Ocala lawmakers, and federal and state laws, decide fate of abundant public park ducks: Death by poison

Another example of government failing to serve, but doing a good job to push around:

Ocala's verdict for Tuscawilla ducks: Death by poison (from Ocala.com)
By Susan Latham Carr

If they weren't doomed to euthanization, the Muscovy ducks that have confounded officials by their proliferation in city parks and retention ponds would have died of embarrassment Tuesday watching the Ocala City Council's highly emotional decision-making process that ended in the ducks' demise.

Council President Daniel Owen hurled vitriol and foul language at Keith Belisle of Ocala Wildlife Sanctuary Inc. (OWLS), who requested to move the 110 offending ducks to a duck-friendly farm at no charge to the city.

"It's too bad ducks don't pay taxes because I would tax the hell out of them for the s--- they put at our parks," an angry Owen growled at Belisle, referencing the ducks that soil city picnic tables and walkways.

Owen spoke softer but with the same angry edge to Tish Hennessey, All Creatures Sanctuary founder, who harbors 200 Muscovy ducks removed from the city of Belleview. She also offered, with a request for a donation, to house the Ocala ducks to keep them from being killed as the city staff recommended.

"However we can assist in helping this be a case of humanness and love and representative of all the people in Marion County that this is a place that loves their animals, we would do whatever is necessary," Hennessey said.

"Do you have any suggestions on how we can treat the humans in our parks humanely and with love?" Owen asked Hennessey. "Right now we bridge that gap between ducks and humans with a lot of pressure washing and Clorox."

READ MORE: http://www.ocala.com/article/20110817/ARTICLES/110819729/1402/NEWS
<< Please comment! 

Another blurb on this stupid highlight of what I believe are stupid laws, via an Ocala radio station's site, tells us that government, from Ocala to Washington, D.C., would rather pay to have non-native ducks killed than to have them moved, alive, FOR FREE, into the care of a group that doesn't encourage killing rather harmless water foul:

Federal and state regulations and control orders prohibit the ducks from be moved to a new site and that also allows Muscovy ducks to be removed for the public good. 

Ocala.com reports the city will hire the U.S. Department of Agriculture for $8,406 to carry out the order.

Dear Ocala, Florida, and AMERICA: 

With regard to the above, I admit I am dumbfounded by the laws used to excuse this action. I don't understand. Non-native or not, I am creeped out by what is very crass decision-making. 

However, the Ocala.com article also suggests that one damaged, flailing ego (City Council's Owen) intended to "win" the argument over the removal of near-harmless animals. He chose the most foul way possible (no pun meant) while avoiding being the ducky assassin himself. So, not only is he hateful to ducks, but he's a bit of a bitchy coward. By the tone suggested in the article, this Owen guy wields his power with a golden thumb-sucking blanket. 

Ocala: Use this numb-skulled move to inspire you to choose leaders who are NOT apparent emotionally stunted dorks such as Council boss Owen. I don't know the whole story, but I do believe that treating ducks like they are dead tree branches is poor form.

There's this: these creatures might have been able to be food for homeless families. No? These ducks not good meat for humans? 

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Posted at No comments:

Rural towns, an armored tour bus and its indefensible occupant

Does anyone see the irony to President Obama taking a $1.1 mil armored bus -- and convoy -- on a tour of rural communities? I KNOW the stark contrast of a shiny black tour bus and the weary barns and some struggling inhabitants along rural roads must make for a real obscene picture of out-of-touchedness, doesn't it? ABC? NBC? MSNBC? CBS? CurrentTV? Logo? No? Oh, that's right, we're relating a story about a liberal Democrat, not a Republican actually working a primary campaign at the moment. Do ya think an armored pickup truck would have been better? Or an old-fashioned steam engine whistle stop tour? No, not for the Campaigner-in-Chief. He deserves a new, heavily customized, armored, rock band arena tour bus. And the trip to be funded by the tax dollars of the adoring concertgoers - uh, citizens. What's more, this "Dark Times Tour" cavalcade is clearly a 2012 campaign tour. How can it not be? There is only 15 months to go before the election! Enough of this laser-focus on the economy and job creation! It's change-you-can-believe-in-part-2 time! Was there a month where Mr. Obama wasn't campaigning? I don't think he ever actually stopped campaigning. He got the wrong job. He should have been the DNC chairman, not president. That job would suit him. That, or being the figurehead president of chairman of a behemoth corporation, with his easy smile (easier bloodshot eyes) and ability to make an Enron-style confidence scheme look brilliant.
- jR

