I have been to Madison several times.  I vaguely remember those times, as Uncle Jimbo was my host, and he and Kev and I would blow through some serious coin drinking in a college town each time.  That being said, I could've not had to curl up on Jimbo's couch if I'd known I could just crash on the floor of the Capitol building.

Okay, police chief.  I get that you're a union man, but when does protesting--I asssume this is some kind of sit-in (or sleep over)--become simple squatting?

You don't have to drag these folks out, turn on the hoses and release the hounds... simply make life REALLY uncomfortable.  After the cleaning crews are done on the upper floors, have them open all the doors and windows on those floors.  Madison gets chilly in summer... and is currently dipping into the low teens.  So the folks squatting in the parlor can either sleep in their nice, comfy homes, or freeze their asses off. 

Next, shut off the other things they have for creature comforts--like electricity on the first floor.  And lock all the bathrooms, too.  As a matter of fact, turn off the water, lest the pipes freeze up over the weekend.  While you're at it, put radios on all the upper floors, tuned (poorly) to every single AM and FM frequency they can receive.  Put a MP3 player set on repeat on the loudspeaker system, and play any single nickleback song.  You haven't done anything to stop them from squatting in the Capitol building, just made the experience less pleasant.  Also, now would be a REALLY good time to have the floors stripped, too.  Ammonia works wonders for removing wax, don't you know.

Here's the thing:  Public Sector unions are unfair to the taxpayer.  Why?  Because the citizen a) can't match the political contribution of the union, or the political power.  So the vote of the citizen (1ea) is worth less to the politician than the vote of the public sector union employee.  The PS union employee gets 1ea vote at the polls, but then also gets to have the union represent them in the capitol.  So 2-1, the citizen loses.

Another reason I hate Public Sector unions:  because they limit the productivity of the worker.  That's right folks, unions do as much as they can to ensure that the dead weight, non-performers keep their jobs.  By doing so, they make the overall population less effective, and that means that the organization is less effective and more expensive.  Since the citizen pays for it, shouldn't the citizen be able to demand the best value for the money?

Unions in general piss me off.  Businesses should hire and fire based on performance.  The best businesses will draw the best applicants, and the best applicants will work for the best businesses.  Where unions come in is where the applicants are less than best, or worst of the bunch, and they need to see that those who are the worst don't get fired for sucking.  Nothing says "job security" like doing a good job and doing it consistently.  There was a time in America when unions were necessary--a time before OSHA, before labor laws, and before anti-trust laws.  That time is over.

Police and Firefighter unions?  Screw them, too.  You want to stage a walk-out/protest/strike?  Fine.  I'll set your house on fire, Firemarshall Bill.  I'll rob your house when you aren't home, Deputy Fife.  Both of those unions use fear, pure, unadulterated fear, that if their demands aren't met, then our towns will devolve overnight into lawless anarchy and then burn to the ground.  What do we call it when people use popular fear to coerce a response... oh, that's right, terrorism. 

Other public unions.  Firefighters don't keep your house from burning down.  They keep the neighbor's house from catching fire, too.  Police don't stop you from being robbed, either.  They write up the report for you to file with your insurance company.  The supreme court has ruled that cops do not have the responsibility to protect you from crime, too.  They cannot be held accountable, for instance, if you get raped and they aren't there to stop it.  Report after report has shown that the best deterrent to violent crime is an armed populace, castle doctrine, and the wide availability of personal firearms.  In towns, cities, and states where carrying weapons is legal, if not encouraged, crime is always lower.  Compare Arlington VA, where the right to carry and defend yourself is a given, with Prince George's County, Maryland, where guns are the devil!  In VA, your chances of being on the receiving end of violent crime are thirty five times less than across the river in MD (5604/100K in MD vs 157/100K in VA.)  Both counties have cops, too.  And yet one sees far, far fewer crime than the other. 

I'm not saying that we shouldn't have police and firefighters.  However, many municipalities do just fine with volunteer firefighters.  Maybe if cities went to volunteer firefighters, (saving the cities MILLIONS in taxes) and not enough people joined, then after the buildings burned down, more civic-minded people would move in.  Nothing cures urban blight like a good, cleansing fire.  Just ask Chicago, LA, or SF.  Police are a bit trickier.  Nobody except the nice fellows at Xe want a privatized police force.  Police are, and should be, public servants.  That doesn't mean that police should be allowed to unionize.  Again, the union exists to keep the worst performers on payroll.  So the worst cops get hauled before an internal affairs investigation, and what happens?  The union lawyer (paid for with your tax dollars) shows up, and the bad cop gets a 4-month paid leave to let public opinion die down before they come back to work.  If the city does not pay a living wage, then people will either a) not serve on the force, of b) serve on the force and supplement income with second jobs or through graft and corruption.  In the case of a) good for them, in the case of b) public executions of dirty cops should be the norm.  But here's the rub... if your citizenry is capable of protecting itself, how much are cops going to really be needed?

