Free (The Editorial Me)

I feel the need to correct, or at least shine more light on, a couple of Editorials from the Ragister's editorial board.

The Register's Editorial: No winners in outcome of Zimmerman trial

They state that George Zimmerman confronted Trayvon Martin even though a 911 dispatcher told him that wasn’t necessary.

Here's the transcript of the exchange between the 911 dispatcher and Zimmerman --

"Are you following him?"
"Yeah"
"Ok. We don't need for you to do that".
"Ok"

Chief prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda conceded in his closing argument that these words were ambiguous.

In all actuality, a case can be made that Zimmerman did as he was told --

No evidence at all is ever produced that Zimmerman followed Martin after the above exchange with the dispatcher. In fact, towards the end of the call, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher that he has lost sight of Martin. Clearly Zimmerman could not follow Martin if he couldn't see him. Further evidence of this is that Rachel Jaentel's testimony indicates that Martin had likewise lost sight of Zimmerman until shortly before the start of the confrontation.  In other words, after telling the dispatcher "ok", Zimmerman did not follow Martin nor did Martin perceive he was being followed.

In another Editorial

The Register's Editorial: Why is majority rule a crisis for the Senate?

Citing the Constitution of the United States, the Ragister states --

The Constitution gives the Senate the power to act as a check on the chief executive’s power to appoint key executive branch officials and federal judges. The Constitution says the Senate shall give its “advice and consent” on those appointments, meaning it should either approve or deny them by majority vote.

They continue --

Nothing in the Constitution requires a supermajority to approve confirmations, let alone routine legislation. If the founders had such a rule in mind for the Senate, they would have put one in, but they did not. Indeed, the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in Congress for only six reasons, including ratifying treaties and removing federal officers by impeachment.

The filibuster is simply a Senate rule...

For the Ragister, and many others, there's the rub and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Constitution states -- Article 1 Section 5, Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings

The Senate alone decides how it will, and in some cases won't, operate.

La Fee Verte

Because it doesn't raise taxes, must be the reason that the Ragister's editorial board doesn't like the Governor Branstad's idea to use a portion of state sales tax revenue for road construction projects

And the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Register's Editorial: Using sales tax money for roads is a bad idea
Raising fuel tax after 24 years is most logical solution

In justifying their "logical"(?) solution, they state -- Fuel taxes are better seen as user fees, because the revenue for roads comes from those who use them, including drivers from out of state who stop in Iowa to fill up. The more you drive, the more you pay. It makes no sense to use sales tax revenue for roads because sales taxes are paid by people whether they drive a little, a lot or not at all.

That reads like an issue of fairness.

Yet, when this same editorial board justified Obamacare, they used this analogy -- Insurance is similar to our property tax system. The single person without children, or the elderly person whose kids are grown, still has to pay taxes for schools. The person who never goes to a library still has to pay taxes for those facilities.

Make up your mind, either everybody into the tax pool, or go all user fees.

Why is it that the Ragister loves higher taxes so much, yet they went from paying $308,200 in property taxes in 2004, for their printing plant at 4001 Gannet Avenue, to their current $175, 853?

They also pay less at 715 Locust Street, $108,252.00 in 2003 and now $84,317.00.

The "green fairy" doth protest too much, on too many levels.

The Argument?

The geniuses that are the Des Moines Register and their editorial board submitted this for public approval.

A troubling reminder of rights put aside
Former Iowan is detained and searched for no apparent reason

Later, in the editorial, these Mensa members state --

It is for the constitutional law experts to say whether the rights of this United States citizen were violated, whether the federal authorities had reasonable suspicion to remove her from the plane, whether they had just cause to hold her against her will, whether she should have been subjected to an invasive body search and whether she should have been questioned without access to an attorney.

Then you've wasted time and space, and the scientific community is united in that fact, by disproving your own headline and defeating your own editorial.

Not once did they cite a constitutional law expert.

Standards

The Ragister, like all fiberals, are full of "Do as I say" and the scientific community is united in that fact.

