By the calendar, autumn arrived in Michigan early last week (the autumnal equinox). But real fall usually comes with the change of colors. And, the leaves are starting their change--and fall.
The last couple of autumns, it seems (although I confess to having lost recollection), we've been cheated out of our colors. Storms, high winds, and heavy rain shortened our seasons, knocking down Mother Nature's artwork before we had much of a chance to appreciate it.
I noted quite a few leaves down in the backyard this AM, without benefit of a storm or high winds. And the maple trees, at least some of them, have begun turning. Although several out back as still lush with green, thanks to the continued rain and warm temperatures I suppose, a couple are fiery red--already.
On my runs through the woods, I've noticed a lightening of the greens into the yellows and even golds--are those the oaks? Tinges of red have begun to appear, at least before today.
Yet, the grass is still growing. I'm mowing once a week, both front and back. Fortunately, Bopper bails me out by often doing the front while I trim or pull weeds in Grandma's flower beds and berms.
It's sure beautiful out there and the promise is for even more beauty. In fact, although I just visited three weeks ago (Has it been three weeks already?), I'm thinking about another long weekend to New England later in October, the third weekend I think--for Homecoming. We'll see......
And, to top off a good week (after one of several devastating e-mails the week before), Matt and Linda are getting married! Hooray! Now, will the wedding be here (unlikely)? in Linda's hometown of Philadelphia (where I think her parents still live)? in Las Vegas? Karen is opting for the Jacuzzi Winery in Sonoma, although my guess that option doesn't stand much of a chance. Great news!
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Friday, September 27, 2013
Exemptions
OK, perhaps I wasn't clear. Members of Congress can do (and this was supported in a letter to me by my own Democratic US Senator who voted for ObamaCare) will enter the exchanges, but can opt for better coverage than offered. That is, they can keep the same "Cadillac coverage" that they had. The better coverage costs more of course, but instead of them paying for it, they are reimbursed with federal funds. Now, for Joe Taxpayer, will he be "reimbursed" if he opts for better coverage?
That this isn't holding "to the letter of the law" is a bit of an understatement, isn't it? What it really is is members of Congress don't have the same ObamaCare that the rest of us have. That they needed this to prevent any "brain drain" is a joke--there aren't many "brains" in DC. OK, that's a bit strong, but most of those Bozos don't deserve anything like this. Just listen to some of them--from both parties!
BTW, one of my college classmates just received his bill for his health insurance. Unless he was lying and I have no reason to think he is, he received a $300 a month increase in premiums, a 30% rise. When he asked his agent, he was told the insurance company was complying with the terms dictated by ObamaCare. Needless to say, he was not at all happy. Again, I have no reason to believe he wasn't telling the truth. I should ask him if he will be "reimbursed" with taxpayer monies. (And I know about the tax credits, which won't cover his extra almost $4000 a year.)
It's a bad law which is likely to get worse the more we find out about it. I don't know if this is true, but a guest on a local radio show claimed that had the federal gov't merely purchased $20,000 health insurance policies for the uninsured, that would have save a considerable amount of money over ObamaCare. And I think this meshes with the housing crisis. Had the federal gov't merely paid several years (up to five) of mortgages costs to people underwater, it would have been far less costly than merely giving money to the big-wigs (bankers, mortgage companies, etc.) And, who doesn't know people who still lost their homes when those same companies who took the federal money still foreclosed?
That this isn't holding "to the letter of the law" is a bit of an understatement, isn't it? What it really is is members of Congress don't have the same ObamaCare that the rest of us have. That they needed this to prevent any "brain drain" is a joke--there aren't many "brains" in DC. OK, that's a bit strong, but most of those Bozos don't deserve anything like this. Just listen to some of them--from both parties!
BTW, one of my college classmates just received his bill for his health insurance. Unless he was lying and I have no reason to think he is, he received a $300 a month increase in premiums, a 30% rise. When he asked his agent, he was told the insurance company was complying with the terms dictated by ObamaCare. Needless to say, he was not at all happy. Again, I have no reason to believe he wasn't telling the truth. I should ask him if he will be "reimbursed" with taxpayer monies. (And I know about the tax credits, which won't cover his extra almost $4000 a year.)
It's a bad law which is likely to get worse the more we find out about it. I don't know if this is true, but a guest on a local radio show claimed that had the federal gov't merely purchased $20,000 health insurance policies for the uninsured, that would have save a considerable amount of money over ObamaCare. And I think this meshes with the housing crisis. Had the federal gov't merely paid several years (up to five) of mortgages costs to people underwater, it would have been far less costly than merely giving money to the big-wigs (bankers, mortgage companies, etc.) And, who doesn't know people who still lost their homes when those same companies who took the federal money still foreclosed?
Doo-Gooders
No, that's not a typo....