Ronald Regan said it best when (and I'm paraphrasing here) "You monkeys got 48 hours to get your asses back to work... No?  Fine.  You're fired, and banned from being rehired... for life."

The governor of Wisconsin needs to seriously man up.  He has taken a stance, now it's time to get medieval on their asses.  They want to act like children throuwing a tantrum becuase their wages are twice the average private sector employee?  Treat them like intemperate children--and don't spare the rod.  The state employees work for him, period.  the buck stops with him.  He can tell the teachers unions to get their asses back in the classrooms and do their damn jobs, or they can go elsewhere and ply their trade--elsewhere being anywhere not in the state, as he's going to a) fire them, b) yank their teaching certificates, c) absorb the pension monies and d) put a blanket statement out about their choice to put their own pocketbooks ahead of the interests of their students.  If the local cops decide that they are going to support their union brothers, fine.  Fire all the damn cops, too, and call out the national guard (Governors can do that, too) to keep the peace and restore order.  Once they are in place, fire all the cops with the same provisions as the teachers, but ensure that their pink slip says "refused to enfore the laws and lawful orders of the governor." 

He could, and should, bust all the public sector unions.  Ban them, make them illegal, take away the collective bargaining rights.  You get hired based on your qualifications, and retain (or lose) your job based on your performance and the need for your job to exist.  Just like in the rest of the world.  Private sector unions should take note, too.  Employers hve every right to shitcan someone who doesn't pul their weight--especially in unskilled labor markets--here's looking at you, UAW.  (A note on the UAW:  these guys are recognized as getting paid ridiculous sums for working on assembly lines and being "nut turner number 416" and churning out shoddy result after shoddy result.  Granted, there are some who are truly talented individuals, and who have jobs that require years of specialized instruction and training.  They deserve the high wages, which would actually be higher, if their "brothers" in the union weren't holding them back through collective bargaining.  For more on the benefits of union labor in the Private sector, take a drive through Detroit.)

--Chuck

As some of you know, the milblogosphere, and more importantly, ME, have had issues with Mike Yon in the past.

As I sat and watched the waves crash along the rocky shores of Ehukai beach, not really thinking about anything for a few minutes, I became aware of the incredible feeling of calm that can beset a person once they've let go of their emotions and just forgiven.  There is a tranquility here that goes beyond relaxation--one that transcends rest.  There is a feeling of the impact a person really has on a universal scale--that we, no matter how full of sound and fury, signify nothing in the big--really big picture.


The largest waves--pure, perfect energy, were dashed along the reef, the energy washing over the rocks and escaping as a crash and whisper of foam.  The waves, for all their terrible might, were really nothing more than the grains of sand along the shore.  The fury, the power, the force--nothing after a few moments; and followed by another wave, sometimes greater, sometimes smaller, but always followed.

And so it it with Michael Yon.  Michael Yon has left the massage parlors, bars, and temples of Thailand and is now wandering the Afgan countryside, looking for a story.  He has taken pictures of sand, mountains, snow, the moon, helicopters, and cars.  He is searching... for the truth, or a truth that fits his narrative; for a story or a picture that will bring him fame and sell his books, or maybe he's just looking for something to do.  Whatever it is, I hope he finds it.  I hope he finds the peace that I have found... the peace to look aound and see that what we do in our lives can matter--whether we are the big wave, a little wave, or a grain of sand.

I have been following Michael Yon on his new, much more interesting blog, and you should too.

--Chuck

Post Script:  One last thing, if you should happen to read this Michael....  Eat my shit, asshole.

The middle east is imploding!  Oh dear mohammed (peas be upon him) what should we do????

Item #1:  These folks (Egyptians/Lybians/Bahrainians etc.) don't want our help.  They certainly don't want an occupation force of Americans to come and sully the place up.

Item #2:  The American Military, if you've not been paying attention, is pretty damn busy right now.  Granted, we've scaled back the number of troops in Iraq, and politicians have never been very serious about sending the troops we need to Afghanistan, but we are as busy as we've ever been.  Not a good time to start putting penny packets of troops out on a very tenuous logistics thread.

