On New Year's Eve I prefer to ignore the Fiscal Cliff, Hillary's illness, Piers Morgan's campaign to eliminate guns in the country where he's a guest, the GOP Eunuchs in Congress, and the White House that has us all under surveillance.
Instead I am focused on the good stuff. The Colts played an inspired game against the Texans yesterday to honor Coach Pagano. Is there any way we can expect them to repeat that inspired performance next week in their first playoff game against Baltimore?
In about a week we will find out if the Irish can pull out a National Championship against Alabama.
Indiana and Butler basketball teams continue to impress. Both are fun to watch. Notre Dame's got pretty good basketball teams as well - both their men and women are doing very well.
So as my taxes go up and the government wastes it lining the pockets of Obama's cronies, I'll offset my frustration by following our Indiana sports teams.
I can't get elected Senator, so I guess that's about all I can do. When the tyrannical federal government comes after me for believing the wrong things, I hope they just get it over with quickly.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Friday, December 28, 2012
Life
For the new year, I was thinking about the essence of life. For me, there are so many ways to describe what life is about, at least for me.
Birth
Death
Faith
Wisdom
Knowledge
Family
Friends
Shelter
Food
Getting Warm
Cooling Off
Bathing
Nature
Loving
Fighting
Hating
Praying
Reading
Working
Watching
Sleeping
Restaurants
Chocolate
Fat
Ice Cream
Exercising
Romance
Arguing
Giving
Receiving
Grieving
Celebrating
Laughing
Crying
Pain
Illness
Entertainment
Best wishes that everyone gets all the good things on the list and very few of the bad things in the new year.
Birth
Death
Faith
Wisdom
Knowledge
Family
Friends
Shelter
Food
Getting Warm
Cooling Off
Bathing
Nature
Loving
Fighting
Hating
Praying
Reading
Working
Watching
Sleeping
Restaurants
Chocolate
Fat
Ice Cream
Exercising
Romance
Arguing
Giving
Receiving
Grieving
Celebrating
Laughing
Crying
Pain
Illness
Entertainment
Best wishes that everyone gets all the good things on the list and very few of the bad things in the new year.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Has the Faith Community Already Lost?
Two articles today suggest perhaps we have. At least on the Life issues.
Congress passed a Defense Authorization Bill. It includes free abortions for women in the military. The House passed it 315-107 and the Senate 81-14. So much for a pro-life legislature.
Sonya Sotomayor was up to bat to review whether or not the Supreme Court would hear a case about the HHS contraception mandate. She of course rejected it out of hand, saying that Hobby Lobby will just have to pay for the morning after pill or pay the million-dollar-a-day fine beginning next Tuesday for refusing to do so. Of course the lower court judge told them to go away because they aren't a church, therefore matters of concience don't apply to them.
Another story that is sort of related, sort of not, is about the CNN Village Idiot from Britain. Piers Morgan now says the bible should be amended. Because it happens to identify sexual activities like fornication and adultery and homosexuality as sinful. How terribly outdated, says Piers.
How's that petition coming along to deport the idiot back to Great Britain? Perhaps I should add my signature.
So how about we boil everything down to the essence of what's happening in the new year. The 1st Amendment to the Consitution, especially regarding Freedom of Religion. Destroyed by ObamaCare.
The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, the Right to Bear Arms. About to be destroyed by the Senate, which is lining up behind Diane Feinstein's bill to essentially repeal that amendment. Just watched the video 'For Greater Glory', in which an early scene depicts a hit squad of Mexican Federales breaking down the Church doors and slaughtering the unarmed people inside attending Mass.
Is the day nearer than we thought when Ms. Feinstein might order a hit squad to do the same at a parish in California?
I'll bet the Christeros didn't think it could happen to them either.
Christians have been persecuted since the First Century. I suppose we Americans have enjoyed 200 years of freedom from such persecution, and our time is up.
As the priest portrayed by Peter O'Toole told little Jose as he awaited the Federales he knew were on their way to execute him,
"There is no greater glory than to give up one's life for Christ".
How many Americans will discover the truth of that statement first-hand over the next decade or so?
Congress passed a Defense Authorization Bill. It includes free abortions for women in the military. The House passed it 315-107 and the Senate 81-14. So much for a pro-life legislature.
Sonya Sotomayor was up to bat to review whether or not the Supreme Court would hear a case about the HHS contraception mandate. She of course rejected it out of hand, saying that Hobby Lobby will just have to pay for the morning after pill or pay the million-dollar-a-day fine beginning next Tuesday for refusing to do so. Of course the lower court judge told them to go away because they aren't a church, therefore matters of concience don't apply to them.
Another story that is sort of related, sort of not, is about the CNN Village Idiot from Britain. Piers Morgan now says the bible should be amended. Because it happens to identify sexual activities like fornication and adultery and homosexuality as sinful. How terribly outdated, says Piers.
How's that petition coming along to deport the idiot back to Great Britain? Perhaps I should add my signature.
So how about we boil everything down to the essence of what's happening in the new year. The 1st Amendment to the Consitution, especially regarding Freedom of Religion. Destroyed by ObamaCare.
The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, the Right to Bear Arms. About to be destroyed by the Senate, which is lining up behind Diane Feinstein's bill to essentially repeal that amendment. Just watched the video 'For Greater Glory', in which an early scene depicts a hit squad of Mexican Federales breaking down the Church doors and slaughtering the unarmed people inside attending Mass.
Is the day nearer than we thought when Ms. Feinstein might order a hit squad to do the same at a parish in California?
I'll bet the Christeros didn't think it could happen to them either.
Christians have been persecuted since the First Century. I suppose we Americans have enjoyed 200 years of freedom from such persecution, and our time is up.
As the priest portrayed by Peter O'Toole told little Jose as he awaited the Federales he knew were on their way to execute him,
"There is no greater glory than to give up one's life for Christ".
How many Americans will discover the truth of that statement first-hand over the next decade or so?
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Curious About What Your Paycheck Will Look Like?
In case you are wondering, your first paycheck of 2013 will look the same as your last paycheck of 2012. So we're all personally not falling off that fiscal cliff just yet.
Clearly there's no deal in Washington. But the bureaucracy failed to go ahead and release the new tax regulations per the automatic changes that were set to kick in January 1st, I imagine because the Obama White House told them to wait. Given that everything Obama does is politically calculated, it's pretty easy to understand and explain. (Obama doesn't want millions of angry people getting after him when their first check of the new year is well short of last year's).
Sometime in the next 2-3 weeks I expect to be helping my payroll clients set up their new Federal tax tables, where most folks will see their rate go up 10 to 15 percent.
But Republicans have concluded that ultimately Obama wants to make sure there's no deal and those tax hikes on everybody go into effect. I'm pretty sure it will hit sometime before the end of January. Then Obama will pretend to save everyone from those high taxes, pushing through a bill to cut taxes for everyone who earnes less than $200K.
It's pure semantics, but folks are easily fooled by such semantics. Now instead of imposing higher taxes, Obama can claim to have lowered taxes for the vast majority of American taxpayers. Although the end result won't be any different from what he's been trying to push through for the last 4 years. He's counting on it being a political victory - or in sports terms, a blowout of the opposing Republicans.
Those "low information voters" we've been hearing about since the election will fall for it, especially after all the networks trumpet that message 24/7. Fox News will continue to be called "extreme" for merely trying to point out the truth of the whole affair.
The GOP can't escape the trap that's been set for them. If they had developed and heavily publicized their alternative plan, assuming that plan was sensible and realistic, they might have had a chance to change the terms of the argument. But Boehner's been playing Obama's game, and one can never win playing another person's game.
So prepare to be hammered with a higher income tax rate, then miraculously rescued by your messianic president.
Clearly there's no deal in Washington. But the bureaucracy failed to go ahead and release the new tax regulations per the automatic changes that were set to kick in January 1st, I imagine because the Obama White House told them to wait. Given that everything Obama does is politically calculated, it's pretty easy to understand and explain. (Obama doesn't want millions of angry people getting after him when their first check of the new year is well short of last year's).
Sometime in the next 2-3 weeks I expect to be helping my payroll clients set up their new Federal tax tables, where most folks will see their rate go up 10 to 15 percent.
But Republicans have concluded that ultimately Obama wants to make sure there's no deal and those tax hikes on everybody go into effect. I'm pretty sure it will hit sometime before the end of January. Then Obama will pretend to save everyone from those high taxes, pushing through a bill to cut taxes for everyone who earnes less than $200K.
It's pure semantics, but folks are easily fooled by such semantics. Now instead of imposing higher taxes, Obama can claim to have lowered taxes for the vast majority of American taxpayers. Although the end result won't be any different from what he's been trying to push through for the last 4 years. He's counting on it being a political victory - or in sports terms, a blowout of the opposing Republicans.
Those "low information voters" we've been hearing about since the election will fall for it, especially after all the networks trumpet that message 24/7. Fox News will continue to be called "extreme" for merely trying to point out the truth of the whole affair.
The GOP can't escape the trap that's been set for them. If they had developed and heavily publicized their alternative plan, assuming that plan was sensible and realistic, they might have had a chance to change the terms of the argument. But Boehner's been playing Obama's game, and one can never win playing another person's game.
So prepare to be hammered with a higher income tax rate, then miraculously rescued by your messianic president.
Friday, December 21, 2012
Thoughts for the End of the World
Today's an appropriate day to write down a few thoughts as I wrap up the work that needs to be finished before we break for Christmas.
A head-scratcher from the hard left is a seemingly endless stream of invective that threatens NRA members and other 2nd Amendment advocates. It seems the deranged controlling socialists may be plotting to shoot those they feel are standing in the way of firearms bans. They apparently have no appreciation for irony.
The "Freedom from Religion" group's latest initiative is an attempt to bully West Point into abandoning its oldest traditions regarding prayer and Christian observances. Join my new political action group, I think I'll call it "Freedom from Freedom from Religion". Why are they so hostile to people who believe in God?
Hillary can't talk to Congress about the Benghazi disaster because she claims she fell and hit her head. I give that excuse about a 20 percent chance of being true. If I caught the story right, she never even saw a physician about her alleged concussion. Come on, left-wingers, you don't really believe that fairy tale, do you?
The Benghazi story is proof that we have a corrupt and incompetent government headed by a corrupt and incompetent President. Hillary and Barack will never tell the truth about Benghazi, so we should stop asking them to. We already know what happened: Ambassador Stevens and his staff pleaded with Hillary's State Department for better security and were ignored. They got attacked in a siege that lasted almost 9 hours, while the fast-response team of commandos stood by their helicopters ready to mount a rescue. The White House told the rescue team to stand down. Then the White House concocted a cover story about a spontaneous protest to save Obama's campaign.
The only questions remaining will never be answered unless somebody in Obama's inner circle decides to blow the whistle. We don't know exactly why the State Department denied enhanced security in Libya, but there is a person at State that has stepped up and taken responsibility for the decision in congressional testimony. She really took one for the team. We also don't know who at the White House concocted the cover story about the spontaneous protest. But Susan Rice's punishment for being a team player by quite obviously deciding to go tell that lie on television all day the next Sunday was having her hopes to take Hillary's job dashed. And we don't know the exact reason Obama told the rescue team to stand down, and Obama will never tell us.
If you watch Cable Television, especially CNN, MSNBC, and to a lesser extent Fox News, it can be easy to form the impression that most people are fundamentally evil. CNN's Piers Morgan and their airhead anchorette with the pretentiously "diverse" name, Soledad O'Brien, continue a campaign to brand all gun owners and second amendment rights folks as the root of all evil. MSNBC's entire lineup more generally expound on how evil Conservatives are in general, telling their tiny audience that conservatives like seeing children shot, want to starve children and seniors, want to deny medical care to the poor, and of course are racist sexist homophobes. Of course no evidence is necessary of racism - opposing Obama is all that's needed to prove that charge. Homophobia is proved simply by opposition to Gay Marriage. Sexism is evidenced by resistance to forking over the money to pay for every woman's birth control.
I was just wondering what are Fox News' equivalent of the CNN and MSNBC slanders? The most partisan voice at Fox I think would be Hannity, so let's see if I can think of any slanders from Hannity toward liberals. Is it slander to accuse them of desiring wealth redistribution? Of desiring to control what we eat and drink, drive and shoot? Of desiring to eliminate fossil fuels? Which is slanderous? Aren't those things true, and isn't the best defense against a slander charge the truth?
Fiscal Cliff here we come. Boehner went ahead and proposed something in the House, but there weren't enough votes. Apparently he tried to give Obama a compromise based on his own rhetoric (remember "millionaires and billionaires"?) He set the bar at a million dollars for the increased tax rate. The Democrats of course refused to support it, as did the Republicans.
Proof that there will be no "deal". The sides are diametrically opposed. The right side wants to leave tax rates alone and cut spending. The left side wants to hike tax rates and increase spending. The left says they will accept no cuts, period. The right says they will accept no tax increases, period. That means there's no middle ground. So we will end up with one of two outcomes: The automatic spending cuts and tax increases they built in in their last "deal" kick in. Or they agree to extend the deadline and keep the fight going.
Obama's intractable attitude suggests he wants the automatic cuts and tax hikes, but knows his constituents don't support that. So he is trying an approach that he thinks allows him to blame the Republicans for refusing to compromise. The simple fact of his re-election suggests his strategy will probably work, given his worshipping news media and the ignorance of the masses who voted for him.
A head-scratcher from the hard left is a seemingly endless stream of invective that threatens NRA members and other 2nd Amendment advocates. It seems the deranged controlling socialists may be plotting to shoot those they feel are standing in the way of firearms bans. They apparently have no appreciation for irony.
The "Freedom from Religion" group's latest initiative is an attempt to bully West Point into abandoning its oldest traditions regarding prayer and Christian observances. Join my new political action group, I think I'll call it "Freedom from Freedom from Religion". Why are they so hostile to people who believe in God?
Hillary can't talk to Congress about the Benghazi disaster because she claims she fell and hit her head. I give that excuse about a 20 percent chance of being true. If I caught the story right, she never even saw a physician about her alleged concussion. Come on, left-wingers, you don't really believe that fairy tale, do you?
The Benghazi story is proof that we have a corrupt and incompetent government headed by a corrupt and incompetent President. Hillary and Barack will never tell the truth about Benghazi, so we should stop asking them to. We already know what happened: Ambassador Stevens and his staff pleaded with Hillary's State Department for better security and were ignored. They got attacked in a siege that lasted almost 9 hours, while the fast-response team of commandos stood by their helicopters ready to mount a rescue. The White House told the rescue team to stand down. Then the White House concocted a cover story about a spontaneous protest to save Obama's campaign.
The only questions remaining will never be answered unless somebody in Obama's inner circle decides to blow the whistle. We don't know exactly why the State Department denied enhanced security in Libya, but there is a person at State that has stepped up and taken responsibility for the decision in congressional testimony. She really took one for the team. We also don't know who at the White House concocted the cover story about the spontaneous protest. But Susan Rice's punishment for being a team player by quite obviously deciding to go tell that lie on television all day the next Sunday was having her hopes to take Hillary's job dashed. And we don't know the exact reason Obama told the rescue team to stand down, and Obama will never tell us.
If you watch Cable Television, especially CNN, MSNBC, and to a lesser extent Fox News, it can be easy to form the impression that most people are fundamentally evil. CNN's Piers Morgan and their airhead anchorette with the pretentiously "diverse" name, Soledad O'Brien, continue a campaign to brand all gun owners and second amendment rights folks as the root of all evil. MSNBC's entire lineup more generally expound on how evil Conservatives are in general, telling their tiny audience that conservatives like seeing children shot, want to starve children and seniors, want to deny medical care to the poor, and of course are racist sexist homophobes. Of course no evidence is necessary of racism - opposing Obama is all that's needed to prove that charge. Homophobia is proved simply by opposition to Gay Marriage. Sexism is evidenced by resistance to forking over the money to pay for every woman's birth control.
I was just wondering what are Fox News' equivalent of the CNN and MSNBC slanders? The most partisan voice at Fox I think would be Hannity, so let's see if I can think of any slanders from Hannity toward liberals. Is it slander to accuse them of desiring wealth redistribution? Of desiring to control what we eat and drink, drive and shoot? Of desiring to eliminate fossil fuels? Which is slanderous? Aren't those things true, and isn't the best defense against a slander charge the truth?
Fiscal Cliff here we come. Boehner went ahead and proposed something in the House, but there weren't enough votes. Apparently he tried to give Obama a compromise based on his own rhetoric (remember "millionaires and billionaires"?) He set the bar at a million dollars for the increased tax rate. The Democrats of course refused to support it, as did the Republicans.
Proof that there will be no "deal". The sides are diametrically opposed. The right side wants to leave tax rates alone and cut spending. The left side wants to hike tax rates and increase spending. The left says they will accept no cuts, period. The right says they will accept no tax increases, period. That means there's no middle ground. So we will end up with one of two outcomes: The automatic spending cuts and tax increases they built in in their last "deal" kick in. Or they agree to extend the deadline and keep the fight going.
