The hypocrsy of attacking student loan foregiveness for those less forunate. i.e. Doctors, lawyers & politicians.

 When I hear Right wing Republican't pundits & politicians complaining about student loan forgiveness programs this meme takes on a more urgent message about passing on the cost of professional training at the college level. So many of the politicians tend to be college-trained professionals who routinely escalate their bills to not only cover legislation to protect their occupation but to also cover the cost of THEIR STUDENT LOANS... passing on their student loan debt to you and me, their own debt forgiveness program.

DON'T BELIEVE IT? Just ask your Doctor or Lawyer about their ridiculous fees and see if they don't defend it by mentioning their student loan debt or some of the things in this meme.

Last week I met with an elder care lawyer about helping me to get guardianship of my stepmother. He wanted $5000 dollars to do it and only if it was uncontested. Now how do they justify that? fancy offices, expensive copy machines, and student loan debt, RIGHT?

My ex-wife put me in contact with a para-legal that helped me fill out and file the papers for free! Total time spent on completing the paperwork and filing it myself... 2 and a half hours, total cost of filing fee... $177 dollars.

Don't believe student loans weren't a pyramid scam scheme from the start? Just look at the inflation rates for a college education since the beginning of the student loan program.

There's more than one type of student loan forgiveness... one for the professionals, the wealthy, and the political and another one for the rest of us.

Any person who is using his professional training to pay off his student loan debt is fortunate and exempt from my criticism, but those who justify their elevated fees so as to pay off their loans and then criticize others who are overwhelmed with debt are just plain hypocritical to the point of being dishonest.

If 2nd Amendment Rights give us the means to defend our homes...

 

http://www.glennlittrell.org/2020/08/in-defense-of-black-lives-matter.html

If ALL lives truly matter...

 http://www.glennlittrell.org/2020/08/in-defense-of-black-lives-matter.html

In Defense of Black Lives Matter

Laying Blame to Reduce Racial Guilt?

So this sums up your attitude on racism in America? 

You posted it; You must believe it.

Here's what this meme says:

That even though the white Europeans incentivized black Africans to capture and sell their black African neighbors to white traders, it was OK because Africans were complicit in the act. And you're OK with that because 'they started it'? You must feel that they're to blame even though the practice of slavery in America existed long after the trans-Atlantic slave trade ended. You think that since we don't equally blame Africans for the beginning of the slave trade, we should overlook the white Europeans role in it too. 

So you want to excuse the role whites played in the slave trade because blacks participated too. You want the blame to be equally shared. Do you see the primitive tribal societies of Africa and the advanced and exploitive 'Christian' societies of Europe as equals in guilt? 

But the African role at the beginning of the trans-Atlantic slave trade has not been ignored. The African role has been front and center whenever the suppressed history of the transatlantic slave trade has been explored.

But what about everything after that?

Your sharing the meme implies:

• You're OK with the 200 years of slavery instituted and maintained by southern states, Christian churches, and white America even after the transatlantic slave trade ended.
• You're OK with the legal separation of families, raping, whipping, and forced labor of slaves.
• You're OK with Jim Crow laws, the KKK, the lynching, and civil rights oppression of free African-Americans.

That's what your meme is saying, and if that's what it's saying, why would you post it?

The meme is an irreverent piece of racist BS meant to inflame tension and appease white guilt.

I'm white, and I do not feel the responsibility for slavery or past racism. I do acknowledge the advantages it may have afforded me. I do assess blame for those who endorsed and maintained it. This blame extends to our forefathers, the churches, and the countries that sanctioned it, including ours. I also take responsibility for my role in what to do about it today.

 

I sincerely cannot fathom what else this meme is supposed to say. I know what the creator of it was seeking to accomplish. When you share it without clarification, condemnation, or explanation, you are endorsing it as is. How else would anyone take it?

GlennDL

meme= an image, video, piece of text, etc., that is copied (often with slight variations) and spread rapidly by Internet users.

 

Read past the headlines… you are being duped!

While I am naturally suspicious of the validity of such a document, let's assume that it is accurate and authentic, because fact checking an unsourced graphic is difficult and time consuming, and in this case not necessary.

So, without fact checking, let's just try reading it to see what it shows and what does the author "MikeM-------" say it shows:

"THIS IS WHAT 1 ILLEGAL REFUGEE GETS WITH THE FEDERAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM $3874 PER MONTH !!!"

Really? Obviously Mike didn't read it or didn't do the math or more likely, he doesn't think you will.
There are three types of expenses included in this voucher/document: Start-up assistance, monthly expenses, and a loan.

• The monthly expenses Mike refers to is $1399 NOT $3874
• The 1 person Mike refers to is actually a family of 5
• The illegal refugee Mike refers to is a LEGAL REFUGEE family!
  