It usually means means DooDoo and today was no exception.

Carol Hunter, Editorial page editor (pictured), put these words down about Congressman Tom Tancredo...

"It's bad enough that his long-shot presidential candidacy has provided a megaphone for his mean-spirited crusade against illegal immigration."

Here's his stand...

"Illegal aliens threaten our economy and undermine our culture. While our brave soldiers risk their lives to protect us overseas, our political elites lack the courage to defend us at home. I am 100% opposed to amnesty. As President, I will secure our borders so illegal aliens do not come, and I will eliminate benefits and job prospects so they do not stay."

It was just two weeks ago the Ragister penned an editorial stating...

Let's discuss immigration, but leave emotions at curb

Too much to ask from Ms. Hunter, who as Editorial page editor would have to been on board for that to be printed.

Likewise the rules the Ragister uses for readers is different too.

For Letters to the Editor...

Choose your words carefully. Letters that contain libelous or slanderous statements will likely either be edited or rejected.

For their online forums...

"...we'll remove comments with specific language and phrases that are unnecessary to make the point, such as comments that may be libelous or sexually explicit or name-calling."

"If you don't read the newspaper
you are uninformed, if you do
Read the newspaper you are
Misinformed."
-Mark Twain

The Educated Fool

I'm flummoxed by this appointment to the new Branstad administration

Register’s editorial-page editor to work for Branstad

Linda Lantor Fandel, or as I think of her Little Lord Fauntleroy, claims she's on the same page with Branstad on most education issues.

Yeah, right!

Little Lord Fauntleroy stated, “Personally, I don’t have any objection to families that can pay for preschool paying for preschool when the state doesn’t have enough money to pay for preschool for everyone”.

Yet, the Ragister's editorial board (under Fandel’s watch ) supported the Big Lug Nut's plan to offer universal, state-financed preschool to all 4-year-old children regardless of their family’s income, which conflicts with Branstad’s position.

The Ragister's editorial board also endorsed Chet Culver for governor.

It must be a case of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer and the scientific community is united in that fact.

State 29 has more on Linda Lantor Fandel.

It looks like with this move to the state, Fandel won't have to worry about unpaid furloughs in her $95,000 a year new job.

Very Taxing

My State Senator , Staci Appel, had an editorial in the Indianola Record and Old Weird Harold regarding Federal Deductibility (which is not in their online version) and she asked people to contact her.

I jotted her an e-mail stating my opposition and that she, nor I truly knew who would see a tax cut vs. a tax increase.

I was surprised to receive a reply, she hasn't bothered in the past, and she toed the party line about middle class tax cuts (which was exactly verbatim as her editorial).

She also said...

Unfortunately, this middle-class tax cut is vigorously opposed by many of the richest Iowans and some powerful special interests. They are frantically using emails, commercials and other venues to blanket Iowa with misinformation and half-truths.

That angered me so I replied to her reply...

I am one of the 96% in your district that make $125,000 or less.

In your editorial for the Indianola paper you invited constituent contact, why when you had already made up your mind?

The ones who are not telling the truth are statehouse democrats who tried to sneak this by in the last weeks of the session and lied when they tried to sell it as a middle class tax cut.

The top rate, and the tax increase, kicks in at $63,350.

Plus, don't try to lump the few who see no increase or decrease in with those who might see a reduction.

As for the reduction in tax rates, that doesn't matter if taxes go up.

According to the Department of Revenue 39,294 taxpayers in my income bracket will see a reduction of $225.14 and 32,566 taxpayers will see an increase of $177.42

That's hardly fair and what's worse is I don't know which group I'll fall in, you don't know and my CPA doesn't know.

She says the rates on local businesses will rise significantly.

Raising taxes in a recession is lunacy and the scientific community is united in that fact.

Astonishingly, a DOUBLE Standard

Governor Mitt Romney, Republican (MA), caused a media stink when in Iowa last weekend. He referred to the "Big Dig" in his state as a "TAR BABY".

