TheWorx

[ note: I get serious at the 3rd paragraph ] How fast can an innocent man get out of jail in NJ these days? Well, if you took a solitary ant, saddled him with 70 times his weight in extra luggage, and asked him to circumnavigate Chris Christie's girth--all the while tabulating the location of the crumbs as it trudged through a coating of hot Fralinger taffy, the ant would travel a distance equal to that of from Trenton to the White House before you'd be released (on your own recognizance to await trial, no less) and (incidentally, I've also factored in the time the ant would need to evolve to actually do these things [OK, evolve with a little help from the friendly Mary Shelleys at Monsanto). We are told, however, that there are these progressive measures in the works. (See the Fiscal Analyst's description of the law if you want a more readable version) "Bail is set at $__," "Bail is denied," groans or moans the judge. These are statements w...

The sample ballot which we receive in New Jersey does nothing to illumine the issues/controversy surrounding the public questions to be voted on this election cycle. After reading this unbiased take on the public questions before us, I've gone from two yes votes to two no votes and sticking to them. This after reading--for each question--three reasons for voting yes and three for voting no. The sample ballots, imho, should come with a link to the New Jersey League of Women Voters and their concise and easy to understand explanations on the repercussions of voting one way or the other. I hope they always do this because it is so needed and so refreshing to see two sides laid out in such a way that you know how you should vote. I am putting the LWV on my list of vetting tools.

However, and I am sure he supports me in this, not for his Army Ranger service in Afghanistan but for speaking out against our scamming of America's youth by the war mongering establishment. Some, like the celebrities in the following article must be doing it inadvertently because I can't conceive of anyone who loves Rock and also pushes for war; but read this well-written article from a man who has been in the trenches, knows futility, and wants to save us from ourselves. Tomgram: Rory Fanning, Why Do We Keep Thanking the Troops? | TomDispatch

Well, it pleased me to know that our government here in the U.S. has put out a call for innovative solutions to the Ebola epidemic: USAID Development Innovation Accelerator Broad Agency Announcement for Fighting Ebola: A Grand Challenge for Development - baa.pdf Unfortunately for those of us who wish to contribute, the funds for development would only be available to "potential partners with recognized expertise in relevant areas." Oops, I haven't cured an epidemic or put together any PPE (Personal Protection Equipment) so that leaves me out. I'm glad, though, I wouldn't want to follow their strict bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo requirements only to have my ideas deep-sixed. So, here are my ideas in the hope that someone in a federally recognized "priesthood" will see the merit and use it as their own (No Problem). A. put together a temperature sensor with built-in GPS and WiFi (an arduino with the appropriate shields would do the trick). Give th...

Containment has always been the buzz word when it comes to epidemics but, at least in regards to Ebola, experts reporting to Forbes (see Thinkprogress.org Article ) are saying that travel should not be restricted and provide us with four less-than-compelling reasons. Although the article does not differentiate between them, I will address these three kinds of travel:   1.) from the U.S., 2.) within an African country with an Ebola epidemic, and 3.) to the U.S. Travel for the health professional from the U.S. should be allowed as we do not have an Ebola epidemic. If it is not economically feasible for the airlines to provide one-way service to Africa, our military should provide the service--certainly to any duly-registered health professional. Within the country with the epidemic, experts say that health officials will not be "able to effectively" track people with symptoms. The reason being that people will find ways around barriers to travel anyway and, i...

This is the information being provided at thewhitehouse.gov: [my comments in black]   EBOLA CANNOT BE SPREAD THROUGH THE AIR, WATER, FOOD IN THE U.S., OR CASUAL CONTACT WITH SOMEONE WHO HAS NO SYMPTOMS OF THE DISEASE. YOU CAN ONLY GET THE EBOLA VIRUS THROUGH DIRECT CONTACT WITH: • Body fluids of a person who is sick with    or has died from Ebola • Objects contaminated with the virus • Infected animals [Well now, what if the animal is someone's dog and comes around to be petted? What symptoms does an animal show? What if the dog gets wet and does it's characteristic 'shake?' The President says that it can't be spread through the air but we know that you CAN get it through a sneeze that travels through the air and what if that sneeze just happens to be the victim's first symptom? What if the victim works at a restaurant and goes in because the employer doesn't offer paid sick leave; what if he/she handles your food/water? Or a sic...

Ebay tolerates fraud in its venue. On three separate occasions when bidding for an item on Ebay, a bidder with no transactions to his credit, outbids me. The next day, the item is up for sale again with the seller saying something about the non-paying bidder. This is done in order to determine what the maximum price was that bidders were willing to pay. Let me explain. Let's say I stipulate a maximum bid of $150. However, the bidding in the last minutes of the auction only goes up to $80. The seller, would like to sell for the highest price he can get but he doesn't know my maximum amount--what is he to do? All he has to do is set up a bogus account and bid an outrageous amount. Let's say he bids $500. When he does that he wins the auction but most importantly, he now knows exactly how much I was willing to pay for the item because the winning bid will be slightly more than my maximum. The seller's bogus account holder (himself or a friend) now defaults on payment and...