It’s all right there in the document, read it.

The $1399 TEMPORARY aid is not permanent. It is an allowance to help a family arriving in this country to transition from nothing to a self-sustaining status. A family, most likely with nothing after much time in refugee camps, following a vetting process (yes, there is one, always has been) and fleeing violence and/or extreme poverty… is receiving a monthly allowance that in most states is near the poverty level, and in some states falls below the poverty level.
As for the start-up expenses are they really that high? Clothing, furniture, transportation assistance for relocation, and job hunting?

If there is an objection to resettling and helping all and any refugees or if someone chooses to believe Mike’s headline and not the actual contents of the voucher, which HE SUBMITS, then go ahead you're free to. I’m sure that in the face of that I can’t change your mind, but if, as a nation, we insist on disregarding our moral obligations of charity, compassion and serving as a beacon of light to the world, then I can only hope and pray we realize we can do better.

by GlennDL

---

While we’re on the subject:

…unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me…

Hateful Rhetoric For The Enemy, Our Friends, And Our Fallen,

How about checking your facts once in awhile

Snopes and Urban Legends are the oldest fact-checking sites, but PolitiFact is probably the most efficient and popular.

Below is a list of sites I use:

• http://www.snopes.com/
• http://urbanlegends.about.com/
• http://www.truthorfiction.com/
• http://www.politifact.com/
• http://www.opensecrets.org/index.php
• http://factcheck.org/
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker
• http://www.factandmyth.com/    *
• http://www.factmonster.com/     *

* These are new sites that I have not yet completly vetted  

Can a fact-checking site be biased? Of course, but the critical point is to what degree, and even more important is that just because you disagree with the fact check that doesn’t make it biased. Too often, we look for confirmation of our own biased by rejecting any bias by others.

Ask yourself this:

• Does the site have a stated methodology in their evaluation of facts? Do they conform to that methodology?
• Does the site provide names, dates, verifiable quotes, and links to supporting references.
• Are the source and references independent of the fact-checking site? In other-words is the site quoting themselves or sister sites, opinion sites, or sites that are themselves biased.
• Always consider the opposing opinion. You can’t truly understand the complexity of debate if you can’t completely understand and explain the opposing view.
• Too many websites will contain a link to what is supposed to support a fact, but does it? I’ve seen many sites quote an article from SNOPES.COM, and then when I click the link, the SNOPES article doesn’t support the sites claim, sometimes it is unrelated, and sometimes it even disputes the claim. What is happening there is the site assumes that most people will be attracted to their headline and won’t read the article, and they think you are too lazy to click and read the SNOPES article. That’s them calling you stupid and lazy, not me. Always check sources and links; after a while, you learn what sites are honest and not.
• Can you make a critical and fact-based argument to support you view in the face of an unfavorable fact check?

After a while, you will learn what fact-checking websites are the most reliable and honest. Notice I didn’t say unbiased. If you want a fact checker that supports your biased then your not interested in the truth. If you want a website that has absolutely no bias then good luck. If you can accept a website that meets the above criteria with some, but minimal bias, then you are on the right track to getting at deciphering truth from opinion.

Never present opinion as fact, never ignore facts in the face of opinion, and don’t ever be afraid to weigh both fact and opinion equally.

These two sights are not fact-checking sites like the above but:

this one is great for looking up and reading the actual language of proposed laws. You can also look up laws passed in past congresses:

• http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

and this one is great for looking up actual labor statistics. You know for those charts that keep appearing comparing on presidents effect on jobs against another, or one party against another.

• http://www.bls.gov/home.htm

When the site provides a link or reference, does it checkout? Usually, when you want to check an email, you can copy the title in the subject line of the email into the 'Search" box on the websites page. If someone has changed the subject line in the chain email, you may have to look for a key phrase or words to put into the search box.

I won't claim that any of these sights are free of bias, but I don't think any site or any of us can make that claim. The question should be how bias, that's why I usually look at more than two sights on any subject and sometimes will look at all of them to see if anyone has a counter-argument.

Over the years, I have responded to chain mails because I think that, just like old-fashion chain letters, they are, for the most part, deceitful and pray on the little old lady types who could be scared into keeping the chain going for fear of bad luck. That may never be the person's intention in forwarding the chain mail, but it is the intention of the person who originated it.

Sadly, it seems many people like forwarding chain emails. I say this because, over the years, as I have responded by correcting the chainmail's, I have received less of them. I suspect that too many people prefer to receive chainmail's that fit into their beliefs more so than they want to hear the truth or facts about someone they would rather hate than know the truth. (??)