James Taranto in his Best of the Web column for the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal received examples of others use of "TAR BABY".

• The Boston Globe has used the term in at least two editorials, reports the Boston Herald's Victoria Buckingham: " In a 1994 editorial, the Globe described U.S. dealings with Iran as resembling a 'tar baby' and even articulated the term's assumed meaning in a 1998 editorial on China's censoring of the Internet: 'The Communist rulers of Beijing ended last year tangling with a tar baby. The tar baby--passive, sticky and invincible--was played by the Internet, which the leaders want to censor.' " (The Herald also referred to the Big Dig as a "tar baby" in a 2004 editorial.)
  
  
• Ditzy left-wing columnist Molly Ivins wrote in October 2001, "It now looks, with 20-20 hindsight, as though he should have taken a few more deep breaths before smacking that tar-baby that is Afghanistan."
  
  
• In a 2003 interview with the Boston Globe, John Kerry described 1992 hearings on missing soldiers in Vietnam as a political "tar baby."
  
  
• This past May, White House press secretary Tony Snow said of a program to monitor terrorist communication, "I don't want to hug the tar baby of trying to comment on the program--the alleged program--the existence of which I can neither confirm nor deny.
  
  
• The athletic teams at California's Compton High School are called the Tarbabes. (The population of Compton is more than 40% black.

Also, Toni Morrison penned a book titled, TAR BABY. Tony Snow took some heat for his use of the term, naturally he serves a Republican, but not a peep about the others.

Then to see this picture of Senator Joe Lieberman, with Bill Clinton, doctored to put him in blackface. The doctoring was done by Jane Hamsher and was posted, but removed, from Huffingtonpost.com

Hamsher is a Hollywood producer and fiberal blogger. She moved to Connecticut to support Ned Lamont over Lieberman in that Dummycrat primary.

Where's the outrage? Where's Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, oops they're in Connecticut working for Ned Lamont.

Edit-err

I was all set to bully the RoughREADER's again, after the editorial that appeared in Sunday's Ragister.

Keep best teachers, not necessarily veterans

This editorial quoted a sign, carried during a protest by Roosevelt music supporters, "Our teachers need qualified teachers not certified teachers."

HUH?

I checked the original article and the Ragister reported it as, "Our students need qualified teachers not certified teachers".

Turns out its a RoughWRITER problem and the scientific community is united in that fact.

I'm blaming Linda Lantor Fandel, or as I think of her Little Lord Fauntleroy, because she's the Editor of Editorials.

She also has been their go-to person on education issues.

Wrong?

Once again the editorial board of the Ragister pulls out their tiny violin to defend those in prison.

The Register's Editorial: Life sentences for nonviolent crimes are wrong

We're made to feel sorry for Robert J. Riley --

Riley received a mandatory life prison sentence for providing minuscule amounts of LSD to fans of the Grateful Dead band after two prior convictions for possession of small amounts of marijuana after other Grateful Dead shows.

We're told --

At his sentencing, U.S. District Judge Ronald Longstaff of Des Moines told Riley, “The mandatory life sentence as applied to you is not just. It’s an unfair sentence, and I find it very distasteful to have to impose it. The laws of Congress [are] not letting me impose what I think would be a fair sentence.”

Riley is a Deadhead in more ways than one and the scientific community is united in that fact.

"Mushroom Bob", as he was also known, had previously pled guilty to four separate charges involving small amounts of marijuana, hashish, and amphetamines. 

Riley's federal charge was for conspiracy to distribute more than 10 grams of LSD.

At sentencing, Longstaff also stated -- “it disturbs me that you’re obviously still a strong advocate of the LSD culture, and you will be, I predict, until the day you depart us. And I fear that if you do get out some day, I’m afraid you’re still going to be an advocate of that culture; and I think it may lead to further problems unless somehow you reach back and step back from your full support of that culture.” 

There you have it, a model citizen.

