Thursday, April 30, 2009
Sad day.
A friend lost his battle with his demons. The prospect of going to jail was apparently too much and he took his own life.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Napoli & Specter
Arlen Specter, the moderate Republican Pennsylvania senator has switched to the Democratic Party at the same time our own Wild Bill Napoli has suggested he may run for Governor.
Napoli is quick on the draw when it comes to inviting Republicans to leave the party when they don't fall lock-step in line with his vision of what Republicans ought to be. Specter's defection leaves President Obama one senate seat (Al Franken) from a filibuster-proof majority.
Or democracy (or representative republic) does not work well when one party has absolute power.
Republicans like Napoli have brought this upon themselves. They are powerless in Washington and the country is at the mercy of the Democratic Party for at least two years, and more probably eight.
And Wild Bill thinks the Republican field for governor is too liberal to represent South Dakota's conservative values. His entry into the race would split the party along religious lines – those who want to move away from incendiary issues like gay marriage and abortion toward fiscal responsibility and those who wish to force their religious views upon others.
Such a split would almost assure Republican defeat if Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin chooses to try to raise up her youngun in the Governor's mansion.
When the Republican Party concerns itself with letting South Dakotans keep more of the money they earn, and spends less time figiting about other people's sin, they will gain back some of the power they lost with Specter's announcement today.
Former Sen. Napoli has it wrong. His entry into the Republican race for governor will accomplish nothing but defeat.
Napoli is quick on the draw when it comes to inviting Republicans to leave the party when they don't fall lock-step in line with his vision of what Republicans ought to be. Specter's defection leaves President Obama one senate seat (Al Franken) from a filibuster-proof majority.
"Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."– Lord Acton
Or democracy (or representative republic) does not work well when one party has absolute power.
Republicans like Napoli have brought this upon themselves. They are powerless in Washington and the country is at the mercy of the Democratic Party for at least two years, and more probably eight.
And Wild Bill thinks the Republican field for governor is too liberal to represent South Dakota's conservative values. His entry into the race would split the party along religious lines – those who want to move away from incendiary issues like gay marriage and abortion toward fiscal responsibility and those who wish to force their religious views upon others.
Such a split would almost assure Republican defeat if Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin chooses to try to raise up her youngun in the Governor's mansion.
When the Republican Party concerns itself with letting South Dakotans keep more of the money they earn, and spends less time figiting about other people's sin, they will gain back some of the power they lost with Specter's announcement today.
Former Sen. Napoli has it wrong. His entry into the Republican race for governor will accomplish nothing but defeat.
Did Obama get something correct?
There's an excellent Forum piece in yesterday's USA Today. Read it here. It's written by Stephen Prothero, chair of the Department of Religion at Boston University and author of Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs To Know – And Doesn't.
Prothero quotes Obama from his inaugural when he describes the United States as a "nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus – and non-believers." He later cites an Obama speech made in Turkey: The United States "does not consider itself a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation" but "a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."
These are the wisest words to have left Obama's mouth that I can recall.
Prothero's piece is an excellent analysis of the conclusions drawn by Newsweek from the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey. And he makes the point that the discussion of whether or not this is a Christian country is more complicated than simply counting the number of people who identify themselves as Christians.
Of course, that's what the First Amendment is about. There are times when majority rule is not the best idea, and the framers knew this. And, the freedom to worship – or not worship – as we choose is among our most important freedoms. Obama has it right. We must be a nation bound by ideals and a set of values and not by a specific religion. The fact that many of those values have their roots in Christianity, is not a bad thing either.
Prothero quotes Obama from his inaugural when he describes the United States as a "nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus – and non-believers." He later cites an Obama speech made in Turkey: The United States "does not consider itself a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation" but "a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."
These are the wisest words to have left Obama's mouth that I can recall.
Prothero's piece is an excellent analysis of the conclusions drawn by Newsweek from the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey. And he makes the point that the discussion of whether or not this is a Christian country is more complicated than simply counting the number of people who identify themselves as Christians.
Of course, that's what the First Amendment is about. There are times when majority rule is not the best idea, and the framers knew this. And, the freedom to worship – or not worship – as we choose is among our most important freedoms. Obama has it right. We must be a nation bound by ideals and a set of values and not by a specific religion. The fact that many of those values have their roots in Christianity, is not a bad thing either.
They ALL Stink!
I've been thinking about trying to make some intelligent comment about the differences among CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, CBS and ABC.
Here it is: They are all revolting disgraces. From the standpoint of unbiased, objective reporting, there is no difference between Rachel Maddow and Glenn Beck. They are both horrible. There's no significant difference in the quality of the commentary of Keith Obermann and Sean Hannity. They both suck.
Anyone who thinks they can get straight unbiased reporting from any kind of television signal is dillusional. Anyone who thinks either Chris Matthews or Bill O'Reilly are serious journalists has never seen, or read, a serious journalist.
Consequently, if you are basing your opinions upon the opinions or reportage of any of the talking heads on any television network, you are likely as dumb as they are.
My friend, Bill Fleming, with whom I disagree more often than I agree, had it right on another blog: Read. (Unfortunately, Bill's implication was that only smart liberals read and dumb conservatives don't.) Seeking unbiased, well-written reporting, whether printed on dead trees or "published" on the internet, won't necessarily make you a conservative or a liberal; Republican or Democrat. It'll just make you smarter.
Allowing the nonsense on television to influence your opinions will turn your brain to unflavored gelatin.
Here it is: They are all revolting disgraces. From the standpoint of unbiased, objective reporting, there is no difference between Rachel Maddow and Glenn Beck. They are both horrible. There's no significant difference in the quality of the commentary of Keith Obermann and Sean Hannity. They both suck.
Anyone who thinks they can get straight unbiased reporting from any kind of television signal is dillusional. Anyone who thinks either Chris Matthews or Bill O'Reilly are serious journalists has never seen, or read, a serious journalist.
Consequently, if you are basing your opinions upon the opinions or reportage of any of the talking heads on any television network, you are likely as dumb as they are.