Obama's intractable attitude suggests he wants the automatic cuts and tax hikes, but knows his constituents don't support that. So he is trying an approach that he thinks allows him to blame the Republicans for refusing to compromise. The simple fact of his re-election suggests his strategy will probably work, given his worshipping news media and the ignorance of the masses who voted for him.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
If Christmas Happened Today
This post was attempted one before, but in the spirit of Christmas, I thought I'd give it another shot.
Imagine if the Christmas Story took place today. A young schoolgirl, say somewhere between 14 and 16 years old, gets a vist from an Angel. She's told she will give birth to a baby who will be the savior of the world.
The part about little Mary being betrothed just doesn't happen in America, so we can't make that parallel. And her husband-to-be can't marry her, because if he happens to be an adult, well, that just isn't done either. So I can't figure out how to bring Joseph into the picture.
Absolutely nobody will believe her. They'll just toss it off as a young girl whose boyfriend got her pregnant. Only problem is that she doesn't have a boyfriend, and nobody has any clue about the identity of the middle-schooler (or maybe high schooler?) that got her pregnant.
There's also no such thing in America as going to your family's original hometown to register for a census. So if she travels somewhere right before giving birth, it would have to be for some other reason. But being forced to have the baby in a barn isn't completely impossible, although it's much more likely that she would show up in some hospital emergency room and have the child there under the care of professional medical personnel.
How about the star? A bright star appears in the sky and seems to move until it stops directly above the hospital (or barn if you prefer) where the birth takes place. The star might be explained as a comet, which of course the scientific community would immediately tell everyone was an ordinary comet on its ordinary orbit through the solar system. Means nothing. The fact it happens to stay directly over the place where a girl who claims a virgin birth is just silly superstition.
The Catholic Church will not even bother to investigate, and the rest of the Christian Community will reject the entire story to avoid being taunted as ignorant boobs for believing the little girl.
But there will be a small group of folks who will get wind of the story and believe the little girl. They will gather at the birthplace, trying to see the little girl and her baby. But most likely they'll be turned away by riot police sent there by an alarmed government that fears these religious radicals.
The news media will make a point to ignore the story entirely, telling themselves that it's best not to inflame those radical Christians by even mentioning it.
But God will know what he's doing. People will find out anyway, and will appear from around the globe to pay homage and pray together. The little miracle child will build a following regardless of government efforts to stamp out the movement from the start. But the real transformation of the world will have to wait until the child comes of age and begins spreading his message to the people.
Merry Christmas.
Imagine if the Christmas Story took place today. A young schoolgirl, say somewhere between 14 and 16 years old, gets a vist from an Angel. She's told she will give birth to a baby who will be the savior of the world.
The part about little Mary being betrothed just doesn't happen in America, so we can't make that parallel. And her husband-to-be can't marry her, because if he happens to be an adult, well, that just isn't done either. So I can't figure out how to bring Joseph into the picture.
Absolutely nobody will believe her. They'll just toss it off as a young girl whose boyfriend got her pregnant. Only problem is that she doesn't have a boyfriend, and nobody has any clue about the identity of the middle-schooler (or maybe high schooler?) that got her pregnant.
There's also no such thing in America as going to your family's original hometown to register for a census. So if she travels somewhere right before giving birth, it would have to be for some other reason. But being forced to have the baby in a barn isn't completely impossible, although it's much more likely that she would show up in some hospital emergency room and have the child there under the care of professional medical personnel.
How about the star? A bright star appears in the sky and seems to move until it stops directly above the hospital (or barn if you prefer) where the birth takes place. The star might be explained as a comet, which of course the scientific community would immediately tell everyone was an ordinary comet on its ordinary orbit through the solar system. Means nothing. The fact it happens to stay directly over the place where a girl who claims a virgin birth is just silly superstition.
The Catholic Church will not even bother to investigate, and the rest of the Christian Community will reject the entire story to avoid being taunted as ignorant boobs for believing the little girl.
But there will be a small group of folks who will get wind of the story and believe the little girl. They will gather at the birthplace, trying to see the little girl and her baby. But most likely they'll be turned away by riot police sent there by an alarmed government that fears these religious radicals.
The news media will make a point to ignore the story entirely, telling themselves that it's best not to inflame those radical Christians by even mentioning it.
But God will know what he's doing. People will find out anyway, and will appear from around the globe to pay homage and pray together. The little miracle child will build a following regardless of government efforts to stamp out the movement from the start. But the real transformation of the world will have to wait until the child comes of age and begins spreading his message to the people.
Merry Christmas.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
About Tebow (Update)
Tim Tebow is the most famous NFL player that doesn't play. He's a backup quarterback for the New York Jets who has been languishing on the bench all season. That's puzzling to many Jets fans and other NFL observers, who believed he would be integrated into the Jets offense as a change-of-pace quarterback. Everyone thought he'd run a wildcat offense to confuse opposing defenses.
The Tebow-hating media jumped on reports out of the Jets camp from teammates who claimed that Tebow was a horrible quarterback in practice. Theoretically that's why he was never really tried in the expected wildcat. Even as the Jets starter, Mark Sanchez, struggled mightily throughout the season, the Jets never so much as gave Tebow a look.
I think the time has come and passed to give Tim his shot. The guy managed to lead the Broncos into the playoffs last season, despite his unorthodox and awkward quarterbacking skills. The Jets are officially out of the playoffs, so what would they lose by giving Tebow a shot in the next game? Whether the Jets lose with Sanchez or lose with Tebow, does it really matter? Who knows, maybe the home-schooled anachronistic quarterback who wears his Christianity on his sleeve can pull off another miracle for a Jets victory?
Hey Rex, Jets fans and non-fans alike want to see Tebow. Give him a shot in the last game, or maybe the last 2 games. Then release him. Maybe another team will give him a shot, maybe they won't. But at least we'll all find out what he can do.
Update: Shortly after I posted this, Rex Ryan named Greg McElroy the starter, bypassing Tebow. It's a pretty big insult to skip your backup and go to the third stringer, but that's what Ryan did. Tebow reportedly wants to be traded. More likely he'll be released. We may never find out whether he can be a successful NFL QB. Maybe the story ends here.
The Tebow-hating media jumped on reports out of the Jets camp from teammates who claimed that Tebow was a horrible quarterback in practice. Theoretically that's why he was never really tried in the expected wildcat. Even as the Jets starter, Mark Sanchez, struggled mightily throughout the season, the Jets never so much as gave Tebow a look.
I think the time has come and passed to give Tim his shot. The guy managed to lead the Broncos into the playoffs last season, despite his unorthodox and awkward quarterbacking skills. The Jets are officially out of the playoffs, so what would they lose by giving Tebow a shot in the next game? Whether the Jets lose with Sanchez or lose with Tebow, does it really matter? Who knows, maybe the home-schooled anachronistic quarterback who wears his Christianity on his sleeve can pull off another miracle for a Jets victory?
Hey Rex, Jets fans and non-fans alike want to see Tebow. Give him a shot in the last game, or maybe the last 2 games. Then release him. Maybe another team will give him a shot, maybe they won't. But at least we'll all find out what he can do.
Update: Shortly after I posted this, Rex Ryan named Greg McElroy the starter, bypassing Tebow. It's a pretty big insult to skip your backup and go to the third stringer, but that's what Ryan did. Tebow reportedly wants to be traded. More likely he'll be released. We may never find out whether he can be a successful NFL QB. Maybe the story ends here.
Sports Time
So Butler knocked off Indiana this weekend. When Yogi Ferrell knocked down the 3 to force overtime, I really thought it was over for Butler. Two of their key players had fouled out, and Indiana went into the huddle after the end of regulation smiling and confident. I think Indiana believed they had withstood the Butler storm and would run away with the game in overtime much as they did in the overtime game against Georgetown.
But somehow Butler hung in there in the overtime, falling down early but regaining the lead with dead-eye 3-point shooting from Rotnei Clarke and Chase Stigall. Then the walk-on aspiring basketball coach found a gap in the Indiana defense to knock down the game winner.
Such an entertaining game to watch. I remain stunned that Brad Stevens hasn't been lured by a major program with millions to spend on a quality coach. UCLA comes to mind. But there are programs all over the country that I'm sure would happily pony up the big bucks to pry Brad away from Indianapolis. There's something to be said for having a job you love in a place you feel at home, so I respect Brad for fending off those offers. Gotta think he's going to get the one he can't refuse this year, though.
Indiana shouldn't worry too much about losing their spot in the national polls. They're still a good team. Now they know they are vulnerable, and maybe it will tighten their focus going into the Big 10 part of the season. I think they'll probably lose at least 2 games against Big 10 opponents. I can see them being beaten by Illinois, Michigan, or Michigan State.
I was curious to see how the Colts would do this weekend against the Texans. The outcome was pretty much what I expected. Most Colts fans probably stuck with the game until there was no hope left, given the history of comebacks this year. No comebacks against Houston, unfortunately. The Texan team is just too good.
The Colts will get into the playoffs, probably by beating Kansas City next week. They could possibly beat the Texans at home in the last game of the season, presumably because by then the game will have no impact on either team's playoff position and Houston might rest some of their starters.
Right now it looks like the Colts may play the Ravens in the wild-card game. The Ravens would probably be favored, and the Colts haven't been very good on the road. But if they manage a victory, I can't see them making it past the second round, most likely against the Broncos or the Patriots. A second round matchup with the Broncos would be fun to see.
But somehow Butler hung in there in the overtime, falling down early but regaining the lead with dead-eye 3-point shooting from Rotnei Clarke and Chase Stigall. Then the walk-on aspiring basketball coach found a gap in the Indiana defense to knock down the game winner.
Such an entertaining game to watch. I remain stunned that Brad Stevens hasn't been lured by a major program with millions to spend on a quality coach. UCLA comes to mind. But there are programs all over the country that I'm sure would happily pony up the big bucks to pry Brad away from Indianapolis. There's something to be said for having a job you love in a place you feel at home, so I respect Brad for fending off those offers. Gotta think he's going to get the one he can't refuse this year, though.
Indiana shouldn't worry too much about losing their spot in the national polls. They're still a good team. Now they know they are vulnerable, and maybe it will tighten their focus going into the Big 10 part of the season. I think they'll probably lose at least 2 games against Big 10 opponents. I can see them being beaten by Illinois, Michigan, or Michigan State.
I was curious to see how the Colts would do this weekend against the Texans. The outcome was pretty much what I expected. Most Colts fans probably stuck with the game until there was no hope left, given the history of comebacks this year. No comebacks against Houston, unfortunately. The Texan team is just too good.
The Colts will get into the playoffs, probably by beating Kansas City next week. They could possibly beat the Texans at home in the last game of the season, presumably because by then the game will have no impact on either team's playoff position and Houston might rest some of their starters.
Right now it looks like the Colts may play the Ravens in the wild-card game. The Ravens would probably be favored, and the Colts haven't been very good on the road. But if they manage a victory, I can't see them making it past the second round, most likely against the Broncos or the Patriots. A second round matchup with the Broncos would be fun to see.
Monday, December 17, 2012
I Joined the NRA
The heated and emotional arguments coming from the Left after the incident in Newtown, CT is frightening me. The iron-fisted control freaks in the leftwing government are embarking on a full blown campaign to outlaw firearms, so the least I could do in response was join the NRA.
Is it time to acquire a handgun? Maybe. If I can get a day off. But then I'd need to join a shooting range somewhere to become competent. Another day off or more. Then I'd need to get a concealed carry permit. Maybe more than a day off.
Days off are the hardest part these days. So I'll have to wait and see if and when I can acquire a means to protect myself and my family before the National Socialist in the White House orders all private firearms be confiscated, leaving us all without the means of protecting ourselves from the roving gangs that will spring up to endanger us.
In Connecticut a mentally disabled kid got hold of his Mom's guns then used them to kill her, the adults in the office at the elementary school, and a kindergarten class. The guns didn't cause the problem any more than the vehicle he used to drive to the school. The disturbed boy who invaded the school and shot so many innocent people was the problem.
Maybe instead of trying to control people by taking away their guns, sodas, french fries, and SUVs the government should try to stop mass shootings by mentally unstable people. Maybe by trying to make sure unstable people have the care and supervision they need. You don't stop the next mentally ill young man from going off his meds and shooting a bunch of people by taking firearms away from stable and responsible adults. Maybe you stop it by having more stable and responsible adults armed so they can stop the shooting before it takes out two dozen people.
I'm devastated by the way those kindergarteners lost their lives. But the Second Amendment is not to blame. Actually, the willful destruction of the family is ultimately to blame. I think it is now up to people of faith to step up and change people's lives and minds one at a time until our country is once again the best civilization in the history of the planet.
Is it time to acquire a handgun? Maybe. If I can get a day off. But then I'd need to join a shooting range somewhere to become competent. Another day off or more. Then I'd need to get a concealed carry permit. Maybe more than a day off.
Days off are the hardest part these days. So I'll have to wait and see if and when I can acquire a means to protect myself and my family before the National Socialist in the White House orders all private firearms be confiscated, leaving us all without the means of protecting ourselves from the roving gangs that will spring up to endanger us.
In Connecticut a mentally disabled kid got hold of his Mom's guns then used them to kill her, the adults in the office at the elementary school, and a kindergarten class. The guns didn't cause the problem any more than the vehicle he used to drive to the school. The disturbed boy who invaded the school and shot so many innocent people was the problem.
Maybe instead of trying to control people by taking away their guns, sodas, french fries, and SUVs the government should try to stop mass shootings by mentally unstable people. Maybe by trying to make sure unstable people have the care and supervision they need. You don't stop the next mentally ill young man from going off his meds and shooting a bunch of people by taking firearms away from stable and responsible adults. Maybe you stop it by having more stable and responsible adults armed so they can stop the shooting before it takes out two dozen people.
I'm devastated by the way those kindergarteners lost their lives. But the Second Amendment is not to blame. Actually, the willful destruction of the family is ultimately to blame. I think it is now up to people of faith to step up and change people's lives and minds one at a time until our country is once again the best civilization in the history of the planet.
Telling Me I Should Support Obama
Somebody told me I should be an Obama supporter, not opponent or detractor. Because he's been good for my personal economy.
That's true, I'm busier than ever largely because of Obama's love for government regulation. Because I help companies comply with regulations every day. And boy do companies have piles of new regulations to which they must comply, and quickly.
I almost feel like an ancillary government employee without the health and pension benefits.
Clients are worried about the "fiscal cliff". They fear that massive new tax regulations will be passed with no notice, and may even be retroactive.
Sure, the idiots in Washington are capable of pulling that sort of kooky policy on America. But my personal analysis is that there are two scenarios that are most likely to play out at year end. I'm thinking the odds of the two options are about 50-50, although I'm leaning toward the second option being more likely.
Option 1: Boehner and Obama decide to join hands and jump off the cliff together. It means a return to Clinton-era tax policy. Most likely companies will be told after they've already issued their first payroll of 2013. Those companies are just hoping they're not forced to adjust their employees' next paychecks to collect the extra taxes. What is certain to happen under this scenario is angry phone calls from employees into every company's payroll department, asking why his or her net pay is so much lower than it was in December?! The media of course will tell them it's the Republicans fault, because they refused to compromise with the President.
Option 2: Nothing happens. Congress passes the buck by passing a bill that keeps all tax rates exactly as they are today, setting a new deadline 3 or 6 months out. So no scrambling to get new rates in the payroll systems, and no need to worry about retroactive tax collections. But the fight will go on. And on, and on, and on ....
Strangely, I always thought "Compromise" meant that in order for one side to get what he wants (i.e. tax rates higher for the "rich"), he offers something the other side wants in return (i.e. cutting some spending, or relaxing bans on energy development).
But Obama's definition seems to be, "I get what I want. I give you nothing. I won. You lost". So unless the GOP Representatives suddenly have their privates surgically removed, no deal is possible. Therefore, a binary choice - jump off the cliff or pitch a tent at the cliff's edge and keep arguing for a few more months.
That's true, I'm busier than ever largely because of Obama's love for government regulation. Because I help companies comply with regulations every day. And boy do companies have piles of new regulations to which they must comply, and quickly.
I almost feel like an ancillary government employee without the health and pension benefits.
Clients are worried about the "fiscal cliff". They fear that massive new tax regulations will be passed with no notice, and may even be retroactive.
Sure, the idiots in Washington are capable of pulling that sort of kooky policy on America. But my personal analysis is that there are two scenarios that are most likely to play out at year end. I'm thinking the odds of the two options are about 50-50, although I'm leaning toward the second option being more likely.
Option 1: Boehner and Obama decide to join hands and jump off the cliff together. It means a return to Clinton-era tax policy. Most likely companies will be told after they've already issued their first payroll of 2013. Those companies are just hoping they're not forced to adjust their employees' next paychecks to collect the extra taxes. What is certain to happen under this scenario is angry phone calls from employees into every company's payroll department, asking why his or her net pay is so much lower than it was in December?! The media of course will tell them it's the Republicans fault, because they refused to compromise with the President.
Option 2: Nothing happens. Congress passes the buck by passing a bill that keeps all tax rates exactly as they are today, setting a new deadline 3 or 6 months out. So no scrambling to get new rates in the payroll systems, and no need to worry about retroactive tax collections. But the fight will go on. And on, and on, and on ....
