people who are holding us back. Like the whacko wing of the Republican Party (and probably quite a few blue-dog Democrats way down in the land of Dixie).

The last politically-charged conversation I had with my mother started out, on her part, thusly: "It's not because he's black..."

Bits & Pieces, Odds & Ends

Distracted Driving, Part 2

In a nice follow-up to the article which prompted me to write this post about texting while driving, the New York Times ran another stunner today. Apparently saving lives on the highways takes a backseat to... not "angering Congress."

I shit you not.

In 2003, researchers at a federal agency proposed a long-term study of 10,000 drivers to assess the safety risk posed by cellphone use behind the wheel.

They sought the study based on evidence that such multitasking was a serious and growing threat on America’s roadways.

But such an ambitious study never happened. And the researchers’ agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, decided not to make public hundreds of pages of research and warnings about the use of phones by drivers — in part, officials say, because of concerns about angering Congress.

[...]

The former head of the highway safety agency said he was urged to withhold the research to avoid antagonizing members of Congress who had warned the agency to stick to its mission of gathering safety data but not to lobby states.

Critics say that rationale and the failure of the Transportation Department, which oversees the highway agency, to more vigorously pursue distracted driving has cost lives and allowed to blossom a culture of behind-the-wheel multitasking.

“We’re looking at a problem that could be as bad as drunk driving, and the government has covered it up,” said Clarence Ditlow, director of the Center for Auto Safety.

[...]

State Senator Joe Simitian of California, who tried from 2001 to 2005 to pass a hands-free cellphone law over objections of the cellphone industry, said the unpublished research would have helped him convince his colleagues that cellphones cause serious — deadly — distraction.

“Years went by when lives could have been saved,” said Mr. Simitian, who in 2006 finally pushed through a hands-free law that took effect last year.

What a big ol' giant bucket of fetid fail.

|||

The Senate Shoots Down Fighter Jets

At least the Senate rightfully heeded my request to stop the F-22 now! Ahh, the power and influence of konagod!

By a vote of 58 to 40, the Senate voted to put this absurdity down.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), shortly before the vote, noted that national guard members from his state are not asking for more F-22s but for more body armor and boots. Continuing the program "defies common sense," he said, while health care requirements and other economic needs are more imminent.

[...]

F-22 supporters included lawmakers from many of the other states where the plane's components are manufactured, such as California, Texas, and Georgia. Senators Patty Murray (Wash.) and Christopher J. Dodd (Conn.) and other Democrats argued that killing the program would undermine the nation's defense by idling highly trained engineers and mechanics.

It might idle some Lockheed Martin lobbyists. But spending billions for fighter jets we don't need, and the Pentagon doesn't want, seems like a pretty warped approach to our national security.

| | |

Blog Sagas Won't Die

Lastly, it was noted this morning at Shakesville that His Royal Petulance has resigned as a contributor to that blog... yes, that femnist blog!

He needed a break from all the hiatusing he's been doing over there. Homo slacker! And gee, the timing of this sure puts me in an awkward position.

I would hate to think that my coincidental slipped Disqus glitch brought down his desire to continue with a pretty decent gig over there. Oh well, his world of followers will probably not be impacted by this.. all one of us.

OK, I'm done poking at things with my stick for the day. :-)

Ready For Action

And I Thought I-35 Sucked

I cannot quite grasp how a 259 car pile-up could happen, even in Germany where the autobahn is essentially a race track.

Don't they have guidelines, like we do, regarding tailgating and slowing down when the roads are wet? Or do some people ignore those rules just like in the US?

Seriously, try to imagine 259 cars piling up one after another. I try visualizing this in my head and I get rather nauseated after about ten of them.

Sometimes We Have to Do the Right Thing

[This post has been updated Monday morning.]

I de-friended a guy on Facebook tonight. Ronnie Walker, a musician from Houston with a penchant for guns, Ted Nugent, and white people.

My biggest mistake was not capturing his status update before I defriended him because you would not believe the shit. He was going on about how white people have controlled the planet from the very beginning, and bragging about it, and he was getting a little pissed off lately at how things were being called into question.

I should have defriended him when he took the pro-Ted Nugent/pro-gun stance, but I'm all about the Constitution and free speech and all that shit. But the knife in the gut was today.

