Sunday, December 28, 2008

For this Americans gave up their lives

In land scarred by violence, dogfighting makes a comeback

KABUL, Afghanistan: In a dingy butcher's shop reeking of slaughter, a half-dozen sheep's carcasses dangled from hooks, and two men spoke of dogs.

"My dog is younger than his dog, I have the advantage," said one of the men, known as Abdul Sabour, 49. "And my dog is more energetic than his dog."

"He's lying," grumbled the other man, Kefayatullah, 50. "His dog is old. He's just here wasting his time. How many dogs has my dog beaten? Sixty! My dog has been a champion for three years!"

The men were arranging a dogfight, largely in the international language of trash-talking. They represented two groups of bettors. The purse, they said, was $50,000, a fortune in this impoverished country and one of the biggest prizes here in recent memory.

Afghans like to fight. They will boast about this. They will say that fighting is in their blood. And for all the horrors of three decades of war, they still find room to fight for fun, most often through proxies: cocks, rams, goats, camels, kites.

The sport has even experienced a resurgence in the south, where the influence of the Taliban is strongest, though the crowds have thinned somewhat since February, when a suicide bomber detonated himself at a dogfighting match. About 80 people were killed and more were wounded.

Here in the capital, there are two tournaments every week, both on Friday, the day of prayer. The bigger one unfolds in the morning in a natural dirt amphitheater at the bottom of a craggy slope on the city's outskirts. It draws thousands of men and boys as spectators — like most sports and sporting events in Afghanistan, it is almost exclusively a male pursuit.

"It's something from our ancestors," said Ghulam Yahya Amirzadah, 21, whose family owns 17 dogs in Kabul and in their hometown in the northwest province of Badghis.

Amirzadah, who is known in dogfighting circles as Lala Herati, said he inherited the pastime from his father, who ran fighting dogs in his youth.

"It's not about money," Amirzadah said. "If my dog beats another dog, it makes me feel like I've won $100,000. I can survive just from the happiness."

On a recent Friday, Amirzadah was at the dogfighting amphitheater, though without his dogs. He was watching the fights and arranging future matches for his stable.

More than 2,000 people were there — poor men who had arrived on foot as well as former warlords in sport utility vehicles accompanied by Kalashnikov-toting guards. And there were dozens of dogs — hulking, big-headed mastiff breeds that, in the right light and the wrong setting, might be mistaken for small bears. Some were so big that they had to be restrained by two men. A few owners, their arms tired, had lashed their dogs to the wheels of cars.

An informal committee of arbiters, including Kefayatullah and Abdul Sabour, was selecting the fights and matching up the dogs. Some fights had been organized days in advance, with hundreds of dollars, sometimes thousands, riding on each.

The event was presided over by a ringmaster, a toothless old man with a turban and a limp. He carried a wooden staff that he used to beat spectators who crowded the pitch and members of the dogfighters' entourages who blocked the spectators' view.

Though dogfighting is again popular here, it is far from universally embraced. The country's elite disparage it as the domain of the uncultured and the criminal.

"In my personal view, it's not a good thing," said Ghulam Nabi Farahi, deputy minister of information and culture. "In today's world, these animals should be treated well. But unfortunately, there's a lot of fighting."

But dogfighters generally shrug at these sorts of remarks. In modern Afghan society, there are not many sources of entertainment, they argue. In addition, they say, the dogs are well fed and well treated.

"The interest of the people is increasing day by day," said Sher Mohammad Sheywaki, 50, who was standing on the edge of the fighting pitch. "Even if people are starving, they'll still keep dogfighting."

A fight was about to begin. Two dogs were brought close by their owners, then released. They lunged at each other, thrusting upward on hind legs and clamping their jaws onto each other's face. They tugged and twisted each other, looking for leverage, each trying to knock the other off balance.

Their handlers pressed in, shouting encouragement and slapping the dogs on their haunches, as a jockey would a racehorse. A cameraman crouched nearby, recording the fight for collectors' DVDs. A large cloud of dust enveloped the scrum.

