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.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
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.
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
More Fun with Football
The Colts and Irish are both great Indiana stories this fall. Both had great games over the weekend that entertained me far better than some new blockbuster movie or concert.
I left the Notre Dame game for supper late in the 4th quarter and set the DVR for an extra 30 minutes, thinking that should be enough time to return and catch the end. But when I returned to my La-Z-Boy recliner expecting to play back that last 30 minutes, I turned on the TV to find the game still underway in the second overtime.
Seeing Cierre Wood fumble away his touchdown run, I thought the game was over. But astoundingly, Pitt missed the Field Goal that should have given them the victory. My chin was still laying on the floor when the Irish took their victory in the third overtime. They stole one for sure, but it still counts in the win column.
I'll happily stay for the ride with Notre Dame through their Bowl Game. If that happens to be against Alabama for the National Championship, something I think is a long shot, I can't imagine the Irish winning that game. But I'll be happy to be astounded once again.
I feel very good for Andrew Luck and the Colts. The inspirational story of coach Pagano and the un-rookie-like performance of Luck against the Dolphins combined for a Sunday that was not just entertaining, but inspiring.
My own preseason prediction for the Colts was that if they somehow managed to end the year 8-8, it would be an impressive overachievement. I still feel that way. But looking at the Colts' remaining schedule, I think 9-7 or maybe even 10-6 is realistic. Which would probably mean the playoffs. Talk about overachieving with a team full of rookies.
But I'm not building my hopes too high. The Colts still might end up 8-8, which can still be called overachieving. But wouldn't it be cool if that record was 10-6 instead?
I'll just go along for the ride and have fun along the way.
I left the Notre Dame game for supper late in the 4th quarter and set the DVR for an extra 30 minutes, thinking that should be enough time to return and catch the end. But when I returned to my La-Z-Boy recliner expecting to play back that last 30 minutes, I turned on the TV to find the game still underway in the second overtime.
Seeing Cierre Wood fumble away his touchdown run, I thought the game was over. But astoundingly, Pitt missed the Field Goal that should have given them the victory. My chin was still laying on the floor when the Irish took their victory in the third overtime. They stole one for sure, but it still counts in the win column.
I'll happily stay for the ride with Notre Dame through their Bowl Game. If that happens to be against Alabama for the National Championship, something I think is a long shot, I can't imagine the Irish winning that game. But I'll be happy to be astounded once again.
I feel very good for Andrew Luck and the Colts. The inspirational story of coach Pagano and the un-rookie-like performance of Luck against the Dolphins combined for a Sunday that was not just entertaining, but inspiring.
My own preseason prediction for the Colts was that if they somehow managed to end the year 8-8, it would be an impressive overachievement. I still feel that way. But looking at the Colts' remaining schedule, I think 9-7 or maybe even 10-6 is realistic. Which would probably mean the playoffs. Talk about overachieving with a team full of rookies.
But I'm not building my hopes too high. The Colts still might end up 8-8, which can still be called overachieving. But wouldn't it be cool if that record was 10-6 instead?
I'll just go along for the ride and have fun along the way.
Monday, November 05, 2012
Final Election Thoughts
Democrats think they're going to win tomorrow. Republicans believe they'll win. Both sides predict the election will be very close, and could go either way.
Democrats think the popular vote will be razor-thin, and could end up favoring Romney, but they believe the key swing states - especially Ohio - will push Obama over the finish line for an electoral college victory. It's sort of interesting that the party that's pushed hard to eliminate the electoral college since Bush beat Gore is suddenly silent on that issue.
Averaging of polls show a tie or slight edge for Obama. But the Republicans believe the left-leaning pollsters have skewed the average to make the race look much more favorable for Obama than reality might indicate. The Republican argument is that liberal pollsters are expecting the same turnout in swing states as 2008, therefore they filter their respondents by party affiliation to oversample Democrats by 9 percentage points more than Republicans.
So if the Republicans are right about the oversampling, it looks like a Romney victory or maybe a Romney blowout. Democrats understand their success hinges on their constituents showing up and voting in the same or very similar numbers to 2008.
There are little indicators being ignored by the media that aren't guarantees, but suggestive of a Romney advantage. Romney rallies in the last couple of weeks are drawing tens of thousands of enthusiastic supporters, while Obama events are drawing from a few hundred to a couple of thousand people only, and those crowds are much less enthusiastic.
