This morning my father breathed his final breath and departed this world. For those of us who believe Scripture and who do not "in this life only... hope in Christ" (1 Cor. 15:19a) he is in a better place. Even the most secular minded among us can say that he no longer suffers, but the placing of his, and my own, faith in puts the outcome immeasurably better than the simple cessation of pain and struggle. His passing is one of a change of address. That which really is my father is simply no longer housed in the body that I have known for 47 years, but is with the one who made the body of Adam from dust. He is enjoying the presence of his Lord and Savior. I don't view him as "gone" but rather he has stepped away for a while but I will see him again some day. I don't say "adieu" but rather "au revoir" (though I suppose in one technical sense "adieu" fits if one takes its literal translation of "to God"... but enough of my Sheldon side for the moment).
I haven't cried, even when I returned to pick up his remaining personal items after my mom and sister had left and I kissed him goodbye. I feel sad but no tears. I kept expecting to see him breathe again, thinking that it was simply a pause of breathing caused by the morphine. When I reached a 10 count I came back to reality knowing that he indeed passed. I called my partner and talked to him. I didn't cry and he did his best to comfort me but I didn't really feel like I needed comforting. I wrote an email to my boss and told her I would be taking bereavement leave and since my family home is out of cell coverage I would not be able to work. I didn't cry.
Honestly, at the moment, I don't feel "sad". I don't feel a sense of loss. I worry about my mother and my sister, my two young nephews (one of whom I know does not fully understand what happened tonight so part of my duty now is to help him through this), but I do not cry. I know it is coming, but now is not my time. It was the same way wither Jerry when after a long battle with AIDS he ceased his struggles and passed away in my arms. I didn't cry then. I had responsibilities that precluded succumbing to emotional despondency but it did come (so do not worry about me, I know there is still some part of me that is human). Probably after I return to San Diego a time will come when I walk down to the beach and do my own impression of Demosthenes though rather than simply practice oration there will come a cry from me that will shake the foundations of the palace of Poseidon in ways it has not seen since the war with the Titans.
What will take time will be getting used to the idea that I cannot call poppa to talk about Mizzou sports or make fun of Democrats. I can't call to tell him of the little triumphs I will have or to seek his advice. When I talk to mom I will have to catch myself before I blurt out "you and dad" or "tell poppa I said 'hi'".
It's 2:43 AM and my mind is weary yet amazing in what it pulls up from its depths in times like this. Rather than try to make sense of it I will close with the following quotes (I may butcher parts so please excuse the typing and punctuation):
"If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the first-fruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death." - 1 Corinthians 15: 19 - 26
Thy name is not among the great, as some count greatness,
Neither pen nor sword have brought thee glory,
No man called thee lord, with press of lackeys fawning at they gate.
...
Thine was a loftier dower — a nobler fate.
And tribute shall be paid in hearts, not gold.
And of such kind we pay thee of our best.
Let Caesars take their homage as of old.
They have their pleasure,leave to God the rest.
Content thee, if through ages yet untold,
The little children rise and call thee blest.
- Alsager Hay Hill
The Road goes ever on and on
Out from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
Let others follow it who can.
Let them a journey new begin.
But I at last with weary feet
Will turn towards the lighted inn,
My evening-rest and sleep to meet.
- Bilbo Baggins (JRRT)
Good night poppa.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
The Ban Stands
This just in...
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – California's supreme court backed a ban on gay marriage on Tuesday, ruling six-to-one that a voter-approved proposition defining marriage as between a man and a woman could stand.
The court, which last year unexpectedly opened the door to same-sex unions in the most populous U.S. state, bowed to the rule of the majority of California voters who passed the ban known as Proposition 8 last November.
But the court also said the roughly 18,000 marriages that took place in the state before the November ban remained valid since the ban was not retroactive.
(You can read the full report here)
How sad, but I knew this would be the outcome. Now two fights will brew over the next campaign cycle, one from each side... one, to reverse Prop 8 (that is, another California constitutional amendment), and two, to nullify the existing gay marriages that have been allowed to stand since California does not recognize marriage outside of the heterosexual definition.
Think of what this has created in a supposedly "liberal" state. California is not liberal in any known sense of the word. As I said at the BBQ Sunday, California is not liberal, it's loony. We have Prop 13 but then we have communities with Mello-Roos attached to get around Prop 13. We now have a set of circumstances where a small subset of same-sex couples are married but no more can be. We have married gays in this state, but the state does not acknowledge same-sex marriage from any other state. This isn't liberal, this is split-personality if not outright schizophrenia.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – California's supreme court backed a ban on gay marriage on Tuesday, ruling six-to-one that a voter-approved proposition defining marriage as between a man and a woman could stand.
The court, which last year unexpectedly opened the door to same-sex unions in the most populous U.S. state, bowed to the rule of the majority of California voters who passed the ban known as Proposition 8 last November.