This fight, like most others, was over in a few minutes when one dog had pinned the other to the ground and held him there. They were pulled apart and hauled out of the ring.

In some countries, dogfighters will fight their dogs to the death. But Afghan dogfighting is more akin to Greco-Roman wrestling. A dog is declared the victor when he clearly establishes his dominance over the other, or when the weaker dog displays one of the telltale signs of submission, including backing off from the fight or putting its tail between its legs. They are usually pulled apart before they can inflict serious damage on each other.

The stakes for dogfighters are too high to risk their charges any further. Dogs may be a costly investment for the average Afghan, but they can also make their owners money.

On the eve of the fight between Kefayatullah's dog, Palang (meaning tiger), and Abdul Sabour's dog, Zambur (bee), the planned $50,000 purse dropped to $10,000, according to Kefayatullah.

The fight took place on a sunny and chilly Friday morning this month. It was heavily anticipated, and the crowd was large. For more than 10 minutes, Palang and Zambur tore against each other, drawing blood. Kefayatullah, Abdul Sabour and others with money riding on the fight stayed close and yelled encouragement, according to Amirzadah, who attended.

Eventually, Zambur, Abdul Sabour's dog, ran out of steam and Palang overwhelmed him, prompting the men to call a halt to the fight. In celebration, friends of Kefayatullah swarmed Palang, whose fur was wet with blood, and showered him with Afghani bills.

Except for deep wounds on a leg and an ear, Palang was O.K. But his owner was not. Minutes after the fight, Kefayatullah collapsed and was rushed to the hospital. He had suffered a heart attack.

"It was a stroke of joy and happiness!" he joked a week later, as he lay in a ward in the Wazir Akhbar Khan Hospital in Kabul. His wife and daughter sat at his bedside. "I'll be up in no time," he said, "and everything will be back to normal, like before."

His wife's face visibly tensed. "No you won't!" she said, glaring. She was serious. He was smiling. The daughter looked embarrassed.

"It's over," Kefayatullah's wife continued. "I will kill the dogs! I will give them some pills."

Kefayatullah shrugged and smiled again, trying to defuse the situation. "She says a lot, but I don't listen," he said, and he vowed to be back at the Friday dogfights — with his champion dogs — soon enough.

Abdul Waheed Wafa contributed reporting.

Saturday, December 27, 2008

The hype of Jay Nixon !!!

Mr Nixon,

The best thing you could do is have the state legislature to pass a law which requires much tighter restrictions on malpractice suits. Doctors are scared of being sued and you also have people who want everything under the sun covered and if it isn't then we will have pending litigation. Insurance companies try there best on coverages but at some point people need to be responsible for their own actions as well.

Jay Nixon believes that every Missourian should have access to quality health care.

Every Missourian and every individual in this country has ACCESS to quality health care, please point to me where they don't.

Unfortunately, that is not the case today.

Once more the people have been led astray by hyperbole, of course Hulshof was not any better.

Because of Governor Matt Blunt's massive health care cuts in 2005, nearly 700,000 Missourians, including 121,000 children, do not have health insurance.

What does this have to do with access to quality health care

Businesses are struggling to provide health care for their employees,

Open up the market place so more companies can come into the state and be competitive in the marketplace. The I.C. has maintained the same insurance companies for years, where is the competition ?

seniors are paying too much for prescription drugs,

There also over medicated just like much of the population of this country

and our medical research facilities aren't getting the resources they need to move forward.

Stem-cell research an amendment 2 will take care of this.

As Governor, Jay will make it a priority to fix our broken health care system so Missourians can live longer, healthier lives and so that our state can lead the nation in medical research.

By living longer we can lead the nation in medical research ?? Living longer creates a draw on the social security funds, the nonexistent funds.

While Governors in other states are making smart investments by expanding health coverage for their citizens, Matt Blunt is doing the opposite here in Missouri. Since taking office, Blunt has slashed or eliminated the health care coverage of more than 400,000 Missourians, including 73,000 children.

