To contact us Click HERE
Here's how it works.
Gummint folks continually raise taxes and don't have the courage to vote for it.
Taxpayers push back, take away the money-fountain.
Gummint folks steal money from "trust funds."
Taxpayers push back by dumping the thieves, get themselves NEW Gummint folks.
NEW Gummint folks piss and moan openly that they don't have enough money.
Taxpayers push back.
Gummint folks say "OK. You don't want to give us mo' money, WE take away your stuff."
In the case at hand, Gummint folk are going to ignore the single-most-trafficked intersection in the entire State of Wisconsin. Last time (when the thief was ruling) a bridge in that intersection started falling down.
Somehow, the phrase "Spend less elsewhere" never crosses the alleged "minds" of Gummint folks.
Maybe a 2x4 upside the head would help them think?
28 Kasım 2012 Çarşamba
You're Getting Boehned Again!!
To contact us Click HERE
The tanned, tanned, tanned John Boehner has a great plan for budget savings. My plan--a better one-- is at the bottom of this post.
[Agriculture-Whore/Cong.] Frank D. Lucas has raised hopes that Congress might still be able to produce a multi-year farm bill soon ...Lucas says Speaker John A. Boehner has indicated that the billions of savings over 10 years that a farm bill provides makes it an attractive option for legislation to avoid a combination of budget sequester and across-the-board spending cuts known as the fiscal cliff. --RedState quoting CQ
You're right. I mentioned Boehner and haven't told you exactly how he's going to screw you. Well, BOHICA, baby, here it comes!!
...The last farm bill, which was enacted in 2008, authorized $604 billion in spending. The current House bill proposed by Lucas (HR 6083) authorizes $957 billion in spending extrapolated over 10 years. Yet, this 58% increase is considered a cut in ‘Washington speak’ because the phony CBO baseline, which locks in Obama’s food stamp spending, projects $992 billion in spending. Hence, passage of the farm bill, which locks in the record food stamp spending and creates new farm welfare programs, will be scored as a spending cut
This whole "cliff" thing is more of the same smoke-and-mirrors.
My plan? Shove all of Congress and the Executive Branch off the cliff.
[Agriculture-Whore/Cong.] Frank D. Lucas has raised hopes that Congress might still be able to produce a multi-year farm bill soon ...Lucas says Speaker John A. Boehner has indicated that the billions of savings over 10 years that a farm bill provides makes it an attractive option for legislation to avoid a combination of budget sequester and across-the-board spending cuts known as the fiscal cliff. --RedState quoting CQ
You're right. I mentioned Boehner and haven't told you exactly how he's going to screw you. Well, BOHICA, baby, here it comes!!
...The last farm bill, which was enacted in 2008, authorized $604 billion in spending. The current House bill proposed by Lucas (HR 6083) authorizes $957 billion in spending extrapolated over 10 years. Yet, this 58% increase is considered a cut in ‘Washington speak’ because the phony CBO baseline, which locks in Obama’s food stamp spending, projects $992 billion in spending. Hence, passage of the farm bill, which locks in the record food stamp spending and creates new farm welfare programs, will be scored as a spending cut
This whole "cliff" thing is more of the same smoke-and-mirrors.
My plan? Shove all of Congress and the Executive Branch off the cliff.
Mutiny Over McCain?
To contact us Click HERE
Seems that John McCain is just another Benthamite.
...Over the weekend, 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain said pro-life conservatives should state their position on abortion, then “leave the issue alone.” Elected officials, he indicated, should enact no new legislation to protect the unborn.
He and a host of GOP consultants have suggested the party downplay or abandon social issues in light of the 2012 electoral loss.
Nor is he alone. The Rockefeller/GWBush bunch, often referred to as "country club Republicans" for good reason, have actively opposed pro-life Republicans whenever they could. This strain of politicians is descended from the Benthamite pragmatists, who are not Conservative in any real sense of the word.
Romney happens to fall within that category as well, although (it seems) by default. He really held no political principles except 'managerial' ones, although few question his personal bona fides.
Priebus has a very large challenge, indeed.
