Ogre's Politics & Views
July 27, 2005
Christian Harry Potter?
This week's question for the Christian Views Symposium (brought to you by Cross Blogging) is:
Is Harry Potter a Christian Allegory and why or why not?
Each week the Christian Views Symposium asks a question and seeks answers from other bloggers. If you have writer's block or want a regular question to make you think and answer, why not head over and answer one some time? As you can see, the questions range far and wide, and you do not have to be a Christian to answer them.
But on to my answer for this week.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:04 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
A well written book, regardless of which age group it was originally intended as a marketing section, deserves to be recognized. This particular set of writings has some of profound imaginative ploys which permit the reader the opportunity to wander inside another realm of possibilities. It is fantasy with lots of details that make such an impact, not whether or not it has anything at all to do with religion or reality. I feel sorry for folks who can’t enjoy a good piece of fiction for what it is, fiction. I have heard some of my fellow Christians get all whacked out by the black arts and the occult ramifications; hey guys, it’s FICTION intended to entertain!
Posted by: TF Stern at July 27, 2005 05:31 PM (dz3wA)
2
I may have to pick up some of the books and read them. I'm not one of those who reads a fantasy book and examines it for it's content, really. But the initial question was, "Is it an allegory or not" -- not making a difference if the book is drawing one towards evil or not.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 08:10 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Low Ride Er.
I head the Barry White song "Low Rider" today on the way in to work. Every time I hear it now, I think of an Easter special I saw on TV a long time ago (maybe 10 years ago?). It had rabbits and I think a rabbit in a low rider VW convertible. I've never seen the show again, and I have SEARCHED for it every year when Easter comes around.
Has anyone else ever seen this show, or did I imagine it? If you've seen it, does anyone have any clue how I can get a copy of it or view it again? Who can I write to in order to get it playing again next Easter? I don't remember a lot about it, but I do remember laughing quite a lot...
Posted by: Ogre at
10:21 AM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I thought War did "Low Rider" . . . Barry White?
Bunnies in VWs? Are you sure you are taking all your medication Ogre?
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 27, 2005 01:49 PM (6Gm0j)
2
Ogre! Try this: http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=rabbit+or+bunny+and+low+rider+vw+convertible&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3Df152914c4177482f%26clickedItemRank%3D1%26userQuery%3Drabbit%2Bor%2Bbunny%2Band%2Blow%2Brider%2Bvw%2Bconvertible%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.badmovieplanet.com%252F3btheater%252Fc%252Fclaymationeaster.html%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage%3DNSSearchboxNS8%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.badmovieplanet.com%2F3btheater%2Fc%2Fclaymationeaster.html
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 27, 2005 01:51 PM (6Gm0j)
3
Or this: http://search.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=rabbit+or+bunny+and+low+rider+vw+convertible&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3Df152914c4177482f%26clickedItemRank%3D1%26userQuery%3Drabbit%2Bor%2Bbunny%2Band%2Blow%2Brider%2Bvw%2Bconvertible%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.badmovieplanet.com%252F3btheater%252Fc%252Fclaymationeaster.html%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage%3DNSSearchboxNS8%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.badmovieplanet.com%2F3btheater%2Fc%2Fclaymationeaster.html
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 27, 2005 01:55 PM (6Gm0j)
4
That second one was supposed to be this one!
http://www.badmovieplanet.com/3btheater/c/claymationeaster.html
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 27, 2005 01:57 PM (6Gm0j)
5
That's the one -- where can I find it so I can watch it?
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 08:36 PM (L0IGK)
6
Order A Claymation Christmas (it is on there) at Amazon.com!
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 27, 2005 09:17 PM (6Gm0j)
7
It's on the claymation Christmas CD? I saw that there was such as CD listed on Amazon, but I didn't really read the details since I wasn't interested in Christmas stories. That is SO cool! Thanks, Oddy!!
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2005 05:48 AM (L0IGK)
8
yes, its on the video along with Claymation Halloween. No problem! I'm just doing my job, patrolling the blogosphere, helping those in need!
Posted by: oddybobo at July 28, 2005 09:30 AM (6Gm0j)
9
Say, you didn't already buy it for me, and watch it for me, too, did you?
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2005 09:57 AM (/k+l4)
10
I would have but I'm not that nice, come on!
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 28, 2005 10:12 AM (6Gm0j)
11
Damn you! Fine, I'll just order it myself.
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2005 10:13 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
McCrory Veto
Mayor McCrory is the mayor of Charlotte (it's a world-class city, you know). He wins every year on the Republican ticket, and I have, in the past, categorized him as...well... less than a conservative Republican, certainly. I'd say he's a moderate or RINO Republican.
However, when he gets one right, I'll be the first to say so. On Monday, he
vetoed a "cultural arts" plan. He does not use his veto power very often, and in this case the council will very likely override his veto because they only need 7 of 11 votes to override him, and the vote passed 8-3. But this was still a good move on his part.
Good job, Mr. McCrory! This stupid plan would spend $150,000,000 on "cultural arts" -- including building a building for Wachovia, a private business; move a museum that was already moved once; give more money to the incredibly, obviously racist "Afro-American Cultural Center"; and give more money to Discovery Place. And where was the money to come from? Higher taxes, of course!
Council Member Susan Burgess (D) is clearly firmly entrenched in the liberal version of reality. She actually told businesses that she was helping them by making them pay more taxes. "It is good for all our people," she said.
And communist artist Ray Overman said he would be supportive of taking money out of your pocket to build a building for his own, personal use. There's a lot of good art, and "art lovers want more." Hey "art lovers" -- use your own damn money and do whatever the heck you want! Stop taking my money for YOUR crap.
Once again, good job Mayor McCrory. If only your veto would hold up.
Posted by: Ogre at
06:14 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
If I could trust that my money was actually going towards real art, I might be o.k. with it. But the anti-American, Mary and Jesus drawn withe elephant dung crap they try to pass off as art now days...I'd rather not contribute to.
Posted by: Jay at July 27, 2005 07:52 AM (2FcUc)
2
And this money would go to a group that raises hundreds of millions from individuals every year! Why do they raise money from people and then soak the government? It's plain wrong.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 07:55 AM (/k+l4)
3
Personally I don't think art should be government supported in any way. And since I'm obviously not an art lover, I definately don't want to assist in paying for it.
Posted by: Contagion at July 27, 2005 08:57 AM (Q5WxB)
4
I agree.
But the left in this country is quite vehemently opposed to both you and I.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 09:56 AM (/k+l4)
5
McCrory being a Republican is like Zell Miller being a true Democrat. I can't beleive that he actually wins primaries still. Why don't you run Mayor Ogre? My parents still live there, and they are getting swamped by taxes on everything under the sun.
Posted by: Michael R. Churchill at July 27, 2005 11:41 AM (eqaaP)
6
Too many Democrats and people wanting handouts in the city for me. WAY too many. Even those who claim to be Republicans in Charlotte support higher taxes and more government spending -- as you will see when this veto is overriden.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 12:57 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 26, 2005
Brother Against Brother
Kit Jarrell of Euphoric Reality has started posting a rather contentious series titled, "Brother Against Brother. The page is a bit slow to load, but it is well worth the wait.
The story is
A seven-part series about jealousy, truth, and honor between men who fought in a place called Vietnam.
The "story" is quite extensively researched and is actually facts about a small group of men in Vietnam. According to Kit:
This story is just that – a quest for the truth. We were asked to uncover what we thought was a case of fakery, horrific deeds and falsely claimed honor. In our own research, we ended up finding more than we bargained for. As the layers of the story were peeled away, we found a group of men that are not perfect; who made mistakes and paid for them. We found men who fought in a war that was dirty and unconventional; who did what they had to do in situations that most of us cannot even fathom. We found boys who went to the other side of the world and came home as old men before they were even old enough to drink. But we also found men who were honorable; who did their very best and made it home.