I was receiving some chain e-mails so often that at one point, I started cataloging them on one this website to keep from having to re-answer the same chainmail every year. (Click the "Spitting Back" link) There are 20 posts under that topic, and they all won't appear in the same listing, so when you get near the bottom, look for the 'Older Post' link. There is also a link ('Spam and E-Mail Hoaxes') in the 'Information' box for an explanation of how and why people start chainmail's and why they can be putting your mailing list at risk.'

Sadly, it seems many people like forwarding chain e-mails. I say this because, over the years, as I have responded by correcting the chainmail's, I have received less of them. I suspect that too many people prefer to receive chainmail's that fit into their beliefs more so than they want to hear the truth or facts about someone they would rather hate than know the truth. (??)

GlennDL

MORE

125

National Police Week / Peace Officers Memorial Day

In 1962, President John F. Kennedy signed a proclamation which designated May 15th as Peace Officers Memorial Day and the week in which that date falls as Police Week. Currently, tens of thousands of law enforcement officers from around the world converge on Washington, DC to participate in a number of planned events which honor those that have paid the ultimate sacrifice.

“Arizona Peace Officers Memorial" by Visitor7 - Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons -     The National Peace Officers' Memorial Service, which is sponsored by the Grand Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police, is one in a series of events which includes the Candlelight Vigil, which is sponsored by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (NLEOMF) and seminars sponsored by Concerns of Police Survivors (C.O.P.S.)

Amended in 1994, Bill Clinton, through Public Law 103-322, directed that the flag of the United States be flown at half-staff on May 15. According to a proclamation by George W. Bush in 2002, "Peace Officers Memorial Day and Police Week pay tribute to the local, State, and Federal law enforcement officers who serve and protect us with courage and dedication. These observances also remind us of the ongoing need to be vigilant against all forms of crime, especially to acts of extreme violence and terrorism." At the National Peace Officer's Memorial Service on May 15, 2013, President Barack Obama paid tribute to fallen law enforcement officers, closing: “The 143 fallen officers we honor today put themselves on the front lines of that fight, to preserve that quality of community, and to protect the roots of our greatness. They exemplified the very idea of citizenship -- that with our God-given rights come responsibilities and obligations to ourselves and to others. They embodied that idea. That’s the way they died. That’s how we must remember them. And that’s how we must live. We can never repay our debt to these officers and their families, but we must do what we can, with all that we have, to live our lives in a way that pays tribute to their memory. That begins, but does not end, by gathering here -- with heavy hearts, to carve their names in stone, so that all will know them, and that their legacy will endure. We are grateful to them and we are grateful to you.”

Much of the holiday centers on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial wall in Washington, D.C., whose walls feature the names of more than 19,000 law enforcement officers who have been killed in the line of duty.

Sources:

• http://www.policeweek.org/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_Officers_Memorial_Day

Stop saying “Stop Drinking the Kool-Aid”

by Glenn Littrell

A particularly disturbing video was posted on my Facebook wall with no context or explanation, other than a statement to the effect that this was something Obama wanted for America.

What follows is the conversation that resulted.

None of the remarks were edited or removed. Surnames and links have been removed.

• K:  I try to remain silent on stuff like this but please explain how "this is what Obama wants for the USA". Perhaps provide some supporting documentation .
• B:  @K, maybe bowing to them at every opportunity? How about refusing to even admit Islamic Radicals exist? How about when he has publicly admitted he is 'one of them'? How about his written statement that says “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”? How about the excessive financial support to Islamic nations that hate us? How about refusing to support France over radical Muslims? How about his statement that said Islam was a major factor in the creation of the US? How about his support of Sharia Law? The same law that allows young 10 yr old girls to undergo genital mutilation with rusty pocket knives or the execution of a 15 yr old girl raped by 4 men? How long do you want this list to continue?
• K:  You can stop there and send links or whatever to all the supporting documentation for your list . That would maybe help but I've heard all this malarkey before and likely won't be swayed so we can probably just stop here.

Can someone explain to me why…

by Glenn Littrell

UPDATE:  Having asked the question on several issues it is apparent that an answer is not forthcoming, and neither is the Tea Party. Like the 1st time voters in the 2010 election they went home after the election and expected that everything they wanted would happen, only to find that you have to stick around and monitor, encourage and demand that your expectations be met. The end result being that the loonies they elected had their own agenda: pro corporate, pro-big and interfering government at the state level and a unannounced love of social issues that were covert during the election. The end result is that the legislative bodies have done nothing on jobs or the economy outside of more tax breaks for the rich, corporations and further attacks on the working class. De-funding Planned Parenthood, NPR and destroying unions was more important than strengthening schools. All four of the bills mentioned below were passed [amended] in Indiana.

…Tea Partiers aren’t marching on the state capitol with the rest of us in opposition to bills that:

House Bill 1538: Makes local government units servants to state government mandates by barring them from setting a minimum wage higher than the state’s minimum wage? The argument for ‘states rights’ evidently doesn’t carry over to local rights. Strong centralized government control is ok at the state level but not the federal?