...Over the weekend, 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain said pro-life conservatives should state their position on abortion, then “leave the issue alone.” Elected officials, he indicated, should enact no new legislation to protect the unborn.
He and a host of GOP consultants have suggested the party downplay or abandon social issues in light of the 2012 electoral loss.
Nor is he alone. The Rockefeller/GWBush bunch, often referred to as "country club Republicans" for good reason, have actively opposed pro-life Republicans whenever they could. This strain of politicians is descended from the Benthamite pragmatists, who are not Conservative in any real sense of the word.
Romney happens to fall within that category as well, although (it seems) by default. He really held no political principles except 'managerial' ones, although few question his personal bona fides.
Priebus has a very large challenge, indeed.
NYU-Poly Expands Campus in Brooklyn's MetroTech Center
To contact us Click HERE
NEW YORK, NY May 25, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- In an important step to fulfill NYU's city-wide strategic vision for expansion of its academic facilities, NYU's engineering affiliate, the Polytechnic Institute of New York University (NYU-Poly) (top left center), will expand into neighboring space in Downtown Brooklyn's MetroTech Center.
The move is part of NYU-Poly's $38 million capital plan, called the i-squared-e Campus Transformation - where the "i-squared-e" stands for invention, innovation and entrepreneurship.
The expansion into MetroTech will allow NYU-Poly to accommodate faculty offices, dry computational labs, small classrooms, and administrative functions, while freeing up space in current facilities for renovation and potential redevelopment.
"MetroTech Center has a great central commons area," said NYU-Poly President Jerry Hultin (lower right photo). "Expanding into buildings that flank the commons creates a better presence of NYU-Poly in the square, and imparts a more dynamic, vibrant feel to our campus."
NYU-Poly is entering into a 20-year lease with real estate developer Forest City Ratner Companies for a total of 120,000 rentable square feet of space at 2 MetroTech and 15 MetroTech, which also involves a 9-year sub-lease of space from Wellpoint Insurance.
For more information about NYU 2031 and a complete copy of the institution’s news release, please log onto www.nyu.edu/nyu-in-nyc or contact . Wendi Parson of Polytechnic Institute of New York University, wparson@poly.edu, +1-718-260-3323 Web Site: http://www.poly.edu
NEW YORK, NY May 25, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- In an important step to fulfill NYU's city-wide strategic vision for expansion of its academic facilities, NYU's engineering affiliate, the Polytechnic Institute of New York University (NYU-Poly) (top left center), will expand into neighboring space in Downtown Brooklyn's MetroTech Center. The move is part of NYU-Poly's $38 million capital plan, called the i-squared-e Campus Transformation - where the "i-squared-e" stands for invention, innovation and entrepreneurship.
The expansion into MetroTech will allow NYU-Poly to accommodate faculty offices, dry computational labs, small classrooms, and administrative functions, while freeing up space in current facilities for renovation and potential redevelopment.
"MetroTech Center has a great central commons area," said NYU-Poly President Jerry Hultin (lower right photo). "Expanding into buildings that flank the commons creates a better presence of NYU-Poly in the square, and imparts a more dynamic, vibrant feel to our campus."
NYU-Poly is entering into a 20-year lease with real estate developer Forest City Ratner Companies for a total of 120,000 rentable square feet of space at 2 MetroTech and 15 MetroTech, which also involves a 9-year sub-lease of space from Wellpoint Insurance. For more information about NYU 2031 and a complete copy of the institution’s news release, please log onto www.nyu.edu/nyu-in-nyc or contact . Wendi Parson of Polytechnic Institute of New York University, wparson@poly.edu, +1-718-260-3323 Web Site: http://www.poly.edu
What can you tell me about Center Court's...Verde Suite...
To contact us Click HERE
What can you tell me about Center Court's...Verde Suite...
revlon 
I%26#39;ll be in KW on for the weekend on April 21-23rd and was wondering about these properties. I want to be somewhat close to Duval, and it looks like these three Center Court places are really nice. Anyone know personally?
What can you tell me about Center Court's...Verde Suite...
