musing minds

Best Friends Forever

Krystal Tobias (9) and Laura Hobbs (8) of Zion, Illinois, best of best friends, went for a bike ride together on Mothers’ Day. They never came home. Sometime in the middle of the night, whoever had prevented them from going back to their mothers, repeatedly stabbed both of them and left them in a park near their homes. Laura’s father and grandfather found them at dawn Monday.

Laura and Krystal
May they rest in peace. Our prayers go out to their families and friends.

Update: The Chicago Tribune has this:

Source: Charges to come in Zion slayings

Tribune staff report
Published May 10, 2005, 9:53 AM CDT

An individual will be charged today in connection with the stabbing deaths of two young girls from north suburban Zion, police sources told the Tribune this morning. Details to come.

Related:
Best Friends Forever
Best Friends Forever – Mr Hobbs Charged?
Father is being charged in deaths of best friends
Hobbs Confesses to Killing Best Friends

Inside the Actor's Studio Questions

The Anchoress has answered some James Lipton, Inside the Actor’s Studio type questions also answered by Greg at What Attitude Problem. So here are my answers:

1. What is your favorite word?
Love.

2. What is your least favorite word?
any of the 7 words you can’t say on television

3. What turns you on creatively, spiritually or emotionally?
helping others

4. What turns you off?
lack of taking responsibility for one’s own actions

5. What is your favorite curse word?
skboochie-dinkelflopper-dia-flappatoodas-superbyhumpdickle
-elephantisimos (My great-grandmother made my great-grandfather put money in a jar every time he cursed, so he made up a new curse word to substitute so he wouldn’t have to “contribute” to the jar. If something small happened, he’d use the first part, the worse the curse, the longer the curse though).

6. What sound or noise do you love?
I love the sweet sound of the gentle snores my four year old makes when he finally falls asleep.

7. What sound or noise do you hate?
rolling boom-boxes shaking the house

8. What profession other than your own would you like to attempt?
teaching

9. What profession would you not like to do?
any kind of sales.

10. If Heaven exists, what would you like to hear God say when you arrive at the Pearly Gates?
Welcome Home.

Forget Election Results, Listen to the MSM

So Blair wins a third consecutive majority government, and of course the Guardian’s Robin Cook’s recommendation is for Blair to immediately step down.

The Guardian’s pre-election bias didn’t effect the outcome (well who knows if it would have been a landslide without a hostile media telling UK voters that Blair is a liar), so now they are simply advocating that the electorate’s will be ignored.

Cook’s take is that the public really voted for the Labour party and not for Blair. Apparently it would be more democratic to run with one candidate, take the win, and then substitute the leader with someone who we can be absolutely certain the public did not vote for.

Well that makes sense.

Bill to keep illegals driving in California

I found this one over at Red State. Apparently there is a bill in the system to exempt illegals from having their vehicles impounded.

California State Sen. Gil Cedillo is sponsoring S.B. 591 to amend the CA Vehicle Code to prevent illegal aliens who are caught driving without a license from having their cars impounded:

…This bill would require a city or county to exempt a person from the impound period where the offense involves a person who has never been issued a driver’s license due to an inability to meet the requirement that the applicant’s presence in the United States is authorized under federal law

Exempting a lawbreaker from the consequences of a law because the are breaking another law just by being in California… What will they think of next?

Read the whole thing.

This is also at Michelle Malkin’s Immigration Blog (same post as at Red State).

Blogspotting at BusinessWeek

A few weeks ago we added Blogspotting, Business Week’s newest Blog to the blogroll. This is a very interesting blog, dedicated to blogging in business, blogging as business and blogging and the media. Go check it out.

The Doomsday Argument Against Private Accounts

A few thoughts to add to Kim’s excellent post below about opposition to private accounts for social security. This whole argument that the accounts won’t be protected if the markets collapse is like saying homeowner’s insurance is no good because it won’t protect you if a large asteroid collides with the earth. If the capital markets go down the drain the entire economy will have crumbled, and getting our social security check will be the least of our worries. In that scenario, private or no private accounts, we would all be economically doomed.

Given that there appear to be more experts that say a devastating asteriod is likely to hit earth than there are experts fortelling the demise of our country’s economic foundations, perhaps we can move on to an intelligent debate on the subject.

Social Security Reform

An outfit called ProtectYourCheck.org has bought airtime on Fox News recently. Their website says they are:

…a non-profit advocacy organization established to oppose the White House’s effort to dismantle Social Security, the most successful retirement and anti-poverty program in our nation’s history. ProtectYourCheck.org will educate Americans on the financial health of Social Security, promote policies to strengthen Social Security and encourage citizens to speak out about this issue to ensure that Congress doesn’t pass legislation that weakens the Social Security Trust Fund.

They state that if private accounts are allowed benefits will be slashed by 45% and if the stock market tanks, then “Whoah”. ProtectYourCheck.org wants you to contact your senators and representatives to vote against personal accounts because

Slot Machine
Social Security. It’s a guarantee you earned. Don’t let them make it a gamble.

I recently received my Social Security Statement in the mail (everyone should receive one a couple of months before their birthday).

ProtectYourCheck’s ad states Social Security is a guarantee that you’ve earned. My Statement has this part:

It says:

Your estimated benefits are based on current law. Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so any time. The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2042, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 73 percent of scheduled benefits.

My youngest child will be 18 years old in 2018. I will be 62 in 2024. Under the current structure, if I die anytime between 2018 and 2024 we lose everything that I have “contributed” to social security, except for the special one time death benefit of $255 that my spouse or child may be eligible for. If I die before 2018, my youngest is eligible for payments only until he’s 18. If I die after 2024, I get payments until I die then my spouse gets nothing from my contributions. He will continue to receive payments from his own account, but mine’s gone (his payment will be larger than mine will be).

Personally, I would far prefer to put some of my contributions into a personal account. ProtectYourCheck.org warns that if the stock market tanks, “Whoah”. Except that your voluntary contributions would be put into a mutual fund similar to the Thrift Savings Plan fund choices that are available to your elected representatives! You would think that if it’s good enough for them it would be good enough for their constituents.

I agree with President Bush’s suggestion that lower wage earners have a faster track to increases in payments (indexing on wages). The lower wage earners are either at jobs that don’t offer a 401(k) or equivalent, or if they do, the lower wage earner needs every cent to pay the bills and can’t afford to save for retirement. Personal accounts would allow the lower wage earner the opportunity to save on his/her own behalf for retirement. Higher wage earners benefits being indexed on inflation also makes sense. These workers have access to additional retirement savings plans. Where the cut-offs are, of course, subject to negotiation.

The MSM and the Dems are playing this as a reduction in benefits. It’s not a reduction in benefits, it’s a reduction in the pace of increasing benefits for those who can afford a smaller increase while benefitting those who need the higher level of increases. Benefits that can be left to your children. Benefits that can be left to your spouse, even while your spouse is receiving benefits of his/her own.

Michelle Malkin’s Look Who’s Defending the Rich Now has a round up of lefty blog spin and a round up of the MSM anti-Bush headline spin The Roar of MSM Demagogues

mm-5