Here was my reply: (the second reply; I don't have a copy of my first, about how white men were also responsible for the atomic bomb, strip malls, and perhaps, strip clubs. Damn me to hell for not saving them.)

Delete. In the name of all that is right, delete. Sorry Ronnie, get some help. TV doesn't make white people look stupid. WHITE PEOPLE make white people look stupid. I've said this all along.

And thus endeth a Facebook relationship, one which didn't have a lot of tap root to begin with. Sorry for ending a sentence in that grammatical fashion.

**********

UPDATE: I also left a comment last night on the Facebook page of a mutual friend here in Austin. Her name is Charlotte and she is a promoter of local music here in Austin. I wanted her to be aware of the racism being spewed by Ronnie since he has played here in Austin in one or more of her events.

This morning she sent me a message and copied the additional comments which were in response to my last exiting comment on Ronnie's page. Here we go:

Ronnie Walker:Well Win,they only show really goofy fuckers on TV.Are you a goofy fucker?No you're not.Im with you on the gay issues but don't think Im a dipshit because I'm white or from the south.Us white folks better stick together or we're gonna be gone.

Charlotte Shafer:Pat Buchanan and Sarah Palin make white people look stupid on TV. Comments like this make white people look stupid on FB. Sorry Ronnie I'm with Win.

Larry Parcell:Charlotte What do you do? I can't wait to hear what state that you govern

Larry Parcell:Win you're a pethetic idiot!!!!!!!!!! What other race, you stupid fuck has done shit for humanity!!!!!! Name one ?????Blacks,Asians,Arabs You need to shut the fuck up. Go spit on a white soldier who keeps you safe at night. My blood is boiling

Larry Parcell:Please don't try to respond with some profound liberal horseshit. I think you should leave this country. By force!!!!!!!!!! And go live in some countyr where you think people are nice and smart.

Larry Parcell:And not white!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Charlotte Shafer:Ronnie, Win may have de-friended you but I am not going to de-friend you, because I want a chance to hear from you that you didn't really mean it, you were drunk and/or maybe thinking you were being funny and just parodying a racist, because up until this point it's not something I would have ever expected from you. And as for that Larry Parcell guy he can kiss my big fat white ass.

Kim Evans:Amen

On her blog, Charlotte wrote a short piece titled Honky Tonk Heroes and Racism.

This guy, Larry Parcell, is the lead guitarist and songwriter for a band in Houston named "Honky Tonk Heroes". I can tell you that MY honky-tonk heroes, some of whom are named on Mr. Parcell's MySpace page, would NOT approve of his so-called opinions. I strongly urge you to boycott him and his band, should you ever have the opportunity to see or hear them, and if you should be so inclined to let others know, feel free to spread the word.

Racism is alive and well in 21st century America, under a black American president, and plenty of people are not only willing to be openly and blatantly racist, some are even willing to stake their careers on it.

Intoxicated by Texting

Can we please do something to stop this insane practice of texting while driving? The time is way overdue to examine this phenomenon and get serious about reducing the occurrences. And even cellphone use should be mandated by law to be hands-free while driving a vehicle, at the very least.

Mr. Hill, a diligent student with a reputation for helping neighbors, also took pride in his clean driving record. “Not a speeding ticket, not a fender bender, nothing,” he said.

Until last Sept. 3. Mr. Hill, then 20, left the parking lot of a Goodwill store where he had spotted a dresser he thought might interest a neighbor. He dialed her to pass along news of the find.

Mr. Hill was so engrossed in the call that he ran a red light and didn’t notice Linda Doyle’s small sport utility vehicle until the last second. He hit her going 45 miles per hour. She was pronounced dead shortly after.

Later, a policeman asked Mr. Hill what color the light had been. “I never saw it,” he answered.

If these people who crash their cars while using a device simply smash into a tree or a concrete barrier, I probably would not be as outraged. People who do stupid things and take risks will pay the price when something goes wrong. I don't think we need a law against cellphone use or texting while jumping from a plane with a parachute, for instance. The only person likely to die in this situation is the person jumping, and it would probably have nothing to do with cellphone use. And wind noise might be a problem, but I digress.

A driver distracted by texting or other cellphone use could be as much a threat to the rest of us as an intoxicated driver. [Emphasis mine.]

