Behind Blue Eyes

Poor, Poor Marche Taylor.   Today she is a victim.   She was wrongfully denied entrance to her prom because of an innocent little dress that the big bad evil school wouldn't let her wear.   She knew that there was a dress code for prom but she's a princess and the rules NEVER apply to her!   How dare they interfere with her dreams of looking like a hooker at prom!!!

Skankprom.jpg

I am sorry folks but freedom of expression is null and vid at a school function - especially when a child shows up wearing two strips of cloth covering her nipples.

I support the schools action 100%!!!

1. They were right to deny her entry to the prom.  Its a teenaged celebration of the completion of high school.  It is not a music video or a brothel.

2.  They were right to keep the money for the tickets.   The school did not breach the contract - Miss Taylor breached the contract.  She knew that there was a dress code and she CHOSE to ignore it!  They owe her NOTHING.

3.  She was arrested because she was causing a scene and refused to leave the premises.  What should the school do?  Allow a rude screaming brat to remain on the premises so she can ruin the prom for the other people in attendance (they seem to have figured out te dress code).   They aren't allowed to touch her in any way - so they did what they had to do.  They called the cops.   Miss Marche could have left peacefully and she CHOSE not to do so.  

http://www.khou.com/topstories/stories/khou080509_tj_promdress.e4ef3d2b.html

Detroit-Skyline-Web

1 comment

Detroit is an incredible city.  It is full of wonderful, colorful, creative, intelligent and interesting people.   The architecture is absolutely gorgeous ranging from 300 year old buildings to new ones.  The history is rich and wonderful to tell.  It is a city that deserves to survive. 

Unfortunately, auto maker woes, economic upheaval and racial issues dragged this once great city down int a quagmire that is has yet to escape from.   Every once in a while, we see glimmers of the incredible city that we once were and can be again.  The Super Bowl.  New buildings.  New business.   All-Star games.   Festivals in Hart Plaza.  Then we are inundated with scandal after scandal as a immature race-baiting mayor threatens to drag the city down with him.

We have seen this game before.   For decades, Coleman Young ran the city.   He inflamed racial tensions.  He chased way business.  He let buildings fall into disrepair.  He screamed "racist" at every suburb and told them they weren't welcome in his city.   We thought we got away from that when he left office.  We thought we were safe from that kind of mayor when Young passed away.

We had Dennis Archer, a man that fought tirelessly to bring new business to the city.  He pushed forward a Riverwalk project that is beginning to show promise.  He brought the Super Bowl to a city that has never seen its football team play in it.   He brought the football team in from the suburbs.  Archer realized that this is a metropolitan community that is tied to one another for survival - city and suburbs.   Archer was an incredible mayor and he changed he city for the better.

Then came Kwame.   The young man whose mother was in the House of Representatives.   A family man with a beautiful wife and the cutest little kids.   Fresh ideas and a reborn Detroit were what was promised but instead Detroit was given the shaft.   At 31, he was the youngest man ever elected mayor of Detroit but at 31, he was by no means a child - even though he acted like one. 

He cheated on his wife.  He cheated on he tax payers.  He used his mayoral power and city money to hide his philandering ways.   He fired good police officers when they dared to ask why his guards were being paid thousands in overtime dollars to attend stripper parties and to hide the affair.  He spent more time playing than actually working and when good things happened because of the work that Dennis Archer did - he claimed credit for things that weren't his doing.

Apparently, behind the scenes he was laughing with his girl friend/Chief of Staff, Christine Beatty, about the city full of "idiots".   They were calling city council members childish names.    They were manipulating the police department to fill it with people that they could control and wouldn't ask questions.   They were treating the city legal department as their personal lawyers.   Worse yet - Kwame Kilpatrick betrayed the taxpayers of Detroit and used 9 million dollars of their dollars to hide his misdemeanors and moral philandering.

At this point, Kwame Kilpatrick is nothing more than an embarrassment to the city, the region and the state.   HE hinders progress by laughing at the charges against them.  The old ways of Coleman Young race baiting are now being played with him on a daily basis.   The evil suburbs and the evil white media are all to blame for his woes according to dear Kwame.

