All this week, it seems that the various news programs have interviewed soldiers back from Iraq with the question, "Was it worth it?" What do we expect them to say? Soldiers at war have to believe that what they are doing is the "right" thing. It is in the psyche of most soldiers. One story dealt with a small town where several soldiers from a National Guard Unit had died. Sad.
Was it worth it? We can't asked the soldiers NOW! They are too close to it. When I was in Vietnam, I supported the war. I had too. How else could I look at it. Seeing my buddies die, the ravages of war. How could I not say we were justified/doing good. Give me a break! Now, way down the road and many years before even, I can say assuredly, the sacrifices of Vietnam were for nothing. It was a sorry war, almost as ill conceived as Iraq. And, worst of all, the sorry MFers, the powers that be, didn't learn s..t from Vietnam. In a way, I will have to say this for LBJ, he kind of "got" how he had f..ked up in the end: no second term. Nixon is the real culprit. When he promised to get us out of Vietnam, we only had a few thousand lost to that sorry ass war. By the time he resigned, 58,000 plus had given their lives for s..t. Was Vietnam worth it. F..k NO. Was Iraq worth? F..k NO!
Saturday, December 31, 2011
TIRED OF IOWA
I am so tired of the Repubican bullshit stuff. It is the same old song, with the the pccasional exception of Perry. He at least can have some novel ideas. Ron Paul, he ought to be hauling his Grandkids around. Newt has bit the dust based on his ethical lapses where money rules. The only colorful one was Herm Cain who had gotten it on with most women in America. Rick Perry's idea of a part time congress. Reduce their salary. Now, that resonates. Why it doesn't appeal to voters is beyond me Mitt Romney is a bigtime 1%er and is constantly checking the direction of the wond and would tell anybody what they wanted to hear. Once he's got the vote, he wouldn't give you the time of day. How does the Iowa voter not get it.
Most of the hardcore Iowa Republicans appear to be idealogue zeolots and are f..king non thinkers (softening this) in my opinion anyway. And, what I also think is that those who follow someone like Ron Paul somehow don't grasp that he is so far out of the mainstream that he's dangerous. Plus, they are surrounded by people who think like themselves. What the f..k is this anyway.
Most of the hardcore Iowa Republicans appear to be idealogue zeolots and are f..king non thinkers (softening this) in my opinion anyway. And, what I also think is that those who follow someone like Ron Paul somehow don't grasp that he is so far out of the mainstream that he's dangerous. Plus, they are surrounded by people who think like themselves. What the f..k is this anyway.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
PFC MANNING
PFC Manning is a soldier, bigtime stupid but not dumb. He doesn't need to be treated like some treasonest paragon. If I have been disappointed with the President in anything, it is in areas like this. I can't believe that in his heart he wants to take this heavy handed approach to this stupid young soldier. Manning is a PFC. Do you know what a PFC is? He is a f..king private: at the lowest rank of our military system. (E1-a recruit, E2-finished basic training-E3, breathing, sometimes given E3 based on civilian education and has to do with pay). I say again, as a soldier, he gets the PFC rank for breathing. Manning as a PFC (private first class) would be invisible. Comparatively speaking, in the civilian world, a mail room clerk in a giant corporation would be way above a PFC. Are you getting the picture here? It is just the military system.
The very idea that we would allow Manning or any "Private" access to important material is unfathomable. It is like a parent giving the car keys to a 12 year old. There is no way that he should have been able to see classified documents. Where the f..k is the "calling into account" those who put this temptation in his path.
Manning is a smart, twenty something, disgruntled, shown no respect, so? The military has spent lots of taxpayer money on his education. The issue in a real sense isn't Manning, it is a piss poor system that puts us in this position.
I haven't seen where the leaks have hurt. Cost lives? If that is the case, from the media, I haven't seen it. For instance, Afghanistan is so f..ked up, I don't see where anything we do or don't do makes a difference, surely not leaked documents. We don't even know who the f..k is on whose side.
Manning is a young, troubled soul obviously. A Private First Class in a military that hardly allows his existence, other than scut work. His work is probably listening for radio traffic, maybe seeing some block of info but most of the time he is cooling his heels. He is obviously unsupervised, much like the Americans who so screwed up at Abu Garib. The American military has a strict chain of command and with Manning, somebody was asleep at the wheel.
My suspicion is that by taking a heavy handed approach means that the President is listening to the military or other bureaucrats. Plain and simple, Manning should not have had assess to important documents. He is a Private.
Those at the top of the military are "rule followers" by in large who wouldn't know a creative approach to PFC Manning if it ran over them. An article 32 investigation is a joke. Sure he did it. The investigation will produce a court martial. Any military type who has been around will tell you about court martials: there is a common refrain: Bring the guilty bastard in. Give me a break!
The whole classified bullshit is also a joke. The military, when they don't want to do something says, "classified." This is time for the President to weigh in. Manning is a misguided, young twenty something who easily should be on Castro Street in San Francisco and not in the military--probably joined as it was about his only option. Based on his initial public appearance, it is going to be a circus: civil rights, 1st Amendment BS, all will make us look bad. Work out a deal: prison time which should be time served, give him a General discharge, which probably means nothing to Manning but the traditionalists would like it; fine him, announce you are assigning responsibility to those who should have been supervising him. The big thing is end it. Move on. Don't have a circus. Don't listen to those who want a heavy hand. Any parent with kids understand this. Let's treat him like we would any Private: kick his ass and move on! Next Case.
