Monday, August 20, 2012

Barker's Newsbites: Monday, August 20, 2012


Hmm... Monday morn'... how'bout a wee bit o' Irish music?!

Enjoy, my friends... enjoy...

Posted by at

7 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314365/dreams-his-brother-lee-habeeb

You would think the media would be crawling all over a rich-man-poor-man story like this. One brother is poor and lives in Africa. The other is rich and lives in America.

One lives in a shanty in a slum in Nairobi on dollars a month. The other lives at the most exclusive address in the world — 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Sound like a fictional Hollywood screenplay, one the Left would eat up?

But it gets better. It turns out that the rich American brother made his fortune writing about his own life, and about the father from Kenya he didn’t really know. The poor African brother wrote a book about his own life, too, and about his father he didn’t know.

The rich brother is a man the world knows: President Barack Obama. The poor brother is a man the world doesn’t know — George Obama.

To make this story even richer, it turns out that the wealthy American brother has not bothered to help his poor African brother. Not a bit. Indeed, President Obama has not even bothered to get to know, let alone help, his struggling brother George. The two met briefly when they were younger, back when Barack Obama was searching for his identity and selling what he discovered to an American publisher.

At the National Prayer Breakfast this past February, President Obama gave an eloquent speech explaining why his faith informs his desire to serve the public, and why government should play a role in helping the less fortunate among us. This is what he said in front of some of the nation’s most distinguished religious leaders: “But part of that belief comes from my faith in the idea that I am my brother’s keeper and I am my sister’s keeper; that as a country, we rise and fall together.”

I guess he was talking about his metaphorical brother. He certainly wasn’t talking about his real-life half brother, George.

So why do we know so little about this brother and President Obama’s refusal to help him?

Why hasn’t the media covered the story more fully?

Can you imagine what fun they’d be having if the poor, estranged brother was Mitt Romney’s?

* THE ARTICLE CONTINUES... BUT WHAT I'M GIVING YOU HERE IS THE "MEAT."

August 20, 2012 at 9:24 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_3_otbie-british-health-care.html

* FOLKS... THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ARTICLE YOU SHOULD READ IN IT'S ENTIRETY. IT'S NOT LONG - JUST ONE PAGE - AND WHILE I'LL GIVE THE USUAL SYNOPSIS... YOU REALLY SHOULD READ IT IN ITS ENTIRETY.

In April, the British Medical Journal published “How the NHS Measures Up to Other Health Systems,” a report about two studies conducted by the New York–based Commonwealth Fund that compared the health-care systems of 14 advanced countries.

According to the report, the British were the most satisfied with their health care of all the populations surveyed; they were the most confident that in the event of illness, they would receive the best and most up-to-date treatment; and they were the least anxious that their personal finances would prevent them from receiving proper treatment.

* AH... BUT KEEP READING!

[T]he studies contained a paradox that the authors of the BMJ article failed to notice or, at any rate, to remark upon. On several measures of actual achievement, rather than subjective assessment, the NHS came out the worst of all the systems examined.

For example, it ranked worst for five-year survival rates in cervical, breast, and colon cancer.

It was also worst for 30-day mortality rates after admission to a hospital for either hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke.

On only one clinical measure was it best: the avoidance of amputation of the foot in diabetic gangrene. More than one reason for this outcome is possible, but the most likely is that foot care for diabetics — a matter of no small importance — is well arranged in Britain; the amputation rate is four times higher in the United States.

Overall, however, Britain seems to face a self-esteem problem: too much of it.

How is it that the population most confident that it will receive treatment of the highest possible standard, featuring the latest medical advances, actually has the worst survival rates in precisely those diseases that require the most up-to-date treatments?

One explanation is ignorance. ... The average Briton or Swede is unlikely to know that the five-year survival rate for colorectal cancer is 51.6% in Britain but 59.8% in Sweden (for the United States 65.5%), or that the 30-day fatality rates for myocardial infarction in those two countries are 6.3% and 2.9%, respectively (for the U.S. 5.1%.)

* FOLKS... AGAIN... I STRONGLY, STRONGLY, STRONGLY URGE YOU TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE.

August 20, 2012 at 10:05 AM
William R. Barker said...

