The Grumbling Old Fart

C'mon... WAKE UP

2011-09-24T22:41:00.005-05:00

I have relatives with Down's Syndrome. Haven't seen them in years, but I'd know there was something different about them even if I'd never met them before. I know that because that was my first thought during my first meeting with them... and I was a kid then.

Some police officers in the Miami - Dade area need some training. Training to to identify people with Downs Syndrome is probably the easiest of the training they need.

If you aren't interested in clicking through on the link, here is the short version, followed by my commentary.

A cop spots a guy with a "bulge" in his pants. The Cop decides he has a RIGHT to know what that bulge is.

Exactly where does this cops right to know come from? Public Safety? It can't be that because the US Supreme Court has ruled that police officers have no legal obligation to protect anyone not ALREADY in the custody of the police officer.

So, back to Miami and the endangering bulge.

The cop tells the guy to stop. The guy stops, probably thinking the cops wants to talk or ask something. When the cop attempts to feel the guy up, he takes off.

The cop must have looked at the guy. He had to. He's a cop. He is supposedly TRAINED to notice things.

Am I supposed to believe he didn't see this guy had Downs Syndrome? Am I supposed to believe that at the age of 8, I had more ability to determine a "difference" than a supposedly trained professional... a "professional" paid by the public to look for differences?

Well, he either didn't notice, or he more than likely didn't fucking care. After all... he has a badge. His opinions supposedly carry more weight in a court of law... yet he was "retarded" enough to not even notice the guy had Downs Syndrome before he beat him.

Oh... did I get ahead of myself?

Yeah. When the cop finally caught the bulging pants bandit, and then hit him a couple of times, he FINALLY realized the guy had Downs Syndrome. Yeah... right.

But at least the cop protected the citizens of Miami - Dade from the horror of the bulge in the pants of the guy with Downs Syndrome.

I mean, who knows what that asshole was planning with that COLOSTOMY BAG. The horror was averted. You are safe. Go back to scrolling along the world wide web. This attack was averted.

Come on people. WAKE THE FUCK UP.

We The People. We own this. We allow this. You! Me!

You need to yell about this shit. I do.

They work for us. All of us. That means if you don't complain, you condone your EMPLOYEES assaulting people against the laws of the US Constitution.

Speak out. Ask for these assholes to be held accountable and FOLLOW IT UP.

A cop beat a guy with Downs Syndrome for having a colostomy bag. I AM NOT FINE WITH THAT!

So, now they shouldn't hate us.

2011-09-11T00:25:00.008-05:00

Like most people, I remember September 11, 2001 like it was yesterday.

When the first plane hit the WTC, I was driving northbound on Route 128 somewhere around the Mass Pike, heading to work in Waltham.

When I walked into the production control area of Private Healthcare Systems... there was no one. Not one person at their desk in a department of eight people. I hadn't heard anything about the first plane. I had no clue what was happening. I made my own hours at this job (within reason), and I thought it was extremely odd that all the folks who should have been toiling at their desks already for at least an hour were nowhere to be found.

So I figured I'd walk into the data center to see if anyone knew where they were.

After swiping my access card and walking through the door, I found them. Not only the production control folks, but most of the IT division. All in the data center... in front of the consoles.

I guess I should mention for the folks out there who don't work in IT, or have access to a data center... they usually have huge televisions. Obstensibly the TVs are for "news" and "weather" channels, but the occasional sporting event has been watched in many data centers on 6 foot rear projection screens.

I was shocked everyone would be in there watching TV. Until I tried to push through to find my boss and started hearing what was going on. Plane. World Trade Center. Fire.

As I got in view of the large screen TVs, I could see the smoke pouring out of the building.

Then it happened.

The picture above is basically what I remember seeing... moments after arriving at work. I was horrified.

I never really knew I was a libertarian. I didn't know what a libertarian was back then. I just knew I didn't fit in the round hole of the democrats, or the square peg of the republicans.... but I knew I did have some things in common with both. I knew I believed in real freedom and the rights of the individual. I believed in the US Constitution. Freedoms and Rights written on paper and agreed to be followed by the people we elect.

Over the next few weeks after the devastating and horrific loss of innocent life in those attacks, I heard over and over.... "They hate us for our freedoms", "They hate us because we have guaranteed rights"

Well, it's ten years later.

We don't have those same freedoms. We don't have those same rights. The 4th amendment has been decimated. We live in a time where the government doesn't need a warrant to tap your phone line, or tell your ISP to hand over your emails.... they just need to say the word "terrorism". Presto. The Patriot Act. A free pass to a police state.

In the last 5 years, the Patriot Act has been used more for drug investigations than for terrorism investigations... to the tune of 1000-10. Thousands of what would otherwise be illegal searches during drug investigations are now allowed so the government can do the same in 10 terrorism investigations. Of course of those 10 terror related Patriot Act warrantless (or "delayed warrant") investigations... not one has led to a court conviction.

So, while I mourn the thousands of innocent Americans who died at the hands of cowards who flew airplanes into buildings on September 11, 2001, one thing I will remember is... those people died at least a little freer than you or I are today. And I think it's very sad that because those cowards with box cutters "hated us for our freedoms" enough to use them to kill, that our government has forced us to give those freedoms up. Freedom doesn't negotiate with terrorists. Freedom doesn't bow to terrorists.

Oh, and all those TSA safety rules... remember, it was box cutters. Not shampoo. Not shoes. Not the diaper of an incontinent grandmother. Box cutters.

Today I'll remember all those free people who died at the hands of fanatical murders ten years ago. And I'll mourn. For them, and for us. Free people. We don't really exist any more... or we are least on our last legs.

Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither.
Benjamin Franklin 1775

Cheesy Goodness

2011-03-13T17:11:00.007-05:00

Rat. Scab. Cockroach.

Those are some of the nicer words used to describe people who are willing to do work outside of a union contract.

So, with a few states (Wisconsin in particular) either passing laws or working towards passing laws that roll back the influence of unions in government, I thought I'd offer my opinion... not that you asked.

I should first say that I have never been a union member. I've worked at plenty of jobs that unions represent: busboy, clerk, etc... just never for an employer that hired union workers. I should also say that I've never worked for any government, other than a short stint in a government run workforce that doesn't allow unions and requires the wearing of various shades of green and brown.

Now that the disclaimers are done, I don't dislike unions. I think they serve a purpose, for those who want to join them. In the private sector, customers are free to choose between products and services offered by both union and non-union providers. This offers competitive pricing and differing levels of quality for those price levels.

Unions were born to help the common man (or woman, I guess) not get screwed over by a company owner who was only out to increase his bottom line. Now, the government has seen fit to legislate most of that crap. Owner forcing to work on a holiday? There's a good chance it's one of the days the government says you get to be paid time and a half. Owner trying to make you work 60 hours a week for straight time pay? There are laws against it. Owner telling you that you have to work through lunch and he's not going to pay you for it? Yep, you guessed it... the government backs you up with a law.

Unions have no right being in the public (or government) sector. None.

The number one reason for my stance is that the government owner is EVERY taxpayer. We aren't making you do anything. The same laws that protect a private businesses employee protect a government employee.

But lets look even deeper into my reason for this stance against public sector unions.

Well, how about wages. We hear time and time again about how underpaid public sector union employees are compared to private sector employees in comparable jobs. I've seen people claim that public sector employees are paid as much as 25% less than people in the private sector.

BULLSHIT.