I see McDonald's and other fast-food places are "under pressure" to serve vegies now. Apparently they are scrambling to do so.
I wonder who is "pressuring" for vegies. I can't imagine. But it seems to me that this is one sure way to kill fast-food restaurants. C'mon, who will stop for vegies? Maybe I'm wrong and people will, maybe lots of people. I just don't see it. When was the last time I went out with others to eat and people, just one, ordered vegies--no meat or spaghetti or fish? Oh, never or at least I can't remember ever having someone order that. I think, at some wedding dinners, there have been vegie choices instead of chicken or beef (I originally mistyped "beer," a Freudian slip?) and some folks have eaten that choice. But, boy, not many at all.
So if these vegie doo-gooders do manage to drive fast-food places out of business or merely hurt their sales, who takes care of the people who have lost their jobs? The doo-gooders? Hardly. They remind me of the guy who was walking along a pier and heard cries for help by a nonswimmer who had fallen into the water. The doo-gooder found the lifebuoy/ring and threw it out to him. When the drowner grabbed the lifebuoy/ring, the doo-gooder asked, "Do you have a good hold of it?" When assured that the drowner did, he said, "Good," dropped the rope attached to the lifebuoy/ring and moved on to do another good deed. Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Burt Folsom, and others have enumerated countless of well-intentioned people whose deeds had terrible unintended consequences.
Perhaps on a bit of a different note, but related. (And I know it's dangerous to generalize on things like this, but....) I stopped at a fast-food restaurant today and wondered, "How can these workers demand a pay raise up to $15 an hour??????" My bill came to more than $6 for my four-year old and me--and I ordered off the so-called "Value Menu." Then, it took between 15 and 20 minutes to get our food. Granted it was 12:45, but there was only one person ahead of me who hadn't ordered. And, my order was wrong! To top things off, my tummy has been growling all afternoon.
I see McDonald's and other fast-food places are "under pressure" to serve vegies now. Apparently they are scrambling to do so.
I wonder who is "pressuring" for vegies. I can't imagine. But it seems to me that this is one sure way to kill fast-food restaurants. C'mon, who will stop for vegies? Maybe I'm wrong and people will, maybe lots of people. I just don't see it. When was the last time I went out with others to eat and people, just one, ordered vegies--no meat or spaghetti or fish? Oh, never or at least I can't remember ever having someone order that. I think, at some wedding dinners, there have been vegie choices instead of chicken or beef (I originally mistyped "beer," a Freudian slip?) and some folks have eaten that choice. But, boy, not many at all.
So if these vegie doo-gooders do manage to drive fast-food places out of business or merely hurt their sales, who takes care of the people who have lost their jobs? The doo-gooders? Hardly. They remind me of the guy who was walking along a pier and heard cries for help by a nonswimmer who had fallen into the water. The doo-gooder found the lifebuoy/ring and threw it out to him. When the drowner grabbed the lifebuoy/ring, the doo-gooder asked, "Do you have a good hold of it?" When assured that the drowner did, he said, "Good," dropped the rope attached to the lifebuoy/ring and moved on to do another good deed. Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Burt Folsom, and others have enumerated countless of well-intentioned people whose deeds had terrible unintended consequences.
Perhaps on a bit of a different note, but related. (And I know it's dangerous to generalize on things like this, but....) I stopped at a fast-food restaurant today and wondered, "How can these workers demand a pay raise up to $15 an hour??????" My bill came to more than $6 for my four-year old and me--and I ordered off the so-called "Value Menu." Then, it took between 15 and 20 minutes to get our food. Granted it was 12:45, but there was only one person ahead of me who hadn't ordered. And, my order was wrong! To top things off, my tummy has been growling all afternoon.
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Here's a link to Congress's Exemption from ObamaCare
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/358550/congresss-exemption-obamacare-john-fund
Senator David Vitter from LA is behind the move to force Congress to make a public stand, unlike the President, who ordered the OPM to exempt (OK, to "reimburse") members of Congress for any costs related to their forced entry into the ObamaCare exhanges--like the rest of the people, except those favorites who've already received exemptions and extensions. Still more, including some of the larger unions, are calling for exemptions. Hey, if the thing is so darn good, why are so many people seeking exemptions?!?!?!
Senator David Vitter from LA is behind the move to force Congress to make a public stand, unlike the President, who ordered the OPM to exempt (OK, to "reimburse") members of Congress for any costs related to their forced entry into the ObamaCare exhanges--like the rest of the people, except those favorites who've already received exemptions and extensions. Still more, including some of the larger unions, are calling for exemptions. Hey, if the thing is so darn good, why are so many people seeking exemptions?!?!?!
History
If ObamaCare is defunded (and, wow!, listen to all the lies and obfuscation flying around with that!), I recently wondered how historians will rate President Obama. No doubt they'll be swayed by the fawning of the LameStream media and mostly undeserved praise he gets from them. And, those who rate Presidents, largely college political science and history professors, are generally on the left of the political spectrum.