My friend, Bill Fleming, with whom I disagree more often than I agree, had it right on another blog: Read. (Unfortunately, Bill's implication was that only smart liberals read and dumb conservatives don't.) Seeking unbiased, well-written reporting, whether printed on dead trees or "published" on the internet, won't necessarily make you a conservative or a liberal; Republican or Democrat. It'll just make you smarter.
Allowing the nonsense on television to influence your opinions will turn your brain to unflavored gelatin.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Stephanie Obsession Disorder
Pat Powers over at the War College sure seems obsessed with Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin – witness his posts on her delay in deciding what post she will seek in 2010 and Chris Nelson's announcement that he's thinking about maybe running for her house seat. Read it here.
Pat seems to think the longer she takes to make up her mind, the better it is for Republicans. It just won't matter, Pat.
She won't run for Thune's senate seat because it's the only race she'd likely lose. I believe she could run for Governor and win with a fight and a bucket of money, (which she has). And her House seat is hers for the asking, no matter who the Republicans put up against her.
She has a voting record which for the most part won't make folks in East River puke.
She'll have plenty of opportunity to screw up her opportunities. But, regardless of how many times Pat calls her a carpetbagger and a princess, she's an awfully bright politician and will be very difficult to beat.
If she returns to her Blue Dog roots, it'll be smooth sailing from here out. If she votes for one of the administration's or Nancy Pelosi's ridiculous gun control bills, she'll be in a lot of trouble, as she will if she votes for one more trillion-dollar anything.
The house seat is hers to lose, Pat. And, as good a candidate as Chris Nelson might be, as popular as he is and as nice a guy as he is, the only way it will be an easy fight is if she screws something up. And, I don't think she will.
Pat seems to think the longer she takes to make up her mind, the better it is for Republicans. It just won't matter, Pat.
She won't run for Thune's senate seat because it's the only race she'd likely lose. I believe she could run for Governor and win with a fight and a bucket of money, (which she has). And her House seat is hers for the asking, no matter who the Republicans put up against her.
She has a voting record which for the most part won't make folks in East River puke.
She'll have plenty of opportunity to screw up her opportunities. But, regardless of how many times Pat calls her a carpetbagger and a princess, she's an awfully bright politician and will be very difficult to beat.
If she returns to her Blue Dog roots, it'll be smooth sailing from here out. If she votes for one of the administration's or Nancy Pelosi's ridiculous gun control bills, she'll be in a lot of trouble, as she will if she votes for one more trillion-dollar anything.
The house seat is hers to lose, Pat. And, as good a candidate as Chris Nelson might be, as popular as he is and as nice a guy as he is, the only way it will be an easy fight is if she screws something up. And, I don't think she will.
RIP Pontiac 2
2008 Solstice
1994 Trans Am Ram-Air
1972 Trans Am
1969 Grand Prix SJ
1957 Safari (2-Door Wagon)
1948 Silver Streak Woody
1941 6-Torpedo
1936 6-Delux
1927 CabrioletRIP Pontiac Motor Division
Pontiacs: They were a step up.Chevy was the entry-level car.
Pontiac was the next step.
Buick (ah, the deuce ana quata).
Cadillac was luxury, favored by barkeeps.
My first one was a 1964 GTO, 389 six-pack exactly like the one pictured here, including the color, but not the girl. My Dad taught me to drive in that car. My wife and I had our first date, and our first kiss, in it.
Back then to me, it was an 8-year-old used car, handed down from my older sister. My Dad paid $1000. He knew it was cool. It took me a while to understand. If I had it now, the same car in the condition it was in before I totaled it, (in 1974), it would be worth more than $70,000. Sigh.
I owned other muscle cars. But this one was the pioneer of muscle cars. It smoked the wimpy little Mustangs of the same year. The design was John De Lorean at his prime. Elegance on top of 348 horses.
I'm saddened by the demise of a car company with so many beautiful cars in its history. The company was the brainchild of Edward Murphy and Alanson Brush and the Pontiac Buggy Company of Pontiac, Michigan. Murphy called his new car company The Oakland Motor Car Company in 1907. William C. Durant, owner of General Motors, bought the company in 1908, shortly before Murphy's death. The first Pontiac was introduced in 1924.
General Motors, the company that bought Pontiac, made her the experimental division of GM and is responsible for most of her beautiful offspring, eventually ran her into the ground and finally killed her.
Photos of Pontiac's history of design to follow.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Torture
There's a video demonstration of waterboarding here.
This is the most objective demonstration I could find on the web. There are a lot of over-acted extreme nonsense versions of the same idea. This one, clearly tries to convince us that waterboarding is torture. It fails to convince me.
There is much talk of the Geneva Convention when discussing how to extract information from people who want to kill us. Those who would fly jumbo jets into skyscrapers are not bound by the Geneva Convention.
The previous administration claims their interrogation techniques were successful in foiling other plots to kill Americans. Cheney has called for the CIA to release documents that would prove it. The Obama Administration doesn't seem interested in that, they seem to want to cherry pick memos that suggest illegal behavior.
It is politics. It is a waste of time. And the administration has clearly said they will adopt different interrogation techniques. Fine. Move on.
It is clear that terrorists are a different enemy than we've fought before. Perhaps different rules are required.
This is the most objective demonstration I could find on the web. There are a lot of over-acted extreme nonsense versions of the same idea. This one, clearly tries to convince us that waterboarding is torture. It fails to convince me.
There is much talk of the Geneva Convention when discussing how to extract information from people who want to kill us. Those who would fly jumbo jets into skyscrapers are not bound by the Geneva Convention.
The previous administration claims their interrogation techniques were successful in foiling other plots to kill Americans. Cheney has called for the CIA to release documents that would prove it. The Obama Administration doesn't seem interested in that, they seem to want to cherry pick memos that suggest illegal behavior.
It is politics. It is a waste of time. And the administration has clearly said they will adopt different interrogation techniques. Fine. Move on.
It is clear that terrorists are a different enemy than we've fought before. Perhaps different rules are required.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Why have an engineering department?
So anyone here concerned that we have an engineering department in Rapid City, employing several licensed engineers, and yet every time we need someone to design something, we farm it out to companies that employ engineers we've fired?
More than $1 million is up for grabs in two weeks. How many top notch engineers can we hire for $1 million? That's a lot of dough! What do our city engineers do except draft Requests for Proposals?
