Who is Rachel at Cardholder Services?

It appears that Rachel is the nom de computer of credit card scammers who say they can lower your credit card interest rate. This is the newest scam to burn up the cell phone lines with an auto dialer. Similar to the car warranty scam earlier this year, these robo calls dial your cell phone, hit you with an automated pitch and ask you to push "1" to speak with a person (I bet that big tease Rachel never answers).

So the pitch is that this company can lower the interest rate on your card, for a fee, of course. I think it's best to just hang up on them or string them along if you are in the mood to mess with criminal credit card scammers. In any event, you don't want to give them any personal info or your credit card number.

Return the Stolen Artwork to the Northside!

People say you can't have anything nice without someone screwing it up and apparently some criminals on Youngstown's Northside believe that. Thieves stole three of thirty-seven 6 x 8 canvases from a fence on Wick Ave. placed there by the group Art Youngstown. They were part of an effort to make art accessible to the public.

According to the Vindicator article, "a neighbor witnessed several young men take down the artworks at about 3 a.m. Saturday." Really? Why would you steal three paintings that were donated by local artists? You can't sell canvas for scrap.

I've been admiring the paintings for the last week as I visited a relative at St. Elizabeth's. Entering the city via Youngstown-Hubbard Rd. is a pretty bleak experience and the artwork was appreciated. The paintings demonstrated a vibrant side to the city and showed residents have pride in the place where they live.

The article states that the paintings can be returned with no questions asked so if you stole them, give them back. The info to do so is below:

The paintings can be returned by dropping them off at the Lemon Grove Cafe,
122 W. Federal St., downtown, which is open until 4 a.m.; by contacting
Dubec at (330) 398-4565; or by going to artyoungstown.org and sending an
e-mail to indicate where the paintings can be picked up.

More Good Stuff from Rust Belt Pop

make custom gifts at Zazzle

Why is it So Darn Hard to Read Slate.com?

I like Slate.com. I really do. One of my guilty pleasures is reading Emily Yoff's Dear Prudence column every Thursday. It's just that when I move on to the other interesting articles, I have a problem with being pulled out of the story by a combination of links and seemingly random bold print.

So I'm actually complaining about the formatting rather than the content.

I appreciate that the site wants me to know their writers can properly cite references for the statements they make but I view these large swaths of light blue text as an interruption to the reading experience. Take, for example, this article on Afghanistan (and yes I know I'm using a link but it's small and relevant). Five links in nine paragraphs with the average one being 4.5 words long. My inner reader's voice stumbles over these written speed bumps and loses focus on an otherwise well written article.

And just look at this:



What is up with this seemingly random bolding of large portions of text? Do the editors really think I can't pick out the important parts of the article myself? If I've managed to navigate to the tuna story I probably have an interest in reading and understanding what they are reporting so it's unnecessary to be so condescending as to point out the three or four lines that really get to the heart of the story. Especially something written so plainly as "endangers the species". That packs a wallop all by itself.

Maybe that's what irks me. A relatively smart site like Slate shouldn't be so nervous that it must cite a reference for every fact or treat its readers like dufuses who can't understand which arguments or conclusions are important without being bold (See? It's like I don't trust you to understand that this is the point I am trying to make).

Tom Friedman gets Afghanistan Right

Every once in a while you read something that so perfectly encapsulates your feelings on a subject you wonder how the writer can be in such synchronicity with you. That is the case with Thomas Friedman's column today in the New York Times.

Mr. Friedman argues that we should not build up the troop levels in Afghanistan because we cannot want victory there than its citizens. He thinks it's time to reduce our presence and re-think our goals. That perhaps if everyone there had to stand on their own they would reconsider the actions they are taking. In his words, "Let them all start paying retail for their extremism, not wholesale. Then you’ll see movement."

From the piece:

What if we shrink our presence in Afghanistan? Won’t Al Qaeda return, the
Taliban be energized and Pakistan collapse? Maybe. Maybe not. This gets to my
second principle: In the Middle East, all politics — everything that matters —
happens the morning after the morning after. Be patient. Yes, the morning after
we shrink down in Afghanistan, the Taliban will celebrate, Pakistan will quake
and bin Laden will issue an exultant video.

And the morning after the morning after, the Taliban factions will
start fighting each other, the Pakistani Army will have to destroy their
Taliban, or be destroyed by them, Afghanistan’s warlords will carve up the
country, and, if bin Laden comes out of his cave, he’ll get zapped by a
drone.

He has a point. The presence of our forces are driving people to act like the Taliban even if they aren't joining the Taliban. They want the foreign invaders gone. The Karzai government only wants us in the country to prop themselves up. If people want democracy they need to work for it and earn it like every other democracy. We cannot keep spilling blood and spending ourselves broke to enforce our will on a country that doesn't seem interested in our way of doing things.

So we should just go.

I hope President Obama is taking so much time to make a decision on Afghanistan because he is considering this option. The United States needs its young people and money right now. This isn't "losing", no matter what the Fox News crowd thinks. This is cutting ourselves loose from a bad deal. I hope the president is smart enough to see this for himself.

Mike Prelee's Rockin' Railroad

No, not me, the other Mike Prelee.

My Uncle Mike is a world class designer of O scale railroads. I've featured his past efforts, like the Croton Canyon Railroad. "Mr. Mountain", as he is known, is featured in the October/ November issue of O Gauge Railroading with his Red Rock & Roll railroad.

Uncle Mike grew up in the Sharon, PA area but his radio career took him all around the country, eventually landing him a career on New York radio. On trips to the southwest United States he was enamored of the red rocks found in the desert.

He brought this appreciation back east with him and included it when he constructed the Red Rock & Roll railroad. The layout is 9' x 17', 39" high and features five turnarounds, Ross track, 24 switches and TMCC.

Uncle Mike's railroads always incorporate fun with detailed design. Check out the railroad ties being replaced in the Thomas picture or the mariachi band performing at a wedding. It's easy to see that he loves what he does and has a real passion for it.

Issue 3 Treats the Mahoning Valley Like a Red Headed Step Child

Dave Betras has a point about Issue 3. He says it is bad for the Mahoning Valley because Trumbull and Mahoning counties are left out of the development and his reasoning is absolutely correct.

Issue 3 is on the ballot this November 3rd. It would amend the state constitution to allow one casino to be built in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus and Toledo. The Mahoning Valley has supported gambling initiatives in the past and many people here are customers of gambling locations at Presque Isle, PA and Wheeling, WV. In fact, it will still be shorter to drive to those locations than the casinos in Cleveland and Columbus.

This proposal prevents future casino development from taking place which prevents new jobs from being created in Youngstown and Warren. The casinos in the other four cities could turn them into the Las Vegas's of the midwest but you'll never see development here in our home. The language in the proposed amnedment specifies one casino in each of the four cities. It doesn't even provide for the possibility of future development. These investors want us to let them into the bakery and then lock the door so no one else can taste the cake.

Given our past support of this issue the residents of this area would be correct if they beg off this time. It's an insult to ignore the part of the state that needs the most development. Where are the jobs for us? Where is the investment in our cities? It's not greedy to think that way. Not when we're looking at 15% unemployment. Providing strong opposition to this proposal may get us what we want the next time they try.

Vote no on Issue 3.