I remember, too, that historians and their textbooks still credit FDR and his New Deal for ending the Depression, when they did no such thing. That's a hard one to dispel, so firmly ingrained is this historical myth. Facts, for example, of unemployment and production numbers do little to persuade people after what they've, often erroneously, learned in their history courses. After all, "The textbook says...." I've had this discussion with a number of folks and they refuse to listen to any contradictory evidence. I wonder what is the fascination with FDR that historians have.
I suppose it's like Kennedy and the myth of Camelot. He is often, not always, but too often portrayed as a good President. Some, esp the people on the street, identify him as "a great" one. That, of course, is hardly so. His record as "a cold warrior" was not enviable. He was very lukewarm on civil rights, finally goaded into a minimum amount of action by his equally-lukewarm brother Bobby when he finally changed his views. I will credit JFK for inspiring Americans to do more than they might have thought capable and, over the past 10 or 12 years, I've changed my mind on this. I think this was the most important aspect of JFK's Presidency. But, when queried about what made Kennedy "great," what it boils down to is he was assassinated. So, to be "great," all a President has to do is get assassinated. That's a tough criterion.
I know how I will rate Obama and it's not good. Even if I left my personal animus aside (I think he's a fraud, a hypocrite, a narcissist, and more--and I was infuriated when, for a while, there was a move to favorably compare him with Abraham Lincoln, certainly, if sincere, quite an ignorant attempt), which I would, he would be rated poorly. To head off some who might find fault with that, I also rate W. Bush poorly. Neither were good Presidents, not even close. And, even worse, the times really necessitate good Presidents. In the end, I could blame the American voters and I do--to an extent. But then I remember the alternatives and they were bad, too (although my school's still out on Mitt Romney). For that I blame the Democratic and Republican leadership/establishment--they gave us the rotten choices. I suppose voters could demand better, but they don't.
I think it was Fatty Arbuckle, back 100 years ago, who said, "You get what you pay for." (It might have been Juan Valdez?) I suppose that goes for politics, too.
I remember, too, that historians and their textbooks still credit FDR and his New Deal for ending the Depression, when they did no such thing. That's a hard one to dispel, so firmly ingrained is this historical myth. Facts, for example, of unemployment and production numbers do little to persuade people after what they've, often erroneously, learned in their history courses. After all, "The textbook says...." I've had this discussion with a number of folks and they refuse to listen to any contradictory evidence. I wonder what is the fascination with FDR that historians have.
I suppose it's like Kennedy and the myth of Camelot. He is often, not always, but too often portrayed as a good President. Some, esp the people on the street, identify him as "a great" one. That, of course, is hardly so. His record as "a cold warrior" was not enviable. He was very lukewarm on civil rights, finally goaded into a minimum amount of action by his equally-lukewarm brother Bobby when he finally changed his views. I will credit JFK for inspiring Americans to do more than they might have thought capable and, over the past 10 or 12 years, I've changed my mind on this. I think this was the most important aspect of JFK's Presidency. But, when queried about what made Kennedy "great," what it boils down to is he was assassinated. So, to be "great," all a President has to do is get assassinated. That's a tough criterion.
I know how I will rate Obama and it's not good. Even if I left my personal animus aside (I think he's a fraud, a hypocrite, a narcissist, and more--and I was infuriated when, for a while, there was a move to favorably compare him with Abraham Lincoln, certainly, if sincere, quite an ignorant attempt), which I would, he would be rated poorly. To head off some who might find fault with that, I also rate W. Bush poorly. Neither were good Presidents, not even close. And, even worse, the times really necessitate good Presidents. In the end, I could blame the American voters and I do--to an extent. But then I remember the alternatives and they were bad, too (although my school's still out on Mitt Romney). For that I blame the Democratic and Republican leadership/establishment--they gave us the rotten choices. I suppose voters could demand better, but they don't.
I think it was Fatty Arbuckle, back 100 years ago, who said, "You get what you pay for." (It might have been Juan Valdez?) I suppose that goes for politics, too.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Sat AM Thoughts
The evidence against and criticism of the Common Core standards continues to mount. It's as I noted months ago, "follow the money." Many individuals, companies, and foundations have profited greatly from the money that has willy-nilly been handed out in the name of "quality education." It's been a strange gathering of bedfellows, Democrats and Republicans, but the glue has been the same--money and lots of it. Here, Michelle Malkin offers a good recap, including a number of points you've seen here over the past year or so: http://www.humanevents.com/2013/09/20/jeb-bushs-latest-common-core-snit-fit/ And, anecdotally, I've spoken with more than one teacher who has admitted some of the things now being required of teachers has already produced undesirable results, namely more paperwork (that is, useless paperwork) and more testing (including computer-based tests given to students who haven't been trained on computers!).
