I can't believe it. Whatever it is, it seems to have started with Tim, moved on to Chris, and now I have it. My day started out OK, just a little tired and creaky feeling in the morning. But as the day has progressed, I have been feeling worse and worse, until right now I feel like a truck ran over me.
Time to go home. On the way I'll stop and get whatever looks like it might work for my symptoms. I'm so ticked, as I've really been staying away from all the flus and other stuff that went around all winter. Now I get hammered. Plus, I'm supposed to head back to Chicago right after my morning class tomorrow. Well, we will cross that bridge when we get to it.
I used to wonder which of my sons would be married first, or which was most likely to make me a grandpa first. For a long time, I expected it would be Tim, who has pretty much always had the girls hanging around and never lacked for female companionship.
But now I'm changing my prediction to Nick. But you say that Nick doesn't even have a prospective girlfriend right now? True, but he seems pretty focused (dare I suggest consumed) with finding one. I could be off base, but it seems like Nick's at the stage where he's actively seeking "the one". Tim's nowhere near that mindset. Therefore my prediction - Nick will stumble across his dream girl before 2005 is over, and will marry her shortly after graduation.
Of course, now that I've made the prediction, Nick will probably read my blog and be motivated to prove me wrong, just blowing up the whole thing altogether. Even so, I'll stick with it at least until I find evidence that makes me change my mind.
Trying to have a little fun in the midst of misery helps just a little.
Tuesday, February 22, 2005
Monday, February 21, 2005
Racial Ramblings
I haven't been able to blog for awhile, between an outrageous schedule and lacking a connection to the net in the evenings for a week. For some reason, probably all the stuff we're getting right now on "Black History Month", it's brought forward lots of thoughts about the whole race issue. If you are sensitive and pc, you might want to stop reading now, because I've decided to be completely honest in the following analysis.
The popular societal trends and attitudes these days say that we western-european-caucasian-whitebread folks should feel guilt about our forefathers' treatment of the black race. Affirmative Action is a racial preference program that noone should dare question lest they be labeled "racists". It has even been suggested that those who don't support the so-called "reparations" movement are also racist bigots. That one suggests that we all should contribute toward today's equivalent of "40 acres and a mule" that was suggested by a Union General after the Civil War to help slaves start their new lives in freedom. Today's equivalent of 40 acres and a mule is actually quite a lot of money; if 40 acres is worth $10k/acre on the low end and today's mule might be a Ford Pickup truck, we're looking at reparations being about $450,000.
What is today's status of this problem of race in our country? Are blacks still discriminated against in the workplace? Yes, there are probably lots of instances you could find if you looked hard enough where a qualified black person was denied a job because of their skin color. However, if you looked harder, you would also find the same denial to Asians, Hispanics, most definitely Middle-Easterners, women, homosexuals, smokers, fat people, people who look just like a hated relative of the hiring manager, I could go on and on.
There's lots of talk about diversity and tolerance, suggesting that all those red-necks who don't agree with giving preferential treatment to blacks and homosexuals are no better than the KKK. Somehow anyone who objects to preferential treatment for any group is full of "intolerance, bigotry, and hatred". Allow me to suggest it is those who use those labels to define people that disagree with them are the only ones guilty of those attitudes.
What forms my opinions on the subject is a mixture of my own education and experience. First of all, I honestly do not hate anybody, and do not expect that I ever will. In my lifetime, when I have found individuals that are unpleasant to be around, I have simply politely separated myself from them. Of the few individuals I can think of who fell into that category, none were black.
Some of the most friendly, outgoing, genuinely likeable people I have known and been friends with have been black. Strictly on a racial factor, I have personally liked far more of the blacks I have met than Asians or Hispanics. In fact, if I were in charge of hiring for a technical position today, I would find it much easier to hire a qualified black than an Asian, because I have found it much more difficult to develop friendly relationships with Asians. But here begins my experiential reasoning for my opinions. In the case of my black friends, I noticed an unmistakeable trend: They were all shunned by their racial peers as "acting white", "uncle Toms", and were social outcasts among those in the closed racial circles.
My first experiences with this phenomenon were when I was a student at Ball State. My black friends were outcasts from the larger group of blacks on campus, who largely kept to themselves, and regarded my friends as some sort of traitors. It's difficult to relate to a group of people who form relationships only with people of their own race and regard everyone else as untrustworthy. On top of that, the campus fraternity members literally branded themselves and their pledges ran around campus at night wearing only shorts and chains.
Living in South Carolina for six years, where black people were in the majority, substantially added to that experience. The schools were dismal failures in academic achievement, so those who could afford it generally sent their children to private and parochial schools. Interestingly, studies were done on this poor performance, which uncovered several contributing factors that the local people had known for some time.
The high schools in particular had ongoing gang issues. Any black student who aspired to do well in school was socially rejected by his/her peers, and might even be at risk of beatings by the school gangs for "acting white". Many black students who took their studies seriously went to elaborate lengths to hide their good grades from others, and would slide into the black slang (called "ebonics" by some) when in the presence of their peers. It was incredibly difficult for a black child to excel in school in South Carolina because of the extremely negative culture.
Other studies on Affirmative Action have found that the preferential spots reserved for blacks almost always go to affluent black students. Again, to cite my own observations when I attended graduate school at the University of South Carolina, government programs simply do not work. Here's what I saw at USC:
People in South Carolina were rather upset that their own students (of all races) were unable to get into the more highly sought degree programs in their own state university. According to USC, high school graduates of the state mostly did not meet the minimum requirements for acceptance into those degree programs. Most of the students in those programs came from out of state or out of the country.