More than $1 million is up for grabs in two weeks. How many top notch engineers can we hire for $1 million? That's a lot of dough! What do our city engineers do except draft Requests for Proposals?
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
How to make a judge sick
A friend of mine, we'll call him Hizhona, spent 17 years on the bench and retired after he said he began catching what he calls black robe fever. "I was getting downright mean," he told me.
So I asked Hizhona if he had heard about Sen. Diane Feinstein's husband and the sweetheart deal described in a Washington Times story which you can read in its entirety (8 pages) here.
Feinstein, it seems, sought $25 billion ($25,000,000,000.00) for the FDIC which had in November awarded her husband's firm a big fat hairy contract. Sen. Feinstein says she didn't know her hubby, Richard Blum, chairman of the board of CB Richard Ellis Group (CBRE), had recently secured the fat FDIC contract to sell foreclosed upon properties the FDIC gets when it takes over a bank.
She also didn't know that he bought 10 million shares of CBRE just before the contract with FDIC was announced, (and after the good Senator got involved) garnering the happy couple a fat 37 percent increase (as of Monday) on their $37,700,000 investment since November. Nothin' fishy about that, right? Gentle readers, if your spouse purchased nearly $38 million in stock, do you think you would know?
What's all this got to do with Hizhona? When I tried to describe the situation to him, he said: "I spent 17 years on the bench putting people in the penetentiary for stealing $500 and sometimes less. And, these people will go free. It makes me sick." (read want to vomit).
The $25,000,000,000.00 Feinstein secured for the FDIC was supposed to help FDIC in their efforts to avoid having to pursue foreclosures. But her husband will get between 6 percent and 30 percent for selling those properties after they're foreclosed upon.
This stinks like dead fish.
So I asked Hizhona if he had heard about Sen. Diane Feinstein's husband and the sweetheart deal described in a Washington Times story which you can read in its entirety (8 pages) here.
Feinstein, it seems, sought $25 billion ($25,000,000,000.00) for the FDIC which had in November awarded her husband's firm a big fat hairy contract. Sen. Feinstein says she didn't know her hubby, Richard Blum, chairman of the board of CB Richard Ellis Group (CBRE), had recently secured the fat FDIC contract to sell foreclosed upon properties the FDIC gets when it takes over a bank.
She also didn't know that he bought 10 million shares of CBRE just before the contract with FDIC was announced, (and after the good Senator got involved) garnering the happy couple a fat 37 percent increase (as of Monday) on their $37,700,000 investment since November. Nothin' fishy about that, right? Gentle readers, if your spouse purchased nearly $38 million in stock, do you think you would know?
What's all this got to do with Hizhona? When I tried to describe the situation to him, he said: "I spent 17 years on the bench putting people in the penetentiary for stealing $500 and sometimes less. And, these people will go free. It makes me sick." (read want to vomit).
The $25,000,000,000.00 Feinstein secured for the FDIC was supposed to help FDIC in their efforts to avoid having to pursue foreclosures. But her husband will get between 6 percent and 30 percent for selling those properties after they're foreclosed upon.
This stinks like dead fish.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Another Good Reporter Gone
Rapid City Journal reporter Scott Aust has been fired. That's too bad. Scott is a solid meetings reporter and a good writer.
I'm not going to second-guess Journal management's decision because I didn't work with Scott. But, he made some of the most boring material in the world interesting reading. And the Journal will be hard-pressed to find a good replacement.
In the meantime, I'll wish Scott the best and hope he lands squarely on his feet.
I'm not going to second-guess Journal management's decision because I didn't work with Scott. But, he made some of the most boring material in the world interesting reading. And the Journal will be hard-pressed to find a good replacement.
In the meantime, I'll wish Scott the best and hope he lands squarely on his feet.
Everyone can benefit from editing
I'm new to this blogging stuff. I realize some posts here have been long-winded.
I'm learning. Having the freedom to write as much as I want, does not necessarily mean I should.
Everyone needs an editor. Rather than edit the long posts, I'll leave them as a reminder to myself.
In the future, please post a comment when I'm writing too long.
I'm learning. Having the freedom to write as much as I want, does not necessarily mean I should.
Everyone needs an editor. Rather than edit the long posts, I'll leave them as a reminder to myself.
In the future, please post a comment when I'm writing too long.
Ordinance – Like the Ducks – Doesn't Fly
It was my faint hope that an ordinance prohibiting wildlife and waterfowl feeding would pass without amendment at Monday's city council meeting. The ordinance, as written, would have placed a hefty $500 maximum fine on people who feed wildlife and waterfowl in Rapid City.
Alderman Sam Kooiker (Ward 2) successfully amended the ordinance to graduate the fines from $25 now to $500 in 2012. There was nothing in the ordinance preventing the City Attorney or Magistrate from assessing lesser fines. The amendment took the teeth out of the ordinance.
Alderman Bill Okrepkie (Ward 3) and alderwoman Deb Hadcock (Ward 2) displayed a profound lack of understanding of the issue, both citing the fact that a previous council spent millions of tax dollars creating a "duck feeding area" (read toilet) several years ago. They were concerned about the mixed message of building the feeding area and then telling citizens to not feed the ducks.
The message is simple: A previous council stupidly created the rock monstrosity stupidly encouraging people to continue their stupid practice of feeding ducks until they're too fat to fly, which in turn causes them to crap all over the rock monstrosity, which because it's rock, can't absorb their crap or filter their crap before it reaches water we drink. This council, being smarter, is now telling you feeding ducks is now and always was a real bad idea.
I addressed the council and urged them to pass the ordinance without amendment and encouraged them to bring forward another ordinance prohibiting the release of domestic waterfowl into any Rapid City water.
Alderwoman Karen Gunderson Olson (Ward 3) who was out of town on another council excursion, left a message which alderman Malcom Chapman (Ward 5) read into the record. That message was one of the few sane comments made on the issue, explaining the numerous reasons why the ordinance was needed.
