57303376

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over." Hunter S. Thompson
.
.
.
WELCOME TO MY PUBLIC PAGE
My neighborhood is a cool place. There are always people around, and they make eye contact much more readily than they do in Santa Monica or Malibu. There is no way to predict who will pass you next on the sidewalk. It may be an ancient Indian woman with traditional dress, a slackeresque young goddess or a surprisingly attractive person who could either be a man or a woman. Every language known to man is spoken on these streets. Most people understand basic English. A friend gives me Spanish lessons every day at work. I love California because the people are more interesting than anywhere else I've lived. The variations are endless, people are generally easygoing and unjudgmental. People wear their weirdness on their sleeves here in Hollywood, and it's not the end of the world. It's OK, it's even hip to have issues. Artists have them. And this is an artist's town no matter how much crap comes out of the major media machines. Every town has its traditional industry, and ours is storytelling. Everyone here has a story, knows stories, and reveres and respects those who tell stories well. Respect is given to the very honorable professions of entertaining and acting. People elsewhere may marginalize us, call us circus freaks, but performers are the coolest people to be around, in my opinion. So they're not predictable. Anyone who thinks life is or should be predictable for even a moment ought to have his head examined. People in other cultures in our country---the Midwest, my original stomping grounds when I was young---do not value creativity the way people do here. It was a relief to find this place. It is unlike any other place in the country, I'm convinced of it.
So for people like the Gnarly One, and Sharon, who I don't get to see, can come here and know they're welcome and there's all kinds of stuff like my artwork and photos and some blogs and audio recordings and you'll be right within the sound of my voice. Cause I miss you guys.
.
.
.
.
.
October, 2009
I've been blogging over at California Vs. Peterson , my most recent topic of study. It's an education and an interesting one. Peterson didn't do it. It's an unbelievable story, but I believe it---his story, that is. That's because there's literally no way he killed his wife and unborn child. That child lived at least six days beyond December 24, 2002---and the bone growth proves it. The testimony that was supposed to present this truth to the jurors was a complete bust---impossible to understand. SII is the best source for information about the Peterson trial that I have found. Yes, the best, of all the newspapers, other blog sites; it's a project of a woman named Marlene Newell, whose work inspires the hell out of me, and whose thinking, research, and outline-style presentation are both accessible and extensive. The child's bone growth is the simple, stunning fact that exonerates Peterson totally. The state's own expert testimony indicates the baby was 33 to 40 weeks old at the time of death; he was 32 weeks December 24th, and that's according to Laci's physician. 33 is also the unlikely minimum number of weeks---it is much more likely the child was at the upper end of the spectrum. The math is what had me hung up for a long time, because I can't understand math very well. But after reading Newell's information over and over (and it is good information, actual photos of court exhibits, links to sources, transcripts, etc)--it's clear that baby lived well past December 24th. But that's just one of many reasons this guy didn't, couldn't have, done it.
The story has me fascinated, because there is so much misinformation about Peterson out there---perceptions that have no bearing on what I myself observe when I look at the totality of the case, and I have been studying it in my spare time for several months now. I'm working on a list of (so far) 37 reasons he's absofuckinglutely not guilty, and I'll be following that up with a list of reasons why Peterson should sue the hell out of the State of California, Court TV, and maybe even some specified individuals, who knows. .
.
.
.
(turn off player at upper left, before starting this video, to hear it better.)
I really think Jeff Spicoli is an American hero in subculture that doesn't get near the respect it deserves. He's a perfect example of how brilliance doesn't require coloring within the lines. (one of his best scenes: "I can fix it!" ...and he does!!) And of course, at one point in the movie he says the word that always reminds me of my nephew, James. (who is too young to watch this movie, but not for much longer.)
.
.
.
.

(this guy is doing one video a day for a year...pretty cool....got this song in my head now & can't get it out!!!
I'M ON AFTERNOONS AT KOLA 99.9 SAN BERNARDINO/LOS ANGELES WITH THE COOLEST AFTERNOON GUY IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, VIC SLICK!!! HE'S THE SHIT! the music, I CRANK UP. my co-workers deal with it somehow.