The very idea that we would allow Manning or any "Private" access to important material is unfathomable. It is like a parent giving the car keys to a 12 year old. There is no way that he should have been able to see classified documents. Where the f..k is the "calling into account" those who put this temptation in his path.
Manning is a smart, twenty something, disgruntled, shown no respect, so? The military has spent lots of taxpayer money on his education. The issue in a real sense isn't Manning, it is a piss poor system that puts us in this position.
I haven't seen where the leaks have hurt. Cost lives? If that is the case, from the media, I haven't seen it. For instance, Afghanistan is so f..ked up, I don't see where anything we do or don't do makes a difference, surely not leaked documents. We don't even know who the f..k is on whose side.
Manning is a young, troubled soul obviously. A Private First Class in a military that hardly allows his existence, other than scut work. His work is probably listening for radio traffic, maybe seeing some block of info but most of the time he is cooling his heels. He is obviously unsupervised, much like the Americans who so screwed up at Abu Garib. The American military has a strict chain of command and with Manning, somebody was asleep at the wheel.
My suspicion is that by taking a heavy handed approach means that the President is listening to the military or other bureaucrats. Plain and simple, Manning should not have had assess to important documents. He is a Private.
Those at the top of the military are "rule followers" by in large who wouldn't know a creative approach to PFC Manning if it ran over them. An article 32 investigation is a joke. Sure he did it. The investigation will produce a court martial. Any military type who has been around will tell you about court martials: there is a common refrain: Bring the guilty bastard in. Give me a break!
The whole classified bullshit is also a joke. The military, when they don't want to do something says, "classified." This is time for the President to weigh in. Manning is a misguided, young twenty something who easily should be on Castro Street in San Francisco and not in the military--probably joined as it was about his only option. Based on his initial public appearance, it is going to be a circus: civil rights, 1st Amendment BS, all will make us look bad. Work out a deal: prison time which should be time served, give him a General discharge, which probably means nothing to Manning but the traditionalists would like it; fine him, announce you are assigning responsibility to those who should have been supervising him. The big thing is end it. Move on. Don't have a circus. Don't listen to those who want a heavy hand. Any parent with kids understand this. Let's treat him like we would any Private: kick his ass and move on! Next Case.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
MILITARY ACADEMIES
Talk about a spirited contest, the Army/ Navy football game. Both sides' stadiums full. Even the Prez showed up. For American style football, this isn't much. No powerhouses with the Academies. The military academies and most everybody who cogitates their navels about sports gets why. Really big football prospects aren't going to the academies, mainly because they have a military commitment of mostly five years waiting for them. Thus ending any desires for a professional sports career.
There was a time that the Academies were competitive. When? We had the draft. Young men figured they were going to serve anyway, why not get a good education? For free no less. Do we think that Milt Friedman and the then SecDef, Melvin Laird, who sold us a bill of goods, thought of those unintended consequences?
I always look at the academies a little differently than most. First of all, this worshipful attitude toward them needs to be put in perspective. These kids' education is no small thing--a million bucks a pop. And, there's other stuff, they do get a stipend, maybe a few other bennies. The flip side of the coin is that going to one of the Academies is no cake walk. It is hard: field problems, restrictions, other things that some non academy types like myself don't even know. I can tell you this though. We don't need all these separate academies. One is sufficient and certain curriculum could be tailored to individual services. Consolidating the Academies, like so many things in government, could save billions of dollars. Think any congressman would have the "balls" to even suggest such a thing. We are talking WW3. The military lobby would be in "hell raising" political posture before you could say, "at ease."
There was a time that the Academies were competitive. When? We had the draft. Young men figured they were going to serve anyway, why not get a good education? For free no less. Do we think that Milt Friedman and the then SecDef, Melvin Laird, who sold us a bill of goods, thought of those unintended consequences?
I always look at the academies a little differently than most. First of all, this worshipful attitude toward them needs to be put in perspective. These kids' education is no small thing--a million bucks a pop. And, there's other stuff, they do get a stipend, maybe a few other bennies. The flip side of the coin is that going to one of the Academies is no cake walk. It is hard: field problems, restrictions, other things that some non academy types like myself don't even know. I can tell you this though. We don't need all these separate academies. One is sufficient and certain curriculum could be tailored to individual services. Consolidating the Academies, like so many things in government, could save billions of dollars. Think any congressman would have the "balls" to even suggest such a thing. We are talking WW3. The military lobby would be in "hell raising" political posture before you could say, "at ease."
ARMY's FEEL GOOD PROGRAM
On Wednesday's NewsHour, Betty Ann Bowser profiled a new Army program called, "The Comprehensive Soldier Fitness" program. Get this, the Army gave this guy from the University Of PA a "no bid" contract of 32 mil to develop this program. When I saw it, I thought, you have got to be s..ting me.
Think about this. The powers that be have "played" the soldier card. Who does not want to help soldiers but some hardened combat vet is not about to sit in some class and be told, "be positive, you will be OK." Bullshit.
Its goal is to boost the mental toughness of soldiers. Teaching them how to better communicate with loved ones, become more aware of their emotions and change the way they cope with emotional stress. Good goals and the Army BS hopes to reverse the number of troops suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and suicide. Bullshit, a "feel good" class ain't going to do it.
