Thursday, December 31, 2009
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
Four states, including our neighbor Washington, are going forward with steps to legalize marijuana - and, by making those steps, are moving toward the termination of our preposterous "Drug War"
Not surprisingly at least one of the officials that benefit by the irrational "Drug War" puts forth a negative reaction: "There's no upside to it in any manner other than for those people who want to smoke pot," said Travis Kuykendall, head of the West Texas High Intensity Drug-Trafficking Area office in El Paso, Texas. "There's nothing for society in it, there's nothing good for the country in it, there's nothing for the good to the economy in it."
This person who benefits from the "Drug War" fails to note the human and financial costs, the devastating enforcement structure we've built, the way we have overwhelmed our judicial and penal systems with users and the way we have trashed our neighbors to the south with our efforts. He also fails to take into account two other realities: Marijuana has not been shown to be more dangerous than tobacco, which we subsidize, or coffee in which we are drowning ourselves. This is not even to take note of the fact that the "Drug War" has been a dismal, totally unpromising, failure.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Friday, December 18, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
The Doser lacks any understanding of why three people would venture -
on a dangerous avalanche-prone slope
with a heavy storm in the immediate offing
without sufficient means to weather a storm and
without any of the inexpensive signal devices.
Who pays for attempts to save such persons? Have those who have made those attempts ever lost their lives in the process? (Other than the one helicopter pilot who died trying to get the whining John Day off Denali a few years ago.)
The Doser has acquired one, incomprehensible, explanation for the lack of signal devices: they are not required because carrying one would make the adventurer overly-confident and, thus, cause him to do what his good sense tells him not to do.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
were composed of almost stereotypical parts. They were:
One or more African American men were identified as the candidates. It was broadcast that they raped a white woman. A mob formed. No investigation was made of the rape claim. The police did not do anything to disburse the mob. The lynching occurred. Photographs of the lynched persons were taken. Sometimes a special purpose photograph was posed. The photographs were widely disseminated. The police will did nothing to stop the lynching or reduce the public display that followed. The murderers were not brought to justice. Part of the press reported the event with approval; part of the press did not report the incident; part of the press viewed the event with disapproval.
Here is what the process told African Americans.
1. It could be you, since being selected is arbitrary.
2. It matters if white women are raped; it doesn't matter if African American women are raped.
3. The weapon of resolution is a mob - meaning an insensitive, out-of-control group drawn from the immediate area.You are isolated among persons any of whom may be hostile.
4. The police are not going to help you.
5. The photographs affirm to interested people that the matters of white superiority, sanctity of white women, necessary abasement have been taken care of.
6. It is a lynching offense to be an African American; it is not an offense to lynch an African American.
7. The media is not to be regarded as helpful.
8. Essentially, you are very vulnerable. You'd better keep in your place.
Does some of this action and reaction seem reminiscent of the events at Abu Ghraib?
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
On the above site there are shown several photos that deal with the Little Rock, Arkansas, school desegregation. Several, taken just 52 years ago, demonstrate the intensity of the feelings against desegregation and the isolation of the persons against whom the feelings were directed. A couple of 2007 pictures are added to show that all is forgiven and forgotten. The Doser says: Whooee. I'm sure glad racial discrimination is a thing of the past because it wasn't nice at all.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
1. Facing a calendar back-log, the judge doesn't want to take on a trial that will take three times what it would take if a lawyer were involved. 2. He will have step repeatedly out of the judicial role to tell the defendant what to do and how to do it. 3. He will have to help the defendant introduce evidence and then have to rule on its admission. 4. Trials under self-defense conditions are rife with reversal possibilities and judges do not like to be reversed. 5. Judges like their court-rooms to be orderly and judicial and the self-defender usually turns the process into a farce. 6. Even young law school graduates are not adept at participating in trials in their early days. 7. If the defendant wants to have a jury, the above reasons should be multiplied on the messiness scale by a factor of at least three.
Monday, December 7, 2009
The main-line journals that we read have commented calmly upon our torturing of prisoners. Some got out on a limb to speculate if it might be illegal or, somehow, not permitted. We even engaged in a national colloquy on the subject of whether drowning a person just short of killing him was actually "torture." Our media has not viewed with alarm or followed up on the implications.... Nor have we....
The author of the article in Art Journal doesn't do that. She lays it right out. We've been following our national bent to humiliate, denigrate, mutilate and lynch black people - and we've done it again. We've been humiliating, denigrating, mutilating Islaamic people. Bush and his minions told us it was OK and we did it and accepted it - and, now, we are willing to let bygones be bygones.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
How would it be if the State of Oregon controlled the sport killing of deer so that the wolves could have their natural prey and, then, reimbursed the ranchers for stock proved to have been slain by wolves.