Then there was my own graduate program. I was in the MBA program at USC that was structured for working people. As I recall, approximately 25 percent of our entering class in the program were black. When I graduated, there were only two left (not 2 percent, 2 students!). Understandably, there is a lot of attrition from a program like that. It's intense and very difficult to keep up with studies in a Master's program where you meet in 4-hour evening sessions 2-3 times per week, then all day Saturday every third week. And all sorts of people had to drop out, take some time off, or failed for a variety of reasons. But on a percentage basis, the attrition of the black students in particular was shocking.
I saw a similar situation develop when I went to school for my computer degree. There was a fairly large contingent of black people who began the computer program, but almost none completed it successfully. A particular incident I had direct knowledge of was a black female student who noticed that all the employees in the computer lab were white. So she went to the school administration and demanded she be hired to work in the lab or she would bring a discrimination lawsuit against the school. She was hired, and was terribly unqualified for the job. Whenever I had a shift immediately following hers, it always took me at least the first hour of my shift to clean up her "messes", which ranged from huge backlogs in turnaround of student projects to one time when she actually "crashed" the system. As much as I would like to be able to say that there were black people at that school who would have been qualified to work for that computer lab, there absolutely was not a single one. It was a small school, and I knew pretty much everyone, and helped many with their projects. I knew who was competent and who was not. Sadly, they were not.
One interesting fact, also from my experience in the educational system, was that race alone was not the determining factor of success in technical programs. I knew some black students from Africa and the Caribbean who were extremely successful. It was the American-born black students who were incapable of succeeding in the technical coursework.
On a personal basis, we had a black family next door to us for our last couple of years in South Carolina. The father was in the Army (there's a large base in Columbia), and was a genuinely great guy. His son and mine (Tim) played together almost every day, and were inseparable. However, the mother of the family was standoffish, and we saw her very little.
One day, the two boys apparently had a spat over a toy. According to Claudia, the neighbor boy's mother was terribly upset and accused our son of a racial motive for taking his toys and coming home after the boys had their argument. This floored us, as the boys were only about 4 or 5 years old, and were great friends. Disputes over toys is quite normal at that age, and of course this one was already forgotten and the boys playing together as if nothing had happened. But the whole racial preconceptions seemed to be so deeply ingrained in the mother that her first reaction was that the argument was somehow a racial issue.
There are some, especially Bill Cosby, who are crusading to get black families stronger and more focused on morality and education. I'm in total agreement with him and others like him. Blacks will not escape their plight by forcing the rest of us to give them their 40 acres and a mule, but by keeping their families together and rubbing out the whole culture of alienation.
Given my age, I believe there have been great strides in educational opportunity and achievement. I sincerely hope that black students are succeeding in many technical programs in much better numbers, and that the negative cultural messages are beginning to be overcome.
The popular societal trends and attitudes these days say that we western-european-caucasian-whitebread folks should feel guilt about our forefathers' treatment of the black race. Affirmative Action is a racial preference program that noone should dare question lest they be labeled "racists". It has even been suggested that those who don't support the so-called "reparations" movement are also racist bigots. That one suggests that we all should contribute toward today's equivalent of "40 acres and a mule" that was suggested by a Union General after the Civil War to help slaves start their new lives in freedom. Today's equivalent of 40 acres and a mule is actually quite a lot of money; if 40 acres is worth $10k/acre on the low end and today's mule might be a Ford Pickup truck, we're looking at reparations being about $450,000.
What is today's status of this problem of race in our country? Are blacks still discriminated against in the workplace? Yes, there are probably lots of instances you could find if you looked hard enough where a qualified black person was denied a job because of their skin color. However, if you looked harder, you would also find the same denial to Asians, Hispanics, most definitely Middle-Easterners, women, homosexuals, smokers, fat people, people who look just like a hated relative of the hiring manager, I could go on and on.
There's lots of talk about diversity and tolerance, suggesting that all those red-necks who don't agree with giving preferential treatment to blacks and homosexuals are no better than the KKK. Somehow anyone who objects to preferential treatment for any group is full of "intolerance, bigotry, and hatred". Allow me to suggest it is those who use those labels to define people that disagree with them are the only ones guilty of those attitudes.
What forms my opinions on the subject is a mixture of my own education and experience. First of all, I honestly do not hate anybody, and do not expect that I ever will. In my lifetime, when I have found individuals that are unpleasant to be around, I have simply politely separated myself from them. Of the few individuals I can think of who fell into that category, none were black.
Some of the most friendly, outgoing, genuinely likeable people I have known and been friends with have been black. Strictly on a racial factor, I have personally liked far more of the blacks I have met than Asians or Hispanics. In fact, if I were in charge of hiring for a technical position today, I would find it much easier to hire a qualified black than an Asian, because I have found it much more difficult to develop friendly relationships with Asians. But here begins my experiential reasoning for my opinions. In the case of my black friends, I noticed an unmistakeable trend: They were all shunned by their racial peers as "acting white", "uncle Toms", and were social outcasts among those in the closed racial circles.
My first experiences with this phenomenon were when I was a student at Ball State. My black friends were outcasts from the larger group of blacks on campus, who largely kept to themselves, and regarded my friends as some sort of traitors. It's difficult to relate to a group of people who form relationships only with people of their own race and regard everyone else as untrustworthy. On top of that, the campus fraternity members literally branded themselves and their pledges ran around campus at night wearing only shorts and chains.
