I never realised just how important that that two-inch band of brass running across the factory floor really was to the establishment of that particular factory.
Just inches away on either side of the band are two plaques, one marked OKLAHOMA, with faded light blue paint, and MISSOURI on the other side of the band.
But when I read the article in the breakroom earlier this week I learnt an interesting lesson about how regulations used to be in the past.
It turns out that this old plant, built in the late 1940s along what once was US60, and today is Business US60, had had two different sets of operations in place, because of existing state laws that forbade the sale of tinned milk in a state other than where it was produced. Those laws were long since repealed and now larger operations covering more states can be rolled out at that facility.
Now I should point out why I was working a temporary assignment down at a tinned milk plant on the state line near Seneca, Missouri this past week. This past week, there were no inventories, in part due to the runup to Independence Day, which is next week. And I was still playing catchup with my bills.
I had just had to make two withdrawals en route from St Louis County to Springfield so I could pay my car insurance bill...via Express Mail. Then I had to make a withdrawal on Saturday to cover the phone bill. Now that left me precious little for rent, and so I made the call to a temporary employment service I have been aligned with for most of the past seven years.
It was about 8.00 or 9.00a or something like that and I was having trouble sleeping later. Therefore I found the need to do something constructive. With one week already gone in the current pay period, I found that extra work was a must. At 10.00a I got the call.
Within the next hour I had eaten, taken a shower, driven to the office, gotten instructions, filled out a safety awareness form, and started driving down to Seneca. Blasting an Exposé CD --- I guess maybe I AM predictable that way --- I would find myself at the factory shortly after 11.00a. It was time to pull weeds and grass, then sweeping gravel into potholes that had formed.
I joined someone who had also come in from Joplin, and we talked about music and current affairs. He did show some different views but then again even I had a different take on this...and then there was more work ahead.
The 96-degree heat was definitely not the most comfortable but we got quite a lot done outside that day.
Tuesday was a day when I came better prepared with tea and Powerade, in addition to salami-on-rye sandwiches and tortilla chips. There was more filling of potholes with dirt and gravel shovelled off the streetside car park. Then I was one of three temps sweeping up, scraping out grass, and swabbing down the algae off of some outdoor storage tanks. Along the way I discovered refrigerant-filled pipes which held a thin coat of ice in the near-100-degree heat, and we all noticed how cool it was. Then a milk truck drove in from Minnesota to receive cream for use in making butter, and I walked alongside that noticing how the mirror finish of the caravan had the distortion effect of a circus mirror. I tried just a small taste of that cream and noticed it lacked all flavour.
Wednesday was rather hot outside, getting more cleanup done along the side of the warehouse across the Oklahoma line --- I was past the Welcome to Oklahoma Native America sign, shovelling out dirt accumulated in the trench, as there was a corporate audit coming right after Independence Day. But at about 9.00a I was moved indoors and wound up cleaning up a number of parts and pieces out of an upstairs storage area in the shop. It was hot and sticky work...and ultimately I needed a fan up there, and then I discovered some of the reason for those pipes being so cold: anhydrous ammonia tanks were in place, with some pipes and connectors covered with a thick coat of ice, sometimes up to one inch thick. It felt great to stick my forehead or even temple against the side of that...and I brought lots of iced tea with the Gatorade...
On Thursday I cleaned up another storage area, taking the whole day to clear out some packages dating back to the 1960s, a few never opened. It took the whole day but everything would wind up in order.
Finally I made it to the production floor on Friday, stacking cases of five-ounce milk tins onto pallets. I saw quite a few pallet changes and continued until I stepped aside for a Gatorade break then came back to find production was done for the day.
After work I went across the street to a liquor store that was also the site of a Bud Girls appearance as Anheuser Busch representaqtive presided over a Bud Light Lime tasting session. I wound up drinking the equivalent of a shot glass of beer. One of the lovely ladies offered more but I indicated I was content with that. I could definitely taste the lime, it appears to be OK, even though Bud anything is not on my hot list. Right after that I walked out, drove back, using the cruise control, with Herman Cain's admonition, Use The Cruise, ringing in my head from his guest appearance on Neal Boortz' radio show on Monday.