But Hadcock really didn't get it. I don't know if she wasn't listening or if she's just not capable of understanding the issue. But she actually said she was worried the ducks' health would be adversely affected if they didn't get their daily dose of man-provided food. A sliver of the problem may have penetrated her skull, because she at least agreed bread was bad for ducks. But then she suggested the city begin providing duck food that wouldn't be bad for them. Note to Deb: It's all bad for them. The dependence on man-provided food is bad for them. Yes, there is such a thing as Purina Duck Chow. It is made for domestic ducks. It it is intended to make farm ducks big and fat so they will taste better with a nice curry sauce. It is not intended for wild ducks, because it will make them so fat they can't fly.
That's the point Hadcock couldn't grasp. Wild animals should eat what wild animals eat in the wild.
If people quit feeding ducks, eventually we will have a smaller year-round population and we'll have room for those who are just passing through.
Aldermen Ron Kroeger (Ward 5) and Ron Weifenbach (Ward 1) both had good ideas about putting up signs to inform the public about the different birds that make a stop at the lake. These signs would also explain why it is important to not feed them. Hooray! There was a lot of talk about how bad it would be if we deprive our citizens the pleasure of duck feeding. But Kroeger and Weifenbach and later alderman Lloyd LaCroix (Ward 4) all saw the value and the pleasure of taking your kids and grandkids to the lake and learning about wildlife.
Okrepkie said he doesn't want to see little old ladies coming to council meetings and "inching their way" to the podium "with their walkers" to complain about being fined for taking their grandchildren to feed the ducks. Politicians who are unwilling to make unpopular decisions may need to be replaced with ones with the courage to do the right thing.
My 4-year-old grandson is just about ready to go out to the lake and begin learning about ducks. It would be nice if I could teach him about the many species of wild ones, rather than explain to him why the city council wasn't smart enough to prevent the cross-bred ones.
The first reading of the amended ordinance was continued for two weeks. Let's hope six of those on the council will take the advice of the wildlife biologists who made their recommendations to the city.
Alderman Sam Kooiker (Ward 2) successfully amended the ordinance to graduate the fines from $25 now to $500 in 2012. There was nothing in the ordinance preventing the City Attorney or Magistrate from assessing lesser fines. The amendment took the teeth out of the ordinance.
Alderman Bill Okrepkie (Ward 3) and alderwoman Deb Hadcock (Ward 2) displayed a profound lack of understanding of the issue, both citing the fact that a previous council spent millions of tax dollars creating a "duck feeding area" (read toilet) several years ago. They were concerned about the mixed message of building the feeding area and then telling citizens to not feed the ducks.
The message is simple: A previous council stupidly created the rock monstrosity stupidly encouraging people to continue their stupid practice of feeding ducks until they're too fat to fly, which in turn causes them to crap all over the rock monstrosity, which because it's rock, can't absorb their crap or filter their crap before it reaches water we drink. This council, being smarter, is now telling you feeding ducks is now and always was a real bad idea.
I addressed the council and urged them to pass the ordinance without amendment and encouraged them to bring forward another ordinance prohibiting the release of domestic waterfowl into any Rapid City water.
Alderwoman Karen Gunderson Olson (Ward 3) who was out of town on another council excursion, left a message which alderman Malcom Chapman (Ward 5) read into the record. That message was one of the few sane comments made on the issue, explaining the numerous reasons why the ordinance was needed.
But Hadcock really didn't get it. I don't know if she wasn't listening or if she's just not capable of understanding the issue. But she actually said she was worried the ducks' health would be adversely affected if they didn't get their daily dose of man-provided food. A sliver of the problem may have penetrated her skull, because she at least agreed bread was bad for ducks. But then she suggested the city begin providing duck food that wouldn't be bad for them. Note to Deb: It's all bad for them. The dependence on man-provided food is bad for them. Yes, there is such a thing as Purina Duck Chow. It is made for domestic ducks. It it is intended to make farm ducks big and fat so they will taste better with a nice curry sauce. It is not intended for wild ducks, because it will make them so fat they can't fly.
That's the point Hadcock couldn't grasp. Wild animals should eat what wild animals eat in the wild.
If people quit feeding ducks, eventually we will have a smaller year-round population and we'll have room for those who are just passing through.
Aldermen Ron Kroeger (Ward 5) and Ron Weifenbach (Ward 1) both had good ideas about putting up signs to inform the public about the different birds that make a stop at the lake. These signs would also explain why it is important to not feed them. Hooray! There was a lot of talk about how bad it would be if we deprive our citizens the pleasure of duck feeding. But Kroeger and Weifenbach and later alderman Lloyd LaCroix (Ward 4) all saw the value and the pleasure of taking your kids and grandkids to the lake and learning about wildlife.
Okrepkie said he doesn't want to see little old ladies coming to council meetings and "inching their way" to the podium "with their walkers" to complain about being fined for taking their grandchildren to feed the ducks. Politicians who are unwilling to make unpopular decisions may need to be replaced with ones with the courage to do the right thing.
My 4-year-old grandson is just about ready to go out to the lake and begin learning about ducks. It would be nice if I could teach him about the many species of wild ones, rather than explain to him why the city council wasn't smart enough to prevent the cross-bred ones.
The first reading of the amended ordinance was continued for two weeks. Let's hope six of those on the council will take the advice of the wildlife biologists who made their recommendations to the city.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
It's time to kill Donald Duck
The City Council will on Monday discuss an ordinance prohibiting the feeding of wildlife and water fowl. Good.
There are some things affecting Rapid City's water supply over which the council has no control. The exacerbation of the duck and goose problem in Rapid City is not one of them. And, as council members discuss the proposed $500 fine for feeding wildlife, you can be sure there will be in attendance a long line of well-meaning citizens who believe that feeding the ducks at Canyon Lake is not only their right, but it is a tradition which must be saved.
It is a tradition. One of my earliest memories is of taking a bag of bread heals to the lake and feeding the ducks. My dad spent a good deal of time with me teaching me to identify the difference between a bald pate and a mallard.
I have loved waterfowl ever since. The walls in my house are covered with paintings of them. Nearly every shelf has a wooden decoy of some sort. I spent years as a volunteer and eventually as the area chairman for Ducks Unlimited. People who know me would be hard pressed to question my devotion to the preservation of waterfowl.
