Nov 11, 2009 -
On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court heard two cases that could have major implications for the way juvenile offenders are treated in our criminal justice system. Sullivan v.
- 4 Comments
Oct 25, 2009 -
I am going to give you my personal look at Obamacare from a perspective which may seem a bit strange but in reality it should be alarming. The interesting thing is that most of all of my childhood I went without even some of the basic things people assume most everyone has. The only healthcare I had as a child was Medi-cal...which is the program upon which Obamacare was designed.
My father worked several part-time jobs as well as his full-time job as a Baptist minister. He did everything possible to provide for us, worked his fingers to the bone and still managed to comfort the people in our church and help them deal with their own problems. Not once did any congregation we served bother to possibly consider that making sure the minister and his family had any healthcare or even some of the basic necessities in life was one of their priorities. They did however call at any time of the day or night for his help and he was there for them.
Sometimes our whole family was there for them. I was a very experienced babysitter, cook, and housekeeper before I was even 11. This is not bitterness I speak from---it is my attempt at revealing to you that many who are among the uninsured are hardworking people often working in service-oriented positions which simply aren't offered healthcare.
So....let me get back to Medi-cal......the mentor of Obamacare. When I hear people on the Obamacare bandwagon I think they probably don't really understand what they are supporting. Many have never been on medi-cal.
- 4 Comments
Sep 27, 2009 -
Villians take a huge part of the story... Their role is to show that humans commit crimes everyday without knowing it. In a sense, it adds a twist because humans are evil and not just them. It is very symbolic to human the flaws in nature.
One of the villians is Lazy the Clown.
This is how Lazy the Clown is created into the story.
- 0 Comments
Sep 28, 2009 -
In this episode, "The One Where Rachel Shows She's the Worst Boss Ever" er, I mean "Paris Dilemma," Rachel first makes an organizational error after she speaks too soon to invite Brad and Taylor both to Paris, and then instead of just apologizing for her mistake and assigning someone to stay behind, she puts it to the two of them to decide. Well sort of — she expects Brad to just say he'll stay behind because he hasn't been on as long as Taylor. Then when he gets upset because Taylor makes the "test" clear, Rachel makes things even worse by not hearing Brad's legitimate claim out, and then she makes Taylor make the decision.
- 1 Comment
Sep 14, 2009 -
In honor of Reading Is Sexy's grand opening, I'm going to start off with the series that's has been holding me in a chockhold for going on 10 years now.
Nora Roberts, writing as JD Robb in her not so far distant future has captured my attention since my very good friend lend me a copy of the 1st of the series, Naked In Death. That copy started me on my 10 year journey of hunting and gathering mission to find and read every one of the books in the series.
- 18 Comments
Aug 31, 2009 -
Michael Yon
Online Magazine
Home Michael's Dispatches Precision Voting
Precision Voting
Next >
31 August 2009Helmand Province, Afghanistan
The historical Afghan elections scheduled for 20 August were days away. While the west mostly continued to vote for Afghanistan, the big question was, “Will Afghanistan vote for itself?”
The latest media wave splashed into the main voting centers in places like Kabul, Kandahar, Jalalabad, Herat and Lashkar Gah. The larger cities only account for perhaps 20% of the Afghan population. Whereas the easy and obvious stories are in the cities, a crucial and larger dimension—the other 80%—would unfold in the boonies. Most Afghans would have no chance to vote.
The election was to be run by Afghans. In theory and in practice this would be a recipe for disaster. The strategic thinkers cannot be faulted for this; after nearly eight years of war, if the west were still running the elections, the elections and government would be a failure to begin with. By comparison, the Iraqi elections on 30 January 2005 (less than two years after invasion) were run mostly by Iraqis. In the voting of October and December of that same year, Iraqis had two more runs at the ballots, which were increasingly successful. Afghanistan, however, is different. This would be only the second election in history.
There are no good choices here. Either we run the elections and the central government and in doing so undermine the same central government we are investing in, or we allow that central government to run the elections and probably watch it undermine itself. But who knows?