That's one thing that I like about the Chevrolet that I drive, that I miss in my Ford pickup. But that will likely be added at some point later this year. Right now I must focus on fixing the Chevrolet's left front tie rod and then getting the rest of the process completed on the paperwork for the Ford. Of course now the Ford pickup has a great new Sony stereo, which I am seriously contemplating for the car whose CD player sometimes skips the first track or so...
But that brass line in the floor showed me some of the important things in life, such as appreciation for more normal work conditions that I am accustomed to. I know I will appreciate my regular job even more when I go back to it after Independence Day which is next Friday (04_07_2008).
FREEDOM REAFFIRMED --- WITH A BANG
You have no doubt heard the glorious news about the Supreme Court ruling that reaffirmed what our founding fathers had already declared more than two centuries ago about gun owners' rights.
But the 5:4 ruling that set in stone for all time the individual right to own, keep, bear, and carry a firearm by eliminating the unconstitutional and contrarian Washington DC handgun ban of 1976 made it abundantly clear that a city that engage in such a ban have no respect for the constitutionally-protected civil rights of the individual.
But how can such a historic declaration be applicable to the present time?
It's actually very simple...
When the right to keep and bear arms was written into the United States Constitution as one of the first ten amendments known as the Bill of Rights we were rather fresh off our War for Independence. The idea of arming oneself in order to prevent another tyranny like the one that we had had to fight off just a few short years earlier prevailed in the minds of our founding fathers.
And though it was fairly common for people to own muskets back in those times --- there were even colonial laws as well as state laws at that time that mandated that people travelling carry sufficient ammunition and armament --- it was not intended that the Second Amendment merely protect people's ability to hunt, as a number of (usually) Democrat politicians falsely claim that it was designed for.
Instead, the Second Amendment protects us because we the people have the right to strip government of their powers, by armed force if necessary, because the government perform their activities only by consent of the governed --- we the people.
However, recent activities in the courts across the United States make us wonder if either we have lost our mettle to defend ourselves from freedom, out of fear of violating the law, or maybe we have lost our will to fight back against the powers that be.
The Founding Fathers would clearly not have accepted last month's ruling in the mislocated California Supreme Court that allowed same sex marriage; to the contrary they --- or even Americans living 50 years ago for that matter --- would not have stood for such judicial activism. No, they would have ridden down to the Courthouse, bearing muskets and gunpowder, and they would have exterminated at the very least the corruptors of the law who usurped power from the people in a fashion contrary to the Tenth Amendment.
And other citizens would have followed suit, as the actions of the judicial tyrants would be met rather violently, a useful and genuinely angry mob who would have the express mission of eliminating the threat to their freedom.
Nor would they have tolerated the SCOTUS ruling from the day before the ruling on Washington's handgun ban, in which the death penalty for child rapists was dumped --- a ruling that to his credit even Illinois Senator and Democrat Presidential Candidate Barack Obama condemned, because he thought that the Louisiana death penalty law for child rapists was clearly constructed enough to meet his satisfaction.
And they definitely would NOT have tolerated an activist federal judge's ruling against an Oklahoma law that was designed to prevent illegal aliens from obtaining jobs in the underground economy for the sake of avoiding income taxes. With the growing mood amongst growing majorities of Whites, Blacks, Asians, Native Americans (INCLUDING THIS Native American blogger --- my great-grandmother was of Cherokee extraction), and Hispanics (INCLUDING THIS Hispanic blogger --- I have BOTH of those ancestries) being to put the brakes on illegal immigration --- the law made perfect sense and the Founding Fathers would have approved of the law, condemned the ruling, and met this activist judge with muskets and gunpowder.