But the court also said the roughly 18,000 marriages that took place in the state before the November ban remained valid since the ban was not retroactive.
(You can read the full report here)
How sad, but I knew this would be the outcome. Now two fights will brew over the next campaign cycle, one from each side... one, to reverse Prop 8 (that is, another California constitutional amendment), and two, to nullify the existing gay marriages that have been allowed to stand since California does not recognize marriage outside of the heterosexual definition.
Think of what this has created in a supposedly "liberal" state. California is not liberal in any known sense of the word. As I said at the BBQ Sunday, California is not liberal, it's loony. We have Prop 13 but then we have communities with Mello-Roos attached to get around Prop 13. We now have a set of circumstances where a small subset of same-sex couples are married but no more can be. We have married gays in this state, but the state does not acknowledge same-sex marriage from any other state. This isn't liberal, this is split-personality if not outright schizophrenia.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
I Agree
In all the flak over the Miss U.S.A. competition where Perez Hilton was a "judge", I honestly feel that Ms Prejean came out the better. Though I disagree with her, she simply stated what she believed was right in the matter of allowing same-sex marriage. Mr. Hilton simply showed how classless he is with his rabid retort which I was saying he did primarily to promote his own "celebrity". I was feeling rather alone in my assessment as proponents of each side of the issue took what they wanted and attacked like starving dogs over a bone. I was glad to read this editorial. I may be in the minority but at least I am not alone :-)
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Braggin' Again
My oldest nephew was given honorable mention for All District Honors in basketball, quite an honor when you consider it was voting by the entire district as well as the regional sports press.
The similarities between him and myself are obvious. :-)
The similarities between him and myself are obvious. :-)
Monday, March 23, 2009
If You Go To Baja Betty's...
THE TAP PROJECT
WORLD WATER WEEK MARCH 22-28, 2009
BAJA BETTY'S IS PROUD TO BE SUPPORTING UNICEF'S TAP PROJECT--AN OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR CUSTOMERS TO DONATE $1.00 OR MORE FOR THE TAP WATER THEY USUALLY ENJOY FOR FREE.
ALL FUNDS RAISED SUPPORT UNICEF'S EFFORTS TO BRING CLEAN AND ACCESSIBLE WATER TO MLLIONS OF CHILDREN AROUND THE WORLD. NEARLY 900 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE LACK aCCESS TO CLEAN WATER. LACK OF CLEAN WATER IS THE SECOND LARGEST KILLER OF CHILDREN UNDER FIVE. EVERY DAY, 4200 CHILDREN DIE OF WATER RELATED DISEASES.
BY PARTICIPATING IN THE TAP PROJECT, YOU ARE HELPING TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF NEEDLESS DEATHS TO ZERO--JUST ONE SINGLE DOLLAR RAISED CAN PROVIDE A CHILD WITH SAFE DRINKING WATER FOR 40 DAYS.
HELP US MAKE A DIFFERENCE
COME DINE WITH US DURING WORLD WATER WEEK, MARCH 22-28, 2009.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Gotta Brag
This morning I received the following IM from my sister regarding my nephew who is in the first grade:
the school sent H*****'s progress report. Straight A's but they also sent testing results. He is at 4th grade 4th month in reading & scored a 99% which stated that only 1% of kids his age in the NATION (sic) scored higher. He was at 2nd grade 9th month on math & a 94% on the test. Teacher said that was the highest reading score she has ever had!
the school sent H*****'s progress report. Straight A's but they also sent testing results. He is at 4th grade 4th month in reading & scored a 99% which stated that only 1% of kids his age in the NATION (sic) scored higher. He was at 2nd grade 9th month on math & a 94% on the test. Teacher said that was the highest reading score she has ever had!
Monday, March 16, 2009
That Was An Argument?
In the Sunday edition of the San Diego Union Tribune retired Navy Captain J. F. Kelly, Jr. submitted an op-ed supporting the current policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT). If only all opponents to DADT were so weak-minded, this issue would have been concluded years ago and gay men and women would be serving openly. Here is my letter to the editor that I submitted (whether or not it goes beyond this blog I don't know):
That was supposed to be a reasoned argument for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? Please. The entire opinion piece can be broken down into three parts each of which are easily refuted: First, gays shouldn't serve because "a large proportion of the population and a number o f mainstream religions and cultures find [gay behavior] immortal and abhorrent". Please, "Tailhook" wasn't a gay scandal. Large numbers of people and religions and cultures find divorce abhorrent but how many people in the military are divorced? Bad road to travel down Mr. Kelly. Second, the privacy issue. Mr. Kelly talks about the military having to separate genders and such actions are too costly to do for gays serving openly. How about why we had to create separate quarters. Societal proprieties demanded it, but it was also to protect the women from the men! Are you saying we would need to protect the few gays who would serve openly from the vast majority of heterosexual men? How silly Mr. Kelly. Even sillier would be the notion of our fighting force having men (and women) of such delicate sensibilities as to be intimidated by being in the same shower/bathroom/berthing with gays (which they already do Mr. Kelly). Finally, Mr. Kelly states that the military does discriminate and provides a list, yet does not says why the military discriminates so I will provide the proper commentary for some of them: overweight (because they can't physically do the job), physically impaired (because they can't physically do the job), mentally impaired (because they can't mentally do the job), those with limited intelligence (because they can't mentally do the job). Their inability to do the job makes them unsuited for such positions. How, Mr. Kelly, does being gay make one physically or mentally unable to do the job at hand?