The unedited article appears here . It is quoted in this blog post to facilitate my comments to Ms. Heuvel [in red]. Obama should set his sights higher By Katrina vanden Heuvel July 10 at 4:53 PM Last Monday, President Obama defied Republican threats to file suit against him for his use of executive orders. “If House Republicans are really concerned about me taking too many executive actions,” the president said , “the best solution to that is passing bills. Pass a bill, solve a problem.” Republican obstruction is so extreme that House Speaker John Boehner can’t even get what he wants done, much less what the country needs. House Republicans have blocked countless jobs plans [in statements like this, I’d like to see references to the HR bills put forth by House Democrats] , stonewalled immigration reform, stopped a hike in the minimum wage and prevented emergency unemployment benefits from even getting a vote. [can you fucking blame them when they smelled weakn...

This is the last paragraph in Jeffrey Toobin's recent piece in The New Yorker on Ted Cruz . Cruz’s sincerity in these goals is beyond question. When he was solicitor general of Texas, he had a piece of advice for the lawyers on his staff. “I tried to stress to every lawyer in the office that if any lawyer from the S.G.’s office stands in front of the judge and says, ‘The law is X and the facts are Y,’ then that judge would always, always trust that we are levelling [sic] with them and telling the truth.” He’s approached politics the same way. “Since I became a senator, a year and a half ago, I’ve kept two promises to the people of Texas,” he said. “I have endeavored to do what I said I was going to do and I have always told the truth. It says something about Washington that those are perceived as radical acts." I don't doubt Senator Cruz' sincerity in wanting to realize his goals. The issue is, has he stated his goals without being disingenuous?   Or, differe...

Oh, my blessed Lord! To add insult to injury, I now find myself in the unenviable position of thanking my most despised (Citizens United, etc.) Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court for his, alas, losing decision contrary to those who said that helping a "broadcaster" simulcast their offerings complete with ads and which augments the number of ad viewers is illegal. A new win-win scenario for the people was declared illegal because a win-win was scenario was already comfy in place. Here are the sordid details: Aereo is illegal, Supreme Court says, in big win for broadcasters - CNET CBS, the parent company of CNET was ecstatic but why the fuck were they excited? If I, by Aereo's actions can now say to my advertisers, "look we are now reaching an audience 30% larger," why wouldn't they, CBS, just ask the advertiser for more money? We need further analysis to get to bottom of this; or, am I missing something? Here is the high wire act that I see: the bi...

[This is a response I received from Senator Menendez' office concerning his non-support of the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act. My comments are in red .]   Dear Mr. and Mrs. Jimenez :   Thank you for contacting me regarding the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act.  Your opinion is very important to me, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you on what, for me, is a principled issue.   The Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act would prohibit the President from regulating or prohibiting travel to or from Cuba by United States citizens or legal residents except in time of war or armed hostilities between the U.S. and Cuba.  I have been a lifelong advocate for democratic change in Cuba and have interacted with many of my colleagues in the Senate on these issues over the years.  Although I am opposed to recent efforts to loosen the embargo such as the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act, I have worked with the Obama Administration in ho...

I asked Senator Cruz to support changes being proposed in the FOIA and, as such, I ended up getting his newsletter. I read today's communication and I said to myself, "Hey, nice guy standing up for the first ammendment right to free speech." However, after listening to his free speech here I realized he was trying to support Citizen's United. In doing so, the Senator falls flat on his face using a straw man argument to support his position. If we implement this, he says, it will mean Congress can stop publishers from publishing political views (after all, they are corporations and publishing a political book like Hillary Artillery's new book is free speech). It will stop organizations like the ACLU from lobbying, he adds. All of which is total nonsense. The good Senator from Texas is equating a corporation's political contribution with what the founders thought was free speech. He says nobody would say that a corporation is a "human being;" but ...

And so did I when I was much younger. Damn, what purpose do guns serve in our Nation? Guns have five purposes that I know of. One, they help defend us from invaders. Well, we've never had many invasions--none that I can recall, actually; but, in any event, the populace doesn't need them because of our highly subsidized military. Two, the Black man in the hood needs a gun to command respect. Understandable. How else will they get respect? I'm sure this has a societal fix, I'm just not sure what it is we are willing to change.  Certainly, the majority in our country do not need guns for daily respect but see the fifth purpose. Three, the Police need guns because the violent perpetrator has easy access. Can we do anything about this? Unlikely, this is Capitalist America and where there's a buck to be made, a buck will be made regardless of whatever regulation anyone tries to implement. Fourth is the so-called sportsman. They are well-regulated and I know of no ...

This is a phone call I recorded--and transcribed here--with a staffer from Senator Menendez' office who was responding to my request for "help with a Federal matter;" namely, an FOIA request that was met with exorbitant and unnecessary fees. I put it out so my fellow citizens know what their representatives mean when they offer to help you "with Federal matters." [note: as citizens, it is our right to tape conversations with government officials without their knowledge. Just like a corporation can document it's employees' actions surreptitiously, government officials are OUR employees and we can document them without their knowledge.] [ my remarks are in red ] Staff: You requested information from. . .under the Freedom of Information Act from the Dept. of Commerce? Me: Yes Staff: OK, so, unfortunately, I read over all the materials and , uh, unfortunately, because they address. . .unless you ...