It's a 7-part story and
part 3 was just posted today. It's quite a long read, but very, very interesting so far.
Posted by: Ogre at
06:35 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Thanks for the heads up. Sounds very interesting.
Posted by: Debris Trail at July 26, 2005 07:30 PM (Y1ykG)
2
It is VERY interesting -- well worth the read!
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 07:40 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
It's Hot
The last few days I've been working on some landscaping in the yard. I've got pictures, and as soon as I organize them, I'll post some. Unfortunately, I didn't take them until after I started, so you won't get the full effect of "before and after."
Today I'll be outside from about 3-5pm moving some more rocks and shoveling dirt. According to the weather channel:
CONTINUED HUMID CONDITIONS WILL COMBINE WITH THE HOT TEMPERATURES TO RESULT IN AFTERNOON HEAT INDEX VALUES BETWEEN 105 AND 110 DEGREES.
THE COMBINATION OF HEAT AND HUMIDITY WILL CREATE A SITUATION IN WHICH HEAT EXHAUSTION AND HEAT STROKE ARE POSSIBLE. BE SURE TO DRINK PLENTY OF FLUIDS. IF YOU HAVE TO WORK OUTSIDE BETWEEN NOON AND 6 PM...TAKE FREQUENT BREAKS IN AN AIR CONDITIONED BUILDING.
A number of my neighbors (usually after sunset) have come by and seem to think I'm a loony, and they don't even know my (correct) political views. However, they do seem to understand the name "Ogre." However, what I want to know is why I haven't been arrested.
After all, the government has clearly determined that it is dangerous to be outside. Heck, the forecast for Tuesday is for 100 degrees, and that would put the heat index even higher. Why do they allow me to risk getting heat stroke? I could go to the hospital and cost people money. It's dangerous. Why do they allow me to continue this way? After all, we now know that it's not even my land, it's the government's.
It is clearly dangerous for me to be outside shoveling. It's not inconvenient for me to go inside and wait until sunset, is it? So why do they allow me to do it? Maybe it's just that the police haven't driven by my house yet. If you don't hear from me tomorrow, you can guess that I've been arrested. After all, it's for my own good, right?
Posted by: Ogre at
04:02 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
It hasn't been as bad as it was supposed to be up in Raleigh. My usual complaint is that it isn't necessarily the heat, but the sun frying my brain pan. Doesn't feel like that. My apartment, on the top floor, is usually a nightmare on days like this, but hasn't been to bad. Yet.
Posted by: William Teach at July 27, 2005 08:44 AM (Pzlrt)
2
It was 85 at my house...at 6am this morning. The radio weathermen are calling for 102 degrees today. The current record high for today is 97.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 08:57 AM (/k+l4)
3
We went through that heat this past weekend. I don't have an air conditioner so it was even more fun.
I don't know about being arrested, but you might need a 48 hour involuntery commitment to the psych ward of the local hospital. But there's multiple reasons for that besides doing landscaping in the hot sun.
Posted by: Contagion at July 27, 2005 09:01 AM (Q5WxB)
4
When I went inside in the air conditioning, I was shivering -- 75 degrees was absolutely freezing me after adjusting to 95+!
But hey, stop giving the local "health officials" ideas! 'ol Teach will be calling them and sending them my way -- especially if they see the 6-year old out there with me with his own shovel.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 09:58 AM (/k+l4)
5
Sorry to hear that your government is failing to protect you :-)
Posted by: Harvey at July 27, 2005 04:22 PM (ubhj8)
6
I stand corrected for today. Was 80 as I was walking out the door at 9am. Got home, and it was over 77 degrees in my apartment, which is on the top floor. Yuck!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: William Teach at July 27, 2005 08:09 PM (Pzlrt)
7
Yay, it hit 100 degrees today! And I finished the landscaping!
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 08:15 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Homespun Symposium XXIX.V
Are there decimals in the Roman Number system? I mean, certainly they had to have terms for fractions. There had to be a one-half, but was it I/II? Or did they know about decimals and they represented it as 0.V?
This is the usual spot where you might find the weekly (correct) answer to the
Homespun Blogger symposium question. However, this week,
Major Dad 1984 seems to have forgotten his weekly duty...
I'm kidding, Major Dad! Taking a peek over at his blog, his
last entry was on July 17 and was about "Operation Glamour Shot" -- about shot of the MajorBaby...those with kids can certainly understand why we may not hear from him for awhile...
But hey,
Discovery Launched! How cool is that? An awesome picture and my
first thoughts after watching it sail into space at an absolutely incredible speed are over at
The Wide Awakes.
Posted by: Ogre at
12:52 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Hey, Ogre! I still have yet to set up as a new munuvian! The site was set up for me, and I hope it's still there, but have not had the time to do it yet...and there's a little of coward in me, too. As I have often admitted, I'm an html idiot!
Posted by: DagneyT at July 26, 2005 05:53 PM (MrShs)
2
Oh, it's still there! And don't be afraid -- there's tons and tons of help over there. On the main Munuvian site there's a whole gaggle of links that show you exactly, step-by-step how to set different things up. And any question you ask on the main site usually gets answer REAL quick-like.
And, if you're interested in the turn-key model, I'm sure Pumping Pixels can help ya!
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 05:57 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Computer God
Well, was there ever any doubt?
Found at
My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
Posted by: Ogre at
09:03 AM
| Comments (19)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
You are a Supreme Computer Geek. Can you say, "Hey look at me, I'm a computer geek!"
Posted by: vw bug at July 26, 2005 11:35 AM (dkZJv)
2
You novice, you.
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 11:45 AM (/k+l4)
3
I'm half the geek you are at 48. I guess hosting your own blog on your own linux server is just getting started, and far from the definition of a geek
Posted by: Echo Zoe at July 26, 2005 12:27 PM (K+h36)
4
Indeed it is a good start, too, I might add!
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 12:55 PM (/k+l4)
5
You IT folks are scaring me! I scored way way low. I'm way OK with that... ;-)
Posted by: Bou at July 26, 2005 02:59 PM (5JHEt)
6
"Your computer geekiness is: 21
You are tech support's worst nightmare, you have no clue..."
LMFAO! I'm not THAT bad!
Posted by: Gun-Toting Liberal at July 26, 2005 05:12 PM (Er9BL)
7
Bou and GTL, that's WHY we're the IT geeks!
They actually have a business around here called "Geeks on Call." I should probably be running it...
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 05:49 PM (L0IGK)
8
You're going to be horrified, but I actually hire someone to do my big computer stuff. Yup.
Posted by: Bou at July 27, 2005 02:21 PM (5JHEt)
9
And it's not me that she hires! Thank goodness. I think my actually number score was 91 or 92. I have just been around way too long and even with kids, I have been keeping my finger in the pie just enough to understand the terminology and what's coming up.
Posted by: vw bug at July 27, 2005 09:39 PM (dkZJv)
10
Well, a 92 is pretty impressive.
And this test was clearly based on someone who's been around a bit, as there were very few current technology questions.
Geez, I feel even more like a geek for having noticed that...
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2005 05:50 AM (L0IGK)
11
um er (kickin the dirt),,,,,,,,,,,I got a 6.
OH YEAH
Posted by: Tomslick at August 01, 2005 09:59 AM (xNjHI)
12
SIX? How did you even manage to complete the quiz?
Posted by: Ogre at August 01, 2005 10:07 AM (/k+l4)
13
perseverence and my die rolling skills. Ugh
Posted by: Tomslick at August 01, 2005 02:11 PM (xNjHI)
14
Die rolling? I think you took the wrong quiz...
Posted by: Ogre at August 01, 2005 02:47 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Tax break = tax increase
This editorial in the Sun News of Myrtle Beach has it right. The editorial talks about a "tax break" that's been proposed in North Carolina. This "break" would allow home builders to be exempt from property taxes for up to 5 years for homes they build that are not occupied immediately.