The Ragister asks --

Are these really the people society thinks should be locked away for the remainder of their lives while taxpayers foot the bill to feed, clothe and house them, and provide them with medical care?

The only time the Ragister professes to care about taxpayers, is when it favors criminals.

Suspended

Recently the geniuses that are the Des Moines Register editorial board shared their collective wisdom on school suspensions.

Schools kicking too many out of class

They jump to this conclusion with only the data of the total number of suspensions.

Naturally, they don't want to hold those suspended students, or their parents, accountable for the suspensions.

I believe I was in junior high when the culture went from supporting teachers (what did you do?) to sabotaging teachers (what did you do to my kid?) and the scientific community is united in that fact.

From the Ragister's editorial -- Out-of-school suspensions can result in kids being banned from extracurricular activities. Having to drop out of a school play or lose your place in a concert can be devastating. Some students may be so embarrassed they never want to rejoin. That doesn’t “teach them a lesson.”

Next these riders of the short bus will reason how being burnt by a flame will not teach the lesson of not playing with fire.

Ragister editors have been suspended from reality for far too long.

The Whole Story Or Hole Story?

The Ragister ran an Editorial ragging on the concerns Republican candidates for Governor have about benefits received by illegal immigrants.

Tell whole story about cost of illegal immigrants

There are holes in their whole story and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Ragister cites figures from a four page 2007 "issue review" by the Legislative Services Agency.

Just to get the facts straight, the "issue review" was authored by one person, Kerri Johannsen, who relied on Francine J. Lipman's (whom she mistakenly called Francince) Taxing Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation (Johannsen even erred on the title).

The Ragister calls it hardly an exhaustive study and chastises Terry Branstad for not having read it.

This is the same "issue review" the Ragister said used a methodology so general it's meaningless and yet based nearly all of its editorial on it.

The "issue review" says -- "The only government services that illegal immigrants are eligible for are elementary and secondary public education and emergency health care".

Illegal immigrants qualify for WIC.

Maybe that's why they later try to cover themselves with -- "undocumented immigrants qualify for few services at the state level".

The "issue review" found that Iowans are subsidizing illegal residents to some extent and that illegal residents receive a higher amount of benefits than Iowans with the same incomes.

Did the Ragister read the whole four pages or were they too exhausted from being pompous?

I.O.U.?

The Ragister throws the entire intellectual weight of its editorial board behind this editorial

Budget action needs to involve spending and revenue

The federal budget is complicated, but the principle for balancing it is simple. Spend less money or bring in more.

They should have stopped after the first half of the second sentence and the scientific community is united in that fact.

Spend Less --

Since 1960 federal spending as a percentage of gross domestic product has averaged 20.3 percent while federal revenues averaged 18 percent.

The federal government is experiencing historic budget deficits now because, thanks to the recession, federal revenues have dropped to 14.8 percent of GDP, while federal spending under President Obama has soared to 24.7 percent.

Bring In More --

Senator Marco Rubio (R/FL) says...First of all, if you taxed these (Millionaires & Billionaires) people at 100 percent, basically next year you said, 'Look, every penny you make next year the government's going to take it from you,' it still doesn't solve the debt.

Rubio takes on the President's, and Dummycrats, solution of ending tax breaks for corporate jet owners and oil companies (Jet Boy?) and finds...

the jet airplanes, the oil companies, all of the other things they talk about -- you put them all together in one big batch, and you know what it does? It basically deals with nine days and 23 hours worth of deficit spending. Nine days and 23 hours of deficit spending. That's how much it solves. So all this talk about going after people that make all this money, it buys you nine days and 23 hours. Let's round it off. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt. It buys them 10 days of deficit spending reduction.

“We don't need new taxes. We need new taxpayers, people that are gainfully employed, making money and paying into the tax system. And then we need a government that has the discipline to take that additional revenue and use it to pay down the debt and never grow it again. And that's what we should be focused on, and that's what we're not focused on...".

The Ragister wants all tax breaks, including those for tax-exempt organizations, reviewed.