And, in a way, I feel vindicated. A few months ago I blogged that members of Congress should also be required to participate in the health exchanges of ObamaCare. I was told by several people that, indeed, they are. Well, that's not so, at least not according to a US Senator I heard last week. I believe he is from Louisiana. He emphasized that President Obama signed a special rule, through the Office of Personnel Management, in August that permits this: members of Congress can designate themselves and/or members of their staffs to opt out of ObamaCare or, if they remain in, are reimbursed for the extra costs of keeping their old coverage. And, he stressed, if other Americans, that is, you and me, have higher health insurance costs, we aren't reimbursed. This, too, was the gist of a letter I received from one of our Michigan Senators, although it was cloaked somewhat to make it seem that members of Congress are just like us. Yeah, right.
In this same vein, I came across a guy who bought minimal health care coverage for his three sons and himself. It included a very high deductible, he electing to gamble on his family maintaining good health and staying injury-free. It was his choice. I believe ObamaCare refers to this as "bronze coverage." The man said he paid $330 a month, something he chose to do for his boys and himself. His premiums, according to his last billing, rose to $960 a month! That's almost triple. There was a letter, complete with the ObamaCare/government regulations, that explained the increase. Yep, the President was right: "You can keep your current health insurance." He neglected to add that the cost would triple.
I know, I know, "But Bush lied." I hope everyone is enjoying Dancing with the Stars, American Idol, college football, and the NFL......
And, in a way, I feel vindicated. A few months ago I blogged that members of Congress should also be required to participate in the health exchanges of ObamaCare. I was told by several people that, indeed, they are. Well, that's not so, at least not according to a US Senator I heard last week. I believe he is from Louisiana. He emphasized that President Obama signed a special rule, through the Office of Personnel Management, in August that permits this: members of Congress can designate themselves and/or members of their staffs to opt out of ObamaCare or, if they remain in, are reimbursed for the extra costs of keeping their old coverage. And, he stressed, if other Americans, that is, you and me, have higher health insurance costs, we aren't reimbursed. This, too, was the gist of a letter I received from one of our Michigan Senators, although it was cloaked somewhat to make it seem that members of Congress are just like us. Yeah, right.
In this same vein, I came across a guy who bought minimal health care coverage for his three sons and himself. It included a very high deductible, he electing to gamble on his family maintaining good health and staying injury-free. It was his choice. I believe ObamaCare refers to this as "bronze coverage." The man said he paid $330 a month, something he chose to do for his boys and himself. His premiums, according to his last billing, rose to $960 a month! That's almost triple. There was a letter, complete with the ObamaCare/government regulations, that explained the increase. Yep, the President was right: "You can keep your current health insurance." He neglected to add that the cost would triple.
I know, I know, "But Bush lied." I hope everyone is enjoying Dancing with the Stars, American Idol, college football, and the NFL......
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Sad
According to national statistics, Flint and Detroit are the two most violent cities in the US. Wow! I know this has been the case for the recent past, but it doesn't make it easier to swallow. Both cities hold special places in my heart and it breaks when I read this stuff. I don't have the answers to the question of violence, but certainly they lie somewhere in convincing people that a change in culture is needed. Thuggery, which often leads to violence, must be condemned. Citizens can't hide criminals, family members or not. People need to turn in the thugs. Of course, the article also cited the US Attorney's Office and the Detroit and Flint police depts, as well as local politicians. None excited any confidence that they can make a difference. Education, instead of being blackballed, needs to be encourage and embraced.
Another article compared unemployment of upper level incomes with lower level incomes. Upper level income jobs are almost in full employment, an unemployment rate of about 3.8%. For the lower levels, it is a bit over 20%--that's still Depression-level numbers. And, this crunches the middle class, which is shut out of a full upper level and is pushed into the lower level income jobs, reducing their incomes. The answer is education--college, skilled trades, technology, etc. That is, education, instead of being blackballed, needs to be encouraged and embraced.
Several people have asked why I oppose the Common Core Curriculum. Here is as good an answer as I've seen.
Another article compared unemployment of upper level incomes with lower level incomes. Upper level income jobs are almost in full employment, an unemployment rate of about 3.8%. For the lower levels, it is a bit over 20%--that's still Depression-level numbers. And, this crunches the middle class, which is shut out of a full upper level and is pushed into the lower level income jobs, reducing their incomes. The answer is education--college, skilled trades, technology, etc. That is, education, instead of being blackballed, needs to be encouraged and embraced.
Several people have asked why I oppose the Common Core Curriculum. Here is as good an answer as I've seen.
