Sounded Good at the Time...

Go, Tea Parties and 912ers!!

2009-09-10T08:40:00.000-07:00

We are approaching two very special dates to remember: September 11 and 12.

September 11, 2001
When our nation watched a horrorific attack on our soil - both in New York City and in Washington, DC, plus the plane that went down in Pennsylvania thanks to the efforts of brave passengers who loved this country and were smart enough to know what to do and brave enough to do it.
September 12, 2001
When our nation rallied as one to show the world we were still strong, that the lives taken by murdering terrorists would not go unnoticed and without response.

The first date has been declared a National Day of Remembrance and Service. I think Glenn Beck is correct in stating that the day of service should be the second date (9/12).

If you want a real view of your life under Statism vs. Capitalism, check out this great blog.

For a view of what true free-market healthcare could be like, check out this posting at John's Ponderings on Townhall.com: Understanding True Free-Market Medical Health Insurance.

My best wishes to all those tea party goers and those who will be in DC for the 9/12 events.

And a shake of my head in sheer puzzlement to those "911 truthers" such as Van Jones and Charlie Sheen. Do they also believe the Earth is flat?

Dear Congressman: A Virtual 'Boston Tea Party'

2009-03-16T11:16:00.000-07:00

Rather than sending you a real tea bag -- something that will just get dumped by the mail screeners, I am sending you this image of a tea bag. This tea bag is a symbol of how you have been letting us down, how you think you can get away with excessive taxation without listening to us, how you use such tactics as promoting wealth envy to get many of us stirred up to vote for you. As Rick Santelli said, enough is enough. It's time for a new Boston Tea Party. Along with throwing tea in the harbor (metaphorically speaking), we need to toss all of you in with them, along with Obama, Geithner, Soros, and the whole rotten bunch. It won't make a very good cup of tea, but it will improve life for all the rest of us.

Taking Action at the Local HOA

2009-03-05T15:42:00.000-08:00

A lot of talk is bandied about these days regarding starting at the local level – contacting mayors, town council members, etc., about controlling spending. Sounds good, but…

We can’t even get our Homeowners Association (HOA) to listen.

People think an HOA helps preserve their property value and neighborly quality of life. Whether they do or not is a matter of opinion. The facts, however, are that they can use force to collect the homeowner dues (also called “regular assessments” according to our HOA President) and impose late fees and liens on our houses if these dues aren’t paid. (Sort of a mini-IRS.)

Usually, people who get elected as officers have such low self-esteem that they need to have power over others, whom they fear – in this case their hapless neighbors whom would run totally amok without the omnipresent authority of the HOA. They spend the dues money on things that they think are crowd-pleasers, such as kid-oriented events (about 80 out of 197 households in our HOA have children) then wonder why more and more owners stop paying their dues. The basic principle of capitalism – getting value for the value given – seems to totally escape these people. They live by the platitude of “doing it for the community.”

My husband and I got fooled into thinking that an HOA would help in dealing with difficult neighbors, like the renters who lived on both sides of our previous house (in a cul-de-sac). They held parties where plenty of alcohol consumption took place, in the front yards (which were tiny) instead of the back yards (which were large). They were illegal Hispanics, and the landlords cajoled us with the statement that their tenants’ disruptive behavior was just a “cultural difference” and that we “should get used to it.”

Unfortunately, our HOA falls far short of the expectation of having someone to help when there are neighbor issues like these. We still have to deal with them ourselves. In fact, our neighbors impose on us. One got a school bus stop arranged in front of our house. They have also acquired a young dog that is turning into quite a barker. Other neighbors harass workmen who happen to park outside of our property while doing repairs.

Of course, the HOA did its part by forcing a neighbor to throw away the shingles he got at a discount and then buy other shingles. Why? The ones thrown away were brown. Our bylaws/covenants specify using only black. We have yet to understand how this improves our property value and maintains a pleasant neighborhood. Sounds like just a bunch of petty, small-minded thugs flexing their puny muscles.

One thing we’re thankful for: the HOA is not in charge of our household budget. My hubby and I would be in bankruptcy court in a year or less.

Here’s a sample of what they are doing (remember that this is a small HOA of 197 houses, a tennis court, a pool, and a sorry excuse for a clubhouse – amounts are rounded off):

Management/admin: $16,300/year*
Grounds care: $13,000/year
Pool expenses.: $17,500/year**
Clubhouse/tennis courts: $3,000/year**
Newsletter/social events: $2,350**

* They wanted more but settled for a decreased amount; I’m certain they will get the rest through the back door. Our HOA officers are complete Socialists.

** Approximately 10% of the owners use the pool regularly. Approximately 1% use the tennis courts and clubhouse regularly (mostly Girl Scout meetings). All for “the community.” The newsletter is a waste of paper and postage, filled with “fluff” pieces.