Item #3:  Some people have brought up the idea of "owning the skies" or "No Fly Zones" over places like Lybia.  That's a great idea.  We have all sorts of Aircraft Carriers, planes, and pilots with nothing but time on their hands, our airframes have all just come off the assembly line and have all sorts of time left on their airframes and engines.  They haven't been doing continuous patrols in Iraq and Afghanistan, making sure that there is always someone nearby with a JDAM when you need it, or back home in the US, training for the next deployment.  We could, of course, just park some Aegis Guided Missile Cruisers in the Gulf of Sidra and control the skies that way.  That worked out well in the Straights of Hormuz, right? 

Item # 4:  During our own revolution, we received aid from France (thank god they didn't send troops, or we'd all be speaking English now.)  We received money and weapons.  I would wager that in all of the countries we're talking about, it isn't very hard to come across an AK, and it seems they have a fresh supply of money right under the sand.  So what can we offer them in terms of support?

I think the best thing we can do for them is to offer safe haven to all of the heads of their governments.  Tell them that they can come here, we'll grant them refugee/political assylum etc., they can bring their families and their assets, and we'll give them estates in whichever state they would like to live in.  This is prettymuch what we did with the Shah of Iran and with Ferdinand Markos, so it isn't like this is a new idea.

Then, once the revolution is over, the people have established new governments, and peace has returned to their nations, we box up said dictators and ship them back home in chains.  (Hey, we said we'd grant assylum--just not forever.)  We work all this out with the leaders of the revolution through whichever agency is able to handle sneaky things without getting their hands caught in the cookie jar.  Under our terms, they can make noises about us being bad for taking these dictators away from "justice," but not too much noise, maybe even thank the US for cutting the cancer out of their country, and giving them the chance to breathe free.  Once they've made the effort to recognize our benevolence in defusing the violence, they get back their dictator and his assets and family to use as guillotine fodder.

I realize that isn't going to happen.  What we will do is rattle a saber or two with the military, prepare to send in our troops for humaintarian aid missions (which cost $Billion$, and are second only to Peace Keeping as things nobody enlists to do) and eventually come out looking like we were supporting the wrong side, whichever side wins. 

This is a zero chance of success game.  Democracy and Freedom will not suddemly erupt in the Middle East. They are going to either replace what they have in their countries (in the case of a tryant, I'm betting on a Theocracy or Communist government; in the case of Monarchy, I'd bet on a constitutional Monarchy or Theocracy) or install more of the same--a revolutionary leader will step up, kill off his enemies, and make himself the new president for life.  No way, no how will these people a) love the US b) stop looking at Israel as the root of all evil c) stop trying to harm our economy by screwing with oil prices d) stop supporting terrorism.

Here's the funny thing:  in any country where revolution fails, I would bet a paycheck that Israel gets blamed for starting the revolution by the government, and the US gets blamed by the people for not helping them.  In any revolution that succeeds, the US will get blamed for supporting the old regime, or not supporting the revolutions enough, and Israel will get blamed for existing.

--Chuck

Black history month:  when we celebrate the history of a people grouped not by the content of their character, but by the color of their skin. 

I really don't understand black history month.  If we are talking about the history of people with high melanin content, shouldn't we be celebrating the history of people dating back to the dawn of man in Africa?  If we are talking about Black American history, we should properly confine the dates to 1776-present, as prior to 1776, this wasn't a country, it was a collection of colonies, owned by the British, French, Dutch, Spanish, etc.

In either case, we identify a group of people to celebrate based upon the color of their skin--how is that tolerable?  I'm all for cultural diversity, accepting that people come from different backgrounds and cultures and each has its own unique characteristics and contributions to our modern society... I just don't like the idea of having special months/weeks/days whatever for them, unless, in the interests of diversity, and not holding any one culture above another, we have equal time for all cultures, which we don't.  This country was built (after it became a country) by successive waves of immigrants, mostly of Irish, Italian, German, Slavic, and Polish descent, and yet where is the "Polish American History Month?"  Sure, the Irish get St. Patrick's day, where we drink ourselves into oblivion and eat corned beef and cabbage.  And there's Columbus day, celebrated by alternating parades and protests and a trip to Olive Garden, where we eat spaghetti and drink ourselves to oblivion, and Octoberfest, where we drink ourselves into oblivion and eat sausages, and the Quatro, Sinco, and Sixtho of Mayo, where we eat taco and drink ourselves into oblivion, but we don't celebrate months for skin color in the same manner as we do Black History Month. 