As would be obvious to anyone who has read my blog, my hope is for a Romney blowout. The key factor I'm using is mostly ignored by the media and pundits - I believe in the resurgence of the Christian Conservative base. Obama has stirred up the Christian base with the HHS mandate, his radically pro-abortion policies and rhetoric, cancelling Don't Ask - Don't Tell, and supporting Gay Marriage. Catholics who actually go to Mass and Evangelicals have joined together in common cause to fire Obama, and I tend to believe they'll make the difference.
If you have an energized Moral Majority and a super-majority of Independents behind you in addition to the rest of the core Conservative base, there aren't enough Democrats in the population to overcome that wave. That's why I think Romney might win decisively.
What puzzles me is the conflicting reporting on early voting. USA Today this morning claims that Democrats have an edge among the early voters, but other outlets like Fox News are reporting the oppposite - that Republicans have a significant turnout advantage. The best explanation I can find for that discrepancy may be that the Fox News turnout advantage refers to nationwide turnout, while USA Today is claiming the Democrat edge for swing states only. I guess we'll see.
Will the Unions, Trial Lawyers, Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Illegal Immigrants, College Students & Professors, Welfare Dependents, Dead People, Convicted Felons, Fraudulent Voters and Socialist/Communists turn out in high enough numbers to overcome the energized Christians, Businesspeople, White Middle-to-Upper Classes, Coal Miners, Oil Workers, Intact Families, and Federalists/Capitalists?
Hopefully we will know when we wake up Wednesday morning. But wouldn't it be nice if we could hear this announcement by 11PM Tuesday?
"(ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox News/CNN) can now call the race for Mitt Romney in a landslide".
Democrats think the popular vote will be razor-thin, and could end up favoring Romney, but they believe the key swing states - especially Ohio - will push Obama over the finish line for an electoral college victory. It's sort of interesting that the party that's pushed hard to eliminate the electoral college since Bush beat Gore is suddenly silent on that issue.
Averaging of polls show a tie or slight edge for Obama. But the Republicans believe the left-leaning pollsters have skewed the average to make the race look much more favorable for Obama than reality might indicate. The Republican argument is that liberal pollsters are expecting the same turnout in swing states as 2008, therefore they filter their respondents by party affiliation to oversample Democrats by 9 percentage points more than Republicans.
So if the Republicans are right about the oversampling, it looks like a Romney victory or maybe a Romney blowout. Democrats understand their success hinges on their constituents showing up and voting in the same or very similar numbers to 2008.
There are little indicators being ignored by the media that aren't guarantees, but suggestive of a Romney advantage. Romney rallies in the last couple of weeks are drawing tens of thousands of enthusiastic supporters, while Obama events are drawing from a few hundred to a couple of thousand people only, and those crowds are much less enthusiastic.
As would be obvious to anyone who has read my blog, my hope is for a Romney blowout. The key factor I'm using is mostly ignored by the media and pundits - I believe in the resurgence of the Christian Conservative base. Obama has stirred up the Christian base with the HHS mandate, his radically pro-abortion policies and rhetoric, cancelling Don't Ask - Don't Tell, and supporting Gay Marriage. Catholics who actually go to Mass and Evangelicals have joined together in common cause to fire Obama, and I tend to believe they'll make the difference.
If you have an energized Moral Majority and a super-majority of Independents behind you in addition to the rest of the core Conservative base, there aren't enough Democrats in the population to overcome that wave. That's why I think Romney might win decisively.
What puzzles me is the conflicting reporting on early voting. USA Today this morning claims that Democrats have an edge among the early voters, but other outlets like Fox News are reporting the oppposite - that Republicans have a significant turnout advantage. The best explanation I can find for that discrepancy may be that the Fox News turnout advantage refers to nationwide turnout, while USA Today is claiming the Democrat edge for swing states only. I guess we'll see.
Will the Unions, Trial Lawyers, Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, Illegal Immigrants, College Students & Professors, Welfare Dependents, Dead People, Convicted Felons, Fraudulent Voters and Socialist/Communists turn out in high enough numbers to overcome the energized Christians, Businesspeople, White Middle-to-Upper Classes, Coal Miners, Oil Workers, Intact Families, and Federalists/Capitalists?
Hopefully we will know when we wake up Wednesday morning. But wouldn't it be nice if we could hear this announcement by 11PM Tuesday?
"(ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox News/CNN) can now call the race for Mitt Romney in a landslide".