Of course, if this happens, then everyone else will have to pay more taxes to make up for the builder not paying taxes. Normally, I support any reduction in taxes. However, why should only ONE group get a tax deduction? Why not just reduce taxes for everyone? Heck, if vacant houses get no taxes charged on them, I want a tax deduction for my house when I go on vacation and it's empty.
The editorial is right -- this "tax break" is just plain wrong. Then again, that's how the North Carolina government works these days -- whatever special interest group gives the most in campaign contributions to the Democrats will get the deals while the working people get to pay more taxes. This IS today's Democrat Party in North Carolina.
Posted by: Ogre at
05:01 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
As always, the Ogre with Keen eyes Wide Awake!
Posted by: Jay at July 26, 2005 09:00 AM (2FcUc)
2
Thanks, Jay -- I'm just trying to get the news out that doesn't seem to make the press. I don't know if many people from North Carolina read this stuff, but if just a few do and see what's really going on, I'm happy.
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 09:01 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 25, 2005
Carnival, carnival!
Well, this past week I was busy plotting to take over the world planning some landscaping, so I forgot to put in my entries for the various carnivals of the week. Ah well, there goes my ecosystem ranking, right?
Anyway, I'd still like to point out a few carnivals for you this evening:
The Tarheel Tavern is again excellent. If you've never read this carnival, take a peek -- it's not just a conglomeration of posts, the hosts have really taken this one to an art form with poetry, rhyming, themes, pictures, and other fun stuff. I'm wanting to volunteer, but I don't know my version can compare with the top-notch stuff coming out of this carnival.
The
Carnival of Liberty is posted as well. This one features posts from a wide variety of points of view and directions, all with a common focus: Liberty. Take a peek.
The
New Blog Showcase is where you can go to find brand-spanking new blogs in the world. This week the showcase was to be found at
Steal The Blinds -- however, there were exactly ZERO blogs entered! If you see a new blog, either tell them about the Showcase, or submit them yourself, please!
The Showcase is currently looking for hosts, so drop me an email if you'd like to host. Otherwise, head on over and read the shiny new blogs.
Posted by: Ogre at
08:04 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Yeah, I've been participating in the carnival of liberty, but I tried to join the Liberty, property, etc. blogroll and they said I didn't fit in. Go figure, I'm too rightwing. You are in there though. Funny I find myself agreeing with you so much, but I'm too rightwing. I guess I can understand...I'm misunderstood.
Posted by: Jay at July 25, 2005 08:52 PM (BKqRl)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Elizabeth Wallenberg
Folks, we really need to change lawsuit rules in this country. I don't think most people realize how much lawsuits affect the prices you pay for everything. Many people also don't understand, or simply don't care, where the money comes from that they get in a lawsuit.
For example, if you sue the school system, you're getting money from ME and YOU in higher taxes! That's insane. Government should get out of the school system and then that won't be a problem. When you sue a company, that simply creates higher prices for everyone to pay for the lawsuit and insurance. And then you just have complete, total idiots:
Elizabeth C. Wallenberg, fool from New York City, is apparently
suing Con Ed. Why? Because she was burned when she fell off a skateboard onto a manhole cover and got burned. Apparently it's Con Ed's fault that their manhole cover gets hot when the sun shines on it. Perhaps she's be happier if she fell into an open manhole?
Hey, Miss Wallenberg, you are an idiot. And yes, I would say that to her face, were she standing here in front of me. This is completely wrong. You are costing the people of New York money because Con Ed has to pay to defend this moronic lawsuit. Everyone will have to pay higher utility fees because YOU wanted some free money because YOU fell on the ground.
We should change the rules of lawsuits -- when Miss Wallenberg loses this lawsuit, she should be required to pay all court costs, pay the lawyer's fees for Con Ed, and then be fined a punitive amount to ensure she won't cost taxpayers money for her foolishness again. That's what an evil business would have to do if they lost, wouldn't they?
Posted by: Ogre at
04:02 PM
| Comments (39)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
She is one of the many playing Judiciary Lotto, hoping for a payoff, mostly on the odds that even a small payoff before trial is better for a large corporation than the cost of any trial and lawyer fees. I'm with you, make her pay for all court costs and lawyer fees on both sides for filing a dumb law suit. Then make the judge who permitted such a travisty forfit ( I never could spell) his pay and step down to let someone with more wisdom sit in his/her place. And we wonder why the court docket is full...
Posted by: TF Stern at July 25, 2005 06:09 PM (dz3wA)
2
Well, most of these problems are brought on by money hungry lawyers, some of these guys shouldn't even be allowed in the courthouse.
Posted by: J.R. at July 25, 2005 06:09 PM (VQYgi)
3
I'm with you, TF. It almost makes me angry enough to want to go to law school and become a lawyer. In NC, until very recently, you didn't have to be a lawyer to be a judge -- and that was a good thing!
And you're on too, JR -- but if the plantiff is fined and has to pay the lawyer's fees, the lawyers won't find so many idiots to file suits.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 06:33 PM (L0IGK)
4
I was under the impression that the manhole cover was hot due to an electrical problem in the equipment that it was covering and that it could have killed somebody, nevermind severely burning her...
Posted by: Flannel Avenger at July 25, 2005 07:54 PM (kKZTW)
5
That's not in any reports I've seen. I've only seen it reported that the cover was hot...and it's 90+ degrees there, so I'm quite sure a manhole cover just sitting out in the sun will surely burn you.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 08:03 PM (L0IGK)
6
looked it up, the manhole was covering steam equipment and so it was hotter than it would have been if it had just been the sun. I think that she's entitled to her medical costs.
Posted by: Flannel Avenger at July 25, 2005 08:13 PM (kKZTW)
7
This news report:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/330332p-282308c.html
says her lawsuit is based on an "excessive buildup of steam."
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 08:13 PM (L0IGK)
8
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/21/AR2005072102057.html
Posted by: Flannel Avenger at July 25, 2005 08:15 PM (kKZTW)
9
you post too fast :p
Anyway, I don't think it's as cut and dry to make a good example of a frivolous lawsuit. If she can show that the steam was in fact heating the manhole cover to a dangerous temperature then she does have a case.
Posted by: Flannel Avenger at July 25, 2005 08:16 PM (kKZTW)
10
I think we both hit "publish" at the same time there...
I'm still not convinced she's entitled to her medical costs -- but that's not what she's going for. She is suing because of "excruciating pain, disability and grotesque cosmetic disfigurement" -- nowhere is it listed that she wants medical costs. And she wants "unspecified damages" -- which means as much cash as she can get, NOT medical bills.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 08:23 PM (L0IGK)
11
Here in Canada she'd be entitled to ZIP! She get patched up in a government funded hospital... if she had the time to sit around for hours before anybody would see her. Then, if she tried to make a court case out of it, she'd likely get laughed out of court. It's interesting how our two systems differ. Our government paid healthcare sucks; but our courts are pretty tight when it comes to dealing out cash.
Both systems have their problems... there's got to be an inbetween someplace.
Posted by: Debris Trail at July 26, 2005 01:38 AM (Y1ykG)
12
It is always good to see citizens concerned with the efficiency of the legal system, because it shows a genuine interest in how that system actually functions.
According to the Fox News report, this person has "filed a lawsuit". Since the late 19th century, the New York rules of civil procedure (and after it the Federal rules) have permitted "notice pleading", which essentially means that you can file a complaint about anything you like. The courts have worked on that basis for a hundred years.
The reason why this system has not caused the cost of ConEd electricity and McDonalds hamburgers to swell beyond the means of any but the most wealthy members of American society is that (a) lawyers can be (and are) disciplined for filing trivial claims, and (b) ill-founded cases can be thrown out of court, very cheaply, for failure to state a claim (through a motion for judgement on the pleadings), or slightly less cheaply (through summary judgement after discovery).