Strangely, I always thought "Compromise" meant that in order for one side to get what he wants (i.e. tax rates higher for the "rich"), he offers something the other side wants in return (i.e. cutting some spending, or relaxing bans on energy development).
But Obama's definition seems to be, "I get what I want. I give you nothing. I won. You lost". So unless the GOP Representatives suddenly have their privates surgically removed, no deal is possible. Therefore, a binary choice - jump off the cliff or pitch a tent at the cliff's edge and keep arguing for a few more months.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
More NFL Racist Idiocy
How long must we continue to endure this ongoing display of stupidity among racist sports commentators? ESPN hired Rush Limbaugh to add the controversial spice he could bring to their NFL studio show. Then they fired him after the second show of the season, calling his comment that Donovan McNabb was overrated because of the media's obsession with building up black quarterback racist.
Whether Rush's commet was racist is debatable. But now after Bob Costas makes a racist observation that black NFL athletes shouldn't be allowed to own firearms comes Robert Parker, who vents his frustration over his perception that Robert Griffin III is not authentically black.
OK, as a white guy I'm completely ignorant about the lingo. I really don't know what "Cornball Brother" means. But I can figure out what Parker was getting at, that RGIII isn't "down for the cause". Why, he may even be a *gasp* Republican!
RGIII actually responded to a reporter's question about his race by saying that race isn't how he wishes to be defined, but by his character and accomplishments. Very mature, reasoned, and M. L. King-like, I'd say.
My belief about race relations is that the ultimate goal is that we can someday become a color-blind society. But apparently the goal for folks like Parker sounds more like black separatism with dictatorial leadership enforcing conformity of thought and belief among everyone who happens to have a certain skin pigment.
Whether it's Parker trashing RGIII for not being black enough, or the rest of the ESPN commentators destroying Tim Tebow for being openly Christian, I'm getting tired of it all.
Sportscasters and commentators on ESPN, NBC, CBS, FOX, or anywhere, I'm pleading with you! Please just stop with the social commentary, you're not smart enough for it. Just stick to the game and get out of politics, please. RGIII is an exciting rookie quarterback who plays for the Washington Redskins. End of story. Tim Tebow's a backup quarterback for the Jets. End of story. When either guy plays, talk about how they played like you would any other player. Leave it at that.
I'm weary of all the racist talk, as well as the anti-Christian talk. Just cover the games and spare us the stupid social commentary.
Whether Rush's commet was racist is debatable. But now after Bob Costas makes a racist observation that black NFL athletes shouldn't be allowed to own firearms comes Robert Parker, who vents his frustration over his perception that Robert Griffin III is not authentically black.
OK, as a white guy I'm completely ignorant about the lingo. I really don't know what "Cornball Brother" means. But I can figure out what Parker was getting at, that RGIII isn't "down for the cause". Why, he may even be a *gasp* Republican!
RGIII actually responded to a reporter's question about his race by saying that race isn't how he wishes to be defined, but by his character and accomplishments. Very mature, reasoned, and M. L. King-like, I'd say.
My belief about race relations is that the ultimate goal is that we can someday become a color-blind society. But apparently the goal for folks like Parker sounds more like black separatism with dictatorial leadership enforcing conformity of thought and belief among everyone who happens to have a certain skin pigment.
Whether it's Parker trashing RGIII for not being black enough, or the rest of the ESPN commentators destroying Tim Tebow for being openly Christian, I'm getting tired of it all.
Sportscasters and commentators on ESPN, NBC, CBS, FOX, or anywhere, I'm pleading with you! Please just stop with the social commentary, you're not smart enough for it. Just stick to the game and get out of politics, please. RGIII is an exciting rookie quarterback who plays for the Washington Redskins. End of story. Tim Tebow's a backup quarterback for the Jets. End of story. When either guy plays, talk about how they played like you would any other player. Leave it at that.
I'm weary of all the racist talk, as well as the anti-Christian talk. Just cover the games and spare us the stupid social commentary.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
All Hold Hands and Jump!
Let's just get it over with. We can all join hands and jump off that Fiscal Cliff together. Why not?
The stalemate looks something like this: Obama will do no deal that doesn't include his tax increase on higher income earners. He also will agree to no discernable spending cuts.
Boehner is trying to negotiate increasing tax revenue by scaling back deductions. He's even hinted at a willingness to discuss a lower percentage increase or moving the income level higher for Obama's tax hike. But he is still insisting that Obama agree to cut some spending, somewhere.
So now we're hearing they're negotiating tiny fringe things like cutting COLA's on Social Security, which of course isn't a drop in the ocean.
Let's forget the whole thing and just let the automatic tax increases kick in. After all, that's what most honest Democrats admit they want to happen anyway. The people will get angry when they see that first 2013 pay stub, and the press will work overtime to tell them they need to be angry with Republicans, not Obama for that smaller check. So what?
Democrats own the narrative and Americans don't have a clue about what Republicans actually stand for, so what else will be new?
Republicans are being given a choice - give in to what Obama wants, or ... umm ... give in to what Obama wants. So I say they just refuse to play the game, thereby giving in to what Obama wants.
Oh Well.
The stalemate looks something like this: Obama will do no deal that doesn't include his tax increase on higher income earners. He also will agree to no discernable spending cuts.
Boehner is trying to negotiate increasing tax revenue by scaling back deductions. He's even hinted at a willingness to discuss a lower percentage increase or moving the income level higher for Obama's tax hike. But he is still insisting that Obama agree to cut some spending, somewhere.
So now we're hearing they're negotiating tiny fringe things like cutting COLA's on Social Security, which of course isn't a drop in the ocean.
Let's forget the whole thing and just let the automatic tax increases kick in. After all, that's what most honest Democrats admit they want to happen anyway. The people will get angry when they see that first 2013 pay stub, and the press will work overtime to tell them they need to be angry with Republicans, not Obama for that smaller check. So what?
Democrats own the narrative and Americans don't have a clue about what Republicans actually stand for, so what else will be new?
Republicans are being given a choice - give in to what Obama wants, or ... umm ... give in to what Obama wants. So I say they just refuse to play the game, thereby giving in to what Obama wants.
Oh Well.
Interesting Idea
This idea from Hinderaker is fascinating. He makes a very compelling case. Let's figure out how to make the low-information voters get just a bit more information. Or at least cut down on the misinformation they think they know.
Channel Surfing
Nothing on TV last night, so I turned it off and read a Kindle book.
But while channel surfing on my way to making the decision to abandon the tube in favor of the Kindle, this analogy popped into my head.
Two men, let's say John Boehner and Barack Obama, are having dinner in an expensive restaurant. Boehner suddenly realizes he doesn't have enough money to pay for the dinner and mentions the fact to Obama. Obama doesn't have enough either, but says "Don't worry, it will work out. I see Warren Buffet over there at a table in the corner; we'll just get him to cover us".
Boehner is uncomfortable with the idea. "Aren't you the least bit embarrassed at having to get somebody else to pay for dinner? I was raised to be responsible for myself".
So a negotiation ensues between the two. Boehner proposes choosing the cheapest entre on the menu, which he thinks they can almost afford. Obama insists on ordering the most expensive steak and lobster entre, then getting Warren to pick up the tab.
As the waiter waits impatiently, the negotiation continues until a compromise is reached. They'll cut the tip from 20 to 15 percent and get Warren to pay the rest of the shortfall. So the waiter is mad, Boehner is embarrassed, and Obama is clueless.
But Warren agrees to kick in only 5 bucks, leaving the two still short by about 100 dollars. They order, knowing that when they leave the restaurant they will have a big problem. They will leave owing the restaurant 100 bucks, that is if the restaurant allows them to leave and doesn't have them arrested or put them to work in the kitchen washing dishes.
That's what the current fiscal debate sounds like to me.
Back to the channel surfing:
Fox News was still on the union thug punching out one of their people. And the hypocritical press who like to do stories about the racist and violent Tea Party sans evidence completely ignores this story of actual violence.
MSNBC is bewailing the destruction of Labor Unions, claiming it's actually a destruction of the middle class. Ignoring of course the fact that unions are all but extinct in the private sector anyway. But that doesn't slow down their characterization of Right to Work laws as complete by and for the corporate fat cats.
On CNN, Piers Morgan's still obsessing over gun control.
Nobody is choosing to present the big picture. Maybe because it's not sensational enough to talk about budgets and deficits and debt.
I'd rather watch sports.
But while channel surfing on my way to making the decision to abandon the tube in favor of the Kindle, this analogy popped into my head.
Two men, let's say John Boehner and Barack Obama, are having dinner in an expensive restaurant. Boehner suddenly realizes he doesn't have enough money to pay for the dinner and mentions the fact to Obama. Obama doesn't have enough either, but says "Don't worry, it will work out. I see Warren Buffet over there at a table in the corner; we'll just get him to cover us".
Boehner is uncomfortable with the idea. "Aren't you the least bit embarrassed at having to get somebody else to pay for dinner? I was raised to be responsible for myself".
So a negotiation ensues between the two. Boehner proposes choosing the cheapest entre on the menu, which he thinks they can almost afford. Obama insists on ordering the most expensive steak and lobster entre, then getting Warren to pick up the tab.
As the waiter waits impatiently, the negotiation continues until a compromise is reached. They'll cut the tip from 20 to 15 percent and get Warren to pay the rest of the shortfall. So the waiter is mad, Boehner is embarrassed, and Obama is clueless.
But Warren agrees to kick in only 5 bucks, leaving the two still short by about 100 dollars. They order, knowing that when they leave the restaurant they will have a big problem. They will leave owing the restaurant 100 bucks, that is if the restaurant allows them to leave and doesn't have them arrested or put them to work in the kitchen washing dishes.
That's what the current fiscal debate sounds like to me.
Back to the channel surfing:
Fox News was still on the union thug punching out one of their people. And the hypocritical press who like to do stories about the racist and violent Tea Party sans evidence completely ignores this story of actual violence.
MSNBC is bewailing the destruction of Labor Unions, claiming it's actually a destruction of the middle class. Ignoring of course the fact that unions are all but extinct in the private sector anyway. But that doesn't slow down their characterization of Right to Work laws as complete by and for the corporate fat cats.
On CNN, Piers Morgan's still obsessing over gun control.
Nobody is choosing to present the big picture. Maybe because it's not sensational enough to talk about budgets and deficits and debt.
I'd rather watch sports.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Upside-Down
Wow. Politifact picked Romney for their "Lie of the Year". The article goes on to provide the actual facts of the matter, which prove he didn't lie. Or it was only a lie if you change his words to pretend he said Chrysler's new owners were "moving" jeep production to China. Inconveniently for them, that's not what he said. He said they were going to build jeeps in China, which according to the actual article is TRUE.
Given Obama's daily prevarications, this is Stalinesque.
Given Obama's daily prevarications, this is Stalinesque.
A Late Perspective on NFL Gun Drama
I wasn't going to comment on the murder-suicide committed by Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher. But Bob Costas' tone-deaf commentary on the incident set off my hypocrite alarm.
Bob blamed some kind of "gun culture" in the NFL for the incident, and claimed a belief that if Belcher hadn't had a gun, he and his girlfriend would still be alive.
So Bob seems to be saying that NFL football players, who are overwhelmingly black, should be denied their second amendment rights. For the race-hypersensitive Left, isn't that blatant racism? Certainly if conservatives can be called racist for pointing out that the family is the best solution for our problems. The racist charge comes because the highest percentage of unmarried mothers is found among black people. Consequently, shouldn't Costas be held to the same standard?
Where's the NAACP, marching on NBC and demanding Costas be fired for his racist comments? Where's the outrage over suggesting rather overtly that young black athletes are irresponsible young men who should not be allowed to own firearms?
Men killing their wives and girlfriends in fits of jealous rage is an unfortunate event that happens far too often among people of all colors. They don't need a gun to commit that crime. It's certainly not unique to NFL players, unless one wants to make the case that they are more prone to 'Roid Rage than the general population.
Incidents like this go beyond a sports commentator pretending to be some sort of sage that is somehow smarter and wiser than the rest of us. This is not just about an idiot sportscaster trying to jump into the arena of politics in the middle of a football game. We football fans don't like being dragged into another Left-Right debate on our entertainment time. Is there no longer any refuge from the constant political bickering?
Repealing the second amendment won't stop people from becoming murderously jealous of their romatic partners. Following Bob's logic, if Belcher didn't have access to a gun, would he have killed his girlfriend? I don't think there's a definitive answer to that question.
Can we all at least agree to keep sportscasters away from politics? As Laura Ingraham suggested in "Shut up and Sing", we don't want our politics and entertainment to mix. And just because somebody's pretty good at singing or acting or sportscasting doesn't mean we care to hear their political opinions.
Bob blamed some kind of "gun culture" in the NFL for the incident, and claimed a belief that if Belcher hadn't had a gun, he and his girlfriend would still be alive.
So Bob seems to be saying that NFL football players, who are overwhelmingly black, should be denied their second amendment rights. For the race-hypersensitive Left, isn't that blatant racism? Certainly if conservatives can be called racist for pointing out that the family is the best solution for our problems. The racist charge comes because the highest percentage of unmarried mothers is found among black people. Consequently, shouldn't Costas be held to the same standard?
Where's the NAACP, marching on NBC and demanding Costas be fired for his racist comments? Where's the outrage over suggesting rather overtly that young black athletes are irresponsible young men who should not be allowed to own firearms?
Men killing their wives and girlfriends in fits of jealous rage is an unfortunate event that happens far too often among people of all colors. They don't need a gun to commit that crime. It's certainly not unique to NFL players, unless one wants to make the case that they are more prone to 'Roid Rage than the general population.
Incidents like this go beyond a sports commentator pretending to be some sort of sage that is somehow smarter and wiser than the rest of us. This is not just about an idiot sportscaster trying to jump into the arena of politics in the middle of a football game. We football fans don't like being dragged into another Left-Right debate on our entertainment time. Is there no longer any refuge from the constant political bickering?
Repealing the second amendment won't stop people from becoming murderously jealous of their romatic partners. Following Bob's logic, if Belcher didn't have access to a gun, would he have killed his girlfriend? I don't think there's a definitive answer to that question.
Can we all at least agree to keep sportscasters away from politics? As Laura Ingraham suggested in "Shut up and Sing", we don't want our politics and entertainment to mix. And just because somebody's pretty good at singing or acting or sportscasting doesn't mean we care to hear their political opinions.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Being in the Minority
Suddenly I discovered I'm no longer a member of the majority in America. It's a bit disconcerting. I'm not referring to race, but if mine is not in the minority yet, it seems it will be soon.
I'm referring to those American values I used to believe were nearly universal. Only hippies and communists rejected them. Now the hippies have grown up and taken over, and we call them Democrats. Likewise communists.
So all this stuff going on I can't even understand, and am stunned that it's all taken seriously by a reported majority of Americans.
The debt/deficit problem can only be addressed with spending cuts and tax increases. But the media tells me that the majority says the answer is tax increases only, and only on the "rich". Defined as anybody that makes more than they do. Because somehow they came by their wealth dishonestly and deserve to have it taken away from them. I don't understand how it's justified to hammer people based on an arbitrary $200K earnings number that won't make a measurable difference. At least raising taxes on everybody would make a difference in the deficit we might notice.
Gay Marriage is now a fundamental human right. In my world, marriage is an institution we received from God for the purpose of building and maintaining families. It seems the majority has redefined it as all about sex. I don't understand the logic.
Illegal Immigrants are now just people who need to be welcomed with open arms. It doesn't matter that they broke the law to enter the country, often avail themselves of our generous welfare programs paid for by the rest of us, and commonly break laws against identity theft, driving without a license, etc. Why should America be the only country on the planet that must open up the borders to anybody who wants to come?
America's got the richest energy resources on the planet, including vast untapped reserves of oil, coal, and natural gas. But we're told the majority think those energy sources are dirty, and they've elected people who have essentially shut down development of those resources and forced us to import them from countries that hate us and hope to annihilate us someday.
Science is settled, not on Climate Change, but on human development. Babies are human when they're conceived. Aborting them is murder, plain and simple. But we have a president who would kill them even after they've been born alive, calling it 'honoring the mother's right to choose'. The majority allows the issue to be obscured by silly arguments over allowing the murder of children conceived through rape or incest, as if those represent most abortion cases. I don't get why we can't tell the truth about abortion without the hippies changing the subject.
We're assured that everything's just fine in the world due to the president's "smart" leadership. But all I see is country after country melting down into chaos and the middle east about to go nuclear. A clear failure in security and horrific bad judgement by the President and his Secretary of State led to an American Ambassador and a number of others being killed. The same President and Secretary chose to lie about what happened for a month after it happened, then angrily denounced those criticizing the obvious failures and lies as racists. And strangely that majority does not care.
Christianity is the religion that founded the nation. Now the majority holds Christianity in disdain, and supports driving all messages about the Gospel of Jesus Christ underground. Many in that disdainful majority rank the Christian faith above Islam as the most dangerous and violent faith on earth. Despite a total lack of supporting evidence.