Reading crap like this makes my blood boil. They have the right to make a case against DADT, but if they can't do any better than this then they really need to keep quiet because they simply make their cause look silly. They're much better off saying gays can't serve because we don't like the idea of f*ggots and be done with it.
That was supposed to be a reasoned argument for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"? Please. The entire opinion piece can be broken down into three parts each of which are easily refuted: First, gays shouldn't serve because "a large proportion of the population and a number o f mainstream religions and cultures find [gay behavior] immortal and abhorrent". Please, "Tailhook" wasn't a gay scandal. Large numbers of people and religions and cultures find divorce abhorrent but how many people in the military are divorced? Bad road to travel down Mr. Kelly. Second, the privacy issue. Mr. Kelly talks about the military having to separate genders and such actions are too costly to do for gays serving openly. How about why we had to create separate quarters. Societal proprieties demanded it, but it was also to protect the women from the men! Are you saying we would need to protect the few gays who would serve openly from the vast majority of heterosexual men? How silly Mr. Kelly. Even sillier would be the notion of our fighting force having men (and women) of such delicate sensibilities as to be intimidated by being in the same shower/bathroom/berthing with gays (which they already do Mr. Kelly). Finally, Mr. Kelly states that the military does discriminate and provides a list, yet does not says why the military discriminates so I will provide the proper commentary for some of them: overweight (because they can't physically do the job), physically impaired (because they can't physically do the job), mentally impaired (because they can't mentally do the job), those with limited intelligence (because they can't mentally do the job). Their inability to do the job makes them unsuited for such positions. How, Mr. Kelly, does being gay make one physically or mentally unable to do the job at hand?
Reading crap like this makes my blood boil. They have the right to make a case against DADT, but if they can't do any better than this then they really need to keep quiet because they simply make their cause look silly. They're much better off saying gays can't serve because we don't like the idea of f*ggots and be done with it.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Same Crap, Different Pile
Here's the opening to an article titled Obama decries earmarks, signs law with 9000 of them:
WASHINGTON — As a candidate, Barack Obama once said that a president has to be able to do more than one thing at a time. Wednesday he proved it, though not in the way he had in mind.
He criticized pork barrel spending in the form of "earmarks," urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress .
"Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability," Obama said.
He said, however, that it was crucial for him to sign the $410 billion bill as soon as it arrived at the White House from Congress because it's needed to finance much of the government for the rest of this fiscal year. It was largely written last year but was held back while Republican George W. Bush was president because he opposed it.
...
Must mark an end? If this man had any real fortitude he would not have signed it and said "This piece of legislation is from the old way of doing business. As we are now in a new era of responsibility and accountability I will not sign it. Congress must do better in affirming this pledge to the American People" (or at least something to that effect). Two things to note from the article (besides Obama showing how he is no different than any other politician):
Some of his own staff were responsible for some of the earmarks. Lovely. So much for his pristine, hand-chosen cabinet.
This piece was held back from Bush because he opposed it. Interesting. If Bush was part of the "old way of doing business" and he opposed pork at this level while Obama who signs it is the "new era", I think I would rather have the old way back.
WASHINGTON — As a candidate, Barack Obama once said that a president has to be able to do more than one thing at a time. Wednesday he proved it, though not in the way he had in mind.
He criticized pork barrel spending in the form of "earmarks," urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress .
"Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability," Obama said.
He said, however, that it was crucial for him to sign the $410 billion bill as soon as it arrived at the White House from Congress because it's needed to finance much of the government for the rest of this fiscal year. It was largely written last year but was held back while Republican George W. Bush was president because he opposed it.
...
Must mark an end? If this man had any real fortitude he would not have signed it and said "This piece of legislation is from the old way of doing business. As we are now in a new era of responsibility and accountability I will not sign it. Congress must do better in affirming this pledge to the American People" (or at least something to that effect). Two things to note from the article (besides Obama showing how he is no different than any other politician):
Friday, March 06, 2009
Who Else Would You Expect?