They surely would not have tolerated the 12 June ruling that gave terrorists constitutional rights either: Justice Anthoney Kennedy and Ruth Ginsburg would be on the short list to face the founders' wrath, muskets, and gunpowder as well for endangering the American public.
But today's legal professionals have gravely distorted the meaning of the law, as they seek to attack every tenet of American tradition, from marriage to the backyard barbecue. They seek to promote a more totalitarian methodology and do not believe in traditional laws like the Second Amendment, yet they believe in "discovering" special rights for (usually) fringe minorities, criminals, and/or terrorists. And as a result we see our children coming out of public schools grossly disinformed, facing the real world with little if any understanding about the rich traditions and history of our great republic.
There was a time when such a mindset would have been acceptable, such as Brown V Board Of Education Of Topeka Kansas in 1954, or the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 --- the last two of which were achieved under Democrat President Lyndon Johnson but required the votes of Republican Senators and House Representatives to pass. Of interesting note: One Democrat Senator who did NOT vote for either Civil Rights Act was the father of a recent former Vice President --- a Tennessee man named Albert Arnold Gore, Senior.
That time has passed but unfortunately the mentality still remains. And those people who are still pushing this mentality of "change" for the sake of stealing what little power we have left --- INCLUDING the supporters of the aforementioned Senator Obama --- have failed to move forward with the times. The 2000s are NOT the 1960s nor the 1970s, folks. We are facing greater and greater threats like never before. We have political organisations that organise on the fly for the express purpose of stealing power from we the people, simply because we would refuse to ignore a certain never-elected media puppet excuse for a President's genuine scandals. We have outfits that would sooner sepulchre us than respect us because we don't share their point of view.
How far are we from the next violent American revolt? My sense is we are not that far away, folks. I am clearly NOT advocating that people take up arms and shoot their local judge over a bad ruling in the local news. Most judges are fair and decent individuals. It is the very very few that give the rest a very bad reputation indeed. You know, the folks who push homosexual marriage, infanticide, appeasement of terrorists, appeasement of illegal aliens, and the forcible indoctrination of radicalised concepts like global warming and evolution down the populace's collective gullets --- even when we the people vote in large majorities to the contrary.
And what if someone snaps, and takes up arms, and exercises the following words of President Thomas Jefferson?:
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."
And I have a feeling that such a person may not be alone: Other brave Americans may find themselves with little choice but to join --- and to get back to fighting for freedom --- literally.
And though it may wind up rather violent for a short time, it will be the legacy of Jefferson living on, much as it will be the legacy of the Second Amendment living on.
But judicial tyranny is NOT the only possible venue for such a revolt: Take for instance the current push by Nancy Pelosi to block the Broadcaster Freedom Act from reaching the floor of the House so she can force the failed Fairness Doctrine down our gullets once again.
You can bet the world that our Founding Fathers would NEVER have accepted the Fairness Doctrine either: They would have ridden into town in 1949 and met the Federal Communications Commission with their own distaste in such fashion that at the very least the Commission would have been begging for their lives and promising to scrap the Fairness Doctrine.
Suffice it to say, the Second Amendment is not merely a way for hunters to remain legal, nor even a way to defend ourselves from a criminal, like a carjacker or a home invasion robber. It has an even greater design: there IS a reason some folks regard the Second Amendment as the "defender of the rest". And the close margin of victory for the American people --- 5:4 --- is even more critical than ever as a reason for you to get up and vote, to go out and exercise your freedoms, to stand up for what is right.
For once the SCOTUS get it right.
Let freedom ring!
THE MEDIA'S CONGRESS ATTACK TALK RADIO --- AND PEOPLE ARE FIGHTING BACK
In recent months a number of Democratic House and Senate leaders, as well as an Independent Senator who, with socialist views, tends to poll with the Dems, have called for the reimposition of an insidious form of censorship that would stifle the development of radio.
This form of censorship was imposed upon broadcasters from 1949 to 1987 but was repealed when it was found to have constrained open political discourse.