Living in South Carolina for six years, where black people were in the majority, substantially added to that experience. The schools were dismal failures in academic achievement, so those who could afford it generally sent their children to private and parochial schools. Interestingly, studies were done on this poor performance, which uncovered several contributing factors that the local people had known for some time.
The high schools in particular had ongoing gang issues. Any black student who aspired to do well in school was socially rejected by his/her peers, and might even be at risk of beatings by the school gangs for "acting white". Many black students who took their studies seriously went to elaborate lengths to hide their good grades from others, and would slide into the black slang (called "ebonics" by some) when in the presence of their peers. It was incredibly difficult for a black child to excel in school in South Carolina because of the extremely negative culture.
Other studies on Affirmative Action have found that the preferential spots reserved for blacks almost always go to affluent black students. Again, to cite my own observations when I attended graduate school at the University of South Carolina, government programs simply do not work. Here's what I saw at USC:
People in South Carolina were rather upset that their own students (of all races) were unable to get into the more highly sought degree programs in their own state university. According to USC, high school graduates of the state mostly did not meet the minimum requirements for acceptance into those degree programs. Most of the students in those programs came from out of state or out of the country.
Then there was my own graduate program. I was in the MBA program at USC that was structured for working people. As I recall, approximately 25 percent of our entering class in the program were black. When I graduated, there were only two left (not 2 percent, 2 students!). Understandably, there is a lot of attrition from a program like that. It's intense and very difficult to keep up with studies in a Master's program where you meet in 4-hour evening sessions 2-3 times per week, then all day Saturday every third week. And all sorts of people had to drop out, take some time off, or failed for a variety of reasons. But on a percentage basis, the attrition of the black students in particular was shocking.
I saw a similar situation develop when I went to school for my computer degree. There was a fairly large contingent of black people who began the computer program, but almost none completed it successfully. A particular incident I had direct knowledge of was a black female student who noticed that all the employees in the computer lab were white. So she went to the school administration and demanded she be hired to work in the lab or she would bring a discrimination lawsuit against the school. She was hired, and was terribly unqualified for the job. Whenever I had a shift immediately following hers, it always took me at least the first hour of my shift to clean up her "messes", which ranged from huge backlogs in turnaround of student projects to one time when she actually "crashed" the system. As much as I would like to be able to say that there were black people at that school who would have been qualified to work for that computer lab, there absolutely was not a single one. It was a small school, and I knew pretty much everyone, and helped many with their projects. I knew who was competent and who was not. Sadly, they were not.
One interesting fact, also from my experience in the educational system, was that race alone was not the determining factor of success in technical programs. I knew some black students from Africa and the Caribbean who were extremely successful. It was the American-born black students who were incapable of succeeding in the technical coursework.
On a personal basis, we had a black family next door to us for our last couple of years in South Carolina. The father was in the Army (there's a large base in Columbia), and was a genuinely great guy. His son and mine (Tim) played together almost every day, and were inseparable. However, the mother of the family was standoffish, and we saw her very little.
One day, the two boys apparently had a spat over a toy. According to Claudia, the neighbor boy's mother was terribly upset and accused our son of a racial motive for taking his toys and coming home after the boys had their argument. This floored us, as the boys were only about 4 or 5 years old, and were great friends. Disputes over toys is quite normal at that age, and of course this one was already forgotten and the boys playing together as if nothing had happened. But the whole racial preconceptions seemed to be so deeply ingrained in the mother that her first reaction was that the argument was somehow a racial issue.
There are some, especially Bill Cosby, who are crusading to get black families stronger and more focused on morality and education. I'm in total agreement with him and others like him. Blacks will not escape their plight by forcing the rest of us to give them their 40 acres and a mule, but by keeping their families together and rubbing out the whole culture of alienation.
Given my age, I believe there have been great strides in educational opportunity and achievement. I sincerely hope that black students are succeeding in many technical programs in much better numbers, and that the negative cultural messages are beginning to be overcome.
Saturday, February 12, 2005
What Weekend?
The weekend is here, but I've got far too much going on to be able to enjoy it.
Got back from Chicago last night, and then got up early to get my proposal ready for the prospective web client that came to visit this morning. Although it was an encouraging meeting, I've been through many like it before. Typical story is, I get through the demos, find out specifically what they want, develop the proposal for just that, then get the standard "we'll get back to you". Hopefully this isn't one of those.
If I could just get a couple of these clients signed up now and then, I wouldn't have to go on the road so much. The attraction of the consulting thing, besides it being very easy for me to do, is that I get paid pretty well, and by the hour. None of that working into the night or getting up at 6AM to prepare and then getting no result. It's a whole lot harder to sign up a new client than to deliver services that have already been sold by somebody else. It's totally shot my confidence in having any ability to sell; I'm not sure I could sell ice water to people in ..., well you get the idea.
Ever try to get health insurance on your own? Turns out it's impossible if anybody in your family has ever had a diagnosis. Tim's the picture of health, and they won't insure him because he was once diagnosed with asthma. Claudia's fine, but had a hip replacement, so she's uninsurable. I'm overweight, also uninsurable. What a messed up system. If only I could hire one or two people in my business, then we could get group insurance, no sweat.
Gotta get started on taxes this weekend as well, since the financial aid info for the boys is due. And I've got to sing tonight on top of it all. Then back to Chicago right after class on Monday.