How does he continue to sleep at night, much less stay in office, with the things that he is doing to his city and his family?   How can he look his constituents in the face knowing that he consider them "idiots".  How does he look his wife and children in the face after text messages telling Christine Beatty that they would be married and he would be her children's stepdaddy in 2012?  To see these horrendous text messages

The excuses of "oh, he's a young guy" are null and void now.  He is almost 40 years old - he knows better.   The excuses that he was hurt by being called the "n" word are null and void seeing as he uses it liberally in his own conversations - even calling Beatty his "nigette" (please note that it pained me just to write that word).  The excuses are gone Kwame.

in the document that got Kwame to steal 9 millon dollars of the city's money to prevent it from the public seeing it - read here.

Mr Kilpatrick, for the good of this beautiful city, please leave.  Please leave office today.  You once talked about how the New York Times likes to write about you because you were a young black man with power.   Well now they like to talk about you because you are creating enough scandals by yourself to fuel paper sales for the next year.   Your salacious life is better than fiction now. 

Please leave before they really start investigating the murdered stripper from your alleged Manoogian Mansion stripper party with cops that you don't control.  I would really hate to see what happens if it comes back to you...

PS...Can you please let somebody else vote at the democratic convention.  You don't deserve to be a super delegate.

So apparently, there are rumors floating around that Condi has been actively campaigning to be the Republican running mate to McCain.  Really?!?!?   Seriously?!?!?!?   Can she possibly be serious?

Talk about political suicide for McCain.

I'm sorry but right now, if McCain gets into office, it will be because the democratic party is split.   We have two nominees fighting viciously.   We have democrats that refuse to support the other democratic candidate.  We even have people, like myself, that ar willing to vote McCain if our chosen candidate doesn't get the nomination.

HOWEVER....that will change if you put one of Bush's Administration in office.   Let me tell you - I don't think Condi should be doing anything except selling coffee at Starbucks after her stint in the Bush Administration. I will vote for Obama should McCain even THINK of doing that!

What, are the Republicans are jealous of the Democrats flair for losing unloseable elections and wanted to top the Democrat stupidity?

The torch arrived in America today behind a ton of secrecy.   The plans of its route had been changed and somehow - they weren't leaked to anybody.  Why?  BEcause protestors were going to make their presence known and attempt to extinguish the flames.

People are in an uproar because protestors around the world have been picketing, blocking the torch's route, and extinguishing the flame.   People seem to think this is unfair because the Olympics are about the "spirit of competition" and the poor athletes  have worked so hard.

I hate to say it but WHO CARES!   I could care less if an 18-year-old kid doesn't get to compete in the Olympics.   The issue should be China and their chronic human rights violations, environmental atrocities and treatment of Tibet.  It should not be about kids wanting to play a game.

The Olympics will pump BILLIONS if not TRILLIONS into the Chinese economy - but at what cost?   IF Americans participate, we will be funneling our dollars to the horrendous policies of China.   We will be supporting the thousands of people force from their homes to make way for Olympic Stadiums.  We will be supporting the Chinese crimes against the people of Tibet.  Hell, the Chinese issued new threats against the Tibetan protestors saying that they would protect the torch at all cost (ie murdering protestors).

How the hell do we support this?   We have boycotted before and we should boycott again.  Like I said, who cares if a person doesn't get to compete - there are more important things in this world.

Food for thought.  

BY KATHY GILL

Since January 2005, Barack Obama has outspent both John McCain (2.5:1) and Hillary Clinton (3:1) in currying favor with fellow senators and representatives.

As of December 31, 2007, Obama's leadership PAC, The Hope Fund, had already given $299,000 to Democratic senators and representatives for the 2008 election cycle. Neither Clinton or McCain made any contribution to federal candidates during 2007.

The three-year (2005-2007) tally looks like this: Obama, $900,000; McCain, $356,000; Clinton, $297,000.