- 1 Comment
Aug 31, 2009 -
Michael Yon
Online Magazine
Home Michael's Dispatches Precision Voting
Precision Voting
Next >
31 August 2009Helmand Province, Afghanistan
The historical Afghan elections scheduled for 20 August were days away. While the west mostly continued to vote for Afghanistan, the big question was, “Will Afghanistan vote for itself?”
The latest media wave splashed into the main voting centers in places like Kabul, Kandahar, Jalalabad, Herat and Lashkar Gah. The larger cities only account for perhaps 20% of the Afghan population. Whereas the easy and obvious stories are in the cities, a crucial and larger dimension—the other 80%—would unfold in the boonies. Most Afghans would have no chance to vote.
The election was to be run by Afghans. In theory and in practice this would be a recipe for disaster. The strategic thinkers cannot be faulted for this; after nearly eight years of war, if the west were still running the elections, the elections and government would be a failure to begin with. By comparison, the Iraqi elections on 30 January 2005 (less than two years after invasion) were run mostly by Iraqis. In the voting of October and December of that same year, Iraqis had two more runs at the ballots, which were increasingly successful. Afghanistan, however, is different. This would be only the second election in history.
There are no good choices here. Either we run the elections and the central government and in doing so undermine the same central government we are investing in, or we allow that central government to run the elections and probably watch it undermine itself. But who knows?
- 1 Comment
Aug 31, 2009 -
Michael Yon
Online Magazine
Home Michael's Dispatches Precision Voting
Precision Voting
Next >
31 August 2009Helmand Province, Afghanistan
The historical Afghan elections scheduled for 20 August were days away. While the west mostly continued to vote for Afghanistan, the big question was, “Will Afghanistan vote for itself?”
The latest media wave splashed into the main voting centers in places like Kabul, Kandahar, Jalalabad, Herat and Lashkar Gah. The larger cities only account for perhaps 20% of the Afghan population. Whereas the easy and obvious stories are in the cities, a crucial and larger dimension—the other 80%—would unfold in the boonies. Most Afghans would have no chance to vote.
The election was to be run by Afghans. In theory and in practice this would be a recipe for disaster. The strategic thinkers cannot be faulted for this; after nearly eight years of war, if the west were still running the elections, the elections and government would be a failure to begin with. By comparison, the Iraqi elections on 30 January 2005 (less than two years after invasion) were run mostly by Iraqis. In the voting of October and December of that same year, Iraqis had two more runs at the ballots, which were increasingly successful. Afghanistan, however, is different. This would be only the second election in history.
There are no good choices here. Either we run the elections and the central government and in doing so undermine the same central government we are investing in, or we allow that central government to run the elections and probably watch it undermine itself. But who knows?
- 1 Comment
Aug 31, 2009 -
Michael Yon
Online Magazine
Home Michael's Dispatches Precision Voting
Precision Voting
Next >
31 August 2009Helmand Province, Afghanistan
The historical Afghan elections scheduled for 20 August were days away. While the west mostly continued to vote for Afghanistan, the big question was, “Will Afghanistan vote for itself?”
The latest media wave splashed into the main voting centers in places like Kabul, Kandahar, Jalalabad, Herat and Lashkar Gah. The larger cities only account for perhaps 20% of the Afghan population. Whereas the easy and obvious stories are in the cities, a crucial and larger dimension—the other 80%—would unfold in the boonies. Most Afghans would have no chance to vote.
The election was to be run by Afghans. In theory and in practice this would be a recipe for disaster. The strategic thinkers cannot be faulted for this; after nearly eight years of war, if the west were still running the elections, the elections and government would be a failure to begin with. By comparison, the Iraqi elections on 30 January 2005 (less than two years after invasion) were run mostly by Iraqis. In the voting of October and December of that same year, Iraqis had two more runs at the ballots, which were increasingly successful. Afghanistan, however, is different. This would be only the second election in history.
There are no good choices here. Either we run the elections and the central government and in doing so undermine the same central government we are investing in, or we allow that central government to run the elections and probably watch it undermine itself. But who knows?
- 3 Comments
Pepe Jeans
Lipsy
Giorgio Fedon