You can read more about these and other exciting features of your nation's system for processing civil disputes in Rule 11, Rule 12 and Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (see links below). This case was filed in New York; the corresponding provisions of New York law is left as an exercise for the reader. Shouldn't take much work -- researching the law is much less stressful than reading Fox News. Most of it actually makes sense.
But I just dropped by to thank Ogre for his submission to Wit and Wisdom for a One Party State, and to congratulate him on providing the inspiration for the latest entry.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule11.htm
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule12.htm
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule56.htm
http://jassalasca.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at July 26, 2005 03:48 AM (ZkHgJ)
13
Debris, indeed, she should get nothing here. However, if it gets to a jury, there's no telling if she'll get a pile of idiots on the jury or not. Either way, it's a tremendous waste of time and money and drain on the legal system.
And yes, Jassalasca, the cases can be thrown out -- but even doing that takes up way too much time and taxpayer money, and in this case, money from everyone in the form of ConEd having to pay for lawyers to GET the case thrown out.
And thanks for the link!
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 05:48 AM (L0IGK)
14
I would guess that you have lost more in opportunity cost by churning this factlet than it will add to a ConEd customer's bill.
From the decor of your site I wouldn't take you for a communist, but a Soviet apparatchik would have felt right at home with the argument you've just made. The collective interest should trump individual troublemakers from the get-go, it's too costly to hear them out. Worked pretty good so long as their luck held out, but Chernobyl was a bit of a downer.
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at July 26, 2005 06:38 AM (jeXxM)
15
Wow. I've been called lots of nasty things over the years, but I don't think anyone has ever called me a communist (or a Soviet) before.
Then again, I guess if my idea that idiots should not be able to rule over the people and that individuals should not be allowed to force millions of other people to pay more money for their own personal stupidity; and if the communist system were instead based on freedom and the individual; then I'd be a communist.
I find your first statement interesting in that you presume to charge individuals just a small amount and that any fines that are required would only add a little to the customer's bill -- as if you have the sole right to determine how much each person should pay, and you know how much is a little for every person. It tells volumes of your position on the individual, freedom, and capitalism when you make such statements. I'll be waiting patiently for your next argument that it's "for the children."
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 06:55 AM (/k+l4)
16
Anytime you give people rights, some people will try to abuse them. It's the nature of the beast. So if you're going to give people rights, you need to have some way of sorting out the real claims from the garbage. That's what legal process is used for -- even in the military.
It does cost money. If everyone followed the spirit and the letter of the rules, the costs would be zero, but they never are. That's why we have managers (and Dilbert). That's why we have IRS audits (and accountants). That's why we have police (and Internal Affairs). Enforcement overheads are part of the cost of doing business, and every enterprise that wants to survive factors those costs into its budget. Anyone who doesn't is living in fantasy land, because you just can't will away the possibility of dishonesty. People sometimes cheat, that's the way they are.
If you don't believe me, ask Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh because they know better than either of us.
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at July 26, 2005 08:18 AM (jeXxM)
17
And I completely agree with you. The place we seem to disagree, and correct me if I'm wrong, is in that WHO should pay. I think the person who causes the additional expenditure, especially when that cost falls upon taxpayers, should pay the additional money.
In other words, in a case where a person brings a frivolous lawsuit, they should be forced to pay the cost of the lawsuit, not the company being sued.
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 08:58 AM (/k+l4)
18
“Tillinghast-Towers Perrin, an independent consulting firm, reports that in 2002, the total costs from tort litigation jumped by 13 percent to $233 billion. That's an astonishing 2.23 percent of our entire Gross National Product, and these costs are passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices for goods and services. According to the Department of Treasury, this "tort tax" works out to $809 for every individual and more than $3,200 for a family of four, every year,”
I am with you comrade Ogre (nudge nudge).
Too many people manipulate the system and the biggest reason is, they have nothing to lose. I read we are the only country that does not have a loser pays scenario or no deterrent for frivolous lawsuits.
And since our Congress has no ties to trial lawyers, I am certain a "loser pays" legislation would pass unanimously.
Posted by: tomslick at July 26, 2005 09:34 AM (xNjHI)
19
Thanks for the really, really disgusting numbers, Tomslick! Certainly, "loser pays" legislation would reduce costs of doing business and costs of goods across the board. And you're right, I'm sure such legislation would fly through the Congress...sigh.
I can't count how many times I see people just playing the lawsuit lottery, hoping to get rich off other people's backs, without working. It's disgusting and the people who do it should be called out for the lazy, good-for-nothing bums they are.
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 09:58 AM (/k+l4)
20
She is one of the reasons so many people hate lawyers. That a lawyer would take this case is pathetic. Hell, next you will see warnings on manhole covers that say "caution, sun heats metal." Assinine. I would smack anyone coming into my office with this type of complaint. Too bad she didn't break her neck when falling off that skateboard. Arghhh!
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 26, 2005 10:44 AM (6Gm0j)
21
But, Oddy, it's apparently not her fault the manhole cover wasn't made of soft foam. Next she'll sue the city for running steam pipes underground!
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 11:01 AM (/k+l4)
22
@Ogre: I'm going to lose my temper slightly and suggest that you read things. Read the full account of the case, linked by Flannel Avenger above. Then read Rule 11 of the FRCP that I've linked above. Then read this case:
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/90-256.ZS.html
It's a Supreme Court case affirming the assessment of one million dollars in legal against a party, for wasting the court's time.
As it happens, the case raised in your post isn't a frivolous case, but if it was, the judge would have perfect freedom to do exactly what you are suggesting. There is no point getting into a lather about this one.
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at July 26, 2005 04:31 PM (jeXxM)
23
@tomslick: Tillinghast-Towers Perrin works for the insurance industry, which oddly enough is reporting record profits lately.
The report you cite lumps everything the insurance industry spends on settling claims under the heading "litigation costs". Including the vast majority of cases that never involve a lawyer. It also uses figures provided by the insurance industry without questioning them. It's exactly the kind of dishonest reporting that would get a lawyer sanctioned under Rule 11.
If you "read we are the only country that does not have a loser pays scenario or no deterrent for frivolous lawsuits," then your reading material is lying to you. As noted above, US courts do have tools for deterring frivolous lawsuits. The loser pays principle -- what a high-ranking conservative barrister once described to me as "trial by ambush" -- is not the rule in the United States of America, but your country is not alone in that. You could mount an argument for introducing it, but the country that does (England) suspends it in cases involving people with limited means. England also has a robust legal aid system, which the United States of America lacks. Introducing the former without the latter would take you right back to Chernobyl.
If you're going to be the permanent party of power, you could do well to broaden your reading list.
http://www.employerhealth_why_is_this_site_blocked_pray_tell.com/EHR_sample_pages/sp2277.htm
http://www.atlanet.org/pressroom/sreports/TillinghastResponse.asp
http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at July 26, 2005 05:43 PM (jeXxM)
24
I'm not saying it's not possible that loser pays, it's just very, very, very, very unlikely and almost unheard of. In fact, on a case where I served as a juror, we, the jury WANTED to make the loser pay for the defendant's fees, we wanted to fine the plaintiff who was clearly full of crap. The JUDGE refused to let us. He simply told us that we could not do that.
So while it is POSSIBLE, it is very, very unlikely and certainly not the standard. I want it to be the standard, not the occasional exception.
I'd also hesitate to say that America has a weak legal aid system -- that's all we need is yet another damn government program wasting even more of the money that I earn.
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 05:54 PM (L0IGK)
25
Yes, fee shifting is a question for the judge. It pains me to say it, but juries are too unpredictable to be given that power -- as you know, they can be swayed by all sorts of sob stories, and lawyers are masters of deception. If the case you sat on involved a significant amount of money, the lawyers on both sides would have known more about your fellow jurors than you could possibly have learned about them during the term of the case. In England, there is no jury at all in civil actions (except for defamation cases).