You Are Most Like Ronald Reagan |
 People tend to think you're a god - or that you almost ruined the country. But even if people do disagree with you, they still fall victim to your charms! |
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Tough Words Of Common Sense
"The loss of confidence is pervasive. There isn't any magic bullet here that's going to save Citi or Bank of America. The only thing that might save them is if the government comes in and sponsors a bankruptcy," said John Schloegel, a vice president of Capital Cities Asset Management in Austin, Texas.
"Until we have some meaningful discussion about doing the right things instead of just throwing money at things like AIG and General Motors, we're not going to solve the crisis we're in."
About $170 billion into AIG so far. To quote Leon from Blade Runner, "Wake up! Time to die!"
"Until we have some meaningful discussion about doing the right things instead of just throwing money at things like AIG and General Motors, we're not going to solve the crisis we're in."
About $170 billion into AIG so far. To quote Leon from Blade Runner, "Wake up! Time to die!"
Thursday, February 26, 2009
When You Look At What He Said...
Some quick hits about President Obama's speech from Factcheck.org:
President Obama's first speech to a joint session of Congress was stuffed with signals about the new direction his budget will take and meant-to-be reassuring words about the economy. But it was also peppered with exaggerations and factual misstatements.
* He said "we import more oil today than ever before." That's untrue. Imports peaked in 2005 and are substantially lower today.
* He claimed his mortgage aid plan would help "responsible" buyers but not those who borrowed beyond their means. But even prominent defenders of the program including Fed Chairman Bernanke and FDIC chief Bair concede foolish borrowers will be aided, too.
* He said the high cost of health care "causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds." That's at least double the true figure.
* He flubbed two facts about American history. The U.S. did not invent the automobile, and the transcontinental railroad was not completed until years after the Civil War, not during it.
* He claimed that his stimulus plan "prevented the layoffs" of 57 police officers in Minneapolis. In fact, it's far more complicated than that, and other factors are also helping to save police jobs.
Follow the link at the top, check the details.
President Obama's first speech to a joint session of Congress was stuffed with signals about the new direction his budget will take and meant-to-be reassuring words about the economy. But it was also peppered with exaggerations and factual misstatements.
* He said "we import more oil today than ever before." That's untrue. Imports peaked in 2005 and are substantially lower today.
* He claimed his mortgage aid plan would help "responsible" buyers but not those who borrowed beyond their means. But even prominent defenders of the program including Fed Chairman Bernanke and FDIC chief Bair concede foolish borrowers will be aided, too.
* He said the high cost of health care "causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds." That's at least double the true figure.
* He flubbed two facts about American history. The U.S. did not invent the automobile, and the transcontinental railroad was not completed until years after the Civil War, not during it.
* He claimed that his stimulus plan "prevented the layoffs" of 57 police officers in Minneapolis. In fact, it's far more complicated than that, and other factors are also helping to save police jobs.
Follow the link at the top, check the details.
I Miss Swagger
Let's face it, yes some corporate executives did pad their pockets and were more interested in their own bottom line than the bottom line of their company, but definitely not all. Did anyone here Obama's address where he painted all corporate CEOs with the same brush of how they supposedly took taxpayer money to host lavish parties and increase their personal wealth? Personally, I would like to see proof of that, I want to see where CEOs said "Oh look, government money! I'll reinstate my mind-boggling raise and then use what is left of this money to throw a big party!" President Obama, shame on you... you should know better. And shame on those blowhards in Congress who for the most part have NEVER produced anything but bills taking people to task for making money. Hey, with all this "share the pain" talk from the party on the left, where is the salary reduction and perk reduction for you pompous Caesars? Why aren't you "sharing the pain" with the rest of us? Even more so, where are the entrepreneurs telling the truth to these government officials?
Note to Obama and the Democrat Congress: Please stop talking about helping the middle class. None of you have any idea what it means to be middle class and you have no idea how to really help. Why don't you take a real job and just see what it means to be a middle-class American?
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Obama's Non-State of the Union Address
Funny, I was told all day long that President Obama's speech was to be on the economy. What I heard sounded more like a state of the union address where the first 10 minutes of the 55 minute speech was making sure no one could ever think that his policies were the problem, that it was ALL former President Bush's fault.
* sigh *
He sounded like a little kid saying "Don't blame me. I didn't do it."
Fine, we get it. You're the new kid, but you have to start taking responsibility. You have to also start listening to your own rhetoric. Disagreeing with you is not the same as partisan politics unless you truly believe you already know all the answers in which case stop playing around and trying to fake consensus.
* sigh *
He sounded like a little kid saying "Don't blame me. I didn't do it."