So yes, I'm a minority. It's strange and confusing to suddenly discover the "majority" consider me some sort of racist-bigot-homophobe-teaparty rube.
In other words, the majority is insane. And America is becoming their asylum from which the sane can only hope to escape.
I'm referring to those American values I used to believe were nearly universal. Only hippies and communists rejected them. Now the hippies have grown up and taken over, and we call them Democrats. Likewise communists.
So all this stuff going on I can't even understand, and am stunned that it's all taken seriously by a reported majority of Americans.
The debt/deficit problem can only be addressed with spending cuts and tax increases. But the media tells me that the majority says the answer is tax increases only, and only on the "rich". Defined as anybody that makes more than they do. Because somehow they came by their wealth dishonestly and deserve to have it taken away from them. I don't understand how it's justified to hammer people based on an arbitrary $200K earnings number that won't make a measurable difference. At least raising taxes on everybody would make a difference in the deficit we might notice.
Gay Marriage is now a fundamental human right. In my world, marriage is an institution we received from God for the purpose of building and maintaining families. It seems the majority has redefined it as all about sex. I don't understand the logic.
Illegal Immigrants are now just people who need to be welcomed with open arms. It doesn't matter that they broke the law to enter the country, often avail themselves of our generous welfare programs paid for by the rest of us, and commonly break laws against identity theft, driving without a license, etc. Why should America be the only country on the planet that must open up the borders to anybody who wants to come?
America's got the richest energy resources on the planet, including vast untapped reserves of oil, coal, and natural gas. But we're told the majority think those energy sources are dirty, and they've elected people who have essentially shut down development of those resources and forced us to import them from countries that hate us and hope to annihilate us someday.
Science is settled, not on Climate Change, but on human development. Babies are human when they're conceived. Aborting them is murder, plain and simple. But we have a president who would kill them even after they've been born alive, calling it 'honoring the mother's right to choose'. The majority allows the issue to be obscured by silly arguments over allowing the murder of children conceived through rape or incest, as if those represent most abortion cases. I don't get why we can't tell the truth about abortion without the hippies changing the subject.
We're assured that everything's just fine in the world due to the president's "smart" leadership. But all I see is country after country melting down into chaos and the middle east about to go nuclear. A clear failure in security and horrific bad judgement by the President and his Secretary of State led to an American Ambassador and a number of others being killed. The same President and Secretary chose to lie about what happened for a month after it happened, then angrily denounced those criticizing the obvious failures and lies as racists. And strangely that majority does not care.
Christianity is the religion that founded the nation. Now the majority holds Christianity in disdain, and supports driving all messages about the Gospel of Jesus Christ underground. Many in that disdainful majority rank the Christian faith above Islam as the most dangerous and violent faith on earth. Despite a total lack of supporting evidence.
So yes, I'm a minority. It's strange and confusing to suddenly discover the "majority" consider me some sort of racist-bigot-homophobe-teaparty rube.
In other words, the majority is insane. And America is becoming their asylum from which the sane can only hope to escape.
Monday, December 10, 2012
Pleasant Distractions Continue
The good sports stories continued for Indiana teams over the weekend.
The Hoosiers continued to roll. The only question now is, who's going to finally beat this team? If there was an office pool on the question, I'd pick Michigan. Or maybe Illinois. Could it possibly be Butler next Saturday?
Indiana's soccer team won the national championship, although the lack of media coverage was disappointing.
Butler knocked off Northwestern.
Manti Te'o didn't get the Heisman, but that wasn't really a surprise. He was up against an anti-Notre Dame bias among the "elite" sports people, plus a Heisman bias that has always favored quarterbacks and running backs. Although Johnny Football seems like a great guy and a decent college quarterback, I'm not sure the freshman was the better choice over Te'o.
The Colts won again. The custodians at Lucas Oil must still be trying to clean up the stench from that first half performance yesterday. Bob Lamey had it about right when he called it "horrible". But the Colts just played better in the second half, mostly on defense, and grabbed the ugly and sort of boring victory. The stunning realization I had this morning is that if New England beats the Houston Texans tonight, that would give the Colts an actual shot at stealing the division championship.
As much as the Colts have overachieved this season, the possibility of a division title shouldn't be ruled out entirely.
It's a nice distraction from all the stupidity elsewhere. Liberals are getting ridiculous, pushing outrageous new communist ideas and saying stupid things. The entire "Fiscal Cliff" issue is disturbingly dishonest from nearly every aspect. If hiking the top tax rate to forty percent had even a chance of solving the massive deficit and debt problem, at least the argument would be worth considering. But it won't even make a tiny dent, and that dent gets even smaller as people change their behavior to avoid having to pay 40.
I'm rapidly losing respect for Boehner, who continues to play the Democrats' game. It's beyond me why he and the Republicans don't go out and push hard to sell their own solution to the economic and budgetary problems that are burying the country. Push a plan to cut spending and bring back a booming economy! Instead he talks about small ideas to close loopholes. OK as far as that goes, but we need to see a much bigger vision.
I'd rather continue to enjoy the distractions.
The Hoosiers continued to roll. The only question now is, who's going to finally beat this team? If there was an office pool on the question, I'd pick Michigan. Or maybe Illinois. Could it possibly be Butler next Saturday?
Indiana's soccer team won the national championship, although the lack of media coverage was disappointing.
Butler knocked off Northwestern.
Manti Te'o didn't get the Heisman, but that wasn't really a surprise. He was up against an anti-Notre Dame bias among the "elite" sports people, plus a Heisman bias that has always favored quarterbacks and running backs. Although Johnny Football seems like a great guy and a decent college quarterback, I'm not sure the freshman was the better choice over Te'o.
The Colts won again. The custodians at Lucas Oil must still be trying to clean up the stench from that first half performance yesterday. Bob Lamey had it about right when he called it "horrible". But the Colts just played better in the second half, mostly on defense, and grabbed the ugly and sort of boring victory. The stunning realization I had this morning is that if New England beats the Houston Texans tonight, that would give the Colts an actual shot at stealing the division championship.
As much as the Colts have overachieved this season, the possibility of a division title shouldn't be ruled out entirely.
It's a nice distraction from all the stupidity elsewhere. Liberals are getting ridiculous, pushing outrageous new communist ideas and saying stupid things. The entire "Fiscal Cliff" issue is disturbingly dishonest from nearly every aspect. If hiking the top tax rate to forty percent had even a chance of solving the massive deficit and debt problem, at least the argument would be worth considering. But it won't even make a tiny dent, and that dent gets even smaller as people change their behavior to avoid having to pay 40.
I'm rapidly losing respect for Boehner, who continues to play the Democrats' game. It's beyond me why he and the Republicans don't go out and push hard to sell their own solution to the economic and budgetary problems that are burying the country. Push a plan to cut spending and bring back a booming economy! Instead he talks about small ideas to close loopholes. OK as far as that goes, but we need to see a much bigger vision.
I'd rather continue to enjoy the distractions.
Friday, December 07, 2012
Red Dawn Movie
Wemt to see the remake of Red Dawn this week. The old one, with actors we got to know well in the years after its release, was based on the idea of what it might be like if the communists invaded. A group of teens became an insurgent group that fought a guerilla war against the invading Cubans, who were advised and supported by the Russians.
This time the invaders are North Koreans. They were originally going to be the Chinese, but substantial pressure was brought to bear on the producers by the offended Chinese, so they switched to the North Koreans. Supported once again by the Russians. Portland, Oregon took over ground zero from Colorado (I forget what town in Colorado it was supposed to be). This time the invaders made use of some sort of EMP weapon that shut down all communications to hamstring the US Military defenses.
Nick told me the reviews were very negative. I hadn't read any reviews before going to see the movie, so I just finished reading one. The negative review was not about the movie, but politics. The reviewer was derisive and dismissive over the very idea that communists might ever invade, therefore the movie (in his opinion) was a silly right-wing fantasy unworthy of attention.
I liked it. Not because I'm one of those right-wingers happily immersing myself in the fantasy of evil communist invaders. Because I thought it was a pretty good movie. Well scripted, beautifully shot, and even pretty well acted. And beyond the fact that the invaders were communists, there were no overt political messages in the movie.
Bad reviews ignored the qualities of the movie itself because the reviewers themselves are, well, Communists. Presumably they don't believe their friends from Russia and North Korea would ever actually invade America, because they don't have to. These folks are doing a fine job with the president of "transforming" America into a Socialist State, so there's no need to invade.
The original made a rather chilling point about gun control, depicting the invaders as seeking out the gun registration papers immediately after they arrived to identify and go round up all registered gun owners, then executing the ones who couldn't produce their firearms for confiscation. The new version didn't bother with anything like that.
I'd recommend the movie not for its patriotism or anti-communist themes, but for pure entertainment. Some arguments are going around the net about which version was better. I'm not participating in that argument. The two versions are different enough that they don't require comparison, and I enjoyed both.
This time the invaders are North Koreans. They were originally going to be the Chinese, but substantial pressure was brought to bear on the producers by the offended Chinese, so they switched to the North Koreans. Supported once again by the Russians. Portland, Oregon took over ground zero from Colorado (I forget what town in Colorado it was supposed to be). This time the invaders made use of some sort of EMP weapon that shut down all communications to hamstring the US Military defenses.
Nick told me the reviews were very negative. I hadn't read any reviews before going to see the movie, so I just finished reading one. The negative review was not about the movie, but politics. The reviewer was derisive and dismissive over the very idea that communists might ever invade, therefore the movie (in his opinion) was a silly right-wing fantasy unworthy of attention.
I liked it. Not because I'm one of those right-wingers happily immersing myself in the fantasy of evil communist invaders. Because I thought it was a pretty good movie. Well scripted, beautifully shot, and even pretty well acted. And beyond the fact that the invaders were communists, there were no overt political messages in the movie.
Bad reviews ignored the qualities of the movie itself because the reviewers themselves are, well, Communists. Presumably they don't believe their friends from Russia and North Korea would ever actually invade America, because they don't have to. These folks are doing a fine job with the president of "transforming" America into a Socialist State, so there's no need to invade.
The original made a rather chilling point about gun control, depicting the invaders as seeking out the gun registration papers immediately after they arrived to identify and go round up all registered gun owners, then executing the ones who couldn't produce their firearms for confiscation. The new version didn't bother with anything like that.
I'd recommend the movie not for its patriotism or anti-communist themes, but for pure entertainment. Some arguments are going around the net about which version was better. I'm not participating in that argument. The two versions are different enough that they don't require comparison, and I enjoyed both.
Tuesday, December 04, 2012
GOP Urged to Abandon "Social Conservatism"
"Social Conservatism" has become the metaphor for "Christianity". The Left says that religion is now irrelevant, and are convinced that as long as Republicans continue to support the Christian agenda, they'll never win national races again. Many establishment Republicans agree with them. With Mitt Romney's narrow loss this year, the Left, the GOP Establishment, and the Media are piling on the party to abandon the "Religious Right".
Interestingly, their argument is based on inflated themes on irrelevant questions. Mitt Romney was in part a victim of collateral damage when Senate candidates from Missouri and Indiana made some unfortunate blunders when answering "gotcha" questions about abortion. Both made statements about strongly-held beliefs that innocent human life should be protected that were distorted by Democrats to make them seem ignorant and out of touch.
Another common "gotcha" question that's a media favorite against Republicans is the one about the age of Planet Earth. Bible Literalists believe the earth's between 6 and 7 thousand years old, because that's what the Bible suggests in Genesis. The Left loves it when they get a conservative Christian to admit to holding something akin to that belief, because they can proceed to use it to bludgeon the entire party with the charge that they're flat earthers who ignore science.
My perspective is that Conservatives need to blunt all these attacks on their faith by refusing to play the game. I'd parry their "gotcha" questions like this:
"You don't have to be a religious person to understand that abortion is the willful execution of a human being. Why punish the innocent baby for the sins of her parents?"
"I don't know how old the earth is, I wasn't there. Why ask an irrelevant question about ancient history when there are so many substantive questions about here and now that need to be discussed?"
"It is an established fact that children raised in intact families with a mother and father who are responsible adults committed to each other are much more successful than children raised in single parent households. You don't have to be religious to acknowledge the societal benefits that result from a country that values families."
My advice to the GOP is don't abandon your Christian base and traditional values. Embrace us and be smart about your message and you will win.
Interestingly, their argument is based on inflated themes on irrelevant questions. Mitt Romney was in part a victim of collateral damage when Senate candidates from Missouri and Indiana made some unfortunate blunders when answering "gotcha" questions about abortion. Both made statements about strongly-held beliefs that innocent human life should be protected that were distorted by Democrats to make them seem ignorant and out of touch.
Another common "gotcha" question that's a media favorite against Republicans is the one about the age of Planet Earth. Bible Literalists believe the earth's between 6 and 7 thousand years old, because that's what the Bible suggests in Genesis. The Left loves it when they get a conservative Christian to admit to holding something akin to that belief, because they can proceed to use it to bludgeon the entire party with the charge that they're flat earthers who ignore science.
My perspective is that Conservatives need to blunt all these attacks on their faith by refusing to play the game. I'd parry their "gotcha" questions like this:
"You don't have to be a religious person to understand that abortion is the willful execution of a human being. Why punish the innocent baby for the sins of her parents?"
"I don't know how old the earth is, I wasn't there. Why ask an irrelevant question about ancient history when there are so many substantive questions about here and now that need to be discussed?"
"It is an established fact that children raised in intact families with a mother and father who are responsible adults committed to each other are much more successful than children raised in single parent households. You don't have to be religious to acknowledge the societal benefits that result from a country that values families."
My advice to the GOP is don't abandon your Christian base and traditional values. Embrace us and be smart about your message and you will win.
Monday, December 03, 2012
What Party Platform Promotes Breaking Ten Commandments?
Let's run it down quickly:
1. Don't have other gods before God. Which party promotes Government as God, and their President as the Messiah?
2. Don't Worship Graven Images. A bit tougher, but does one party tend to build more monuments to their leaders?
3. Honor your Parents. Hollywood cranks out movies and television shows every day depicting parents as clueless idiots. Which party dominates the political leanings of Hollywood? Which party thinks the Education System should take children away from their parents from infancy so they can indoctrinate them against the parents' old-fashioned and bigoted attitudes and faith?
4. Respect the Sabbath, Keep it Holy. Which party scoffs at everything Christian and will never darken the door of a Church? The don't work part of this commandment isn't really a fair indictment for a party that doesn't really think work is a value to be promoted.
5. Don't Curse in God's Name. Think of the crudest and most profane people you know, then think of which party they're most likely to favor. (Bill Maher, perhaps?)
6. Don't Murder. Which party stridently promotes the murder of infants, calling it "Choice"?
7. Don't Commit Adultery (ie, don't have sex with somebody else's spouse). Which party demands we ignore it when their leaders are guilty of this one?
8. Don't Lie. Which party's favorite president lies in every speech to the delight of his followers?
9. Don't Steal. Which party thinks it's their right to take others' property and give it to those who "need" it.
10. Don't Envy Others. Which party campaigned for the last 4 years on the idea that "rich" folks don't deserve to keep what they have and should be punished with high taxes?
See what I'm getting at? More than half of America now is dedicated to breaking each and every one of the 10 basic laws God gave Moses way back when. And they've turned their hostility toward God into a political movement!
Just think about it for awhile.
1. Don't have other gods before God. Which party promotes Government as God, and their President as the Messiah?
2. Don't Worship Graven Images. A bit tougher, but does one party tend to build more monuments to their leaders?
3. Honor your Parents. Hollywood cranks out movies and television shows every day depicting parents as clueless idiots. Which party dominates the political leanings of Hollywood? Which party thinks the Education System should take children away from their parents from infancy so they can indoctrinate them against the parents' old-fashioned and bigoted attitudes and faith?
4. Respect the Sabbath, Keep it Holy. Which party scoffs at everything Christian and will never darken the door of a Church? The don't work part of this commandment isn't really a fair indictment for a party that doesn't really think work is a value to be promoted.
5. Don't Curse in God's Name. Think of the crudest and most profane people you know, then think of which party they're most likely to favor. (Bill Maher, perhaps?)
6. Don't Murder. Which party stridently promotes the murder of infants, calling it "Choice"?
7. Don't Commit Adultery (ie, don't have sex with somebody else's spouse). Which party demands we ignore it when their leaders are guilty of this one?
8. Don't Lie. Which party's favorite president lies in every speech to the delight of his followers?
9. Don't Steal. Which party thinks it's their right to take others' property and give it to those who "need" it.
10. Don't Envy Others. Which party campaigned for the last 4 years on the idea that "rich" folks don't deserve to keep what they have and should be punished with high taxes?
See what I'm getting at? More than half of America now is dedicated to breaking each and every one of the 10 basic laws God gave Moses way back when. And they've turned their hostility toward God into a political movement!
Just think about it for awhile.
Thanks for the Distractions
My personal message to the Colts, Irish, Hoosiers, and Bulldogs:
THANKS!
Andrew Luck and the Colts, that comback and winning touchdown on the last play of the game yesterday was awesome!