Public sector UNION employees might be paid less than private sector UNION employees in comparable jobs, but they make more than every comparable non-union private sector employee. Add to that the fact that non-union private sector employee's outnumber private sector union employees, and it's an apples to oranges comparison. The majority of private sector taxpayers aren't union members, and make less than their government employee counterparts.

Benefits. Ahhh, benefits.

This is where government union employees tip the scales in their favor. Even when compared to their private sector union brethren. Contractually guaranteed raises based not on performance, but just on the fact they didn't do enough to get fired by another contractually agreed to issue. Holiday pay? If the government agency observes it, you get to sit at home and enjoy the free money... or if the job requires coverage on that day and you work it, big bucks. I won't even go into the complexities of trying to figure out the differences between private sector non-union retirement plans versus government union retirement plans, except to say that for the most part government union employees don't even come close to the money deducted or the percentage of money paid to the retiree comparable to final salary.

My final point is this.

I can donate all the money I want to my employer from my paycheck, and it's not going to influence him to increase my pay or benefits one bit. But government employee unions donate millions of dollars every year to the campaign funds of the people who vote on their raises, pay, and benefits. In the real world, that's called a bribe.

So, while non-union workers might be rats, cockroaches, or scabs... government unions are the festering sores.

Monopolize THIS!

2010-12-09T13:30:00.003-06:00

For those who don't know, the United States Postal Service is by law the ONLY legal way to send "first-class" mail. First-class mail has fairly exact definitions, but the easiest way to put it is that any two sheets of 8.5" X 11" pieces of paper folded inside a "letter size" envelope fits the description. In other words, most of what gets put in your mailbox is in some form considered "first-class" mail, and the USPS has a monopoly on delivery of it.

UPS, FedEx, DHL, and any other "delivery" company is prohibited from competing with the US Post Office in delivery of these types of communication.

So, last week it was with great unease that I made changes to my bank of record for payroll direct-deposit, because that would require my company to issue me a "live" check for one pay period while they "pre-post" my new account. That live check would be in the clutches of the 800,000 employees of the USPS, and the fine service they provide.

Wednesday, December 1st, my company had the USPS pick up all the outgoing first-class mail from our Dover, NH printing facility. Expected delivery times for ALL first-class mail from-to anywhere in the continental United States is two to three postal business days starting on the date mailed. So, into the USPS on Wednesday, delivery expected by Friday.

Good luck with that.

So, on Monday December 6th, when my check has still not arrived, I started calling my companies Human Resources people. I continued calling through Wednesday, December 8th because the script reading call center HR robots just kept spewing the same crap. "We can put a "stop" on the check on December 8th, and reissue the check which will then be mailed via the US Postal Service". Ahhh, NO!

Last night, FedEx shows up at my house. I'm not expecting a delivery. It's an overnight package from some pump company in the city I live in, Olathe, KS.

I open the very slim FedEx package, and pull out an envelope. My paycheck!

Seems the legally sanctioned mob with a monopoly on delivery of first-class mail can't tell the difference between my home address, and the address of Grundfos Pump USA.

I can see it.

I mean Grundfos USA has an address on W. 118th Terr., Olathe, KS and mine is kind of similar in that it has alphabetical characters. N. Logan St. Olathe, KS. Wow, it's scarey how alike those look!

And seriously, I don't see how missing the delivery location by a mere 4 miles should be considered sub-standard customer service. It was fairly close. If you use atomic blast zone radii as a measuring standard.

Oh, and that 2-3 postal days for delivery of first-class mail... yeah, it took 6 postal days to be delivered to the wrong fucking address.

I can't wait to see how well run this health care system will be. As long as they have to use the USPS for sending bills... we might never get them!

Quick Call 911 Part II

2010-11-27T22:03:00.003-06:00

Last week I put up a post that asked a question of my readers. Are the police required to protect you, "joe citizen", from criminals? Is that a big issue for them?

Kind of funny that I got zero answers. I thought I heard crickets chirping in here.

But now it's time to pull back the curtain for the big reveal. It may or may not surprise you. Depends on where you stand on how your tax money is spent, and may somewhat depend on your opinion of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

The short answer is No. The police have no obligation to protect you, "joe citizen", from a criminal.

The long answer is established state and federal court cases as far back as 1968 confirming the police don't owe you any protection for the money you pay.

1968: Linda Riss vs City of New York. This woman was terrorized for six months by one man. She repeatedly contacted the police who did nothing. The man eventually hired another guy to throw acid in her face. The court held the cops were not responsible to protect her even though she repeatedly asked for this guy to be arrested and charged.

1975: Hatzler vs City of San Jose. Hatzler is the attorney of Ruth Bunnells estate. She had received a call from her estranged husband saying he was coming over to kill her. Ruth called the San Jose police and asked them to send an officer. They told her to call back when he showed up. He showed up 45 minutes later and stabbed her to death. She was a little too busy trying to defend her life to call the police back. The court ruled the police were not at fault for telling her to call back later because "no special relationship" existed between the police and Ruth.

1981: Warren vs District of Columbia. Three women living in a rooming house in D.C. Two men break in and start sexually assaulting a woman on the second floor. The women on the third floor hear her screams and call the police and report someone has broken in the home and are there now. Three cops respond. One knocks on the front door, and when no ones answers the door, all three officers leave. The women on the third floor call the police back and again say there are intruders IN THE HOUSE. The person taking the call says police will be sent back out to investigate. They never send any more police officers. The two men find the other two women upstairs and hold all three captive for the next fourteen hours, repeatedly sexually assaulting the women. The women sue the city and police (wouldn't you?). The court ruled that women "failed to fit into a class of people to which a special duty was owed".

1990: Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept. This women is continually harassed by her ex-husband for three years (plus). She has restraining orders from courts, and not once do the police arrest her ex. The police continually allow him to violate the court orders. When she sues the police, the court says: the police don't have to arrest any one.

And finally, the big one.

2005: Castle Rock v. Gonzales. The US Supreme Court took this case. Mrs. Gonzales had an order of protection against her estranged husband that also limited his time with the children. He showed up at her home and kidnapped the kids from the front yard. Mrs. Gonzales called the police, showed them order of protection and asked them to find and return her children. The police read the order, and told her to call them back in the kids didn't show back up later. Twelve hours latter her husband pulled up to the police station, shot at the cops who killed him. They found kids inside the vehicle... killed by their father. So what did the US Supreme Court say about this "protection" by the police? The majority said Ms. Gonzales did not have a "property interest" in police protection, because the police have wide discretion in what to do and "a benefit is not a protected entitlement if officials have discretion to grant or to deny it."

So you have courts ruling against these citizens because of "special relationship", "special duty", "property interest", and "protected entitlement".

Want to know what that means in English?

The only people the police have an obligation to protect are CRIMINALS or persons IN THEIR CUSTODY. No obligation to ANY other person.

Unless the police deny you freedom of movement (meaning detaining for questioning) or have actually physically impeded you (throwing on the cuffs and/or locking your ass up), EVERY COURT says they have no obligation to protect you.... no matter how many times you ask them for that protection.

So remember, when it's the middle of the night and you hear a loud crash as some criminal breaks in your back door... you have a choice to make. Call 911 and take your chances on being helped and protected by people who don't have to respond, or reach for your gun and protect yourself, as you are lawfully allowed.

Oh no... we are making TSA Cry!