Well, you say, that's a compromise for which the deer-hunters must pay. (It is their fee support, and legislative support, which is vital to the Oregon Wildlife programs.) Okay, we need a reasonable compromise for that one!
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
The recent spurt in growth of the venerable bristlecone pines raises questions about warming. Of course it is not denied that such evidences of global warming tend to show that there is global warming going on. The diminution of polar ice and the advance of conifer forests into the tundra, and a number of other processes, show that there is global warming. The sticking point for the objectors is their view that it is not emergency-type global warming of which we are the cause but just a run-of-the-mill natural cycle of warming. When we are causing an atmospheric effect that results in global warming, when global warming has occurred at an increased rate recently, it seems to The Doser that we must curtail that conduct whether it is causing the global warming or exacerbating it.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
They have scheduled the trial of the ones who claim they arranged the destruction of the twin towers. The trial is set in a court house quite near the scene of the tragedy. That there probably won't be many jurors called who actually dwell in that area only reduces "the problem." The problem will be to get an unbiased jury. The questioning of jurors will proceed along two lines: (1) Do you know about the event that took out the twin towers on 9/11? and (2) Do you think you can be an unbiased juror? The jury will be made up of those who answer "yes" to the second question. The defense won't have enough perremptory challenges to clean that mess up! Think! If the answer is "no" to the first question, is that really believable ? And - if "yes" to the second question, is that really believable?
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
But, "Mom" was right on the cusp of the problem: she wanted the girl to come and tell her if her brother was stuck up a tree. She just did not want to be included in the way brother and sister learned to deal with each other. The message, however, was: "Don't be a tattle-tale." Since the investment the "teller" had in telling was slight, it was still possible for "Mom" to give some dimension to the prohibition.
It's like The Doser's grand-children who were told not to speak with strangers. The children learned the lesson that they should not speak to their infrequently-visiting grand-parents. What seems to be needed is a training message that says: Don't do this - but - do that.
Later in life, when peers began to be more important and the parental regulations-structure more burdensome, the person who went to authority with a report on what was going on was called a "rat." The Doser understands that this term is used on those who "rat" on their criminal associates. Even the "informer," without whom most crimes would remain unsolved, is not a noble figure - even to the police who rely upon him. By this time, the "costs of telling" have gone up. Payment and protections are sometimes provided for the person who tells.
The US Navy used to have a well-embedded "us-them" demarcation which did not encourage enlisted men to "tell" on other enlisted men. The Doser's guess is that it is still pretty much the same, generally, in all armed forces. Probably based camaraderie and the fear of retaliation. However, The Doser's friend Rob, says that there are Army mechanisms to protect a person who is picked on, hazed, violated and the like. It does turn on going to authority to complain. It would be a long walk to the Lieutenant's office past the Sergeant's desk! And an even longer walk back to the berthing area.
Those of us old enough to remember the Nazi era remember how horrified we were that neighbors were encouraged to "tell" on neighbors. That is: they were encouraged to tell the authorities about infractions of the law. Further, to show how despicable the Nazis were, we were led to understand that they encouraged children to tell on their parents.
The Doser was thinking about the boy who brought the gun to school the other day. Apparently, his backing among the student body for bringing a weapon to school was not large because some students told some teachers about the gun. Even at this remove, one wonders if the plural of "students" and "teachers" was not used to protect a single person that told.
It is not hard to imagine that there are situations where the ones who would want to tattle-tale or "rat" on the school gunsel would certainly not do that: for example, if there were mean streets between the school and their homes and the gunsel was a member of a gang. The costs of telling could be very high.
Anyone that has ever attended an automobile accident or witnessed a crime in a crowded place knows very well that, "I don't want to get involved," decides who saw anything. Thus, even to uphold rules that we all rely upon, we can't bring ourselves easily to tell authorities what happened. Here, the "don't tell" rule applies even though the costs of telling are as low as giving a statement or appearing in court.