There is, of course "Asian History Month," "Pacific Islander Month," Native American History Weekend" and special group recognition ad infinitum, but why do we not call it "Yellow People Month" or "Tan People Month" or "Not everyone from Mexico is of Spanish Descent Month" (to relieve confusion from "the other tan people month")?

Some argue that Black History Month celbrates all of African-American history.  Great--but why not just call it American History month, and celebrate the history of our nation--and all people who contributed to building it, without regard to color or ethnicity?  Others bring in the topic of slavery.  In the case of slavery, one could argue that as a nation, we only had the institution of slavery for 90 years... tossing out the status quo that had existed in the colonies of other nations for almost four centuries.  Others point to the civil rights movement as the focus for black history month... which completely discounts the efforts of the many thousands of people who pushed for recognition of content of character over color of skin, and who were in fact not Black.

So how do you recognize the achievements of a race, without racism?  I don't think you can, very well, because it will always appear that you are ignoring some set or subset of a society.  Instead, wouldn't it be better to recognize the achievements of people without regard, or even mention of their race?  You could easily tell somone of the tremendous achievements of George Washington Carver, and they would be suitably impressed, even if you made no mention of race.  In fact, is it not racist to say "Hey, look at what this guy did, isn't that great?  Oh yeah, he was black, too!"  Like the color of his skin should have been an indicator of his inability to do something, and he overcame the hurdle of his skin color to accomplish it.  "Even though he was black, he made transistor radios from peanuts!"

I'm not discounting that racism has played a part in our history--and still does in our society.  Maybe racism, in all its forms, needs a history month in and of itself, so that various forms of it can be exposed to that wonderous disinfectant: sunlight.  Of course, wanting to be as diverse as possible, I will posit that racism as a belief system is just as valid and acceptable as any other, except for the Amish and Wiccans.  I submit, along those lines, that racism as a belief system is not necessarily wrong.  It is not just, but justice and rightness are not always the same thing, either.  Calling one belief system wrong places other belief systems above that belief system, and is the antithesis of diversity.

So I don't get the elevation of a part of our society, even for a month, for the recognition of that part's history.  It seems like the antithesis of the great melting pot that we are supposed to be:  Unhyphenated Americans.

--Chuck

Just click here and listen.

Trust me.

~~Code Monkey

The Mrs. and I were discussing TV today.  It's just getting silly, all the various versions of the same show.  First, we Law and Order.  Then came L&O: SVU, L&O: Criminal Intent, L&O: Los Angeles, and now even L&O: UK.

The CSI franchise is jumping this particular shark, too.  CSI, CSI: Miami, CSI: Florida, and coming this fall, CSI: Dogfart, NH. 

Oh, and I can't leave out the colon-ization of NCIS to NCIS:Los Angeles. (And NCIS: Hawaii, which is really Hawaii Five-O.) (Also called NCIS: with Asians.)
Then producers went ape-shit like Lindsay Lohan and Charlie Sheen after day four of their rehab, with the "Real" housewives of Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Orange County, Atlanta, New York, and New Jersey.  Still waiting for "Real" housewives who aren't married to millionaires, don't cheat, aren't catty and bitchy 24-7, actually raise children, (not just have them,) and can have an intelligent conversation about something besides plastic surgery, Botox, ass fat, and dildos.

Now, Criminal Minds is all set for getting its colon-puffed with CM:  Suspect Behavior. 
I guess what I am really carping at here is the lack of any newness on the TV.  It's like producers just say "Hey!  This show is kinda popular.  Let's just spin off the same format, put it in another city (pick from the list of five approved cities) and add a new cast, which looks mostly like the other cast.  Then we'll do a special two-part show, where the first cast meets, or otherwise has some tie-in, with the second cast.  Do you know the best part?  We don't even have to think of a name!"

It's frustrating, as when I do watch TV, I actually like to be entertained.  I don't always need to be engaged intelligently; there are days when I really get into Tosh.0 marathons.  But other times, I like watching shows that I can't figure out whodunit before the first break.  (For you fans of Bones, it's usually whomever they talk to first, but then disregard as an unlikely suspect.)  I will readily watch the implausible over the formulaic, too.  I would rather watch Psych, instead of any of the L&O clones... its written better, and is more the stories play out in a manner that is both interesting and engaging.  I’d rather watch a drunken Timothy Hutton mumble through Leverage instead of the same characters do the same shtick on NCIS.  Or most shows that aren't on the "Big Four."  For instance, I like (always have, actually) Dr. Who.  I like Leverage.  I like The Walking Dead.  I really like shows that tell a good tale, without seeing the exact same formula for every episode, and every time I see a re-run.