2010-11-20T18:08:00.006-06:00

Some of the flying public are up in arms about having to make a choice between submitting to Xray scans that basically give a government agency a nude image of yourself, or going through what the Transportation Safety Administration calls an "enhanced search".

Well, now we are finding out that the TSA agents themselves aren't very happy about having to feel up the public.

Here are few of the TSA agent comments:

“Yesterday a passenger told me to keep my hands off his penis or he’d scream. Is this how a 40 year old man in business attire acts? He’ll scream? My 3 year old can get away with saying he’ll scream, but a 40 something business man? I am a professional doing my job, whether I agree with this current policy or not, I am doing my job. I do not want to be here all day touching penises.”

But you have no problem actually touching his penis as part of your job? Really? The only people who should be touching a guys penis WITHOUT the guys consent are medical professionals trying to help him while he's unconscious... and even then there better be a medical reason for that! Oh, and we'll get to the "doing my job" thing after a few more gems from TSA gropers.

“Being a TSO means often being verbally abused, you let the comments roll off and check the next person, however when a woman refuses the scanner then comes to me and tells me that she feels like I am molesting her, that is beyond verbal abuse. I asked the woman if she thought I like touching other women all day and she told me that I probably did or I wouldn’t be with the TSA. I just want to tell these people that I feel disgusted feeling other peoples private parts, but I cannot because I am a professional.”

That is BEYOND verbal abuse? Well yeah, I agree it is beyond verbal abuse, because it is a legal certainty. Touching the genital/breast area of any woman without their consent is actually sexual assault. Unless your professional title has RN or MD (and possibly EMT) as part of it, you can't touch a woman's genitals without her consent and not face arrest. By the way... don't tell "these people" that you feel disgusted doing this... TELL YOUR BOSS.

“Molester, pervert, disgusting, an embarrassment, creep. These are all words I have heard today at work describing me, said in my presence as I patted passengers down. These comments are painful and demoralizing, one day is bad enough, but I have to come back tomorrow, the next day and the day after that to keep hearing these comments. If something doesn’t change in the next two weeks I don’t know how much longer I can withstand this taunting. I go home and I cry. I am serving my country, I should not have to go home and cry after a day of honorably serving my country.”

Oh no... we are making TSA agents cry because we are making them grope us. Oh wait, we AREN'T making them do it. And, you aren't "serving your country" in the TSA. You are an over glorified security guard who feels nuts and boobs for a living. So don't go to work tomorrow, or the next day. You'll feel better about yourself if you aren't actually assaulting people at an airport.

“I served a tour in Afghanistan followed by a tour in Iraq. I have been hardened by war and in the past week I am slowly being broken by the constant diatribe of hateful comments being lobbed at me. While many just see a uniform with gloves feeling them for concealed items I am a person, I am a person who has feelings. I am a person who has served this country. I am a person who wants to continue serving his country. The constant run of hateful comments while I perform my job will break me down faster and harder than anything I encountered while in combat in the Army.”

Two things here. 1: Again, being in the TSA isn't "serving your country". The tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, yeah those qualify... but not wearing blue gloves to grope a 40 year old guy in a business suit in Cleveland. Get over yourself. 2: I'm glad it's breaking you. It should. You took an oath when you enlisted in the military to protect and defend the US Constitution against all aggressors, foreign and domestic. So it should break you to go against your oath.

and finally

“Do people know what a Nazi is? One can’t describe me as a Nazi because I am following a security procedure designed to find prohibited items on a passenger’s body. A Nazi is someone with hatred and ignorance in their hearts, a person who carried out actions of execution and extermination of those based on their religion, origins or sexual preferences. I work to make travel safer, even if I do not agree with the current security procedures. Further more, I am Jewish and a TSA Transportation Security Officer, an American Patriot and to call me a Nazi is an offense beyond all other offenses.”

Actually, many Nazi's didn't hate anyone. Many weren't ignorant, in their hearts or minds. Lots of them were just German citizens who the Nazi government hired to do a job. To follow orders without questioning the right or wrong of the order. To blindly do the bidding of the ignorant and hateful. Well, just as it was wrong for those Nazi's of long ago to use the defense of "I was just following orders and doing my job".... it wrong for you too. Even more so because you supposedly grew up in a country that has been "free" for over 200 years. At least the Germans who followed orders were only shortly removed from Kaiseric rule. Not excusing anything those Nazi's did. Because each and every individual is responsible for his or her own actions towards another person. You, as TSA Agent with your excuse of making travel safer even you don't agree with the procedure, are exactly like a Nazi "just following orders".

So, to all you TSA agents crying at home every night because you are being forced to grope passengers for a living. Quit crying. Quit assaulting strangers. Quit.

Anyone want to take bets on how long before Congress tries to pass a law making it illegal to call a TSA agent a derogatory name? Two weeks? A month? It'll be called the TSA Anti-Bullying Law.

Whew... it was almost Armageddon

2010-11-17T22:31:00.006-06:00

It's about damn time they put a stop to these evil alcoholic drinks mixed with caffeine. I mean 12% alcohol!!!??? Holy shit... it's a wonder people can stand up after having one. Oh wait, that must be what the caffeine is for.

I can't believe the FDA didn't act sooner. But I guess it takes time to figure out the effects of mixing alcohol and caffeine, and once they got that done they stepped right up to the plate and batted that ball over the wall! Outta Heeeerrrrrrrre!

I'm guessing it's only a matter of time before they go after bars and people in homes serving newfangled replacements... like Bacardi and Coke. Which if my sources are correct have an astonishing alcohol content of anywhere from thirty-seven to seventy-five percent!

Jebus H Crist! One of these things has got to be banned! We can't have people mix alcohol and caffeine.

Think of the children.

Mom and dad in DC are upset... and the slide continues.

Quick... call 911 (part I)

2010-11-17T21:05:00.003-06:00

Crime is everywhere. And lots of people believe that more police officers is the answer. Police = safety. Or so we are taught from an early age.

If a politician even mentions looking into the possibility of reducing the police budget, or number of officers, then the response is usually a Mount Everest of violent crime statistics for that area. Not to mention the hyperbole of how this will create danger for the average citizen. And the people usually leading the charge of half truths and outright lies are the police themselves.

But have you ever taken the time to think about the job you actually pay the police to do? I mean exactly what is the police departments responsibility to the citizens who pay their salaries, benefits, and perks?

Well, if you're like most of the ~~sheep~~ population, you probably think one of the major things the police are there for is to respond to calls to the 911 system and protect you from crime and criminals when you are being victimized. Yeah, they investigate crimes after the fact. Yeah, they arrest criminals (and non-criminals too).

But is protecting you actually a major issue that your local police is responsible for? I'd like to know what you think.

I'm going to save my reply(s) for a single post later in the week, possibly the weekend... but I seriously would like to hear your opinion on whether the police have any responsibility to protect you from crime or criminals, especially if you involve them through 911 or the court system.

Music of my youth

2010-11-05T14:08:00.003-05:00

Last Saturday night, Mrs Old Fart, myself, and 4 other friends/family members went to see Roger Waters perform THE WALL Live at the Sprint Center in Kansas City.

It was the most awesome concert I have EVER seen. The music was perfect. Waters voice was great. The show itself can not be beat.

But it got me to thinking about all the concerts I've ever been to, so I could really try to compare the overall performances.

I've been racking my brain for almost a week now, and The Wall Live is still at the top of my list.