Fine, we get it. You're the new kid, but you have to start taking responsibility. You have to also start listening to your own rhetoric. Disagreeing with you is not the same as partisan politics unless you truly believe you already know all the answers in which case stop playing around and trying to fake consensus.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Spot The Humor
The following is a quote from an "analyst" about Obama's extra $275 billion plan for mortgages announced this morning:
"This plan is good, but it is unnecessarily complicated," said Michael Cheah, senior portfolio manager at AIG SunAmerica Asset Management in New Jersey.
Did ya find it?
"This plan is good, but it is unnecessarily complicated," said Michael Cheah, senior portfolio manager at AIG SunAmerica Asset Management in New Jersey.
Did ya find it?
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Taxifornia
Results
Estimated additional sales taxes...................$ 374
Estimated additional income taxes..................$ 634
Estimated additional VLF fees......................$ 50
Estimated additional gas taxes.....................$ 81
Estimated loss in dependent tax credits............$ 0
Total annual personal cost of proposed budget......$1,139
Lovely. The country is dropping further and further into hard times and those geniuses in Sacramento want to raise my taxes by an estimated $1,139 per year. To find your impact you can play the game here. Not even a tax credit for lubrication for this screwing we're about to get. If the Republicans cannot hold the line it's time to seriously rethink my allegiance to this party. There are ways out of the mess without forcing the hardworking citizens of this state to even more taxes. What's even worse, with the Obama money coming from the federal government they are not going to reduce the burden on the taxpayer but rather put even more spending into the budget.
Anyone outside of CA looking for a pretty damned good technical manager can just email me the offer directly.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Valentine's Day
My beau and I were lucky to get to spend Valentine's Day together. After his lovely present for my birthday (which I blogged about here) it was my turn to spoil him a bit. We got gussied up and had a wonderful dinner at Laurel. The atmosphere, the wine, the food, the time together was magical. After a two-hour dinner we bundled up and walked up the street to Top of the Park for a nightcap and one of the best views of downtown San Diego.
Today he texted me and thanked me for a wonderful evening. I told him that what made the night wonderful was that two people who love each other spent it together. I believe that with all my heart.
Today he texted me and thanked me for a wonderful evening. I told him that what made the night wonderful was that two people who love each other spent it together. I believe that with all my heart.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
How Much Is That Stimulus In The Window?
At least $3.27 trillion...
Yes, trillion, with a "t"
Who believes that these programs, once initiated, will ever be pared back much less eliminated?
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? As you can see from the table below, the true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion.
Details here.
Yes, trillion, with a "t"
Who believes that these programs, once initiated, will ever be pared back much less eliminated?
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? As you can see from the table below, the true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion.
Details here.
Figuring Out The "Stimulus" Package
I think I got it. As with most things the government does it was a simple oversight. Once I made the correction it all makes perfect sense. Obama's speech writer simply omitted one word, but once that word is inserted it became crystal clear...
Instead of simply saying "stimulus package" President Obama meant to say "negative stimulus package". Really Barack, for someone of such supposed rhetroical skills you should have read your speech much more closely before delivering it, it creates too much confusion.
Instead of simply saying "stimulus package" President Obama meant to say "negative stimulus package". Really Barack, for someone of such supposed rhetroical skills you should have read your speech much more closely before delivering it, it creates too much confusion.
Saturday, February 07, 2009
When "god" Speaks
Obama must really believe himself divine, his word is sacred and not to be questioned. This man, who has never been tested in any sense in his adult life, seems to think that honest differences in though are not to be discussed, especially when it differs from his own omniscience. Our earth-bound divine leader recently said "We can't expect relief from the tired old theories that, in eight short years, doubled the national debt, threw our economy into a tailspin, and led us into this mess in the first place". So honest discussion and debate about a second multibillion dollar "stimulus" package is not on the table, we are just to trust him? Right, sorry, I forgot he expects unwavering faith.
I really wonder if he even hears himself or if he thinks that whatever he says must be right? Funny, people said they hated this aspect of Bush yet here it is again (just that the leader is a "D" rather than an "R"). If Obama REALLY took his own words seriously he would think about where this money is coming from (but it's hard to expect that from someone who never really worked). If he wanted to do away with the "tired old theories" of the last eight years (of which a quarter of that lead by the Democrats) he would:
Cut spending
Let people who work keep more of their money by lowering tax rates rather than those stupid little tax credits they propose
If they want to give away money, take a portion of this humongous spending package and distribute it to those who work so they (that is, the worker) can start to stimulate the economy. This will work faster than any of that central planning BS they contemplate now
Make a good-faith effort toward the American people by cutting out all the crap that has been put into the package. A sizable chunk has nothing to do with "stimulus" efforts but looks more like a "Here's our chance to buy more votes under the guise of doing some good".
If our Economist-in-chief wants to stimulate business, cut or repeal the corporate income tax. Corporate income tax has never made good sense because if you think about it such income often gets taxed two or three times as it travels through the system. Why slap on an additional 35%?
