Different than fake news . . . false charges? Who can tell . . .
Maria Butina: Kremlin says U.S. charges against Russian woman fake
Saturday, July 21, 2018
Friday, July 20, 2018
Flashback Friday Reads: War, Politics and Coping
 |
| Italian Gas Mask ca 1930s |
Fierce campaigns brought strong resistance in every Nazi German-occupied country "by a variety of means, including non-cooperation, disinformation and propaganda, guerrilla warfare and recapturing of towns." Many of the resistance fighters involved in the German-Soviet War of WWII (aka Operation Barbarossa) would become well-known Soviet Partisans, instrumental along with allies in the war effort that consumed lives and resources from over 30 countries overall.
Participants waged war with "the entirety of their economic, industrial, and scientific capabilities". Any distinctions between military and civilian resources were practically suspended. The deadliest conflict in human history, WWII took 15 - 85 million lives, most of them civilian bystanders and partisans.
On this day in 1942, the first detachment of the Women's Army Corps (WACS) began basic training at Fort Des Moines, Iowa. About a year later, in July of '43, they were converted to active duty in order to serve the various non-combatant duties of the time, such as clerical and other administrative support.
REF:
- On-This-Day.com
- World War II Database ww2db.com
- U.S. Army Center of Military History history.army.mil/brochures/WAC/WAC.HTM
- Wikipedia
*1939 - 1945, approximately 3/4 century and 2-3 generations ago
War - if it were easily stopped, wouldn't it?
SCOTUS Lifts Sports Gambling Ban: to Benefit or Detriment?
Isn't it ironic that as more people make less money, opportunities to gamble away earnings or spend them on other activities that don't benefit one's family only increase.
Recently, New England denizens were either stoked or broken to hear that sports betting bans were struck down by the Supreme Court in May.
Supreme Court opens door for sports betting across the country by striking down federal anti-gambling law.
Don't get me wrong: I want casinos for my Southwestern area of The States. Maybe you do, too. However, for some, you really have to trust those you live with-- that they'll be making money in or around that system, and not losing money you need to live. Same goes for sports betting, especially, as the number of sports aficionados who will become active, lawful gamblers is likely to soar well above that of casino and slot players.
But wait: who needs casinos when sports fans have new sports each season to bet on. On the other hand, if they want families playing [spending] together, they'll need to erect casinos around the sports betting booths, after all. Or, maybe they won't bother building anything, and sports betting will be only more opportunity to throw money away from your family online.
It can be hard to tell, but it's also true that more people are making more money today than they did before The Great Recession. We have both: more people making less and more people making more. The latter of these are the only people who should be taking on any gambling . . . but we know the situation won't be reflective of such reason.
Thus, we have what was always the problem with vices like gambling, drinking, strip clubs, prostitution, etc. It's less about prudish mores and more about retention of economic assets and financial decisions made within a family.
Remember, gambling can be as addictive as any reward-seeking behavior. Compulsive gambling, also called gambling disorder, is the uncontrollable urge to keep gambling despite the toll it takes on one's life. Sad, how high the toll can be before anyone takes notice.
Are you looking forward to having more opportunities for high-stakes gaming?
RELATED READING:
Sports betting set to explode across country
Recently, New England denizens were either stoked or broken to hear that sports betting bans were struck down by the Supreme Court in May.
Supreme Court opens door for sports betting across the country by striking down federal anti-gambling law.
Don't get me wrong: I want casinos for my Southwestern area of The States. Maybe you do, too. However, for some, you really have to trust those you live with-- that they'll be making money in or around that system, and not losing money you need to live. Same goes for sports betting, especially, as the number of sports aficionados who will become active, lawful gamblers is likely to soar well above that of casino and slot players.
But wait: who needs casinos when sports fans have new sports each season to bet on. On the other hand, if they want families playing [spending] together, they'll need to erect casinos around the sports betting booths, after all. Or, maybe they won't bother building anything, and sports betting will be only more opportunity to throw money away from your family online.
What People Gamble, Besides Income Gained in a 'Recovering Economy'
It can be hard to tell, but it's also true that more people are making more money today than they did before The Great Recession. We have both: more people making less and more people making more. The latter of these are the only people who should be taking on any gambling . . . but we know the situation won't be reflective of such reason.
Thus, we have what was always the problem with vices like gambling, drinking, strip clubs, prostitution, etc. It's less about prudish mores and more about retention of economic assets and financial decisions made within a family.
Remember, gambling can be as addictive as any reward-seeking behavior. Compulsive gambling, also called gambling disorder, is the uncontrollable urge to keep gambling despite the toll it takes on one's life. Sad, how high the toll can be before anyone takes notice.
Are you looking forward to having more opportunities for high-stakes gaming?
RELATED READING:
Sports betting set to explode across country
Thursday, July 19, 2018
So Much Sex Scandal, So Few Major Political Parties
Could we stop pretending that constituents of any political party should be heard-and-overlooked, just because they're representing our party?
Not only are we overlooking red-flag moments in sex, gender, age and race issues (for the massive trees of the forest-of-iniquities), we're actively allowing and contributing to the untended abhorrent behaviors of our representatives (and peers), in many circumstances.
Let's stop telling ourselves—and letting others tell us—that it's okay to minimize the bad, untrustworthy, behavior of an irresponsible Democratic Representative (for example) in order to save Party-Face while using similar scenarios to denigrate an opposing Party-Face under the guise of being better, somehow, because of a t-shirt. Because that's what we've got right now . . . t-shirt politics.