Here's the only bright side. There isn't any football on this weekend for me to miss, except maybe the Pro Bowl, which isn't all that exciting.
Got back from Chicago last night, and then got up early to get my proposal ready for the prospective web client that came to visit this morning. Although it was an encouraging meeting, I've been through many like it before. Typical story is, I get through the demos, find out specifically what they want, develop the proposal for just that, then get the standard "we'll get back to you". Hopefully this isn't one of those.
If I could just get a couple of these clients signed up now and then, I wouldn't have to go on the road so much. The attraction of the consulting thing, besides it being very easy for me to do, is that I get paid pretty well, and by the hour. None of that working into the night or getting up at 6AM to prepare and then getting no result. It's a whole lot harder to sign up a new client than to deliver services that have already been sold by somebody else. It's totally shot my confidence in having any ability to sell; I'm not sure I could sell ice water to people in ..., well you get the idea.
Ever try to get health insurance on your own? Turns out it's impossible if anybody in your family has ever had a diagnosis. Tim's the picture of health, and they won't insure him because he was once diagnosed with asthma. Claudia's fine, but had a hip replacement, so she's uninsurable. I'm overweight, also uninsurable. What a messed up system. If only I could hire one or two people in my business, then we could get group insurance, no sweat.
Gotta get started on taxes this weekend as well, since the financial aid info for the boys is due. And I've got to sing tonight on top of it all. Then back to Chicago right after class on Monday.
Here's the only bright side. There isn't any football on this weekend for me to miss, except maybe the Pro Bowl, which isn't all that exciting.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
Help Wanted
I'll use the blog today to try out an ad I need to put together. I really need to expand my reach, and this is how I hope to accomplish that.
BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY
If you or someone you know wants to build your own business, with freedom to set your own schedule and earn as much as your motiviation and ability allows, then send your resume for consideration.
The following attributes are required for candidates:
BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY
If you or someone you know wants to build your own business, with freedom to set your own schedule and earn as much as your motiviation and ability allows, then send your resume for consideration.
The following attributes are required for candidates:
- You must be self-directed, entrepreneurial, and able to work without supervision.
- You must be well versed with the internet and its capabilities. Technical skills are helpful, but not required.
- You must have some background in Sales and Marketing. You must have solid oral and written communication skills, and be able to comfortably interact with business owners and managers.
- You must be customer-service focused, and committed to exceeding customer expectations.
- You must be consulting-oriented, capable of finding creative solutions to business problems.
- You must be willing to work hard, including some evenings and weekends to meet customer needs.
- You must have dependable transportation, and be able to travel within a 100 mile radius of Columbus, Indiana.
- You must have the ability to survive on very little income for the first 6 months.
- You will represent a global company with over 1,100 offices in 87 countries.
- Your product offerings exceed those of any other business in the marketplace.
- Your average income, based on national averages, will be approximately $2,000 for each new client. Your total income potential is nearly unlimited.
- You will receive personalized, hands-on training in the local office at no cost. Additional training is available from the company for a fee plus travel expenses if desired.
- You will receive office space, telephone, and internet access at no cost. You must provide your own laptop computer (made available at cost from the company).
- A list of prospective clients will be provided upon completion of training to help you get started.
- Once you have established a thriving business, you may be offered the opportunity to open your own independent office.
For more information, contact me at the email address provided.
Monday, February 07, 2005
Monday Morning
So, how did I do?
Predictions:
Patriots 31 Eagles 17 Actual: Patriots 24 Eagles 21 (You could say I was only 3 points off on the total score, and I got the winner correct)
T.O. a non-factor Actual: He didn't score, but he did rack up some pretty decent receiving stats.
No Lewd Hip-Hop Halftime Show Actual: Paul McCartney. Very family-friendly show that I thought was also very entertaining. (Tim sneered and refused to watch).
At least one very funny commercial Actual: I laughed pretty hard at the cat & spaghetti sauce commercial, and the commercials with the monkeys were pretty funny.
New record for sports cliches Actual: I suppose that's a hard one to prove one way or the other, but I thought Aikman and Collinsworth were actually pretty good.
So what's the verdict? Am I psychic or a fraud?
If you think I'm psychic, send me your name, address, your question, and $100, and I'll answer your question. (fine print: management is not responsible for inaccurate predictions. For entertainment purposes only.)
Predictions:
Patriots 31 Eagles 17 Actual: Patriots 24 Eagles 21 (You could say I was only 3 points off on the total score, and I got the winner correct)
T.O. a non-factor Actual: He didn't score, but he did rack up some pretty decent receiving stats.
No Lewd Hip-Hop Halftime Show Actual: Paul McCartney. Very family-friendly show that I thought was also very entertaining. (Tim sneered and refused to watch).
At least one very funny commercial Actual: I laughed pretty hard at the cat & spaghetti sauce commercial, and the commercials with the monkeys were pretty funny.
New record for sports cliches Actual: I suppose that's a hard one to prove one way or the other, but I thought Aikman and Collinsworth were actually pretty good.
So what's the verdict? Am I psychic or a fraud?
If you think I'm psychic, send me your name, address, your question, and $100, and I'll answer your question. (fine print: management is not responsible for inaccurate predictions. For entertainment purposes only.)
Sunday, February 06, 2005
Lent Already
Lent seemed to sneak up on me this year. Somehow I thought it was later, but here it comes this week already.