This all sounds worthy until you grasp that we have/had programs like this out the "gazoo:" doctors, psychologists, chaplains, shrinks, social workers, etc who are already doing and running programs like this. And, it appears that the guy who sold this program to the Army has made liberal use of psychotherapist, Albert Ellis. Ellis theory of Rational Emotive Therapy was basically founded around the idea, "it's not what happens to you thats the problem but how you look at it." The more I think about this, the more it appears collusion stupidity might be involved. A "no bid" contract, no coordination with other Army programs and skeptics from other disciplines outside the military that are working on the same thing. With us focusing on the deficit where in California, for instance, we are doing away with school busses and the Army is pending 32 mil for our soldiers to feel good. F..kkkkkk
Think about this. The powers that be have "played" the soldier card. Who does not want to help soldiers but some hardened combat vet is not about to sit in some class and be told, "be positive, you will be OK." Bullshit.
Its goal is to boost the mental toughness of soldiers. Teaching them how to better communicate with loved ones, become more aware of their emotions and change the way they cope with emotional stress. Good goals and the Army BS hopes to reverse the number of troops suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and suicide. Bullshit, a "feel good" class ain't going to do it.
This all sounds worthy until you grasp that we have/had programs like this out the "gazoo:" doctors, psychologists, chaplains, shrinks, social workers, etc who are already doing and running programs like this. And, it appears that the guy who sold this program to the Army has made liberal use of psychotherapist, Albert Ellis. Ellis theory of Rational Emotive Therapy was basically founded around the idea, "it's not what happens to you thats the problem but how you look at it." The more I think about this, the more it appears collusion stupidity might be involved. A "no bid" contract, no coordination with other Army programs and skeptics from other disciplines outside the military that are working on the same thing. With us focusing on the deficit where in California, for instance, we are doing away with school busses and the Army is pending 32 mil for our soldiers to feel good. F..kkkkkk
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
CONSOLIDATE THE MILITARY ACADEMIES
Talk about a spirited contest, the Army/ Navy football game. Both sides' stadiums full. Even the Prez showed up. For American style football, this isn't much. No powerhouses with the Academies. The military academies and most everybody who cogitates their navels about sports gets why. Really big football prospects aren't going to the academies, mainly because they have a military commitment of mostly five years waiting for them. Thus ending any desires for a professional sports career.
There was a time that the Academies were competitive. When? We had the draft. Young men figured they were going to serve anyway, why not get a good education? For free no less. Do we think that Milt Friedman and the then SecDef, Melvin Laird, who sold us a bill of goods, thought of those unintended consequences?
I always look at the academies a little differently than most. First of all, this worshipful attitude toward them needs to be put in perspective. These kids' education is no small thing--a million bucks a pop. And, there's other stuff, they do get a stipend, maybe a few other bennies. The flip side of the coin is that going to one of the Academies is no cake walk. It is hard: field problems, restrictions, other things that some non academy types like myself don't even know. I can tell you this though. We don't need all these separate academies. One is sufficient and certain curriculum could be tailored to individual services. Consolidating the Academies, like so many things in government, could save billions of dollars. Think any congressman would have the "balls" to even suggest such a thing. We are talking WW3. The military lobby would be in "hell raising" political posture before you could say, "at ease."
There was a time that the Academies were competitive. When? We had the draft. Young men figured they were going to serve anyway, why not get a good education? For free no less. Do we think that Milt Friedman and the then SecDef, Melvin Laird, who sold us a bill of goods, thought of those unintended consequences?
I always look at the academies a little differently than most. First of all, this worshipful attitude toward them needs to be put in perspective. These kids' education is no small thing--a million bucks a pop. And, there's other stuff, they do get a stipend, maybe a few other bennies. The flip side of the coin is that going to one of the Academies is no cake walk. It is hard: field problems, restrictions, other things that some non academy types like myself don't even know. I can tell you this though. We don't need all these separate academies. One is sufficient and certain curriculum could be tailored to individual services. Consolidating the Academies, like so many things in government, could save billions of dollars. Think any congressman would have the "balls" to even suggest such a thing. We are talking WW3. The military lobby would be in "hell raising" political posture before you could say, "at ease."
The Prez On Sixty Minutes
Sixty Minutes is one of my favorite TV programs. I find the stories penetrating and mostly relevant. I don't care much for the celebrity interviews but nothing is perfect. Sunday night, Steve Kraft interviewed the President. I don't get it for one thing: why the president would subject himself to the media that mostly are interested in a story and not the truth. I guess the Sixty Minutes format is the best. Steve did a pretty good job, he's no Mike Wallace which in my opinion is mostly good, no softballs and a little more gentle that I like --the President was candid, answered the questions directly. But, I still don't get it. You can't convince people who have their minds made up. And, let's face it, most Americans were watching a ballgame or some reality show. Give me a break. In fact we went to a dinner party of about a dozen recently. I did my own little survey: "any of you watch Sixty Minutes Sunday night? Zero, zilch, none.
And, what the f..k is it with these polls? Nobody ever polls me. How a question is asked probably determines how it's answered. F..kkkk; still 73% disapprove of the way he's handling the economy says the survey. If it were me, I would give them the finger. What the hell do they think the president is: a magician. The guy inherited a f..king mess anyway you look at it.
