Well technically Twinkies yet available while both sides are in mediation the Hostess site informs us production remains closed.

But our show where we discussed these topics and culture with Ladd Ehlinger and Mary Lotz is now available here.

AP reports the following:

The bankruptcy judge hearing the case says that the parties haven’t gone through the critical step of mediation and asked the lawyer for the bakery’s union to ask his client, who wasn’t present, if he would agree to participate

And there are interested parties

Bimbo has already sniffed around the bankruptcy proceedings that have haunted Hostess for a decade, in a bid to further expand its North American portfolio and pad its $4 billion net worth. Bimbo reportedly put in a low-ball bid of $580 million a few years ago, Forbes reports, and may be rewarded for that move since the Hostess kit-and-kaboodle may fetch more like $135 million today.

But the big question is whether the same problems that haunted Hostess – high sugar prices tied to US trade tariffs, changing consumer tastes, and union pushback against labor concessions – will squeeze whatever profit is left in the brands.

Especially if a Mexican buyer is involved, production may go the way of the Brach’s and Fannie May candy concerns: south of the border. With US sugar tariffs set artificially high to protect Florida sugar-growing concerns, a non-unionized shop with access to lower-priced sugar in Mexico could be the Twinkie lifeline, economists suggest.

but it’s not just a question of losing the tariffs it’s losing the unions:

First, this development has no small amount of irony.  The labor movement has attacked Republicans for many long years for off-shoring jobs in the name of free trade. Thanks to the bakers’ union, we may end up with almost 19,000 jobs heading south of the border, in the factories of Grupo Bimbo.  The protectionist sugar tariffs that both parties have extended and championed may end up having their own ironic role in these job losses, too.

Will Twinkies survive?  If we are to believe the unions then no, because it’s all about demonstrating power at least that’s what they said.

Anyway I’ve broken open a box of devil dogs but we’ll ration the Funny bones etc for now until we know for sure.

If it works out there are going to be a lot of people who spent a fortune of Twinkies to put on eBay or people who have boxes on eBay who are going to feel like fools.

Update: No answer at the local Hostess thrift shop, might be too late for them.

Update 2: Both side now have agreed to mediation, no word if that means the thrift store re-opens but got some bargains Saturday.

Hostess, its lenders and the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (BCTGM), agreed to go into mediation at the urging of Bankruptcy Judge Robert Drain of the Southern District of New York, who urged mediation rather than a more expensive, public hearing regarding the company’s liquidation.

“My desire to do this is prompted primarily by the potential loss of over 18,000 jobs as well as my belief that there is a possibility to resolve this matter,” Drain said.

Does the thrift shop return?

Update 3: The key words from the Hostess web site

PRODUCTION REMAINS SHUT DOWN.

While we ponder the questions the left isn’t asking about the reaction to Operation Pillar of Defense Granite Grok is still there and keeping an eye on some questions that have yet to be answered about the late election, first the stats:

First, in a town with 5000 plus voters there were 630 new registrations for this year’s election.

The law give NH citizens the ability to see public documents

New Hampshire State law (91-a) allows the citizen to review, examine, or inspect, any public document that is available. They can even take pictures of it, or make their own copies or abstracts as long as the document(s) are on site and it occurs during regular business hours.

Granite Grok however reports that there was a slight issue when a citizen wanted to see the form concerning these 630 new registrations…

These 630 new voters piqued the interest of a Barrington resident, who decided that they wanted to get a copy of this public record, but when they asked the Town clerk said it would cost him $300.00.

The Grok folks have some questions about this, but wanting to be fair to all concerned I called the Town Clerk’s office myself. I spoke to a very nice lady who asked me if I could submit those questions via an e-mail to make it easier. So I did, providing a link to the Grok article quoted above with the following questions:

Per said article I have the following questions

1. Is the record of the voter rolls in Barrington available to be viewed by the public

2. Is there a separate record of new registrants and/or same day registrants available?

3. Did a person come in to obtain said records?

4. If so was said person told it would be $300 for said records?
4a. If there is such a fee, is that set by the city or state? Is it a standard fee for records?

5. The GROK article states that such public records are available under state law saying the following:

New Hampshire State law (91-a) allows the citizen to review, examine, or inspect, any public document that is available. They can even take pictures of it, or make their own copies or abstracts as long as the document(s) are on site and it occurs during regular business hours.
5a Is this correct and if so can said person make their own copies without charge?

6. Will said records be available electronically (in PDF format etc) and available either to the public on request or on the Barrington site eventually?

7. If I came down to see said records would they be available for viewing?

Any help in answering these question would be appreciated

Thank you.

That was on Wednesday November 14th when I first wrote this post but held back posting awaiting a reply and while I’m sure Barrington NH can be a busy place I think five days is plenty of time for it to come.

By an odd coincidence while I haven’t received a reply the day after I sent that request Granite Grok’s person went back to the town hall and was told the following:

Our intrepid checklist warrior went back to the clerk armed with 91-a and was informed that they didn’t actually have the list prepared yet. He was told that it would be a few weeks but that they would give him an electronic copy of the new list when it was complete. Skip has encouraged him to go back and ask for the existing list, which they used for election day, and which we now know is available in electronic form. For free, apparently.

Amazing how things change after an e-mail from a guy with 50,000 watts behind him isn’t it?