"Loser pays" does not describe exactly how the English system works. Defendant can make a firm offer at any time before the trial begins. Plaintiff can choose to accept the offer or press on. If plaintiff carries the case to trial and recovers less than the payment in, the judge may shift defendant's fees to the plaintiff. Otherwise the fees may shift the other way. This arrangement saves court time by encouraging the parties to settle outside of court. It punishes weak parties. It does not punish weak claims.
One big reason for not applying this treatment to legal aid cases (i.e. lawsuits filed by people who are not rich) is that it would do exactly nothing to discourage them from filing strike suits anyway. Economic sanctions don't work against people who don't have anything that you can take away from them. Legal aid (in which the lawyer does not collect a fat fee for winning the case) does a better job of sorting the wheat from the chaff in this category of cases than the payment-in rule would do.
As for not trusting government with your hard earned money, what can I say. Judging from the catastrophic performance of the current administration, I think I know exactly how you feel.
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at July 26, 2005 09:10 PM (ZkHgJ)
26
Except for that bit where the lawyers work for free, the system you describe isn't too bad. However, as you know, here in America, the people are completely trusted to do what's right. Juries HAVE the absolute power to determine damages and fines, even over the judge's opinion. However, many judges do not like that, and most people do not know enough to challenge it. We are, for all practical purposes, an oligarchy today, no matter what the actual laws dictate.
I'm also sorry that you are so filled with hate for President George Bush.
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 06:02 AM (L0IGK)
27
JJ - I couldn't open all the links for some reason, but I did get into the trial lawyer site. Not a big surprise there. 2 sides to every story for sure. What makes me shake my head in disbelief are things,,,,,
Like this
In September 1988, two Akron, Ohio-based carpet layers named Gordon Falker and Gregory Roach were severely burned when a three and a half gallon container of carpet adhesive ignited when the hot water heater it was sitting next to kicked on. Both men felt the warning label on the back of the can was insufficient. Words like “flammable” and “keep away from heat” didn’t prepare them for the explosion. They filed suit against the adhesive manufacturers, Para-Chem. A jury obviously agreed since the men were awarded $8 million for their troubles.
Or this
In 1992, 23-year old Karen Norman accidentally backed her car into GalvestonBay after a night of drinking. Norman couldn’t operate her seat belt and drowned. Her passenger managed to disengage herself and make it to shore. Norman’s parents sued Honda for making a seat belt their drunken daughter (her blood alcohol level was .17 – nearly twice the legal limit) couldn’t open underwater. A jury found Honda seventy-five percent responsible for Karen’s death and awarded the Norman family $65 million. An appeals court threw out the case.
This
In 1997, Larry Harris of Illinois broke into a bar owned by Jessie Ingram. Ingram, the victim of several break-ins, had recently set a trap around his windows to deter potential burglars. Harris, 37, who was under the influence of both alcohol and drugs, must have missed the warning sign prominently displayed in the window. He set off the trap as he entered the window, electrocuting himself. The police refused to file murder charges. Harris’s family saw it differently, however, and filed a civil suit against Ingram. A jury originally awarded the Harris family $150,000. Later, the award was reduced to $75,000 when it was decided Harris should share at least half of the blame.
lol and this
In 1991, Richard Harris sued Anheiser-Busch for $10,000 for false advertising. Harris (no relation to the above-mentioned burglar) claimed to suffer from emotional distress in addition to mental and physical injury. Why? Because when he drank beer, he didn’t have any luck with the ladies, as promised in the TV ads. Harris also didn’t like that he got sick sometimes after he drank. The case was thrown out of court.
In 2003, Richard Schick sued his former employer, the Illinois Department of Public Aid. Schick sought $5 million plus $166,700 in back pay for sexual and disability discrimination. In fact, Shick was so stressed by this discrimination that he robbed a convenience store with a shotgun. A jury felt his pain and awarded him the money he was seeking. The decision was then reversed. Unfortunately, the $303,830 he was still awarded isn’t doing him much good during the ten years he’s serving for armed robbery.
Not to mention this
In 1995, Robert Lee Brock, a Virginia prison inmate, decided to take a new approach to the legal system. After filing a number of unsuccessful lawsuits against the prison system, Brock sued himself. He claimed his civil rights and religious beliefs were violated when he allowed himself to get drunk. After all, it was inebriation that created his cycle of committing crimes and being incarcerated. He demanded $5 million from himself. However, since he didn’t earn an income behind bars, he felt the state should pay. Needless to say, the case was thrown out.
And this lucky pain endurer
In 1996, Florida physical therapist Paul Shimkonis sued his local nudie bar claiming whiplash from a lap dancer’s large breasts. Shimkonis felt he suffered physical harm and mental anguish from the breasts, which he claimed felt like “cement blocks” hitting him. Shimkonis sought justice in the amount of $15,000, which was denied
Take a look at some warning labels such as
product may cause drowsiness on sleeping pills.
Do not use while wearing clothes on irons.
Are these necessary?
Maybe if a fly lands on my head, I will try to kill it using a hammer. I could get a good buck off of Stanley for that.
It has gotten to the point where the juducial system is a free for all. Some people will sue for anything. How many times do insurance companies pay because it would cost them more in legal fees than to fight the lawsuit? I am not saying that companies should not be accountable for what they produce, but consumers with no common sense should not ride the gravy train for doing stupid things.
Posted by: tomslick at July 28, 2005 10:34 AM (xNjHI)
28
Good examples, TomSlick. Indeed, our current civil "justice" system has turned into nothing more than a lottery.
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2005 10:46 AM (/k+l4)
29
Loser Pays
America differs from all other Western democracies (indeed, from virtually all nations of any sort) in its refusal to recognize the principle that the losing side in litigation should contribute toward "making whole" its prevailing opponent. It's long past time this country joined the world in adopting that principle; unfortunately, any steps toward doing so must contend with deeply entrenched resistance from the organized bar, which likes the system the way it is. . . . Continue reading...
http://www.pointoflaw.com/loserpays/
More damn lies I guess. Help me out here JJ
I tried searching for frivolous lawsuits in Europe, Canada, Germany, France, international, etc, but all I came up with was the lawsuit against Donald Rumsfield.
I then tried frivolous lawsuits in the US and only got 302,000 hits.
Great topic as usual Ogre, I am learning things.
I have learned we have more lawyers in California than there are in Europe for one.
And also remember, we will accept no money, unless we win some for you.
Posted by: tomslick at July 28, 2005 01:38 PM (xNjHI)
30
That reminds me of an old joke, Tomslick. I'm not sure if I'll be prosecuted for a hate crime, but I'm not in New Jersey, so this might still be legal:
What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A good start.
(Sorry Oddybobo)
Posted by: Ogre at July 28, 2005 07:56 PM (L0IGK)
31
I howled when I read this one.
Sorry Oddy in advance
So the lawyer is cross-examining the doctor about whether or not he had checked the pulse of the deceased before he signed the death certificate. "No," the doctor said, "I did not check his pulse." "And did you listen for a heartbeat?" said the lawyer. "No, I did not," said the doctor. "So," said the lawyer, "when you signed the death certificate, you had not taken steps to make sure he was dead." The doctor said, "Well, let me put it this way. The man's brain was in a jar on my desk, but for all I know he could be out practicing law somewhere."
Posted by: tomslick at July 29, 2005 10:46 AM (xNjHI)
32
ROFL!
Oh, we're hoping Oddy is having a good day when she reads this...