What we seem to have is a well-settled ambivalence about telling authority that somebody did something wrong? Those feelings come out of a culture that fully supports that reluctance. Though it works to the disadvantage of the underdog, the violated person, it appears to The Doser that it may be too embedded to be cured.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
1. Adler, John (N.J.)
2. Altmire, Jason (Penn.)
3. Baird, Brian (Wash.)
4. Barrow, John (Ga.)
5. Boccieri, John (Ohio)
6. Boren, Dan (Okla.)
7. Boucher, Rick (Va.)
8. Boyd, Allen (Fla.)
9. Bright, Bobby (Ala.)
10. Chandler, Ben (Ky.)
11. Childers, Travis (Miss.)
12. Davis, Artur (Ala.)
13. Davis, Lincoln (Tenn.)
14. Edwards, Chet (Tex.)
15. Gordon, Bart (Tenn.)
16. Griffith, Parker (Ala.)
17. Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (S.D.)
18. Holden, Tim (Penn.)
19. Kissell, Larry (N.C.)
20. Kosmas, Suzanne (Fla.)
21. Kratovil, Frank (Md.)
22. Kucinich, Dennis (Ohio)
23. Markey, Betsy (Colo.)
24. Marshall, Jim (Ga.)
25. Massa, Eric (N.Y.)
26. Matheson, Jim (Utah)
27. McIntyre, Mike (N.C.)
28. McMahon, Mike (N.Y.)
29. Melancon, Charlie (La.)
30. Minnick, Walt (Idaho)
31. Murphy, Scott (N.Y.)
32. Nye, Glenn (Va.)
33. Peterson, Collin (Minn.)
34. Ross, Mike (Ark.)
35. Shuler, Heath (N.C.)
36. Skelton, Ike (Mo.)
37. Tanner, John (Tenn.)
38. Taylor, Gene (Miss.)
39. Teague, Harry (N.M.)
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Let's assume that there is a group of youths that think they are adults and leave their parental homes because they want to be liberated from the parental situation. The Doser wonders: What about having adult-sponsored youth living enclaves? These would be designated civic entities where they are free to act as adults: they can earn a wage that sustains them, they must live by the laws of the state and will, presumably, need to adhere to the rules of the mores section into which they gravitate. They can drink, dope, shirk, fornicate, form partnerships, espouse causes, act out and work as much as they want to - with the same consequences that older adults experience when they do those things. They would have an opportunity to live as an adult with an adult's consequences. The deal would be that all youths that want to "run away from home" could enroll.
Sort of a combination of CCC and Lord of the Flies?
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The Doser learned about these absurdities from Leonard Pitts Jr's column.
To get an impression of the corrections Schlafly makes is in the long ending of Mark's Gospel, which includes the story of the woman caught in adultery. This incident is not found in most of the oldest Greek manuscripts used to translate the Bible. Schlafly says that the adultery story, in which Jesus says, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her," should be cut because it portrays Jesus as being soft on sin.
"It's a liberal addition, put in by people who wanted to undermine the reality of hell and judgment," he said.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
Sunday, September 27, 2009
But, just when we need the conservative intellectual expression, it has disappeared and the right wing has turned itself over to the ranters-and-ravers. The conservatives are not furthering the process of commonweal; they are providing intemperate, disorderly, rude contributions and actually promoting harmful conduct. Comparing President O'bama to Adolph Hitler, saying that the health package contains provision for death committees, saying that President O'bama has no strategy for Afghanistan because he doesn't send immediately the 40,000 troops requested by the military, encouraging people to act out their hatreds.
President O'bama was right, initially, to try to draw some of his program's intellectual adversaries into bi-partisan debate and support but there simply is no intellectual element there any more. The Doser's opinion is that The President realizes there is nothing there and he is now simply trying to get a few votes from the less turbulent ones.
The Doser notes that the long-in-the-tooth are fairly solidly supportive of this madness. Q: How can the elderly put any belief in a group that has the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Joe Wilson, Lou Dobbs, Frank Luntz and Bill O'Reilly as their spokespeople? A: They have come to believe that O'bama's program will cost them some of the program support upon which they have relied and they are so angst-ridden, they are persuaded to believe the unbelievable.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
The Doser mentions this because the US appears to be at an historical turning point: whether to accept defeat and withdraw from Afghanistan or materially increase the military commitment there.
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the US/UN commander in Afghanistan has announced that, without more troops being committed to the Afghanistan war, it will soon be impossible to win the war.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Friday, September 4, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
(True to form, The Oregonian doesn't have its current newspaper on line yet, so The Doser's reference to the source needs to be the labored one: The above information was reported August 23, 2009, in The Oregonian in a front page story by Andy Dworkin entitled What's so Special about Health Co-ops? The statistics Dworkin uses are from the WHO.)