The first concert I ever went to was Van Halen touring for their first album at the Omni in Atlanta, GA. Journey opened for them. I don't remember much of the Journey part of the show, but I do remember VH. It was a very good show.

So, I decided to write down every concert I can remember going to. I'm sure there must be a few I've forgotten about... so don't take this as an all inclusive list.

I've tried to put them in chronological order, but even that might be a little off... I'm old... heh. But rating the top three concerts for overall experience, the order would be:
1. Roger Waters The Wall
2. Pink Floyd at Foxboro Stadium
3. Any of the KISS concerts.

Without further ado, here is the list of concerts I've seen.

Van Halen
Journey
Kiss (5 times)
J. Geils Band
Black Sabbath w/Ozzy
Black Sabbath w/Dio
Blue Oyster Cult
Ozzy Osbourne
Cheap Trick
Crosby Stills & Nash
The Del Fuegos
Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers
John Fogerty
Three Dog Night
Foghat
Ted Nugent
Nazareth
Thin Lizzy
The Cars
Bare Naked Ladies
Peter Frampton
Earth Wind & Fire
America
Pink Floyd
The Eagles
Atlanta Rhythm Section
Willie Nelson
Toby Keith
Trace Adkins
Garth Brooks
Keith Urban
Taylor Swift
Roger Waters

There are of course some bands/singers I would still want to see that were popular in my younger days. Some of them still tour. So who knows.

So, who was the headliner at your first concert?

The First Amendment is [CENSORED]

2010-10-28T20:53:00.005-05:00

The First Amendment of the US Constitution is one that most every American can recite some part of.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of speech. Freedom of the press. The right to peaceably assemble.

Well, the federal government is trampling all over Siobhan Reynolds (pictured) first amendment rights... and trying to do it in complete secrecy.

Siobhan is the founder of the Pain Relief Network, a non-profit organization that advocates for sensible drug policy in regards to physicians being able to prescribe otherwise legal medications for their chronic pain patients without fear of being arrested as drug traffickers.

Well, Siobhan was helping a doctor and his nurse wife from Kansas who were being charged with many felonies. She wrote opinions, took out ads, and exercised her first amendment rights about the case. The federal attorney prosecuting the case didn't like it and wanted Siobhan shut up via a gag order. No Way said a judge.

Read what is happening in this case at The Agitator. It is frightening. If one prosecutor can do this stuff in total secrecy.... we are all FUCKED.

Give Me That Donut, Or I'll Shoot!

2010-09-25T21:23:00.007-05:00

I've been following a story that started back in July.

Three Las Vegas Metro police officers shot a man to death outside a Costco store, after the store manager called police about a man with a gun.

The man, Erik Scott, had a concealed carry permit, and never took the gun out while in the store. The store has no signs stating that CC weapons are not allowed in the store.

If you want to read the whole story about the shooting, I'd recommend this article.

What I am going to write about is the Coroner's Inquest they are having to determine if the shooting was "justified".

The picture of the well padded police officer (William Mosher) above is the guy who not only fired the first two shots, but who was also audio recorded giving verbal commands to the victim (Erik Scott) of the shooting.

Here is a small section of what has come out so far at the inquest:

Mosher, describing what happened next, said he waved several citizens out of the way. Holding his gun to his chest, he told Scott to turn around; as he did so, Mosher saw the gun in Scott’s waistband.
Mosher said he yelled several commands.
He saw that Scott’s eyes looked bloodshot.
He noticed that Scott appeared to be “out of it.”
He heard Scott say, “I have a gun.”
When he saw that gun “come up,” the five-year Metro veteran fired two rounds. Two other officers also fired, ultimately hitting Scott with seven bullets. Five went into his back.

Prior to the shooting, the store manager testified that he had asked Scott to leave the store because Costco doesn't allow weapons inside the store. Scott told the manager he was a Green Beret and he needed to "read the fucking Constitution". The manager also stated that Scott never pulled the gun out, nor threatened any one with the gun, nor did he act aggressively to any one inside the store.

Back to the cops testimony:

Mosher testified that he didn’t know that the gun was in its holster at the time he fired.
He said he owns the same type of holster, and the gun could be “easily fired” while in its holster.
He also testified that he didn’t recall ordering Scott to “drop his gun.”
But those commands are distinctly heard on the 911 tape that was played for the jury.
The tape was again played for Mosher, who said it was his voice on the tape. He was the only officer issuing commands, he said.
The following is heard in the 911 call: “Put your hands where I can see them now. Drop it! Get on the ground! Get on the ground!”
“He refused to comply with those commands, to show his hands, or to get on the ground,” Mosher testified.

Now, refer back to his previous testimony stating Erik Scotts eyes looked bloodshot. How can he see that someones eyes look bloodshot, yet NOT see that a weapon is in a holster? A type of holster that he states he also owns.

Obviously the officer is making shit up. He states that his eyes were bloodshot, so that the the folks at the inquest will say to themselves... guy must have been on drugs.

And how convenient that the officer gives three contradictory commands (all heard on the audio tape of the encounter) 1. Hands Up. 2. Drop It. 3. Get On The Ground. How the fuck can guy put his hands up, get on the ground, and drop the weapon he TOLD the officer he was carrying.

Yeah, that's right. Erik Scott TOLD the officer he had a weapon... that is when the cop said "Drop It".

So, what do you think? Will the shooting be deemed "justified" or not?

Let me warn you... since 1976 Clark County Nevada has had over 200 Coroner's Inquests to determine if an officer involved shooting was justified. Only ONE has been found unjustified. In 34 years. One.

Edited to add that as posted in the comments section, the jury found the shooting justified

Private Business Looking For Handouts

2010-09-22T16:43:00.005-05:00

In 1997, the Great Mall of The Great Plains opened in Olathe to much fanfare. It was large, and it was filled with outlet stores. People came from all over the midwest to shop at the largest outlet mall in Kansas.

But, by 1999 several of the malls anchor tenants had closed up, due in part to an over saturation of shopping malls in the metro KC area that were closer to the urban/sub urban areas.

You see, the GMoftheGP was built in an area that really had nothing out there... not even shoppers.

Of course now, thirteen years later, the area is home to many other businesses, including Garmin headquarters, and some new medical buildings.

But even new residential development hasn't helped GMGP. Stores have been closing their doors faster than mall maintenance workers can board them up. A Steve & Barry's Outlet store selling inexpensive clothing items and college themed shirts from an anchor location didn't even last a year.

So the mall was sold to new owners in January of 2009. Great Olathe Center LLC, run by local executive David M. Block, bought the mall (which cost $110 million to build) for $20 million dollars. Supposedly, Great Olathe Center LLC had big plans for the mall that would turn it around.

Well, we finally found out what those Great plans are.

Ask the taxpayers for money. Half a million dollars to be exact.

And the money isn't for improvements, or reconstruction... it's for a feasibility study. To see what, if anything, can be done to make money at that location.

Well, the Olathe City Council said sure... we'll let you raise the sales tax at the GMGP from 8.6% to 10.1% (adding 1.5% of tax for the "study") until you nice folks at Great Olathe Center LLC get the extra half a million bucks you need. And notice I said EXTRA... because GOCLLC has to chip in $500,000 of their own money for this study. Wow. Way to play hard ball with the taxpayers money Olathe City Council!

So my solution to this whole thing.

Don't shop at GMGP. EVER.