That said, the situation in West Rapid City is not healthy for waterfowl or the citizens. Canyon Lake is a screwed up mess and has been since after the 1972 flood. I certainly cannot supply a better solution than the ones that have been enacted since the flood. But those decisions have had a negative effect on the lake, as it is used for recreation. The reason: it isn't deep enough.
I lived in Kansas at the time of the flood. However, I understand the decision to make Canyon Lake considerably shallower. But, there were trade-offs. Other events have had their effects, including upstream development and increased silt resulting from fire run-off. Council cannot control those things.
A perfect storm of events have combined to make Canyon Lake what it is today. The shallower lake is warmer, the still parts of the lake outside the Rapid Creek channel, also are warmer and serve as collection areas for "organic matter" from upstream. That "organic matter" percolates in those still areas and with the aid of increased sunlight creates a haven for aquatic plant life.
That plant life chokes the oxygen out of water that is already oxygen shy, because of the stillness. This creates an adverse environment for Canyon Lake as a fishery.
Of course, this creates a wonderful environment for waterfowl, so ducks that once dropped by for a couple of weeks annually on their way to somewhere else, now stick around, sometimes forever. Add to this a component of citizens who provide these animals with a daily meal (which is not a healthy, well-balanced diet) of breadcrumbs, donuts, jellybeans, birdseed and kids' suckers, candy bars, burgers and fries.
The result has been that we now have tens of thousands of little fertilizer producers dumping "organic matter" into a body of water that sits above our water treatment plant.
An additional problem, which I don't believe is addressed in the ordinance before the city, is that many of the ducks and geese at Canyon Lake have no business being there. A Game Fish And Parks employee once called them Donald Ducks. Those are the domestic ducks and geese that have found their way into the wild habitat at the lake.
This happens when well-meaning parents and grand-parents buy their tykes those cute Easter ducklings. When it is discovered that raising ducks is not like raising a puppy, the ducks and geese are delivered to Canyon Lake, where they join the other fat quackers out there. One thing leads to another, (nature being nature and all) and the wild ducks begin romancing the domestic ducks.
The results are not good for wildlife. Genetic goofs like those anyone can observe at Canyon Lake not only foul the lake, but they foul the gene pool as well. The right thing to do with the domestic ducks and geese (Donald Ducks) and their offspring, is to make them table fare, if they are determined to not be diseased. In any event, they need to be killed to assure they don't breed with wild waterfowl.
An amendment to the ordinance before the council is needed to address the issue of releasing pets into the wild. If you turn your grandson's Easter duckling loose at Canyon Lake, it ought to cost you $500.
Okay. So there are a lot of issues with fining people $500 for doing what they've always done here in Rapid City. (Enforcement will be a nightmare, by the way. Imagine a compliance officer issuing grandma and grandpa a ticket for feeding the ducks. They'll say they weren't feeding the ducks, their 4-year-old grandson was, ticket him. It won't be pretty.) But the truth is that a magistrate will likely decide to fine people with a first offense, significantly less than the maximum. And, city attorneys likely will seldom, if ever, ask for a maximum fine.
But a sign that reads "Do Not Feed the Wildlife: $500 Fine" will likely prevent many from bringing their stale bread to the lake. They could post a couple of those signs at Storybook Island and Sioux Park and I'd be tickled.
Ducks and geese in Canyon Lake, at Storybook Island and in Sioux Park are a problem. They foul our waters and our foot-paths. Discontinuing the practice of allowing the public to feed them will reduce their numbers. That, in turn will improve our water quality before it enters the treatment plant, and improve the health of the remaining birds.
I will miss the tradition of taking my grand-kids to the lake to feed the ducks. A cleaner water supply and a population of healthy ducks is worth the sacrifice.
There are some things affecting Rapid City's water supply over which the council has no control. The exacerbation of the duck and goose problem in Rapid City is not one of them. And, as council members discuss the proposed $500 fine for feeding wildlife, you can be sure there will be in attendance a long line of well-meaning citizens who believe that feeding the ducks at Canyon Lake is not only their right, but it is a tradition which must be saved.
It is a tradition. One of my earliest memories is of taking a bag of bread heals to the lake and feeding the ducks. My dad spent a good deal of time with me teaching me to identify the difference between a bald pate and a mallard.
I have loved waterfowl ever since. The walls in my house are covered with paintings of them. Nearly every shelf has a wooden decoy of some sort. I spent years as a volunteer and eventually as the area chairman for Ducks Unlimited. People who know me would be hard pressed to question my devotion to the preservation of waterfowl.
That said, the situation in West Rapid City is not healthy for waterfowl or the citizens. Canyon Lake is a screwed up mess and has been since after the 1972 flood. I certainly cannot supply a better solution than the ones that have been enacted since the flood. But those decisions have had a negative effect on the lake, as it is used for recreation. The reason: it isn't deep enough.
I lived in Kansas at the time of the flood. However, I understand the decision to make Canyon Lake considerably shallower. But, there were trade-offs. Other events have had their effects, including upstream development and increased silt resulting from fire run-off. Council cannot control those things.
A perfect storm of events have combined to make Canyon Lake what it is today. The shallower lake is warmer, the still parts of the lake outside the Rapid Creek channel, also are warmer and serve as collection areas for "organic matter" from upstream. That "organic matter" percolates in those still areas and with the aid of increased sunlight creates a haven for aquatic plant life.
That plant life chokes the oxygen out of water that is already oxygen shy, because of the stillness. This creates an adverse environment for Canyon Lake as a fishery.
Of course, this creates a wonderful environment for waterfowl, so ducks that once dropped by for a couple of weeks annually on their way to somewhere else, now stick around, sometimes forever. Add to this a component of citizens who provide these animals with a daily meal (which is not a healthy, well-balanced diet) of breadcrumbs, donuts, jellybeans, birdseed and kids' suckers, candy bars, burgers and fries.
The result has been that we now have tens of thousands of little fertilizer producers dumping "organic matter" into a body of water that sits above our water treatment plant.
An additional problem, which I don't believe is addressed in the ordinance before the city, is that many of the ducks and geese at Canyon Lake have no business being there. A Game Fish And Parks employee once called them Donald Ducks. Those are the domestic ducks and geese that have found their way into the wild habitat at the lake.