Notre Dame, thanks for a great season. What a fantastic defense, led by the most deserving Heisman candidate this year despite the fact he's not a quarterback or running back or even receiver. Hope you get the trophy, Te'o.
The Indiana Hoosiers are finally back after wandering in the wilderness these many years after the silly firing of Bob Knight. Cody Zeller, I hope you lead your talented and athletic team all the way to the national championship this year. If the team doesn't quite make it all the way, I hope you forego that ridiculous contract that awaits you in the NBA and come back for one more shot at the title. The big question for now is, who's going to be the first team to defeat the #1 Hoosiers this season? I'm guessing a Big 10 team is going to trip the Hoosiers eventually. But just maybe this team's the one to repeat the 1976 perfect season.
Butler is making some noise. Great job beating the Tar Heels in Maui. The Bulldogs have added some nice new pieces to the team. The Atlantic 10 is going to be much tougher than Horizon ever was, so it will be a very difficult road to get back into the tournament. I don't expect another trip to the final game, but a Sweet 16 berth would sure be nice this year.
All of these Indiana teams are providing me a very pleasant distraction to the horrible news from the rest of the country and world.
Thanks to all of you!
THANKS!
Andrew Luck and the Colts, that comback and winning touchdown on the last play of the game yesterday was awesome!
Notre Dame, thanks for a great season. What a fantastic defense, led by the most deserving Heisman candidate this year despite the fact he's not a quarterback or running back or even receiver. Hope you get the trophy, Te'o.
The Indiana Hoosiers are finally back after wandering in the wilderness these many years after the silly firing of Bob Knight. Cody Zeller, I hope you lead your talented and athletic team all the way to the national championship this year. If the team doesn't quite make it all the way, I hope you forego that ridiculous contract that awaits you in the NBA and come back for one more shot at the title. The big question for now is, who's going to be the first team to defeat the #1 Hoosiers this season? I'm guessing a Big 10 team is going to trip the Hoosiers eventually. But just maybe this team's the one to repeat the 1976 perfect season.
Butler is making some noise. Great job beating the Tar Heels in Maui. The Bulldogs have added some nice new pieces to the team. The Atlantic 10 is going to be much tougher than Horizon ever was, so it will be a very difficult road to get back into the tournament. I don't expect another trip to the final game, but a Sweet 16 berth would sure be nice this year.
All of these Indiana teams are providing me a very pleasant distraction to the horrible news from the rest of the country and world.
Thanks to all of you!
Saturday, December 01, 2012
My Sentiments Well Stated
Count on Powerline for re-publishing a very timely letter. May I add my support to the writer's sentiments.
Thanks Kids!
Thanks Kids!
Friday, November 30, 2012
Really?
Just caught a bit of news about the president's latest "compromise" offer to Republicans on the so-called "Fiscal Cliff" negotiations.
OK, I won't raise the marginal rate above 35 percent on folks who make over $250K. I'll just charge them 30% on all earnings.
They may have been acting stupid since Romney lost what should have been a slam dunk election. But seriously! Even Boehner's not that stupid!
OK, I won't raise the marginal rate above 35 percent on folks who make over $250K. I'll just charge them 30% on all earnings.
They may have been acting stupid since Romney lost what should have been a slam dunk election. But seriously! Even Boehner's not that stupid!
On Unions
It has been rather fascinating to watch the liquidation of Hostess, which is claimed by the company to be directly caused by their unions' refusal to negotiate lower salaries, higher employee contributions to health insurance, and reduced pension benefits.
Sure, it is most likely true that the failure of the company to get those concessions from their unions pushed them over the edge. But I'd say that ultimately it wasn't the union that was responsible for Hostess' demise. It was Hostess' management team.
All the same, I found it a bit puzzling that the union chose unemployment for their members over concessions that would have kept them employed.
There's a consistent theme in the business world today. Globalization means that non-union companies, especially those operating in the far east, can produce goods much more cheaply than their US-based unionized competitors. So eventually, unless the US company can innovate proprietary technologies or processes that lower their costs in a way that offsets their fixed labor expenses, they will eventually have to close their US-based operations. Bankruptcy or moving operations offshore become companies' only available options.
So Hostess could have closed their plants, including the local plant here in Columbus, and open new plants in China or Taiwan. Probably not Mexico, because US companies tried Mexico back in the 90's and mostly had to rethink the decision because of the excessive corruption in the Mexican government that makes it nearly impossible to do business there.
One argument that may hold some water is that the union workers at Hostess should be grateful that the company tried so hard to keep their operations running here in the US, they ended up being bankrupted by lower-cost competitors. So their union workers kept their jobs much longer than most of their counterparts in other US-based manufacturing businesses.
Strikers picketing outside the Columbus plant were interviewed for The Republic. They seemed to think the company's threats of business closure were somehow just negotiating tactics. Even after the liquidation of the company was announced, the picketers kept at it for a few more days. Were they hoping somehow the company would suddenly announce, "OK, we were just kidding. Come back and negotiate with us so you can get back to work."
Now jobless union folks are griping about the size of the incentive bonuses being paid to Hostess managers that are staying on to help facilitate the sale and liquidation of company assets. That's a common practice, and while understandable that the bonuses seem excessive to $10-an-hour production workers, there's really nothing untoward happening there.
For years, whenever I walked past the Hostess rack in convenience stores I would marvel at their high prices. Usually there's a Little Debbie rack in the same store, where near-equivalent bakery snacks are priced at about half the Hostess offering. Unless one is addicted to Twinkies or Ho-Ho's, I can't figure out why they wouldn't just pick up the much cheaper Cloud Cakes or Swiss Rolls. That alone was enough evidence for me that Hostess' days had to be numbered.
So the bottom line for Hostess is that their management team failed to define and execute a strategy that would have kept the company competitive. But since the most likely result of such a strategy would have been to close the union plants and open replacement plants in places they didn't have to deal with unions, I can't envision a scenario that would have kept those folks employed without having to sacrifice their cadillac health plans or generous defined benefit pensions.
My take on unionism is perhaps a bit different from the typical Conservative Republican. They seem to despise unions, and view them as communist organizations bent on driving their employers out of business. I've worked for companies where I've heard management folks actually say out loud that if a union ever took over in their company they would lock the doors the very next day. Some business owners truly believe that by operating their business they are serving their communities and the workers they employ, so they are shocked and insulted when their workers choose to unionize.
I've had the fortunate opportunity to work inside hundreds of companies. Lately none of them have been unionized, as unions are mostly gone from everywhere except government and the big automakers.
Union shops are mostly crazy. The most visible craziness is found in the ridiculous work rules. They're so restrictive that companies have to get very creative just to get the job done. I have an old story about getting a light bulb replaced that I think is one of the best illustrations of the insanity of some union work rules.
Non-Union shops can at times be unfair or almost abusive to their employees. But even though I observe maltreatment of nonunion employees on occasion, they're generally the exception and not the rule.
Dad's story about how the union saved him from a terribly unfair abuse in his very first teaching job is a nice anecdote in favor of unionism. He got his public passenger license so he could earn extra money driving a school bus. But the school superintendent declared that while he would be assigned a bus route, he would not receive any compensation for it, as it would be considered just a part of his teaching responsibilities. Well, the union stepped in and forced the superintendent to pay him normal school bus driver wages for the additional job.
I also worked in a small cabinet manufacturer that was a union shop, but it was called a "House Union". The union was formed and organized by the company's management, and the plant General Manager actually led all the union meetings and set the agenda. Apparently it was a very effective strategy that protected the company from outside union organizers but gave the company a very compliant union.
My direct experiences lead me to these conclusions:
Right-to-Work: Support
Wisconsin's restrictions on the right of government unions to negotiate wages: Support
Card Check: Oppose
The bottom line for me is that I support the concept of employees banding together for the purpose of negotiating favorable compensation and working conditions. Managers who carp and complain about the union driving them into bankruptcy are a bit disingenuous, because in the end they agreed to the terms of the contract. It's the company's responsibility to negotiate contracts that do not put their survival at risk.
I also find the mob infiltration into the major unions unacceptable, and can't believe that law enforcement hasn't been able to clean up that corruption. I also think too many unions are built and managed for the benefit of those mobsters, rather than the members who are supposed to control their own union. Finally, it's ridiculous that many unions funnel far too much of union dues money into Democrat politicians' campaigns. If they want to influence legislation, they should do so through a PAC, not providing the primary financing for every Democrat candidate's campaign.
Sure, it is most likely true that the failure of the company to get those concessions from their unions pushed them over the edge. But I'd say that ultimately it wasn't the union that was responsible for Hostess' demise. It was Hostess' management team.
All the same, I found it a bit puzzling that the union chose unemployment for their members over concessions that would have kept them employed.
There's a consistent theme in the business world today. Globalization means that non-union companies, especially those operating in the far east, can produce goods much more cheaply than their US-based unionized competitors. So eventually, unless the US company can innovate proprietary technologies or processes that lower their costs in a way that offsets their fixed labor expenses, they will eventually have to close their US-based operations. Bankruptcy or moving operations offshore become companies' only available options.
So Hostess could have closed their plants, including the local plant here in Columbus, and open new plants in China or Taiwan. Probably not Mexico, because US companies tried Mexico back in the 90's and mostly had to rethink the decision because of the excessive corruption in the Mexican government that makes it nearly impossible to do business there.
One argument that may hold some water is that the union workers at Hostess should be grateful that the company tried so hard to keep their operations running here in the US, they ended up being bankrupted by lower-cost competitors. So their union workers kept their jobs much longer than most of their counterparts in other US-based manufacturing businesses.
Strikers picketing outside the Columbus plant were interviewed for The Republic. They seemed to think the company's threats of business closure were somehow just negotiating tactics. Even after the liquidation of the company was announced, the picketers kept at it for a few more days. Were they hoping somehow the company would suddenly announce, "OK, we were just kidding. Come back and negotiate with us so you can get back to work."
Now jobless union folks are griping about the size of the incentive bonuses being paid to Hostess managers that are staying on to help facilitate the sale and liquidation of company assets. That's a common practice, and while understandable that the bonuses seem excessive to $10-an-hour production workers, there's really nothing untoward happening there.
For years, whenever I walked past the Hostess rack in convenience stores I would marvel at their high prices. Usually there's a Little Debbie rack in the same store, where near-equivalent bakery snacks are priced at about half the Hostess offering. Unless one is addicted to Twinkies or Ho-Ho's, I can't figure out why they wouldn't just pick up the much cheaper Cloud Cakes or Swiss Rolls. That alone was enough evidence for me that Hostess' days had to be numbered.
So the bottom line for Hostess is that their management team failed to define and execute a strategy that would have kept the company competitive. But since the most likely result of such a strategy would have been to close the union plants and open replacement plants in places they didn't have to deal with unions, I can't envision a scenario that would have kept those folks employed without having to sacrifice their cadillac health plans or generous defined benefit pensions.
My take on unionism is perhaps a bit different from the typical Conservative Republican. They seem to despise unions, and view them as communist organizations bent on driving their employers out of business. I've worked for companies where I've heard management folks actually say out loud that if a union ever took over in their company they would lock the doors the very next day. Some business owners truly believe that by operating their business they are serving their communities and the workers they employ, so they are shocked and insulted when their workers choose to unionize.
I've had the fortunate opportunity to work inside hundreds of companies. Lately none of them have been unionized, as unions are mostly gone from everywhere except government and the big automakers.
Union shops are mostly crazy. The most visible craziness is found in the ridiculous work rules. They're so restrictive that companies have to get very creative just to get the job done. I have an old story about getting a light bulb replaced that I think is one of the best illustrations of the insanity of some union work rules.
Non-Union shops can at times be unfair or almost abusive to their employees. But even though I observe maltreatment of nonunion employees on occasion, they're generally the exception and not the rule.
Dad's story about how the union saved him from a terribly unfair abuse in his very first teaching job is a nice anecdote in favor of unionism. He got his public passenger license so he could earn extra money driving a school bus. But the school superintendent declared that while he would be assigned a bus route, he would not receive any compensation for it, as it would be considered just a part of his teaching responsibilities. Well, the union stepped in and forced the superintendent to pay him normal school bus driver wages for the additional job.
I also worked in a small cabinet manufacturer that was a union shop, but it was called a "House Union". The union was formed and organized by the company's management, and the plant General Manager actually led all the union meetings and set the agenda. Apparently it was a very effective strategy that protected the company from outside union organizers but gave the company a very compliant union.
My direct experiences lead me to these conclusions:
Right-to-Work: Support
Wisconsin's restrictions on the right of government unions to negotiate wages: Support
Card Check: Oppose
The bottom line for me is that I support the concept of employees banding together for the purpose of negotiating favorable compensation and working conditions. Managers who carp and complain about the union driving them into bankruptcy are a bit disingenuous, because in the end they agreed to the terms of the contract. It's the company's responsibility to negotiate contracts that do not put their survival at risk.
I also find the mob infiltration into the major unions unacceptable, and can't believe that law enforcement hasn't been able to clean up that corruption. I also think too many unions are built and managed for the benefit of those mobsters, rather than the members who are supposed to control their own union. Finally, it's ridiculous that many unions funnel far too much of union dues money into Democrat politicians' campaigns. If they want to influence legislation, they should do so through a PAC, not providing the primary financing for every Democrat candidate's campaign.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Who Cares?
After the election I lost interest in politics. Last night's Indiana blowout of North Carolina was much more interesting to me than any talk radio or blogs or articles.
They're all atwitter about the "Fiscal Cliff". *YAWN*. So what? I'd rather see the pre-Bush tax rates come back January 1st and let the Democrats and their media sycophants beat the drum about the nasty Republicans who refused to "compromise". Their definition of the word means "compromise your principles", not "find common ground".
All Republicans need to do is stand up and tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may. The House should pass the best possible bill that truly puts us on the path to solving the debt problems while stimulating the economy and tamping down the overreaching federal bureaucracy. Send it to the Senate and tell them, "Let us know when you want to get serious and talk about our bill".
I know, won't ever happen. Ergo, why care?
The USA had a chance to rescue ourselves from an incompetent narcissist who wants to be dictator, but there weren't enough informed and responsible voters to accomplish that. So he continues to shred the Constitution, and commit egregious acts of corruption and lawbreaking (read: Benghazi, Fast & Furious). And the country doesn't care.
Because it's racist and unpatriotic to point out such things. Here's a news flash for those of you who think we conservatives oppose the President only because of his race: No, we oppose him because he's lawless, incompetent, and is pushing hard for policies that have destroyed America as the free and prosperous place we used to know.
So I'll root for my favorite teams and try to make a living despite the government pickpockets. Unless and until there's a leader who emerges who actually proposes solutions to problems that would actually work and has the courage to step up and force the issue, I'm out.
They're all atwitter about the "Fiscal Cliff". *YAWN*. So what? I'd rather see the pre-Bush tax rates come back January 1st and let the Democrats and their media sycophants beat the drum about the nasty Republicans who refused to "compromise". Their definition of the word means "compromise your principles", not "find common ground".
All Republicans need to do is stand up and tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may. The House should pass the best possible bill that truly puts us on the path to solving the debt problems while stimulating the economy and tamping down the overreaching federal bureaucracy. Send it to the Senate and tell them, "Let us know when you want to get serious and talk about our bill".
I know, won't ever happen. Ergo, why care?
The USA had a chance to rescue ourselves from an incompetent narcissist who wants to be dictator, but there weren't enough informed and responsible voters to accomplish that. So he continues to shred the Constitution, and commit egregious acts of corruption and lawbreaking (read: Benghazi, Fast & Furious). And the country doesn't care.
Because it's racist and unpatriotic to point out such things. Here's a news flash for those of you who think we conservatives oppose the President only because of his race: No, we oppose him because he's lawless, incompetent, and is pushing hard for policies that have destroyed America as the free and prosperous place we used to know.
So I'll root for my favorite teams and try to make a living despite the government pickpockets. Unless and until there's a leader who emerges who actually proposes solutions to problems that would actually work and has the courage to step up and force the issue, I'm out.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Another Good Football Weekend
Notre Dame Football is back! After knocking off SoCal, they've got a ticket to the National Championship in Miami against whichever team survives the remaining conference championship games. Alabama seems most likely.
I'm making no predictions for the victor in that game. But the Irish confirmed that their greatest strength is their defense. That's a big turnaround, given that defense has been their greatest weakness over the past several years. The Irish offense is decent, especially with the running game. Everett Golston's done a good job managing the offense this season. He's a decent but not great passer and has pretty good speed and elusiveness. But the real strength of the Irish offense is its offensive line. Those guys can manhandle just about anybody.
How they'll do against Alabama remains to be seen.
The Colts got to 7-4 today. Great for them. It was a dull game against the Bills with neither team able to get much done offensively. I still believe the Colts don't have the defense or the rushing game to get out of the first round of the playoffs, but that takes nothing away from the fact that they've overachieved impressively this season with their roster full of rookies.
The Indiana High School championships weren't very dramatic. Not really any surprises. The Catholics won 4 of 5. The only reason they didn't win the 5th was because they didn't have any high schools big enough to qualify for the 5A class. That gets fixed next year, when Cathedral moves up from 4A to 5A.