Taxpayers should not be paying for a private company to look into ways to improve their business. The City of Olathe needs to tell companies that come begging for a hand out: NO, Spend your own money to make your company profitable.

I will say that I will continue to patronize the restaurants that are on the outer edge of the GMGP, because they have been exempted from the tax increase, since they are actually owned by another person... but the Council left the door open to add those in later if needed. If they do, then Waffle House, 54th Street, Chilis, et al... kiss my money good bye.

And I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Great Olathe Center LLC on the fantastic idea of improving business by getting the city to raise taxes at that ONE location. I mean, it isn't like people can't go to one of the four Targets or Walmarts in Olathe to get what they need without paying extra taxes that don't pay for any government services.

Idiots.

All Politics Are Local (part 2)

2010-06-17T19:28:00.003-05:00

Two years ago, I wrote a post about a democrat running for Kansas State Representative against a long standing republican incumbent. The only reason I wrote about the guy at all was that his ideas were very radical for democrat. Just read this post.

After a hard campaigned race, Sean Tevis lost his bid by a very slim margin...

So, now he's decided to go national. Running for US Congress, with new radical ideas (for a democrat) for the entire country.

His website should be live any day now, and I'll certainly be looking forward to reading what this guy has to say.

I'll let you know what I think about it also.

Jaywalking Scuffle

2010-06-16T19:31:00.006-05:00

I post a lot of stuff about police abuses. SWAT team raids, victimless crimes, and the ever present "war on drugs", shooting dogs on (or even inside) their owners property.

This is NOT one of those posts.

If you've watched the above video, you see a police officer punch a 17 year old girl in the face. I think she got off easy. Too easy.

The video was shot in Seattle Washington by another citizen who just happened to be nearby. One thing you should know about Seattle is that they are considered a "Pedestrian Friendly" city. They have extremely strict laws on how motor vehicles and pedestrians interact. Washington State law states quite clearly that a motor vehicle must stop for any pedestrian who steps into the street at an intersection, whether there are marked crossing lanes or not, and whether there are pedestrian signals or not. The city of Seattle has gone so far as to build a multitude of pedestrian bridges that cross major roadways that were in the past scenes of many pedestrian vs. automobile collisions.

Because of the laws of the State and City, and also because of the ped bridges, Seattle strictly enforces its "aggressive driving" and "pedestrian jaywalking" laws. Aggressive drivers face a fine in the area of $120 and jaywalkers face of fine of around $50.

So, if you've already watched the video, watch it again. Look for two very important things. The busy street with traffic in the background, and the pedestrian bridge that is right in the background.

These two women crossed a busy street, right underneath a pedestrian bridge. If they had been hit by a vehicle, the driver would most certainly have been arrested due to Seattle in recent years enacting a law that charges drivers with a crime punishable by a fine up to $10,000 and 2 years in prison for causing harm to a pedestrian. Even if the pedestrian was partially at fault.

The women wanted to fight a cop over a $50 fine for something that not only put themselves at risk, but also put drivers at risk.

Here is a quote about how this all started:

Walsh (the officer), working in a patrol car, saw several people jaywalking on Martin Luther King Jr. Way South, just south of Rainier Avenue South, despite a nearby pedestrian overpass.

Walsh tried to stop a group of females when one woman, later identified as Levias, began walking away, according to an incident report.

Walsh told Levias she must identify herself so he could issue her a citation or she would face arrest for obstruction, the report said. Levias continued to walk away, prompting Walsh to grab her upper arm with his right hand, the report said.

I never thought I'd post something like this, but that cop showed a lot more restraint than he should have.

One interesting fact. The 17 year old woman who was punched... was arrested last year for being involved in a robbery where the 15 year old victim was punched in the face before being robbed.

Karma... gotta love it.

Burger King Ribs (a review)

2010-06-03T18:15:00.003-05:00

I've been wanting to try the new BBQ ribs at Burger King since they came out last week. More out of curiosity than for culinary reasons.

I mean, how good can the ribs be at a mass market, fast food, burger chain?

Well... actually not bad.

I went in expecting to hate them. But I can't.

They certainly aren't on par with any ribs you'll get at a top end BBQ joint like BB's Lawnside or Guy & Mae's Tavern, but they do have a decent flavor, and are actually quite tender.

The ribs are served dry. No sauce. You get a generic plastic dipping cup of BK BBQ sauce to use if you need it. I tried the sauce, but it is nothing special. Probably isn't meant to be.

The size of the ribs is the weird thing. It seems as though BK cuts a rib rack in half (across the bones) to get a smaller size. As you can see in the picture, one rib is about the size of my thumb.

Overall, the flavor is good. Nice and smokey, with some char. The texture/tenderness is also good. These aren't as tough as I thought they would be. I figured I'd be using knives or other assorted weapons to get meat from the bone... but it comes off easily with each bite.

The only drawback is the price. 6 ribs (or they'd be better termed "ribbettes") with a drink and fries runs about $8.50 with tax. A little bit steep for the amount of meat, in my opinion.

But, if you've been wondering whether to give these a try... go for it. Just remember, it is from a fast food burger joint so it won't be the best you ever had.

2010-05-31T22:14:00.002-05:00

Memorial Day is a government holiday to remember those in the military who have made the ultimate sacrifice. To remember those who have given their lives after swearing to defend the United States of America constitution.

As a libertarian, I take the words of the US Constitution seriously. I believe those words mean something.

And, as a libertarian, I could sit back and measure the lives lost by those men versus my own feelings about whether a war they fought in was justified or not.

But I won't.

I sit here sipping a beer, and I think to myself... if they took that oath, and paid that price, then I can at least remember them.

I raise my glass to every man or women who took that oath and believed it enough to give everything. I won't judge them by what the politicians do. Politicians and the men who are at their whim are two different animals.

To the fallen... thank you.

The picture above is of my father... he is still with us. Probably drinking a beer to the memory of friends he's lost.

It's No Wonder Police Lie To You...

2010-05-28T16:45:00.006-05:00

On my way to work today I drove up the Kansas side of I435 northbound, on my way to the MO-152 cut across to I29.

When I was coming up to the Kansas Ave. exit, just before the I-70 interchange are, there was a couple signs on the side of the road.

The first one said:
KANSAS HIGHWAY PATROL DRUG CHECKPOINT AHEAD.

With one right after it that said:
BE PREPARED TO STOP. DRUG SNIFFING CANINE IN USE.

Break lights went on like crazy.

People were slowing down to 50 mph in a 70 mph zone.

Some people even went for the Kansas Ave. Exit to avoid the Drug Checkpoint.

IDIOTS!

That is where they stop you.

Know why?

Because by jumping off the highway, you give them reasonable suspicion to think you are trying to avoid a drug checkpoint because you might actually have drugs in your vehicle or on your person.

There is, was, and won't be a drug checkpoint on I435, or on any road.

Know why?

IT IS ILLEGAL. The US Supreme Court ruled that way in City of Indianapolis V Edmond.

Of course the court did say they could lie to you and if you are actually stupid enough to believe the lie and try to avoid the lie, then the cops can search you.

But the court doesn't want you lying, to it or to the cops.

Not really a level playing field.

So, to you folks who jumped off the highway at Kansas Avenue and I435N, get yourself a lawyer.... and then brush up on your constitutional rights and the rule of law in this country.

Dumbasses!

Rino's Running Rampant in Kansas

2010-05-11T18:48:00.004-05:00

This month, both the Kansas Senate and House passed bills increasing the state sales tax from 5.3% to 6.3%. Our unelected Governor will sign the increase later this month.