This happens when well-meaning parents and grand-parents buy their tykes those cute Easter ducklings. When it is discovered that raising ducks is not like raising a puppy, the ducks and geese are delivered to Canyon Lake, where they join the other fat quackers out there. One thing leads to another, (nature being nature and all) and the wild ducks begin romancing the domestic ducks.
The results are not good for wildlife. Genetic goofs like those anyone can observe at Canyon Lake not only foul the lake, but they foul the gene pool as well. The right thing to do with the domestic ducks and geese (Donald Ducks) and their offspring, is to make them table fare, if they are determined to not be diseased. In any event, they need to be killed to assure they don't breed with wild waterfowl.
An amendment to the ordinance before the council is needed to address the issue of releasing pets into the wild. If you turn your grandson's Easter duckling loose at Canyon Lake, it ought to cost you $500.
Okay. So there are a lot of issues with fining people $500 for doing what they've always done here in Rapid City. (Enforcement will be a nightmare, by the way. Imagine a compliance officer issuing grandma and grandpa a ticket for feeding the ducks. They'll say they weren't feeding the ducks, their 4-year-old grandson was, ticket him. It won't be pretty.) But the truth is that a magistrate will likely decide to fine people with a first offense, significantly less than the maximum. And, city attorneys likely will seldom, if ever, ask for a maximum fine.
But a sign that reads "Do Not Feed the Wildlife: $500 Fine" will likely prevent many from bringing their stale bread to the lake. They could post a couple of those signs at Storybook Island and Sioux Park and I'd be tickled.
Ducks and geese in Canyon Lake, at Storybook Island and in Sioux Park are a problem. They foul our waters and our foot-paths. Discontinuing the practice of allowing the public to feed them will reduce their numbers. That, in turn will improve our water quality before it enters the treatment plant, and improve the health of the remaining birds.
I will miss the tradition of taking my grand-kids to the lake to feed the ducks. A cleaner water supply and a population of healthy ducks is worth the sacrifice.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Extremism on the right
So when I was reading the Journal the other day I couldn't help notice the AP story about the Department of Homeland Security (DOC) report on rightwing extremism. I wasn't particularly surprised by the story except for the reference to veterans being targeted for extra caution and observation.
Then I read Randall Rasmussen's post on the Journal's political blog, Mount Blogmore. You can read it at: http://blogs.rapidcityjournal.com/politicalblog/
I expected Randall's post to be a shrill over-reaction to an innocuous bureaucratic document with out-of-context quotes. So to make sure, I downloaded the document.
Gentle readers, I am not comforted by this report. I am not comforted that DHS wished to have the document viewed only by law enforcement. I am not comforted that the document found its way to the Washington Times, which broke the story. I am not comforted by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano's explanation. Neither am I comforted by the fact that she would have "changed a few words," if she had the chance. I'm not comforted by her apology to veterans. Read it here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/17/homeland-security-got-internal-flags/
The report was clearly written by staffers who believe what they wrote – the gist of which is that people who disagree with our new president are susceptible to being brainwashed into becoming terrorists, and as such require additional attention from our constabulary. That is not comforting.
People who believe in states' rights, the Second Amendment, the First Amendment and people who return to the U.S. after risking their lives for our freedom are among those who require special attention.
The document is nine pages long. It can be downloaded from within the original Times story here: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/
Please download it and read it. They say you're not paranoid if "they" are really after you.
Then I read Randall Rasmussen's post on the Journal's political blog, Mount Blogmore. You can read it at: http://blogs.rapidcityjournal.com/politicalblog/
I expected Randall's post to be a shrill over-reaction to an innocuous bureaucratic document with out-of-context quotes. So to make sure, I downloaded the document.
Gentle readers, I am not comforted by this report. I am not comforted that DHS wished to have the document viewed only by law enforcement. I am not comforted that the document found its way to the Washington Times, which broke the story. I am not comforted by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano's explanation. Neither am I comforted by the fact that she would have "changed a few words," if she had the chance. I'm not comforted by her apology to veterans. Read it here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/17/homeland-security-got-internal-flags/
The report was clearly written by staffers who believe what they wrote – the gist of which is that people who disagree with our new president are susceptible to being brainwashed into becoming terrorists, and as such require additional attention from our constabulary. That is not comforting.
People who believe in states' rights, the Second Amendment, the First Amendment and people who return to the U.S. after risking their lives for our freedom are among those who require special attention.
The document is nine pages long. It can be downloaded from within the original Times story here: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/
Please download it and read it. They say you're not paranoid if "they" are really after you.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Rapid City Tea Party
In spite of a chill in the air, a crowd of between 600 and 1000 angry, placard-toting, tax-paying citizens converged on Memorial Park in Rapid City to send a message to Congress: Get smart or get fired.
It is a safe bet that many of those in attendance were participating in their first demonstration. The assemblage was peaceful and the message was for the most part one of frustration with a congress that seems hell-bent on spending the country into second-class status.
Demonstrators first lined up along Omaha Street and waved their placards to honking traffic passing by.
The question, of course, is: Will the messages they carried on their hand-made signs get through to their intended audience, or was the exercise one of preaching to the choir?
I suspect our congressional contingent is aware of the proceedings. People from Sen. John Thune's office were there. I didn't see anyone who was obviously from Sen. Tim Johnson or Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's office.
Shortly before noon the demonstrators made their way to the pavillion where state Sen. Gordon Howie introduced speakers who were there to add redundancy to the placards. The most compelling of the speakers was Ira Taken Alive. I recorded his address and am trying to find a way to upload that here.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Hell Freezes Over at the Rapid City Journal
Michael Lefort, Rapid City Journal editor has his own blog about the activities associated with the newspaper business. I like Lefort, and his take on newspapering today. An interesting post on his blog explains how Monday's front porch version of the Journal will be more than an inch narrower.
You can read it here: http://blogs.rapidcityjournal.com/editor/
There are several disturbing items in the post, which also includes some other, less meaningful changes which will take place on Monday. For instance, not many will care that the body copy and box score fonts will change. In fact few will notice.
Your puzzles will move. Stocks will get narrower. "Today in History" is, well, history. And then he saved this for last: "- A front page ad will appear along the bottom of A1 daily."