In the case of the Democratic candidates, the disbursements are worth a second look, since each Democratic senator and representative is a super delegate. In August, The Hill reported that:

In June, Obama gave $5,000 contributions from his PAC, Hopefund, to every Democratic member of Congress from Iowa and New Hampshire. On June 15, he gave to Reps. Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire, and Reps. Bruce Braley, David Loebsack and Leonard Boswell of Iowa. At the end of the month, he wrote a $5,000 check to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

Obama’s wooing paid off last month. On July 26, Hodes became the first lawmaker from Iowa or New Hampshire to make an endorsement in the Democratic primary, throwing his support to Obama.

In November, The Huffington Post noted that Obama was giving money to "to local Democratic groups and candidates in the key early-voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina... Obama's PAC reported giving a $1,000 contribution, for instance, to New Hampshire state Sen. Jacalyn Cilley on July 25, six days before she announced she was endorsing Obama for president."

Leadership PACs have been criticized as a loophole for big donors and as tool for a Congressional member to become "a major player." Congressmen can't spend the money on their campaigns directly, but they can indirectly by hiring consultants and pollsters, for example.

In the combined 2006-2008 campaign cycles, McCain's PAC has raised (and spent) more than $8 million; Obama has raised (and spent) more than $4.2 million; and Clinton has raised (and spent) more than $3.2 million. Obama's expenditures differ from the other two candidates: thousands in limos, a skeleton office in 2007, multiple phone carriers around the country. McCain's extravagance is chartered air travel (about $1 million worth). Clinton had no extravegances.

Here are the data for the three major candidates in the presidential race:

• Hillary Clinton (D-NY) created her leadership PAC, HILLPAC, on 5 January 2001. For the 2008 campaign cycle, she has given no money to any candidates; the PAC has spent $209,465, almost exclusively on staff and office expenses.
  
  In the 2006 campaign cycle, her PAC spent $2,992,573, but only $297,000 went to Senate ($170,000) or House ($107,000) candidates. The remainder was spent almost exclusively on wages and office expenses, although there were some consulting fees and an insignificant travel bill.
  
  
• John McCain (R-AZ) Straight Talk America, his leadership PAC, on 20 March 2000.
  Like Clinton, he has given no funds to Senators or Representatives in the 2008 campaign cycle, although his PAC has spent $288,000.
  
  In the 2006 campaign cycle, his PAC spent $7.9 million, but only $355,572 went to federal candidates: $109,479 to Senators and $246,093 to Representatives. Unlike Clinton, McCain's PAC spent lots on travel (around $1 million with charter firm Flight Options, Cleveland, OH) and lots on consultants (political, financial, IT, internet). Some traditional air travel, salaries, a lot of direct mail (politicking) fees.
  
  Also unlike Clinton, McCain had another PAC, Straight Talk America - Florida during the 2006 season. It spent $17,986; none went to federal candidates.
  
  
• Barack Obama (D-IL) created his leadership PAC, the Hope Fund, on 25 Jan 2005. For the 2008 campaign cycle, he has given $231,000 to House candidates and $68,000 to Senate candidates, yet the fund has spent more than twice that: $626,777.
  
  Obama's 2008 cycle expenses are different from Clinton's and McCain's. More travel (although not charter airfares); a $466 limo bill in (greater?) D.C.; $5,000 to Habitat for Humanity. What's odd: payroll is for less than a year but paid more frequently than office expenses; there are phone bills scattered across the country with multiple carriers -- Cingular, T-Mobile and Verizon -- but for only a few months. Even Perkins Coie appears to have been retained for only 10 months. Off year slow down?
  
  For the 2006 cycle, Obama's PAC gave $337,526 to House candidates and $239,243 to Senate candidates. Total: $595,169. Other expenses totaled $3.8 million. A whole lotta travel; a $830 limo bill in Ft. Lauderdale and $1,545 one (!) in East Elmhurst, NY; $5,000 to Ned Lamont's unsuccessful campaign to derail Joe Lieberman; lots of direct mail, US mail and consulting fees (politicking); lots (11) of staff.

A man wandered the streets.  His face cracked and blistered from the blustering bitter arctic wind.   His beard and hair were unkempt and wild.   The tattered stocking cap on his head looked as though it would keep nothing warm.