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Monday, August 17, 2009
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Dial 1 for amputation
Dial 2 for angioplasty
Dial 3 for appendectomy
Dial 4 for bilateral cingulotomy
Dial 5 for cholecystectomy
Dial 6 for circumcision
Dial 7 for heart transplantation
Dial 8 for lobotomy
Dial 9 for pancreaticoduodenectomy
Dial 10 for episiotomy
Dial 11 for diverticulectomy
For all other procedures Dial 12.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Friday, August 7, 2009
Not too long ago, however, it burgeoned mightily: 1. gaining acceptance among non-religious people as a social exercise and 2. invading our civil law at several places, mainly in taxes, finances, inheritance, and land law.
What we now need is a way to honor the relationship of non-religious people who commit themselves to each other and think of, possibly having children.
Let us not be unmindful of the unquestionable reality that the religious/"marriage" people have not done their thing successfully in a lot of recent years. Their failures suggest that they actually ought to be ignored when they claim the power to define how people doing the commitment/family thing are required to do it.
The Doser suggests a first step: let's figure out an honoring way to describe that process or event or state where non-religious people decide to step out into the future as a committed pair of people.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Friday, July 24, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
"We don't believe in doctors, we know that God will heal our child." A nosy neighbor looked over the fence one day and said: "I think you ought to change doctors, your child isn't improving at all." And the mother said "We don't believe in doctors, we know that God will heal our child." When the mother got to hell she asked the Devil why she had been sent there. The Devil said, "Because you killed your own child, dummy." The woman said: "But we were convinced that God would save her." The Devil says,"Well, what do you expect, God sent the grocery clerk, the postman and the nosy neighbor."
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
"I hope that my message is clear. After reading this, the next time you talk to a Black person you can feel comfortable in now knowing with every fiber of your being that you have no clue what they think or feel based on their skin color."
The Doser is reading Blackmon Slavery by Another Name - which, The Doser mused, seemed to give a believable explanation to why "black people seem, mysteriously,to be unable to succeed in the American system like other peoples (Asiatics in particular),newcomers who take to our system and succeed quickly in it." (The Doser confesses he actually said such a thing.) Well, that means the Doser just flat-out flunked the awareness test. That means the Doser rates high on the bigotry scale. There isn't, according to White's article, any group of black people. Just like the Doser is not a member of a white people group just so no black person is a member of a black group. With blacks, just as it is absolutely so as it is to whites, there is no way to say, "Every white person seems to........." No, just NO!
So, does this realization further the "cause of the black people?" Well, no, since there are no "black people," so they don't have a "black peoples' cause." How can they even be thought of to have a "cause." It does further the Doser's climb from bigotry, however.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
This legislation (not to mention the suet that stuck itself to this popular bill) has several effects. Among those that seem the most valuable to the Doser are noted as follows.:Gives FDA power to regulate tobacco; requires manufacturers to reveal the contents of tobacco products; provides for a biennial Health Department inspection; protects nicotine from the zeal of the FDA.The Doser gives this one a hearty Μπραβω! Tobacco products cause the death of 400,000 Americans annually and the killing process is both expensive and painful. It is the number one preventable cause of death in America. "Preventable" because it can be prevented by one or two straightforward actions: 1. Don't start. 2. Just quit. Number one is so easy - number two can be desperately difficult.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
From a religious point of view, what was going on there? Were the couple testing the power of God to heal their child? Or were they testing their opinion that God could be prevailed upon by their beliefs and actions to heal their child? Anybody who believes in God posits God's power to do anything. So, presumably, these parents were not testing the ability of God to heal their child. The test they were making was of their religious opinions - and whether they were sufficiently strong to persuade God to heal the baby. To believe that is not standard religion but belief in magic.
So,then, from a parental,legal point of view, what was going on there? How does depriving their child of needed medicine compare with other parental neglects? Let us say that it comes into the parents' heads that, though they have food, it would be a test of their opinions to leave the provision of food for their baby to God. Or, let's say their child tears out the seat of his trousers at school and comes to his parents to have them mended. Or, if they see their child suspended over an abyss with only a weakening thread preventing his death. Or if the child takes up a dangerous habit like smoking. Or, as a toddler, their child is trying to run out into traffic. Would they also leave these ordinary necessary parental actions to God?
The Doser considers them to be, at least, guilty of manslaughter and criminal mistreatment.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Monday, June 8, 2009
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
The families of soldiers killed in combat now receive $100,000 as a death gratuity, certain continuing post privileges, a burial stipend of $1,900. The family will get GI Insurance benefit in the amount for which the soldier paid premiums. The family will get standard social security benefits. The Doser's soldier friend said: "Some states also give benefits; don't enlist until you check them."