Taking people off the roles of government is some how bad ?? Sometimes people need a little motivation to get motivated to better themselves.

Because the number of uninsured has increased so dramatically, Missourians with health care are being forced to pay higher premiums.

My rates haven't increased and I haven't noticed increased cost because of this issue in billing either.

The Governor unexplainably turned down over $1 billion federal dollars that would have helped provide the neediest Missourians with health insurance. When it comes to investing in a healthy Missouri, Matt Blunt is clearly taking us in the wrong direction.

Would this be the same federal government that is 10 trillion in debt and currently is printing bill faster to devalue the dollar even more.

As Attorney General, Jay has a record of finding creative ways to improve Missouri's health care system. He helped create the Missouri Foundation for Health (MFH), a foundation dedicated to strengthening Missouri's health care system and to promoting prevention and healthy lifestyles.

Perhaps requiring people to pay something into the system would be quite beneficial, we just can't keep requiring the middle class and wealthy to continue to pay for the poor.

The Foundation formulates public policy proposals to advance efforts to increase access to high-quality health care, particularly for the insured, throughout Missouri.

Jay understands that many small business owners who want to provide health care for their employees are simply unable to afford it.

I'm not buying this statement !! If Jay truly understands that many small businesses want to be able to have health insurance why then are small businesses restricted from forming co-ops to make insurance more affordable and why then are there 27 state mandates on what is REQUIRED to be covered.

In fact, more than 50 percent of uninsured workers in Missouri either work for small businesses or are self-employed. As Governor, Jay will be committed to working with small business owners to help them provide health care to their employees.

Then get government out of the insurance industry and get government out of the insurance policy industry.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Just exactly who are they talking about

I have found some interesting quotes from some talk show host on both sides of the aisle and I thought it quite interseting how you can use the quote for either political party president.

“Is the president purposefully using propaganda and hyperbole to garner the American public for support?” Are we talking about Bush the elder, Bush the younger, Clinton, or perhaps (PEBO) President Elect Barack Obama

“Why should one U.S. airman give up his life when our national security is not in imminent danger?” Good question are we talking about Iraq or Somilia?

“trying to get every tax dollar for every pork barrel project.” republican or democrat?

"If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is with representation." Which political party controlled congress at this point

"If you commit a crime, you're guilty." perhaps one should be careful on what becomes a crime

"
There's a simple way to solve the crime problem: obey the law; punish those who do not. see above

“Mistakes are a part of being human. Appreciate your mistakes for what they are: precious life lessons that can only be learned the hard way. Unless it's a fatal mistake, which, at least, others can learn from.” Words to live by

“He'd be natural liberal Senator. Nobody listens to him.”

"And yet, if we don't, first and foremost, act responsibly with the national tax dollars that we have, we can't properly address those regional priorities that we would like to." which side of the political aisle does this one come from?

"
By overhauling current rules and speeding the entry of competitors in the market, we encourage competition and provide our constituents with new choices and cheaper bills." see the same question above

I found this exercise quite enlightening as both sides of the political spectrum use the same language to keep their voters coming back for more.

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Laissez-Faire Capitalism Should Be as Dead as Soviet Communism

Laissez-Faire Capitalism Should Be as Dead as Soviet Communism

By Arianna Huffington

The collapse of Communism as a political system sounded the death knell for Marxism as an ideology. But while laissez-faire capitalism has been a monumental failure in practice, and soundly defeated at the polls, the ideology is still alive and kicking.

The only place you can find an American Marxist these days is teaching a college linguistic theory class. But you can find all manner of free market fundamentalists still on the Senate floor or in Governor's mansions or showing up on TV trying to peddle the deregulation snake oil.

Take Sen. John Ensign, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, who went on Face the Nation and, with a straight face, said of the economic meltdown: "Unfortunately, it was allowed to be portrayed that this was a result of deregulation, when in fact it was a result of overregulation."

Or Gov. Mark Sanford, who told Joe Scarborough he was against bailing out the auto industry because it would "threaten the very market-based system that has created the wealth that this country has enjoyed."

