Shopping with Credit Cards

So, I ran by the grocery store today and got a bag of apples and a bag of bagels. At checkout the lady asked to signature verify my credit card. I have to dig it back out so she can take the card, glance at the back of it, and give it back to me. She did not ask for a photo ID. I got to thinking which is always my mistake and realized just how dumb this process is. First, the electronic signature devices produce signatures that look nothing like the one on the back of the card. In fact, the e-signatures often look nothing like writing. Second, last I checked, the people working the grocery store check-out lanes are not handwriting experts and would not know a forged signature if it came over and bit them. She is not qualified to verify anything. Third, and this is the kicker, for purchases under a certain dollar amount (which this one was), the grocery store does not require the purchaser to sign. So... what was she verifying against? The only thing this process verifies is that there is actually *some* signature on the back of the card. Of course, if there isn't, I can always sign it right then and there to make it valid. They can't really say anything about that, though granted it might then cause an ID check. Still, I think that if I were going to use a stolen card, I would look it over and if the back was unsigned, then I'd sign it before I tried using it. And if the back was signed, I'd practice that signature a few times.

Political stunts

Republicans may filabuster but Democrats flee the state.

Illinois - Genius with a "J"

So our governor, realizing that state needs to reduce its spending, and not wanting to go after any entitlements or anything like that, seems to have proposed the following cuts to education:

1) We must consolidate school districts because we have too many and having fewer will reduce costs. This will mean closing schools, of course.

2) We will cut funding to the districts for their transportation budgets. They will have to pay for that themselves.

MY ISSUE: Having grown up rural, I know that if you close schools, you will necessarily force MORE and LONGER bus routes to get the kids to schools. Thus, consolidating school districts means you will see your bus costs go up, and buses already are a huge MANDATORY expense for rural districts. This strikes me as an unfunded mandate or at least an increased mandate coupled with decreased funding. Double wammie. The school districts will have to cut program and teaching to accommodate these new costs; that or ask for tax levies.

Democratic assumptions

With all the protests in Egypt right now and the talk of democracy, I feel obliged to point out a couple of things:

We ASSUME that a democracy will provide fair, just, human right conscious government. We assume it is better than an autocracy. We assume that democracies are more friendly to the Western democracies than other governments. This is not necessarily so. A democracy with no protection for the minorities can be a terrible thing. A democracy in a place that is majority anti-West is not in our interest.

Sarah Palin

It's two years since we elected Obama and I'm still reading headlines about Sarah Palin.

Query: Why is Sarah Palin even relevant to anything anymore? She was the governor of Alaska and basically a political nobody when McCain (McCane?) picked her as his VP candidate. (My opinions on that are documents elsewhere in this blog, I believe.) Together, they went down in one of the worst Republican presidential defeats in recent memory. As a political commentator, she says nothing new, unique, or even particularly insightful. Indeed, as far as I can tell, all she has done is make periodic statements and endorse various candidates. In Alaska, where they know her best, the candidate she endorsed lost to a WRITE-IN. In two other states, Nevada and Delaware, she and the Tea Party cost their party the elections and probably control of the Senate. Who the hell cares what she thinks, says, or does? Why is she even relevant to any political discussion in America?

My own stupidity...

Just to prove I'm an equal opportunity critic, here's a bit of my own stupidity. Sometime you just don't realize how bad you sound until you read it in print.

Q (by me): Were you aware that XXXX and her husband were having marital problems?

A: Yes.

Q: Was that after he died?

A: Yes.

This just in....

Basic Civil Liberties Threaten People's Security. Details at 11. (This parody of an actual insipid headline brought to you by Common Sense.)

Because passing regulations is the solution to everything - Euro Stupidity

Heard on NPR today that the Transportation Minister of the EU is outraged at the problems being caused by the heavy snowfall across Europe. If the airports can't handle it, he wants to increase regulation.

'Cause that's the solution to everything. By God, we'll slap a regulation in that limits the amount of snow an airport can experience in any given period. That'll fix 'em.

"We compromised on eight."

"The Conservatives wanted six; the Liberals wanted four; we compromised on eight." - Winston Churchill.

I cannot swear to the exact accuracy of the previous quote, but it is more or less accurate. It has to do with the British government's internal arguments on naval spending circa 1909. The Admiralty wanted to build six battleships that year, but Churchill and Lloyd George wanted four. A crisis in the form of a scare about German naval building occurred and when the dust settled, Parliament authorized the building of eight battleships.

This quote is mentioned because it came to mind after reading that the President was going to sign the tax compromise bill this afternoon. Everyone seems to agree that the deficit is a problem and the economy is a problem. The Dems want to expand unemployment to pay benefits for a longer time, costing the tax payer money. They argue this puts money in the hands of people who will spend it and stimulates the economy. The GOP wants to keep taxes low, allowing people to keep more money and hopes they will then spend or invest it. This also costs the taxpayer's money, albeit while avoiding a tax rise that would, excuse the expression, tax the resources of many families. Note that both scheme cost the government money, and in this year of urgency about the growing debt, what do we do? We adopt both.

Doing neither would substantially raise the amount of income the government has. Doing both seems the worst possible thing, so, of course, that's what we did. And it's not the first time. Frequently, in the past, when the two major parties could not agree nor one prevail, they solve the problem by spending more while reducing the government's income at the same time. It's moronic and unsustainable.

Death of a St. Louis Icon

Yesterday marked the last day of the last broadcast of KFUO 99.1 FM, AKA Classic 99, one of the few private classic radio stations. KFUO was owned by the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, LCMS, and had been operating as a classic music station, one of the best in the country, for 62 years. Then LCMS sold it to some funko Jhesus group. (You have to put the "h" in Jesus because it's the first letter of the word "holy.") I guess they did not see it as important to their mission any longer, and I think I heard that they were loosing money on it. As my father noted, I want to hate the LCMS for this, but I wasn't contributing to keep the station going, and they can sell their property if they want to. Still, I will miss it.

So my wife and I sat in the living room last night and listened to the last hour of Classic 99. They went out, flags flying, playing Beethoven's 9th, Ode to Joy.