I think he has been a good president. I don't notice Americans out here sacrificing by in large; every seat in athletic stadiums are filled, every plane full, the roads are filled with cars. Yeah, I know there are people out of work and his illustration of the pilot of the ship in stormy weather strikes true. Fuck yes? Some people are unhappy but I don't see where the president can get the blame.
The Republicans are this bunch of recalcitrant buffoons, sure; but the ones that tick me off as well are the non thinking Democrats or Independents. Where the hell do you think you are going to go: to the Republicans who haven't had an original idea in the last ten years.
I thought the real telling comment of the President on Sixty Minutes was his reality check:he said something like. "the Republicans have supported most of the legislation I've proposed in the past. However in the present climate in Washington, attach my name to it and the Republicans only know NO!!!!"
And, what the f..k is it with these polls? Nobody ever polls me. How a question is asked probably determines how it's answered. F..kkkk; still 73% disapprove of the way he's handling the economy says the survey. If it were me, I would give them the finger. What the hell do they think the president is: a magician. The guy inherited a f..king mess anyway you look at it.
I think he has been a good president. I don't notice Americans out here sacrificing by in large; every seat in athletic stadiums are filled, every plane full, the roads are filled with cars. Yeah, I know there are people out of work and his illustration of the pilot of the ship in stormy weather strikes true. Fuck yes? Some people are unhappy but I don't see where the president can get the blame.
The Republicans are this bunch of recalcitrant buffoons, sure; but the ones that tick me off as well are the non thinking Democrats or Independents. Where the hell do you think you are going to go: to the Republicans who haven't had an original idea in the last ten years.
I thought the real telling comment of the President on Sixty Minutes was his reality check:he said something like. "the Republicans have supported most of the legislation I've proposed in the past. However in the present climate in Washington, attach my name to it and the Republicans only know NO!!!!"
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
Homeless Kids
This will make you happy. Scott Pelly just announced that those two kids from his show on homeless kids who live in a truck with their dad have both been given a full scholarship to Stetson University. She is the girl who was so well spoken. Remember? Great news!
The above is the text my wife sent me when I had lamented about these homeless kids. In essense, my thinking is that there will be much more for these kids and others like them. Americans are generous by nature has always been my contention. I, like much of America, was taken by the two kids living in a truck with their father. Good for Stetson for being on the ball like this. Plus in our news media world what great publicity for them. I notice that Scott Pelly is leaning up next to their truck with the GMC emblem. Apparently GMC, at least as far as we know, is asleep at the wheel as they are not giving this family a new truck. O,r better still, give the dad a job.
The above is the text my wife sent me when I had lamented about these homeless kids. In essense, my thinking is that there will be much more for these kids and others like them. Americans are generous by nature has always been my contention. I, like much of America, was taken by the two kids living in a truck with their father. Good for Stetson for being on the ball like this. Plus in our news media world what great publicity for them. I notice that Scott Pelly is leaning up next to their truck with the GMC emblem. Apparently GMC, at least as far as we know, is asleep at the wheel as they are not giving this family a new truck. O,r better still, give the dad a job.
BATTLE OF WANAT
The "power of grief" is probably our most potent emotion. I was reminded of that, which I already knew, recently through an article in Vanity Fair about a young Lt killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've seen of late, related to the same sorry war is Pat Tillman. In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line to use that overworked term, is that grief is simply
I recently read a long article from Vanity Fair. Took me three days to read it as it was so dense with facts and description. Great writing. It demostrated again the "power of grief" which is probably our most potent emotion.The article was about a young Lieutenant killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've read about of late, related to the same sorry war, is Pat Tillman's family. This putcome is much better than the Tillman one. (To me, the Tillman family never really got their due as it somewhat ended in a congressional embarrassment with them bowing and scraping to the generals and a few others, even Rumsfeld if I remember correctly). The "power of grief" is probably our most potent emotion. I was reminded of that, which I already knew, recently through an article in Vanity Fair about a young Lt killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've seen of late, related to the same sorry war is Pat Tillman. In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line to use that overworked term, is that grief is simply
I recently read a long article from Vanity Fair. Took me three days to read it as it was so dense with facts and description. Great writing. It demostrated again the "power of grief" which is probably our most potent emotion.The article was about a young Lieutenant killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've read about of late, related to the same sorry war, is Pat Tillman's family. This putcome is much better than the Tillman one. (To me, the Tillman family never really got their due as it somewhat ended in a congressional embarrassment with them bowing and scraping to the generals and a few others, even Rumsfeld if I remember correctly).
In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line, to use that overworked term, is that sometimes grief is simply a debilitating emotion that turns into anger. Very sad unless it helps the grieving along their path of recovery or something related. Doubt there is ever complete healing. And, the article is another example of what a fast train to nowhere is Afghanistan. (just today, over 50 killed by suicide bombers) A mess.
The battle of Wanat (subject of article) was a disaster and the blame has to go to the generals who sit back and make these inane strategy decisions like young LTs who hardly know what end is up sitting down with what we would call "village chiefs" and who are probably involved with the enemy anyway. It is idiocy at the highest levels. Hurts my heart. The command structure above expected way too much, gave them inadequate support, and simply ignored some of the basic survival rules of war.