During this time of shifting cultural mores and party lines, we are a people of division with labels on everything. The sad irony is that we distinctly label all which has inherent capacity for change, including two major political parties. Some see Republicans well-known to them, and cannot believe they're wearing the shirt of discrimination today. Some see Democrats and wonder how far off path they'll need to wander in order to have everyone's needs met, whatever shirt they're wearing.
Allowing two-faced judgements to stand unfettered could only result in a continued backslide of the important strides made thus far in U.S. politics, in issues of equality, and to the health of our total society. We should never let tacit approval of unwanted behavior slide.
Case in Point:
Minimizing Al Franken's sexism scandal [complete with unconscious/unwilling player(s)] as a "comedy skit" does nothing to ingratiate a public to positives of the inferred major party of the apologist . . . not if they're at all concerned about grappling with like behaviors in their workplaces, the workplaces of your spouses, sons and daughters, etc.
Not only are we overlooking red-flag moments in sex, gender, age and race issues (for the massive trees of the forest-of-iniquities), we're actively allowing and contributing to the untended abhorrent behaviors of our representatives (and peers), in many circumstances.
Let's stop telling ourselves—and letting others tell us—that it's okay to minimize the bad, untrustworthy, behavior of an irresponsible Democratic Representative (for example) in order to save Party-Face while using similar scenarios to denigrate an opposing Party-Face under the guise of being better, somehow, because of a t-shirt. Because that's what we've got right now . . . t-shirt politics.
It's not okay to minimize bad behaviors of our political party representatives.
During this time of shifting cultural mores and party lines, we are a people of division with labels on everything. The sad irony is that we distinctly label all which has inherent capacity for change, including two major political parties. Some see Republicans well-known to them, and cannot believe they're wearing the shirt of discrimination today. Some see Democrats and wonder how far off path they'll need to wander in order to have everyone's needs met, whatever shirt they're wearing.
Allowing two-faced judgements to stand unfettered could only result in a continued backslide of the important strides made thus far in U.S. politics, in issues of equality, and to the health of our total society. We should never let tacit approval of unwanted behavior slide.
Case in Point:
Minimizing Al Franken's sexism scandal [complete with unconscious/unwilling player(s)] as a "comedy skit" does nothing to ingratiate a public to positives of the inferred major party of the apologist . . . not if they're at all concerned about grappling with like behaviors in their workplaces, the workplaces of your spouses, sons and daughters, etc.
But al Frankens comedy skit? Whew he almost got away with it.— Livin the Teal High Life (@tealtimeB) July 19, 2018
Ever notice how some of the most critical battles, like the push-back against unwanted sexual predation, tend to bridge any political party divides?
In essence, it appears that @tealtimeB is more interested in protecting the ill-behavior-interests of the likes of Franken (no doubt, Trumpesque) than in protecting of his/her life companions that could fall under the scope of such a chad as Franken. Incredibly, @tealtimeB also retains an ability to negatively judge aspects of a performance executed against one of our most damaging parties of late, and associated gun group, by alleged female Russian agent Mariia Butina, in such a way as would never occur in regard to any male 'agent'. In fact, one must delve into chewing the entire meat of a post to understand that the potentially fallible target of the Russian seductress was nonetheless a deciding actor in his/her situation of sexual misdeed. No one was taken advantage of in their sleep, as with Franken when he made light of . . . a number of issues (pictured above).
Whether we're working and living with Republicans, Democrats, Green-Party adherents or Libertarians, chances are that we're working with a multitude of personalities across the spectrum of people who do and don't vote. Further, did you know that there are about 50 registered political parties in the United States? Most of them considered minor players, the groups range from "American"-labeled racially-based or religious political platforms to straight-up communism and vague-label centrism. When you get into reading the platforms for some of the parties, it becomes truly worrisome. You thought Rs and Ds were bad, just wait until the C or M parties are at major odds at the top of the heap.
Whether Trump did it or Franken did it: Hold all people responsible, not just the others. Otherwise, we're in a lion's den of our own making.
RELATED READING:
Trump's interfering gag rule threatens to further degrade women's health care, which impacts families and opportunities.
On the flipside, Trump is "expected to sign an executive order establishing two panels dedicated to job training and education opportunities for U.S. workers".
Party Haven - Almost Anything Could Happen with Irresponsible Constituencies
Whether we're working and living with Republicans, Democrats, Green-Party adherents or Libertarians, chances are that we're working with a multitude of personalities across the spectrum of people who do and don't vote. Further, did you know that there are about 50 registered political parties in the United States? Most of them considered minor players, the groups range from "American"-labeled racially-based or religious political platforms to straight-up communism and vague-label centrism. When you get into reading the platforms for some of the parties, it becomes truly worrisome. You thought Rs and Ds were bad, just wait until the C or M parties are at major odds at the top of the heap.
Whether Trump did it or Franken did it: Hold all people responsible, not just the others. Otherwise, we're in a lion's den of our own making.
RELATED READING:
Trump's interfering gag rule threatens to further degrade women's health care, which impacts families and opportunities.
On the flipside, Trump is "expected to sign an executive order establishing two panels dedicated to job training and education opportunities for U.S. workers".
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
Much of what's wrong with the world today is a reflection of the decimation of natural resources that would otherwise be available to s... -
Identity politics are a challenge, even when you want to remain independent of all the fuss—as much as possible. Although, to desire s... -
Possibly the greatest issue of independent company is not knowing what you're going to get like chocolates Are they all che...