<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Gary Kleppe&#039;s Web Site</title>
    <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/</link>
    <description>Gary Kleppe&#039;s personal Web Site</description>
    <language>en-us</language>           
    <generator>Nucleus CMS v3.64</generator>
    <copyright>Ã¯Â¿Â½</copyright>             
    <category>Weblog</category>
    <docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
    
    <item>
 <title>Day Late, Many Thousands of Dollars Short</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=97</link>
<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120515/news/705159701/" target="_blank">Daily Herald:</a><br />
<blockquote>DuPage Forest Preserve commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday to reduce their own salaries from nearly $57,000 to $53,500, but they disagreed on whether the cuts were deep enough.<br />
<br />
Commissioner Joe Cantore suggested reducing salaries in October and on Tuesday fought to keep the issue from being tabled to next week’s commission meeting.<br />
<br />
He urged fellow commissioners to cut their salaries to $50,000, roughly equal to the annual compensation DuPage County Board members receive.<br />
<br />
“It was just time for some action,” Cantore said. “We needed to get it done. But I don’t think we reduced it enough and I guess you could call it a compromise.”</blockquote><br />
<br />
Oh Joe, you great crusading action hero you.<br />
<br />
Reality check, please. The median income per household in the USA as of the last census was a little over fifty thousand. In DuPage it's just over $75,000. Assuming an average of 1.5 wage-earners per household, that means that even if this proposal had passed, Joe and his buddies would still each have been getting the same money the rest of us get, plus very generous benefits like health care and pensions. But the rest of us have to work full time for our money; not so Joe. DuPage Forest Preserve Commissioners claim (in the Herald article linked above) to work 1000 hours a year; that's only half a full-time job, if true; the real amount of time they spend is probably quite a bit less. Most if not all of them have day jobs&mdash;Cantore is an industrial building remodeling contractor.<br />
<br />
Then there's this:<br />
<blockquote>[Outgoing commissioner Carl] Schultz said one forest commissioner represents the same number of people as three county board members per district. He added that county board members also have offices, while forest commissioners keep offices in their homes.</blockquote><br />
<br />
This is a bloody silly argument for a number of reasons. Besides the obvious, that running the forest preserves might not be quite as much work as running the entire rest of the county, the fact of the matter is that DuPage County Board members are also grossly overpaid, getting full-time salary and benefits for work they do as a sideline to their regular jobs.<br />
<br />
Joe and others, if you're really out to save the taxpayers some money, cut your salary and benefits to what a typical ten-hour-per-week position would offer. Give up your guaranteed government-provided health care and retirement income until such time as the rest of us are entitled to such things, which might happen if we get the Republicans out of state and federal government.<br />
<br />
Alternately, keep the salary and benefits, but make the Commission work for them. Make it illegal for Forest Preserve Commissioners (and County Board members) to accept any outside paid position or own a significant interest in any business during their terms. Transfer to them some of the work currently being done by salaried managers and make them spend enough time on it to earn that money we're giving them.]]></description>
 <category>Local politics</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=97</comments>
 <pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 12:28:14 -0500</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>Roskam tells another Roskam</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=95</link>
<description><![CDATA[If <a href="http://spreadingsantorum.com/" target="_blank">Santorum</a> is defined to refer to that certain mixture of bodily fluids, then Roskam really ought to refer to a falsehood so blatant that nobody with the remotest shred of decency would want to touch it. Sadly this class of human being includes few if any modern-day Republican politicians, and certainly not Mr. Roskam himself. Case in point, his latest <strike>tax-payer-funded campaign email</strike>constituent franking email:<br />
<blockquote>You and your families are surely affected by high and rising gas prices. The average price is already over $3.50 a gallon! Unfortunately, some experts say they could rise as high a $5-per-gallon. <br />
<br />
This is a disappointing but unfortunately not surprising reality. High gas prices and rising electricity costs are just some of the results of the Administration's energy policy designed to benefit political allies at the expense of lower American energy costs. <br />
<br />