Enter the so-called 'Fairness' Doctrine.
Initially introduced by US House Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) in January as a means of "reforming" the media and forcibly instilling "balance", simply because people like him have failed in talk radio.
You may recall that Air America Radio --- a patently left-wing radio network whose commentators were more often than not loaded with irrational partisan hatred --- had a similar message that could already be heard in the following outlets:
* ABC News
* CBS News
* Cable News Network
* CNBC
* MSNBC
* NBC News
* National Public Radio
* Public Broadcast Service
* Associated Press
* Most major newspapers like the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, the St Louis Post-Dispatch, and the Washington Post
* Most major news magazines like Time, Newsweek, and US News & World Report
And in the end the network wound up losing so much money, at least in part because they PAID stations to carry their material, that they have since entered receivership and are trying to recover.
And word is that Communist organisations like Communist Party USA (which was heavily funded by the Soviet Union), the Maoist-influenced Revolutionary Communist Party, and World Can't Wait are all complicit in the efforts to censor the airwaves.
Representative Hinchey --- joined by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent who has left-of-centre views --- have been supported in their efforts by patently anti-American left-of-centre billionaire George Soros, who has financed a number of left-leaning groups like the Massachusetts-based "Free Press" and other mellifluous-sounding front groups in effort to undermine freedom of speech and maybe even American society as a whole. Soros has also funded organisations dedicated to decriminalising dangerous illegal drugs, even to the point of sending security guards to attack those who protest his methods at public exhibitions.
And whilst the controlled media have been ignoring his numerous and ethical violations in his quest to steal power from and even censor the American people --- they have habitually mongered hatred toward independent media outlets like talk radio and internet-based news sites like NewsMax and WorldNetDaily and even bloggers, and even Fox News (which like MySpace, is a part of NewsCorp, albeit in a different division) as well, all because they have found ways to report the news without injecting their left-of-centre political biases and spin into the news.
They have also attacked the military, enforcement of immigration policy, business, and even innocent people like the Duke lacrosse players falsely accused of rape, not to mention overexaggerating social problems like homelessness, and even demonised religious conservatives.
Another leftist group, the so-called Centre for American Progress, have bemoaned the dominance of conservatives in talk radio by calling it "structural imbalance" in a fake report.
Now, the conservatives are fighting back, not only by contacting their Congressional representatives, but also by introducing, then passing, a bill that would prohibit the reimposition of the "Fairness" Doctrine without an Act of Congress.
The National Association of Broadcasters' CEO and president, David Rehr, has himself condemned the "Fairness Doctrine", citing the numbers of media outlets available today, with more than 13 000 radio stations, more than 1 700 television stations, and a myriad of websites with visual, video, and audio outlets catering to basically any viewpoint in America.
One needs to remember that with the Left --- especially in the editorial desks --- openly promoting a more neoliberal viewpoint that condemns America, condemns conservatism, and condemns freedom --- the marketplace has opened with the advent of myriad cable and satellite channels, including more television news sources, the growth of real talk radio, and the growth of internet-based news sites --- thus leading to the successes of folks like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Neal Boortz.
And that is the basic rule of the marketplace: You MUST be able to deliver a product the people actually want. With the liberal media dominating print and television news, millions of Americans have chosen to go with real talk radio; Air America Radio failed precisely because the audiences decided that they did not want to hear the same thing that they could easily see on no fewer than six television news channels, read in most major newspapers, or read in most major news magazines.
But because the Left have failed to attract an audience they seek to force-feed their message to the general public, most of whom have determined that they do not want that type of agenda embedded in their news coverage.
And ironically one of their own hosts has been badly burnt at least in part by another controversial talk radio host who aggressively shut down a rival: Al Sharpton, who himself hosts a show carried on 21 stations, led a campaign to bust Don Imus off CBS Radio and MSNBC over his controversial derogatory remarks about the Rutgers University women's basketball team.