If a politician announced he was running on a platform of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" he would be laughed off the stage. That is also the correct response to anyone who continues to make the case that markets do best when left alone.

It's time to drive the final nail into the coffin of laissez-faire capitalism by treating it like the discredited ideology it inarguably is. If not, the Dr. Frankensteins of the right will surely try to revive the monster and send it marauding through our economy once again.

We've only just begun to bury the financially dead, and the free market fundamentalists are already looking to deflect the blame.

In a comprehensive piece on what led to the mortgage crisis and the subsequent financial meltdown, the New York Times shows how the Bush administration's devotion to unregulated markets was a primary cause of our economy to ruin. But the otherwise fascinating piece puts too much focus on the "mistakes" the Bush team made by not paying attention to the warning signs popping up all around them.

"There is no question we did not recognize the severity of the problems," claimed Al Hubbard, Bush's former chief economic adviser. "Had we, we would have attacked them."

But the mistake wasn't in not recognizing the "severity of the problems" -- the mistake was the ideology that led to the problems. Communism didn't fail because Soviet leaders didn't execute it well enough. Same with free market fundamentalism. In fact, Bush and his team did a bang-up job executing a defective theory. The problem wasn't just the bathwater; the baby itself is rotten to the core.

William Seidman, the longtime GOP economic advisor who oversaw the S&L bailout in 1991, cuts to the chase: "This administration made decisions that allowed the free market to operate as a barroom brawl instead of a prize fight. To make the market work well, you have to have a lot of rules."

Even Alan Greenspan, whose owl-eyed visage would adorn a Mount Rushmore of unregulated capitalists, has begun to see the light, telling a House committee in October that he "made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms."

But most Republicans are still refusing to see what's right in front of them. Especially Bush, our CEO president, who lays the blame not on the failures of the marketplace but on past administrations and corporate greed. "Wall Street got drunk," he says. Maybe so, but who made the last 8 years Happy Hour, and kept serving up the drinks?

Last week, Ben Smith reported that the GOP was launching "a new, in-house think tank aimed at reviving the party's policy heft." In a private memo explaining the think tank, RNC chairman Mike Duncan wrote: "We must show how our ideology can be applied to solve problems." But, of course, it's that very ideology that's causing the problems. It's like the old horror movie cliché: "We've traced the call -- it's coming from inside the house!"

We've got to do everything we can to make sure there will be no sequels to this political horror. The blame shifters cannot be allowed to make their case without the truth being pointed out at every turn. It's time to relegate free market fundamentalists to the same standing as Marxist ideologues: intellectual curiosities occasionally trotted out as relics of a failed philosophy.

Arianna Huffington is co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post.

Monday, December 22, 2008

23 in the books

Today was the 23rd anniversary of my wedding vowels to Janine O'Dell Marion, she is the mother of my two children, the drive behind my desire to achieve unmitigated success, and the reason for my being. If ever there was a time that GOD was truly looking out for me it was definitely the day that I met the women who has been my faithful companion since march of 85 and marriage in December of 85.

It can only be said with these words...