Maybe it’s just me but if you multiply this question by small town after small town in NH and you get a margin of victory that doesn’t show up in polls.

That’s apparently a question our friends on the left aren’t asking, but we will.

Update: Apparently Barrington replied to my questions promptly but due to an e-mail glitch I missed their e-mails (along with 7 weeks of them from a particular account) until December 29th.

My apology post is here, and the e-mail responses from Barrington follow below:

Dear Peter “DaTechGuy” Ingemi,

My answers are listed below:

1. Is the record of the voter rolls in Barrington available to be viewed by the public YES

2. Is there a separate record of new registrants and/or same day registrants available? NO, PER Secretary of States Office

3. Did a person come in to obtain said records? YES

4. If so was said person told it would be $300 for said records?NO, the fee would be actually be $379 which is the rate for the current MARKED CHECKLIST, which is based on our current photocopy fee per page, which is $1/page.

4a. If there is such a fee, is that set by the city or state? Is it a standard fee for records? For a marked checklist

the fee is what the Town or City charges for a copy.

5. The GROK article states that such public records are available under state law saying the following:

New Hampshire State law (91-a) allows the citizen to review, examine, or inspect, any public document that is available. They can even take pictures of it, or make their own copies or abstracts as long as the document(s) are on site and it occurs during regular business hours.

5a Is this correct and if so can said person make their own copies without charge? A person may view and takes notes on the marked checklist, but NO there will be no copies made without a charge, PER NH STATE LAW (91-a;IV)

“If a photocopying machine or other device maintained for use by a body or agency is used by the body or agency to copy the public record or document requested, the person requesting the copy may be charged the actual cost of providing the copy, which cost may be collected by the body or agency.”

6. Will said records be available electronically (in PDF format etc) and available either to the public on request or on the Barrington site eventually? An electronic copy will be available upon request after the Supervisors of the Checklist have entered and scanned the checklist and new voters into the statewide database for a fee of $26.50.

7. If I came down to see said records would they be available for viewing? YES

I have answered all your questions to the best of my ability, if you have any further questions please

feel free to contact the New Hampshire Secretary of State at 271-3242.

Kimberly Kerekes

The Doctor: You know what really gets me about you Oswin? The soufflés. Where do you get milk? The soufflés. Seriously, is nobody else wondering about that?

Rory Williams: No frankly no! Twice.

Doctor Who Asylum of the Daleks 2012

Two days ago a story was reported at Breitbart of a pro-Hamas rally

Today, a hard left-wing pro-Hamas rally took place in Tel Aviv.

That came to an ironic end:

The rally apparently broke up shortly thereafter, thanks to rocket sirens warning of incoming ordinance … from Hamas-controlled Gaza.

Yes they had to run away from the rockets they were cheering, Ha Ha Ha, delicious irony we get a chuckle but this story illustrates a point far more important than a bunch of delusional leftists supporting homicidal barbarians who not only want to kill them but while they are in the process of doing so. A point that our friends on the left either can’t or don’t grasp or wish to ignore.

To understand this point you must go back to the “Crazy Uncle” Theory that I’ve mentioned before:

It’s not so odd that 1% of any population might be off its rocker, the problem is in a country of 300,000,000 that is 3 million people. Even if 1/10 of one percent is crackers that’s 300,000 people.

Ok so if Israel’s population is 7.7 Million than finding 77,000 1% who support Hamas shouldn’t be all that hard no big deal right?.

Until you consider the other side of the coin where are the pro-Israel protests?

Where is the single sign on a TV screen, where is that one Israeli flag not used for burning? Where are the counter cultural Arabs or that one crazy uncle in the mix in their population?

Consider the numbers: Jordan (6.1 mil), Egypt (Population 82.5 mil) and the West Bank Palestinian territories. (4.0 mil of which 1.6 million are in Gaza) that makes 92.6 million people. If you take 1/10 of 1% of that number you have 92,600 people.

That doesn’t even count anyone from places non-contiguous with Israel like Libya (6.4 mil), Saudi Arabia (28 mil) , or Iraq (32.9 Mil), Yemen (24 mil), Oman (2.8 mil), UAE (7.8 mil), Qatar (1.8 mil) Bahrain (1.3 mil) that’s another 105 million people a potential addition of 105,000 folks to our potential crazy uncle total bringing it to 197,600.

Nor do we consider Lebanon’s 4.2 million people because they are worried about what is happening in Syria whose 20.8 million people are fighting a government that kills more innocent Arabs every single day on purpose than Israel has killed accidentally in Gaza since the start of this operation.

Not a person in front of a camera, a man behind a microphone nor a fellow in front of a single web cam saying even something like:

“If you want to kill Jews, fine but don’t do it from populated areas where innocents can get killed.”

There is not a peep out of a population of 222.6 million of a opinion, even one as vulgar as the one I just typed suggesting firing rockets at Israel is a bad thing. Not one crazy uncle in a population 2/3’s the size of the US who dares express to the world that opinion from any of those lands.

Does that not strike our friends on the left as strange? More interestingly, why does this question not even occur to our friends on the left?

I submit and suggest that they don’t dare ask that question aloud or even to themselves, because the answer that is staring them in the face leads them somewhere that shatters their entire worldview.

That unasked question speaks volumes about the left and the Arabs.