Extensive research shows the dangers of distracted driving. Studies say that drivers using phones are four times as likely to cause a crash as other drivers, and the likelihood that they will crash is equal to that of someone with a .08 percent blood alcohol level, the point at which drivers are generally considered intoxicated. Research also shows that hands-free devices do not eliminate the risks, and may worsen them by suggesting that the behavior is safe.

A 2003 Harvard study estimated that cellphone distractions caused 2,600 traffic deaths every year, and 330,000 accidents that result in moderate or severe injuries.

Yet Americans have largely ignored that research. Instead, they increasingly use phones, navigation devices and even laptops to turn their cars into mobile offices, chat rooms and entertainment centers, making roads more dangerous.

So, during the time since the 9/11 attacks, we've lost possibly 20,000 or more innocent lives, and possibly 2 million+ injuries, and we've done almost nothing to prevent the carnage. By contrast, we lost a fraction of that number in the 9/11 attacks and allowed a cowboy president and Congress to basically run roughshod over the US Constitution.

Police in almost half of all states make no attempt to gather data on the problem. They are not required to ask drivers who cause accidents whether they were distracted by a phone or other device. Even when officers do ask, some drivers are not forthcoming.

The federal government warns against talking on a cellphone while driving, but no state legislature has banned it. This year, state legislators introduced about 170 bills to address distracted driving, but passed fewer than 10.

Where the hell are our priorities?

Make note of the research mentioned above regarding hands-free devices. I suspect it depends on the person, the nature of the call, and traffic conditions. But without a doubt, there are plenty of situations where that is equally unsafe.

I think about my own phone conversations while I'm sitting at my desk in my home, or on the sofa. I notice two patterns develop: either I'm observing something going on around me and the person speaking has uttered an incomprehensible sentence or two, or I'm paying close attention to the speaker and engaging in conversation myself, and the world beyond the tip of my nose becomes a blur.

Even when I'm in the car with txrad, I occasionally find conversation to be overly-distracting when I'm in heavy traffic. I often need my complete attention focused on the cars around me, being aware of the person tail-gating me, or the idiot who is about to dart across three lanes of traffic directly in front of me to make the exit.

Here's my suggestion. Before sending a text message or having a conversation while driving a vehicle, ask yourself: is this text message or call really worth the possibility of a hospital emergency room visit? Is it worth possibly killing someone or being killed? Is it even worth the possibility of a fender-bender with the resulting hassles of auto repairs and insurance issues? Are you really that hooked on it?

Scientists are grappling, too, with perhaps the broadest question hanging over the phenomenon of distracted driving: Why do people, knowing the risk, continue to talk while driving? The answer, they say, is partly the intense social pressures to stay in touch and always be available to friends and colleagues. And there also is the neurological response of multitaskers. They show signs of addiction — to their gadgets.

John Ratey, an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard University and a specialist on the science of attention, explained that when people use digital devices, they get a quick burst of adrenaline, “a dopamine squirt.” Without it, people grow bored with simpler activities like driving. Mr. Ratey said the modern brain is being rewired to crave stimulation, a condition he calls acquired attention deficit disorder.

“We need that constant pizzazz, the reward, the intensity,” he said. He largely dismisses the argument that people need the time in the car to be productive. “The justification for doing work is just that — a justification to be engaged,” he said.

Auto accidents will continue to happen and innocent people will continue to die. But we need to move beyond categorizing as an accident the blatantly careless selfish obsession with new freedoms to "stay connected" at all times and in all situations.

In a world where one or two seconds can mean the difference between life and death, there are important questions. The person who rammed into this vehicle should have asked them. The mother who was driving this car would still be alive.

Take a look at the Patchwork of Policies compiled by the New York Times. There are only 14 states with a total ban on texting while driving!

If you feel you simply must text while being in motion, then I suggest you take a walk. At least the damage you may cause will only be to yourself.

Don't Stop Me Now

Please, Can I Touch It?

Some of you may remember when I canceled my subscription to the New York Times a few months ago. It felt strange for the first 2 or 3 days not having a reason to walk out to the street to fetch it.

The biggest adjustment has actually been walking into the office with my morning coffee, eyes still blurry from sleep, and trying to acclimate myself to a bright computer monitor as opposed to a printed page.

But in terms of having a physical printed paper in my home every morning, I honestly haven't looked back with regret. I even got a letter from the Times this week with a half-price renewal offer for six months which was printed on the outside of the envelope. I did not even open it.