My fiance and I stayed the ';Tropical Hideway'; (through Center Court) during our December %26#39;02 trip to Key West. It%26#39;s on the same property with the Pineapple Retreat %26amp; the Seaport Suite. I didn%26#39;t get to see inside the other 2 units, but I can vouch for the common grounds of the property and its location in Old Town.
The property is well maintained and in a quiet neighborhood. The pool is fairly large (by Key West standards) and since it%26#39;s only shared with 2 other units (one of which has its own private dipping pool) we never saw many people using it. The landscaping on the property was extensive, and it was very convenient to have complimentary laundry facilities onsite. The daily housekeeping service was a nice touch as well. Even on the days that we put out the ';no housekeeping necessary'; sign, they still were nice enough to leave fresh towels for us!
I wouldn%26#39;t classify the property as being ';close'; to Duval street. It was roughly 6-7 blocks away, which was about a 20 minute walk at a VERY leisurely pace for us. We never minded the walk - we felt more like locals by staying in a primarily residential setting, and it was a nice change of pace to adjust our walking routes to tour through the surrounding neighborhoods on our way to/from Duval.
If you want, you can use a online service like ';MapQuest'; to show you exactly how far it is from the property to Duval St. Use the intersection of Frances St %26amp; Eaton St as your starting point, and the intersection of Duval St %26amp; Eaton St as your ending point. That gives you a straight-shot distance to Duval St, with Mallory Square being a block or so away from that ending point.
I liked our location for being so close to the some of the more ';local'; hangouts AND one of our favorite lunch spots - B.O.%26#39;s Fish Wagon. The added benefit of being away from Duval was how peaceful our neighborhood was. We could leave our French doors open in the mornings and evenings and the only sounds coming in were the rustling of the leaves in the breeze %26amp; the birds chirping. Very relaxing!
27 Kasım 2012 Salı
TSA 'Business As Usual," Defending the Indefensible. Again
To contact us Click HERE
I bend over backwards at times giving the TSA the benefit of the doubt, including in its remarkably timid responses to the guns that more people are trying to bring through checkpoints because those people think they have a God-given "right to carry" their firearms anywhere they choose, including onto an airplane.
TSA=We're vigilant about old ladies in wheelchairs, but we're terrified about upsetting the gun lobby.
Now here, as if to prove that the TSA just doesn't make sense many times, is the agency's intrepid mouthpiece, "Blogger Bob" Burns, defending the indefensible -- that is, he airily waves off protests about TSA agents waylaying passengers as they queue to board airplanes, and "testing" whatever beverages they have in hand.
Now, it's a given that if you have a soda or a bottle of water in hand at the gate, you have purchased or obtained that drink within the secure area of the airport, because they wouldn't have let you carry it through the checkpoint in the first place. The TSA says, as a matter of optics and a tactic of preemptively covering its butt, that of course nothing is "100 percent secure," yada-yada. Yes, that is correct. Except when the TSA has some asinine gate-theater to defend, and then it's "CSI Airport."
"Blogger Bob" is correct in saying that this is nothing new, despite the current outpouring of online protest about the agency testing drinks at the gate. And, let note here the absolutely predictable response from the Brigade of Official Reassurance on public radio that there's nothing to see here, folks. Why, silly, the government told us so!
Yes, they have had this ludicrous procedure in place for a while -- but my guess is that they've stepped up the performances lately of this particular comic act on the security-vaudeville playbill.
Agents waylaying passengers at the gate may be designed to present "another layer of security," as "Blogger Bob" says, but in fact what we, the public, see is another ridiculous manifestation of make-work for a vastly bloated federal jobs program, the TSA -- which is without doubt the most hated agency of the federal government. The most hated, yes. The possibly also the least trusted. And lack of trust in your security is a basic security flaw, as any expert in the field will tell you.
Here's "Blogger Bob" on the TSA blog today, pooh-poohing objections to this nonsense by insisting that this all is "business as usual." Business of security theater as usual, I would add.
Emphasis is mine:
"While browsing the web this morning, I saw that the topic de jour was that TSA was now screening liquids at the gate. We've talked about random gate screening here before, and if you travel frequently, you've likely experienced a gate screening. Not a big deal really... Heck, even I have been pulled aside for random gate screening.