The Mrs. still clings to American Idol, and yes, she does get mad about the cruel comments I make about EVERY SINGLE PERSON who has "suffered such hardship" and "worked so hard" and needs their life played out like some kind of docudrama before they can sing crappy covers of bubblegum pop in front of The Perverted old man from Family Guy, Gigli, and The Village Idiot (Steve Tyler, Jell-O, and Randy Jackson for those of you who don't watch.)  I miss the foreign guy who used to excoriate people with the truth, hit on the coked-out porn star, while the Village Idiot tried to figure out how percentages work.  This year, the back-story on one wanna-be was that her house burned down.  Big, fat, hairy stinking deal.  Another was a guy who had Tourettes, Aspergers, and whose dad OD'd when he was eight.  Big, Fat, Hairy (Stupid Bitch!) Deal.  You were eight.  That was 12 years ago, get over it already.  You barely knew the guy, and he obviously loved the smack more than he loved you.  Your dad was a failure in life, and certainly as a father.  Good to see that you are now a father, and living in poverty, and have pinned your child's future hopes on your ability to convince enough Justin Bieberettes to text your number to AT&T every week.  Another chick's sad, sad tale of woe was how her parents had to leave their life of luxury in some banana republic and move to America when the revolutionaries came.  She was an infant then, is drop dead gorgeous now, and can sing, too.  It’s a hard-knock life, indeed.  One guy's sob story came from his fiancée who was in a car accident and is now a semi-functioning vegetable. None of it has to do with how well they can sing, on a show that is supposedly about a singing competition.  Do you know what I think is the worst part?  The "Please, I've worked so hard" whimpering when they get shit-canned.  I've had to learn how to walk again.  I’ve had to learn how to feed myself and put on clothes for myself again... and my recovery, compared to many, was easy.  Don't tell me how hard you've worked, or what you think you deserve.  Most of you ritards are still in your teens and very early twenties, (which is really the same thing) and you don't know the meaning of "hard work," or "deserve."

Finally, the other thing that pisses me off about TV, is that every single action-drama plot is either about jihadis stealing a nuke and threatening to set it off; or (and more commonly) evil guys stealing a nuke while pretending to be jihadis, so they can make a killing in the stock market.  Is that the best we can do?  Can we get a good plot that maybe revolves around jihadis actually being the bad guys, who actually do bad things?  Could we maybe see a plot that doesn't involve a nuclear option?  It just isn't scary like it used to be--maybe because we all saw "Threads" and "The Day After" back in the 80's and after that, came to accept that one nuke wouldn't be nearly as bad as ALL THE NUKES IN RUSSIA.   Maybe even consider a show where (gasp!) they actually manage to set off the nuke.  Or a dirty bomb.  Or a chemical weapon.  Or, and this would be REALLY SCARY, a biological weapon.  You know--those pesky things that the jihadis can actually grow in their bathtubs.  Once a city has had that exposed to it, how do you stop the spread?   Not something you can resolve neatly in an hour, or even a season.  Multiple plot lines and story arcs--the guys who go after the bad guys, the families and couples who lose, and survive, the devolution of society to anarchy, the reestablishment of society, the decontamination ,the whole nine yards.  Okay Hollyweird, there's your freebie.  Get cracking.

--Chuck

I'll admit, I haven't even clicked on the link:


If you click on the image of the tweet, you'll get to the story. I'm just so sick of hearing this same old song and dance I don't care to click through.

I've worked in both industry and the public sector and there's such a huge difference when times aren't going so well.

In industry (the Intel's, Motorola's, etc. of America) if you're going to lay off 5,000 of your employees you play it as close to the vest as possible. I went through a few layoffs in industry and I've said that the "best" one was when we walked into a conference room and were all stunned. The worst was when the rumors started two months earlier and we all waited to know if we were the one...

In the public sector, it's the exact opposite. It seems it's 100x worse if there are union employees involved. It gets leaked to the employees. It gets leaked to the press. Suddenly, there are people marching in the streets because they think that their child will be dropped off in a school with no teachers next month if the cuts are not stopped.

Once you've seen both sides of it, you don't wonder why there's such bloat in the public sector anymore.

~~Code Monkey

To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. (Unless selling your Nuke secrets down the river will let us get a useless treaty signed.)  United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do—for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

  To those new States whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom—and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.  (This applies to states which have already broken the chains of Tyranny, NOT EGYPT.)

  To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, (This could be Egypt) we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

Help us continue to support our troops. We appreciate the donations of time, talent and treasure that allows us to let them know we honor their service.