Posted by: Ogre at July 29, 2005 11:08 AM (/k+l4)
33
The key, as stated above, is 'notice pleading'. Ms. Wallenberg, by her attorney, is permitted to aver, as generally as she likes, what she thinks is a cause of action, most likely for negligence -- be it the allegedly-negligent design of the manhole cover in retaining heat from the shining sun, or whatever allegedly-negligent buildup of heat may have resulted from the underground steam. The costs have already begun to incur, from the time of the filing the lawsuit, when Con Ed defends itself in litigation. Once a judge is assigned, in the course of 'discovery', all of the 'facts' of the case will begin to emerge. The bulk of the costs will aggregate when both sides engage in heavy research to produce some quantum of proof of the cause of Ms. Wallenberg's injury. Gathering NYC codes, regulations, permits, Con Ed practices, prior lawsuits, safety memoranda, expert engineers, witnesses, medical experts, and other documentary evidence, etc.etc. does NOT come cheap! To me, that's where Ms. Wallenberg should be required to pay for burdening the courts and society for what could most likely turn out to be a grandiose waste of time, resources and money, in an attempt prove what could be a fabricated, frivolous, baseless claim. Thank you very much.
Posted by: Binkley at August 03, 2005 12:53 AM (94Pt6)
34
You are certainly right there, Binkley. From what I've seen in the legal system, sometimes the lawyer actually picks up those costs, because they think they will be recovered, but other times the plaintiff has to pay them in advance, to be reimbursed if and when they win. Either way, Con Ed has to pay for their defense. I agree that if you sue someone and you lose, you should be liable for their costs there.
Posted by: Ogre at August 03, 2005 05:57 AM (L0IGK)
35
Me again, popping back in to grab the link. While I'm at it ...
Oh, why bother. I could point out to tomslick that, before reaching for Google, he should note that they speak OTHER LANGUAGES in most of these countries. I could also drop a hint th since the phoney conservatism industry hasn't gotten a foothold in most of them, they don't spend so much of their time on hysterical whining. I could, in between gusts of laughter, indicate that if juries were put in control of, er, everything in litigation (thanks for that one, Ogre), litigation costs would rise to a point where even ConEd couldn't afford to use the legal system. But you're not listening, so I won't bother.
I will say, though, that as a tort case, this claim will be litigated in a state court. Don't you think it's up to the people of New York to decide what sort of procedural rules should govern litigation in THEIR state? Or is this suddenly an exception to the whole States' Rights thing? Top-down, federally mandated rules for, oh, everything, are GOOD, so long as they work to the advantage of an insurance or an energy company?
A laugh a minute, guys. Thanks for the bundle of contradictions. I'll be on my way again, now ...
Posted by: Jassalasca Jape at August 11, 2005 05:17 PM (jeXxM)
36
Uh, thanks for dropping by, I think...
I'm not sure anyone knows what the "phoney conservatism industry" is...or what state vs. federal has to do with this, but, glad to provide entertainment, that is one of my goals!
Posted by: Ogre at August 11, 2005 05:43 PM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Congratulations, Mr. Armstrong!
In case you're living under a rock, perhaps you don't know that Lance Armstrong won another Tour de France. When I told someone this yesterday, the response was, "Really? Well that's no surprise."
Have you ever tried to win this race? It's no simple matter. The idea that one person could be the absolute best cyclist in the world for seven years in a row is incredible to me. I'm not the best in the world at ANYTHING, much less able to do it year after year while younger people are trying to beat you.
Lance Armstrong, congratulations on an awesome win!
Posted by: Ogre at
01:03 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Congrats to Lance. One could make a fair argument that he is the best athlete in the documented history of the world. What he has accomplished is nothing short of historic, amazing, and almost unbelievable.
Posted by: Gun-Toting Liberal at July 25, 2005 03:21 PM (Er9BL)
2
I think it would be a tough argument that he's not the greatest athlete ever.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 06:02 PM (L0IGK)
3
Wow, look at those muscles.
Posted by: Sissy at July 25, 2005 11:00 PM (uXS+O)
4
I'm with Sissy. I could never to get my calves to look like that. Sheesh.
Posted by: Bou at July 25, 2005 11:41 PM (5JHEt)
5
Stop that, Sissy!
And Bou, if you had muscles that looked like that, well, they just wouldn't look right on you... especially the lats...
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 05:34 AM (L0IGK)
6
lmao that's so funny, my first thought was WOW look at those calves!
Posted by: Erin Monahan at July 26, 2005 10:33 PM (0Ea9a)
7
I thought they were kinda skinny myself...
Posted by: Ogre at July 27, 2005 06:03 AM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Unions & Democrats
Interesting. It seems that a number of groups that were members of the AFL-CIO union conglomerate are leaving the AFL-CIO because they're not happy with the management of the union and not happy with the declining union members.
It is what it is, and it's a free country, so people should be able to associate with whomever they want to associate. I think the time for unions is past in this country and that they currently do more harm than good -- and it appears the vast majority of people in the United States agree, as less than 8% of all private workers belong to unions.
However, what's even more interesting is a quote near the end of the
news story:
A divided labor movement worries Democratic leaders who rely on the AFL-CIO's money and manpower on Election Day.
"Anything that sidetracks us from our goals ... is not healthy," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., chairman of the House campaign committee.
So in case you were wondering whether or not there was any connection between unions and Democrats, there you have it. Unions are Democrat. Now why aren't they treated like any other advocacy group? Why are union members forced to contribute to Democrat political campaigns? That's just wrong.
Posted by: Ogre at
10:04 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
They aren't treated like an advocacy group because they don't advocate. They use force, intimidation and other nefarious means in order to get their membership to vote Dem. and support Dems. My dad was a Teamster till he was blackballed for refusing to pay that portion of dues that goes directly to the DNC.
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 25, 2005 10:49 AM (6Gm0j)
2
But they always claim they are non-partisan! And the press NEVER reports "The AFL-CIO, a left-wing liberal group," like they do for the "far right-wing conservative" think tanks...
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 11:18 AM (/k+l4)
3
Unions are most definatly Democratic. Every election time they send out flyers telling the members whom to vote for, always democrats.
But members can get the amount of their money back that goes to campaigns. They just have to fill out a form and hand it in.
Posted by: Machelle at July 25, 2005 01:41 PM (ZAyoW)
4
I guess it really bothers me so much that the unions claim they are NOT Democrat, AND that they are more concerned with electing Democrats than actually looking out for their own workers.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 02:40 PM (L0IGK)
5
That's the part that always bothered me. Who is looking out for the worker if the Union is busy ass-kissing dems?
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 25, 2005 02:50 PM (6Gm0j)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
City Slips, Truth Leaks Out
Oops. It seems that a couple cities in North Carolina have let the truth slip out regarding the so-called "red light cameras." A recent court decision pointed out that cities and towns across the state were breaking the clear dictates of the State Constitution, and they were directed to stop doing so. At issue were the various millions of dollars collected in fines across the state.
Various cities and counties were using the fines collected for, well, whatever they wanted to use them for -- from neighborhood grants to paying operating costs of government. However, the courts recently ruled that "clear proceeds" of fines collected are required to go to the school system, as the Constitution dictates. With the red light cameras, the vast majority of money was going to the operating agencies.
Once the cities have been told that they must follow the Constitution, the cities have very quickly suspended all use of the red light cameras. You see, in many cases, the operators of the cameras and the city were making large profits from the fines. If the city is forced to follow the Constitution, the city will not make a cash profit -- it will instead actually cost the city money to operate these cameras.
As soon as the cities realize these were not a revenue-generator, they all stopped operating the cameras. In other words, as I have been telling people from the first time these were proposed -- the city is ONLY operating these red light cameras to make money. They have absolutely nothing to do with safety and the recent actions of Charlotte, High Point, and Greensboro clearly show that fact.
Posted by: Ogre at
05:03 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
And your average citizen out there has no idea. But it sure looks clear to me, it was only for the mula.
Posted by: Jay at July 25, 2005 07:24 AM (2FcUc)
2
Actually Jay, I got out of one of those tickets by sending a 20 page affidavit to the district attorney's office, declaring the ticket uncostitutional, and I got away with it; however, it did take a lot of research to get away with it.
Great Post Ogre!