It was sort of unfortunate for Indiana that they fell apart in the fourth quarter of what was a very competitive Oaken Bucket game against Purdue. Maybe someday the Hoosiers will field a competitive football team. In the meantime we'll just enjoy following Cody Zeller and the #1 basketball team in the nation.
I'm making no predictions for the victor in that game. But the Irish confirmed that their greatest strength is their defense. That's a big turnaround, given that defense has been their greatest weakness over the past several years. The Irish offense is decent, especially with the running game. Everett Golston's done a good job managing the offense this season. He's a decent but not great passer and has pretty good speed and elusiveness. But the real strength of the Irish offense is its offensive line. Those guys can manhandle just about anybody.
How they'll do against Alabama remains to be seen.
The Colts got to 7-4 today. Great for them. It was a dull game against the Bills with neither team able to get much done offensively. I still believe the Colts don't have the defense or the rushing game to get out of the first round of the playoffs, but that takes nothing away from the fact that they've overachieved impressively this season with their roster full of rookies.
The Indiana High School championships weren't very dramatic. Not really any surprises. The Catholics won 4 of 5. The only reason they didn't win the 5th was because they didn't have any high schools big enough to qualify for the 5A class. That gets fixed next year, when Cathedral moves up from 4A to 5A.
It was sort of unfortunate for Indiana that they fell apart in the fourth quarter of what was a very competitive Oaken Bucket game against Purdue. Maybe someday the Hoosiers will field a competitive football team. In the meantime we'll just enjoy following Cody Zeller and the #1 basketball team in the nation.
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
A Good Evening
A fortunate coincidence meant I was able to catch my two favorite college basketball teams back-to-back on ESPN last night.
The Butler Bulldogs caught North Carolina flat-footed and unprepared in the first game. The Bulldogs dominated well into the second half before the more athletic Tar Heels woke up and took charge. But the 29 point hole Butler put them in was too much to overcome. I was nervous when UNC closed the gap to only 6 points, but Butler hit their free throws down the stretch to seal the victory.
Indiana was in a battle against Georgetown in the late game that was close throughout. The Hoosiers were able to open a 5 point lead late in the game, but the Hoyas chose to foul freshman Yogi Ferrell, who accomodated them by missing his free throws. That allowed Georgetown to achieve a tie at the end of regulation. But three Hoya starters fouled out and Indiana cruised to a win in the overtime period.
I can't think of a more entertaining way to spend an evening, except perhaps being able to see the two games from a lower-level seat inside the arena.
Happy Thanksgiving!
The Butler Bulldogs caught North Carolina flat-footed and unprepared in the first game. The Bulldogs dominated well into the second half before the more athletic Tar Heels woke up and took charge. But the 29 point hole Butler put them in was too much to overcome. I was nervous when UNC closed the gap to only 6 points, but Butler hit their free throws down the stretch to seal the victory.
Indiana was in a battle against Georgetown in the late game that was close throughout. The Hoosiers were able to open a 5 point lead late in the game, but the Hoyas chose to foul freshman Yogi Ferrell, who accomodated them by missing his free throws. That allowed Georgetown to achieve a tie at the end of regulation. But three Hoya starters fouled out and Indiana cruised to a win in the overtime period.
I can't think of a more entertaining way to spend an evening, except perhaps being able to see the two games from a lower-level seat inside the arena.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
The Frustration of Powerlessness
The nearest analogy to what I'm feeling these days goes something like this:
I'm a passenger on a train that's leaving the station. Somehow I have received direct knowledge that the trestle over a canyon about 100 miles ahead has been destroyed. I know that the train is certain to fall into the canyon when it reaches the missing bridge. I've tried everything I can to convince my fellow passengers to join me in warning our conductor and chief engineer so they can take steps to avoid the disaster.
But the passengers are partying and don't want to hear my warnings. They question my source, and tell me there's nothing to worry about - I'm just being a chicken little. The conductors are deaf to my pleas, and the engineer is isolated up in the engine and unable to hear or understand anything from his trainload of passengers.
So now I'm just riding along, knowing the disaster that's coming but unable to do anything about it.
Likewise we're facing an economic disaster and a major war in the middle east that will do significant harm to everyone. All the while our engineer (read President) holds extravagant parties in the Ivory Tower where he and his friends are entertained by famous celebrity musicians and actors, all the while implementing his vision of a utopian socialist society where nobody's rich but most everybody else (except him and his friends) is poor.
The fuse is lit in Gaza, the debt is guaranteed to exceed 20 Trillion dollars, and American companies are laying off employees, canceling projects, closing their doors or moving to more welcoming places. All while the ignorant citizenry loses large chunks of their wealth every year but still worship the charismatic engineer.
My only option for survival is to seek an opportunity to jump off the train before it reaches the canyon. But then the question will be, "Now What?".
I'm a passenger on a train that's leaving the station. Somehow I have received direct knowledge that the trestle over a canyon about 100 miles ahead has been destroyed. I know that the train is certain to fall into the canyon when it reaches the missing bridge. I've tried everything I can to convince my fellow passengers to join me in warning our conductor and chief engineer so they can take steps to avoid the disaster.
But the passengers are partying and don't want to hear my warnings. They question my source, and tell me there's nothing to worry about - I'm just being a chicken little. The conductors are deaf to my pleas, and the engineer is isolated up in the engine and unable to hear or understand anything from his trainload of passengers.
So now I'm just riding along, knowing the disaster that's coming but unable to do anything about it.
Likewise we're facing an economic disaster and a major war in the middle east that will do significant harm to everyone. All the while our engineer (read President) holds extravagant parties in the Ivory Tower where he and his friends are entertained by famous celebrity musicians and actors, all the while implementing his vision of a utopian socialist society where nobody's rich but most everybody else (except him and his friends) is poor.
The fuse is lit in Gaza, the debt is guaranteed to exceed 20 Trillion dollars, and American companies are laying off employees, canceling projects, closing their doors or moving to more welcoming places. All while the ignorant citizenry loses large chunks of their wealth every year but still worship the charismatic engineer.
My only option for survival is to seek an opportunity to jump off the train before it reaches the canyon. But then the question will be, "Now What?".
Monday, November 19, 2012
Big Football Weekend
The results weren't what I'd hoped for, but the weekend before Thanksgiving was typically eventful. High School and Professional games were disappointing, but College was satisfying.
I found the Class 4A Semistate game on the radio while driving home from the Indy airport. Columbus East was driving toward a touchdown that would have narrowed the deficit to a single touchdown. But the drive ran into a Cathedral wall, and the possession changed to the visitors. Cathedral proceeded to drive the other way for a quick touchdown of their own. By the time I got home, the game was over. The fourth quarter had only just begun, but Cathedral had already inserted their backup players to play out the clock.
The Columbus East team hadn't been challenged by any opponent since they needed a dramatic fourth quarter comeback to defeat crosstown rival Columbus North the second game of the se.ason.
But the Cathedral team is simply in another class, a fact recognized by the IHSAA, which has decided to promote the Indianapolis Catholic School to class 5A next season. That decision will presumably open a clearer path for next year's Columbus East squad, which has most of its key players from this season returning. Should East make it to Lucas Oil Stadium next Thanksgiving, will the long hoped for accomplishment be somewhat diminished by the knowledge that the championship was obtained without the need to overcome Cathedral.
Notre Dame won easily over Wake Forest on Senior Day, which wasn't unexpected. Then Oregon and Kansas State both lost, paving the way for the Irish to take over the #1 ranking in College Football. What makes it most interesting is that Notre Dame must earn a spot in the bowl game for the national championship by defeating their nemesis, USC. The Irish haven't beaten the west coast school in several years, and have to know they're going to need their best game to do it this year. If Notre Dame plays for the national championship, everyone will have to acknowledge they certainly earned the bid.
Predicting a blowout of the Colts by the Patriots wasn't something I did casually. My blowout prediction fell short of reality, as I only figured on a 45-14 score. My prediction was based on knowledge that the Colts defense isn't really that much improved over the last few years. The Colt defense was incapable of stopping Tom Brady and Rob Gronkowski last year, and I saw no reason they'd be able to stop them this year.
Even though it's been fun following the overachieving class of Colts rookies this season, clearly they've benefited from a soft schedule. I don't know if they can beat the Buffalo Bills, but they still have a reasonable shot at a wild-card berth in the playoffs. Making the playoffs will certainly qualify as a major accomplishment for this group, but getting past that wild-card game is highly unlikely.
Fans should not blame Andrew Luck. Peyton Manning would likely have had the same result on Sunday. Neither Luck nor Manning play defense.
I found the Class 4A Semistate game on the radio while driving home from the Indy airport. Columbus East was driving toward a touchdown that would have narrowed the deficit to a single touchdown. But the drive ran into a Cathedral wall, and the possession changed to the visitors. Cathedral proceeded to drive the other way for a quick touchdown of their own. By the time I got home, the game was over. The fourth quarter had only just begun, but Cathedral had already inserted their backup players to play out the clock.
The Columbus East team hadn't been challenged by any opponent since they needed a dramatic fourth quarter comeback to defeat crosstown rival Columbus North the second game of the se.ason.
But the Cathedral team is simply in another class, a fact recognized by the IHSAA, which has decided to promote the Indianapolis Catholic School to class 5A next season. That decision will presumably open a clearer path for next year's Columbus East squad, which has most of its key players from this season returning. Should East make it to Lucas Oil Stadium next Thanksgiving, will the long hoped for accomplishment be somewhat diminished by the knowledge that the championship was obtained without the need to overcome Cathedral.
Notre Dame won easily over Wake Forest on Senior Day, which wasn't unexpected. Then Oregon and Kansas State both lost, paving the way for the Irish to take over the #1 ranking in College Football. What makes it most interesting is that Notre Dame must earn a spot in the bowl game for the national championship by defeating their nemesis, USC. The Irish haven't beaten the west coast school in several years, and have to know they're going to need their best game to do it this year. If Notre Dame plays for the national championship, everyone will have to acknowledge they certainly earned the bid.
Predicting a blowout of the Colts by the Patriots wasn't something I did casually. My blowout prediction fell short of reality, as I only figured on a 45-14 score. My prediction was based on knowledge that the Colts defense isn't really that much improved over the last few years. The Colt defense was incapable of stopping Tom Brady and Rob Gronkowski last year, and I saw no reason they'd be able to stop them this year.
Even though it's been fun following the overachieving class of Colts rookies this season, clearly they've benefited from a soft schedule. I don't know if they can beat the Buffalo Bills, but they still have a reasonable shot at a wild-card berth in the playoffs. Making the playoffs will certainly qualify as a major accomplishment for this group, but getting past that wild-card game is highly unlikely.
Fans should not blame Andrew Luck. Peyton Manning would likely have had the same result on Sunday. Neither Luck nor Manning play defense.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Civil Behavior
There is no doubt we've lost a lot of basic civility in my lifetime. There are many examples I've been thinking about lately that illustrate not just impoliteness and incivility, but also extending to unethical and immoral behavior.
Who hasn't had the experience with rude drivers on the interstate? The most common is the aggressive driver that speeds to your bumper in the left lane while you're moving past a slower truck or a string of slower vehicles. The aggressive driver tries to intimidate you by accelerating so close to your rear bumper that you fear she's about to ram you.
As we're wrapping up orange barrel season, I have noticed the behavior of aggressive drivers when the barrels funnel traffic into a single lane. They pull into the breakdown lane and drive past all of the waiting vehicles to the front of the line. Some will even pull into the grass to get around everyone else. These are individuals who believe they're more important than everyone else, and in their self-centered minds making it to their appointment on time is much more vital to the survival of the world than the mundane destinations the rest of us are trying to reach.
McDonalds has a creative new drive-through line designed to speed up service for those who want to grab a meal on the run. The drive-through line is single-file until it reaches the ordering kiosks, where it splits into 2 lanes. Some inconsiderate people have discovered that they can jump the line by driving past all the cars in the single-file line, then nosing into the outside ordering lane. I've seen that behavior result in angry shouts from somone in line who was jumped in front of by the cheating customer, horns blown, and even attempts of some in line to block the line jumper with their car. The offender's reaction is mostly to ignore the objectors, but a couple of times I've seen a middle finger salute.
Years ago I attended a conference session about recruiting the best people to come to work for your company. She suggested an interview strategy involving having the candidate drive the interviewer somewhere, preferably in a big city during rush hour. In her world, the most aggressive driver, one who speeds, violates traffic laws, uses the breakdown lane, cuts people off, or otherwise uses overly aggressive tactics to get to the destination sooner is the best candidate. Somehow she suggested that you want to hire these kinds of people, because they're hard drivers who will get things done. Needless to say, I was not impressed.
Certain cities are worse than others in these respects. My worst experiences have been in the NorthEast. My best experiences with civil and polite folks are always in the south. Increasingly I get a sense the incivility is spreading.
Who hasn't had the experience with rude drivers on the interstate? The most common is the aggressive driver that speeds to your bumper in the left lane while you're moving past a slower truck or a string of slower vehicles. The aggressive driver tries to intimidate you by accelerating so close to your rear bumper that you fear she's about to ram you.
As we're wrapping up orange barrel season, I have noticed the behavior of aggressive drivers when the barrels funnel traffic into a single lane. They pull into the breakdown lane and drive past all of the waiting vehicles to the front of the line. Some will even pull into the grass to get around everyone else. These are individuals who believe they're more important than everyone else, and in their self-centered minds making it to their appointment on time is much more vital to the survival of the world than the mundane destinations the rest of us are trying to reach.
McDonalds has a creative new drive-through line designed to speed up service for those who want to grab a meal on the run. The drive-through line is single-file until it reaches the ordering kiosks, where it splits into 2 lanes. Some inconsiderate people have discovered that they can jump the line by driving past all the cars in the single-file line, then nosing into the outside ordering lane. I've seen that behavior result in angry shouts from somone in line who was jumped in front of by the cheating customer, horns blown, and even attempts of some in line to block the line jumper with their car. The offender's reaction is mostly to ignore the objectors, but a couple of times I've seen a middle finger salute.
Years ago I attended a conference session about recruiting the best people to come to work for your company. She suggested an interview strategy involving having the candidate drive the interviewer somewhere, preferably in a big city during rush hour. In her world, the most aggressive driver, one who speeds, violates traffic laws, uses the breakdown lane, cuts people off, or otherwise uses overly aggressive tactics to get to the destination sooner is the best candidate. Somehow she suggested that you want to hire these kinds of people, because they're hard drivers who will get things done. Needless to say, I was not impressed.
Certain cities are worse than others in these respects. My worst experiences have been in the NorthEast. My best experiences with civil and polite folks are always in the south. Increasingly I get a sense the incivility is spreading.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Twilight Zone
The media loves the Petraeus scandal only for its voyeuristic qualities. Yet they exhibit no curiosity about how the scandal ties into the Benghazi massacre. Only a few minutes with CNN this morning showed me the depths of media insanity; The CNN reporter and anchorette spent their segment discussing Benghazi poking fun at, guess who, Republicans!
The CNN folks think it's hilarious that silly Republicans are imagining bizarre conspiracy theories linking the Petraeus sex scandal and Benghazi. Of course they show not a hint of curiosity about why President Obama sent out Susan Rice to weave the false narrative about Benghazi happening as a spontaneous demonstration.
They ignore the facts that can't be disputed about the incident, from the fact everybody in government knew the demonstration story was false before Rice ever appeared on the first Sunday show. That whenever a reporter (never one from CNN) has the gall to ask Obama a question about Benghazi, his only answer is something like:
The perpetrators will be brought to justice
and
An internal investigation will bring all the facts to light.
No disclosure of how the first will be accomplished, nor who's been assigned to run the investigation. No explanation of why it takes an internal investigation to find out what Obama already knows, considering he's the one giving the orders.
So Charles Krauthammer said that Petraeus repeated the false line about the spontaneous demonstration back in September because the Obama adminstration already knew about his affair and was threatening to make it public and ruin his career if he didn't toe the company line. But the day after the election they figured they didn't need that leverage anymore and just went ahead and destroyed him anyway. Did Charles get that information from somebody who knew, or did he merely draw a conclusion from available information?
Theoretically we'll find out when Petraeus shows up to testify in front of Congress. What I can't figure out is what he's actually going to tell them. Its hard to believe Obama would allow him to expose the White House's malfeasance - I sort of think he's assassinate Petraeus first. So either Petraeus is still somehow compromised and unable to testify to the truth, or he'll simply refuse to answer the questions come Friday.
Because there's no other logical explanation for Benghazi than the President ordered the rescuers to stand down, then was the source or at least approved the false narrative on the cause, then sent Susan Rice out to spin the false story, and has been actively suppressing all attempts to learn the truth ever since. No way does he let Petraeus tell the truth on Friday.
And the media remains clueless and incurious.
The CNN folks think it's hilarious that silly Republicans are imagining bizarre conspiracy theories linking the Petraeus sex scandal and Benghazi. Of course they show not a hint of curiosity about why President Obama sent out Susan Rice to weave the false narrative about Benghazi happening as a spontaneous demonstration.