But House Republicans are fighting back. Find out how in my interview with Martha MacCallum here. </blockquote><br />
High gas prices are the result of Obama administration policy in the world according to Pete. <a href="http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html" target="_blank">Here</a>'s a graph of those prices over the past thirty-plus years:<br />
<img src="http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.png"/><br />
As you can see, gas prices were more or less stable until they took a major spike upwards around 2005 and another one in 2008. Gosh. Petey, who was President in 2005?<br />
<br />
If you watch the video, you'll find the "solution" Petey is pushing is to build the <a href="http://www.tarsandsaction.org/spread-the-word/key-facts-keystone-xl/" target="_blank">Keystone XL pipeline</a>. This pipeline is actually designed to allow Canadian oil producers to <b>export</b> oil overseas by providing a route to oil tankers in the Gulf of Mexico. Not only would this pipeline be disastrous for the health and well-being of those of us who drink water, but It might actually <b>increase</b> gas prices in the USA, and according to Cornell researchers might actually <b>cost</b> jobs in the USA.<br />
<br />
But on the plus side, it would mean fat profits for Canadian oil companies, some of which would no doubt fall into Mr. Roskam's campaign coffers. Also, more work for doctors and other health professionals who will have to treat the resulting chronic health problems. This is good news for people like Pete and his staff whose health care is paid for by public money, a benefit he's worked hard to deny to the rest of us.]]></description>
 <category>Local politics</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=95</comments>
 <pubDate>Sun, 26 Feb 2012 17:07:33 -0600</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>PAC Smear?</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=93</link>
<description><![CDATA[The <a href="http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120213/news/702139761/" target="_blank">Daily Herald</a> reports:<br />
<blockquote>Tammy Duckworth, one of two Democratic Congressional candidates making a bid in the 8th District, challenged her opponent Monday to reject any contribution from Super PACs — political action committees that can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money.<br />
<br />
Opponent Raja Krishnamoorthi said he’ll agree — but only if Duckworth also agrees not to accept contributions from international unions, lobbyists or other corporations.... He also proposed that the candidates get rid of “paid media (ads)” by holding one debate a week until the election.</blockquote><br />
<br />
For Krishnamoorthi's specific proposal, look <a href="https://docs.google.com/a/rajaforcongress.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHFaTDAxYW5NMTktTzhJTjM3YW1GWkE6MQ" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
This morning, the Duckworth campaign sent out this:<br />
<blockquote>Yesterday, I asked my opponents to join me in a pledge to keep Super PAC spending out of this race. An overwhelming number of you signed on to agree that unlimited, anonymous funding should have no role in our democracy. But unfortunately, my primary opponent refused to sign on to the same kind of pledge Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown agreed to.<br />
<br />
As I said yesterday, this will only work if my opponent agrees. Over 7,000 of you have contributed to my campaign--often in spite of tough financial circumstances--and I'm not willing to let your contributions be overwhelmed by millions of dollars in negative attack ads.<br />
<br />
We've already seen the corrosive effect of Super PAC support in the Republican presidential primary. And frankly, I'm not surprised to see Republicans embrace unlimited, anonymous corporate funds. But using a Super PAC in a Democratic primary would be unprecedented. It's just not who we are as a party and it's not what we should aspire to be.</blockquote><br />
<br />
Hey, Duckworth campaign: Your primary opponent has a name, you know. And unless I'm missing something, the above is just dishonest.<br />
<br />
How is it dishonest?  For one thing, it's true that using a Super PAC in a Democratic primary would be unprecedented. That's why it's <em>probably not going to happen.</em> Joe Walsh will almost surely benefit from SuperPACs in the general election against whichever Democrat wins in March (and the chance of him signing onto any agreement of this sort are basically nil). But talking about a SuperPAC attack in the primary as if it were a clear and present danger is disingenuous at best, and is an indication of a campaign that is less interested in taking the influence of money out of the election and more interested in using it as a publicity stunt.<br />
<br />