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Posted at No comments:

Moral Liberal: No Crisis With a Steel Cross at Ground Zero

Funny, I thought atheists didn't believe in any god. This makes me think that they themselves are simply unbelievable for anyone else. So, which is it? 

From a site called the Moral Liberal (tip: it's classical liberal, not the American nut-job lefty loon type of so-called liberal which actually seem to be statist utopianists or statist socialists).

Americans Get It - No Constitutional Crisis With Cross at Ground Zero

...We’ve explained the unbelievable arguments put forth in the lawsuit by American Atheists – a lawsuit that charges that their plaintiffs are experiencing “depression, headaches, anxiety, and mental pain and anguish” – not from the devastating destruction of life caused by the terrorists on 9/11 – but as a “direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional existence of the cross.”

-- Noooo kidding.  

That is not pathetic, crazy, or hilarious, though. The rest of us must respect their right to not believe in anything. Anything they could believe in would make any sense at all, if this is their idea of a reasonable civil suit. Thoroughly unbelievable.

- jR

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Posted at No comments:

Is the debt scary? Are big numbers always scary? Is math scary?

There are Web sites that can help out those who want to know a little about large-scale money matters, or economics for dummies and those who are econ-curious. One such site is called Economics in Plain English
From Feb of 2011, which we might be calling the good old days in 2013, there is this post, which is informative without being too painful (to the non-nerds curious about economics, but not to those who want to know nothing about economics). 

$14.1T: AN AFFORDABLE LEVEL OF NATIONAL DEBT?
The United States’ current level of national debt is still affordable and consistent with several other nations. The problem, however, is that with the continued rate of growth in the debt experienced over the last 10 years it will not be affordable forever. National accounting statistics show clearly that the U.S.’s 96% national debt/GDP percentage is, in fact, above average compared with most other modern economies, but it is certainly not the highest as economies like Japan and Italy currently have debt/GDP levels at 204% and 130%, respectively. Moreover, the level of U.S. national debt as a percentage of GDP (96%) is relatively close to where it was back in 1950 after having financed World War II. Our nation’s highest level of debt relative to GDP was 121% back in 1945. The key point is that debt must be benchmarked to our nation’s income which is GDP. I find it interesting that if I tell someone that Bill Gates owes someone $10M they quickly can figure out that he’s probably fine, but if I tell the guy at Starbucks that the U.S. owes $14.1T they think the country must be ready to go bankrupt. Big numbers really scare people, so one needs a perspective.

How high should we do? Here's the suggestion made in that same post:
What should be the goal? I say a debt level of 67% of GDP should be the goal, which is a very average and affordable level of debt. It’s OK for debt to grow as long as it does not become too high relative to the size of our economy or GDP.


- jR (@AirFarceOne on Twitter)

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Posted at No comments:

UT a no funny zone for Democrats: Humorless Dem’s Bad “Temperamint”

The honorable Tennessee State Rep. Joe Armstrong wants to preserve the honor of his president. Underline "his", as he seems to respect the man, not exactly the office. He was offended by some mints all dressed up to mock POTUS Obama. 

So respect for the president... so long as he is an ineffective, liberal campaigner-in-chief clod like we have at moment, works for liberals of all governments, big and bigger. On the site Patheos, an observation by Elizabeth Scalia pulls together some aspects of this story very nicely.
So, in Knoxville, Tennessee, Joe Armstrong — a humorless Democrat state representative — goes into a college bookstore and sees these silly things:And what does he do? Just what you’d expect:

See Scalia's blog post for a nice observation of this bit UT Knoxville silliness, including quotes of Instapundit Glenn Reynolds' take on it (he works at UT). 


- jR

Posted via email from Like, Totally Political Dude! - posterous

Posted at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)