Saturday, November 03, 2012
High School Football
It got cold by the fourth quarter last night, so after Columbus East sent in the Junior Varsity after wrapping up their Sectional Championship with a 36-0 score against Franklin County, I trekked back to the parking lot and drove to the Circle K for a cup of hot chocolate before heading home. (The JV backups gave up 2 touchdowns to Franklin County to make the final score 36-14).
East and North both played in Sectional Championship games last night, and both outcomes were in line with expectations. North was blown out by Center Grove, which was just as much expected as East's easy victory.
East happens to be ranked #1 in their division (4A). But we know from past years that the ranking doesn't mean much in the state tournament. They could get surprised next week by Evansville Reitz. But looming in the bracket is the perennial powerhouse from Indianapolis, Cathedral High School.
Cathedral may have a pedestrian 7-5 record, but nobody, least of all East, will interpret that as the Catholic school being ripe for defeat. Cathedral wins the State Championship in 4A more often than not, and although I'm sure the Olympians may hope they fall to 11-1 Mount Vernon in the Regional, that might be a faint hope.
Columbus East was challenged this year only by their crosstown rival North early in the season. They closed out a very close match with the northsiders late in the fourth quarter to pull out the victory on their way to a so-far undefeated season.
Next week's Regional opponent from Indiana's toe is a bit of an unknown, since they had no opposing teams in common with the Olympians. I think Evansville Reitz is also unbeaten so far this year, so the only way to predict the outcome of next Friday's game is by looking at past history. I can't analyze the historical record thoroughly, but do know that North and East have both had pretty good success against the teams from Indiana's toe, in football and other sports. That means little in an individual season or game, though.
So if East can overcome the boys from Evansville, it seems highly likely they'll have to face Cathedral as their final obstacle to the state final in Lucas Oil Stadium. In Columbus, we can only hope the Olympians can repeat this year's breakthrough year by the North High School boy's soccer team, who finally earned for the 2012 state championship after knocking on the door but falling short in semistate for the last decade, then losing the state championship game on penalty kicks last year.
It's been so long since the Olympians were challenged this season, we can be a little concerned that they're not prepared for a worthy opponent that might force them to be at their best to win. If they can rise to the occasion over the next 2 games, it will be great to see them playing Thanksgiving weekend at Lucas Oil Stadium. I'd try to go see the game, except there is probably a family gathering that will take precedence.
Sports is my entertainment. Life would be terribly dull without the chance to follow teams from local high school to the professionals.
East and North both played in Sectional Championship games last night, and both outcomes were in line with expectations. North was blown out by Center Grove, which was just as much expected as East's easy victory.
East happens to be ranked #1 in their division (4A). But we know from past years that the ranking doesn't mean much in the state tournament. They could get surprised next week by Evansville Reitz. But looming in the bracket is the perennial powerhouse from Indianapolis, Cathedral High School.
Cathedral may have a pedestrian 7-5 record, but nobody, least of all East, will interpret that as the Catholic school being ripe for defeat. Cathedral wins the State Championship in 4A more often than not, and although I'm sure the Olympians may hope they fall to 11-1 Mount Vernon in the Regional, that might be a faint hope.
Columbus East was challenged this year only by their crosstown rival North early in the season. They closed out a very close match with the northsiders late in the fourth quarter to pull out the victory on their way to a so-far undefeated season.
Next week's Regional opponent from Indiana's toe is a bit of an unknown, since they had no opposing teams in common with the Olympians. I think Evansville Reitz is also unbeaten so far this year, so the only way to predict the outcome of next Friday's game is by looking at past history. I can't analyze the historical record thoroughly, but do know that North and East have both had pretty good success against the teams from Indiana's toe, in football and other sports. That means little in an individual season or game, though.
So if East can overcome the boys from Evansville, it seems highly likely they'll have to face Cathedral as their final obstacle to the state final in Lucas Oil Stadium. In Columbus, we can only hope the Olympians can repeat this year's breakthrough year by the North High School boy's soccer team, who finally earned for the 2012 state championship after knocking on the door but falling short in semistate for the last decade, then losing the state championship game on penalty kicks last year.
It's been so long since the Olympians were challenged this season, we can be a little concerned that they're not prepared for a worthy opponent that might force them to be at their best to win. If they can rise to the occasion over the next 2 games, it will be great to see them playing Thanksgiving weekend at Lucas Oil Stadium. I'd try to go see the game, except there is probably a family gathering that will take precedence.
Sports is my entertainment. Life would be terribly dull without the chance to follow teams from local high school to the professionals.