My lenten sacrifice has been chosen, and it will be extremely difficult. But I won't tell anybody what it is. Those who tell everybody they know what they are "giving up for Lent" are kind of missing the point, I think. If nobody ever knows what my sacrifice is, all the better. Otherwise, the awe, pity, or praise you get from others becomes your reward. Ergo, the point of the whole exercise is missed.
Also, I think that people who participate in some token lenten sacrifice just because they feel obligated or just want something to tell others about might as well not do it at all. Some jokingly talk about giving up something they don't do anyway, but I think there are people whose sacrifices aren't much more difficult. Something I think is very clear about the experience is that it should be a personal expression of prayer, study, and growth. If it's anything less, there's no point.
I worked with a guy who drank so much, I often wondered if he was an alcoholic. He always made a big deal out of giving up drinking for Lent every year. It seems to me that, outside of his drinking buddies, it would have been of more spiritual value if nobody else really knew about his sacrifice. On the other hand, I think we all were sort of his support system, encouraging and praising him for being able to control his addiction, even if it was limited to 40 days. So I suppose it worked for him, in a way.
Something I have recently decided, apart from the Lent thing, is essentially this: I am beginning a journey toward meeting some specific short and long-term goals I have set for myself. Those goals are known by nobody, and I will not share them even here in my little obscure blog.
The point of all this is that the attainment of these goals is for personal reasons only. I'm not doing anything to make anybody else proud or happy. Even my family will probably never really know for sure, A) That I even set goals, and B) Whether or which goals I may have attained. Outside of what may be apparent.
By the way, the To-Do list I posted awhile ago in this blog, while it may offer some hints, it isn't going to tell you what I'm ultimately up to. Those are just things I'd like to do before I die; this is about much more than that. (Did you think I'd be that easy to figure out?).
On to more serious matters.
The Super Bowl starts in a couple of hours. Let's see if I have any football psychic powers. Patriots 31, Eagles 17. T.O. is a non-factor. No lewd Hip-Hop or flashing in the halftime show. At least one very funny commercial. The commentators set a new record for football cliches.
Indiana played Illinois in basketball this afternoon. I don't know the final score, because it was headed for a blowout. Illinois may be the best team in the country this year, but that doesn't excuse Indiana's inability to even stay on the court with them. How sad to see such a great basketball program slide so quickly into mediocrity. If there isn't a coaching change after this season, I suspect the alumni will go ballistic.
I'll check against my predictions tomorrow, and find out if I've got superpowers or am a mere mortal.
My lenten sacrifice has been chosen, and it will be extremely difficult. But I won't tell anybody what it is. Those who tell everybody they know what they are "giving up for Lent" are kind of missing the point, I think. If nobody ever knows what my sacrifice is, all the better. Otherwise, the awe, pity, or praise you get from others becomes your reward. Ergo, the point of the whole exercise is missed.
Also, I think that people who participate in some token lenten sacrifice just because they feel obligated or just want something to tell others about might as well not do it at all. Some jokingly talk about giving up something they don't do anyway, but I think there are people whose sacrifices aren't much more difficult. Something I think is very clear about the experience is that it should be a personal expression of prayer, study, and growth. If it's anything less, there's no point.
I worked with a guy who drank so much, I often wondered if he was an alcoholic. He always made a big deal out of giving up drinking for Lent every year. It seems to me that, outside of his drinking buddies, it would have been of more spiritual value if nobody else really knew about his sacrifice. On the other hand, I think we all were sort of his support system, encouraging and praising him for being able to control his addiction, even if it was limited to 40 days. So I suppose it worked for him, in a way.
Something I have recently decided, apart from the Lent thing, is essentially this: I am beginning a journey toward meeting some specific short and long-term goals I have set for myself. Those goals are known by nobody, and I will not share them even here in my little obscure blog.
The point of all this is that the attainment of these goals is for personal reasons only. I'm not doing anything to make anybody else proud or happy. Even my family will probably never really know for sure, A) That I even set goals, and B) Whether or which goals I may have attained. Outside of what may be apparent.
By the way, the To-Do list I posted awhile ago in this blog, while it may offer some hints, it isn't going to tell you what I'm ultimately up to. Those are just things I'd like to do before I die; this is about much more than that. (Did you think I'd be that easy to figure out?).
On to more serious matters.
The Super Bowl starts in a couple of hours. Let's see if I have any football psychic powers. Patriots 31, Eagles 17. T.O. is a non-factor. No lewd Hip-Hop or flashing in the halftime show. At least one very funny commercial. The commentators set a new record for football cliches.
Indiana played Illinois in basketball this afternoon. I don't know the final score, because it was headed for a blowout. Illinois may be the best team in the country this year, but that doesn't excuse Indiana's inability to even stay on the court with them. How sad to see such a great basketball program slide so quickly into mediocrity. If there isn't a coaching change after this season, I suspect the alumni will go ballistic.
I'll check against my predictions tomorrow, and find out if I've got superpowers or am a mere mortal.
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Weekend Lyrics
In honor of Nick, who posts song lyrics on his blog every day, here are some lyrics from a song I knew well, some time ago.
It's kind of syrupy sweet and sappy, and not at all like the cynical, faux-sophisticated, often vulgar songs that seem to be popular now. What I do know is that once upon a time, if a guy had a decent voice and could play a passable guitar, he could capture the girl of his dreams with this song.
It's kind of syrupy sweet and sappy, and not at all like the cynical, faux-sophisticated, often vulgar songs that seem to be popular now. What I do know is that once upon a time, if a guy had a decent voice and could play a passable guitar, he could capture the girl of his dreams with this song.