.
.
.
.
My little bro Mikey has these observations of our political landscape. Mike has a talent for description.
"Obama is all about charisma! Clinton and Bush diddle daddly around too much.. clinton was too busy cheatin' on hilliary with that monica brawd he was fuckin around with.. And Bush and Dick Cheeney were to busy sending everyone to War and sitting on their asses drinkin beers and hunting animals.. remember that hole thing when cheney shot one of his people in the eye on accident and shit.. i thought i read that drama in the Enquirer long time ago.
I think Hillary shoulda won for president.. she's all about free health insurance for everyone and she's a sweet lady.. Woman are more easier going than guys... Fuck that McCaina guy.. he's an old fart and seems like his undies are on too tight and a crab up his ass.
Obama is legit.. but i wanna see some magic.. and he should be proactive and STOPPING THE DRUG WAR!
JMO.. so chew me out.. wadda i know, I'm fuckin stupid dumbass NUTCASE!!! sorry, forgot the ADs past 2 days.. getting refill soon.
.
.
.
.
CINDI BURKEY
has been reporting on Southern California freeways for various L.A. radio stations since 1995
was the local voice of NPR's All Things Considered at KCRW Santa Monica, from 1994 through 2005
has been on the air continuously since 1986
would love to know what you think about anything written or presented on this page
has this advice for L.A. drivers: leave early (this is the most important); make eye contact with other drivers; use your turn signal (or at least hang your arm out the window, for crying out loud--is it too much to ask?!); go with the flow; let other people merge; if ya gotta, ya gotta--but if you're driving, stay off the phone. a recently released study which got almost no play in the press shows that talking on the phone (whether with a handset or headset, both were studied) impairs drivers AS MUCH AS drinking does! (more: DUI BLOG ); watch the pedestrians--they have the right of way, and their carbon footprint is more righteous than yours right now; ditto for bicyclists; crank up the tunes and have fun, and *be in the present.* Don't get too far into your internal head space where work gets done, save that for a safer moment...Remember that thousands of mental processes, conscious and unconscious, are at work as you drive. Respect those processes; and when in doubt, slow down.
.
.
.
.
August 18, 2009
"Last September, when the White House, Paulson and the Congress were pushing for the bailout , I was on business in Iowa, and talked to local bankers who told me the bailout had nothing to so with them. Back in Connecticut, local bankers told me the same thing. I then realized that the "bailout" was a rip-off of the taxpayers to bailout the Wall Street speculators, and had nothing to so with the local banks and credit unions that provide car loans and small business loans. From that point on I have been totally AGAINST any money for Wall Street banks - even a single penny, and totally FOR UNIVERSAL HEATHCARE, which would help individuals and small business and put money directly in the pocket of the American public, giving them the confidence and means to start spending and turning the economy around."
So says OldFreedomGuy from Huffpo.
.
.
.
.
August 14, 2009
..
The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Glenn Beck's Operation
www.thedailyshow.com
..
Daily Show
Full Episodes Political Humor Spinal Tap Performance ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"Anyone who is listening to Glenn Beck, you know, write them off. They won't hear you, don't even waste your time tryng."
PLEASE CUT THE CRAP: DECONSTRUCTING RIGHT WING LIES ABOUT HEALTH CARE
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

rock your body RIGHT!!
.
.
.
.
August 11, 2009
Parrot beats investors in South Korean stock market contest A five-year-old parrot in South Korea has proved smarter than human investors in a stock investment contest.
Ddalgi (Korean for strawberry), from Papua New Guinea, finished third in the six-week contest which ended on Wednesday, said Paxnet, an online stock market information provider.The bird competed with 10 stock investors. Each started with 60 million won (£29,000) in cyber money and traded 10 million won worth of stocks in each transaction.Human investors picked any stocks they wanted. The parrot, using its beak, made random choices from balls representing 30 blue chips including Samsung Electronics."The outcome of our contest was amazing. Ddalgi stood third with her investment return standing at 13.7 per cent," Chung Yeon-Dae, the Paxnet general manager, told AFP.