The 9-11 victims' families received an average of $3.1 million. (The low being $1.85 million and the high $4.7 million.) They will also get the standard Social Security benefits. There seems to The Doser to be a radically unfair disparity in the handling of these two circumstances. In one, the decedents were in the wrong place at the wrong time and were handsomely recompensed. In the other, the decedents volunteered to fight for their country and were killed doing it and are not recompensed anywhere nearly as well.
To gloss over the inequity,totally ineptly, an urban legend was circulated for a while that the 9-11 victims' families were denied the benefits of their own private insurance under their policies' "war" exclusion.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
So, what about this?
1. Sentence every convicted offender to the maximum penalty provided under the law.
2. Make a determination whether this offender is intractable or dangerous. If either is the case - off to the pokey. ("Intractable" is an easy call: this program is explained fully to him and if he refuses to be involved in it, he's intractable. "Dangerous" is a much more difficult concept and initially would be determined in a hearing beyond conviction like the one available now.)
3. If the offender is not intractable or dangerous, he is given an exhaustively thorough life-examination. An elaborate schedule that reflects how the offender would live if he did not commit criminal acts would be devised. A set of rules rather like a very-detailed probation program would be designed for him.
4. The offender would then be presented with the schedule/behavior program. If he refuses to be bound that way - off to the pokey.
5. If the offender accepts the schedule/behavior program, he is fitted with a "short leash" device.
6. The schedule and behavior program is frequently and regularly monitored.
7. If the offender gets off the schedule/behavior program, he is called to give account. If he can't give reasonable account for his failure - off to the pokey.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Friday, May 8, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Sunday, May 3, 2009
* As some remember: "The phrase 'peace for our time' was spoken on 30 September 1938 by British prime minister Neville Chamberlain, in his speech concerning the Munich Agreement....... The Munich Agreement gave the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to Adolf Hitler in an attempt to satisfy his desire for ..... 'living space' for Germany. The German occupation of the Sudetenland began on the next day, 1 October. One year after the agreement, following continued aggression from Germany and its invasion of Poland, Europe was plunged into World War II." (Wikipedia)
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Friday, May 1, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
(1) Do I think that the drug war has stopped a lot of people from taking drugs in the first place?
(2) Do I believe that a lot of people that were committed to using drugs have been stopped from using them by the War?
(3) Do I believe that a lot of people have been protected, by the "War" effort, from being looted or killed by the drug traffic?
(4) Do I believe that fewer people are using drugs now than when the "War" started?
(5) Do I think that we are "winning" the drug war?
(6) Do I think we are holding our own in the drug war?
(7) Do I think we have not yet lost The Drug War?
(8) When President O'Bama talks about programs justifying their existence to get funding, do I think The Drug War will justify its existence by pointing to its progress and victories?
(9) Do I think that drug suppliers are the criminals and that users are just sick people?
(10) Do I think that, if we increased our allotment or changed our War strategy, we'd bring the matter to victory?
(11) Do I think The Drug War makes a strong moral statement about the US?
(12) Do I think that conducting The Drug War is better than not conducting it?
If you answered any of the above questions with a "Yes, I do," don't bother to read on. You have a good thing going for you. Why fix it?
If you did not answer any of the questions with a "Yes, I do," here are some references to help you apply focus on your dissatisfaction:
"The Drug War" is the almost 40 year old Crusade that now costs the Federal and State governments of the United States close to $15 billion each quarter-annum. The cost mounts at the rate of $600 per second. You might watch the costs click the clock up on the ongoing costs.
The Doser says: The Drug War is a euphemism for: Stop other people from providing our people with the drugs they want."
Though it has been dubbed a "War," it really has never been considered one - since we do not publish our losses, the costs involved or the "body-count" (a Viet Nam War practice.)
There is so much creditable material on The Web that excoriates the so-called Drug Wat that The Doser got lost in attempting to make a decent bibliography. You are asked to browse the topic of The Drug War.
One final note: A good place to get synoptic impressions of The Drug War is on Alternet. Why go to the Alernet rather than the WSJ or the NYT or the Big O? Because the war on The Drug War is not yet being fought by the establishment press.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Friday, April 10, 2009
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
The authors numbered are: (1)John Hope Franklin; (2)Lerone Bennett 3) Douglas Blackmon (4) Jervis Anderson (5) Leon F. Litwak