You may remember that, months ago, with the Common Core I suggested that we "follow the money." That's what Common Core is all about, money. Bill Gates and others have spent millions to con people into thinking CC will improve education. No, what it will do, purportedly, is to train workers for work in businesses. That, of course, will save businesses money. (And I hope nobody believes those savings will be passed along to consumers; just like Snyder's business tax cut, at the expense of retirees, didn't lower prices.) Again, as I noted earlier, who wrote the CC? Yep, private concerns, who stand to reap millions from adoption. Also, realize that some who were opposed to the CC earlier are now supportive--after sizable grants from, you guessed it, the Gates Foundation and other businesses who will make money off the CC. I also pointed out earlier that some folks who were on the original CC board have been critical of the standards because, well, they don't do a thing to improve learning/education. That John Engler is on board supporting the CC is an immediate warning. And educators, once again, have sold out.
Remember, education is no longer about learning ("Is love of learning no longer enough?"); it's about testing, testing, testing (and the money others can make off of it).
For years, too, I've been a critic of all the Advance Placement classes and tests, for the majority of students who take them. A new report comes out claiming what I've claimed all along--the AP courses and tests, for the majority of students who take them, are a "waste," esp of federal and state monies. It's a question of, once again, "follow the money." And, once again, schools and educators have sold out--or at least jumped on the wrong bandwagon one more time--to the detriment of many students and taxpayers. Yet, we keep allowing the same kinds of people to run our schools. (Don't expect teachers to stand up for what's right!)
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Crazy!
We say it so often it almost becomes trite. "Don't like the weather in Michigan? Stick around for an hour and it will change." Or, something like that.
Last week, Tue I believe, we broke a temperature record for the date in Flint--96 degrees. The next day was only 93. It's mid-September! Then, yesterday AM about 6 AM as I headed out for a run with my blind buddy, I had to clear ice off of my car's windshield. Ice!
From 96 degrees to ice in three and a half days.
I like Michigan. It's a good place to live. I was born and raised here--early on in Detroit and environs, about 45 minutes or so away since Karen and I were married. I still identify myself to people in other cities as "from Detroit."
But last weekend, in a whirlwind tour, I was reminded of my affinity for New England. In fact, I think I often feel like that's where I belong. I identify with the geography, the pace of life, the history, etc. It seems to be me.
I visited the Amherst campus, spending a good amount of time atop Memorial Hill overlooking the Holyoke Range--something I always do when I return. I went by Emily Dickinson's house, too. Of course, I visited the baseball and rugby fields and checked out the renovations at the football field. Ah, the memories. I took in a couple of my old classrooms and dorms, but was shattered to find the ping pong room at my fraternity house was gone, a victim of renovations there. Don't people know how much character was developed in that ping pong room? I also mosey through town, quite a different place from 40 years ago to be certain. On my trip up from the airport in Hartford I took the back roads, something I almost always do, too. I was again struck by the history of the area--how many streets bear names like "Shay," "Adams," etc.? I ran in Windsor Locks, by the airport on Saturday AM. There I jogged past a church and the town hall, both with cornerstones that read dates in the 1760s. Mystic Seaport in CT, where a party I was attending was held, is more than 300 years old.
I was reminded of the New England hills, both in Mass and Conn. Oh, they don't at all rival the mountains out west, but compared to Michigan, they are real hills. The Prius I rented had a great deal of trouble keeping up speed on the upgrades and hills of the highways. Brooks, both seen from the car and while running, had lots of little waterfalls due to the hills. They are always enjoyable to watch, if only for a few minutes.
Of course, mostly I enjoyed seeing old classmates, teammates, friends. We reminisced some, caught up some, and talked over today some. They are great guys and I feel fortunate to count them as friends for life.
Still, as much as I like Michigan, a little part of me (maybe a big part of me) regards New England as my place.
Last week, Tue I believe, we broke a temperature record for the date in Flint--96 degrees. The next day was only 93. It's mid-September! Then, yesterday AM about 6 AM as I headed out for a run with my blind buddy, I had to clear ice off of my car's windshield. Ice!
From 96 degrees to ice in three and a half days.
I like Michigan. It's a good place to live. I was born and raised here--early on in Detroit and environs, about 45 minutes or so away since Karen and I were married. I still identify myself to people in other cities as "from Detroit."
But last weekend, in a whirlwind tour, I was reminded of my affinity for New England. In fact, I think I often feel like that's where I belong. I identify with the geography, the pace of life, the history, etc. It seems to be me.
I visited the Amherst campus, spending a good amount of time atop Memorial Hill overlooking the Holyoke Range--something I always do when I return. I went by Emily Dickinson's house, too. Of course, I visited the baseball and rugby fields and checked out the renovations at the football field. Ah, the memories. I took in a couple of my old classrooms and dorms, but was shattered to find the ping pong room at my fraternity house was gone, a victim of renovations there. Don't people know how much character was developed in that ping pong room? I also mosey through town, quite a different place from 40 years ago to be certain. On my trip up from the airport in Hartford I took the back roads, something I almost always do, too. I was again struck by the history of the area--how many streets bear names like "Shay," "Adams," etc.? I ran in Windsor Locks, by the airport on Saturday AM. There I jogged past a church and the town hall, both with cornerstones that read dates in the 1760s. Mystic Seaport in CT, where a party I was attending was held, is more than 300 years old.