Whilst Imus himself did a lot of damage to his career and his credibility --- he willingly apologised publicly and again to the Rutgers team --- incidentally on the same night New Jersey Democratic Governor John Corzine was injured in a wreck caused by a speeding state trooper who crashed the SUV through a guardrail at 91 miles an hour and Corzine was not wearing his seat belt.
But inasmuch damage as he did to himself with his racist comments --- Imus also apologised, and after he was basically driven off the air by racists like Al Sharpton (who has openly condemned Whites and may have contributed to the deaths of several Hispanic employees of a neighbourhood clothing store that burnt in the late 1980s) and Jesse Jackson (who is infamous for his anti-Semitic remarks) --- he even saw fit to file a lawsuit against CBS for breach of contract.
Sharpton was further aided and abetted in his efforts by a rather left-leaning group, Media Matters for America, who not only attempted to have Rush Limbaugh removed from Armed Forces Radio but are funded by Soros as well.
Was the Don Imus affair a dry run to make a charge against the ever-dominant talk radio host Rush Limbaugh? One county government in Florida did consider withdrawing their association with a Miami-area talk radio station because the station carry his show.
And now Senators are debating the matter, just after the House passed the Broadcast Freedom Act. Maybe you too could get involved in this effort, as the reality is people from both the left AND the right regularly get their points heard on real talk radio. Here is a site that will help you get started on that.
And if we don't start standing up to the censors who would want to silence real talk radio right now, there is no question that a onesided media would be forced upon the populace --- and then the next step would be forcible viewing and/or listening of the same onesided media --- and then other outlets would soon wind up under government censorship diktats.
Whether or not you agree with Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Michael Savage and Neal Boortz and Glenn Beck and Bill Bennett, you have got to admit that the reimposition of the "Fairness" Doctrine would interfere with your freedom of speech, not to mention your freedom of choice in how you get news, information, and commentary, not to mention even entertainment.
YOU MAKE THE CALL:
SHOULD THE CENTRE FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST BE SHUT DOWN UNDER THE RACKETEER AND INFLUENCE CORRUPT ORGANISATION (RICO) ACT?
The answer to that is an emphatic HELL YEAH!...and I will tell you why.
But first you might want to review the Racketeer and Influence Corrupt Organisation Act. Here is a look at the full text of that law which was passed in 1970 to put the clampdown on organised crime activity specifically with regard to labour unions.
We now take a close look at the Centre for Science in the Public Interest.
Founded in 1971 by known left-of-centre agitator Michael Jacobson, who was forced to keep the coffee machine in the office after a number of employees threatened to mutiny by walking out, the CSPI have basically adopted a basic ideology that you cannot be trusted to make responsible choices for your own alimentary, culinary, and dietary needs.
So they try to find ways to scare you out of eating foods that taste pleasurable. They create false links between dread diseases like breast cancer and foodstuffs generally regarded as safe by the Food and Drug Administration. They whinge about microwave popcorn (which admittedly have been found to have somewhat dangerous additives but the food companies are already sorting that out), they complain about hearty breakfast burritos, they complain about hearty cheeseburgers by branding them with inflammatory pejoratives, they hatch ridiculous screeds about egg companies allegedly deceiving consumers when they talk about the health benefits of eggs, and that is just the tip of the iceberg.
Then they intimidate major companies by threatening lawsuits, like they did with Kelloggs which have caved to pressure from CSPI by "agreeing" not to advertise certain cerealsthat happen to have more sugar than that which the CSPI gang feel is acceptable. Excuse me, but that sounds a LOT like bullying and intimidation to me!
Let's say that you tried to pressure a company into paying you millions of dollars for whatever reason you felt like. Hello, that is the sign of a classic SHAKEDOWN! It's the equivalent of some fat 300lb slob walking up to your little hot dog cart and telling you, "Hey, we're gonna charge you $500 a week just to operate on this block, and if we catch your ass here and you haven't paid your dues, we're gonna send Tiny here (who stands six-foot-six and weighs 375lb) to bust out ya kneecaps, capisce?"
