California Is On Crack

It's official. California is definitely some sort of crack addict who is selling anything and everything that it has so that it can get its next fix. Oh, sure, it will give the state immediate access to some cash that it needs, but that's just the instant gratification part of the deal. In the long run, it will end up costing the state more and probably making things worse for a state that is already teetering on the edge of bankruptcy due to its unwillingness to cut anything at all out of the budget.

Here's the story as reported by the lovely folks over at ABC News and by the ever so diligent reporters over at the LA Times. See, California needs cash because it spends way more than it takes in. I won't even begin to delve into how the extremely large population of folks who are in this country illegally plays into this dilemma, but I will say that there are many areas in which California could trim its budget, yet it chooses not to. Just like a crack addict, California wants what it wants when it wants it.

So, California came up with a way to make a couple of billion dollars. And some of that could even be applied to its debt! California decided to sell 24 of however many buildings that it owns for the whopping total of $2.23 billion. While that sounds like a lot, just keep your pants on (because if California catches you without your pants on, you're going to be in for quite the surprise). Of the $2.23 billion, only $1.2 billion will go into the state general fund. That's because $1.09 billion goes to pay off bonds on the buildings. (I'm not sure what happened to the other .04 billion. Those are the figures that the LA Times gives me.) OK, so problem solved, right? Not so fast.

See, California is still using those buildings. It's not like they were abandoned or anything like that. No, they're fully in use every single day. They sold buildings like the Attorney General Building and the Franchise Tax Board Complex up in Sacramento. Yeah, California still needs those. But that's OK. Now California is just going to pay rent to the people that own them. Wait. What now?

Correct. Whereas before California owned the buildings, now it does not and it must rent them from the new owners. It would be like if you had a car that you owned and, because you needed some crack right that very moment, you sold it to the neighbor. Now you have money, but you have no car. Now you have to take that money that you got and you turn around and lease the car that you just sold your neighbor. How smart does that sound? Not very? Welcome to California.

According to the estimates from the California Legislative Analyst's Office "...It will cost the state $30 million more in the first year to remain in those buildings and that differential will increase to almost $200 million over the course of the 20 year leases." But do it now because you need crack now! What a bunch of morons.

Tell me something. What good is the Legislative Analyst's Office if no one listens to them? This state is already in a financial freefall into the abyss of bankruptcy, what say they trim a little bit off of the budget by eliminating the Legislative Analyst's Office. No one listens to them anyway. They just do what they want because why? They're addicted to crack, that is correct.

We're so doomed. And now we're screwed. We're totally scroomed.

Sphere: Related Content

Houston, We Still Have A Problem

Crack is whack, kids. Here's Whitney Houston giving the concert circuit in Europe a go. Let's just say that it didn't go all that well. I guess that fifteen years of huffing on a crack pipe with Bobby Brown wears on your voice. Huh. Who knew?

Sphere: Related Content

They Smoke Crack in San Francisco!

When was the last time you were in San Francisco (if ever)? Recently? Within the last year? Two years? Five years? Doesn't matter. Chances are that when you were there, you noticed that there are parts of the city (say like Haight) that are rather, how shall we say, bum ridden. That's right. San Francisco has become rather bummy. They're everywhere. Kind of like the swallows returning to San Juan Capistrano every year. Only the bums are always there. They never leave, so they don't have to return. But when you think San Fran, you think bums.

I might be painting the wrong picture by describing some of these outdoor inhabitants as bums. That might be too generous of a term. They're the chronically homeless by choice. They're the drug indulging. They're the publicly defecating. (That's right. Publicly defecating. What? You've never seen someone poo in public? You've clearly never been to the Haight.)

Now, the mayor of San Francisco, a one pretty, pretty Gavin Newsom, has always been a proponent of the, shall we say, "disadvantaged". (We could even use the term "underadvantaged". But really who we're talking about are the folks who lounge about on the the curbs and sidewalks and doorways of businesses and engage in their less than savory lifestyle.) But suddenly, the pretty pretty mayor has spoken out in favor of what is called a sit/lie ordinance.