In the final analysis, after the battalion commander, company commander were reprimanded, signed off on by guys like Praetreus, the special investigator, in the face of enormous opposition, reversed the findings with a partial analysis which I totally agree with: in combat anything can happen and Monday morning quarterbacking can never measure up to what a firefight truly means. I had read about it before but not with this depth.
In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line, to use that overworked term, is that sometimes grief is simply a debilitating emotion that turns intoY anger. Very sad unless it helps the grieving along their path of recovery or something related. Doubt there is ever complete healing. And, the article is another example of what a fast train to nowhere is Afghanistan. (just today, over 50 killed by suicide bombers) A mess.
The battle of Wanat (subject of article) was a disaster and the blame has to go to the generals who sit back and make these inane strategy decisions like young LTs who hardly know what end is up sitting down with what we would call "village chiefs" and who are probably involved with the enemy anyway. It is idiocy at the highest levels. Hurts my heart. The command structure above expected way too much, gave them inadequate support, and simply ignored some of the basic survival rules of war.
In the final analysis, after the battalion commander, company commander were reprimanded, signed off on by guys like Praetreus, the special investigator, in the face of enormous opposition, reversed the findings with a partial analysis which I totally agree with: in combat anything can happen and Monday morning quarterbacking can never measure up to what a firefight truly means. I had read about it before but not with this depth.
I recently read a long article from Vanity Fair. Took me three days to read it as it was so dense with facts and description. Great writing. It demostrated again the "power of grief" which is probably our most potent emotion.The article was about a young Lieutenant killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've read about of late, related to the same sorry war, is Pat Tillman's family. This putcome is much better than the Tillman one. (To me, the Tillman family never really got their due as it somewhat ended in a congressional embarrassment with them bowing and scraping to the generals and a few others, even Rumsfeld if I remember correctly). The "power of grief" is probably our most potent emotion. I was reminded of that, which I already knew, recently through an article in Vanity Fair about a young Lt killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've seen of late, related to the same sorry war is Pat Tillman. In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line to use that overworked term, is that grief is simply
I recently read a long article from Vanity Fair. Took me three days to read it as it was so dense with facts and description. Great writing. It demostrated again the "power of grief" which is probably our most potent emotion.The article was about a young Lieutenant killed in an isolated outpost in Afghanistan and a father's grief which almost succeeded in tarnishing everybody that a sorry war touched. The story is too involved to recount and establishing blame is such a subjective thing. The only other grief so palpable that I've read about of late, related to the same sorry war, is Pat Tillman's family. This putcome is much better than the Tillman one. (To me, the Tillman family never really got their due as it somewhat ended in a congressional embarrassment with them bowing and scraping to the generals and a few others, even Rumsfeld if I remember correctly).
In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line, to use that overworked term, is that sometimes grief is simply a debilitating emotion that turns into anger. Very sad unless it helps the grieving along their path of recovery or something related. Doubt there is ever complete healing. And, the article is another example of what a fast train to nowhere is Afghanistan. (just today, over 50 killed by suicide bombers) A mess.
The battle of Wanat (subject of article) was a disaster and the blame has to go to the generals who sit back and make these inane strategy decisions like young LTs who hardly know what end is up sitting down with what we would call "village chiefs" and who are probably involved with the enemy anyway. It is idiocy at the highest levels. Hurts my heart. The command structure above expected way too much, gave them inadequate support, and simply ignored some of the basic survival rules of war.
In the final analysis, after the battalion commander, company commander were reprimanded, signed off on by guys like Praetreus, the special investigator, in the face of enormous opposition, reversed the findings with a partial analysis which I totally agree with: in combat anything can happen and Monday morning quarterbacking can never measure up to what a firefight truly means. I had read about it before but not with this depth.
In both cases, the grief drives everything. The sad thing and bottom line, to use that overworked term, is that sometimes grief is simply a debilitating emotion that turns intoY anger. Very sad unless it helps the grieving along their path of recovery or something related. Doubt there is ever complete healing. And, the article is another example of what a fast train to nowhere is Afghanistan. (just today, over 50 killed by suicide bombers) A mess.
The battle of Wanat (subject of article) was a disaster and the blame has to go to the generals who sit back and make these inane strategy decisions like young LTs who hardly know what end is up sitting down with what we would call "village chiefs" and who are probably involved with the enemy anyway. It is idiocy at the highest levels. Hurts my heart. The command structure above expected way too much, gave them inadequate support, and simply ignored some of the basic survival rules of war.
In the final analysis, after the battalion commander, company commander were reprimanded, signed off on by guys like Praetreus, the special investigator, in the face of enormous opposition, reversed the findings with a partial analysis which I totally agree with: in combat anything can happen and Monday morning quarterbacking can never measure up to what a firefight truly means. I had read about it before but not with this depth.
Sunday, December 04, 2011
AMERICA COMES THROUGH
This will make you happy. Scott Pelly just announced that those two kids from his show on homeless kids who live in a truck with their dad have both been given a full scholarship to Stetson University. She is the girl who was so well spoken. Remember? Great news!
The above is the text my wife sent me when I had lamented about these homeless kids. In essense, my thinking is that there will be much more for these kids and others like them. Americans are generous by nature has always been my contention. I, like much of America, was taken by the two kids living in a truck with their father. Good for Stetson for being on the ball like this. Plus in our news media world what great publicity for them. I notice that Scott Pelly is leaning up next to their truck with the GMC emblem. Apparently GMC, at least as far as we know, is asleep at the wheel as they are not giving this family a new truck. O,r better still, give the dad a job.