Posted by: Michael Churchill at July 25, 2005 07:33 AM (eqaaP)
3
I got out of one of those tickets, too -- I simply refused to pay. I requested a hearing -- however, they will only give you a hearing AFTER you pay the fine and admit guilt. I refused.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 07:43 AM (/k+l4)
4
Minneapolis just started with the red-light cameras now too. I don't think we have a similar clause in our state constitution though.
I will just stay out of Minneapolis as much as possible.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at July 25, 2005 10:13 AM (K+h36)
5
You can do what I did when they first started this crap -- just take your license plate off. I put it in my back window where the camera won't see it -- and it helps the window is tinted.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 10:19 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 24, 2005
New Neighbor #23
Once again, it's that weekly time to introduce a new neighbor. Each week I scan the Evangelical blogroll (over there on the left, a ways down) and try to find someone new to introduce to you, my good reader. If you're surfing around this Sunday evening, you've got one more place to visit. This week I'd like to introduce:
(Posting as
Funky Dung)
As for the name of the blog, you'll have to let him
explain it. I know some Latin, so I had at least a clue what it means -- if you don't know Latin, you're not going to have much chance of guessing it.
Next, the name. In case you were wondering, the author of the blog is not REALLY named
Funky Dung. Once again, you'll have to read his description to get that answer.
The blog has been around since April 2002 -- that's ancient in Blog time, if you ask me. It appears to be updated quite regularly, but perhaps not quite daily. He's got a
view on the recent actions in London that only briefly crossed my mind -- I wonder who else is thinking that way today. He's also got
a post up for something called "Operation Cleansweep." This is an idea to completely replace ALL current members of the PA General Assembly. I think we need that operation in North Carolina in a BAD way, too.
The site is well-organized and easy to read. There's tons of links and link buttons down the sides, some I've never seen before. And check down the right side where he provides an image to his blogrolls -- it seems quite appropriate, somehow...
So
head on over and have a read this Sunday evening.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:54 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Thanks for the plug. I'm glad you liked what you saw.
Posted by: Funky Dung at July 25, 2005 10:32 PM (6lA2O)
2
You bet! The penname had me wondering, though...
Posted by: Ogre at July 26, 2005 05:33 AM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 23, 2005
Hot Enough For Ya?
Well, it was 93 degrees (F) here today, so some of you might wonder what an Ogre does when such things happen. Why, work in the yard, landscaping, of course! I moved just short of 2 tons (4,000 pounds) of rocks. I'm building a stairway, a fountain, and moving a bunch of poorly placed bushes. Pictures will come later, I assure you.
In the meantime,
a story just happened up for me in North Carolina that will be interesting to watch. A woman is suing her gay husband's gay partner for alienation of affection -- stealing her husband away from her. You see, North Carolina still allows married people to sue when another person steals away their spouse. That's a law I support, but it will be very interesting to see how this one turns out.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:31 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Interesting story. I have to wonder if part of the case involves the concept of "My husband was straight, until this gay man seduced him." Such lawsuits can have all sorts of things to push the damages as high as possible, but it would be interesting if it succeeded with something like that.
Posted by: owlish at July 23, 2005 07:48 PM (fAJnA)
2
I'm trying to install blogads on my site, but it isn't showing up. Can you take a look at that for me? Anyway you can help me figure it out?
Posted by: Jay at July 23, 2005 07:49 PM (BKqRl)
3
North Carolina law is pretty clear here -- if a spouse can prove that someone else seduced or drew a spouse into infidelity, they ARE guilty, no matter what else happens. I've just never seen the lawsuit applied to a gay person.
Posted by: Ogre at July 23, 2005 07:53 PM (L0IGK)
4
And Jay, I'll see what I can see.
Posted by: Ogre at July 23, 2005 07:53 PM (L0IGK)
5
... and after fixing BlogAds, ya' wanna' come do yardwork @ my house? Got some trees to take down, a shed to demolish ... and eventualy a 4-6' retaining wall to build.
Come on over, I have beer. (Not Blueberry though)
/TJ
Posted by: TJ at July 23, 2005 10:34 PM (PL7dL)
6
What the snake? Jumpin' squig-walkies and toot-nerfins! Zelden fad squarner! And then you want to think what these comments be? Jemlin sad? Yes, but fedzord gonzilger...
Posted by: Snake at July 24, 2005 07:15 AM (YBdyI)
7
Hello
I think you have a real great site. I always search for this kind of information online and i am glad to have cross your site. I look forward to all the updates. I have found a great web site, go to http://ibcnews.blogspot.com
Thanks again.
Posted by: Yash at July 24, 2005 08:24 AM (693Fi)
8
Work for beer? Yup, that's me!
Thanks for stopping by Yash!
Posted by: Ogre at July 24, 2005 08:52 AM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Gas Lines Return
If you live in Hawaii, get ready for gas lines. It seems Hawaii politicians don't like the free market, so they're going with price caps on fuel. The only possible conclusion of price caps will be shortages.
It's simple economics. Let's say you make widgets. It costs you $15 to make them and you sell them for $20. For each one you sell, you earn $5. Enter government. If government declares that there is a price cap on widgets and you cannot sell them for more than $12, what do you do?
If you continue to sell them, you LOSE money on every sale. So you either stop selling them or go out of business. Gas companies will simply stop selling gas in Hawaii. So what will the politicians do then? They will have a choice -- get rid of the price cap that caused the problem, or start selling gas themselves. I wonder which they'll pick?
Posted by: Ogre at
08:02 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Oh! I know, I know! I know which one they'll pick!
Posted by: Jay at July 23, 2005 02:46 PM (BKqRl)
2
*sigh* price caps are never the way to go. The market will always settle itself even without outside interference. Don't people know that?!
Posted by: Just Mitch at July 23, 2005 04:15 PM (u28/Q)
3
Lucky that cars can't take you where you want to go on Hawaii...(like to another Island) (^_^)
But, you can always buy a diesel (Mercedes is nice) and go to the boat docks for diesel 101.
Posted by: mensaB at July 23, 2005 04:24 PM (TOHVc)
4
I can't tell anymore which politicians do not understand the free market and which ones simply despise it. Either way, the result is the same. In a way, I hope Hawaii DOES take gas and make it run by the government. Then everyone else can see how BAD such an idea really is.
Posted by: Ogre at July 23, 2005 06:50 PM (L0IGK)
5
C'mon Ogre, you know better than that!!! Yes, if the government starts selling gas it WILL be a disaster, but everyone else will NOT see how bad of an idea it is. The most liberal parts of the coutry will think it's a great idea and it will spread.
Just look at European style socialized medicine. The worse it gets, the more the left wants it here.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at July 25, 2005 10:09 AM (K+h36)
6
Well...that's why I want them to test it in Hawaii -- it would take awhile to catch on in the continental US, and it will hopefully collapse before anyone past CA tries it...I can hope, right?
Then again, it may be like Atlas Shrugs, wherein it's going to take a total collapse before freedom is actually tried again in this country.
Posted by: Ogre at July 25, 2005 10:30 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 22, 2005
Pig Fat
This is a pig:
This is a pig's ear:
Pig's ears, as I have seen them, are sold in many places in this country, usually a treats for dogs. Once again, I present a strong deterrent for terrorists and mass transit in this country:
Place a pig's ear at the entranceway to every mass transit vehicle (train, plane, bus) and force every person who wants to ride to touch the pig's ear. The twisted muslim terrorists will NOT touch it because if they die right after touching it, they will not go to their paradise.
It might not stop them completely, but it sure will slow them down!
(Linked to
Basil's Supper -- Have fun at the game!)
Posted by: Ogre at
02:02 PM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I agree, we should all go the extra mile. And it's true... a friend of mine has a wonderful, old, pet pig and has never had a problem with terrorists.