Friday, November 02, 2012
Just When There was a Glimmer of Hope
Comes this article. A Republican victory on Tuesday will only hold off the inevitable. The news about the lowest birth rate in history combined with the fact that over 40% of those births are to unwed mothers is proof positive that traditional American values have been successfully destroyed by the Left.
The bastards go to government-funded daycare and preschool, then to government-controlled public schools and Leftist-dominated Universities. They become narcissistic entitled brats who have been taught there is no God, they themselves are just evolved to be a little bit smarter than the ape, and government is God. The girls will have babies with boys they don't want to make a family with, and the boys will spread their seed around indiscriminately with no thought of their own responsibilities.
Both the girls and the boys will adopt the attitude that they're owed a living. They don't care where the housing assistance, food stamps, and medical care comes from, as long as it continues to come. They are natural Democrat constituents, and will hand over control of their very lives to those who promise to keep the welfare coming. To them, the most evil people in the world are those who dare suggest they should take responsibility for their own lives and get off the government dole.
A GOP victory this week won't fix this serious problem by itself. Many Republican politicians don't even recognize the problem, and won't help those who do pass anything that might reverse the trend. So hope is dim that we'll accomplish anything with this election except perhaps a temporary reprieve over the inexorable march to marxist atheist socialism.
Is the America I grew up in already lost to history?
The bastards go to government-funded daycare and preschool, then to government-controlled public schools and Leftist-dominated Universities. They become narcissistic entitled brats who have been taught there is no God, they themselves are just evolved to be a little bit smarter than the ape, and government is God. The girls will have babies with boys they don't want to make a family with, and the boys will spread their seed around indiscriminately with no thought of their own responsibilities.
Both the girls and the boys will adopt the attitude that they're owed a living. They don't care where the housing assistance, food stamps, and medical care comes from, as long as it continues to come. They are natural Democrat constituents, and will hand over control of their very lives to those who promise to keep the welfare coming. To them, the most evil people in the world are those who dare suggest they should take responsibility for their own lives and get off the government dole.
A GOP victory this week won't fix this serious problem by itself. Many Republican politicians don't even recognize the problem, and won't help those who do pass anything that might reverse the trend. So hope is dim that we'll accomplish anything with this election except perhaps a temporary reprieve over the inexorable march to marxist atheist socialism.
Is the America I grew up in already lost to history?
Thursday, November 01, 2012
What I've Learned About Democrats
Democrats are everywhere around us, and they can't consistently be picked out of a crowd based on their looks or clothing. I think there are two categories of Democrats; the ideological activists and the generational.
Ideological Democrats are fully versed on their Party's platform. They firmly believe in and support socialist government that takes as much as possible from the wealthier citizens to provide programs and benefits to the poorer folk. They believe in protecting abortion on demand and will fight hard to stop any laws that would attempt to restrict or delay what they believe is an inalienable right of women to destroy the baby in her womb at any time and for any reason. They truly believe that if America would just stop making war, there will be no more war. That rich white men are the bane of the universe and must be cut down to size. That corporations are evil faceless entities bent on mistreating their employees and gaining monopoly power that would permit them to mistreat their customers as well. That no rich person became rich by honest hard work. They want their government to control people for their own good. Dictates to citizens about what they may eat and drink, what sort of vehicles they may and may not drive, and bans on tobacco use (but ironically no bans on smoking of illegal substances) are all desirable functions of government. They hate Christianity and seek to ban it, or at least force it underground. They think Christians are ignorant superstitious fools who believe crazy stuff like God created us, not the random Evolutionary theory the ideological democrat considers sacrosanct. Their substitute religion is sort of a hybridized version of Paganism and Eastern Mysticism, which leads them to believe our modern lifestyle is destroying the planet and needs to be stopped.
Generational Democrats are a bit different. They are ambivalent about issues like abortion and redistribution, and aren't necessarily on board with the idea that government should restrict our personal choices about what we can eat or drive. They're Democrats because their families have always been Democrats, or they hold jobs in the public sector. Don't tell them that their salaries are too high and their pensions are overly generous, because they firmly believe they deserve every penny and more. They will never accept that their compensation is bankrupting the country - rather they believe corrupt government is wasting money elsewhere and can fix the budget if they really want to without touching their pay and benefits. They've never heard of Fast & Furious or the scandal behind the Benghazi terror attack. They've heard of Solyndra, but don't know any details and figure it's just a right-wing propaganda story. They like ObamaCare, even though they know nothing about it beyond that it forces insurers to take on folks with pre-existing conditions and cover adult children under their parents' policies. They think that the blame for the bad economy lies solely with the Bush Administration, but can't really explain exactly how.