* THREE-PARTER... (Part 1 of 3)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444184704577587483914661256.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

* BY SENATOR JIM WEBB (D-VA)

Since World War II, despite the costly flare-ups in Korea and Vietnam, the United States has proved to be the essential guarantor of stability in the Asian-Pacific region, even as the power cycle shifted from Japan to the Soviet Union and most recently to China. The benefits of our involvement are one of the great success stories of American and Asian history, providing the so-called second tier countries in the region the opportunity to grow economically and to mature politically.

As the region has grown more prosperous, the sovereignty issues have become more fierce. Over the past two years Japan and China have openly clashed in the Senkaku Islands, east of Taiwan and west of Okinawa, whose administration is internationally recognized to be under Japanese control.

Russia and South Korea have reasserted sovereignty claims against Japan in northern waters.

China and Vietnam both claim sovereignty over the Paracel Islands.

China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia all claim sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, the site of continuing confrontations between China and the Philippines.

Such disputes involve not only historical pride but also such vital matters as commercial transit, fishing rights, and potentially lucrative mineral leases in the seas that surround the thousands of miles of archipelagos. Nowhere is this growing tension clearer than in the increasingly hostile disputes in the South China Sea.

* TO BE CONTINUED...

August 20, 2012 at 10:31 AM
William R. Barker said...

* CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 3)

On June 21, China's State Council approved the establishment of a new national prefecture which it named Sansha, with its headquarters on Woody Island in the Paracel Islands. Called Yongxing by the Chinese, Woody Island has no indigenous population and no natural water supply, but it does sport a military-capable runway, a post office, a bank, a grocery store and a hospital.

The Paracels are more than 200 miles southeast of Hainan, mainland China's southernmost territory, and due east of Vietnam's central coast. Vietnam adamantly claims sovereignty over the island group, the site of a battle in 1974 when China attacked the Paracels in order to oust soldiers of the former South Vietnamese regime.

The potential conflicts stemming from the creation of this new Chinese prefecture extend well beyond the Paracels.

Over the last six weeks the Chinese have further proclaimed that the jurisdiction of Sansha includes not just the Paracel Islands but virtually the entire South China Sea, connecting a series of Chinese territorial claims under one administrative rubric.

According to China's official news agency Xinhua, the new prefecture "administers over 200 islets" and "2 million square kilometers of water." To buttress this annexation, 45 legislators have been appointed to govern the roughly 1,000 people on these islands, along with a 15-member Standing Committee, plus a mayor and a vice mayor.

These political acts have been matched by military and economic expansion.

On July 22, China's Central Military Commission announced that it would deploy a garrison of soldiers to guard the islands in the area. On July 31, it announced a new policy of "regular combat-readiness patrols" in the South China Sea. And China has now begun offering oil exploration rights in locations recognized by the international community as within Vietnam's exclusive economic zone.

For all practical purposes China has unilaterally decided to annex an area that extends eastward from the East Asian mainland as far as the Philippines, and nearly as far south as the Strait of Malacca.

China's new "prefecture" is nearly twice as large as the combined land masses of Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and the Philippines.

Its "legislators" will directly report to the central government.

American reaction has been muted.

(*NOD*) (*SIGH*)

* TO BE CONTINUED...

August 20, 2012 at 10:32 AM
William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 3 of 3)

The State Department waited until Aug. 3 before expressing official concern over China's "upgrading of its administrative level . . . and establishment of a new military garrison" in the disputed areas.

* SENATOR WEBB MEANS "HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON'S STATE DEPARTMENT..."

(*PURSED LIPS*)

* AND PERHAPS THE SENATOR "MEANT" TO ADD "UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA'S DIRECTION..."

(*SHRUG*)

The statement was carefully couched within the context of long-standing policies calling for the resolution of sovereignty issues in accordance with international law and without the use of military force.

[T]he Chinese government responded angrily, warning that State Department officials had "confounded right and wrong, and sent a seriously wrong message." The People's Daily, a quasi-official publication, accused the U.S. of "fanning the flames and provoking division, deliberately creating antagonism with China." Its overseas edition said it was time for the U.S. to "shut up."

(*PURSED LIPS*)

In truth, American vacillations have for years emboldened China.

* YEP! HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I BROUGHT UP BUSH'S COWARDESS BACK IN '01 WITH REGARD TO THE "HAINAN INCIDENT!?"

U.S. policy with respect to sovereignty issues in Asian-Pacific waters has been that we take no sides, that such matters must be settled peacefully among the parties involved.