They ignore the facts that can't be disputed about the incident, from the fact everybody in government knew the demonstration story was false before Rice ever appeared on the first Sunday show. That whenever a reporter (never one from CNN) has the gall to ask Obama a question about Benghazi, his only answer is something like:
The perpetrators will be brought to justice
and
An internal investigation will bring all the facts to light.
No disclosure of how the first will be accomplished, nor who's been assigned to run the investigation. No explanation of why it takes an internal investigation to find out what Obama already knows, considering he's the one giving the orders.
So Charles Krauthammer said that Petraeus repeated the false line about the spontaneous demonstration back in September because the Obama adminstration already knew about his affair and was threatening to make it public and ruin his career if he didn't toe the company line. But the day after the election they figured they didn't need that leverage anymore and just went ahead and destroyed him anyway. Did Charles get that information from somebody who knew, or did he merely draw a conclusion from available information?
Theoretically we'll find out when Petraeus shows up to testify in front of Congress. What I can't figure out is what he's actually going to tell them. Its hard to believe Obama would allow him to expose the White House's malfeasance - I sort of think he's assassinate Petraeus first. So either Petraeus is still somehow compromised and unable to testify to the truth, or he'll simply refuse to answer the questions come Friday.
Because there's no other logical explanation for Benghazi than the President ordered the rescuers to stand down, then was the source or at least approved the false narrative on the cause, then sent Susan Rice out to spin the false story, and has been actively suppressing all attempts to learn the truth ever since. No way does he let Petraeus tell the truth on Friday.
And the media remains clueless and incurious.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Here We Go
68 new regulations per day.
Hundreds of companies announce layoffs.
Stock Market tumbles 300 points day after Obama is re-elected.
Investors dump stocks in anticipation of Tax Increases.
ObamaCare full implementation now assured. Majority of Americans Unaware of How it Will Impact Them.
Obama Administration blocks All Oil Shale projects on Federal Land
Petraeus resignation much larger implications than just an affair?
Debt to exceed 20 Trillion before Obama's second term ends
Agreement unlikely in time to avoid "Fiscal Cliff", taxes to resume Clinton rates for everyone January 1st.
Economists Project Unemployment will exceed 10 percent by Q1 2013. CBO predicts 9.1 percent.
2013 Recession Assured - Only Question is How Severe
Catholic Institutions Face Choice - Stop Offering Health Insurance to Employees or Close Down?
Crime Rate Skyrockets Across America
Hundreds of companies announce layoffs.
Stock Market tumbles 300 points day after Obama is re-elected.
Investors dump stocks in anticipation of Tax Increases.
ObamaCare full implementation now assured. Majority of Americans Unaware of How it Will Impact Them.
Obama Administration blocks All Oil Shale projects on Federal Land
Petraeus resignation much larger implications than just an affair?
Debt to exceed 20 Trillion before Obama's second term ends
Agreement unlikely in time to avoid "Fiscal Cliff", taxes to resume Clinton rates for everyone January 1st.
Economists Project Unemployment will exceed 10 percent by Q1 2013. CBO predicts 9.1 percent.
2013 Recession Assured - Only Question is How Severe
Catholic Institutions Face Choice - Stop Offering Health Insurance to Employees or Close Down?
Crime Rate Skyrockets Across America
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Destroying a Political Party
Those folks we like to call the "Establishment" are delusional. Apparently they look at Romney's loss and decide it's because he wasn't moderate enough. If only Republicans would embrace amnesty for illegal immigrants, then maybe their candidate would get more Hispanic votes. If only Republicans would back off the Pro Life thing, maybe more single women would vote for them. If only Republicans would stress a stronger desire to negotiate peace than go to war, if only ...
As they spout these inanities, all I hear from these people is, "Republicans need to become more like Democrats". Not surprisingly, lots of this "advice" is coming from (so-called) journalists and Democrats! It's sort of like the Steelers telling the Patriots before a big game that people will like them better if only Tom Brady stopped passing the ball, and they used only running plays on offense.
Unbelievably, the GOP party "leaders" seem to be falling for it.
Somebody needs to explain something to Boehner, Priebus, McConnell and the gang: Conservatives know why America has been the greatest nation ever established - freedom. If your game plan follows the opponents' demands (to run the ball and never pass), then you have the wrong game plan! You didn't lose because the other side has a better message; you lost because you failed to communicate your own message.
The whole "Fiscal Cliff" argument is happening now. But you wouldn't know it, since the media's obsessed with David Petraeus' affair (but not at all curious about the reason it was made public the Friday before he was scheduled to testify in Congress about Benghazi). I think the GOP-controlled House should stick to their guns and pass a bill designed to fix the budget crisis and reform the tax code, then tell Obama and Reid they can take it or leave it. They can go ahead and pass the bill through the senate and get Obama to sign it, or we'll go ahead and let all the Bush Tax rate cuts expire. All along the way, go on TV every chance you get to explain how this bill will help solve the problem and challenge Obama and the Democrats to explain why they refuse to support it.
Yes, I know. The "mainstream" media won't give them the airtime and will actively promote the Democrat's message. Which as usual will be misleading to false on nearly every point. And the media will trumpet to the ignorant masses the White House theme that it's the Republicans' fault because they refused to negotiate. Whatever.
Hinderaker makes a pretty good argument for this idea.
Be bold or go home.
As they spout these inanities, all I hear from these people is, "Republicans need to become more like Democrats". Not surprisingly, lots of this "advice" is coming from (so-called) journalists and Democrats! It's sort of like the Steelers telling the Patriots before a big game that people will like them better if only Tom Brady stopped passing the ball, and they used only running plays on offense.
Unbelievably, the GOP party "leaders" seem to be falling for it.
Somebody needs to explain something to Boehner, Priebus, McConnell and the gang: Conservatives know why America has been the greatest nation ever established - freedom. If your game plan follows the opponents' demands (to run the ball and never pass), then you have the wrong game plan! You didn't lose because the other side has a better message; you lost because you failed to communicate your own message.
The whole "Fiscal Cliff" argument is happening now. But you wouldn't know it, since the media's obsessed with David Petraeus' affair (but not at all curious about the reason it was made public the Friday before he was scheduled to testify in Congress about Benghazi). I think the GOP-controlled House should stick to their guns and pass a bill designed to fix the budget crisis and reform the tax code, then tell Obama and Reid they can take it or leave it. They can go ahead and pass the bill through the senate and get Obama to sign it, or we'll go ahead and let all the Bush Tax rate cuts expire. All along the way, go on TV every chance you get to explain how this bill will help solve the problem and challenge Obama and the Democrats to explain why they refuse to support it.
Yes, I know. The "mainstream" media won't give them the airtime and will actively promote the Democrat's message. Which as usual will be misleading to false on nearly every point. And the media will trumpet to the ignorant masses the White House theme that it's the Republicans' fault because they refused to negotiate. Whatever.
Hinderaker makes a pretty good argument for this idea.
Be bold or go home.
Friday, November 09, 2012
Explanations Abound
for Romney's loss. I've been mostly ignoring the news and have found my self rather uninterested in Talk Radio lately. Somehow I still hear people theorizing about the reasons for Mit Romney's loss. Republicans were so confident about taking over the Senate and regaining control of the White House, because after all, we haven't had such an inept president since Jimmy Carter!
But the people who showed up voted to keep President Inept in the White House. All that's left is to wonder why. Let's see if I can recall all the reasons being bandied about:
He's an ideological chamelion
He's a Mormon
He's rich
He doesn't pay taxes
He has Swiss Bank Accounts
He doesn't understand what its like for ordinary people
He's stiff and impersonal
He's too liberal
He's too moderate
He's too conservative
He will outlaw abortion and contraception
He will destroy Medicare and cut Social Security
He will cut Food Stamps
He would be just like George W Bush
He will start another war in the Middle East
He failed to expose Obama's failures and corruption
He failed to aggressively counter the lies spread about him by the Obama campaign
He didn't raise and spend enough money
He couldn't spend money on advertising through the summer while the Obama campaign was running negative ads against him to which he couldn't respond
He failed to explain how his policies would impact the lives of ordinary people
A dishonest press and media were unpaid activists for the Obama Campaign
Obama's photo op trip to the Sandy-ravished Northeast the days before the election pushed him over the top by making him look caring and compassionate
Republicans didn't show up to the polls - something like 3 million fewer votes than McCain got in 2008.
America's demographics have changed. There is now a plurality of people who have discovered they can vote themselves benefits, and they will do so from this point forward.
I suspect that he lost because of a combination of most of the above reasons. But it no longer matters. It's over. The takers have overwhelmed the makers, therefore we makers can only prepare to be looted.
But the people who showed up voted to keep President Inept in the White House. All that's left is to wonder why. Let's see if I can recall all the reasons being bandied about:
He's an ideological chamelion
He's a Mormon
He's rich
He doesn't pay taxes
He has Swiss Bank Accounts
He doesn't understand what its like for ordinary people
He's stiff and impersonal
He's too liberal
He's too moderate
He's too conservative
He will outlaw abortion and contraception
He will destroy Medicare and cut Social Security
He will cut Food Stamps
He would be just like George W Bush
He will start another war in the Middle East
He failed to expose Obama's failures and corruption
He failed to aggressively counter the lies spread about him by the Obama campaign
He didn't raise and spend enough money
He couldn't spend money on advertising through the summer while the Obama campaign was running negative ads against him to which he couldn't respond
He failed to explain how his policies would impact the lives of ordinary people
A dishonest press and media were unpaid activists for the Obama Campaign
Obama's photo op trip to the Sandy-ravished Northeast the days before the election pushed him over the top by making him look caring and compassionate
Republicans didn't show up to the polls - something like 3 million fewer votes than McCain got in 2008.
America's demographics have changed. There is now a plurality of people who have discovered they can vote themselves benefits, and they will do so from this point forward.
I suspect that he lost because of a combination of most of the above reasons. But it no longer matters. It's over. The takers have overwhelmed the makers, therefore we makers can only prepare to be looted.
Thursday, November 08, 2012
In Defense of Social Conservatives
I'm weary of the constant drumbeat throughout the media and political classes as they vilify those Social Conservatives. Especially since I happen to be one - it's not any sort of club where we sign up, pay dues, and have secret meetings. It's simply a loose coalition of folks who oppose Gay Marriage and abortion and seek to uphold the First Amendment.
Democrats call us extremists. Republican Establishment types blame us for Romney's loss. Lies are spread about our motives and objectives. We're portrayed as bible-thumping bigots and hypocrites. Somehow we want to force everyone to believe as we do and adhere to our Victorian sexual mores, while we secretly practice our own sexual deviancy.
It's time to speak out for the defense against these terrible charges.
First and foremost, a Christian and Social Conservative does not hate people. Contrary to the false portrayals believed by millions, we do not want to persecute, imprison, or even harass homosexuals. Our faith teaches us to love them, but use our own loving example to try convincing them to turn away from self-destructive and immoral behavior.
The idea that faith-based programs designed to help homosexuals learn to change their behavior is somehow kidnapping gay people and indoctrinating them against their will is ridiculous. There is no force in Christianity, period. It is not wrong to enroll someone in a behavior modification training class that helps them change negative behaviors into positive ones, whether it's deviant sexuality, alcoholism, or drug addiction.
Let's be clear - no, homosexuals are not "born that way". And there are no studies supporting that hypothesis; if anything, honest scientific studies done on that topic have strongly suggested the opposite. They've found the most predictive factors are single mother households, especially when Mom's boyfriend sexually abuses the children. It's really a national tragedy tied to the breakdown of the family, not to some "gay gene".
Families are the key to a functioning and prosperous society. America became great because most of our citizens embraced a simple formula for life success: Children, behave yourself, get a good education that leads to a decent job (or business venture or career), find and marry the love of your life, build a home and family, and raise your children to understand and carry out those same values.
Gays marrying each other doesn't fit any of that. Besides, if gay folks want to "marry" each other, nobody's stopping them. They can go out in the woods and make up any vows they like, say them in front of some wiccan priestess, then build a life together pretending like they're just like a traditional family. They can even sign contracts that give each other inheritance rights to each other's property when one passes.
That's the open secret. Gays don't want to get in front of a Roman Catholic Priest of Methodist Pastor and get married just like everybody else. They want benefits. Gay Marriage isn't about the holy sacrament called "Marriage" - most Gay folks are atheists. Gay Marriage is about getting money and benefits - Social Security Survivor income, Employer-provided Health Insurance, stuff like that.
My personal version of Social Conservatism is that I don't really care if Gays want to pretend to be married, just don't disrespect one of the most important sacrements of my faith by forcing us to honor and support the idea of redefining that sacrament to include those flaunting a seriously sinful lifestyle.
Next we'll talk about abortion. Science is actually on the side of Social Conservatives on this issue - a fetus is a human baby, not some blob of tissue that can be excised like a cyst. The issue is typically obscured by the Democrat/Media establishment, who focus on pregnancies resulting from rape and incest. They always ask that question of social conservative candidates so they can use their answers against them in campaigns.
Missouri's Todd Aken and Indiana's Richard Mourdock are the most recent examples. Both men were stupid enough to give away what probably would have been certain Senate victories with their answers to that loaded question. No matter what a social conservative candidate says on this question, it will be used against him. Aken was the more idiotic of the two, as he came up with some theory bandied about in his church about women being able to avoid pregnancy in cases of "legitimate" rape. Mourdock was much more innocuous, but his unfortunate phrasing, "That's something God intended to happen", became the television advertisement played on TV incessantly and was probably the phrase that lost him the election.
How about some truth on the issue for a change?
If a candidate being asked that trap question, my first response would be something like this:
Are you suggesting that we can all now agree that abortion is not appropriate in cases where there's no reason to kill the baby other than it represents an inconvenience for its mother? If so, I'm happy to accept that agreement and move ahead to stop doctors from aborting children for no reason other than the Mother doesn't feel like bringing her into the world. Now that that's out of the way, we can start talking about rape and incest.
We already agree that rape and incest are horrible things. They're illegal, immoral, and terribly abusive to the women that are victimized. What I would like folks to consider is this basic question: Who should be punished for this crime? The man who committed it, or the baby that may have resulted? Why kill the innocent baby - what did she do wrong? What message do we send to all those who are living happy and productive lives right now, when we say to those victims it's OK to kill your baby if she came about because of a rape or incest? Are their lives somehow less valuable than the rest of us?
Abortion in the end doesn't need God or Religion's involvement to tell us its wrong. If we believe it's wrong to kill a healthy infant, then it's wrong whether or not the infant has been born or not. Science confirms that babies are babies, and from conception through adulthood they're continuously developing. So its silly to suggest just because a child still lives inside its mother's womb, that makes it OK to kill her.
What this Social Conservative just came to realize on Tuesday is that we're no longer the "Moral Majority" of 20-30 years ago, but have become a marginalized and persecuted minority. As our ancestors who shared our faith have been for most of the last 2,000 years. In many ways, we've already been forced underground. We're no longer allowed to say so many things out loud anywhere but within the walls of our churches - things like abortion is wrong, homosexuality and adultery are sins, envy is a sin, rejecting God forfeits your chance for life after death. Such ideas are ridiculed and we are called bigots, superstitious, weak-minded, stupid, and racist. (The racist charge is the wierdest - where is there anything in this post that has anything remotely to do with race?)
In the end, all we're saying is that faith and morals are the foundation of a prosperous, happy society. We have watched all that slip away through the deliberate efforts of the "Progressives" over our lifetimes. And we understand that our complacency is partly to be blamed for allowing that to happen. Now we live in a country that is full of hate, crime, immorality, envy and injustice. All brought about because we allowed the Progressives to marginalize us and destroy the country in the process while trying to implement what they believed would be some sort of utopia.
Democrats call us extremists. Republican Establishment types blame us for Romney's loss. Lies are spread about our motives and objectives. We're portrayed as bible-thumping bigots and hypocrites. Somehow we want to force everyone to believe as we do and adhere to our Victorian sexual mores, while we secretly practice our own sexual deviancy.
It's time to speak out for the defense against these terrible charges.
First and foremost, a Christian and Social Conservative does not hate people. Contrary to the false portrayals believed by millions, we do not want to persecute, imprison, or even harass homosexuals. Our faith teaches us to love them, but use our own loving example to try convincing them to turn away from self-destructive and immoral behavior.
The idea that faith-based programs designed to help homosexuals learn to change their behavior is somehow kidnapping gay people and indoctrinating them against their will is ridiculous. There is no force in Christianity, period. It is not wrong to enroll someone in a behavior modification training class that helps them change negative behaviors into positive ones, whether it's deviant sexuality, alcoholism, or drug addiction.
Let's be clear - no, homosexuals are not "born that way". And there are no studies supporting that hypothesis; if anything, honest scientific studies done on that topic have strongly suggested the opposite. They've found the most predictive factors are single mother households, especially when Mom's boyfriend sexually abuses the children. It's really a national tragedy tied to the breakdown of the family, not to some "gay gene".
Families are the key to a functioning and prosperous society. America became great because most of our citizens embraced a simple formula for life success: Children, behave yourself, get a good education that leads to a decent job (or business venture or career), find and marry the love of your life, build a home and family, and raise your children to understand and carry out those same values.
