Open thread

title=”Thread_72″ height=”56″ alt=”Thread_72″ src=”http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/files/images/thread_72.jpg” width=”100″ border=”0″

26 Comments

  1. Ben Huie
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    Beam me up Scotty:

    http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/10/05/scientists-teleport-two-different-objects/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2006%2FTECH%2Fscience%2F10%2F04%2Fteleportation.reut%2Findex.html

    Scientists teleport two different objects

  2. Ben Huie
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 8:07 am | Permalink

    Powell: ‘Staying the Course Isn’t Good Enough Because a Course Has to Have an End’In a speech at the University of Minnesota yesterday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell blasted the Bush administration’s “stay the course” policy in Iraq:

    “Only the Iraqi people can resolve this,” Powell said.

    U.S. troops have to stay in Iraq for “some time,” he said. “But there is a limit to the patience of the American people.”

    …In Iraq, “staying the course isn’t good enough because a course has to have an end,” Powell said.

    The White House is trying to distance themselves from the phrase “stay the course.” But it aptly describes a strategy that has not changed in spite of repeated failures. Moreover, President Bush and top administration officials continue to use it.

    http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/10/04/powell-staying-the-course-isnt-good-enough/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2F2006%2F10%2F04%2Fpowell-stay-the-course%2F&frame=true

  3. TRACY
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 8:15 am | Permalink

    Ben-cool news about teleport.

    I read somewhere, maybe NY Times, that the military is going to adopt a “new” strategy:ACTUALLY TRYING TO TAKE CARE OF THE POPULACE!!This is great news.The people will cooperate with whoever can give them the most immediate improved living conditions.Hope it happens, for everyone’s sake.

  4. TRACY
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Here’s the article.This is great, but should have been completed and implemented before we ever “liberated” Iraq.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/05/washington/05doctrine.html?th&emc=th

  5. Vaughn Tolle
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    True, Tracy, but to have done so would have been an admission that the “liberators” would not be greeted with flowers and kisses.

  6. TRACY
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    Now if we just had enough soldiers to accomplish this, we could win this thing!!

  7. Ben Huie
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    A large presence immediately after the invasion might have worked. There was a sort of glow when the statue came down; had we been able to provide security then (including not allowing the chaos and looting) we could have had a start. Then work quickly to reconstitute the Iraqi military and police. That would have included retaining most foot soldiers and low-level officers. Move quickly to give “law&order” an Iraqi face.

    Unfortunately, Rumsfeld refused to even consider post-invasion. The reason: Ahmed Chalabi would take care of that for us.

  8. Vaughn Tolle
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    Is there no honor any more? Sorry to change the subject, but this is just too much.

    http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2530082&page=1

  9. Steven Davis
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    Thanks, Vaughn, that was a crack up.

    Can’t you just imagine it: “Hey, I have seen your (not God-given) endowments before, I’m calling crime-stoppers right now!”

  10. Ben Huie
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    hehehe …

    And can you see “Hi, I’m the official inspector … “

  11. raptor
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 12:13 pm | Permalink

    TV news is reporting about Wichita PD’s desire to prohibit “camping” in Wichita. PD is pointing out how homeless are often targets of violent crime.

    On the flip side, a spokesman (didn’t catch his name) says Wichita needs a full time homeless shelter that will accept everyone, including drunk/high people.

    Doesn’t that sound a lot like enabling? As a long term drunk (who got sober a few 24’s ago) I firmly believe that enabling a drunk doesn’t help him/her..it just allows them to continue their destructive behavior.

    Ok…that might sound cold…but you cannot help someone who will not help themselves first.

    No, I do not have an answer to chronic homelessness…but I do know that enabling active drunks and drug addicts is not going to solve any kind of homeless problem..it will only make it much, much worse.

  12. Ben Huie
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    Somewhere in between raptor. My tendancy would be to have a shelter with ‘guards’ who are veterans, ‘recoveries’, etc. I would also like to see AA/NA meetings hosted. No coercion, attraction only. However, if a sufferer sees a fellow recovering and feeling better maybe that will help.

    I agree with you raptor – there are no easy answers.