The above is the text my wife sent me when I had lamented about these homeless kids. In essense, my thinking is that there will be much more for these kids and others like them. Americans are generous by nature has always been my contention. I, like much of America, was taken by the two kids living in a truck with their father. Good for Stetson for being on the ball like this. Plus in our news media world what great publicity for them. I notice that Scott Pelly is leaning up next to their truck with the GMC emblem. Apparently GMC, at least as far as we know, is asleep at the wheel as they are not giving this family a new truck. O,r better still, give the dad a job.
Saturday, December 03, 2011
OCCUPY WALL STREET AND VIETNAM VETS
What never ceases to amaze me is the often unexpected analysis of life. An example: When Vietnam vets returned from Vietnam, a sorry war, but one in which young Americans, many draftees even, were sent by their country. They went, did their duty and returned home. Not as returning heroes but victims blamed for a war where they merely did what the country asked them to do. Relatively speaking, vets were silent for about ten years.
Now, I see some real affinity with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement and returning Vietnam vets. The OWS movement is out there legitimately assembling, attempting to bring attention to the inequities in our culture and thievery of Wall Street. The OWS participants are alienated from much of society, even as Vietnam vets were. Now, often, they have become objects of derision just like Vietnam vets. Cities are treated them as the enemy. They are not being supported visibly by Americans who themselves are in the 99%. What the f..k! The Cities are using those old excuses of safety and security to break up their camps. We've all seen the pepper spray, etc, those authorities and others who tepidly support them mainly now want them gone. Occupy Wall Street has become a movement. They are not going away like Vietnam vets did. And, to those who don't support them, I say, f..k you very much! More power to OWS!
Now, I see some real affinity with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement and returning Vietnam vets. The OWS movement is out there legitimately assembling, attempting to bring attention to the inequities in our culture and thievery of Wall Street. The OWS participants are alienated from much of society, even as Vietnam vets were. Now, often, they have become objects of derision just like Vietnam vets. Cities are treated them as the enemy. They are not being supported visibly by Americans who themselves are in the 99%. What the f..k! The Cities are using those old excuses of safety and security to break up their camps. We've all seen the pepper spray, etc, those authorities and others who tepidly support them mainly now want them gone. Occupy Wall Street has become a movement. They are not going away like Vietnam vets did. And, to those who don't support them, I say, f..k you very much! More power to OWS!
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
HOMELESS KIDS
My heart is hurting. After watching the 60 Minutes program on homeless kids in Florida, I was so so sad. To think that we have these kids who have no place to lay their heads, other than a truck, a car, and if they are lucky, a dingy motel. Heart Breaking. Philosophically, we know that people (adults) often make decisions which may bring them to where they are. Or, they find themselves where they are through no fault of their own. But, the bottom line is kids ought be playing ball, shooting marbles, playing with friends, drawing pictures, Barbees; whatever kids do now days, not worrying about their safety, living in cars, motels. What in the hell is this? "Sixty Minutes" profiled several but two stuck out. The Metzgers: dad, an out of work carpenter, Mom dead. Their uncertainty in living the life they had too was simply overwhelming. The attitude of these kids--the cute little daughter wants to be a lawyer, serious, had ambitions and an incredibly positive attitude. What the hay, I wanted to run out and adopt them. If some wealthy American who has big bucks and doesn't get on this, I am going to not only be disappointed but reinforced in the idea that we have become greedy sorry MFers. Most of our kids and Grandkids should be so aware as this youngster, saying something like, "it isn't so bad, education is everything to us." She was born "forty years old." Her younger brother is not far behind in attitude. Don't disappoint me America. We made black Friday the biggest shopping spree in history, the least we can do is get a home for the Metzgers and get him a job. And then there was this African American family. Super attitude too. I wish so many of these f..king racists, mostly Republicans, could see this family: guy finally gets a job hustling around trash cans. His comment: "so happy just to have a job."
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
THE CHANGE I BELIEVE IN
I've never heard of Katrina Vanden Heuvel but she is speaking my language. Her book, "The Change I Believe In," is one I'm going to believe in. She has the best critique of the President I've read. Some disappointment but a realization that he is at heart, a "reform president domestically, committed to improving people's lives and to the renewal and reconstruction of America." I believe that and have viewed the president as discovering the running of a country is a hell of a lot different than campaigning. He has tried to reach out to Republicans and they have chew his hand off. Here's where he could have taken a note from Hillary. She never doubted the Republicans hated her and that good will was as illusive as a "straight" man in San Fran's Castro. The president would have served himself and us better if from the beginning he had said, "f..k you very much."
Vanden Heuvel's outlook is a little different from mine. But not much. Where she is somewhat tempered in her view, I am less so. For me, the Republicans have been a recalcitrant bunch of sorry MFers who, with their racist views, announced from day one that they had only one goal: bring down the President. The choir was led by Mitch McConnell, a KY racist who is minority leader of the Senate. In fact, the f..ker announced it publically--One goal, defeat the president. She mentions but a little too academic and not forceful enough for my taste that Democrats, which she spells with a "little d" need more patience. My idea: listen you sorry ass Dems of any label, left wing, right wing, moderate, progressive, where the f..k are you going to go, you sure as hell better wake up and smell the roses or you are going to wake up one morning and the roses will be replaced by some big ass self interest that the Repubs have dreamed up.