I was reminded of the New England hills, both in Mass and Conn. Oh, they don't at all rival the mountains out west, but compared to Michigan, they are real hills. The Prius I rented had a great deal of trouble keeping up speed on the upgrades and hills of the highways. Brooks, both seen from the car and while running, had lots of little waterfalls due to the hills. They are always enjoyable to watch, if only for a few minutes.
Of course, mostly I enjoyed seeing old classmates, teammates, friends. We reminisced some, caught up some, and talked over today some. They are great guys and I feel fortunate to count them as friends for life.
Still, as much as I like Michigan, a little part of me (maybe a big part of me) regards New England as my place.
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Testing, Testing, Testing
Apparently parents are starting to see the light, that all this testing of their kids by the schools isn't such a hot idea. I guess there is a still small, but growing anti-test movement. People have been to school board meetings, picketing schools, and withheld their children from the testing--all over the US. Good for these parents! In oblique reference to one of my comments about the deleterious effects of administrators and many teachers, one of my classmates wrote, in part, "Garbage in, Garbage out." Yep.
Of course, nobody wants to see almost a thousand people gassed to death in Syria. But that's not a valid reason or justification to send in one hundred US missiles. Certainly it's inhumane to use gas on people; but isn't it also inhumane to kill more than 100,000 by/with "more conventional" methods/weapons? Are people who are gassed any more dead than those killed by bullets, bombs, or rockets? Do the families of those killed by bullets, bombs, or rockets grieve any less than those killed by gas? Remember, the use of torpedoes in WW1 was also considered inhumane, "dirty" warfare. But, oddly enough, death by 300-pound shells fired by Big Bertha, 30 miles away or by airplanes dropping their then primitive bombs was not. How would one characterize the fire-bombing of Dresden, Luftwaffe targeting of British cities, or the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Where are those who are outraged by the gas attacks and now demand retaliation when it comes to, say, slavery prevalent in nations in Africa and Asia? Isn't slavery as inhumane as anything? It's a slippery slope, esp when so many are employing selective outrage. Am I the only one who finds it odd that lifelong doves are now the ones calling most loudly for US military action? Where is Cindy Sheehan? How about the "pink" group? Are they now protesting and the media just aren't paying attention or are they silent? Selective outrage......
Of course, our two Michigan Sycophants, er, US Senators have duly fallen in line with the President. I did receive a very well-writtten letter from my Congressman, Kerry Bentivolio about my opposition to any military actions in Syria. He, too, is opposed, but to me most impressive was how clearly he made his case for opposition and the case against Obama. Gee, from "a reindeer farmer" who "plays Santa Claus," too. Who'd a thunk it? If people still think Obama is "eloquent" (he's not!), they should read this letter.
A guy the other night said I should support Obama, "because he's our President, whether you agree with him or not." I didn't want to ruin a nice social occasion, so I let that slide, no response. Because Obama made a big mistake, shooting off his mouth, does not put "US credibility at stake." That is an argument being used for support for Obama's planned missile attack. It reminds me of the Clinton impeachment years. "So what? They all did it? And, of course, "They" didn't all do "it." In fact, the vast majority didn't! I don't even think Obama's credibility is at stake. I don't think he has much. He's lied again and again. While Americans don't seem to care and the LameStream Media continue to cover for him, hard-core foreign diplomats and leaders such as Putin don't hold Obama in very high regard. In fact, with the recent developments calling for Assad to hand over his gas to Putin, Putin is the player while Obama is being played--again.
I'm still waiting for the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to rescind Obama's never-deserved-in-the-first-place award. Don't the committee members feel silly and ashamed, if there's any sense of shame any more?
Of course, nobody wants to see almost a thousand people gassed to death in Syria. But that's not a valid reason or justification to send in one hundred US missiles. Certainly it's inhumane to use gas on people; but isn't it also inhumane to kill more than 100,000 by/with "more conventional" methods/weapons? Are people who are gassed any more dead than those killed by bullets, bombs, or rockets? Do the families of those killed by bullets, bombs, or rockets grieve any less than those killed by gas? Remember, the use of torpedoes in WW1 was also considered inhumane, "dirty" warfare. But, oddly enough, death by 300-pound shells fired by Big Bertha, 30 miles away or by airplanes dropping their then primitive bombs was not. How would one characterize the fire-bombing of Dresden, Luftwaffe targeting of British cities, or the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Where are those who are outraged by the gas attacks and now demand retaliation when it comes to, say, slavery prevalent in nations in Africa and Asia? Isn't slavery as inhumane as anything? It's a slippery slope, esp when so many are employing selective outrage. Am I the only one who finds it odd that lifelong doves are now the ones calling most loudly for US military action? Where is Cindy Sheehan? How about the "pink" group? Are they now protesting and the media just aren't paying attention or are they silent? Selective outrage......