Human investors averaged a 4.6 per cent loss, with only two outperforming the parrot - one by 64.4 per cent and one by 21.4 per cent.The human investors, who mostly chose to trade shares of small and medium-sized firms, each made an average of 190 trades over the six weeks. Organisers gave the parrot seven chances to pick shares over the same period."Our experiment proved that making long-term investments in blue chips is safe and effective," Mr Chung said.
telegraph.co.uk
.
.
.
.
.
August 3, 2009
These birds are Amazing

.
.
.
.
.
July 29, 2009
WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON, SENATOR BAUCUS?
(or: follow the money, ya'll)
The story, from NPR
Max Baucus is the nexus of dozens, even hundreds of
interests in the health-care bill. In Congress since
1975, he's learned how to build relationships and how to leverage them.
Paul Blumenthal, a writer for the nonpartisan watchdog the
Sunlight Foundation, mapped Baucus' network of
influence. ...
"We have Max Baucus, who represents a single node, as the
chairman of the Senate Finance Committee," Blumenthal
explains. On his computer screen, lines radiate from
Baucus to five of his former Senate staffers. Two of
them served as chief of staff to Baucus, the top job
in his Senate office.
All five now lobby Congress for various interests.
Among their clients: drugmakers Wyeth, Merck, Amgen
and AstraZeneca, plus the third-largest corporation in the world, Wal-Mart.
(me thinking: "we're screwed")
"In Washington, relationships are part of the huge game of
influence," Blumenthal says. "If you don't have a
relationship with someone on the Hill, then you aren't
going to have the kind of access that you need for
your client." And so, he says, these lobbyists — and
their clients — have a unique brand of access to one
man at the center of the health-care debate.
Backing up the access is money — and that puts Baucus at
the heart of Congress' ethical conflict.
Baucus And Fundraising
Lawmakers have two constituencies: one, the voters back
home; the other, the people and interests that finance
much of their re-election campaigns. These
donors often live out of state.
When Baucus ran for his sixth term last year, his campaign
raised $11.6 million, according to the Center for
Responsive Politics. Nearly half of the funds came
from out-of-state donors, including millions from
health care and other industries overseen by Finance
and Baucus' other committees.
Just 5 percent of Baucus' re-election funds came from Montana donors.

The fundraising balance for Baucus tips even more sharply
when his personal "leadership PAC" is factored
in. The committee, called Glacier PAC, raises
money to pay for Baucus to travel, raise his political
profile and support other Democrats.
Over the past six years, Glacier PAC raised 76 percent of
its funds from political committee ties to
corporations, unions, trade associations and lobbyists.
Baucus courts these inside-the-Beltway donors by inviting
them to Montana for weekend getaways — skis and
snowmobiles in February, fly fishing and golf in June,
and coming up on July 31, "Camp Baucus," which is
billed as "a trip for the whole family."
Tickets start at $2,500.
So as Baucus and other lawmakers attempt to craft a bill
that can smash through a virtual gridlock of
interests, the awkward question lingers: To whom are
they more attentive — their voting constituencies back
home or the dollar constituencies who are at the Capitol every day?
listen here
(Meanwhile, in the outer provinces of Wingnuttia, the loons are hopping on the Birther wagon, howling about the Prez's citizenship documents, even though Hawaii's department of health has certified the authenticity of his birth certificate, and two newspapers from the 1960's have had his birth announcement on microfiche since O popped out his momma into this crazy world. The amazing thing, to me, as always: that people start believing the hysteria, over the cold hard little facts.)
.
.
.
.
.
July 28, 2009
"If there's class warfare going on in America, then my class is winning."
I was sitting in the office of Warren Buffet, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway and the second richest man in the world. I had heard about the famous simplicity of Buffet's tastes--how he still lived in the same modest house that he'd bought in 1967, and how he had sent all his children to the Omaha public schools.
Still, I had been a little surprised when I walked into a nondescript office building in Omaha and entered what looked like an insurance agent's office, with mock wood paneling, a few decorative pictures on the wall, and no one in sight. "Come on back," a woman's voice had called out, and I'd turned the corner to find the Oracle of Omaha himself, chuckling about something with his daughter, Susie, and his assistant, Debbie, his suit a bit rumpled, his bushy eyebrowes sticking out high over his glasses.