I approached the man as he gathered trash from the streets.   He examined each piece that he picked up and put it in one of three bags that he had tied to an ancient belt.  Fishing through my pockets, I attempted to find something that would help the man out.   There was only spare change floating in a pile of paper receipts.  It was still more than the man had.

I handed the man the money, all that I had.   A flash of silver and copper caught my eye as the coins fell into his hands.   The blackened skin was hard, thick and cracked.   It looked as though he was wearing gloves made of armadillo.  A half a second of hesitation seemed to pass through the man’s eyes but the quickness of his hands defied his pride.

“I can’t take this,” the stranger said.”I want to work for my money.”

How sad I felt.  I did not want to offend this proud man, I simply wanted to help.  He was one of the many men that our country had sacrificed to the lords of war and then turned our backs on.   He was a soldier that had defended our freedom and protected our very lives.   This man was a hero – even now.  

“You already did the work,” I responded.   “You sacrificed your life to save mine.  I can never pay you enough.”

He looked at me.  I looked at him.  I said a silent thank you and moved on.  I knew that this proud man did not want charity.   He didn’t want me to see him humbled.   He just wanted to feel like a man again.   I only wish there was more I could do for him.

As I walked away my son asked me an innocent question.   “Who was that man Mom?”  I told him that the man was an American soldier.

My boy replied to me, “Aren’t our soldiers American heroes?   Is he homeless?  Did we forget him?”

Yes sweetie.   We forgot him.

By Randi Kaye
CNN

JACKSON, Missouri (CNN) -- Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq.

Even though the 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral -- she continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's dead -- she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.

Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly eight years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.

It was the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal -- that loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with Wal-Mart's health plan.

Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.

Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.

Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses, but in 2005, Wal-Mart's health plan sued the Shanks for the same amount.

The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit.

The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the money. Watch this couple's story »

"We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to," Graham said.

The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the couple appealed the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their son was killed in Iraq.

"They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it that bad," Jim Shank said.

In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion.

Legal or not, CNN asked Wal-Mart why the company pursued the money.

Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank's case "unbelievably sad," replied in a statement: "Wal-Mart's plan is bound by very specific rules. ... We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs. Shank's case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but this is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and benefit from, the plan."

Jim Shank said he believes Wal-Mart should make an exception.

"My idea of a win-win is -- you keep the paperwork that says you won and let us keep the money so I can take care of my wife," he said.

The family's situation is so dire that last year Jim Shank divorced Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.

Jim Shank, 54, is recovering from prostate cancer, works two jobs and struggles to pay the bills. He's afraid he won't be able to send their youngest son to college and pay for his and Debbie's care.

"Who needs the money more? A disabled lady in a wheelchair with no future, whatsoever, or does Wal-Mart need $90 billion, plus $200,000?" he asked.

The family's attorney agrees.

"The recovery that Debbie Shank made was recovery for future lost earnings, for her pain and suffering," Graham said.

"She'll never be able to work again. Never have a relationship with her husband or children again. The damage she recovered was for much more than just medical expenses."

Graham said he believes Wal-Mart should be entitled to only about $100,000. Right now, about $277,000 remains in the trust -- far short of the $470,000 Wal-Mart wants back.

Refusing to give up the fight, the Shanks appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. But just last week, the high court said it would not hear the case.

Graham said the Shanks have exhausted all their resources and there's nothing more they can do but go on with their lives.

Jim Shank said he's disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the case -- not for the sake of his family -- but for those who might face similar circumstances.

For now, he said the family will figure out a way to get by and "do the best we can for Debbie."

"Luckily, she's oblivious to everything," he said. "We don't tell her
what's going on because it will just upset her."

In Detroit, we were starting to see a rebirth with MAyor Dennis Archer.   It was because of him, that we were awarded a Superbowl and a MLB All Star game.   We saw Compuware move downtown.  We saw the start of the Riverwalk developments.   We saw the start of the Mid-Town redevelopment.  We were full of hope. 