The House vote earlier today on the bill was 64-61. Six Johnson County REPUBLICANS voted for the tax increase.

They are:
Pat Colloton of Leawood
Barbara Bollier of Mission Hills
Jill Quigley and Ron Worley of Lenexa
Kay Wolf of Prairie Village
Sheryl Spalding of Overland Park

RINO's... every one of them.

Granted, I don't like republicans any more than I like democrats... but republicans are SUPPOSED to be the party of fiscal responsibility. Plundering the tax base without cutting the government to the bone during times of financial hardship and job losses is hardly responsible action.

I got an email from Senator John Vratil on his mailing list yesterday also.

Here it is... followed by my reply to him.

Monday, May 10, 2010

Good evening,

Governor Mark Parkinson released a statement earlier today and I want to share it with you. I believe his message is important and one that should be read by all Kansans. The statement appears below my signature.

Senator John Vratil

A Call for Civility
From Governor Mark Parkinson
Monday, May 10, 2010

“Two weeks ago, in my letter to legislators welcoming them back for the veto session, I wrote about Kansas’ ability to rise above the partisan bickering seen in Washington and come together to solve real problems.

“Today, the 88th day of a 90 day Session, I am disappointed to see that civility slipping away. The political games, divisive debates and entrenched gridlock of Washington have found their way to Topeka. And fanning the flames of partisanship is the Kansas Chamber of Commerce.

“This weekend, the president of the Kansas Chamber of Commerce was quoted as saying that by passing a one-cent sales tax to prevent further cuts to schools, Medicaid and safety-net services, the legislature has “catered to the needs of those at the government trough.”

“It is heartbreaking to think that somebody would equate the disabled, the elderly, school children, veterans, law enforcement and the poor to pigs at a trough.

“Kansans who have been laid off in this recession and are humbly accepting unemployment benefits to put food on the table for their families, are not pigs at the trough.

“Kansas mothers, fathers, grandfathers and grandmothers, who depend on Medicaid to receive care in their final years, are not pigs at the trough.

“Our children, who are given only one small window to receive a quality education and be productive members of our society, are not pigs at the trough.

“Our law enforcement, corrections officers and emergency responders who keep our streets safe and seek justice for crime victims are not pigs at the trough.

“The hurtful words of the Chamber are not reflective of the Kansas I know and love, and they are not acceptable in a time of crisis.

“In my letter to legislators I wrote that “our days are limited but the possibilities for success are limitless.” I still believe this. Let’s reject the political threats and shameful insults of special interests, and instead, come together for the common good.

“That’s the Kansas I know.”

My reply:

Most of the unemployment benefits being paid to people out of work are paid by taxes the employers pay, and money Washington DC kicks in. Not from sales tax increases

School funding in Kansas is a joke. The Johnson County "Candy" is a prime example.

Law enforcement in general is a LOCAL issue. Same with emergency responders such as EMTs and firemen... the states part of that is minimal at best. Plus, if you stop locking up people who commit crimes that don't have victims, you don't need as many prisons and corrections officers.

Any of you spineless RINOs willing to call him on his falsifications?

Didn't think so.

Just like in DC.

But I really think that the Kansas Chamber of Commerce was calling the people in Topeka "pigs at the trough" just as much as they were the people you folks steal our money for. So at least the Governor didn't try to say you folks weren't pigs.

Gimme... Gimme

2010-03-12T16:13:00.003-06:00

Attorneys for three disabled Kansans, three groups serving the mentally disabled and InterHab Inc., which represents service providers, have filed suit against the State of Kansas in the Kansas Supreme Court.

So, what's got the gimps drooling?

The state legislature has the gal to cut funding, so it can balance the state budget. The state budget that without cuts will be $400 million in the hole come the start of the fiscal year.

If these budget cuts are allowed to stand, will handicapped Kansans have to go without aid? No.

But they'll certainly have to tighten their belts a little bit more.

Like Nancy Spano's twenty four year old daughter Heather. Heather lives in her own place now so she can become more independent and be around people her own age.

But that "independence" comes with 24 hour around the clock monitoring. With the cut backs to funding, Heather would actually have to be "independent" overnight, as the funding would only cover daytime monitoring. So Nancy is suing. I mean shit, the more independence thing isn't really about Heather... it's about moms independence, and getting taxpayers to foot the bill so Heather don't have to move back home.

Mr. Pyles. We're Having a Block Party and You're Invited!

2010-03-12T13:48:00.003-06:00

Continuing with the story of David Pyles, the "disgruntled" ODOT employee who was the subject of a mental health evaluation after having a SWAT team surround his home.. without any crime being committed.

The sheriff has stated that Mr. Pyles surrender to authorities and to the mental health evaluation was voluntary.

Voluntary?

Really?

The guys house is surrounded by armed men in bullet proof vests with automatic weapons... and that isn't coercion?

I think the litmus test of whether this was voluntary would be if I believed that if Mr. Pyles refused to speak to the police, that the police would have just said... OK. Lets tell the neighbors its ok to come back home and we're gonna pack it in and leave this guy alone.

I don't see that happening... so it's not voluntary.

Mr. Pyles states that the police told him they wanted to talk to him. He would not be handcuffed, arrested, or detained if he spoke with them.

They lied.

There was no crime committed by Mr. Pyles.

Read the story.

Don't Look Now, Minority Report is here

2010-03-11T19:17:00.004-06:00

Your boss tells you that you have to work overtime on your wedding anniversary? shhhhhh.

The company you work for decides they aren't going to match funds for your 401K deposits? shhhhhh.

Keep your mouth shut. Don't vent about it. Better to listen to your wife scream bloody blue murder about you not loving her.

Because "they" are listening.

You will be labeled "disgruntled".

I don't know if the above scenarios were involved in a story coming out of Medford Oregon, but the story is fucking scary.

The state and local police were contacted by the Oregon Department of Transportation about "disgruntled" employee David Pyle.

Seems that Mr. Pyle was put on administrative leave by his employer (ODOT) last week, and ODOT then contacted the authorities.

"We had concerning information regarding a personnel issue and were watching the subject," Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters said.

The state police had records of Mr. Pyle owning legally obtained weapons, as well as recently purchasing more weapons.

Authorities were "extremely concerned" that the man may have been planning to retaliate against his employers, the news release said.

This is because in a span of two days Mr. Pyle LEGALLY purchased 3 weapons, in addition to the three previously legally owned weapons. All of the weapons required Mr. Pyle to pass an Oregon State Police background check... which he did.

In a case like this, the proper procedure in a country governed by the US Constitution would be for the police to keep an eye on you. Maybe even park an unmarked car so they could watch to see if you load your weapons into a vehicle and attempt to drive on a route that takes you toward your place of employment. Because, really... what has the guy done that is illegal? Last time I checked, being pissed off, or "disgruntled" about your job isn't a crime.

Well, the cops started watching him. Then their imaginations took over. They couldn't wait for Mr. Pyle to actually show that he WAS going to attempt to commit a crime. Oh hell no.

So in the middle of the night they called in a SWAT team. They then evacuated the neighboring three houses. After they were sure everyone would be safe, around 3am in the morning, they called Mr. Pyle on the telephone and asked if he would come outside and speak with them.

Did he barricade himself? Did he come out guns-a-blazing?