  13. Posted October 5, 2006 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    ~~~ Please help volunteer effort to END suicide/impulsive depression :o….it is NOW possible to do so :)Please spread these~~~

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TeenAnswershttp://www.livelogcity.com/users/captainchurchhttp://www.bev.net/users/homepages/JamesSorrellhttp://jimsorrell.proboards33.comhttp://s2.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=15311http://www.americansdiscusshealth.org/node/648http://www.myspace.com/cptchurchhttp://www2.islandpacket.com/suicide_vaccinehttp://thekeeperoftheflame.blogspot.comhttp://b4.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?user=ChurchCaptain

    Thanks, Jim 8-)

  14. Vaughn Tolle
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    Food for thought:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15134247/site/newsweek/

  15. Ben Huie
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

    Good article but one BIG mistake. Eisenhower was from KANSAS; not TEXAS!

    Oct. 4, 2006 – He was a Republican president from Texas at a time of great peril for America, a moment in history when the conservative base of his party was dominated by radical thinking about how to take on the nation’s mortal enemy. It was an election year, and the GOP was making political hay by mocking Democratic weakness. Among the most radical Republican critics was one of the president’s own top cabinet officers, who called for pre-emptive war.But Dwight D. Eisenhower said no to that. In some of the most important yet little appreciated decisions ever made by any U.S. president, Ike faced down both his own advisers and his base in the early to mid-’50s and embraced the containment policies of the other party. And he did it for a simple reason: he knew they were right. His only litmus test was competence.

  16. NoJoCo
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    It depends on your definition of “from”:http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/de34.html

    Eisenhower was born in Texas, raised in KS

  17. Joe Williams
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    Anybody notice that the Dow Jones hit its all time high? And this is without the false bubble economy like it was under Clinton.

    Our economy is going great!

  18. J R
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    Our economy is going great.

    IF you already have a lot of money or IF you slavishy serve those who already have a lot of money.

    For everyone else, the economy pretty much sucks.

  19. heartlander
    Posted October 5, 2006 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    Eisenhower left Kansas at age 19 to attend West Point, and never returned. Retired among kinfolk in Pennsylvania.

    It has been said by many economists that our economy seems to be doing great because we’re going into a lot of debt, like a family that lives high on the hog by maxing out their credit cards. But the bill eventually comes due, in this case, through selling American assets, to foreign debt-holders.

    Foreign capitalists owning America, foreign low-wage laborers invading the country. Is there anything wrong with this picture?

  20. lucee
    Posted October 6, 2006 at 12:24 am | Permalink

    The people who are doing well in this economy are the ones who don’t care how they make their money. If making that extra dollar on your stocks is due to laying off thousands of workers that are trying to feed their families – then you go ahead and call this economy a good one.

    But as for me, I prefer getting a good nights sleep with a clear conscience.

  21. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted October 6, 2006 at 7:57 am | Permalink

    “But as for me, I prefer getting a good nights sleep with a clear conscience.”

    Me too lucee, but it is easier to do that when you are not on the bottom of Maslow’s scale.

    Ya need shelter and a little food in your belly and freedom from violence to have that good night’s sleep.

    And in bush’s america, ya need money for all those things. Too bad all our cash is tied up in a useless and unwinnable occupation of iraq. Or in big pharma and viagra. Or in the pork barrel congress critters love.

  22. Ken
    Posted October 6, 2006 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

    Ike Was born in Denton Texas –

  23. Ken
    Posted October 6, 2006 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

    I wonder if blogging ever really accomplishes something? I see many of the same people posting on these sites, and wonder if it ever makes a difference to anyone who can create changes. I’m pretty sure my emails to our Senators and Tanker Todd don’t change their minds. What would make our politicians sit up and take notice of our laments? How about a general labor strike?

  24. Ben Huie
    Posted October 6, 2006 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    One thing ken – my typing is not near as bad as it used to be!

  25. Posted October 30, 2006 at 1:01 am | Permalink

    sorryhttp://soma-online.wst.st[url=

    Posted November 8, 2007 at 12:05 am | Permalink

    Helloprompt centres for pregnant?[url=http://jnrbizku.t35.com/watergate-hotel/the-watergate-hotel.htmlthe watergate hotel[/URL]