I love you dearly.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

animal control meeting

It was not apparent at the onset of the meeting that there was an agenda, however since this meeting was being conducted by council members one should have figured the AGENDA was going to be forthcoming.
In attendance were people from animal rescue agencies, a local breeder, some people from a local vets office and a veterinarian that I had met the night before at the Young Conservatives meeting, a mayoral candidate, concerned citizens from Springfield and quite a few from Fordland and me. It appeared the meeting was on how we can grow the abusive force of government and require everyone to come under the same governmental umbrella. In terms of a level playing field I felt sorry for one Jenny Thrasher as she tried to explain the HUGE difference between a "breeder" and a reputable breeder.
The wife and I have owned quite a few "papered" dogs, A Norwegian Elkhound, which had won quite a few first place ribbons however she had a flaw which prevented her from showing any further. She was too big for her gender to continue showing but made a GREAT family pet. She also wouldn't have been of breeding stock for show dogs so we agreed to have her spayed. The breeder from which we got her researched our backgrounds through our references and came by the house to make sure that we would be suitable owners for her dog.
On the flip side of this coin we purchased a schipperke from an AKC registered breeder and we made sure we got the papers for this dog but I would classify the individuals we bought it from as being a backyard breeder. The dog had a terrible skin condition which we eventually overcame with treatment and "processed water" baths. The differences between the individual dog owners/breeders was quite immense which allows me to form my opinions on this subject. Reputable breeders don't just have litters in order to make a few dollars. In many instances breeders are asked by a friend or business acquaintance for an animal to complete there family and in that regard they will have some animals to sell. A reputable breeder will show there animals, they become much like family and as such they just aren't given to anyone nor are they just breed like rabbits. Are there abuses in this system YES!!!, but these are the individuals which city ordinances are designed for not those who are abiding by all the laws of common sense.
All of these organizations need to come together and find the areas of commonality and from that direct the city council in the manner of which common sense legislation is drawn up and passed.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Detriot's FAILURE

We as a nation are on the verge of bailing out (when you click on this link LOOK very carefully at the flags the workers are holding) General Motors, Chrysler, & Ford. Are we really bailing out the auto manufacturers or are we bailing out the United Auto Workers union ? I believe we are purchasing out the unions and not the manufacturer of the vehicles. The UAW much like our very own fire fighters & police pension system it is UNDERFUNDED !!!!!!!!! How did this happen you might ask, management wrote out checks post dated to the future without the knowledge of whether the future was going to be able to pay the bills.

I also have a theory as to why the manufacturers are having a hard time selling cars, it has nothing to do with the economy because personally our economy isn't in that bad of shape as compared to the same time frame before 9/11. Remember Bill Clinton got rid of the WORST economy in 50 years by defeating Bush 1.0. Once he was term limited his VP took the Democrat nomination for President and LOST (yes all you democrats I said LOST not stole) the election to Bush 2.0. Up until 9/11 we were in the economy which was created by President Bill Clinton and we all know it was better than the roaring 20's.

NASCAR
unofficially got started when deep in the back woods, farmers around the depression era made moonshine to earn money to support their families. Money for the bare necessities was hard to come by. They learned to outrun the law by making their cars faster than what the lawmen had. One famous moonshine runner is Junior Johnson from Ingle Hollow, he was never caught while running moonshine.

As this sport has gained popularity so have the vehicles which have toured the track. In any given era the cars which dominate the highways and byways of America are the counterparts to their racing cousins. There are exceptions to this rule as well since Plymouth Superbirds and Dodge Charger Daytonas were designed strictly for the track with a limited production for purchase just in order to beat Ford and the racing Torino.
The long list of cars that have been on the track resemble a who's who of auto manufacturers nameplates. During anytime in NASCAR history the car which dominates the track also dominates the sales. This list includes such fantastic vehicles as:

General Motors

Buick Regal
Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme
Chevrolet Lumina/Monte Carlo
Chevrolet Malibu
Pontiac Grand Prix & the current model the Chevrolet Impala

Ford Motor Company

Mercury Montego
Mercury Cougar
Ford Torino
Ford Thunderbird
Ford Taurus & the current model the Ford Fusion

Chrylser Corporation

Dodge Intrepid
Dodge Charger & Charger Daytona
Plymouth Valiant
Plymouth Superbird

There are others that I'm missing but as you look through this list think about the cars you have seen in your lifetime. Ford Thunderbird dominated the track in the 80's and it sold up until the Ford Taurus took over NASCAR duties. The Thunderbird got a redesign and the sales hit the tiolet while the Taurus started to perform quite well on the track it also started performing well on the showroom floor. Same can be said for the Lumina, Monte Carlo, and the Dodge Intrepid.

What we have now is considered the car of tomorrow which has no defining body style and realistically has no defining front or rear tail clip. It is not by mistake that sales have dropped of the current models of NASCAR vehicles since they have NO definition on the highways and byways of America. NASCAR and cars sales work best when we have cars that LOOK like there race track counterparts.