Senate Bill 001:  …limiting local control of teacher evaluations. There is no appeal process under this bill if a teacher is fired unjustly. The [state] Superintendent of Public Instruction may revoke a teacher’s license at will. The bill also includes a provision to require that only 50 percent of the teaching staff at some schools be licensed as teachers. Big brother at the state capitol knows what’s right for schools more than the local school boards? Who can teach, who can be stripped of their license [without appeal] while allowing more teachers to teach WITHOUT a license?

House Bill 1002: The bill allows for acquisition by a non-government entity [ie., charter schools] of under-utilized buildings for $1 per year for up to 20 years. The school corporation must maintain the building. The non-government entity [ie., charter schools] have first option at any under-utilized building, meaning the corporation cannot choose to sell it if the non-government entity wants the building. The free acquisition of local government property without compensation to the tax-payer and without even assuming the cost of maintaining that property? Eminent domain in reverse?

House Bill 1003: Allow public money to be diverted to private entities [schools] to the tune of $110 million. The only difference between this and the federal bailouts is that the private entities aren’t failing financially. With Obama and GM its socialism but with Daniels and Indiana its ???????

Evidently taking their country back meant giving it to the state level republicans so they could do to state economies what the national level republicans did to the national economy. Or could it be that without their corporate sponsored umbrella groups telling them what to do their grass roots movement is lost? Or is it that since unions start all their meetings with a prayer and the pledge without demonizing others they can’t get fired up enough to care? Not enough Hitler and Nazi paraphernalia or gun toting to make them feel comfortable? Too much peaceful coexistence? Too many people?

“…Between 1998 to 2005, GAO found that about 72 percent of large foreign controlled companies and 55 percent of large U.S. controlled companies reported zero tax liability for at least one year. About 57 percent of foreign controlled large companies and 42 percent of U.S. large companies paid no taxes in two or more years, and a third of the foreign companies and one quarter of their U.S. counterparts paid no taxes for at least four of those years. Just 45 percent of large U.S. companies and 28 percent of foreign companies reported a tax liability for each of the eight years. The report defined large companies as those with at least $250 million in assets, or at least $50 million in receipts…”

Yet, Tea Partiers objection to taxes is limited to attacking wage earners? GlennDL

Is $150,000 per pirated song a fair punishment?

reposted from 8-1-09:

by Glenn Littrell

I’ve been trying to warn people about the potential problems with downloading music.  Innocent downloader's are being sent bills for thousands of dollars because a file, bought by them online, has shown up on someone's website.  The fines are so steep and the law so one sided that out of court settlements for thousands of dollars are the rule not the exception:

“After admitting that he is liable for having “uploaded and downloaded music” illegally, Boston University graduate student Joel Tenenbaum faces some potentially steep fines. The jury, which will meet late today, has already been told by the judge that Mr. Tenenbaum must pay for pirating music. But they will decide if he did so “willfully.”

That’s the difference between a $22,500 payment to the record industry and a $4.5 million one.

Federal law states that juries may award $750 to $30,000 for each of the 30 songs that Tenenbaum apparently pirated. But if the music label’s copyrights were infringed upon “willfully,” then damages could reach $150,000 per song…

The Boston Globe wrote that this is “only the second of thousands of music downloading complaints filed by the industry to go to trial. Most defendants settle out of court for $3,000 to $5,000.”

The other trial, against Jammie Thomas-Rassset, started with the jury awarding $9,250 per song. During her appeal, that number rose to $80,000 for each of the 24 songs that she illegally shared. The total: $1.92 million…”

 

read the full article:  RIAA trial: Is $150,000 per pirated song a fair punishment? | csmonitor.com

When you download [purchased or free] can the file be encrypted with your personal info that you usually have to give to register or sign on?  If it isn’t now it probably will be in the future.  If your mp3 player is lost or stolen, or you let someone copy your music files and anyone of them ever shows up on the internet through Peer To Peer networking can the music industry retrieve any personal info.  If so, or when, you will get one of those bills.  I don’t touch downloading or sharing music online in any way, shape or form since the industry, which is losing millions to pirating and sharing have the lobbies to create laws that entrap people, yes kids too, as away of sustaining there excessive profits and lifestyles.     Glenn

note: Joel was found guilty of uploading/downloading copywrited songs and fined $675,000 dollars, which was reduced on appeal to $67,500. That’s just for 31 songs…that’s over $2,000 per song!!!!

“Under Section 504(c) of the Copyright Act, the jury may award statutory damages of between $750 and $30,000 per infringed song in the case of “regular” or nonwillful infringement. If, however, the jury finds infringement to be willful, the maximum it may award jumps five-fold, to $150,000 per song.”