This afternoon we stopped at the supermarket for a few things and I happened to walk by a rack in the store and my eyes were drawn to a copy of today's New York Times for sale. It was folded all neatly and crisply. practically begging for that virgin ink & paper to have contact with my hands. I wanted to stop and just caress it for a second, but I kept walking.

Another Icon Has Died

Walter Cronkite at 92. Beats the hell out of 50.

He was so widely known that in Sweden anchormen were once called Cronkiters.

Yet he was a reluctant star. He was genuinely perplexed when people rushed to see him rather than the politicians he was covering, and even more astonished by the repeated suggestions that he run for office himself. He saw himself as an old-fashioned newsman — his title was managing editor of the “CBS Evening News” — and so did his audience.

Those were the good ole days. Minus the racism and shit. The beginnings of the media fame curse. And Reagan should have had similar "astonishment." Not that Reagan was a "newsman," mind you.

That would have solved many of our current day problems.

Friday Pussy Blog: Loafing Around Edition

Tater Tot assumed one of the better cat loaf positions I've seen in awhile. This was last night when he had migrated into the living room prior to the evening television festivities. He usually sits there facing into the kitchen so he can monitor our dinner progress.

It's hard to supervise things though when your head is tilted to the carpet and your eyes are barely open.

Bless Pat

I had a rant building up inside me but the Field Negro stole my thunder. Typical. Because you know, you can't trust those Negores, or those Latina Puerto Ricans who busted their asses to succeed, or the Mexican day-laborers who build most of our shit. Or the slave labor which built most of our nation.

I am so filled with shame right now. Obama delivered an excellent speech before the NAACP today, and I hope they listen.

"Make no mistake: The pain of discrimination is still felt in America," said Obama, who was greeted with cheers and extended applause. "By African American women paid less for doing the same work as colleagues of a different color and gender. By Latinos made to feel unwelcome in their own country. By Muslim Americans viewed with suspicion for simply kneeling down to pray. By our gay brothers and sisters, still taunted, still attacked, still denied their rights."

Especially the white folks, because they NEED to hear it.. But then, that makes me a racist, doesn't it?

Pat definitely qualifies.

You Can Call Me Harvey

I just cancelled my Disqus account for konagod. For those of you who might not know, Disqus is a commenting system -- like Haloscan, but more powerful -- used by blogs although I've only seen it in use at Shakesville which is where I used it last night to have a discussion with Petulant in the comment thread on his post about gardening.

He had asked a week or so ago to have txrad send him the recipe for his lime bars which came up in the discussion last night. The comment exchange involved maybe four back and forth comments between us including one by me early this morning in which I asked Petulant to send me his modified recipe when he's done tweaking it for his taste.

Of course, I cannot prove any of this because if you visit the thread right now, all konagod comments have been.... umm... what's the word I'm looking for.... redacted? deleted!

What's left are some comments by Petulant in response to mine which are rendered somewhat incomprehensible now, as if he's having a conversation with his own invisible rabbit or something.

I guess I touched a nerve over there with my honest assessment of things awhile back, as well as the follow-up fucked up chafe space spoof piece. (Say that ten times really fast.)

Now I'll admit, the last thing I would have expected was a virtual hug-fest given my clearly expressed feelings here and elsewhere regarding the super-charged, razor's edge atmosphere in many comment threads related to controversial posts. Apparently, konagod discussing vegetable gardening and lime bars is enough to chafe someone's hide and cement the deal on a banning.

So I decided the Disqus account could go as it serves no purpose except to clutter up the innertubez. That does not mean I will be invisible, nor does it mean I will be silenced.

Excessive Bank Fees

The $2.7 billion second quarter profit by JPMorgan and the $3.44 billion profit at Goldman Sachs would have been pocket change for Bank of America if they had successfully pulled off this heist.

New Hampshire resident Josh Muszynski bought a pack of cigarettes at a local gas station for what he thought would be a few bucks but his bank account indicated he actually spent $23 quadrillion instead.

Expecting to see a few hundred dollars of charges when he logged online to check his debit account, Muszynski was amazed to see the 17-digit figure of $23,148,855,308,184,500.

Damn him for noticing. I would have assumed another cigarette tax went into effect.

Playing Naked

There is quite a lot of interestng stuff in this NYT article, When Do They Need a Fig Leaf? concerning young children being comfortably naked and the wide spectrum of opinions held by their family members and friends.