The description of Vanden Heuvel's book sounds more than promising. I'm not quite as optimistic. But, then again, I don't know s..t! Greed is going to have to be overcome and that is a hell of a proposition.
Vanden Heuvel's outlook is a little different from mine. But not much. Where she is somewhat tempered in her view, I am less so. For me, the Republicans have been a recalcitrant bunch of sorry MFers who, with their racist views, announced from day one that they had only one goal: bring down the President. The choir was led by Mitch McConnell, a KY racist who is minority leader of the Senate. In fact, the f..ker announced it publically--One goal, defeat the president. She mentions but a little too academic and not forceful enough for my taste that Democrats, which she spells with a "little d" need more patience. My idea: listen you sorry ass Dems of any label, left wing, right wing, moderate, progressive, where the f..k are you going to go, you sure as hell better wake up and smell the roses or you are going to wake up one morning and the roses will be replaced by some big ass self interest that the Repubs have dreamed up.
The description of Vanden Heuvel's book sounds more than promising. I'm not quite as optimistic. But, then again, I don't know s..t! Greed is going to have to be overcome and that is a hell of a proposition.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
GREED
My good friend and his wife met me at this little cafe in North Beach in
San Fran. His wife and I talked a little politics until she said, "I don't want to talk about it anymore." She is a right wing Republican. I am always simply amazed at how this happens: a smart intelligent person in today's environment who has bought into the bullshit of mostly the Republicans that all our social programs have to be dismantled to solve our problems. Beats the hell out of me how people get this way. Forget the BS of Repubs and Demos, just think of the 25 million kids who are homeless. This is scandalous considering the wealth of this country. These f..king idealogical positions will not fill a stomach. Politics is not for s..t but it is what we have and we can do better. Unfortunately, I have little faith that we will. As a country we are just too damn greedy.
San Fran. His wife and I talked a little politics until she said, "I don't want to talk about it anymore." She is a right wing Republican. I am always simply amazed at how this happens: a smart intelligent person in today's environment who has bought into the bullshit of mostly the Republicans that all our social programs have to be dismantled to solve our problems. Beats the hell out of me how people get this way. Forget the BS of Repubs and Demos, just think of the 25 million kids who are homeless. This is scandalous considering the wealth of this country. These f..king idealogical positions will not fill a stomach. Politics is not for s..t but it is what we have and we can do better. Unfortunately, I have little faith that we will. As a country we are just too damn greedy.
MICHELLE BACHMAN
Listening to Michelle Bachman interviewed by Robert Segal on NPR, my first reaction is, "you've got to be s..ting me. She has written a book. Probably the "Tea Partiers" will run out and scarf it up. F..king non thinkers. I have lots of thoughts but here is the basic one by way of illustration. Stay with me now: These old guys I hang out with use to go to this little restaurant where we got to know our little waitress. We bonded. She was cute as a bug, spoke English really well. We generously tipped. Bought her flowers on her birthday. She was probably illegal. We really had a philosophy about immigration but it went to hell and in our often rattled minds did not apply to our little waitress. She works about three jobs, goes to school. We are proud of her. We affirm her constantly. She has a boyfriend who surely doesn't seem worthy of her. By her own admission, he has cheated on her, lied, etc. Sorry f..ker should have his arsh kicked until his nose bleeds. Here's the grand finale. One morning she announces she is 3 months pregnant. Our mouths drop open. She is happy about it. Her mother is coming from Equador to help. We are aghast. What about her college plans, her future? We are tortured. It is like our grand daughter announcing this catastrophy. What about a termination, other options. She wants none. Too Catholic. What the f..k!!!! In our view, her future goes to hell in a hand basket. What was she thinking. Fast forward back to Michell Bachman. She brags about her own five kids and the 23 foster kids she's raised--something, while laudable, makes me want to say to our little waitress and to Bachman, Why? And F..kkkk
Thursday, November 24, 2011
THANKSGIVING
Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday. So much for which to be grateful. I am always reminded of those less fortunate Americans who, for whatever reason, find themselves suffering. But, on this Thanksgiving, Americans everywhere are helping ease the burden. My daughter is out delivering meals; there are food banks, turkeys--scores of Americans everywhere are out there on the firing line. And let's celebrate that. I am about f..king tired of the news media talking doom and gloom. Hell yeah, the world, the country have dug themselves holes but for America in particular, we might need to do a little retrenchment. Who knows! And, I for one, think it is about time, we cut out the media's negative approach to most everything. As my buddy Tino says, f..kkkk!!!!