Scandal after scandal has turned the stories away from the rebirth of Detroit.   If you hear about Detroit now - the story is about its criminal mayor.   Its embarassing.  Its disgraceful.

Ugh.   Kwame needs to leave his position as mayor if he truly "loves the city" like he claims.   Then maybe we can all move on with a mayor that is their to do the job rather than be a spectacle.

How to Deal with the Historic '08 Candidacies

By Will Durst

This campaign has been tough on everybody, but particularly on members of the media who find themselves stymied when trying to navigate this year's historic candidacy minefield. And since all three candidates have proven to be a bit, shall we say, delicate, a hastily compiled handy reference guide about how to cover the most exciting political sensations of this or indeed, many a generation, is in order.

HILLARY CLINTON
• Avoid the word "female."
• Do not under any circumstances use the senator's maiden name.
• It is sexist to question whether the candidate's alleged marriage is legit, or to say anything about her husband. Positive or negative.
• Do not call Hillary Clinton "shrill." The candidate is penetrating and sharp; intense, passionate and fervent, but not shrill. Or strident.
• Please refrain from referring to the senator as a witch or anything that rhymes with it.
• It is bad form to ask where Senator Clinton got her 35 years of experience. She got it the old fashioned way; she earned it.
• Do not call her husband an oaf. He is a lummox.
• Please do not remark on what the candidate is wearing any more than if she were a man. Especially blue pant- suits.
• Refrain from making comparisons to any other female politicians. Especially Geraldine Ferraro.
• Discussions of a candidate's physical characteristics have no place in serious campaign reportage. Her membership in the Big Calves Society is off- limits.

BARACK OBAMA
• Avoid the word "race."
• Do not under any circumstances use the senator's middle name.
• It is racist to question whether the candidate's alleged religion is legit, or to say anything about his minister. Positive or negative.
• Do not call Barack Obama "articulate." The candidate is eloquent and coherent; lucid, persuasive and expressive, but not articulate. Or clean.
• Please refrain from making comparisons to any other black politicians. Especially Jesse Jackson.
• You are requested not to use the words black, brown, white, red, yellow, pink, charcoal, onyx or inky. Ebony and obsidian are OK.
• The senator is not gamin. He is lithe with the audacity of hope.
• All masculine youths will be referred to as young male children. Similarly, buoys shall henceforth be "floating markers."
• If you eat chicken at one of the candidate's events, make sure it is boneless, skinless and sautéed, not fried. It should neither be recognizable as a breast, a leg, a thigh or a wing, but rather be amorphous yet inspiring.
• The cheap and demeaning "Obambi" is out of bounds, and neither is he doe-eyed. His eyes are alive with the promise of tomorrow.

JOHN MCCAIN
• Avoid the word "old."
• The senator's middle name is Sidney. Go ahead; use it.
• It is ageist to question whether the candidate's alleged infidelity is legit, or to say anything about his supposed girlfriend looking exactly like his wife. Just chalk it up to a case of mistaken identity.
• Please refrain from making comparisons to any other former veterans. Especially Captain Queeg.
• Stop asking for a demonstration of the candidate's authenticity. You wouldn't recognize it if you saw it anyhow.
• You should not call John McCain "prickly." The candidate is penetrating and sharp; intense, passionate and fervent, but not prickly. Neither is he shrill, grouchy, irritable or cantankerous. Or crabby or belligerent. Or grumpy. Or crotchety.
• Cindy McCain is the candidate's wife, not his attending nurse.
• When referring to a vice president assuming the duties of the presidency, please speak about this happening in the case of incapacitation, not death.
• You are requested not to use the words 'getting" and "on" next to each other in a sentence. Or "wizened," "elderly," "coot" or "geezer." "Mature" and "sage- like" are OK.
• Remarks about Early Bird Dinners are not appreciated.

Catch Durst and Willie Brown's new podcast @ Willandwillie.com.
Or performing at the Noe Valley Ministry on March 29th.
Or pre order Durst's new book, The All American Sport of Bipartisan Bashing, available from Ulysses Press on May 1st. New? First.