I was one such child who, between the age of about 3 and 7, was always stripping off every thread of fabric from my body while outside. It wasn't such a big deal for me or my parents since we lived on a farm at the end of the road. We did have farm workers passing by, and the postman who was amused.

For many parents, allowing a child to run around naked at home is perfectly natural, an expression of physical freedom that represents the essence of childhood, especially in the summer. But for others, unclad bodies are an affront to civility, a source of discomfort and a potentially dangerous attraction for pedophiles. These clashing sensibilities can create conflict, even when the nudity in question takes place at home.

It is also interesting, aside from the generational differences of opinion mentioned in the article, how different people assign an arbitrary age limit for such behavior.

Aly Mandel, 41, a school psychologist and mother of five in Highland Park, N.J., said she, too, felt ire from extended family members for allowing her daughter Ava, now 6, to roam naked in and around the house when she was younger.

“My mother, it used to drive her crazy how naked Ava was,” Ms. Mandel said, explaining that the girl abhorred clothes. “My mother-in-law also, they both felt it crossed the line of what was appropriate. My mother-in-law would come in and automatically say, ‘Ava, put on your clothes. Put on your underwear.’ ”

Gloria Schwartz, Ms. Mandel’s mother-in-law, says she didn’t have a problem with the nudity when Ava and her twin sister, Emily, were very young. But “when they got to be 3 years old, it bothered me,” said Ms. Schwartz, 65, a real estate agent. “I would pull up to the house and the girls were running around naked. It felt inappropriate for them to be standing on the street in front of their house naked.”

[...]

Robert Kohlbrenner thought nothing of it last summer when his grandchildren, two boys, ages 4 and 10, and a girl, 6, asked if they could skinny-dip by the dock on a very hot day at his home on Oneida Lake in upstate New York.

“I think it’s fun for them,” said Dr. Kohlbrenner, 58, a psychologist in private practice, who found out later that his son did not approve. “If you can’t do it when you’re a kid, when can you do it, you know?”

Dr. Kohlbrenner’s son, Justin, 30, said he and his wife felt that their oldest son was too old to be naked. “He was getting a little too big to be doing it, you know, especially in front of his brother and sister,” he said.

Inevitably, there are some who think it's fine for a boy to be naked, but not a girl.

Phyllis Halper, a fourth-grade teacher on Long Island, will not permit her 3-year-old son, Gavin, to get completely undressed at home, not because she thinks it’s inappropriate, but because she is concerned that it might influence the behavior of her daughter, Jordyn, 5. “I expect her, especially as a girl, to be more modest,” Ms. Halper said.

When I was about 6 or 7, I went with my parents to dinner at the home of another couple who had a son my age. At one point in the evening we were playing in the bedroom and I instigated a "let's get naked" situation. We were both running around the room, enjoying the feeling of total liberation I suppose, when the boy's mother walked in on us. She started laughing and told my mother what was going on. Apparently, my mother was embarrassed, and she probably knew I was the ringleader. I got my bare bottom spanked.

The article has, at the time I'm writing this, 52 readers' comments, and this one sums up my feelings about the issue:

How silly. Its amazing how confused and conflicted Americans are about the human body. The only country in the world that could be concerned about naked 6 year olds. They're kids. Leave them alone. Otherwise they'll end up making a national stink about Janet Jacksons nipple just like their screwy parents did. I agree the kid who pees in the yard needs some clear instructions about when and where that's appropriate. But the rest of the instances described?....leave them alone. They'll figure it out when they want to.

Where Would You Live?

If you could live in any other country in the world and be granted immediate citizenship assuming you would want that, where would you live? And if you are of the persuasion that you would never leave the USA, let's rephrase the question: if you HAD to leave the USA, where would you live?

This is a question I have grappled with for decades. There are so many people, places, and cultures in which I want to wallow.

I love the mountains of Switzerland, the serenity of Finland, the fjords of Norway, the warmth of the Spanish people, the west coast vibe of Australia, the nearness of Canada, which feels like a 51st state, and yet so different, and the rustic beauty of Mexico (aside from the drug-related massacres). The high altitudes of Bolivia and women in black bowler hats!

Aside from personal aesthetics, I think I'd have to go with a country where I feel I am treated as an equal. My sexual orientation isn't a factor. And that basically limits my choices, which in and of itself is fucking infuriating.