So, the most popular question that comes up with this topic is: "Isn't this redundant?" On the surface, it does seem that way, and it's the first logical thought that many have. However, any security expert will tell you that nothing is ever 100% secure. So, gate screening is kind of like our safety net to keep up with anybody who might be trying to get things past conventional screening.
We stay away from static security tactics. Layered security is common practice, providing the necessary unpredictable measure that makes it more difficult to do malice to the transportation infrastructure. If everything we did was always the same, it would provide a checklist for people to know exactly what to expect. While this would be extremely helpful for passengers, it would also be useful to those wishing to do us harm. ...
As far as the testing of liquids at the gate, this is just one of the many options we have to choose from when deciding what additional tactics to use each day. We started using test strips back in the summer of 2007 and continue to do so. The test involves a test strip and a dropper containing a nontoxic solution. In case you're wondering, our officers don't place the test strips in your beverages/liquids. They simply have the passenger remove the cap/lid and they hold the strip over the opening of the container. Procedures call for moving the test strip to the side and applying the solution from the dropper to test the strip. If the test results are positive TSA will conduct additional testing to make a final assessment.
In a nutshell, liquid screening at gates is random and it isn't happening at every airport every day. So other than possibly taking a few moments of your time before boarding your flight, it's business as usual."
###
I bend over backwards at times giving the TSA the benefit of the doubt, including in its remarkably timid responses to the guns that more people are trying to bring through checkpoints because those people think they have a God-given "right to carry" their firearms anywhere they choose, including onto an airplane.
TSA=We're vigilant about old ladies in wheelchairs, but we're terrified about upsetting the gun lobby.
Now here, as if to prove that the TSA just doesn't make sense many times, is the agency's intrepid mouthpiece, "Blogger Bob" Burns, defending the indefensible -- that is, he airily waves off protests about TSA agents waylaying passengers as they queue to board airplanes, and "testing" whatever beverages they have in hand.
Now, it's a given that if you have a soda or a bottle of water in hand at the gate, you have purchased or obtained that drink within the secure area of the airport, because they wouldn't have let you carry it through the checkpoint in the first place. The TSA says, as a matter of optics and a tactic of preemptively covering its butt, that of course nothing is "100 percent secure," yada-yada. Yes, that is correct. Except when the TSA has some asinine gate-theater to defend, and then it's "CSI Airport."
"Blogger Bob" is correct in saying that this is nothing new, despite the current outpouring of online protest about the agency testing drinks at the gate. And, let note here the absolutely predictable response from the Brigade of Official Reassurance on public radio that there's nothing to see here, folks. Why, silly, the government told us so!
Yes, they have had this ludicrous procedure in place for a while -- but my guess is that they've stepped up the performances lately of this particular comic act on the security-vaudeville playbill.
Agents waylaying passengers at the gate may be designed to present "another layer of security," as "Blogger Bob" says, but in fact what we, the public, see is another ridiculous manifestation of make-work for a vastly bloated federal jobs program, the TSA -- which is without doubt the most hated agency of the federal government. The most hated, yes. The possibly also the least trusted. And lack of trust in your security is a basic security flaw, as any expert in the field will tell you.
Here's "Blogger Bob" on the TSA blog today, pooh-poohing objections to this nonsense by insisting that this all is "business as usual." Business of security theater as usual, I would add.
Emphasis is mine:
"While browsing the web this morning, I saw that the topic de jour was that TSA was now screening liquids at the gate. We've talked about random gate screening here before, and if you travel frequently, you've likely experienced a gate screening. Not a big deal really... Heck, even I have been pulled aside for random gate screening.
So, the most popular question that comes up with this topic is: "Isn't this redundant?" On the surface, it does seem that way, and it's the first logical thought that many have. However, any security expert will tell you that nothing is ever 100% secure. So, gate screening is kind of like our safety net to keep up with anybody who might be trying to get things past conventional screening.
We stay away from static security tactics. Layered security is common practice, providing the necessary unpredictable measure that makes it more difficult to do malice to the transportation infrastructure. If everything we did was always the same, it would provide a checklist for people to know exactly what to expect. While this would be extremely helpful for passengers, it would also be useful to those wishing to do us harm. ...
