Distressed Gentlefolk: March 2012

Think of the Lives Destroyed by Foxwoods Casino

How does a gambling casino end up $2 billion dollars in debt? That's what I do not understand here.

Legalized gambling is, essentially, a means by which the proprietor can print their own money. It is nothing less than a guaranteed cash cow. Except when people fail to understand that gambling is a bubble, not a constant line going upwards. The Foxwoods bubble has peaked, and now revenues are going down. Couple all of that with extremely poor decisions and heavy borrowing against future receipts, and you have no way out of the dive. As soon as the recession hit, they knew their gambling receipts were going to flatten. But they didn't stop trying to expand and they didn't stop living as if revenues were never going to fall.

Later in this piece, someone brings up the idea of being "realistic" members of our society. If you've been living off the fantasy that legalized gambling is a good idea, you are going to have to come back to reality.

Stamping Out Crime in Germany

The Germans don't much care if you are outraged by this; in fact, they have moved on. Why can't the rest of the world? Institutionalized racism makes sense when your entire country is being flooded with young people of color. The last vestiges of a Germany that was, essentially, white and decidedly against a multi-cultural outlook are dying off anyway.

If you go out in modern Germany, you do see people from, literally, every walk of life living here. You see people who are going about their business, trying to live their lives, and so you end up feeling bad for the idea that there is resistance to social justice and treating everyone the same. That should be the goal of every society--respect for individuals, treating people equally, and standing against racism should be the hallmarks of an enlightened society.

We have our own issues with this in the United States; this is why it is hard for an American to look down on the Germans who are doing this because they perceive that there is a crime problem. In point of fact, crime is almost non-existent in large parts of Germany. It is a low crime society. There are, however, severe problems in some of the major cities and this is why the police want this tool. They want to be able to deal with crime as if it is a nail, and they are the hammer, intent on hammering everything until there is no more crime. So, it's not enough to point to the fact that this is a very safe place to live. To the Germans, any crime is evidence of a problem that must be stamped out.

The problem is, no one does a better job of this stamping thing than the Germans, so you have to watch and see how far they take this.

The Fetishization of Lethal Force

Julian Sanchez wrote a post that got me thinking about a lot of things (I will confess to piling on a rather clueless Megan McArdle) that have to do with society and being justified in killing another human being.

We have an outright fetish for rectifying any slight with slaughter. We seem to have built a culture that has celebrated the revenge movie over the movie above all else. If you so much as look at me funny, you die, in other words. How awful we must seem to other cultures who would rather just cut off hands or poke out eyes or stone people and banish them for practicing witchcraft. In America, your greatest sin is usually either being fat or impoverished; God help you if you are fat and living in poverty. Now, factor in race and you have the makings of a situation where killing people takes on an entirely new set of societal problems.

I said on the comment thread that if the young African-American male who was executed in public by the Hispanic male who felt threatened by him and followed him like some latter-day Barney Fife had actually done the killing, he'd be in jail and no one would know his name. I think this is because of the fact that if you are black, you are not entitled to killing someone out of revenge in the same way someone of another race seems to be entitled to it. We have seen the racial consequences of the killing, and there are many (particularly on the Fox News website) who think that the young black man got what he had coming. Those same people would probably react in horror if he had defended himself and killed the man who was chasing him down.

The current culture feeds on being morally justified in killing someone else, provided you are the right kind of vigilante. The problem is, our laws are supporting this fetish when they should be applying justice and fairness wherever possible no matter what your race. If the law says that I can kill you because I feel threatened, then the law is wrong. I'm not justified in killing you unless I am certain you're going to try to kill me. That means, you would have to do something for me to justify this. Our various state legislatures have dispensed with that bit of common sense, and now we have to try to modify the law to account for the fact that human beings really shouldn't go on kill sprees over insults, perceived threats, and protecting property.

Sanchez rightly points out that you can defend yourself adequately without killing someone else.

Why Did They Build It?