Interestingly enough, this administration doesn't seem to know that to encourage sustainable growth they should eliminate bad policy, not add new layers.
I really wonder if he even hears himself or if he thinks that whatever he says must be right? Funny, people said they hated this aspect of Bush yet here it is again (just that the leader is a "D" rather than an "R"). If Obama REALLY took his own words seriously he would think about where this money is coming from (but it's hard to expect that from someone who never really worked). If he wanted to do away with the "tired old theories" of the last eight years (of which a quarter of that lead by the Democrats) he would:
Interestingly enough, this administration doesn't seem to know that to encourage sustainable growth they should eliminate bad policy, not add new layers.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Just What Is Obama Sorry For?
Just when I get my hopes up with his ethics requirements he turns into another politician. At least one of his appointees withdrew her nomination because of taxes (how is it that the party who thinks we worker bees should pay taxes seem to have so many problems paying them?). Then during his "I messed up" speech what it sounds like the problem was had to do with the message rather than it actually being wrong. He was upset that they appeared to be sending the message that there were two sets of standards. Appeared to be? There were two sets of standards and Obama himself built in that two-tiered system by allowing for wavers from the ethics requirements. If you listen to what he said in his mea culpa, it isn't he was sorry for giving his full support to people who had such problems but the image it created.
For a man swept in by "change" it sure looks like business as usual.
For a man swept in by "change" it sure looks like business as usual.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Monday, February 02, 2009
Weekend of Celebrations
My birthday weekend was wonderful and the fact that two dear friends shared their anniversary makes the it even more so (congratulations Cory and Elbert, may you have many more). Friday night Cory and Elbert took me to dinner at Cafe Bleu where we were joined by Heather for food, wine, and conversation (I'll critique the restaurant and wine on my other blog). My beau was unable to join but I was soon with him for the rest of the night where he presented me with a candle-topped carrot cake and sang "Happy Birthday" to me.
The next morning we bucked the trend of newly-found austerity, picked up our friend Sarah, and met Cory, Elbert, and Heather at Orfila Winery to start a day of wine tasting (I'll review the wines at the other blog). A stretch limo picked us up for a ride to and around Temecula to spend the day at various wineries (again, see other blog for details). After a day of drinking, er, tasting and laughing we had dinner at Buca di Beppo in Mira Mesa where we were joined by Gabe and filled out the evening with good food and embarrassment for your truly as I had to stand on a chair holding a candelabra while the place sang "Happy Birthday". After dropping Sarah off it was time for my beau and I to head home and relax (being the old men that we are).
Sunday was sunny and relaxing. After breakfast at Shades we saw Gran Torino where I had a good cry, then it was off to Hillcrest for lunch, walking around, and relaxing. Cory and Elbert celebrated their anniversary Sunday so we pretty much left them alone, content to spend our time together and talking about the future.
So thanks to everyone who made the weekend special for me. You will never truly know how much such friendship is valued.
The next morning we bucked the trend of newly-found austerity, picked up our friend Sarah, and met Cory, Elbert, and Heather at Orfila Winery to start a day of wine tasting (I'll review the wines at the other blog). A stretch limo picked us up for a ride to and around Temecula to spend the day at various wineries (again, see other blog for details). After a day of drinking, er, tasting and laughing we had dinner at Buca di Beppo in Mira Mesa where we were joined by Gabe and filled out the evening with good food and embarrassment for your truly as I had to stand on a chair holding a candelabra while the place sang "Happy Birthday". After dropping Sarah off it was time for my beau and I to head home and relax (being the old men that we are).
Sunday was sunny and relaxing. After breakfast at Shades we saw Gran Torino where I had a good cry, then it was off to Hillcrest for lunch, walking around, and relaxing. Cory and Elbert celebrated their anniversary Sunday so we pretty much left them alone, content to spend our time together and talking about the future.
So thanks to everyone who made the weekend special for me. You will never truly know how much such friendship is valued.
Friday, January 30, 2009
46
46 is the largest even integer that can't be expressed as a sum of two abundant numbers.
46 is the 13th semiprime.
There are 46 human chromosomes.
The code for international direct dial phone calls to Sweden (ewwww... don't like this one).
Code 46 was a pretty bad cyperpunkish movie.
On this day, January 30, someone whose name is firmly entrenched in the annals of American history was born. A man whose name is being invoked more and more frequently in the media and the halls of power. Depending on your political persuasion it is a name spoke in deep reverence or with derision, made to be either the right hand of God or the left buttock of Lucifer. Yes ladies and gentlemen I am speaking of....
Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Oh, yeah, today's my birthday too (sheesh, this year I am connect to both FDR * AND * Sweden, God help me).
46 is the 13th semiprime.
There are 46 human chromosomes.
The code for international direct dial phone calls to Sweden (ewwww... don't like this one).