Of course, our two Michigan Sycophants, er, US Senators have duly fallen in line with the President. I did receive a very well-writtten letter from my Congressman, Kerry Bentivolio about my opposition to any military actions in Syria. He, too, is opposed, but to me most impressive was how clearly he made his case for opposition and the case against Obama. Gee, from "a reindeer farmer" who "plays Santa Claus," too. Who'd a thunk it? If people still think Obama is "eloquent" (he's not!), they should read this letter.
A guy the other night said I should support Obama, "because he's our President, whether you agree with him or not." I didn't want to ruin a nice social occasion, so I let that slide, no response. Because Obama made a big mistake, shooting off his mouth, does not put "US credibility at stake." That is an argument being used for support for Obama's planned missile attack. It reminds me of the Clinton impeachment years. "So what? They all did it? And, of course, "They" didn't all do "it." In fact, the vast majority didn't! I don't even think Obama's credibility is at stake. I don't think he has much. He's lied again and again. While Americans don't seem to care and the LameStream Media continue to cover for him, hard-core foreign diplomats and leaders such as Putin don't hold Obama in very high regard. In fact, with the recent developments calling for Assad to hand over his gas to Putin, Putin is the player while Obama is being played--again.
I'm still waiting for the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to rescind Obama's never-deserved-in-the-first-place award. Don't the committee members feel silly and ashamed, if there's any sense of shame any more?
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Sun Eve
Just a real quick note, having returned from a whirlwind trip to Amherst and the Connecticut Shore. A rejuvenating three days--spiritually and intellectually, if not physically! New England is just a great, great place.
So, now (catching up on three days' worth of newspapers) we have to send missiles into Syria to uphold Obama's, er America's "credibility?" Obama goes shooting off his mouth in a misguided statement about "a red line," from which he's now backing down? And we are going to kill how many people (more than any gas attack, a gas attack from we don't really know whom?) because the President can't afford to lose face? And they called George W. Bush "a cowboy!"
Over the weekend, when I made a face at an obvious Obama-supporter, he snorted (in the way that only the effetely self-righteous can snort), "You didn't like Bush, did you?" I replied, "Nope." While a somewhat confused look came upon this guy's face (I didn't know him before Sat eve and don't remember his name even), I blurted, "I don't like either one...because neither one should have got anywhere near the White House except as tourists."
"American credibility is on the line" my foot! And most of this talk is coming from people who, before Obama, were the doviest of the doves. If matters weren't so serious about all of these things, their hypocrisy (willful or not) would be laughable.
Bath time for the kids--all three in school tomorrow AM.
So, now (catching up on three days' worth of newspapers) we have to send missiles into Syria to uphold Obama's, er America's "credibility?" Obama goes shooting off his mouth in a misguided statement about "a red line," from which he's now backing down? And we are going to kill how many people (more than any gas attack, a gas attack from we don't really know whom?) because the President can't afford to lose face? And they called George W. Bush "a cowboy!"
Over the weekend, when I made a face at an obvious Obama-supporter, he snorted (in the way that only the effetely self-righteous can snort), "You didn't like Bush, did you?" I replied, "Nope." While a somewhat confused look came upon this guy's face (I didn't know him before Sat eve and don't remember his name even), I blurted, "I don't like either one...because neither one should have got anywhere near the White House except as tourists."
"American credibility is on the line" my foot! And most of this talk is coming from people who, before Obama, were the doviest of the doves. If matters weren't so serious about all of these things, their hypocrisy (willful or not) would be laughable.
Bath time for the kids--all three in school tomorrow AM.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Newspaper Columns
Last weekend, an op-ed in the Free Press discussed "Restoring trust in government." Boy, that seems like an easy solution. How about getting our elected officials and bureaucrats to behave honestly? Yep, displays of honesty and integrity on a broad basis, instead of a rare instance, would go a long way to "restoring trust in government." Both parties are sneaky. Both parties tell lies, lots of them. Both parties are more interested in special interests than in the US and its people. (I know, I know, "But special interests are people.....) Both parties are more concerned with election and re-election than doing what's right. (I know, I know, "But if we don't get elected, we can't do anything......" From what Congress and Presidents have done over the past few decades, I'd rather they didn't do anything!) But this article didn't focus on honesty. A stronger economy, campaign spending, gerrymandering, etc. take center focus. OK, these might be real issues, worthy of concern, but how about plain and simple honesty?????? Is that too much to ask? Apparently it is.