(*...*) <--- grin
Posted by: mensaB at July 22, 2005 03:29 PM (TOHVc)
2
This sort of thing is already in place. We used it to great effect during the IRA bombings. If you were Catholic, as I am, you had to spit on a picture of Our Lady before being granted entry to a bus or train. The terrorists would run off, screaming, and go blow up a pub instead.
Posted by: Sally at July 22, 2005 04:48 PM (wrm6o)
3
If the passengers started carrying these, that would help too. The terrorist would worry that a piece of blown-up pig's ear would touch them when the bomb exploded.
This might be a good grass-roots way to get something effective going, without the PC crowd being able to cry government sponsorship of intolerant behavior (or whatever BS they would come up with). If Mr. Muslim doesn't blow us all up, he has nothing to worry about.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at July 22, 2005 05:10 PM (K+h36)
4
I wonder if I could start a charity -- giving out free pig's ears to travelers near mass transit stations...
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 05:27 PM (L0IGK)
5
Wait, blow up a pub? Those bastards.
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 05:34 PM (L0IGK)
6
You are too much Ogre! Really, very brilliant. But then they'll start recruiting, er, infidel pig-farmers? (I can't name any other ethnic or stereotyped USA group, such as XXXXX or XXXXXX, or especially Southern XXXXX XXXXXX, lest I offend anyone).
(whoops)
Posted by: The MaryHunter at July 22, 2005 07:38 PM (SRaIZ)
7
Now for sale:
Ogre Brand Pig's Ears: Guaranteed to fend off mulsim terrorists bastards quicker than underwear on their head.
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 07:45 PM (L0IGK)
Posted by: vw bug at July 22, 2005 08:15 PM (i7MTM)
9
It's cheap, I'll buy more.
That could be a good side effect.
Ogre's Pig Fat -- protects against terrorists on your way to work, feeds the hungry on the way home.
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 09:23 PM (L0IGK)
10
Will carrying a jar of pickeled pigs feet work too? People can snack at the same time. Well, some people. I don't actually like pickeled pig's feet...
Posted by: Bou at July 22, 2005 09:51 PM (5JHEt)
11
You know, I'm not sure how pickling something affects the muslim terrorist religion...
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 10:00 PM (L0IGK)
12
Lets make all the seats in planes, trains, buses and other public transportation out of pig leather, too.
Posted by: Seg at July 23, 2005 12:45 AM (uMX+e)
13
Another excellent idea! I wonder if they would not sit on pig leather seats!
Posted by: Ogre at July 23, 2005 08:41 AM (L0IGK)
14
A perfect prison for Islamic terrorists, no barbed wire or walls, just surrounded by bags of pork rinds.Let's issue stale, (pork) hot dogs to all of our troops, instead of grenades first, just chuck a hot dog at any Islamifascist for effect. Or better yet like in Air America, air drop pigs. Drop them on all Islamifascist hideouts first prior to troops.
Posted by: Steve Anderson at August 30, 2005 01:48 AM (NsHyJ)
15
I can see the "torture" cells now -- a pig sty!
Posted by: Ogre at August 30, 2005 05:43 AM (L0IGK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Jack Lewis Survey
Jack Lewis has a survey up, where he is trying to determine why people blog and where he wants to analyze the habits of various types of bloggers. Head on over and take the quiz, it only takes a few minutes.
HT to
Basil.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:06 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
The NC Senate did something right?
I had to check that a few times before I actually realized they did something right. That's one in a row for them. The Senate finally (after way too long debates and delays) passed a law to prosecute child molesters -- more specifically, internet molesters.
Previously, if a person were caught by an undercover agent posing as a youngster, the pervert couldn't be charged because the agent wasn't actually a youngster. This law finally makes it a felony for a monster to solicit or attempt to solicit sex from a person they believe is under 16 over the internet.
Now if they would just stop spending money on social services and hire some more investigators for the woefully understaffed state bureau of investigation, they could hang some of these monsters.
Posted by: Ogre at
05:08 AM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Posted by: Jay at July 22, 2005 07:26 AM (2FcUc)
Posted by: vw bug at July 22, 2005 07:35 AM (i7MTM)
3
I report on what the NC Legislature does -- good or bad. It's just that the VAST majority of the time, the things they do are bad.
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 08:56 AM (/k+l4)
4
Well, see now? They can't be all that bad . . . What am I saying? Must be the Friday talking.
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 22, 2005 08:57 AM (6Gm0j)
5
Well hot damn. Do they have a lot of people investigating this problem in NC?
Posted by: Contagion at July 22, 2005 09:00 AM (Q5WxB)
6
Unfortunately, no. The group that investigates these crimes is very, very small. They are very understaffed, but we've got to spend tens of millions of dollars on slush funds and personal bribe funds, rather than funding crime-fighting. You see, the attitude of those in power in NC is that if they don't talk about crime, no one will know that crime exists.
In order to increase spending for crime fighting, they'd have to admit there's a crime problem, and they're not willing to admit that.
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 10:05 AM (/k+l4)
7
I think they can already prosecute in FL. I need to look into that.
Now... I'll take it a step further... and say... that if one of these monsters acts on it and are proven guilty, I believe in instant firing squad. No such thing as a life sentence or any jail time. Instant extermination.
Posted by: Bou at July 22, 2005 11:20 AM (5JHEt)
8
You might check it -- in North Carolina, before this law was passed, if a scum made an agreement to meet a 13-year old, but that 13-year old was actually a SBI agent, the scum couldn't be prosecuted simply because it wasn't actually a 13-year old he made the agreement with. After this law, when the scum says, "You're 13, let's meet," it doesn't really matter how old the person really is.
But yes, convictions for this one should be done away with quickly -- I just saw a show on the History channel about an automated firing squad -- rifles sitting inside a shed that fired from a spring and not with people pulling the triggers. It was used just once.
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 11:24 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 21, 2005
Mass Transit Terrorist Solution
By this evening, everyone I'm sure is aware of the additional attacks on London. Once again, mass transit is the target as the terrorists go for the easiest targets to obtain and where the largest potential damage (when measured in loss of life) can be found. I've got a simple solution to drastically slow the pedophilic muslim terrorists.
First, let me point out that Atlas Shrugged has an excellent
reprint of some
excellent ideas for fighting terrorism from
Jihad Watch.
In addition to those excellent ideas, here's a very simple one that will certainly reduce Muslim terrorist attacks on mass transit -- and I'm serious, this is not your usual flippant remark.
Make everyone who enters a mass transit vehicle (bus, train, airport, etc.) touch a piece of dried pig fat. Really! It wouldn't be much of an inconvenience for regular, normal people, especially if it were dried -- nothing would get on you or affect you in any way. However, those Muslim terrorists who are literally dying to go to heaven and have their virgins wouldn't DARE touch the thing, because their religion says that they won't go to heaven if they touch something unclean!
Seriously! What's wrong with this plan? "Welcome to bus #125, fare is $1.10, please touch the pig fat there." Heck, if people are paranoid about germs, we could put some germ-X hand waterless hand sanitizer on the buses and trains, too. That would help normal people, while the Islamic terrorists would never enter.
Folks, I am not kidding about this. It would be very cheap and very effective. You don't touch the pig fat, you don't get on the bus.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:01 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Awesome blog, I like your style! :-)
Posted by: ariadneK at July 21, 2005 10:41 PM (dhpu7)
2
Thank you for stopping by, ariadneK!
Posted by: Ogre at July 22, 2005 05:50 AM (L0IGK)
3
Hmmmm...sounds like you really thought this one through Ogre. I can see it now! LOL! how bout dried Llama guts?
Posted by: Jay at July 22, 2005 06:16 AM (BKqRl)
4
Hey, yeah.."If you don't touch the pig, you don't come to America." (period)
(Incidently, I'd rather pet "real" pig-ears, than take the tube, though.) (^_^)
Posted by: mensaB at July 22, 2005 03:41 PM (TOHVc)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
<< Page 156 >>
Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.2971 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2784 seconds, 171 records returned.
Page size 114 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