And trial lawyers are infamous for doing the same thing too.
They even demand and propose bans on fast food restaurants, such as those proposed in Ogunquit, Maine, and in Los Angeles, California. They also support schools' efforts to forbid specific foods like cupcakes. They have even bullied Cadbury Beverages over the natural ingredient composition of the iconic soft drink SevenUp, which is now a part of the new DrPepper/Snapple Group...and this on top of their haranguing of Kraft over the ingredient lists of Capri Sun drinks! And the CSPI thugs even harass the manufacturers of sport drinks like Gatorade and Powerade.
They have also demanded that restaurants publicly display calorie and fat content nutrition on overhead menus, and such proposals have been floated in California. A similar New York City ordinance was ultimately struck down in December 2006. When California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed such a proposal the CSPI gang cried that it would "leave a greasy stain on his record".
Bull.
You expect ME to believe that an executive who decided not to impose any more undue regulations is stained? Although Governor Schwarzenegger has done a lot of nutty things during his five-year tenure as California Governor, that have INDEED stained his reputation --- vetoing an absurd bill like mandatory menu labelling which won't do a damn thing to change dietary habits but instead piss us off anymore? Hey, Margo Wootan, Marion Nestlé, and Michael Jacobson, and the rest of you left-wing fringe kook extremists, we are trying to get a damn meal that satisfies us for as little as possible in as little time as possible, and yet you see fit to complain about what I am eating? How about you shut up and leave us the hell alone? Let me eat my Jumbo Jack with cheese, my Breakfast Jack, and my tacos in PEACE!
HOW ABOUT YOU NINNY-NANNY NEOCOMMUNIST FOLKS AT THE CENTRE FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST GET A LIFE.
And such bullying has turned out to be counterproductive. As an example, the growing numbers of teen girls weighing themselves obsessively are enough to cause alarm in University of Minnesota researchers to advise against the practise.
Also, it is increasingly known as common knowledge that we the people don't like being told what to eat and what not to eat.
Guess what?
Maybe it is time that we had a serious effort to shut down these fringe leftist kook neoliberal killjoys who want to interfere with our culinary and dietary freedoms. Maybe Michael Mukasey, in what could well be his last months in office, could grow a spine and then leave a lasting legacy of freedom by charging the CSPI gang under the Racketeer and Influence Corrupt Organisation (RICO) Act, investigating the hell out of those ninny-nanny neocommunists, prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law, and locking their principals in prison and shutting down their outfit for once and for all.
Michael Jacobson has no understanding of when enough is enough. He is rather zealous about keeping out all the tasty foods out of his diet. He has attacked all kinds of foods, from cinema popcorn (Remember the 1988 coconut oil scare? Turns out coconut oil has more health benefits than we thought) to Chinese food to good-old-fashioned American fast food. Maybe it is time to consider him for a straitjacket in asylum.
Even a first-year law student could easily handcraft a credible case against the CSPI gang and get some RICO Act convictions to stick.
Let us go to the first paragraph of the United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 96, Paragraph 1961.
"(1) “racketeering activity” means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter"
And what we can see here are a number of cases of extortion, like those directed against Kelloggs and Cadbury. Already I can see no fewer than four violations of the RICO Act.
Then we go further down the list, to Section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), and we can find dozens of violations, just a few of which are mentioned here. And though it appears to be a relatively thin case, the evidence will clearly indicate that the nature of the charges are clearly warranted and therefore a conviction should be easily obtained.
And then we the people will be able to breathe a sigh of relief and enjoy our food without fear of harassment from the likes of Michael Jacobson, who would be better suited living in a padded cell at Patton mental asylum near San Bernardino. We could live our lives in peace without the added drama from Margo Wootan and Marion Nestlé too.
And then we could FINALLY get back to the business of living.
Currently listening :
You Can't See Me By John Cena & tha Trademarc Release date: 2005-05-10
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment