Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

By:  Pat Austin

BOSSIER CITY, LA – They say a picture “is worth a thousand words,” but perhaps sometimes no picture at all says so much more.

The front page of last week’s edition of the Airline High School newspaper was completely blank. Normally this would be a publisher’s nightmare. It is the equivalent of several minutes of dead air time on the radio.

In this case, the blank page was intentional.

The student produced newspaper originally featured a photo of students decorating a Christmas tree; one student was hanging an ornament that said “I love Jesus.” The ornaments were made by students who were describing what Christmas means to them.

The student newspaper is printed, basically at cost, by the Bossier Press-Tribune, for the school. When the faculty advisor realized that the central photo contained a religious message, a call was made to “stop the presses” until the school board attorney had been consulted.

The Bossier School system has learned to be cautious about such things. In 2018, the system was sued by Americans United for Separation of Church and State for “widespread unconstitutional promotion of Christianity throughout Bossier Parish, La public schools,” including, but not limited to student led prayer at graduation ceremonies, choir performances that include Christian songs, and promotion of Christianity through the athletic programs. The school system had to remove advertising from ChristFit gym from the endzone of the football field because their logo includes a cross and a scripture citation.

The lawsuit was settled in March, 2019, after the Bossier School Board agreed to revise its policy regarding religious expression.

After the Bossier Press stopped the presses on the Airline High newspaper last week, the attorney advised that the first page of the paper with the offending photograph should be replaced. Rather than replace the photo, or the entire page, the newspaper staff elected to send a message by running an entirely blank front page. No masthead, no explanation, no nothing.  Blank. Silent.

Randy Brown, publisher of the Bossier Press-Tribune, brought the matter to the public’s attention when he wrote an opinion piece in his own newspaper about the incident. Brown, saying that he was “brought to tears” by this, wrote, “In the Airline school newspaper situation, the bottom line is that while someone else’s First Amendment rights were upheld, the rights of the majority of the students were violated. In this case, the voice of Christianity was silenced.”

It is clear that the students wanted to send a message with the blank page. Other solutions were available such as replacing the photo, revising the page, or even blurring the message on the ornament. Many in the community applaud the blank page statement while others contend that the students were not censored, calling it “preemptive self-victimization.”

That may be a little harsh given the recent lawsuit and the microscope under which the system now operates.

Randy Brown was even criticized on social media by some people for his “emotional and propaganda filled” op-ed.

The Christmas season is obviously a Christian holiday and there are a lot of people who feel like that is under attack.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being tolerant and inclusive but that is a two way street, and many Christians feel persecuted, including, perhaps the student newspaper staff at Airline High School.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport and is the author of Cane River Bohemia: Cammie Henry and her Circle at Melrose Plantation. Follow her on Instagram @patbecker25 and Twitter @paustin110.

Some quick Drudge Flip Thoughts

Posted: December 16, 2019 by datechguy in Uncategorized

The Drudge’s Report’s apparent swing to NeverTrump and the subsequent drop in pageviews is generating a lot of pixels but it’s ignoring a couple of important points.

  1. If Drudge decided to flip on Trump that’s his business, people have the right to be wrong.
  2. If Drudge sold, that’s also his business. He’s been at it for 20+ years and if he wants to cash in and enjoy life, again it’s his business. He doesn’t owe me or anyone else anything.
  3. I’ve never met Drudge and have no idea what his actual ideological beliefs are. It could very well be that his promotion of conservatism/libertarianism was all about finding a market need and filling it, it’s also possible that he thought that turning on Trump and conservatives might have been a market based move where he guessed wrong. I simply don’t know and it’s likely neither do you.
  4. Even if Drudge loses half his readership 50% of an ungodly number is still an ungodly number. He or whoever now owns the site will make out fine.
  5. That being said you can never assume remaining on top. Remember when Drudge was starting out AOL & IE owned the internet.
  6. Now you understand why the left has been so adamant in preventing people of the right from buying money-losers like Newsweek. There is nothing like flipping a well known but unprofitable brand to make a splash and they are determined to do so.
  7. If there was ever proof that Glenn Reynolds plan of buying Women’s Magazines and staffing them with conservatives is a great idea, this is it.
Russia’s aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov on fire. Image from Reddit.

Russia’s only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, is on fire, and not in a good way. A large fire spread throughout the ship during recent welding work, and has so far killed one crew member (likely more, due to the extent of the fire). Anyone that has seen the fires aboard Forrestal can’t help but make an eerie connection.

Fighting the fire aboard the Forrestal. By Official U.S. Navy Photograph – This Image was released by the United States Navy with the ID USN 1124794 1124794#mw-category-media.

You would think this would be big news, but its barely scratched the Google News feed. Given that its Russia’s only carrier, you’d think this might change their Naval strategy or ship building priorities. For Russia though, this might prove to be overall a good thing.

Unlike the United States, Russia doesn’t have nearly the amount of foreign interests around the world. Most of Russia’s interests are right next door to them, in Eastern Europe and the South and Central Asia. These nations don’t require a Navy to reach. When war broke out in Syria and the Kuznetsov couldn’t launch and recover planes, Russia shifted to using other nearby airbases.

This is quite different from the United States, which uses aircraft carriers to project power around the world. The U.S. has multiple islands, two entire states and a number of Caribbean and Pacific territories to defend. Additionally, there are a significant number of Americans overseas, as well as a number of American owned companies that do business around the world. The U.S. needs a Navy to protect all these interests.

Russia’s Navy, in contrast, exists to foil the U.S. Navy. The small Russian economy can’t produce 11 supercarriers. Instead, Russia builds small, extremely capable vessels (such as the Buyan) that are fast, difficult to track and yet carry capable weapons such as the Yakhont anti-ship missile. Russia also builds an extensive and capable submarine fleet, with anti-ship missiles for use against carrier strike groups and fast attack submarines against U.S. ballistic missile submarines.

Remember too that Russia doesn’t need an outright win in any U.S. conflict. It’s sufficient for Russia to slowly take back former Soviet Union territory and keep the U.S. out of a conflict. Georgia and Ukraine are prime examples of Russia “nibbling on the edges of NATO” but keeping the U.S. at bay. In a possible large conflict, Russia would need a quick strike that would hurt the U.S. and convince them to do nothing. A strike on a carrier strike group from a Russian submarine, or an exchange of fire from a small Russian vessel against a NATO surface group, might be sufficient.

So for Russia, it would come as no surprise if they scrap their carrier. It doesn’t fit their naval strategy, and the cost to repair would be far better used building more submarines and smaller, more capable surface vessels. While we might laugh at them for this, given our wasting of money on stealth destroyers that can’t deploy or small ships that can’t fight, perhaps we have something to learn from the Russian Navy.

This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.

Get ready to have your money sucked away rapidly by the Massachusetts tax man and be prepared to have Big Brother riding with you everywhere you drive because Massachusetts lawmakers are formulating a plan to raise more money to pay for transportation.  The current proposals have many odious provisions which are documented in this CBS Boston article Massachusetts Lawmakers Propose Expanding Highway Tolls, Charging Drivers By The Mile.

Several key House members have hinted that they are likely to include an increase in the state’s 24-cents-per-gallon gasoline tax in a transportation revenue bill that Speaker Robert DeLeo is eyeing for release next month, but other ideas put on the table during a Transportation Committee hearing on Thursday could supplement that revenue stream.

Rep. Thomas Stanley warned his colleagues that over the long term the gas tax will be insufficient to meet roadway and public transit needs. Rising fuel efficiency in vehicles, he said, means that even the same frequency of driving will result in motorists purchasing less gas, generating less revenue for the state.

Instead, Stanley suggested Massachusetts embrace legislation (H 3010) he co-filed with Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier to create a pilot program to test fees based on the miles people travel rather than the amount of gas used.

As if all of these driver fleecing proposals aren’t ridiculous enough, there are more being investigated.

The first bill (S 2060) would instruct the Department of Transportation to report on the feasibility of implementing all-electronic tolling on state and interstate highways “not currently subject to a toll,” taking a look in particular at tolls along the state’s borders.

The second (S 2062) would expand tolls to stretches of Interstate 93, Interstate 95 and Route 2 in an attempt to apply equal charges to drivers across the greater Boston region. That bill also calls for implementation of dynamic “peak pricing” where the toll varies based on roadway conditions.

As a libertarian who values personal freedom and privacy very deeply, Massachusetts Bill H3010 really bothers me on a fundamental level.  Here are the details:

SECTION 3. PILOT PROGRAM.

(a) The department of transportation shall develop, implement and oversee one or more statewide pilot programs to assess owners of motor vehicles a user fee that is based on the number of miles traveled on roads in this state by those motor vehicles.

(b) The pilot programs shall include at least 1,000 volunteers across the commonwealth who are representative of drivers of trucks, passenger, and commercial vehicles and throughout the commonwealth, who will have on-board vehicle-mileage-counting equipment added to their vehicles, administered in a manner the department of transportation deems appropriate.

(c) The pilot programs shall test the reliability, ease of use, cost and public acceptance oftechnology and methods for:

(1) counting the number of miles traveled by particular vehicles;

(2) reporting the number of miles traveled by particular vehicles; and

(3) collecting payments from participants in the pilot programs.

(d) The pilot programs shall also analyze and evaluate the ability of different technologies and methods to:

(1) protect the integrity of data collected and reported;

(2) ensure drivers’ privacy; and

(3) vary pricing based on the time of driving, type of road, proximity to transit,          vehicle fuel efficiency, participation in car-sharing or pooling or income of the driver

The freedom to travel wherever we wish is under assault by this bill.  The government will be punishing us for traveling too far by taxing us on every mile we wish to drive.  That is unacceptable.  The technologies to implement this will result in Big Brother riding with us in every vehicle.  That kind of government surveillance is beyond unacceptable.