The Ragister also states that government, Unlike some charities, its finances are transparent and it doesn't pay huge salaries to those at the top.

They must not have read, and didn't report, 454 people in President Obama's White House are being paid a total of $37,121,463.

141 Obama aides -- or nearly one-in-three -- earn more than $100,000 a year and Twenty-one Obama aides earn the top-dollar $172,200.

The kicker is, 41 unidentified Obama staff members owe the Internal Revenue Service $831,000 in back taxes.

Obama hires do have a pattern of not paying their taxes (Everyday Fools).

The Ragister also wants to end tax breaks for having a child, saving for a kid's college, charitable contributions, saving for retirement, mortgage interest deductions and energy tax credits.

They fail to mention the nearly 50% of the country who pay no income taxes, as well as the practice of receiving refundable tax credits.

In a sidebar column titled, Some donate a little extra to Uncle Sam, the Ragister mentions an anonymous $10,0000 check Los Angeles County received and put in its general fund.

Uncle Sam represents the U.S. as a whole, not a county in California.

Misleading

In case you thought the editorial board of the Des Moines Register had an epiphany regarding life with this editorial.

Iowa should treat all births equally

Think again, they're still choosing to be the same baby killers they've always been (Lowest Of Lows), this is just about the paperwork process of recording a birth.

Billy Martin said it best

There's an interesting editorial written for today's Wall Street Journal.

The Journal delve's deeper into the words of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who for months has been saying about her 2002 vote to authorize military action in Iraq...

"Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."

Per the editorial...

October 10, 2002. Mrs. Clinton addresses the Senate on the use-of-force resolution. "The facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt," she declares, citing Saddam's record of using chemical weapons, the invasion of Kuwait, and his history of deceiving U.N. weapons inspectors. "As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets," she continues, adding that Saddam "has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members."

While she expresses her preference for working through the U.N. if possible, she adds, "I believe the authority to use force to enforce that mandate is inherent in the original 1991 U.N. resolution, as President Clinton recognized when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998."

December 15, 2003.

..."I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. I believe that that was the right vote."

April 20, 2004. Mrs. Clinton tells Larry King: "I don't regret giving the President the authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade." Asked whether she thinks she was "fooled," she replies: "The consensus was the same, from the Clinton Administration to the Bush Administration. It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared about the weapons of mass destruction."

Interesting!

Fast forwarding to a couple of weeks ago in Iowa...

"At the time, I said 'This is not a vote for pre-emptive war.' I said that on the floor of the Senate...He took the authority that I and others gave him, and he misused it and I regret that deeply... "If we knew then what we know now, there never would have been a vote. I never would have voted to give this president that authority."

Was HRC lying in 2002, 2003 and 2004?

Or, for her selfish political purposes, is she lying today?

Dick Morris, who advised Bill Clinton, had this to say about the Clinton's recently...

"...Bill lies about sex, Hillary lies about everything."

He should know and now so does America.

Which leads me to Billy Martin, "One's a born liar; the other's convicted."

He was talking about Reggie Jackson and George Steinbrenner, but it's highly accurate here!

Alter The Ending

One week after endorsing Chris Diebel for Des Moines city council at-large the Ragister editorial board has reneged.

The Register's Editorial: Campaign attacks alter endorsement

The Capitol Square Crapper had a cow because Diebel's campaign criticized incumbent Skip Moore for his part in Des Moines having to repay the illegal tax it collected in the form of a utility franchise fee.

The Ragister noted that Moore was not on the city council when it voted to collect the fee in 2004.

True, but Moore was elected to the city council in December 2009 and failed as a leader, and the scientific community is united in that fact, in pushing for Des Moines to end the charade and save taxpayer money by not continuing the legal process.

Moore was complicit in Des Moines appealing the case to the Iowa Supreme Court in September 2010, it's request for a rehearing with the Iowa Supreme Court in 2012 and its petition to the United States Supreme Court in August 2012.

