Observations

 1.  Is there such a thing as 'good' debt?

No.  Maybe you could sip some whisky and say less debt is better than more debt, but in general....any debt is bad debt.

2.  How many folks did Marshall Dillion of Gunsmoke shoot dead?

Some folks have gone back to view the 20 years of episodes and put the minimum to around 138 men and potentially up to around 303 (these were extra bystanders where the camera angle left you wondering).  I should add....he also shot seven women (you can figure that they had it coming as 'villain's').  

3.  Does Trump actually have to run in 2024....to really make things nauseous for the  Democrats?

No.  Just by having him on the road and making speeches for a 'selected' Republican....he can deliver 70-million votes once again. 

4.  Did Joe Biden's nominee for Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights, Uzra Zeya....actually say that Jews have dual loyalty issues and can't really be fully-trusted?

Yeah......that comment was actually uttered.  

Nuke Story

 I sat this morning and read through a story where around 35 to 40 House Democrats (Monday news) has asked the Biden administration to give up his "sole authority" over the launching of nuke weapons.  

Their suggestion?  It should be a committee approach.....so that one person is out of the picture, and a group meeting/vote would occur.

Who would make up this committee?  They didn't really say.

How many in the committee?  They didn't really say. 

How many minutes of time would the committee have to decide upon this decide?  They didn't really say.

My humble guess is that it'd have to be at least five to seven members on this 'committee', and that they wouldn't necessarily be Senators or House members....just full-time nuke authority folks.  

Lets say a situation unfolds and President so-and-so calls up the committee, and they discuss things, and three members are for nuking, three are against, and one abstains.  Then how do you handle this?

Lets say that as you appoint the seven....all of course in their sixties and seventies (in terms of age)....at least two have hidden alcohol and drug habits, and can't be trusted.  Can you fire them in a heartbeat and appoint two new folks.....without a House or Senate vote?

What if you appointed three folks onto the committee who are absolutely don't-nuke types?

Would you have 21 members for the committee, with seven guys always sitting in some bunker in Colorado.....ready to react for their 72-hour shift?  Or would you create a secure golf course resort, with twenty-odd condos for the committee and their houchy-houchy women to hang out while on duty?

What if some nutty country got to the seven guys on the committee and terminated all seven an hour before the launch of the attack on the US?

For some reason, the more you ponder upon this idea.....the more marginal the suggestion becomes.

Social Worker Story

 I read through a ten-line story this morning.....concerning NY City police and a decision they've made in the past couple of days.

So when you call into the 911-folks....and the hint from the call is that there's a 'nutcase' involved....the police won't respond.  They will simply hand the case off to social workers. 

You can imagine 'Marvin' and 'Mary'.....ten-year employees of the city social worker system, and they were brought in this week....to be briefed that things kinda changed, and they might be dealing with some severe cases of nutty behavior.

What'll likely occur?  Marvin and Mary will arrive at some street corner, with a guy acting pretty bizarre.  Mary will try to talk to the guy, and after sixty seconds....realize that he's pretty serious and likely to flip into an assault situation.  As she turns (in hopes that Marvin is there to back her up)....she discovers that Marvin is ten paces behind her now and is of zero value.  

My humble guess?  This NY City police decision will be revisited by the end of July, and at least twenty cases of assault will be noted by the city social worker teams. Will the police just take back the duty?  No....I think they will draw this out and openly challenge the city leadership to admit they really screwed up badly.

Theater Story

 I read this morning that NY City theaters have some kind of deal being made up....to re-open shortly.

The basic premise?  You'd only allow 25-percent of the seats to be used (the other 75-percent would be taped-off).

Can you make a profit as a theater off 25-percent of your seating?  No.  If you have a 400-seat theater and the max usage is 100 seats, you probably make enough to cover rent and utilities.  There's zero profit, unless you started charging $16 to $20 for each seat.  Increasing seat prices?  They haven't really said that, but I don't see how you'd avoid that discussion.

The mask requirement?  Oh yeah.....to watch a 2.5-hour movie....you have to wear a mask through the whole experience.  Popcorn and sodas? How?

The odds that I'd go to this type of deal? Zero chance.  

When 'Armed' Insurrection Isn't Insurrection

 For weeks, since the 6th of January event....there's been this continual chatter of 'armed rebellion' or 'armed insurrection'.  

I've spent a fair amount of time pondering over this, and come to this observation.  If this was rebellion or insurrection on the 6th....the only gunshot fired....was by a Capital Policeman, and that killed an unarmed civilian.  Beyond that....it's a 1-star rebellion/insurrection.  Anybody from Iraq, Syria, or El Salvador would tell you that.

Can you even have a rebellion or insurrection without guns?  I have my doubts.

The most that you can say is that most of the 6th crowd had flags (on sticks), and seemed to be hyped-up.  But it's the same enthusiasm that you'd see at a NCAA football game.

Just something to think about.