NEWT
Newt is the latest front runner for Republicans. Personally, I don't give a flying f..k who the flavor of the moment is for those mostly "half truthers." Fact checkers should have a field day with their facts just from their debates. They wouldn't know the "complete" truth if it ran over them. Unfortunately, in my thinking what makes them relevant is my lack of belief in voters. When you have only 50% of Americans who vote and you have a f..king bunch of zealots on one side whose mantra is, "don't confuse me with facts, I have my mind made up" and on the other, you have apathy (Democrats). Do the math. I could give a s..t less but why a president is important is the f..ker can send you to war. We are fighting one and trying to extract ourselves from the other because a President's ego became more important than American lives.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
A DO OVER
David Brooks on the "News Hour" the other night said that in 10 years we would be like Greece. I would like to think not but based on current things, maybe and before. We are in a f..king mess anyway you look at it. 400 super rich Americans have more that 150 million low to middle class Americans. A protest movement who, if they don't know all the answers, know they are the 99%. Congress is a f..king bunch of "do nothings" who don't give a s..t nor have to answer to anybody. And, whose fault is that. OURS. Mine and yours asshole/MFers. It is our fault. We keep voting the same people into office. They go to Washinhton and enrich themselves and then come home and act like they give a s..t. Wake up and smell the roses. What we need is a "do over." get rid of them all. Start over. It is our only chance. Will we do it? Of course not, we are stupid and we are f..ked
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
TEENAGE ANGST
Jackie and I saw this movie last night that I thought was the best at showing the angst of teenagers that I've seen. What was absolutely amazing to me is that it was so well done, given the fact that there were no real stars in the movie. Well, Mare Willingham (I think is her name) was the only one. Kids dealing with parents who are unbeliably dysfunctional, peer pressure, drugs, suicide, etc. Check it out. Very thoughtful movie. Jackie don't like it at all.
Hope all is well.
{{{{{{{Jerry}}}}}}
Hope all is well.
{{{{{{{Jerry}}}}}}
CONGRESSIONAL CROOKS
I have often wondered how a person could be elected to Congress as simply an average "Joe or Jane" of average means and a few years later leave as a multimillionaire. Well, after Watching "Sixty Minutes" last night we know: INSIDER TRADING.
While stock brokers and other corporate types, many who maybe should be in jail but aren't, can and do, on occasion get caught and go to prison. But, get this: "not Congress," they aren't subject to the same laws as the rest of us on "insider trading." Consequenly, they can use insider information and trade on it and get rich and they do. Some guy and several students, I think at the Hoover Institute, did a study on Congress and who did, in fact, "line their pockets." It is appalling. Steve Kroft of "Sixty Minites" confronted several, some guy from Alabama who make beaucoup bucks on "Insider" trading. Bachus was his name. This asshole bought some sort of derivities or something which made him big bucks because the country was basically headed into a recession. I don't understand it all but he basically profited off the misfortune of the country. Sorry MFer. Most of the confronted Congressmen/women were smart and wouldn't talk to him. He nailed Nancy Pelosi in a news conference with something like, "it doesn't bother you that you have information that the general public doesn't have and can make stock purchases which enrich you." She stumbles, "I haven't done anything wrong." Oh yeah, one answer from a public source says she apparently bought $1 million to $5 million of Visa stock and then thwarte serious credit card reform for two years, and then watched her investment skyrocket 203%.
HELLO!
Pelosi is not the only one for sure. The crooks in Congress are more the rule than the exception. They always have an answer. But, here is the discouraging thing. It won't make a f..king bit of difference. It really is the voter's fault. We keep voting them in year after year. They will never produce reform because it means reforming themselves. Let's face it, our system is broken. Revelations like these keep coming but it doesn't make for s..t. Even master lobbyist and crook Jack Abramhof, just out of prison, which most Americans won't even know, when asked something like, "is Congress less corrupt now than before you went to prison for helping them be corrupt." His simple answer, "No, Congress is more corrupt." Congress can have an approval rating of zilch, total disdain by the people surveyed--doesn't make for s..t of difference. Do we think in the long run, the revelation that Nancy Pelisi that I voted for twice will make any real difference and she'll get pitched our. F ..k no.
While stock brokers and other corporate types, many who maybe should be in jail but aren't, can and do, on occasion get caught and go to prison. But, get this: "not Congress," they aren't subject to the same laws as the rest of us on "insider trading." Consequenly, they can use insider information and trade on it and get rich and they do. Some guy and several students, I think at the Hoover Institute, did a study on Congress and who did, in fact, "line their pockets." It is appalling. Steve Kroft of "Sixty Minites" confronted several, some guy from Alabama who make beaucoup bucks on "Insider" trading. Bachus was his name. This asshole bought some sort of derivities or something which made him big bucks because the country was basically headed into a recession. I don't understand it all but he basically profited off the misfortune of the country. Sorry MFer. Most of the confronted Congressmen/women were smart and wouldn't talk to him. He nailed Nancy Pelosi in a news conference with something like, "it doesn't bother you that you have information that the general public doesn't have and can make stock purchases which enrich you." She stumbles, "I haven't done anything wrong." Oh yeah, one answer from a public source says she apparently bought $1 million to $5 million of Visa stock and then thwarte serious credit card reform for two years, and then watched her investment skyrocket 203%.
HELLO!
Pelosi is not the only one for sure. The crooks in Congress are more the rule than the exception. They always have an answer. But, here is the discouraging thing. It won't make a f..king bit of difference. It really is the voter's fault. We keep voting them in year after year. They will never produce reform because it means reforming themselves. Let's face it, our system is broken. Revelations like these keep coming but it doesn't make for s..t. Even master lobbyist and crook Jack Abramhof, just out of prison, which most Americans won't even know, when asked something like, "is Congress less corrupt now than before you went to prison for helping them be corrupt." His simple answer, "No, Congress is more corrupt." Congress can have an approval rating of zilch, total disdain by the people surveyed--doesn't make for s..t of difference. Do we think in the long run, the revelation that Nancy Pelisi that I voted for twice will make any real difference and she'll get pitched our. F ..k no.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)