It is disappointing to have discovered firsthand that Democrat voters are voting based on mostly false and misleading beliefs about the critical issues facing the country. It's sad to see that so many people are casting their vote based on these beliefs, which range from arguably to completely false:
Richard Mourdock believes rape is God's will
The rich aren't paying their fair share, and if they start paying their fair share our budget problems will be solved
Republicans want to outlaw contraception
Republicans will take us back into unnecessary wars in the middle east that bust the budget and kill our young men for no purpose
Oil, Gas, and Coal can be replaced by windmills and there will be no more pollution
Polar Bears are endangered by Global Warming
Republicans are against Education
Republicans want to deny healthcare to people who can't afford insurance
Republicans would have let the American Auto Industry die in bankruptcy
Republicans are bent on destroying labor unions
The only statement on the above list that has even a little bit of truth is the last one, but even that one can be debated. Who wouldn't vote for the Democrats if the above statements were true? If those were true, I don't imagine there would be anyone that would call themselves Republican.
This is what makes me sad, and unfortunately it means that several Democrats will be elected on false pretenses, quite possibly including the President.
Ideological Democrats are fully versed on their Party's platform. They firmly believe in and support socialist government that takes as much as possible from the wealthier citizens to provide programs and benefits to the poorer folk. They believe in protecting abortion on demand and will fight hard to stop any laws that would attempt to restrict or delay what they believe is an inalienable right of women to destroy the baby in her womb at any time and for any reason. They truly believe that if America would just stop making war, there will be no more war. That rich white men are the bane of the universe and must be cut down to size. That corporations are evil faceless entities bent on mistreating their employees and gaining monopoly power that would permit them to mistreat their customers as well. That no rich person became rich by honest hard work. They want their government to control people for their own good. Dictates to citizens about what they may eat and drink, what sort of vehicles they may and may not drive, and bans on tobacco use (but ironically no bans on smoking of illegal substances) are all desirable functions of government. They hate Christianity and seek to ban it, or at least force it underground. They think Christians are ignorant superstitious fools who believe crazy stuff like God created us, not the random Evolutionary theory the ideological democrat considers sacrosanct. Their substitute religion is sort of a hybridized version of Paganism and Eastern Mysticism, which leads them to believe our modern lifestyle is destroying the planet and needs to be stopped.
Generational Democrats are a bit different. They are ambivalent about issues like abortion and redistribution, and aren't necessarily on board with the idea that government should restrict our personal choices about what we can eat or drive. They're Democrats because their families have always been Democrats, or they hold jobs in the public sector. Don't tell them that their salaries are too high and their pensions are overly generous, because they firmly believe they deserve every penny and more. They will never accept that their compensation is bankrupting the country - rather they believe corrupt government is wasting money elsewhere and can fix the budget if they really want to without touching their pay and benefits. They've never heard of Fast & Furious or the scandal behind the Benghazi terror attack. They've heard of Solyndra, but don't know any details and figure it's just a right-wing propaganda story. They like ObamaCare, even though they know nothing about it beyond that it forces insurers to take on folks with pre-existing conditions and cover adult children under their parents' policies. They think that the blame for the bad economy lies solely with the Bush Administration, but can't really explain exactly how.
It is disappointing to have discovered firsthand that Democrat voters are voting based on mostly false and misleading beliefs about the critical issues facing the country. It's sad to see that so many people are casting their vote based on these beliefs, which range from arguably to completely false:
Richard Mourdock believes rape is God's will
The rich aren't paying their fair share, and if they start paying their fair share our budget problems will be solved
Republicans want to outlaw contraception
Republicans will take us back into unnecessary wars in the middle east that bust the budget and kill our young men for no purpose
Oil, Gas, and Coal can be replaced by windmills and there will be no more pollution
Polar Bears are endangered by Global Warming
Republicans are against Education
Republicans want to deny healthcare to people who can't afford insurance
Republicans would have let the American Auto Industry die in bankruptcy
Republicans are bent on destroying labor unions
The only statement on the above list that has even a little bit of truth is the last one, but even that one can be debated. Who wouldn't vote for the Democrats if the above statements were true? If those were true, I don't imagine there would be anyone that would call themselves Republican.
This is what makes me sad, and unfortunately it means that several Democrats will be elected on false pretenses, quite possibly including the President.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)