But more importantly, Krishnamoorthi didn't fold, he raised the bet. He didn't refuse to sign on, he asked for a broader agreement that would have taken other kinds of money out as well, plus public debates that would've lessened the impact of paid media. Maybe the Duckworth campaign views these extra conditions as unacceptable. It would be reasonable to say that Krishnamoorthi didn't refuse an agreement but attached conditions to it that they viewed as unacceptable. Then maybe they could tell us why they feel that one kind of outside money is bad but other kinds (which are far more likely to actually show up in this particular race) are absolutely necessary. But just portraying Krishnamoorthi's response as a flat-out "no" is flat-out dishonest.<br />
]]></description>
 <category>Local politics</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=93</comments>
 <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:39:48 -0600</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>Dear Republicans</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=91</link>
<description><![CDATA[<img src="images/mittbaker.jpg"/><br />
"I am the nominee, whether you like it or not."]]></description>
 <category>Stuff</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=91</comments>
 <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:10:25 -0600</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>Endorsed: Greg Brownfield for State Senate District 23</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=90</link>
<description><![CDATA[<img style="float: right; padding: 0px 0px 15px 15px" src="http://yorkdemocrats.org/images/brownfield.jpg"/><br />
This race is already shaping up as one of the more active state ones in the area, with three Democratic candidates and two on the other side. For what it's worth, I endorse <a href="http://gregbrownfield.org/" target="_blank">Greg Brownfield</a> over <a href="http://www.allenforillinois.com/" target="_blank">Kevin Allen</a> and <a href="http://www.tomcullertonforsenate.com/" target="_blank">Thomas Cullerton</a>.<br />
<br />
Having worked as a legal aid attorney giving free advice to people who can't afford a lawyer, Greg Brownfield knows first-hand how the wrecked economy is affecting people. He talks about a compassion deficit, the obligation of government to the needy which is as important as its other debts; we must not balance the state's books on the backs of the most vulnerable. Brownfield is also highly skilled at bringing together large crowds of motivated volunteers, a skill that our nominee will surely need in order to take on someone with the resources of a Pankau or Ramey.<br />
<br />
Each of the candidates in this primary has something valuable to offer. Kevin Allen is a friend, a smart guy who's been active for years in local politics against the Republican machine. Tom Cullerton is the best village president that Villa Park has seen for quite some time. Either of them would make a fine State Senator, and I'd be happy to support either of them after the primary. But until then, Brownfield is endorsed.]]></description>
 <category>Local politics</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=90</comments>
 <pubDate>Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:01:58 -0600</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>Quick fixes that are actually no fix at all</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=88</link>
<description><![CDATA[There's an email going around listing some ideas that will supposedly reform Congress. The email attributes its contents to gazillionaire investor Warren Buffet, but in actuality, Buffet only suggested the first idea in the email; the rest are by some anonymous author who evidently felt it necessary to appropriate Buffet's name.<br />
<br />
The email, with my own arguments against what it proposes, is below. I should mention that I have no great regard for (the current) Congress, especially <a href="http://roskam.house.gov/" target="_blank">my current member</a> who I regard as one of the biggest dirtbags on the planet.<blockquote>Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes about the debt ceiling: "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election."</blockquote><br />
<br />
It's a nice, feel-good thought, until you think about what effect it would really have. There's already a so-called "revolving door" whereby people leave Congress and go to work for corporations for whom they did favors while in office. So the money-friendly variety of Congressman wouldn't be terribly inconvenienced by this, and the people supplying the cash could always find new people to replace the old ones. Meanwhile, those few Congress members who do stick up for their constituents, the Barbara Lees and the Dennis Kuciniches, would also be gone, even if they personally didn't vote for the upper-income tax cuts and military spending that ballooned the deficit, and they're much more difficult to replace.<br />
<br />
But let's skip down to the details of what this anonymous author is proposing:<br />
<blockquote>Congressional Reform Act of 2011<br />
1. No Tenure / No Pension.<br />
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.<br />
<br />
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.<br />
<br />
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.<br />
<br />
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.<br />
<br />
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.<br />
<br />