Buffet had invited me to Omaha to discuss tax policy. More specifically, he wanted to know why Washington continued to cut taxes for people in his income bracket when the country was broke.
"I did a calculation the other day," he said as we sat down in his office. "Though I've never used tax shelters or had a tax planner, after including the payroll taxes we each pay, I'll pay a lower effective tax rate this year than my receptionist. In fact, I'm pretty sure I pay a lower rate than the average American. And if the President has his way, I'll be paying even less."
Buffett's low rates were a consequence of the fact that, like most wealthy Americans, almost all his income came from dividends and capital gains, investment income that since 2003 has been taxed at only 15 per cent. The receptionist's salary, on the other hand, was taxed at almost twice that rate once the FICA was included. From Buffett's perspective, the discrepancy was unconscionable.
"The free market's the best mechanism ever devised to put resources to their most efficient and productive use," he told me. "The government isn't particularly good at that. But the market isn't so good at making sure that the wealth that's produced is being distributed fairly or wisely. Some of that wealth has to be plowed back into education, so that the next generation has a fair chance, and to maintain our infrastructure, and provide some sort of safety net for those who lose out in a market economy. And it just makes sense that those of us who've benefited most from the market should pay a bigger share."
We spent the next hour talking about globalization, executive compensation, the worsening trade deficit, and the national debt. He was especially exercised over Bush's proposed elimination of the estate tax, a step he believed would encourage an aristocracy of wealth rather than merit.
"When you get rid of the estate tax, " he said, "you're basically handing over command of the country's resources to people who didn't earn it. It's like choosing the 2020 Olympic team by picking the children of all the winners at the 2000 Games."
Before I left, I asked Buffett how many of his fellow billionaires shared his views. He laughed.
"I'll tell you, not very many," he said. "They have this idea that it's 'their money' and they deserve to keep every penny of it. What they don't factor in is all the public investment that lets us live the way we do. Take me as an example. I happen to have a talent for allocating capital. But my ability to use that talent is completely dependent on the society I was born into. If I'd been born into a tribe of hunters, this talent of mine would be pretty worthless. I can't run very fast. I'm not particularly strong. I'd probably end up as some wild animal's dinner.
"But I was lucky enough to be born in a time and place where society values my talent, and gave me a good education to develop that telent, and set up the laws and the financial system to let me do what I love doing---and make a lot of money doing it. The least I can do is help pay for all that."
It may be surprising to some to hear the world's foremost capitalist talk in this way, but Buffett's views aren't necessarily a sign of a soft heart. Rather, they reflect an understanding that how well we respond to globalization won't be just a matter of identifying the right policies. It will also have to do with a change in spirit, a willingness to put our common interests and the interests of future generation ahead of short-term expediency.
More particularly, we will have to stop pretending that all cuts in spending are equivalent, or that all tax increases are the same. Ending corporate subsidies that serve no discernable economic purpose is one thing; reducing health-care benefits to poor children is something else entirely. At a time when ordinary families are feeling hit from all sides, the impulse to keep their taxes as low as possible is honorable and right. What's less honorable has been the willingness of the rich and powerful to ride this antitax sentiment for their own purposes, or the way the President, Congress, lobbyists and conservative commentators have been able to successfully conflate in the minds of voters, the very real tax burdens of the middle class and the very manageable tax burdens of the wealthy.
Nowhere has this confusion been more evident than in the debate surrounding the proposed repeal of the estate tax. As currently structured, a husband and wife can pass on $4 million wihtout paying any estate tax; in 2009, under current law, that figure goes up to $7 million. For this reason, the tax currently affects only the wealthiest one-half of one per cent in 2009. And since completely repealing the estate tax would cost the U.S. Treasurey around $1 trillion, it would be hard to find a tax cut that was less responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans or the long-term interests of the country.