Then I have to further limit my decision based on which countries I think might be underwater within my lifetime due to global warming. That might take care of the Netherlands which would otherwise be my first choice, probably. I just like the vibe there.

I guess I'd go with Spain.

But if I had to move cats, I'd go with Canada.

Make sense?

Slurring on the Radio

The only thing that surprises me about learning of an AM radio talk show host using the word "wetback" is that it happened in Austin, Texas. Honestly, is this guy so stupid that he didn't expect a backlash in the Berkeley of Texas, ground-zero for liberal progressives in Texas? Not to mention, home to a huge wetback Hispanic population.

If I hadn't done that strike-thru it would have been funny right? Like sarcasm and satire?

"I frequently use sarcasm and satire in my humor," Pryor told listeners this morning. "The first mistake I made is using the term. It's a highly offensive and outdated term that should never be used."

I have never heard this guy's show. I'm not exactly what you'd call a fan of talk radio. But if it's like any of the other AM talk radio formats, real humor isn't even in the equation.

It would have been interesting if the article had included some lengthy quotes so we could have heard the humor, satire, and sarcasm in the proper context.

Pryor began using the word during a discussion about the terminology used to describe people who are in the country illegally.

"Whatever happened to the good old word 'wetback' "? he asked.

[...]

Later during the discussion, Pryor said he was merely trying to come up "with a more efficient way of saying it, that's all, and just bring back a little of good ol' classic Americana."

Oh, right. Like redneck Americana? Like 1950s Lynch a Negro for Jesus Americana?

I don't care if these people have issues with illegal immigration; many people do. But if you can't maintain a little self-control on the air, and behave like a mature adult without resorting to speech which fans the flames, then you really don't have much to say. Nothing at all, in fact.

Nor do you understand very much about sarcasm, satire, and humor. But thanks for reminding me why I avoid talk radio.

Stop the F-22 Now!

My three-dimensional political spectrum just got a little more bent this morning after reading about the F-22 fighter jets. President Obama has rightfully said he won't sign the military spending bill unless the $1.75 billion program to buy seven jets is removed from the bill.

Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry support the purchase. Senators Carl Levin and John McCain oppose it. Supporters want the program because of the high-paying jobs which will be retained. That sounds reasonable on the surface except for one small detail: The Pentagon doesn't really need these jets.

The Pentagon would rather buy unmanned aircraft to gather intelligence in Afghanistan and accelerate the testing for the F-35, a new plane designed to attack ground targets. Pentagon officials say the F-22 is hard to maintain and costs $44,000 to operate for an hour, compared with $30,000 for older planes.

But many Republicans in Congress say more F-22s, which were designed for aerial combat, are needed as a hedge against countries like China.

Holy shit! Let's break this down into bite-sized pieces. In an era when we desperately need to be spending money on things like infrastructure, education, reducing poverty, combating homelessness, health care, gaining energy independence and developing renewable energy sources to name but a few, we have senators pushing for a military expenditure which is unnecessary, simply to keep workers employed. (And keeping executives and stockholders of Lockheed Martin happy.)

It is this kind of disconnect which has me wondering how we'll ever get out of this hole. (We won't, but that's another issue.)

And that argument that the F-22s are a hedge against China? Please. If China wanted to bring us down, they already are well-positioned to cripple us via the economic system. However, Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, believes China will potentially be a threat at some point, "particularly as it will compete directly with the United States for energy supplies."

All the more reason we should be addressing our energy needs now, not when we're over a barrel. No pun intended.

Consider as well, the costs to operate each of the F-22s: $44,000 is one American worker's annual salary for every hour the jets are in use. And that's on top of the $1.75 billion price tag which is another 38,636 such annual salaries.

While that may amount to a minuscule fraction of the jobs we've lost in the current recession, to squander that money unnecessarily is wrong-headed, misguided, and totally void of reasonable logic.

Let's jump back to the China statement for a moment, and John Murtha. And Japan's desire to buy F-22 fighter jets. But there's a slight problem: there's an export ban on the jets.

Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, said Wednesday that he intends to meet in the coming days with Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Rep. Bill Young (Fla.), Murtha’s GOP counterpart on the Defense subcommittee, to discuss lifting the export ban on the F-22.

The key player in that briefing will be Obey, who in 1998 wrote the legislation that bans the exports of the F-22 mainly to keep secret the aircraft’s radar-evading stealth technology. Obey has not budged since, and it’s unclear whether he is willing to relent.