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.</blockquote><br />
<br />
(Here should be a clue that Buffet did not write this. With all of his money he can surely afford a proofreader who understands that "loses" is singular and "their" is plural and that the two forms don't go together. But anyway.)<br />
<br />
The American people typically receive health care coverage, if at all, through their employers as part compensation for doing their jobs. The job of a Congress member is Congress member. So arguably, they are already participating in the same system.<br />
<br />
But obviously the intent of this is that Congress members should buy health coverage on the open market. This is another terrible idea. Congress is already something of a millionaire's club. It's already extremely difficult to get into Congress if you aren't wealthy and aren't sponsored by someone who is. This would take it from difficult to nigh-impossible.<br />
<br />
What Congress <b>should</b> do is pass single-payer Medicare for All, to make health coverage a public service rather than a purchased commodity. Most other countries have done this, and they spend a fraction of what we do while getting better results.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.<br />
<br />
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.</blockquote><br />
<br />
See above. Of course, if something more or less worked in 1793, it must work now, because not much has changed since then, right?<br />
<br />
<blockquote>If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.<br />
<br />
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!</blockquote><br />
<br />
No. No, it isn't. It really isn't. And adding more exclamation points doesn't make it more true.<br />
<br />
Having publicly-financed elections would go a long way towards fixing Congress. If I hand my Congressman a thousand dollars to persuade him to vote my way, that's bribery, and both he and I would go to jail for it. In a sane world, supplying a thousand dollars to his campaign fund would be treated the same way. Paying for campaigns would cost the public a lot less than the money that gets wasted in order to keep the private campaign dollars rolling.<br />
<br />
But ultimately the only solution is for people to be informed and to pay attention. This letter writer obviously wants a quick fix, rule changes that he can put in place and then walk away. <b>There is no quick fix.</b> We can't have any sort of meaningful democracy unless people are engaged to the point where they can cut through the wall of bullshit.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>If you agree with the above, pass it on. If not, just delete. You are one of my 20+.. Please keep it going.</blockquote><br />
<br />
"If you agree with me, speak up. If you don't, shut up." Wonderful.<br />
<br />
]]></description>
 <category>Issues</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=88</comments>
 <pubDate>Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:06:29 -0600</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>A Tale of Two Atrocities</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=86</link>
<description><![CDATA[<img src="/images/eldrup.jpg" style="float:left; padding-right: 15px;" />Ran a <a href="http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20111018/news/710189721/" target="_blank">torture camp for dogs</a>, using her own money. Sentenced to thirty months in jail.<br />
<div style="clear: both; height: 10px;"></div><br />
<img src="/images/george_dick.jpg" style="float:left; padding-right: 15px;" />Ran a torture camp for human beings, using public money. Left free and given fat pensions.<br />
<div style="clear: both; height: 10px;"></div><br />
Moral: Never use your own money.<br />
]]></description>
 <category>Issues</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=86</comments>
 <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 09:45:52 -0500</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>It&apos;s not just the law...</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=84</link>
<description><![CDATA[...it's a really, really good idea:<br />
<blockquote>No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, <b>nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;</b> nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.</blockquote><br />
(Emphasis added, of course.)<br />
<br />
This applies to people regardless of whether we like them, whether they like us, whether they like our country, or whether people of similar skin color and religious background once carried out an attack against our country.<br />
<br />
It applies to everyone, because if it doesn't then it applies to no one.]]></description>
 <category>Issues</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=84</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:50:10 -0500</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>Promoting Violence?</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=82</link>