Code 46 was a pretty bad cyperpunkish movie.
On this day, January 30, someone whose name is firmly entrenched in the annals of American history was born. A man whose name is being invoked more and more frequently in the media and the halls of power. Depending on your political persuasion it is a name spoke in deep reverence or with derision, made to be either the right hand of God or the left buttock of Lucifer. Yes ladies and gentlemen I am speaking of....
Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Oh, yeah, today's my birthday too (sheesh, this year I am connect to both FDR * AND * Sweden, God help me).
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Sadly, I Don't Think Obama Understands This
I'm not Catholic but I have to say that Catholicvote.com has some powerful videos over this message. On another note, this will not be shown during the Super Bowl. Why do I say this? Catholicvote.com offered to buy time to play this "commercial" but it was rejected. Three words to this group... "Don't give up".
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
President Obortion
Well, we can't say we weren't expecting it but I was shocked that President Obama made undoing the "Mexico City Policy" allowing funding to organizations that provide abortions (link) such a high priority. The policy, implemented by Reagan, repealed by Clinton and reestablished by Bush has again been overturned by Obama within three days of being sworn in as president. Apparently a "woman's right to choose" is of greater importance than almost anything else going on at the moment. Obama has always supported abortion rights regardless of the situation and reason. For such a supposedly smart man he just doesn't get it. I'm curious how his actions aren't political (as he claims in his own comments about his action) and it will be interesting to see how his supporters will spin this action as being "pro-family" when the end result is to allow elimination of a family member.
The discussion about abortion is often heated and more knee-jerk than thoughtful. Recently I was talking to a highly educated person who actually made the statement that an embryo was no different than any other mass of tissue such as skin cells or a tumor (shocking but that was what was said). It was a bit sad that I had to point out that one major difference was you could not take a skin sample, implant it in a uterus and nine months later have a baby emerge.
Modern science is showing how viability can be pushed back closer and closer to the time of conception. For someone who claims to want to put science back in the place it belongs, I wish President Obama would pay attention to the science he supposedly reveres.
The discussion about abortion is often heated and more knee-jerk than thoughtful. Recently I was talking to a highly educated person who actually made the statement that an embryo was no different than any other mass of tissue such as skin cells or a tumor (shocking but that was what was said). It was a bit sad that I had to point out that one major difference was you could not take a skin sample, implant it in a uterus and nine months later have a baby emerge.
Modern science is showing how viability can be pushed back closer and closer to the time of conception. For someone who claims to want to put science back in the place it belongs, I wish President Obama would pay attention to the science he supposedly reveres.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Obama's Speech
I have to say, I am a bit disappointed. For someone who is proclaimed to be one of the great orators of his age I found it a bit flat, but then again I actually listened to the words. Unlike the crowds who gazed with rapture at President Obama, I listened, analyzed, weighed the words.
I firmly agree with him on the idea of personal responsibility, that many of our problems today are "a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices". Sadly he focused a bit too much on "greed" and not not enough of the failure to make hard choices. Sorry, but no one had a gun held to their head and forced to sign loan papers when they knew darn good and well that (1) the markets do NOT always go up and (2) they couldn't make the payments at the end of the teaser rate period. Obama gives an interesting list of problems but fails to actually tie them to anything. For example, he said "our schools fail too many", but no tie back to his responsibility theme. Mr. President, why do "our schools fail too many"? Please, don't tell me it's money because if we are both honest with each other we know it isn't. How about parents not making the hard choice of doing without to be more involved with the education of their children?
I found this interesting: "On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics." Now this is interesting, since it has been his side of the aisle that has spat the more vitriolic of statements. Of course, one moment of fun for yours truly was Obama's butting heads with Pelosi and Reid. If he continues to do this he will earn much more of my support, so I will give him the benefit of the doubt. How he handles their tunnel vision of war crimes trials against Bush and Cheney will go far in how I view the man.
This one sent chills down my spine, the idea of "the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness." First of all, there is no such promise of all being equal unless you want to talk soteriology, yet that is not what Obama meant here. We are NOT all equal. We each have different skills, different inclinations, different abilities. The message he is sending is a bit muddled.
I found this one of the better lines in the speech: "Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom." The question is, what will the Obama administration do to help such people?
This statement puzzled me: "We will restore science to its rightful place". What "rightful place" is that? When was science removed from whatever that "rightful place" is? Such statements to me sound like the silly leftist "fair share" statement when it comes to taxation. Who gets to make such definitions?
I agree with this statement up to a point: "The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end." If he stopped at the hyphen I would have liked it more, but Obama says that government should meddle in the lives of people. Where is the responsibility of the individual? Given that most people seem to think that Social Security is "broken" and doesn't work, will he end it? He said earlier that public education has failed, will that end as well?