Nevertheless, after some shrewd marketing by the President and his allies, 70 per cent of the country now opposes the "death tax." Farm groups come to visit my office, insisting that the estate tax will mean the end of the family farm, despite the Farm Bureau's inability to point to a single farm in the country lost as a result of the "death tax." Meanwhile, I've had corporate CEO's explain to me that it's easy for Warren Buffett to favor an estate tax--even if his estate is taxed at 90 per cent, he could still have a few billion to pass on to his kids---but that the tax is grossly unfair to those with estates worth "only" $10 million or $15 million.
So let's be clear. The rich in America have little to complain about. Between 1971 and 2001, while the median wage and salary income of the average worker showed literally no gain, the income of the top hundreth of a per cent went up almost 500 per cent. The distribution of wealth is evern more skewed, and levels of inequality are now higher than at any time since the Gilded Age. These trends were already at work throughout the nineties. Clinton's tax policies simply slowed them down a bit. Bush's tax cuts made them worse.
I point out these facts not--as Republican talking points would have it--to stir up class envy. I admire many Americans of great wealth and don't begrudge their success in the least. I know that many if not most have earned it rhough hard work, building businesses and creating jobs and providing value to their customers. I simply believe that those of us who have benefited most from this new economy can best afford to shoulder the obligation of ensuring every American child has a chance for that same success. And perhaps I possess a certain Midwestern sensibility that I inherited from my mother and her parents, a sensibiltiy that Warren Buffetet seems to share: that at a certain point one had enough, that you can derive as much pleasure from a Picasso hanging in a museum as from one that's hanging in your den, that you can get an awfully good meal in a restaurant for less than twenty dollars, and that once your drapes cost more than the average American's yearly salary, then you can afford to pay a bit more in taxes.
More than anything, it is that sense--that despite great differences in wealth, we rise and fall together--that we can't afford to lose. As the pace of change accelerates, with some rising and many falling, that sense of common kinship becomes harder to maintain. Jefferson was not entirely wrong to fear Hamilton's vision for the country, for we have always been in a constant balancing act between self-interest and community, markets and democracy, the concentration of wealth and power and the opening up of opportunity. We've lost that balance in Washington, I think. With all of us scrambling to raise money for campaigns, with unions weakened and the press distracted and lobbyists for the powerful pressing their full advantage, there are few contervailing voices to remind us of who we are and where we've come from, and to affirm our bonds with one another.
That was the subtext of a debate in early 2006, when a bribery scandal triggered new efforts to curb the influence of lobbyists in Washington. One of the proposals would have ended the practice of letting Senators fly on private jets at the cheaper first-class commercial rate. The provision had little chance of passage. Still, my staff suggested that as the designated Democratic spokesperson on ethics reform, I should initiate a self-imposed ban on the practice.
It was the right thing to do, but I won't lie; the first time I was scheduled for a four-city swing in two days flying commercial, I felt some pangs of regret. The traffic to O'Hare was terrible. When I got there, the flight to Memphis had been delayed. A kid spilled orange juice on my shoe.
Then, while waiting in line, a man came up to me, maybe in his mid-thirties, dressed in chinos and a golf shirt, and told me that he hoped Congress would do something about stem cell research this year. I have early-stage Parkinson's disease, he said, and a son who's three years old. I probably won't ever get to play catch with him. I know it may be too late for me, but there's no reason somebody else has to go through what I'm going through myself.
These are the stories you miss, I thought to myself, when you fly on a private jet.
-Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope
.
.
.
.
I was born in a cross-fire hurricane
And I howled at my ma in the driving rain,
But its all right now, in fact, its a gas!
But its all right. Im jumpin jack flash,
Its a gas! gas! gas!
I was raised by a toothless, bearded hag,
I was schooled with a strap right across my back,
But its all right now, in fact, its a gas!
But its all right, Im jumpin jack flash,
Its a gas! gas! gas!
I was drowned, I was washed up and left for dead.
I fell down to my feet and I saw they bled.
I frowned at the crumbs of a crust of bread.
Yeah, yeah, yeah
I was crowned with a spike right thru my head.
But its all right now, in fact, its a gas!
But its all right, Im jumpin jack flash,
Its a gas! gas! gas!
-The Rolling Stones
.
.
.
.
July 27, 2009
It's the economy, ya knucklehead...