I've written about EJ Dionne before. I think he's terrible. That the liberals/Democrats have him for a spokesperson is hardly flattering. This weekend I happened to see this column; inexplicably, it has been absent the past few weeks, maybe a month or more. Here, among other things, is what he wrote: "[Obama is responsible for] "the welcome decline of our dependence on Middle East oil...." Huh? Is that like banning, unilaterally, even in opposition to a court order, off-shore drilling. Staunch refusal to allow the oil pipeline from Canada, fracking, etc. Yeah, right, "decline of our dependence" on any foreign oil. I'm pretty sure Dionne would not be happy with the grade on his paper if he was in one of my classes. It's not his opinion, to which he's entitled. As my professors wrote on my papers, "No sloppy thinking allowed."
I've written about EJ Dionne before. I think he's terrible. That the liberals/Democrats have him for a spokesperson is hardly flattering. This weekend I happened to see this column; inexplicably, it has been absent the past few weeks, maybe a month or more. Here, among other things, is what he wrote: "[Obama is responsible for] "the welcome decline of our dependence on Middle East oil...." Huh? Is that like banning, unilaterally, even in opposition to a court order, off-shore drilling. Staunch refusal to allow the oil pipeline from Canada, fracking, etc. Yeah, right, "decline of our dependence" on any foreign oil. I'm pretty sure Dionne would not be happy with the grade on his paper if he was in one of my classes. It's not his opinion, to which he's entitled. As my professors wrote on my papers, "No sloppy thinking allowed."
Monday, September 2, 2013
Sun AM Thoughts
A recent post on one of my Amherst College list serves read this, "...his [Obama's] premature Nobel Peace Prize." Hmmm...... "premature." I responded to the entire list serve, "I suppose that's one way of putting it."
I opened my Sun newspaper and the top of the paper read, "legendary reporter dies." How often do I read that word, "legendary," or others like it, "legend," "beloved," etc.? I guess I must be an ostrich of sorts. Many of these "legends" are people I've never heard of, ever. Typically they are the Hollywood-types, television people, or hippy-rock stars whose names I don't recognize. Or, if I do recognize them, I wonder what they ever did to merit a "legendary" sobriquet. I suppose this is yet another instance of us watering down the English language so that, in essence, words become more and more nebulous, without any real meaning.
Ah, cell phones and texting. It's not enough that they are often incredibly rude conveyances. It's not enough that a driver who is texting is 23 times, yes, 23 times!, more like to get in an accident. Now, pedestrians who text while walking are "racking up injuries," according to a newspaper article this AM. Perhaps it's not the technology itself (of course it isn't), but the way the "I, Me, Mine" generations use it to become even more "I, Me, Mine."
I opened my Sun newspaper and the top of the paper read, "legendary reporter dies." How often do I read that word, "legendary," or others like it, "legend," "beloved," etc.? I guess I must be an ostrich of sorts. Many of these "legends" are people I've never heard of, ever. Typically they are the Hollywood-types, television people, or hippy-rock stars whose names I don't recognize. Or, if I do recognize them, I wonder what they ever did to merit a "legendary" sobriquet. I suppose this is yet another instance of us watering down the English language so that, in essence, words become more and more nebulous, without any real meaning.
Ah, cell phones and texting. It's not enough that they are often incredibly rude conveyances. It's not enough that a driver who is texting is 23 times, yes, 23 times!, more like to get in an accident. Now, pedestrians who text while walking are "racking up injuries," according to a newspaper article this AM. Perhaps it's not the technology itself (of course it isn't), but the way the "I, Me, Mine" generations use it to become even more "I, Me, Mine."
In one of my Linked-In e-mails, here are some job titles/descriptions that are out there: "bottle popper," "feed ingredients and by-products specialist," and these, all coming in the field of education, "simulation technician," "permissions clearance researcher," "enrollment associate," "work control and support coordinator," "older adult services director." Hmmm...... Sounds like a lot of paper-pushers to me. I always thought there were/are far too many people in the schools getting teacher-pay for not teaching, but doing pretty much superfluous or useless work. Of course, that's just me.
I suppose it's "Happy New Year!" While most people celebrate the coming of the new year on Jan 1, teachers seem to make the first Tue in Sept their new year. Ah, the return to school. I remember how much I dreaded that for so many years. I don't think anyone realized how much I disliked working at MHS, more so than any imagined, I'd guess. Now, I am excited about my return, looking forward. I know some teachers would say, "It'll be June before you know it." Well, now I don't want it to "be June before [I] know it." I suppose that's for two [4-2?] reasons. I enjoy this much more than I ever did. And, there aren't a whole lot of "Junes" left for me! Regardless, Happy New Year, although I prefer the traditional New Year's Eve Party.
OK, out to do my school work before I change my mind and find other things to tinker with......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