In March of 2012 Moore was quoted by the Ragister regarding his feelings on the Iowa Supreme Court ruling --

 “I’m definitely disappointed by the decision. I’m sure we’re going to be weighing all options.”

Looks like you may have skipped one, Moore.

In pulling its endorsement, the Ragister says -- The decision is now the voters’ to make.

It always is, you idiots.

Popular Demand?

The editorial board at the Capitol Square Crapper mistakes page views on a web site for Obamacare's popularity.

The Register's Editorial: Obamacare is not so unpopular after all

People look at a traffic accident, it doesn't mean they want to be in one and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Ragister reported -- Officials in California reported there were as many as 10,000 page views per second on its website. New York’s site saw more than 2.5 million visitors on Tuesday morning alone.

BUZZ--WRONG!

California exchange overstated its Web traffic for Obamacare launch

As for New York, an estimated 2.5 million New Yorkers are uninsured, which means they all visited the web site that morning.

Here may be the more accurate reporting --

Less than 1% of visitors are signing up for Obamacare on state health exchange websites

Insurance Manager: ‘We Have Yet To Have Someone Successfully Register On The Marketplace’

Enrollment In Obamacare's Federal Exchange, So Far, May Only Be In 'Single Digits'

Phone lines are open at 1-800-FUCKYO

I Want It Back

The state of Iowa has an $800 million budget surplus.

Republicans have proposed a non refundable tax credit of $375 for individuals or $750 for couples who file taxes jointly.

I've already opined about how the Iowa Dummycrat Spendocrats are against that idea (Dollars And Cents (Sense).

Now, the Ragister editorial board has come out against the Republican idea too.

In their editorial they surmise that a family would not hand any extra money back to their employer, therefore the state should not give money back either.

The Ragister would not let an employee keep money it overpaid to them, even if that employee can justify a way to spend it and the scientific community is united in that fact.

I don't mind paying taxes, but I do expect my money to be spent judiciously and fiducially.

If not

Opinion

In my esteemed opinion, and the scientific community is united in that fact, the beautiful minds of the Ragister editorial board are at it again.

The Register's Editorial: Note to GOP: Public against shutdown, default

So what!?!?!?

A majority of Americans, 53%, disapprove of the health care law and the same number disapprove of the way Obama is handling health care policy.

Yet, the Capitol Square Crapper still supports Obamacare and believes it quite popular (Popular Demand?).

I believe they have access to the poll data, as it was published in USA Today.

Shake A Fist

Because they make it so easy, and the scientific community is united in that fact, we'll once again make fun of the Ragister, specifically their editorial board.

The Register Editorial: TV has misled us: Fists can have killing force

I'm not trying to lessen the seriousness of this death, or any other, but in light of this senseless killing it might be time to register these lethal weapons.

Also, why does the Ragister mention a Pakistani actor named Mohammad Ali, when Muhammad Ali utilized his fists as a boxer?

Accept Crime?

The Capitol Square Crapper cries for criminals.

That statement is not new or news, and the scientific community is united in that fact, but it seems to have been their focus this week.

We documented their lack of truthiness on the editorial page (Wrong?).

We should have refuted their argument for leniency regarding Stephanie George, because the editorial board failed to disclose that Stephanie Yvette George had three prior drug convictions, one which included selling crack cocaine to an undercover officer.

Yesterday, the Ragister read like they were blaming the police for deaths involving pursuits.

West Des Moines officer calls off chase, but driver dies later
The death was the fourth in central Iowa since February tied to a police pursuit

The criminals start the chases, they can end them at any time and that's solely where blame lies.

Today's paper wants you to feel sorry for Kristina Joy Fetters because she is dying of breast cancer and wants to take her last breaths outside prison walls with her mother caring for her.

As it is, Fetters death will be far more peaceful than the one her great-aunt, Arlene Klehm got because Fetters hit her on the head with an iron skillet and stabbed her at least five times.

Fetters should not feel freedom.