As far as the testing of liquids at the gate, this is just one of the many options we have to choose from when deciding what additional tactics to use each day. We started using test strips back in the summer of 2007 and continue to do so. The test involves a test strip and a dropper containing a nontoxic solution. In case you're wondering, our officers don't place the test strips in your beverages/liquids. They simply have the passenger remove the cap/lid and they hold the strip over the opening of the container. Procedures call for moving the test strip to the side and applying the solution from the dropper to test the strip. If the test results are positive TSA will conduct additional testing to make a final assessment.
In a nutshell, liquid screening at gates is random and it isn't happening at every airport every day. So other than possibly taking a few moments of your time before boarding your flight, it's business as usual."
###
Border Patrol Nabs Castro Sneaking Dirty Bomb Into U.S. ... Oops! Make That Ex-Arizona Gov. Castro, 96, and He'd Just Had Radiation Treatment
To contact us Click HERE
[Photo: Mr. Castro, the suspect in suspected nuclear-bomb plot that was thwarted by vigilant U.S. Border Patrol agents]
The former governor of Arizona, 96-year-old Raul Castro, of Nogales, Ariz., was waylaid recently by intrepid agents of the U.S. Border Patrol in southern Arizona, where they don't have as much to do these days because fewer Mexicans are risking death illegally trudging 100 miles through the brutal heat of the Sonoran Desert.
A radiation detector, it seems, signaled some radiation on the elderly gentleman's person during one of those pesky stops by the Border Patrol agents who are all over the region.
Governor Castro, it seems, was emitting traces of radiation from a medical procedure. So he was detained and humiliated in the 100-degree heat because he could have posed a "nuclear threat" to the Homeland.
This occurred a good ways from the border itself on Interstate 19 north of Tubac, Ariz. (Border Patrol claims to have martial-law authority in a zone within 100 miles of the border, which includes the city of Tucson.)
You think I'm kidding? Read this.
Mr. Castro was elected in 1974 as the first (and only) Mexican-American governor of Arizona. He is also a former U.S. ambassador to Argentina, Bolivia and El Salvador.
This appalling incident has been well-known in the area since it occurred three weeks ago, and I've been amazed that the national media ignored it for so long, till it got picked up out of a local Nogales publication. (The Phoenix and Tuscon media are too lazy and too craven to rouse themselves much and report this out. They're afraid some right-wing screwball might write them a stern letter of complaint, after all.)
Finally, Salon has got on the case. Here.
###
[Photo: Mr. Castro, the suspect in suspected nuclear-bomb plot that was thwarted by vigilant U.S. Border Patrol agents]The former governor of Arizona, 96-year-old Raul Castro, of Nogales, Ariz., was waylaid recently by intrepid agents of the U.S. Border Patrol in southern Arizona, where they don't have as much to do these days because fewer Mexicans are risking death illegally trudging 100 miles through the brutal heat of the Sonoran Desert.
A radiation detector, it seems, signaled some radiation on the elderly gentleman's person during one of those pesky stops by the Border Patrol agents who are all over the region.
Governor Castro, it seems, was emitting traces of radiation from a medical procedure. So he was detained and humiliated in the 100-degree heat because he could have posed a "nuclear threat" to the Homeland.
This occurred a good ways from the border itself on Interstate 19 north of Tubac, Ariz. (Border Patrol claims to have martial-law authority in a zone within 100 miles of the border, which includes the city of Tucson.)
You think I'm kidding? Read this.
Mr. Castro was elected in 1974 as the first (and only) Mexican-American governor of Arizona. He is also a former U.S. ambassador to Argentina, Bolivia and El Salvador.
This appalling incident has been well-known in the area since it occurred three weeks ago, and I've been amazed that the national media ignored it for so long, till it got picked up out of a local Nogales publication. (The Phoenix and Tuscon media are too lazy and too craven to rouse themselves much and report this out. They're afraid some right-wing screwball might write them a stern letter of complaint, after all.)
Finally, Salon has got on the case. Here.
###
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)