I find it interesting that Obama says "know that America is a friend of each nation". Really? What about countries who deem us as "the great Satan" (and I'm not just talking about the French here). How far does that idea of "friend" go?
I'm not sure how much that goes with his much, much better statement "We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you." I find that Obama, in trying to be the world's "good guy", a sorta global president, he is pledging far too much outside the U.S. before we really clean up our own house (read the three paragraphs or so following the above quotes).
I think what I have the most problem with is the muddled message this sends to those who pay attention to what he says. But, as I said to a co-worker this morning, unlike the rabid liberals I will NOT say that Obama is not my president. He is, and when he and I agree I will support him to the utmost of my ability. Where we disagree I will speak out to any who will listen. This, I think, is the real duty of a patriotic American. So now, it's time to see what he will do. Time for talk and speeches is over, now is the time for action.
God bless America.
I firmly agree with him on the idea of personal responsibility, that many of our problems today are "a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices". Sadly he focused a bit too much on "greed" and not not enough of the failure to make hard choices. Sorry, but no one had a gun held to their head and forced to sign loan papers when they knew darn good and well that (1) the markets do NOT always go up and (2) they couldn't make the payments at the end of the teaser rate period. Obama gives an interesting list of problems but fails to actually tie them to anything. For example, he said "our schools fail too many", but no tie back to his responsibility theme. Mr. President, why do "our schools fail too many"? Please, don't tell me it's money because if we are both honest with each other we know it isn't. How about parents not making the hard choice of doing without to be more involved with the education of their children?
I found this interesting: "On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics." Now this is interesting, since it has been his side of the aisle that has spat the more vitriolic of statements. Of course, one moment of fun for yours truly was Obama's butting heads with Pelosi and Reid. If he continues to do this he will earn much more of my support, so I will give him the benefit of the doubt. How he handles their tunnel vision of war crimes trials against Bush and Cheney will go far in how I view the man.
This one sent chills down my spine, the idea of "the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness." First of all, there is no such promise of all being equal unless you want to talk soteriology, yet that is not what Obama meant here. We are NOT all equal. We each have different skills, different inclinations, different abilities. The message he is sending is a bit muddled.
I found this one of the better lines in the speech: "Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom." The question is, what will the Obama administration do to help such people?
This statement puzzled me: "We will restore science to its rightful place". What "rightful place" is that? When was science removed from whatever that "rightful place" is? Such statements to me sound like the silly leftist "fair share" statement when it comes to taxation. Who gets to make such definitions?
I agree with this statement up to a point: "The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end." If he stopped at the hyphen I would have liked it more, but Obama says that government should meddle in the lives of people. Where is the responsibility of the individual? Given that most people seem to think that Social Security is "broken" and doesn't work, will he end it? He said earlier that public education has failed, will that end as well?
I find it interesting that Obama says "know that America is a friend of each nation". Really? What about countries who deem us as "the great Satan" (and I'm not just talking about the French here). How far does that idea of "friend" go?
I'm not sure how much that goes with his much, much better statement "We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you." I find that Obama, in trying to be the world's "good guy", a sorta global president, he is pledging far too much outside the U.S. before we really clean up our own house (read the three paragraphs or so following the above quotes).
I think what I have the most problem with is the muddled message this sends to those who pay attention to what he says. But, as I said to a co-worker this morning, unlike the rabid liberals I will NOT say that Obama is not my president. He is, and when he and I agree I will support him to the utmost of my ability. Where we disagree I will speak out to any who will listen. This, I think, is the real duty of a patriotic American. So now, it's time to see what he will do. Time for talk and speeches is over, now is the time for action.
God bless America.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Obama's Magic Numbers
Now while I have a few things to quibble about with Obama's economic plan, one thing I find fascinating is how over the matter of a couple of weeks the purported number of jobs it would create has jumped from 2.5 million to 3 million to 4.1 million. Wow! Of course, these numbers come from his own economic council. How nice it would be to live in a world where the president could miraculously create jobs at this rate. Of course, what else can we expect from this one?
Still, one hopes for the best. I just wish he and his followers didn't try to make it out like his bowel movements produce gold. That makes him and his no better than the current fanatics in power.
Still, one hopes for the best. I just wish he and his followers didn't try to make it out like his bowel movements produce gold. That makes him and his no better than the current fanatics in power.
Monday, January 05, 2009
A Tail Of Two Rings
You may have noticed that the last few weeks I have been wearing two rings, one on the left hand and one on the right hand. The ring on the left hand is the ring that my beau gave me to "seal the deal" as he likes to put it. The one on my right hand is my father's high school ring. When I was home for Thanksgiving he gave that ring to me. Dad didn't go to college, but he wanted me to have his academic ring. That ring just fits on my right hand. Now ever time I look at my hands I see symbols of the two men who love me unconditionally. Now when I look my hands I cannot help but smile and feel loved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)