What is a sit/lie ordinance? It's just what it sounds like. (And if you think it sounds ridiculous that one is necessary, you're right on!) It's an ordinance that prohibits sitting or lying on public grounds such as on sidewalks and in doorways. And up until recently, the pretty, pretty mayor was against it. According to the folks over there at SF Gate, Newsom was "telling The Chronicle editorial board earlier this month it (the ordinance) was just too divisive to support." Too divisive?

I don't know about you, but when it comes to me and those who prefer to sit and lie, I prefer a bit of division. In fact, I encourage it. Please. Divide me from that portion of society and do it now. Divisive? Hell yes, it's divisive. That's the frigging point. But if it's so "divisive", why is Gavin suddenly all for it?

It would seem that the mayor "...took his 5 1/2-month-old daughter for a stroll on Haight Street one Saturday morning." A stroll? On Haight Street? How'd that go for you, Mister Mayor? "As God is my witness, there's a guy on the sidewalk smoking crack," Newsom said. Wait. What now?

As God as his witness? Does he actually think that we need convincing of this? Has he NEVER walked on the streets of the fine, fine city that he is mayor of? What in the hell does he mean "As God is my witness"? We KNOW!

Let me get this straight. Gavin Newsom has been mayor of San Francisco since 2003 and he didn't know that people lounged around in doorways of businesses and smoked crack?! Welcome to the city, Gavin! Where in the hell have you been?! Could he be more out of touch? I don't think that he could! That is unbelievable to me.

So now that he is personally effected, now it's an issue. Never mind all of these people that have witnessed this problem getting worse and worse and worse over the years (probably most recently during the past seven years that he has been the mayor, as a matter of fact). Never mind all of their reasons that they had for wanting a sit and lie ordinance. Do you really think that NO ONE ever said to him "Hey, there are people smoking drugs in the doorway of my business." I'm pretty sure that they did. What did he think? That they were just making it up? I realize that he has done his best in an attempt to turn San Francisco into some sort of utopian haven for the displaced in the world. But I had no idea that he was THAT clueless.

Wake up, Gavin. There are people in your city smoking crack on the streets. There are people in your city defecating on sidewalks. There are even prostitutes! I know! Can you imagine?! I guess we all know what to do the next time that some sort of public issue needs addressing in San Francisco. I guess we know that we need to pull Gavin down off his high horse and give him a first hand look at what people are talking about in order for him to take any sort of action that is not nothing. What a joke. I can't wait to see how hard he pushes for this to be passed now that he is personally affected. Well, at least we know where his priorities are and they certainly aren't with the citizens of San Francisco, that's for sure.

Sphere: Related Content

Crack is Whack

Don't do drugs, kids. Drugs are bad. Drugs will take their toll upon you faster than you realize. Now, for Whitney Houston, I'm not sure how "fast" drugs took their toll, but the drugs definitely took her voice and they took her gift. Below is a video of her singing recently in Brisbane (that's in Australia). She's supposed to be singing "I Will Always Love You". And technically, she is singing that song. But it's not the Whitney Houston of yore that's singing it. It's the new Whitney. The one that spent years sucking on a crack pipe or a meth pipe or whatever pipe it was that ruined her pipes. It's just a sad, sad testimony of how something so beautiful and so wonderful can just be thrown away like she did with it. When she was good, there was nothing like her. And now that she's not so good, I highly doubt that there ever will be anything like her in the near future, if ever. It's very sad. It's also a horrible attempt at an awesome song. Ugh.

Sphere: Related Content

The Case of the Criminal Half-fro

I don't know if this goes into the category of "Dumbest Criminals" or "Best Mugshot Ever". There might need to be a new category created. Perhaps something along the lines of "Best Mugshots of the Dumbest Criminals." Or should that be "Worst Mugshots of the Dumbest Criminals"? Whatever it's called, right now, it has one inductee. Marcus T. Bailey, come on down! Behold!