I still can't figure out why they built it where they built it in the first place.

The Skywalk was constructed in a remote part of the Grand Canyon. People have to either fly in or drive on terrible roads to get there. And, when they do arrive, much of the promised infrastructure at the site has been either unfinished or left in a state of disrepair. Couple that with the fact that this structure extends out over the rim of the canyon and you have to ask yourself one question.

If all of the other aspects of building the Skywalk have been done by shady contractors who didn't get all of the requisite land rights squared away up front and by greedy developers, how safe could it possibly be?

Why Did They Build It?

This American Life Gets Burned By Mike Daisey

This is the understatement of the year:

The problem is, journalistic outfits don't do theater; it tends to undermine their credibility. Mike Daisey's admission undercuts his entire program. And the crux of his program was that Apple was using a company in China that was killing people in order to manufacture enough Apple devices for rich Western nations to consume.

Wow. That's all you can say. Wow.

So, This American Life [as of 11PM Europe time I couldn't access their website because it would appear to be down or overwhelmed by traffic] will now have to fall onto a mighty thick sword and try to survive the brutal criticism that will follow. Mike Daisey will continue to go on doing "theater" and I don't think he'll be welcome anywhere except for Fox News.

Shame Them

A young lady named Jada Williams wrote a fantastic essay and shamed an entire school full of weak-minded adults. What did she get for her troubles? She got kicked out of school.

There is an idea floating around out there that, if your don't get on your knees and show people fawning respect, you don't have any right to criticize them. That's nonsense.

“It seems to me that despite intellectual aspirations and the pursuit of excellence, there is still room for respect for authority. ”

What this person fails to understand is that the essay was, through and through, an intellectual exercise in speaking truth to power. Here was a young lady who, through the abilities of her mind and her education, was able to say to the people who were NOT listening to their students, “you are not reaching us and you are not doing what you were charged to do.”

She called them out. She embarrassed them. She told a bunch of weak-minded adults to grow up and start teaching. That's what people do when they are being respectful of a higher ideal.

To suggest that she should have had “respect” for them is to ignore the fact that respect appeared throughout her essay–respect for herself, for the examples that have gone before her, and respect for the idea of learning. The teachers demonstrated no respect whatsoever for truth, learning, or a young lady with the ability to shame them.

Whenever you see someone in a position of power abusing their power and wasting their potential, shame them. That’s the American way.

They Love Rush Limbaugh But They Hate Louis CK?

Aw, never mind. Louis CK has already pulled out of the event.

I would be willing to bet that you could have seen this coming a mile away, and I mean that literally, figuratively, and in the sense that seems naughtier than it should and in the royal we sort of way.

Yes. The Republican Party is now going to pivot on one foot and prove--prove!--that they do not hate sluts/women/people who think for themselves by denouncing the greatest stand-up comedian in the country right now, Louis CK, because he has been chosen to appear at the Radio and Television Correspondents Dinner.

Here's what a failure this strategy is going to be. Louis CK sails completely over their heads. He is the hottest thing there is right now. He is riding the wave, so to speak, and he is on top of his game.

Does that matter to people who are ignorant of the culture? No, of course not. They are staring at the fact that he uses bad words and talks about women. What they are missing is that he is completely and utterly skewering the fact that people who think and say those things are complete and utter selfish assholes. You see, his comedy is not just about the shocking things he says. It is about the context in which he says those things and why that context is left unspoken. He is demonstrating examples of assholery that are a window into how people see, think and feel. He is showing what our inner asshole looks like so he can get people laughing and thinking at the same time.

Here's Greta Van Susteren using up her last moment of righteous indignation before the fall of man:

Here's a blue hair on Larry Johnson's Whitey Tape Outlet:

They just don't get him, do they?

You see, the great comedians and satirists get people to see themselves in what they're saying or doing. Louis CK is fearless and honest, and he makes people see what it looks like when the things everyone thinks get said out loud in the right context. Rush Limbaugh never makes himself the joke--he's on full blast, looking to deflect the joke away from his tortured sex-tourist soul.