If I had to sum up my political beliefs in a neat, tidy way, I would say "If it's good for small business, it's good for the country."
Health care reform is about a lot more than health care at this point. I do remember being little and living in a world where the feeling was that an average person could make it if they worked hard and showed initiative. It's a different world now. It's a world where people working two and three jobs often can't make it. It's a world where both heads of household have to work if the income is "average," and the "average" income has fallen steadily since I was born. In 1968, the minimum wage was higher than it has ever been since then, adjusting for inflation.
This, today, is not the world I was born into.
What really makes me scratch my head is when people express the belief that Barack Obama is somehow responsible for the country's current economic travails. If Warren Buffet says Obama is going to help the economy, that's good enough for me.
For now, here's the Prez in his weekly address explaining why health care reform is essential to getting our ecomomy back on track.
..
.
.
.
.
July 24, 2009
I do believe men landed on the moon.
I do not, however, believe that World Trade Center 7 just fell down all by itself after it caught fire, on 9/11. WTC 7 was the building that fell down though it was not struck by an airplane, and not near the two buildings that did fall.
Now I'm obviously not an expert on controlled demolitions. But I have seen buildings burn down. And they don't just fall vertically down in one smooth movement.
Just sayin'.
.
.
.
.
July 21, 2009
..
.
.
.
July 19, 2009
.
.
.
.
cindiburkey.com *coming soon*
.
.
ROSS PEROT was right. Remember That Sucking Sound? He warned us, man. NAFTA. "That's the sound of all those jobs being sucked over the border."
remember?
.
.
.
.
This song by Kansas just came on the radio and it reminds me of my brother who uses it as his profile song. There are more pics in a new folder I'm setting up. Lt. Glenn Burkey is just returning from a 9 month tour in Afghanistan's Korengal Valley.
"Once I rose above the noise and confusion
Just to get a glimpse beyond this illusion
I was soaring ever higher, but I flew too high
Though my eyes could see I still was a blind man
Though my mind could think I still was a mad man
I hear the voices when I'm dreamin', I can hear them say:
Carry on my wayward son,
There'll be peace when you are done
Lay your weary head to rest
Don't you cry no more
Masquerading as a man with a reason
My charade is the event of the season
And if I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I
don't know
On a stormy sea of moving emotion
Tossed about I'm like a ship on the ocean
I set a course for winds of fortune,
but I hear the voices say:
Carry on my wayward son,
There'll be peace when you are done
Lay your weary head to rest
Don't you cry no more NO!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.SCHOOL HOUSE ROCK ROCKS
HEALTH CARE DEMANDS MY, YOUR, OUR ATTENTION NOW
April 23, 2009 Testimony in committee from David Himmelstein
"Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee. My name is David Himmelstein. I am a primary care doctor in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and associate professor of medicine at Harvard. I also serve as national spokesperson for Physicians for a National Health Program. Our 16,000 physician members support nonprofit, single-payer national health insurance because of overwhelming evidence that lesser reforms will fail.
Health reform must address the cost crisis for insured as well as uninsured Americans. My research group found that illness and medical bills contributed to about half of all personal bankruptcies in 2001, and even more than that in 2007. Strikingly, three-quarters of the medically bankrupt were insured. But their coverage was too skimpy to protect them from financial collapse."
Please read more of Dr. Himmelstein's testimony at PNHP.org (Physicians for a National Health Program)
YOU CAN VIEW MICHAEL MOORE'S DOCUMENTARY, SICKO, HERE. Anyone concerned with health care reform----in any sense---must watch this. It has never been discredited; in fact, Moore offered ten thousand dollars, on his website, to anyone who could prove that any part of the movie was wrong.
No takers.
here it is, check it out. ..
radio traffic reports in So Cal:
KOLA 99.9 CLASSIC ROCK/HITS afternoons
Talkradio 790 KABC evenings 7-11pm
ESPN 800 San Diego
some afternoons 4-6:30pm
VIDEO BLOGGING with the mighty KIM CORBET at
Buttiful America
on politics, current events, hedgehogs and cockatoos. Whatever looks interesting.