I know we've had a long, cold winter, but I wasn't prepared for Hell to freeze over. No wonder he saved it for last. The Front Page, to old school journalists like Lefort (and me) is quite close to sacred. For many of us it's God, then family, then The Front Page. (Considering the divorce rate among journalists, the order of importance is likely different for many.)
The decision to put advertising on the Front Page of our local paper is symptomatic of what is happening in newspapers around the country, at least those that haven't boarded up their windows and hauled their presses to the recycler.
All of the changes at the Journal are coming in order to either save money or make money. The rotten economy is of course affecting newspapers too. So, they can hardly be blamed for seeking ways to reduce overhead. There's a reason they call it the newspaper business. I don't fault the Journal for whacking the width of the paper. The new width will present some challenges for their page designers, but they – and we readers – will get used to that.
Few dedicated news junkies and virtually no real journalists will get used to the idea of advertising on the Front Page. It was bound to happen, though. Newspapers owned by big corporations have been elevating executives via the advertising department for many years. And, advertising executives rarely understand the basic business structure of a successful newspaper. That's why so few of them are successful these days.
Oh sure, the internet has played an important role in the decline of porch delivered news. That newspaper executives around the country allowed that to happen, however, is due entirely to executives who don't understand the basics, and actually believe their readers purchase the newspaper for the advertising it contains.
There are three equal components to a successful newspaper:
1. Information people desire, presented in an entertaining, unbiased and truthful manner. (News, or product.)
2. Numerous readers who enthusiastically look forward to being so entertained. (Customers)
3. Advertisers. (Customers)
The ugly truth that newspapers around the country haven't figured out is that no one of the above three components can survive without the other two. Publishing executives think the above ugly truth is a lie.
The market is not robust enough, nor has it ever been, for readers alone to pay the cost of gathering news, printing it and delivering it to your porch. But advertisers are very interested in reaching the readers who are enthusiastic about the paper's reportage. It seems simple enough.
But within the walls of a newspaper building, there is an unusual dynamic of contempt. Advertising people believe reporters and editors are people who make selling advertising difficult by reporting or commenting on things that upset their customers (advertisers). Advertising people are absolutely convinced that they are smarter than news people, because they make more money.
Newsroom employees believe, or at least behave as if they believe, that advertising, advertisers and advertising salespeople are pests whose requests for news coverage of advertisers' events get in the way of their writing their Pulitzer Prize-winning expose' which if they only had time to complete would render advertising needless, because readers would flock to the news stands to purchase in numbers sufficient to pay for such valuable and expertly presented information. News people also believe that nothing positive an advertiser ever does is newsworthy. News people are absolutely convinced that they are smarter than advertising people, because they've been to college.
Circulation employees have contempt for both because they know their livelihoods depend on a delicate balance of all three components. And Advertising and News have contempt and disrespect for one another.
The worst part is that this behavior is taught in journalism schools across the country.
Each department has team meetings. The Advertising Director meets regularly with his sales team as they devise promotions to take to customers. The Editor meets daily with reporters and subordinate editors to inspire them to go out and "get the story." And the Circulation Manager meets regularly with his staff to come up with new promotions to increase readership. The Publisher meets with the managers. But cross-department fraternization is discouraged. A newspaper is the cliquiest, most in-bred business on the planet. It would be downright hostile if anyone ever spoke to someone from a different department.
There is no real teamwork at American newspapers. And someone has to make executive decisions, like how to make money and how to save money. Today, those decisions usually fall to the publisher, who usually comes up through the ranks of an advertising department. And, so gentle readers, that is why the Front Page of your Monday newspaper will, for the first time, display an ad across the bottom.
In the end, the need to find ways to keep the newspaper viable outweighed the notion that the Front Page of the newspaper represented its soul. The front page is for sale.
Let's hope it works. As much as this is a disturbing sign of the times, I would rather adjust my thinking about a decades-old tradition than to have our community lose its first, and last newspaper.
You can read it here: http://blogs.rapidcityjournal.com/editor/
There are several disturbing items in the post, which also includes some other, less meaningful changes which will take place on Monday. For instance, not many will care that the body copy and box score fonts will change. In fact few will notice.
Your puzzles will move. Stocks will get narrower. "Today in History" is, well, history. And then he saved this for last: "- A front page ad will appear along the bottom of A1 daily."
I know we've had a long, cold winter, but I wasn't prepared for Hell to freeze over. No wonder he saved it for last. The Front Page, to old school journalists like Lefort (and me) is quite close to sacred. For many of us it's God, then family, then The Front Page. (Considering the divorce rate among journalists, the order of importance is likely different for many.)
The decision to put advertising on the Front Page of our local paper is symptomatic of what is happening in newspapers around the country, at least those that haven't boarded up their windows and hauled their presses to the recycler.
All of the changes at the Journal are coming in order to either save money or make money. The rotten economy is of course affecting newspapers too. So, they can hardly be blamed for seeking ways to reduce overhead. There's a reason they call it the newspaper business. I don't fault the Journal for whacking the width of the paper. The new width will present some challenges for their page designers, but they – and we readers – will get used to that.
Few dedicated news junkies and virtually no real journalists will get used to the idea of advertising on the Front Page. It was bound to happen, though. Newspapers owned by big corporations have been elevating executives via the advertising department for many years. And, advertising executives rarely understand the basic business structure of a successful newspaper. That's why so few of them are successful these days.
Oh sure, the internet has played an important role in the decline of porch delivered news. That newspaper executives around the country allowed that to happen, however, is due entirely to executives who don't understand the basics, and actually believe their readers purchase the newspaper for the advertising it contains.
There are three equal components to a successful newspaper:
1. Information people desire, presented in an entertaining, unbiased and truthful manner. (News, or product.)
2. Numerous readers who enthusiastically look forward to being so entertained. (Customers)
3. Advertisers. (Customers)
The ugly truth that newspapers around the country haven't figured out is that no one of the above three components can survive without the other two. Publishing executives think the above ugly truth is a lie.
The market is not robust enough, nor has it ever been, for readers alone to pay the cost of gathering news, printing it and delivering it to your porch. But advertisers are very interested in reaching the readers who are enthusiastic about the paper's reportage. It seems simple enough.