Nope. He agreed to come out and talk to the cops... not really sure what was going on.

The nice police officers took him into "protective custody", and whisked him off for a mental health evaluation. Oh, and they entered his home to secure his weapons. By secure, I mean confiscate.

Mr. Pyle was evaluated at the Rogue Valley Medical Center and RELEASED within hours.

He's back home now. He's asking the police nicely to return the property they removed from his home. The police are saying it could take up to two weeks for them to process the request. They need to check and see if the weapons were stolen and shit like that. Let me speed up the process Officer Dumbass... YES, YOU STOLE THEM.

If this guy wasn't disgruntled before... I bet he is now. And with good reason.

This guy will win a nice tidy sum when he sues the police for illegal search and seizure, as well as illegal detention for attempting to commit him for mental evaluation without ever having dealt with him before.

I just hope that if he does go off... he goes after the thieves in blue who violated his rights.

Open Letter to KS State Sen John Vratil

2010-03-09T18:08:00.004-06:00

Senator Vratil,

Turn in your (R).

You are no more republican than former Governor Sebelius was.

Of course, that is mainly because there is no longer any difference in the idealogy of democrats and republicans when it comes to imposing taxes on the people.

With Kansas facing a budget deficit in the neighborhood of $400 million dollars, the historical republican response would be to make cuts in government. Trim the fat. Starve the beast. But republicans are no longer the party of smaller government.

So what are the solutions you are proposing to help ease the coming budget crisis?

1. Raising the state sales tax.

As if a 5.3 % tax on most sales in the state isn't high enough, you are proposing to increase it, and remove many of the exemptions. I say, reduce the sales tax to 3%... and remove ALL the exemptions. Make non-profits pay the same sales tax that everyone else does. Add the sales tax to utility bills. If you are making home improvements, pay sales tax on it. As it stands right now, the exemptions to the sales tax laws cost the state around $380 million per year.

Or do it your way. Raise the tax, and remove exemptions. Those of us who live on the border with other states will just start spending our tax dollars in those states. Missouri is at 4.2 % right now, and as long as a person avoids the over taxation of Kansas City proper, the total sales tax rate would be quite a bit lower.

2. Raise the tax on tobacco.

You republicans are cracking me up with your pressing for Kansas to pass statewide anti smoking legislation... but remembering to exempt the state owned casinos. Hey, you wouldn't want the smokers to not hand over their gambling dollars to the man! But passing the statewide ban wouldn't be enough. No. Gotta get every last tax dime out of those low class nicotine addicts. Of course raising the tax (yet again) on tobacco products will have the effect of reducing the number of people using tobacco, in all likelihood negating any net gain the state would possibly see from the increase. My hope is that one day, everyone quits. Not because I care about their health, or the health of anyone else. I want to see exactly how any of the governments that impose taxes on tobacco will replace the billions of dollars they rake in from this single product.

3. Tax the sugar in soda.

This one caught me totally by surprise. Yep, you want to tax soda to the tune of one cent for every teaspoon of sugar in the product. The average increase to a 12 ounce soda? Ten cents. So basically this amounts to a 9 % tax on a can of brand name soda, a bit less for the generic stuff.

Hmmm, what other things could we tax at 9%? How about adding a 9% tax on sales of BMW, Mercedes, and Lexus vehicles? This would be in ADDITION to the sales tax. Consider it a sin tax. What, you don't think your fellow republicans would go for that?

Well Senator Vratil... that is exactly my point. You AREN'T republicans if you support raising any taxes to cover the cost of non-essential government services.

Turn in your (R).

TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL

2010-02-18T17:16:00.006-06:00

The title of this post is the title of section 1706 of the Internal Revenue Service tax code.

That section of tax code is posted verbatim in the manifesto (or suicide note) of Joseph Stack III, the guy who intentionally flew a single engine airplane into the side of building containing IRS offices.

Let me say right up front, while I don't agree with what Mr. Stack did... attempting to kill numerous people, including people who have no connection the the IRS, I can certainly appreciate the feeling of hopelessness, frustration, and anger that can come from dealing with IRS about your finances... and the attitude the IRS often takes when it targets a citizen.

I still have eight paystubs from a job I worked in the early 1990's that show the IRS garnished my wages after I refused to pay extra taxes they claimed I owed because they weren't allowing some of my work related deductions. For eight weeks the IRS had my employer send them every dime I earned, with the exception of $120.00 a week. The apartment I lived in with my (now ex) wife and 9 year old son had a rent of $600 per month. The IRS wanted my money, and it didn't matter that I wouldn't be able to pay rent and buy enough food to feed my family. They didn't care. They denied my appeal and had my employer start the deductions. After they took that "pound of flesh" over eight weeks I figured it was over. Nope. They came back about a year later claiming I never paid it! Fortunately I kept the paystubs showing the IRS wage garnishment payments, and I also had my employer write to them. I won that round... even though the round NEVER should have happened.

Mr. Stack's experience with the IRS seems to have been a very bad one, over many years. He is especially vocal about section 1706, which singles out "technical" people who often work as independent contractors. I've read the section, and a non biased explanation of what the code states... and the guy had a right to be pissed off about it. He wasn't upset that he had to pay taxes, he was upset with how it was collected from him and ultimately how those taxes are doled out by the government. I don't think he should have been "fly into a building full of people" mad. But I can understand how he could get there.

I read Mr. Stack's "manifesto" or suicide note, and not once did I think to myself... this guy is nutjob right winger, or this guy is nutjob left winger, or this guy is a nutjob teapartier. I just thought... this was one angry man who got to a point where he didn't care any more.

But I'm finding lots of online articles/blog posts claiming that his words were the rantings of lunatic teaparty person, or some right wing nutcase.

Sure, the guy rants on about the IRS and Unions, great fodder for right wingers. But he also rants about tax exemptions for churchs, the inability of government to reform health care, and GWB and his "cronies", staples of the left side of the political aisle in America. The bonus is that he ends his note with a screed that makes Communism sound fair, and capitalism out to be awful... not something a right leaning person would ever write.

No... Mr. Stack wasn't a tea party nutjob. He wasn't tree hugging lefty. He wasn't a god hogging righty.

He was a pissed off citizen who couldn't cope with the injustices he perceived that the government was laying on him, and from his note, on all of us.

Of course the fact that the liberals and conservatives are each trying to pin this man to it's opponents mantras will be lost on both sides.

As Mr. Stack wrote:
"It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”… and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them."

All Your Pennies Are Belong To Us (nickels, dimes and quarters too)

2010-02-17T19:25:00.005-06:00

Working in Missouri and living in Kansas is such a joy come tax time.

I get the privilege of paying income taxes to both states, and then the extreme pleasure of filing income tax forms for both.

Missouri is actually fairly easy. I fill out the form as a non-resident, figure the excess amount of taxes that the state forced my employer to remove from my income, and send in the form.

Kansas is a bit more involved. After filling out the form, I have to claim a deduction/credit for the amount of taxes that I actually unvoluntarily gave to the state of Missouri minus the refund they are sending me. Then I attach a copy of my Missouri tax return and send it in. Sometimes I owe Kansas money, sometimes Kansas owes me money. But it is never quite that simple.

My experience this year is a classic example.