Jim Croce.
If I could save time in a bottle,
The first thing that I'd like to do
Is to save every day till eternity passes away,
Just to spend them with you
If I could make days last forever,
If words could make wishes come true
I'd save every day like a treasure and then,
Again, I would spend them with you
But there never seems to be enough time,
To do the things you want to do
Once you find them
I've looked around enough to know,
You're the one I want to go
Through time with.
If I had a box just for wishes,
And dreams that had never come true
The box would be empty,
Except for the memory
Of how they were answered by you.
But there never seems to be enough time,
To do the things you want to do
Once you find them
I've looked around enough to know,
You're the one I want to go
Through time with
Friday, February 04, 2005
Idealism?
Attending the banquet for the Pregnancy Care Center last night got me thinking about their particular brand of idealism and it's contrast with the other (dark) side.
One of their programs is presenting abstinence education programs, which I was somewhat surprised to learn are welcomed by the schools. Oops - maybe I shouldn't let that go public and let the ACLU hear about it.
I wonder, is the idealistic hope that teens who hear the abstinence message from this program will embrace it, even though virtually everything else they see and hear in our secular culture teaches them the exact opposite?
How would anyone begin to try to offset the values of our culture, where a teen is generally ridiculed for being a virgin. Where pregnant girls are told to go ahead and abort, because it's really just some blob of tissue, and abortion is just one of many birth control options. Where sincere people working hard to offer alternatives from a perspective of faith are demonized as bible-thumping hypocrites. Where the outrageous spread of STD's and AIDS are seldom mentioned, or if they are, the only suggested solution is a condom. Where abortion is advocated as both a right and a responsibility, to be performed on-demand, without parental notification even for the youngest mothers, right up to full term.
What I found sobering was the fact that Christian children are having sex just as much as their non-churched peers. What more evidence would we need that the secular values are having a greater impact than those the church is trying to impart.
I'm thinking I would love to meet people over 18 who have chosen to remain virgins and committed to saving it for their spouse. Knowing the incredible pressures anyone in that situation faces to abandon that sort of pledge, I could have nothing but the ultimate respect for that choice. It takes an amazing amount of not only self-control, but courage. To be willing to move on from a relationship with a person one thinks might be "the one" when being rejected for saying "no". After all, what could be better than two people entering a marriage in true purity (I now wince at the myth of the white wedding dress), able to begin their lifelong relationship with no baggage from prior partners.
In the meantime, all anyone can do is offer support and help to try to save as many babies as possible. The investment in ultrasound machines for each center is turning out to be possibly more effective than just about anything else in helping convince women and girls to carry their baby to term.
One of their programs is presenting abstinence education programs, which I was somewhat surprised to learn are welcomed by the schools. Oops - maybe I shouldn't let that go public and let the ACLU hear about it.
I wonder, is the idealistic hope that teens who hear the abstinence message from this program will embrace it, even though virtually everything else they see and hear in our secular culture teaches them the exact opposite?
How would anyone begin to try to offset the values of our culture, where a teen is generally ridiculed for being a virgin. Where pregnant girls are told to go ahead and abort, because it's really just some blob of tissue, and abortion is just one of many birth control options. Where sincere people working hard to offer alternatives from a perspective of faith are demonized as bible-thumping hypocrites. Where the outrageous spread of STD's and AIDS are seldom mentioned, or if they are, the only suggested solution is a condom. Where abortion is advocated as both a right and a responsibility, to be performed on-demand, without parental notification even for the youngest mothers, right up to full term.
What I found sobering was the fact that Christian children are having sex just as much as their non-churched peers. What more evidence would we need that the secular values are having a greater impact than those the church is trying to impart.
I'm thinking I would love to meet people over 18 who have chosen to remain virgins and committed to saving it for their spouse. Knowing the incredible pressures anyone in that situation faces to abandon that sort of pledge, I could have nothing but the ultimate respect for that choice. It takes an amazing amount of not only self-control, but courage. To be willing to move on from a relationship with a person one thinks might be "the one" when being rejected for saying "no". After all, what could be better than two people entering a marriage in true purity (I now wince at the myth of the white wedding dress), able to begin their lifelong relationship with no baggage from prior partners.
In the meantime, all anyone can do is offer support and help to try to save as many babies as possible. The investment in ultrasound machines for each center is turning out to be possibly more effective than just about anything else in helping convince women and girls to carry their baby to term.
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Just call me psychic
Pretty good trick, don't you think? I got it almost exactly right on the Social Security proposal. Am I psychic, or hooked into the White House?
Naw. It's just common sense.
Wasn't that the weakest response by an opposing party to a State of the Union speech we've ever seen? Unbelievable.
Complaining that Bush should be doing all the stuff in Iraq he's already doing. Just isn't doing it fast enough? We're all supposed to jump and yell, "Right On!" ? Duhhh.
And Social Security is just fine. It doesn't need any changes. They'd have you believe that Bush wants to give you gambling money to go to Vegas and try to win your retirement at the roulette wheel. Just amusing. (See my last post on Social Security for why democrats REALLY oppose the plan)
That's entertainment that continues to tickle our funny bone, straight from DC.
Naw. It's just common sense.
Wasn't that the weakest response by an opposing party to a State of the Union speech we've ever seen? Unbelievable.
Complaining that Bush should be doing all the stuff in Iraq he's already doing. Just isn't doing it fast enough? We're all supposed to jump and yell, "Right On!" ? Duhhh.