* WHAT'S IT TELL THE WORLD THAT WE'RE REFUSING TO BACK JAPAN EVEN WHEN THERE'S TOTAL AGREEMENT THAT IT'S JAPAN WHICH IS IN THE RIGHT REGARDING THE SENKUKU ISLANDS...?!?!

China, meanwhile, has insisted that all such issues be resolved bilaterally, which means either never or only under its own terms. Due to China's growing power in the region, by taking no position Washington has by default become an enabler of China's ever more aggressive acts.

* FOLKS... THIS IS DEMOCRATIC SENATOR JAMES WEBB THROWING OUT THIS ACCUSATION...!!!

The U.S., China and all of East Asia have now reached an unavoidable moment of truth. Sovereignty disputes in which parties seek peaceful resolution are one thing; flagrant, belligerent acts are quite another. How this challenge is addressed will have implications not only for the South China Sea, but also for the stability of East Asia and for the future of U.S.-China relations.

History teaches us that when unilateral acts of aggression go unanswered, the bad news never gets better with age. Nowhere is this cycle more apparent than in the alternating power shifts in East Asia. As historian Barbara Tuchman noted in her biography of U.S. Army Gen. Joseph Stillwell, it was China's plea for U.S. and League of Nations support that went unanswered following Japan's 1931 invasion of Manchuria, a neglect that "brewed the acid of appeasement that . . . opened the decade of descent to war" in Asia and beyond.

While America's attention is distracted by the presidential campaign, all of East Asia is watching what the U.S. will do about Chinese actions in the South China Sea.

They know a test when they see one.

They are waiting to see whether America will live up to its uncomfortable but necessary role as the true guarantor of stability in East Asia, or whether the region will again be dominated by belligerence and intimidation.

August 20, 2012 at 10:32 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OIL_PRICES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-08-20-11-19-24

U.S. drivers are paying an average of $3.72 per gallon on Monday. That's the highest price ever on this date, according to auto club AAA...

* O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A!

More daily highs are likely over the next few weeks.

* O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A! O-BAM-A!

Retail gasoline prices have risen nearly 12% since July 1st... An increase in the price of ethanol, which is blended into gasoline, also contributed to the rise in pump prices.

(*SARCASTIC CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)

August 20, 2012 at 1:29 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/17404

* SIT DOWN, FOLKS... PLEASE SIT DOWN BEFORE YOU READ THIS...

(*SILENCE*)

Despite having no horses, the water and sewerage department for the city of Detroit employs a horse-shoer.

(*TWIDDLING MY THUMBS*)

(*HUMMING "WE'VE GOTTA GET OUT OF THE PLACE" TO MYSELF*)

The horse-shoer’s job description is "to shoe horses and to do general blacksmith work … and to perform related work as required."

(*PURSED LIPS*)

The description was last updated in 1967.

* FOLKS... I'M HOPING AND PRAYING THAT THIS ARTICLE IS A FRAUD. I'D RATHER LOOK STUPID FOR BEING FOOLED THAN TO HAVE IT TURN OUT THAT THIS STUFF IS ALL TRUE. STILL...

(*SHRUG*)

The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD) has a large debt, rising water prices and inefficient services — using almost twice the number of employees per gallon as other cities like Chicago.

A recent independent report about the DWSD recommends that the city trim more than 80% of the department’s workforce. The consultant who wrote the report found 257 job descriptions, including a horse-shoer.

Capitol Confidential sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the department for the salary, benefits and job description of the horseshoer position. In response to the report, John Riehl, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 207, which represents many of the DWSD employees, told the Detroit Free Press that the department needs more workers.

"They don't have enough people as it is right now," Riehl said. "They are just dreaming to think they can operate that plant with less."

[E]ven with a department so bloated that it has a horse-shoer and no horses, the local union president said it is "not possible" to eliminate positions.

Daniel Edwards, a construction contracts manager with the DWSD, said the employee was transferred from the Detroit Police Department five years ago. The police department has horses, though the DWSD horse-shoer no longer works with animals.

"DWSD has a blacksmith shop in our Central Services Facility," Edwards said. The shop "also ... repairs equipment and works with various metals and welding for the department when needed." The horse-shoer now works at the Central Services Facility.

The city pays $29,245 in salary and about $27,000 in benefits for the horse-shoer position.

August 20, 2012 at 1:51 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)