Given the sad state of American comedy, of course they'll succeed in driving him away. He's too brilliant for that room full of self-aggrandizing assholes anyway. In fact, that's the one room in which no one can see their inner asshole in his material because, well, they'll be staring into mirrors or empty space, waiting for the jokes to feature the only thing they really care about, which is themselves.

Particularly When You're a Private Citizen

This was a very interesting comment. President Obama asserted today that Sandra Fluke is a private citizen. That's a very important legal distinction that may signal the fact that Fluke will want to take legal action against Rush Limbaugh.

The rest of this video is pretty noteworthy. President Obama defers to Michelle Obama, and with good reason. Appearing to be "reasonable" right now is the smart political move.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Only Conservatives Are Allowed to Coordinate Their Efforts

This is the sort of thing that makes me want to tear my hair out. The Daily Caller believes it has found a massive scoop--one that is worthy of a breathless "series" of investigative reports.

You had better be sitting down, because this will blow your socks clean off and make you hold your mud inside with both cheeks. Gasp! There are elements of the SEIU and the Occupy Wall Street movement working together!

Yes. And they're doing so practically out in the open and without buying off judges, juries and lawyers beforehand. Oh, my! People with common cause are joined up and working together in America? Who'd have thunk it?

I mean, you want to shake these people and ask them why they know nothing about democracy, common sense, or activism. You want to ask them why they don't get it. That's your scoop? That an American labor union is organized and coordinating its efforts along with other groups in order to advocate on behalf of the members of those organizations?

Wow.

And here I thought that when the Koch brothers brought in a slew of ringers in order to take over the board of the Cato group that this sort of thing didn't go on in the United States. I had no idea that there were so many people coordinating their efforts in order to get their message out. I had no idea that people would maximize their resources and join together with like-minded individuals and make an effort towards insuring that their views and goals would be met in concert with others. A smart person would call this a common sense effort to stay alive and band together against the corporate money being used to destroy them (see The Daily Caller as a media outfit doing the bidding of the people who want to wipe out unions and occupy protests).

It's all simply too shocking to understand I guess. Coordinating? Communicating? Working together for a common cause? And making certain that a political viewpoint gets a message across? In America?

This post has to end now because I have fallen onto the fainting couch and I can't get up.

Astonishing. Sarcasm intended.

I have a sneaky suspicion that absolutely no laws whatsoever are being violated.

Scott Walker is a Failed Governor

This is pretty much all of Laura Conaway's brilliant post over at the Maddow Blog, and I cannot improve upon it at all. In fact, I cannot understand how it is that the Republican Party can continue to embrace this idea that balanced budgets must be achieved at all costs.

In Wisconsin, this mentality has failed. Cutting budgets, destroying public sector unions, and austerity are failed policies. Jobs are actually going in the wrong direction in Wisconsin right now; times are tough and getting tougher.

I guess it must be time to get rid of Scott Walker and hope that someone can turn things around.

Rush Limbaugh Chases Himself Into the Gutter Again

If you were expecting Rush Limbaugh to find the high ground and criticize the policy, you were mistaken. The only way he can defend the right of the organization mandated to provide contraception coverage to get out of their obligation is to use the worst form of discourse possible and attack someone who merely testified before Congress in favor of the plan. The easy thing is to go after the woman; the difficult thing is to acknowledge that she is correct. Contraception should be paid for since it is part of the overall health care costs incurred by women. It is not about morality; it is about public health.

When companies find loopholes to stop paying for coverage, they seek more loopholes and they try to find other things that they can get out of paying for. This has nothing to do with morality or what a person does (and you'd think libertarians would get this point) because it's about getting out of having to pay for a health care cost.

Anyone stupid enough to fall for this deserves to find out what it's like to see their savings and their assets wiped out by health care costs.

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles

Related articles