<description><![CDATA[<img src="http://www.rawstory.com/rs//wp-content/uploads/2011/07/yt_mitchell_book_110718a.jpg" style="float: left; width:250px; height: 165px; margin-right: 10px;"/>From <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/18/google-suspends-for-book-critical-of-atomic-bomb-cover-up/" target="_blank">Raw Story</a>:<br />
<blockquote>Greg Mitchell's new book, Atomic Cover-Up: Two U.S. Soldiers, Hiroshima & Nagasaki and The Greatest Movie Never Made, is the first to be devoted to the historic full-color footage that was covered up by the U.S. government for decades.<br />
<br />
Google's "ad word team" notified Mitchell Monday that an online ad for the book's video trailer was being suspended because it "promotes violence."<br />
<br />
"At this time, Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain the promotion of violence," an email to Mitchell said. "As noted in our advertising terms and conditions, Google may refuse any ads or terminate any of your ad campaigns at any time, for any reason."</blockquote><br />
<br />
You can watch the video trailer at the Raw Story link above. At no point does it advocate violence against anyone. By exposing the harm that war can cause, it might in some small way help to deter violence.<br />
<br />
A lot of people think of Google as a benign alternative to some of the more obviously scummy corporations like Microsoft. They aren't. When it comes to corporations of that size, there's no such thing as benign. Think about this before you decide to trust them with custody of your email or any other documents.]]></description>
 <category>Issues</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=82</comments>
 <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:38:51 -0500</pubDate>
</item><item>
 <title>Microsoft: &quot;Give us free money, or else&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=79</link>
<description><![CDATA[<img src="images/vercotti01.jpg" style="float:right; padding: 10px;"/>Via <a href="http://blogs.forbes.com/timothylee/2011/07/07/microsofts-android-shakedown/" target="_blank">Forbes</a>:<br />
<blockquote>In the 1980s, attorney Gary Reback was working at Sun Microsystems, then a young technology startup. A pack of IBM employees in blue suits showed up at Sun headquarters seeking royalties for 7 patents that IBM claimed Sun had infringed. The Sun employees, having examined the patents, patiently explained that six of the seven patents were likely invalid, and Sun clearly hadn’t infringed the seventh.... An awkward silence ensued. The blue suits did not even confer among themselves. They just sat there, stonelike. Finally, the chief suit responded. “OK,” he said, “maybe you don’t infringe these seven patents. But we have 10,000 U.S. patents. Do you really want us to go back... and find seven patents you do infringe? Or do you want to make this easy and just pay us $20 million?” After a modest bit of negotiation, Sun cut IBM a check, and the blue suits went to the next company on their hit list.<br />
<br />
Android has roughly 10 million lines of code. Auditing 10 million lines of code for compliance with 18,000 patents is an impossible task—especially because the meaning of a patent’s claims are often not clear until after they have been litigated. Most Silicon Valley companies don’t even try to avoid infringing patents. They just ignore them and hope they’ll be able to afford good lawyers when the inevitable lawsuits arrive.<br />
<br />
So Android, like every large software product on the planet, infringes numerous Microsoft patents. And Microsoft is taking full advantage. They’re visiting Android licensees and giving the same sales pitch Reback remembers from a quarter century ago. “Do you really want us to go back to Redmond and find patents you infringe? Or do you want to make this easy and just pay us?” Once again, many of the targets are writing checks to make the problem go away.</blockquote><br />
<br />
In software development, in which I myself am gainfully employed, you often find that there's one clear best way of doing something. You may reinvent it without knowing or caring who did it before you. Should that entitle the first person to solve the problem &mdash; or the person who patented the solution, who probably wasn't actually the first &mdash; to free money from you? That's a bit like saying that I need to cut a check to Karl Fredric Gauss' decendants every time I solve for three unknowns in three linear equations.<br />
<br />
Microsoft, of course, doesn't follow its own rules. The Win-D'Ohs operating system borrowed heavily from Mac OS and OS-2. The .NET platform is basically Java with some not-very-useful extra features thrown in. And so on. You'd be hard-pressed to find any product these guys put out that somebody else didn't do first, usually better, and almost always cheaper.<br />
<br />
So to all the readers out there -- yes, both of you -- please don't buy any Microsoft products. If you need a PC, get <a href="http://www.ubuntu.com/" target="_blank">Ubuntu</a> instead. After all, Microsoft will get your money anyway.]]></description>
 <category>Software</category>
<comments>http://www.garykleppe.org/index.php?itemid=79</comments>
 <pubDate>Fri, 8 Jul 2011 10:30:52 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
  </channel>
</rss>