But within the walls of a newspaper building, there is an unusual dynamic of contempt. Advertising people believe reporters and editors are people who make selling advertising difficult by reporting or commenting on things that upset their customers (advertisers). Advertising people are absolutely convinced that they are smarter than news people, because they make more money.
Newsroom employees believe, or at least behave as if they believe, that advertising, advertisers and advertising salespeople are pests whose requests for news coverage of advertisers' events get in the way of their writing their Pulitzer Prize-winning expose' which if they only had time to complete would render advertising needless, because readers would flock to the news stands to purchase in numbers sufficient to pay for such valuable and expertly presented information. News people also believe that nothing positive an advertiser ever does is newsworthy. News people are absolutely convinced that they are smarter than advertising people, because they've been to college.
Circulation employees have contempt for both because they know their livelihoods depend on a delicate balance of all three components. And Advertising and News have contempt and disrespect for one another.
The worst part is that this behavior is taught in journalism schools across the country.
Each department has team meetings. The Advertising Director meets regularly with his sales team as they devise promotions to take to customers. The Editor meets daily with reporters and subordinate editors to inspire them to go out and "get the story." And the Circulation Manager meets regularly with his staff to come up with new promotions to increase readership. The Publisher meets with the managers. But cross-department fraternization is discouraged. A newspaper is the cliquiest, most in-bred business on the planet. It would be downright hostile if anyone ever spoke to someone from a different department.
There is no real teamwork at American newspapers. And someone has to make executive decisions, like how to make money and how to save money. Today, those decisions usually fall to the publisher, who usually comes up through the ranks of an advertising department. And, so gentle readers, that is why the Front Page of your Monday newspaper will, for the first time, display an ad across the bottom.
In the end, the need to find ways to keep the newspaper viable outweighed the notion that the Front Page of the newspaper represented its soul. The front page is for sale.
Let's hope it works. As much as this is a disturbing sign of the times, I would rather adjust my thinking about a decades-old tradition than to have our community lose its first, and last newspaper.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Why am I here?
As some of you may know, The Rapid City Weekly News recently closed its doors. I had been a columnist there since the Rapid City Journal sacked me as soon as Brad Slater was named publisher. Slater had his reasons (he didn't bother to share them with me). Our relationship was strained at times when I was a fulltime editor there. It has on occasion been strained since I left the newspaper in 1988. Apparently it was more strained than I thought. But it's his newspaper now, and I hold no grudge.
The Weekly News came to Rapid City, a child of Seaton Publications. They produced a competitive and lively publication for several years and I was proud of the association. Advertisers did not support the paper, in spite of its delivery of 23,000 papers weekly. I'll open a discussion on this later.
I used to not believe the old adage that journalists get into the business because they like to see their name in the paper.
William Allen White, the small town editor from Emporia, Kansas influenced everyone from the shoe salesman across the street (my dad) to several United States Presidents, with his acerbic look at life in America from the perspective of the prairie. In the 1920s he lamented that technology was killing the newspaper business. It had become too expensive to start up a paper and try to sell a news product. I can't find the exact quote, but it went something like: It used to be that all a man needed to get into the news business was a shirttail full of type and something to get off his chest.
White's wisdom of the 1920s and 1930s rings true today. Big corporations own newspapers and those guys with something to get off their chests are opening blogs. The weird thing is that back in White's time, the big corporations were pushing the little guys out of the business. Today, it's the little guys' blogs pushing the big corporate news organizations off the porch and attracting a new generation of news seekers into cyber space.
I have some discomfort with it still. But I believe that there is room in the 55 gallon media drum for a morsel of respectful debate, honest reportage and thoughtful criticism or satire, written in English.
The Weekly News came to Rapid City, a child of Seaton Publications. They produced a competitive and lively publication for several years and I was proud of the association. Advertisers did not support the paper, in spite of its delivery of 23,000 papers weekly. I'll open a discussion on this later.
I used to not believe the old adage that journalists get into the business because they like to see their name in the paper.
William Allen White, the small town editor from Emporia, Kansas influenced everyone from the shoe salesman across the street (my dad) to several United States Presidents, with his acerbic look at life in America from the perspective of the prairie. In the 1920s he lamented that technology was killing the newspaper business. It had become too expensive to start up a paper and try to sell a news product. I can't find the exact quote, but it went something like: It used to be that all a man needed to get into the news business was a shirttail full of type and something to get off his chest.
White's wisdom of the 1920s and 1930s rings true today. Big corporations own newspapers and those guys with something to get off their chests are opening blogs. The weird thing is that back in White's time, the big corporations were pushing the little guys out of the business. Today, it's the little guys' blogs pushing the big corporate news organizations off the porch and attracting a new generation of news seekers into cyber space.
I have some discomfort with it still. But I believe that there is room in the 55 gallon media drum for a morsel of respectful debate, honest reportage and thoughtful criticism or satire, written in English.
And awaaaay we go!
Welcome to the Decorum Forum, a blog designed to provide a place for adult discussion of issues pertaining to Rapid City, Pennington County, Black Hills, West River, South Dakota, National and International politics – in that order.
I've started this blog as place where people who disagree can present their cases. It will be a moderated blog. For the most part, your thoughts will be posted as you write them. However, this is not the place where you can come to call others names or ridicule people whose thoughts differ from yours.
I have a long history in the news business and am experienced in critical writing and editing. Criticism is allowed and encouraged. Insults are not. Your posts may be edited to remove any potential libel.
I am extremely sensitive to libel issues. If you're going to post something here about another person, it needs to be provably true. Posts critical of people who are not legitimate public figures (in the news), will be stricken.
Welcome. I'll begin posting very soon.
I've started this blog as place where people who disagree can present their cases. It will be a moderated blog. For the most part, your thoughts will be posted as you write them. However, this is not the place where you can come to call others names or ridicule people whose thoughts differ from yours.
I have a long history in the news business and am experienced in critical writing and editing. Criticism is allowed and encouraged. Insults are not. Your posts may be edited to remove any potential libel.
I am extremely sensitive to libel issues. If you're going to post something here about another person, it needs to be provably true. Posts critical of people who are not legitimate public figures (in the news), will be stricken.
Welcome. I'll begin posting very soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)