Kansas sent me a refund check for $19.00. I deposited it in my bank. A week later I get a letter from the Kansas Department of Revenue stating:

The credit for tax paid to another state is denied. Reason: Other states tax form not attached to Kansas return. You have thirty days to submit supporting documentation of tax paid to another state, or your income tax form will be adjusted as shown on Adjustment form enclosed. The new amount on the adjustment form shows me OWING Kansas over $3000.00. It even shows a DEBIT for the $19.00 they sent me!

WHAT. THE. FUCK.

How in the world could that be? I sent the MO 1040 with the KS 1040, and they sent me a refund check already.

So I spent four days attempting to get someone on the phone at the number they supplied in the letter. For the first three days the phone would ring, then announce: "All customer reps are currently busy. Please try your call again later." :::click::: Over and over.

Today they actually put you on hold to "wait for the next available customer rep, because your call is important to us". OH, I'm sure.

After waiting on hold twenty minutes I explain to the guy on the other end:

ME: Yeah, I got a letter saying you were denying a credit for tax I paid to Missouri because you don't have a copy of my Missouri tax return. Since I sent it in the same envelope that held my Kansas return, can you tell me what you did with it?

KS Tax Moron1: I'll need you to confirm some information for me. (I give him my SSN and assorted other identifying information). Ah, Ok Mr. Old Fart. I see our computer system processed your return, authorized the refund payment, then flagged it for further review.

ME: OK. Do you have my Missouri tax return?

KS Tax Moron1: Let me take a look at your documentation profile. Yes. Yes, we do have your Missouri income tax form scanned into the system on (mentions date they received the forms).

ME: So... we're good right? You guys aren't coming after me claiming I owe you over $3000.00.

KS Tax Moron1: Actually Mr. Old Fart, you'll have to have the Missouri income tax recreditied to your Kansas return. I can give you a number to call to have that done.

ME: WHAT? Why do I have to call to have something recredited, that NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNCREDITED in the first place.

KS Tax Moron1: I'm sorry Mr. Old Fart, that is just the way things have to be done. Would you like that phone number?

ME: Yeah. What's the number.

(writes down, then dials the new phone number. waits on hold for next available rep for about 8 minutes)

ME: I spoke to someone at (telephone number) about this letter I got saying my credit for tax paid to another state wasn't allowed because you people lost my Missouri tax return I sent. Then after he checked he says you did get it and scanned it in, but flagged me for further review. I need this recredited.

KS Tax Moron2: I don't see a Missouri tax return for that year. I do see one for the year before.

ME: Oh, come on. The other guy said it is scanned and available in my document profile. He just looked at it!

KS Tax Moron2: Let me look again. ::::: Sorry, I see one for the prior year. Oh wait, there it is.

ME: So you found it? You see that I did send it?

KS Tax Moron2: Yes.

ME: Ok, so you can recredit the tax paid to Missouri to my Kansas return?

KS Tax Moron2: You will need to fill out and send in a request to reapply the out of state tax.

ME: NO. I'm not filling out any more forms. You idiots claim I didn't send it in... but since you can see that I did I should not have to jump through hoops to fix your mistake. You need to recredit this.

KS Tax Moron2: Can you please hold for one minute

ME: :::blink::: Sure, I'll hold.

(two minutes of silence)

KS Tax Moron2: Mr. Old Fart?

ME: Yes.

KS Tax Moron2: My supervisor has reflagged your account for review with the notation that the Missouri tax form was included and is scanned and available in your document profile. Will you be able to call back in one week to hear our decision?

ME: You want me to call back? Sure. Why not. Oh... the thirty day notice I got is now voided, correct?

KS Tax Moron2: Yes, Mr. Old Fart. Until the review is completed the thirty day notice is voided. Depending on the decision of the reviewer it may be started again if they find you didn't file the other states return.

ME: YOU SAW THE RETURN, what do you mean if they find I didn't file it? Never mind. I'll call back next week.

So, any one want to take odds on whether the morons can muster enough brain power to figure out that they fucked up. I mean, the 2nd moron kept claiming she couldn't find the return until I kept telling her it was there.

Politics in Review (or The State of Disunion)

2010-01-27T22:32:00.007-06:00

Since President Obama finished his first "state of the union" speech, after one year in office, I thought it would be nice to look back at some of the campaign promises the then Senator made to the American people, and see if he has kept those promises.

Let me say up front... I will focus on promises he made that have to do with "liberty" issues. Lower taxes. Ending wars. Government accountability. Things important to people who believe that being democrat or republican is a difference without a distinction.

So... here we go.

End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000.
Yep, in Obama's Comprehensive Tax Plan he stated "(we) will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This will eliminate taxes for 7 million seniors -- saving them an average of $1,400 a year-- and will also mean that 27 million seniors will not need to file an income tax return at all." Hasn't happened. Isn't being worked on.

Allow five days of public comment before signing bills.
This one was a breathe of fresh air that a lot of liberty people were looking forward to. Allow public comment for five days on non-emergency bills before signing. It was part of Obama's ethics plan, which can be found here (buried in the website, not immediately linked from the "issues" page where it originally was located). Here is just one example of how this promise has NOT been kept. On May 22, 2009, Obama signed into law Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act of 2009. Two days after Congress passed it. The CARD Act wasn't going into effect until 2010, so it certainly wasn't "emergency" legislation.
Hasn't happened with a single bill. Isn't being worked on.

End no-bid contracts above $25,000.
Wait. I can get a government contract for work without having to bid against other qualified individuals or companies who may be able to do the same exact work for less money? Where do I sign up? Oh well, I guess if you at least pick a figure and make suppliers bid for every contract over 25K then it should at least keep the taxpayers from being bilked. Lets look at what Obama had on his website. "Obama will ensure that federal contracts over $25,000 are competitively bid". Obama has sent "memo's" through the White House Office of Management and Budget, asking that agencies use the competitive procurement procedures... but not once has he tried to get a law put into effect, or demand that even the White House go by his promise.
Hasn't happened. Isn't being worked on.

Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels.
I really liked this promise. Well, sort of. I don't like earmarks at all, but the thought of reducing them was novel and better than allowing sometimes big money projects to be added to bills that have nothing to do with what the earmark is for to continue unabated. Unfortunately, it's an empty promise. Congress allocates money. If they don't want to listen to the President about earmarks, then they Presidents only option is to veto entire bills with huge earmarked money in them. The earmarks in 1994 totalled $7.8 billion dollars. For fiscal 2010, it's already over $10 billion.
Hasn't happened. Probably can never be.

Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN.
This is my absolute favorite. CSPAN has carried as much of the health care reform as the President and Congress have allowed. The problem is, most of the "negotiations" have occurred behind closed doors so the US public couldn't see the deals that were being made to try to force through this huge boondoggle. Obama's campaign group Organizing For America (now run by the Democratic National Committee) sent out an email last summer about the health care reform hearings. "The behind-the-scenes committee negotiations aren't front page news," the e-mail said, but warned that "as we speak, key committees in Congress are weighing options and making final decisions about how to tackle health care reform. This could be one of the last opportunities to shape the legislation before it's written." Instead, we've had closed door meetings in both the White House and Congress, with winks, deals, and handshakes that the public will never know about until (or IF) the bill finally passes.
Hasn't happened. Huge lie.

Now I don't want to be a negative Nelly (sure... right) so I'll end with a promise that Obama made and kept that I like.

Grant Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba.
I'm all for Americans being able to travel where they want, and to do what they want with their own money. The US Constitution pretty much says we can. So thank you President Obama for allowing Americans with family in Cuba to do what ALL OF US should be able to do. It's a start.