On the surface, it sounds like a pretty good idea if we want to keep these jobs. Allow Japan to buy the jets instead of us building them for ourselves unnecessarily. A win-win situation, right? Ummm, not so fast. In the world of politics, military, and money, things are never simple.

Murtha, who is willing to work with Inouye on facilitating the sale of the F-22 to the Japanese, admitted it is an expensive proposition that also depends on whether Lockheed Martin’s Marietta, Ga., production line will stay open for several more years. That production line in turn depends on U.S. domestic orders for the plane. The Obama administration did not ask for money for the production of the fighter jet in fiscal 2010 and is adamant about halting production after the 187th airplane is delivered to the Air Force.

Murtha said that he would like to be able to purchase another 20 aircraft in 2010, but that he is uncertain whether that would be possible, considering the total price tag for those planes is $3.2 billion. Murtha also said that he is concerned about the high cost of operating and maintaining the existing planes.

Ahh, catch-22 with the F-22! We need to keep paying to keep the plant operational (i.e. churning out unneeded and expensive jets) until we can work out the details of an export to Japan, which might ultimately help with that Big Red Scare from China when they need more energy.

There are not even any guarantees at this point that this plan will even come to fruition.

For the F-22 to end up in Japan, Lockheed Martin would have to spend a considerable amount of time — several years — demilitarizing the plane. That essentially means stripping the jet of sensitive technologies employed by the U.S. military. That could be costly. By Murtha’s calculations the research and development to remove those capabilities would cost at least $1 billion and could go much higher, and it is unclear whether the Japanese would be able to pay such a steep price.

There's a lot more going on here than just "saving American jobs." I smell a big ol' stinking dead rat.

Beware of "Bargain" Foreclosures

Meth labs in homes across the US are a big problem. And the health issues are not limited to the meth users. This story came as a bit of a surprise to me -- that toxic residue from meth labs in homes can linger for years, and have very negative consequences for new owners of the home.

Federal data on meth lab seizures suggest that there are tens of thousands of contaminated residences in the United States. The victims include low-income elderly people whose homes are surreptitiously used by relatives or in-laws to make meth, and landlords whose tenants leave them with a toxic mess.

Some states have tried to fix the problem by requiring cleanup and, at the time of sale, disclosure of the house’s history. But the high cost of cleaning — $5,000 to $100,000, depending on the size of the home, the stringency of the requirements and the degree of contamination — has left hundreds of properties vacant and quarantined, particularly in Western and Southern states afflicted with meth use.

“The meth lab home problem is only going to grow,” said Dawn Turner, who started a Web site, www.methlabhomes.com, after her son lost thousands of dollars when he bought a foreclosed home in Sweetwater, Tenn., that turned out to be contaminated.

Because cleanup costs are so high, many families have no option but to suffer or walk away.

Meth contamination can bring financial ruin to families like that of Francisca Rodriguez. The family dog began having seizures nine days after the Rodriguezes moved into their home in Grapevine, Tex., near Dallas, and their 6-year-old son developed a breathing problem similar to asthma, said Ms. Rodriguez, 35, a stay-at-home mother of three.

After learning from neighbors that the three-bedroom ranch-style home had been a known “drug house,” the family had it tested. The air ducts had meth levels more than 100 times higher than the most commonly cited limit beyond which cleanup is typically required.

The former owner had marked “no” on a disclosure form asking whether the house had ever been a meth lab, Ms. Rodriguez said. But because he is now in prison for meth possession, among other things, the Rodriguezes decided there was nothing to gain by suing him. They moved out, throwing away most of their possessions because they could not be cleaned, and are letting the house go into foreclosure.

“It makes you crazy,” Ms. Rodriguez said. “Our credit is ruined, we won’t be able to buy another house, somebody exposed my kids to meth, and my dog died.”

There was a 14% increase in the number of home-based meth labs discovered last year. This is clearly another housing crisis, and we have a mish-mash of inadequate state laws dealing with the matter, all of which are woefully inadequate.

About 20 states have passed laws requiring meth contamination cleanup, and they use widely varied standards. Virtually all the laws hold the property owner financially responsible; Colorado appears to be the only state that allots federal grant money to help innocent property owners faced with unexpected cleanup jobs.

This is not the American dream.