Gays marrying each other doesn't fit any of that. Besides, if gay folks want to "marry" each other, nobody's stopping them. They can go out in the woods and make up any vows they like, say them in front of some wiccan priestess, then build a life together pretending like they're just like a traditional family. They can even sign contracts that give each other inheritance rights to each other's property when one passes.
That's the open secret. Gays don't want to get in front of a Roman Catholic Priest of Methodist Pastor and get married just like everybody else. They want benefits. Gay Marriage isn't about the holy sacrament called "Marriage" - most Gay folks are atheists. Gay Marriage is about getting money and benefits - Social Security Survivor income, Employer-provided Health Insurance, stuff like that.
My personal version of Social Conservatism is that I don't really care if Gays want to pretend to be married, just don't disrespect one of the most important sacrements of my faith by forcing us to honor and support the idea of redefining that sacrament to include those flaunting a seriously sinful lifestyle.
Next we'll talk about abortion. Science is actually on the side of Social Conservatives on this issue - a fetus is a human baby, not some blob of tissue that can be excised like a cyst. The issue is typically obscured by the Democrat/Media establishment, who focus on pregnancies resulting from rape and incest. They always ask that question of social conservative candidates so they can use their answers against them in campaigns.
Missouri's Todd Aken and Indiana's Richard Mourdock are the most recent examples. Both men were stupid enough to give away what probably would have been certain Senate victories with their answers to that loaded question. No matter what a social conservative candidate says on this question, it will be used against him. Aken was the more idiotic of the two, as he came up with some theory bandied about in his church about women being able to avoid pregnancy in cases of "legitimate" rape. Mourdock was much more innocuous, but his unfortunate phrasing, "That's something God intended to happen", became the television advertisement played on TV incessantly and was probably the phrase that lost him the election.
How about some truth on the issue for a change?
If a candidate being asked that trap question, my first response would be something like this:
Are you suggesting that we can all now agree that abortion is not appropriate in cases where there's no reason to kill the baby other than it represents an inconvenience for its mother? If so, I'm happy to accept that agreement and move ahead to stop doctors from aborting children for no reason other than the Mother doesn't feel like bringing her into the world. Now that that's out of the way, we can start talking about rape and incest.
We already agree that rape and incest are horrible things. They're illegal, immoral, and terribly abusive to the women that are victimized. What I would like folks to consider is this basic question: Who should be punished for this crime? The man who committed it, or the baby that may have resulted? Why kill the innocent baby - what did she do wrong? What message do we send to all those who are living happy and productive lives right now, when we say to those victims it's OK to kill your baby if she came about because of a rape or incest? Are their lives somehow less valuable than the rest of us?
Abortion in the end doesn't need God or Religion's involvement to tell us its wrong. If we believe it's wrong to kill a healthy infant, then it's wrong whether or not the infant has been born or not. Science confirms that babies are babies, and from conception through adulthood they're continuously developing. So its silly to suggest just because a child still lives inside its mother's womb, that makes it OK to kill her.
What this Social Conservative just came to realize on Tuesday is that we're no longer the "Moral Majority" of 20-30 years ago, but have become a marginalized and persecuted minority. As our ancestors who shared our faith have been for most of the last 2,000 years. In many ways, we've already been forced underground. We're no longer allowed to say so many things out loud anywhere but within the walls of our churches - things like abortion is wrong, homosexuality and adultery are sins, envy is a sin, rejecting God forfeits your chance for life after death. Such ideas are ridiculed and we are called bigots, superstitious, weak-minded, stupid, and racist. (The racist charge is the wierdest - where is there anything in this post that has anything remotely to do with race?)
In the end, all we're saying is that faith and morals are the foundation of a prosperous, happy society. We have watched all that slip away through the deliberate efforts of the "Progressives" over our lifetimes. And we understand that our complacency is partly to be blamed for allowing that to happen. Now we live in a country that is full of hate, crime, immorality, envy and injustice. All brought about because we allowed the Progressives to marginalize us and destroy the country in the process while trying to implement what they believed would be some sort of utopia.
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
Revelations
Some conversations I had recently brought to mind the experience I had when I was 17 years old with an OBE (Out-of-Body Experience) or an NDE (Near-Death Experience). I told the story in a blog post here long ago.
Rather than tell the entire story again, here's a quick summary:
Early morning, I'm asleep in my bed. I'm still in high school, living with my parents (of course), two sisters and a brother, all younger than me. I have a dream, but it can't really be a dream because it's too vivid - so vivid I think it's more real than my perception of the world when I'm awake and walking around.
I'm floating, but don't have any sort of sensation of floating. It feels perfectly natural and ordinary. I look down at my body lying in my bed, and have a sort of bemused thought, "Hmm, I think I'm dead". No trauma, no fright, no concern, just a mildly detached sort of curiosity.
I feel the light coming up behind me before I see it. It feels like a warm, loving embrace. In that moment I experience a feeling of being enveloped in something that we earthlings have such an inadequate word for: "Love". But it's really so much more than that. It's a warm embrace, it's unconditional, it's universal somehow, but it's still personal and inclusive of little old Me.
Anyway, I am turning around to enter the light where I will be embraced by God and so many others who have crossed through the veil into heaven, all of whom love me and can't wait to welcome me into their realm.
But as I'm turning I can somehow see my Mother walking down the hall. She's either thinking or saying, "I need to get Dan up". The thought enters my mind something like, "I better not leave now, Mom's coming to wake me up". Instantaneously I'm returned to my body, where I open my eyes as I hear the knock on my door and my mother saying, "Dan, time to get up".
But that's not what this post is about, at least not the story itself. This post is really about what I felt as I felt the embrace of the light. In addition to the feeling of love and supreme contentment, I thought I suddenly understood everything. Not everything about any specific topic, but everything about, well, everything!
So after I returned to mortality, of course I also returned to my limited human mind and my limited understanding. But there are some fundamental lessons I think I was able to keep with me from the experience. Just a few examples:
Our planet is the tiniest speck within the vast universe we can see through telescopes. But that universe is one small universe within many other universes we can't detect or perceive with our limited human understanding.
Therefore, time is a human perception based on the movement of our planet through our tiny insignificant little solar system. Seconds, Minutes, Hours, Days, Weeks, Months, Years, Centuries, Millenia are meaningless measurements of time to God, who transcends time. Because he lives in his own universe that is very different from almost everything we insignificant earthlings can perceive.
So we've been endowed by God with that spark we like to call a soul that he first gave to Adam. When we die, that spark is able to escape our physical body and can travel out of our physical universe into God's own universe. That's what we call "heaven". It's not a place like we think of like Indianapolis, or Chicago, or the Moon, or even Mars, Venus, Saturn, or Pluto. It's like another dimension that exists right beside our physical universe, but it's not very much like our universe. Because all of the sparks that live there don't require our physical attributes to move around or communicate with each other.
Yes, God created our universe. He created us. Darwin's evolutionary theories are OK as far as explaining how God's creatures are able to adapt to earth's changing environment over time, but fail miserably to explain the origin of our stars, planets, and life itself. For that brief instant in the embrace of the light, I really thought I clearly saw and understood precisely how God brought our universe and our ancestors into being. It seemed as if I could even explain it coherently in a way that even a child would understand. But when I re-entered the limited shell of my body, I seemed to lose that insight to the limitations of my physical brain and intellect.
Too bad, I might have killed in Engineering, Physics, or Medicine at College if only I could have retained a small piece of that knowledge and insight. But something that the experience did cause in me was an inner feeling of exasperation whenever I hear people talk authoritatively about almost any subject. I often find myself wanting to blurt out, "You have no idea what you're talking about!". I may instinctively know that's true, and even often feel an inkling about what the real truth of the subject may be, but my body's own limitations prevent me from explaining.
My overwhelming sense is that understanding our universe, planet, ourselves and others is simple. I couldn't believe I hadn't realized it all along, it was so extraordinarily simple and obvious. But the experience left me with the absolute belief that yes, God made our universe and he created us. God made us so he could share his love with us and we with him, although again I must point out that the word "love" is so inadequate to describe what it really entails. I think that's probably why most members of our race don't really understand, because they've never experienced love in God's form. All I can say for certain is, we earthlings have no clue what that thing we call "love" really is in its purest, God-given form. It's so much more than a simple emotion or a physical expression or giving and receiving pleasure, yet somehow at the same time it's none of those things. Because paradoxically emotion and pleasure are fleeting physical things that only mean something to our inadequate temporal bodies, and they mean nothing when we leave our bodies behind to commune with God and our loved ones who went on before.
What I don't know anything about is Hell. And I don't know if it's because that knowledge wasn't shared with me or if I lost it when I returned to my earthly shell. I have nothing to share about the existence or nature of Hell, nor how bad a sinner I'd have to be to be sentenced to live out the rest of eternity there.
There's actually much more I believe I learned from the experience, but the nutshell is about what God wants from us. It's so very simple, and can be confirmed by Jesus' words: Matthew 32:26-40.
God wants us to seek him, love him unconditionally (all your heart, soul, and mind), and love your neighbors as yourself. It is so obvious that these are really the only commandments we humans need to make our universe the best and happiest place. But of course we fail miserably.
Simple, but never easy.
Rather than tell the entire story again, here's a quick summary:
Early morning, I'm asleep in my bed. I'm still in high school, living with my parents (of course), two sisters and a brother, all younger than me. I have a dream, but it can't really be a dream because it's too vivid - so vivid I think it's more real than my perception of the world when I'm awake and walking around.
I'm floating, but don't have any sort of sensation of floating. It feels perfectly natural and ordinary. I look down at my body lying in my bed, and have a sort of bemused thought, "Hmm, I think I'm dead". No trauma, no fright, no concern, just a mildly detached sort of curiosity.
I feel the light coming up behind me before I see it. It feels like a warm, loving embrace. In that moment I experience a feeling of being enveloped in something that we earthlings have such an inadequate word for: "Love". But it's really so much more than that. It's a warm embrace, it's unconditional, it's universal somehow, but it's still personal and inclusive of little old Me.
Anyway, I am turning around to enter the light where I will be embraced by God and so many others who have crossed through the veil into heaven, all of whom love me and can't wait to welcome me into their realm.
But as I'm turning I can somehow see my Mother walking down the hall. She's either thinking or saying, "I need to get Dan up". The thought enters my mind something like, "I better not leave now, Mom's coming to wake me up". Instantaneously I'm returned to my body, where I open my eyes as I hear the knock on my door and my mother saying, "Dan, time to get up".
But that's not what this post is about, at least not the story itself. This post is really about what I felt as I felt the embrace of the light. In addition to the feeling of love and supreme contentment, I thought I suddenly understood everything. Not everything about any specific topic, but everything about, well, everything!
So after I returned to mortality, of course I also returned to my limited human mind and my limited understanding. But there are some fundamental lessons I think I was able to keep with me from the experience. Just a few examples:
Our planet is the tiniest speck within the vast universe we can see through telescopes. But that universe is one small universe within many other universes we can't detect or perceive with our limited human understanding.
Therefore, time is a human perception based on the movement of our planet through our tiny insignificant little solar system. Seconds, Minutes, Hours, Days, Weeks, Months, Years, Centuries, Millenia are meaningless measurements of time to God, who transcends time. Because he lives in his own universe that is very different from almost everything we insignificant earthlings can perceive.
So we've been endowed by God with that spark we like to call a soul that he first gave to Adam. When we die, that spark is able to escape our physical body and can travel out of our physical universe into God's own universe. That's what we call "heaven". It's not a place like we think of like Indianapolis, or Chicago, or the Moon, or even Mars, Venus, Saturn, or Pluto. It's like another dimension that exists right beside our physical universe, but it's not very much like our universe. Because all of the sparks that live there don't require our physical attributes to move around or communicate with each other.
Yes, God created our universe. He created us. Darwin's evolutionary theories are OK as far as explaining how God's creatures are able to adapt to earth's changing environment over time, but fail miserably to explain the origin of our stars, planets, and life itself. For that brief instant in the embrace of the light, I really thought I clearly saw and understood precisely how God brought our universe and our ancestors into being. It seemed as if I could even explain it coherently in a way that even a child would understand. But when I re-entered the limited shell of my body, I seemed to lose that insight to the limitations of my physical brain and intellect.
Too bad, I might have killed in Engineering, Physics, or Medicine at College if only I could have retained a small piece of that knowledge and insight. But something that the experience did cause in me was an inner feeling of exasperation whenever I hear people talk authoritatively about almost any subject. I often find myself wanting to blurt out, "You have no idea what you're talking about!". I may instinctively know that's true, and even often feel an inkling about what the real truth of the subject may be, but my body's own limitations prevent me from explaining.
My overwhelming sense is that understanding our universe, planet, ourselves and others is simple. I couldn't believe I hadn't realized it all along, it was so extraordinarily simple and obvious. But the experience left me with the absolute belief that yes, God made our universe and he created us. God made us so he could share his love with us and we with him, although again I must point out that the word "love" is so inadequate to describe what it really entails. I think that's probably why most members of our race don't really understand, because they've never experienced love in God's form. All I can say for certain is, we earthlings have no clue what that thing we call "love" really is in its purest, God-given form. It's so much more than a simple emotion or a physical expression or giving and receiving pleasure, yet somehow at the same time it's none of those things. Because paradoxically emotion and pleasure are fleeting physical things that only mean something to our inadequate temporal bodies, and they mean nothing when we leave our bodies behind to commune with God and our loved ones who went on before.
What I don't know anything about is Hell. And I don't know if it's because that knowledge wasn't shared with me or if I lost it when I returned to my earthly shell. I have nothing to share about the existence or nature of Hell, nor how bad a sinner I'd have to be to be sentenced to live out the rest of eternity there.
There's actually much more I believe I learned from the experience, but the nutshell is about what God wants from us. It's so very simple, and can be confirmed by Jesus' words: Matthew 32:26-40.
God wants us to seek him, love him unconditionally (all your heart, soul, and mind), and love your neighbors as yourself. It is so obvious that these are really the only commandments we humans need to make our universe the best and happiest place. But of course we fail miserably.
Simple, but never easy.
Goodbye, America, We Loved You
I was following election returns last night on Fox News, and it appeared that Obama was pulling ahead in Ohio and possibly Virginia while North Carolina and Florida were too tight to call. Things weren't looking good. Bill O'Reilly came on the set and his analysis was right on the money. To paraphrase O'Reilly,
The demographics of the country have changed. We're not the same America we were 20 years ago. Democrats now have the numbers to overwhelm Republicans. They're consituencies are the folks who believe government exists to give them stuff. Obama and the Democrats promise to give them more stuff, and that's how they win.
I turned off the TV right after he finished talking, knowing it was over. This morning I opened up my hotel copy of USA Today and looked at the county-by-county electoral map and marveled. It's a sea of red, with small pockets of blue clustered around the big cities. The big cities are where the Democrats live, and they are establishing a new tyranny that will oppress everyone not like them.
We're officially no longer the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. We're no longer Of the People, By the People, For the People, but now we're strictly of, by, and for:
Now we're guaranteed expensive healthcare that we'll have difficulty accessing, $5 or $6 gas, further destruction of our hard-earned savings, permanent high unemployment, escalating taxes enacted too late to stave off national bankruptcy, food prices skyrocketing out of reach of middle class families, and an oppressive, tyrannical government that dictates where we may live, what we may eat and drink, what medical treatments we may and may not recieve (if we're lucky enough to get an appointment), and general misery and loss of incentive to achieve.
I've got to remove my Prophecy post, it's no longer relevant. I'm certainly no Prophet.
To any Democrat who may stumble across this post, congratulations - you know not what you just did.
The demographics of the country have changed. We're not the same America we were 20 years ago. Democrats now have the numbers to overwhelm Republicans. They're consituencies are the folks who believe government exists to give them stuff. Obama and the Democrats promise to give them more stuff, and that's how they win.
I turned off the TV right after he finished talking, knowing it was over. This morning I opened up my hotel copy of USA Today and looked at the county-by-county electoral map and marveled. It's a sea of red, with small pockets of blue clustered around the big cities. The big cities are where the Democrats live, and they are establishing a new tyranny that will oppress everyone not like them.
We're officially no longer the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. We're no longer Of the People, By the People, For the People, but now we're strictly of, by, and for:
- Black People
- Hispanic People
- Gay People
- Labor Union People
- Trial Lawyer People
- Government Bureaucrat People
- Socialist and Communist People
- Welfare People
- Atheist People
- People who live on monthly checks from the government
Now we're guaranteed expensive healthcare that we'll have difficulty accessing, $5 or $6 gas, further destruction of our hard-earned savings, permanent high unemployment, escalating taxes enacted too late to stave off national bankruptcy, food prices skyrocketing out of reach of middle class families, and an oppressive, tyrannical government that dictates where we may live, what we may eat and drink, what medical treatments we may and may not recieve (if we're lucky enough to get an appointment), and general misery and loss of incentive to achieve.
I've got to remove my Prophecy post, it's no longer relevant. I'm certainly no Prophet.
To any Democrat who may stumble across this post, congratulations - you know not what you just did.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)