Can't sleep. Clowns will eat me.

An Alice Cooper classic (sort of).

F-35

The Idaho potentates involved in such matters have kicked into high gear in an effort to get the Air Force to site 1 - 3 squadrons of the new F-3 aircraft here. As I understand it (and admittedly my understanding is not deep or fully informed), an operational squadron could go to Mountain Home, and a training squadron could be put on Gowen field. One, or the other, or both. And somewhere along the line a third squadron might be sited here as well.

Well, if the training squadron goes to Gowen, it will be an Idaho Air National Guard mission. As such, it will pretty much double the number of Air Guardsmen in the state (which then will make Army and Air Guard have about the same number of personnel). Big budget increase, of course, but only for the Air Guard.

I think this would be great. The benefit would go almost exclusively to the Treasure valley, though (for the Guard mission). See, Army Guard is situated in towns all over the state, from Rexburg to Preston to Burley to Hailey to Emmett to Grangeville to Sandpoint, and lots of other towns and cities in between. Air Guard, on the other hand, is all in Boise; that's where the planes are. You really can't put military aircraft in little towns around the state; they've got to be near the runways and maintenance facilities that support them.

The current 2-star general in charge of all of the Idaho National Guard, Army and Air, is a blue-suiter, and he's got the Air Guard all jazzed up and going full speed ahead in pursuit of this new mission. Not much the Army Guard can do to help, really, plus they're focused on the upcoming deployment.

Good luck to the Air Guard in getting this mission (though if they do, I'll be glad I don't live near the airport; apparently the F-35 is one noisy aircraft).

Divine contradiction

I see that 8 of the 10 Baptists in Haiti have been released, which is certainly good news for them and their families. That does seem to be a case of good intentions gone awry.

Upon being released, they thanked God for staying with them, and for helping them get released. The basis of such a sentiment is (apparently) that they believe God is involved in and in control of their daily lives.

Praising God upon surviving an ordeal is very common. I've seen many people on TV, standing amidst the wreckage of their home having been destroyed by a tornado, or fire or mudslide or something, thanking God that they survived. The contradiction is, I never see or hear these folks blaming God for putting them through the ordeal in the first place.

Crapo's hypocrisy

From Think Progress, Sen. Crapo is exposed for voting against the stimulous bill, yet bragging about the positive effect it is having in Idaho.

Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID) Bragged About Job Creation, Environmental Clean Up Benefits Of Recovery Package. According to KIDK News, Senator Crapo gushed: “Approximately $400 million plus, maybe as much as $465 million will come to INL right here in Idaho for hundreds of new jobs and a significantly expedited clean up activity.”
[KIDK News, 2/17/09

-Senator Crapo Voted Against The Recovery Package Twice
[Record Vote 59; Record Vote 60]

-Senator Crapo Decried The Recovery Package As “Dangerous” Because “We Can’t Spend Our Way To Prosperity.”
[Idaho Mountain Express, 2/11/09]

Kill the filibuster

Back when Republicans were threatening "The Nuclear Option" to abolish the filibuster, I was really hoping they would. You recall that Republicans were hoping to get Justices Roberts and Alito confirmed, and, anticipating Democratic objections, threatened to do away with the filibuster rule.

I hoped they'd kill it because I knew one day Democrats would be back in power and Republicans would use it to stymie their agenda. So, I supported getting rid of it then, and I support it now. For several reasons.

Elections should mean something, and the minority should not be able to stop the majority from enacting its agenda. If the agenda is unpopular, well, elections come along every two years.

More importantly, I think it's unconstitutional. Not unconstitutional in the sense that it violates some provision of the Constitution, because the legislature gets to organize under their own rules, but unconstitutional in the sense that it doesn't comport with the system intended by the framers.

The framers put plenty of safeguards into our system of government to protect minority political views. The Senate by it's very existence is a protection for small states, i.e., minorities. Legislation is hard enough to get through without some additional stupid hurdle enacted by the senators. The US Senate is deeply dysfunctional, enabled by the filibuster rule. This country can't seem to fix any of its problems, and the filibuster rule is a big part of that.

Our problems are too pressing, and we are having too much competition from China, to not be able to made adjustments and pass legislation. So, I support abolishing the filibuster. Yes, some day Republicans will be back in power in the Senate. But by then perhaps we will have made some progress. And there will always be another election.

Palin's fake glasses

I've written before that I suspected that Sarah Palin's glasses are just glass, and have no real correction. I think she wears them to give herself a bit of gravitas. Our society tends to view attractive women only in the context of their looks. Most folks do not look at an attractive woman and think "I bet she's really smart." So, I can understand her wanting to be taken seriously.

Anyway, look at the image below. Notice especially in the red circle. You will see the straight and unbroken line of the earpiece on both sides of the lens, and through the lens. You'll see the same unbroken line of the side of her head on both sides of the edge of the lens. Look at anyone wearing glasses, and look through the lens. Any correction at all will cause at least some distortion when you look through them.



Even if there is some correction there, it is exceedingly small. Certainly small enough that she doesn't really need the glasses.

No big point here, just noting this.

Picture lifted from Talking Points Memo, credit wdcpix.com.

Seems like a good idea

New Mexico might be moving its bank accounts, and the money in them, to local banks and credit unions. Putting that money in local financial institutions will allow them to lend locally, and will also help them survive these tough times.

How about if the super-majority in the Idaho legislature considers something similar? That would be a more fruitful use of time then trying to keep minorities from voting. And way more fruitful than fretting over health care reform and trying to find ways to keep Idaho's uninsured, uninsured.

Wingnuttism rears its ugly head

House Majority Leader Mike Moyle has introduced a bill to require photo ID in order to vote in Idaho. Such a move is typically associated with racist efforts to keep minorities from voting, and is a favorite cause of the most far-right wingnuts around the country.

I'm especially dismayed that the House State Affairs Committee voted unanimously to introduce this bill. Unanimously. So, in addition to all the Republicans, five Democrats also voted for it, the five being: Mary Lou Shepard; Elaine Smith; Anne Pasley-Stuart; Phyllis King; and Elfreda Higgins.

Unbelievable. What I'm waiting for, and fully do not expect to see, is the reason for this measure. Specifically, what are the instances of voters defrauding poll workers that would lead to the need for this restriction on voting? Idaho Code Section 18-2302 makes it perjury and a crime to falsely state a voter's qualifications, and it and other statutes would seem sufficient to prevent voter fraud.

This looks to me to be, if not some other nefarious purpose, an effort to discourage Democratic voters.