Oh, what the hell is that? And what happened?! So, SO many questions. (Oh, crap! This isn't some new trend I haven't heard about yet, is it? Like the damned sagging pants thing? Please tell me that I'm not going to have to stare at that whenever I leave my walled off compound and venture out into public. Because if it is, that's just going to reinforce all of my reasons for having the walled off compound.) Fortunately, there are answers to all of them. Meet Marcus T. Bailey. a 25-year old Evanston, Indiana man who is quite dedicated to running his own business. Now, his business is selling crack cocaine, but he seems very dedicated to the craft.

It would seem that Mr. Bailey had gone to a barbershop on the south side of Evansville to have (wait for it) his hair braided. I guess that when you're Mister Big Time Crack Dealer, you can afford to have a south side barbershop worker braid your hair for you. I'll admit to not knowing a whole lot about this kind of hair braiding, but I know even less about barbershops on the south side of towns in Indiana. Since when did barbers get into the hair braiding business? Is this new?

New or not, he was there and it would seem that the process had just begun when a couple of his clients arrived and needed to hold an impromptu meeting in the boardroom. That being in a car out in front of the barbershop. Being as how I'm unfamiliar with Indiana, I had this need to know exactly how stupid of a move this was, holding your business meetings in front of a barbershop. Stupid, yes. But how stupid was my question. Thanks to those Google Boys and all of their maps, I have concluded that it was very stupid. Behold! Said barbershop.

Yeah, there's not a whole lot around there that leaves any room for obstructing the vision of anyone who may or may not be intentionally watching what's going on. (Hey, Indiana! How about some trees?) And when you're hanging out in a car with a couple of other folks, it's pretty easy for the cops to see what's going on. And they're going to be paying attention to what's going on when they are actively seeking you out because you had a warrant for your arrest for some sort of parole violation. You know, the parole that you were on from the last time that you went to prison for dealing drugs. It was similar to those other times that you went to prison for things like being convicted of "...cocaine possession, carrying a handgun without a license, criminal recklessness and resisting law enforcement." Yeah, it was just like that. What a maroon.

Bailey's customers, a one Demorrio Lawrence and a one Tamarra Blue, had been told that he'd be at the barbershop and if they needed some crack, that's where to find him! Wow, he's a really good business man. Always keeping the clients well informed about the day-to-day operations. That boy's going to go far. Far, far away! (Why would you name your kid Tamarra Blue? Were you hoping that one day she'd fulfill that destiny of being either a stripper or a hooker? Because that's who would have a name like Tamarra Blue - strippers and hookers.).

Clearly, when Mr. Bailey stepped outside and into his "office" to conduct business, he had not yet finished his prior business, that being all the braiding of all of the hair. It's when he was outside an in his "office" with his clients that "Law enforcement arrived on scene at this time and placed Bailey into custody prior to the completion of the transaction." That according to the folks over there at the Evansville Courier & Press. I know it only looks like it's about a quarter of the way finished, but I'm still going to call that look the "half-fro". It's catchy. I think it'll stick.

But get this: After all of the arresting goes down, those two "...were cited for possession of narcotics paraphernalia and released" while our hero there gets arrested and charged with a class A felony count of dealing cocaine. I guess I was thinking that they would all get arrested, but that's not the case. Do you want to know why? It's because "...Blue and Lawrence had physical signs of being crack-cocaine addicts, suggesting they were buying the drug. Bailey did not have any such physical signs." That according to the affidavit. Wait. What?! They were cited but not arrested because they were crack addicts? How does THAT work? That makes little to NO sense to me. (Don't tell me it's because of 'jail overcrowding'. They're in Indiana!) I'm finding the not getting arrested because you're a drug addict part of this story a bit troubling. It doesn't seem like there'd be a huge incentive to NOT be a drug addict or, at the very least, to NOT get caught. Maybe they're just trying to deter people from moving up from user to dealer or something. I don't know, but I'm thinking a few hours in jail can't hurt!

Oh, and just in case you were wondering about Mr. Bailey's duo of customers, I found Ms. Blue's MySpace page and with neither permission nor malice, borrowed these photos to use as a visual aid. Also, you can see how close she looks to what you were picturing her to look like in your head. Ready? A crack customer! Behold!

How'd you do? Of course you did! I had faith. This one wasn't too hard to noodle through and come up with a mental image.

Sphere: Related Content