And Social Security is just fine. It doesn't need any changes. They'd have you believe that Bush wants to give you gambling money to go to Vegas and try to win your retirement at the roulette wheel. Just amusing. (See my last post on Social Security for why democrats REALLY oppose the plan)
That's entertainment that continues to tickle our funny bone, straight from DC.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Social Security Reform for Dummies
I don't know exactly what the president's proposal is for Social Security reform beyond the basic idea of letting people put 2% of their withholding into personal retirement savings accounts. But I do know exactly how the proposal could be designed in a way that nobody could object to it with any credibility.
The program could be very simple, and it should be a long-term plan that eventually leads to the entire payroll tax being funnelled directly to personal accounts, maybe 50 years from now. But let's start with the 2% proposal for now.
A new type of retirement account, similar to the IRA, would be designed, but with some specific differences. For our purposes, we'll call the new account an SRA (Security Retirement Account). To qualify, the investment vehicle must be approved and certified by the Social Security Administration. It would have to have a proven track record, passing audits, showing a solid long-term rate of return, etc. Most of the more popular mutual funds would easily qualify.
Then, the rules of the account would include the following:
1. Funds cannot, under any circumstances, be distributed before legal retirement age or the death of the fund owner.
2. Funds cannot be used as collateral for loans, cannot be attached by creditors, and are otherwise exempt from being attached for any purpose other than retirement or survivor's benefits.
3. Funds would include life insurance that would pay a pre-established death benefit to the survivors of the account owner if death occurs prior to retirement. At retirement, the fund's balance becomes the death benefit.
4. The funds also would include insurance that guarantee principle and/or a minimum growth rate. These insurance plans are available and being sold commercially today.
5. The distribution from the account upon retirement will normally be provided through an annuity, but the retiree can withdraw the entire value if they meet certain conditions.
6. Of course, like any other investment account, the balance of the account will be included in the estate upon the death of the owner, to be distributed to heirs as determined by the owner's will and existing laws.
The only conceivable objections people might have against the program would be that the accounts might be taken by creditors, blown by the owner, put into risky investments, etc. Well, I've laid out ideas above that would address those objections.
So, what possible objection could be left? That's easy. If your congressperson was honest, they would have to admit that the Social Security Trust Fund isn't at all what we've been led to believe. They make payments to existing beneficiaries, then the rest is basically taken by the Congress to pay for everything else. So, the problem isn't the concept, which is terrific. The problem is that these accounts would drain a huge amount of money away from the Federal Government, which is the same as taking the drugs away from an addict. They would be forced to either cut taxes or spending to make up the difference of all those dollars slipping through their grasp.
When you hear opponents talk about the plan "bankrupting" the social security system, what they really mean is it's going to drop billions of dollars from the till that they are used to emptying out every year to fund unrelated programs. The main question a citizen has to ask him or herself is, would we rather have our own social security account that belongs to us, gives us a higher income after retirement, and that we can pass on when we die; or are we content to pay the tax throughout our lifetime and have some go to other retirees and the rest into the government's coffers, while not really believing it's going to be there for us when we retire?
Not much question about my choice.
The program could be very simple, and it should be a long-term plan that eventually leads to the entire payroll tax being funnelled directly to personal accounts, maybe 50 years from now. But let's start with the 2% proposal for now.
A new type of retirement account, similar to the IRA, would be designed, but with some specific differences. For our purposes, we'll call the new account an SRA (Security Retirement Account). To qualify, the investment vehicle must be approved and certified by the Social Security Administration. It would have to have a proven track record, passing audits, showing a solid long-term rate of return, etc. Most of the more popular mutual funds would easily qualify.
Then, the rules of the account would include the following:
1. Funds cannot, under any circumstances, be distributed before legal retirement age or the death of the fund owner.
2. Funds cannot be used as collateral for loans, cannot be attached by creditors, and are otherwise exempt from being attached for any purpose other than retirement or survivor's benefits.
3. Funds would include life insurance that would pay a pre-established death benefit to the survivors of the account owner if death occurs prior to retirement. At retirement, the fund's balance becomes the death benefit.
4. The funds also would include insurance that guarantee principle and/or a minimum growth rate. These insurance plans are available and being sold commercially today.
5. The distribution from the account upon retirement will normally be provided through an annuity, but the retiree can withdraw the entire value if they meet certain conditions.
6. Of course, like any other investment account, the balance of the account will be included in the estate upon the death of the owner, to be distributed to heirs as determined by the owner's will and existing laws.
The only conceivable objections people might have against the program would be that the accounts might be taken by creditors, blown by the owner, put into risky investments, etc. Well, I've laid out ideas above that would address those objections.
So, what possible objection could be left? That's easy. If your congressperson was honest, they would have to admit that the Social Security Trust Fund isn't at all what we've been led to believe. They make payments to existing beneficiaries, then the rest is basically taken by the Congress to pay for everything else. So, the problem isn't the concept, which is terrific. The problem is that these accounts would drain a huge amount of money away from the Federal Government, which is the same as taking the drugs away from an addict. They would be forced to either cut taxes or spending to make up the difference of all those dollars slipping through their grasp.
When you hear opponents talk about the plan "bankrupting" the social security system, what they really mean is it's going to drop billions of dollars from the till that they are used to emptying out every year to fund unrelated programs. The main question a citizen has to ask him or herself is, would we rather have our own social security account that belongs to us, gives us a higher income after retirement, and that we can pass on when we die; or are we content to pay the tax throughout our lifetime and have some go to other retirees and the rest into the government's coffers, while not really believing it's going to be there for us when we retire?
Not much question about my choice.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Cool Limerick for the Wiz
I stumbled across this and thought it was good enough to share. I'd credit the author if I knew who it was.
The fabulous Wizard of Oz
Retired from his racket because,
What with up-to-date science,
To most of his clients
He wasn’t the Wizard he was
The fabulous Wizard of Oz
Retired from his racket because,
What with up-to-date science,
To most of his clients
He wasn’t the Wizard he was
dem dummies
I've taken a long break from politics, but stuff happening lately is actually getting somewhat humorous. For a bunch of people who want us to believe they're the intelligent ones, they sure have been stupid lately.
Here are great ways to win over the American people:
Barbara Boxer is the poster child for stupid democrats these days. First she raises a challenge to Ohio's electoral votes by alleging fraud, but has no evidence whatsoever to back up her challenge. The best arguments she could come up with was that the lines were long in some minority polling places and some people couldn't or wouldn't wait, and that there was a problem with a machine at one place (which everybody knows was caught and corrected). She then had the distinct honor of being the only Senator to vote against certifying the electoral count for Ohio.
Then good ol' BB proceeded to make a fool of herself by openly calling Condi Rice a liar in her confirmation hearings for Sec State. Condi slapped her down with a masterful retort that got lots of play across the media. So Barbie decided to get even more petty by holding up the confirmation vote just for spite. There might be a couple dozen wackos in her San Fransisco consituency applauding her, but I'm guessing the rest of Californians probably now consider her an embarrassment.
Now we get a great success in the Iraqi election, and here comes John Kerry. Still acting the part of the sore loser, he can't bring himself to say anything positive about the outcome, but still seems to be making the same campaign speeches. Maybe if he says it often enough, people will finally start to believe him when he says that he could get the UN to cooperate and share the burden of helping Iraq rebuild and stamp out the insurgency. Interesting that he still hasn't explained just how he would do that - apparently just the force of his charismatic personality will make guys like Chirac and Schroeder come around; "Sure, we'll be happy to give billions of dollars and thousands of soldiers to the effort in Iraq just because it's you asking, Mr. Kerry". What's that guy smokin?
And Kennedy is still talking like a drunken fool, Pelosi is a nutcase, don't get me started on Byrd, and they just might make Howard Dean the chairman of their party. Wow, I'm no political expert, but even I see clearly that just about everything they are doing right now is incredibly stupid.
How about instead of slamming Bush at every turn, they offer their own alternative plans and ideas? Anybody ever heard them say what they think would work better, in Iraq, for Social Security, balancing the budget, stimulating the economy, etc.? I haven't.
How about instead of obstructing everything Bush is trying to accomplish, they step up and offer to deal. Mr. President, you want us to help pass initiative A? How about you give us our minimum wage increase? Get the concept? (Look up 'compromise', it's in the dictionary)
I've always been suspicious of politicians, but I don't know if I've ever seen them acting so irrational and stupid as the dems right now. At least it's almost entertaining to watch.
Here are great ways to win over the American people:
Barbara Boxer is the poster child for stupid democrats these days. First she raises a challenge to Ohio's electoral votes by alleging fraud, but has no evidence whatsoever to back up her challenge. The best arguments she could come up with was that the lines were long in some minority polling places and some people couldn't or wouldn't wait, and that there was a problem with a machine at one place (which everybody knows was caught and corrected). She then had the distinct honor of being the only Senator to vote against certifying the electoral count for Ohio.
Then good ol' BB proceeded to make a fool of herself by openly calling Condi Rice a liar in her confirmation hearings for Sec State. Condi slapped her down with a masterful retort that got lots of play across the media. So Barbie decided to get even more petty by holding up the confirmation vote just for spite. There might be a couple dozen wackos in her San Fransisco consituency applauding her, but I'm guessing the rest of Californians probably now consider her an embarrassment.
Now we get a great success in the Iraqi election, and here comes John Kerry. Still acting the part of the sore loser, he can't bring himself to say anything positive about the outcome, but still seems to be making the same campaign speeches. Maybe if he says it often enough, people will finally start to believe him when he says that he could get the UN to cooperate and share the burden of helping Iraq rebuild and stamp out the insurgency. Interesting that he still hasn't explained just how he would do that - apparently just the force of his charismatic personality will make guys like Chirac and Schroeder come around; "Sure, we'll be happy to give billions of dollars and thousands of soldiers to the effort in Iraq just because it's you asking, Mr. Kerry". What's that guy smokin?
And Kennedy is still talking like a drunken fool, Pelosi is a nutcase, don't get me started on Byrd, and they just might make Howard Dean the chairman of their party. Wow, I'm no political expert, but even I see clearly that just about everything they are doing right now is incredibly stupid.
How about instead of slamming Bush at every turn, they offer their own alternative plans and ideas? Anybody ever heard them say what they think would work better, in Iraq, for Social Security, balancing the budget, stimulating the economy, etc.? I haven't.
How about instead of obstructing everything Bush is trying to accomplish, they step up and offer to deal. Mr. President, you want us to help pass initiative A? How about you give us our minimum wage increase? Get the concept? (Look up 'compromise', it's in the dictionary)
I've always been suspicious of politicians, but I don't know if I've ever seen them acting so irrational and stupid as the dems right now. At least it's almost entertaining to watch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)