The budget total is $61,000 ($310 per year per house, which is $10 more than we pay in fees per house per year – that’s a deficit of $1,970 per year). Meanwhile, our pool has been estimated to cost $150,000 to replace in a few years. Guess we better get ready to bend over and take it when a large “special assessment” comes our way.

To top off all of this, our budget income amount included items such as fees for statements on the HOA’s finances issued to buyers (we tried to get one of these before buying, but the management company refused). These statements are rarely done. That’s like finding a $10 bill on the sidewalk one year and including in your projected income for the next year the certainty of finding another $10 bill. Chances are pretty slim. Our HOA officers don’t seem to be able to grasp this basic concept. Of course, our HOA doesn’t have to worry about it. They can just raise that “regular assessment” or issue a “special assessment” to cover the shortfall they irresponsibly created with their expenditures on Easter Egg Hunts, etc. Sigh, it’s all in the name of “the community.”

With an HOA like this, how does one start at local level to undo the mess of overspending in the trillions at the national level? Just be glad these people aren’t part of the DC spendthrift crowd.

Copyright © 2009 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good after all. (And don't forget to check out her blog site: Sounded Good.) She and her hubby also have a fun blog that takes a little lighter look at the issues: Break Time Topics (things to read while you take a break to enjoy your morning coffee of afternoon tea). Also, don’t miss her on Townhall.com.

Caroline is ‘Present’

2008-12-21T14:11:00.000-08:00

The next “ruler” of our nation will be sworn in come January 20th of the fast-approaching New Year. The “B.O.”zo man is wasting no time, however, getting things lined up for his grab at the brass ring. He and “the Missus” have selected a private school for their little ones, executive orders have been lined up along with a few fresh pens full of ink, and his arch enemy, “That Hillary Woman,” has been tapped for her next political gig as his Secretary of State. Sounds good, but…

Who will fill the Hillarybeast’s shoes in Congress?

We finally have a “Kennedy-free” zone in D.C. A political dynasty that began with the “Camelot-ish” reign of “Jack” and “Jackie” is now faltering as Ted “Chappaquiddick” Kennedy puts his health in the hands of the best medical professionals in the land and absents himself from his Senatorial seat.

But, wait – that’s very BAD! We have to have a Kennedy in D.C., and not just passing out punch and cookies as a D.C. “hostess” – we’re talking about having a “real” role in governing us bunch of unruly individuals that run amok without regulations and “oversight.”

Gee, how about Caroline Kennedy? Didn’t she do such a SUPER job as part of the BOzo's V.P. selection team? On the experience scale that MUST rank higher than Palin being a Mayor and then a Governor. Not to mention Her Royal Clintoness being an ex-First Lady and then carpetbagger-turned-New-York-Senator.

The final test of Caroline’s qualifications would sound something like this:

Me: “Hi, Ms. Kennedy.”

CK: “Please, call me Caroline. I’m a Kennedy but want to be treated just like you humble people.”

Me: “Uh – ok – well, I was just going to ask you about your qualifications to be Senator from New York.”

CK: “Oh, I’m so flattered to be asked. Here, have some punch and cookies. Gee, first I got to help pick the V.P. That was so exciting. Biden wasn’t my first choice, but he won’t be too bad. The press just has to stop reporting his gaffes. And he’s studying hard so he can get up to speed on some things like…”

Me: “Sorry to interrupt, but I just wanted to ask you one thing.”

CK: “Oh, sure. I’m always glad to answer anything you people in the media…”

Me: “I’m not a journalist. I write opinion columns.”

CK: “Oh, the sort of things that the Fairness Doctrine will address.”

Me: “That’s radio. My question is…”

CK: “More punch?”

Me: “No, I’m good. Actually, it smells a bit ‘strong.’”

CK: “Of course. It’s Ted’s secret recipe.”

Me: “Ok…” (I set glass gently aside) “Well, I just wanted to ask you to say something.”

CK: “That sounds easy. Shoot.”

Me: “Say ‘present.’”

CK: “‘Present.’”

Me: “Great. You passed.”

CK: “Really? That’s it? I’m qualified.”

Me: “Sure. That’s about all our President-elect said while in office. Piece of cake.”

CK: “Cool. More cookies?”

Sounds like a good idea to read up on the importance of individual rights and what we could be losing with people like this running the government.

Ho, ho, ho! Everyone!

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good afterall. She and her hubby also have a fun blog that takes a little lighter look at the issues: Break Time Topics (things to read while you take a break to enjoy your morning coffee of afternoon tea). Also, don’t miss her on Townhall.com. Get confused about the difference between Capitalism and Statism? This blog lays it all out for you.

Pouncin' on Palin

2008-09-14T14:41:00.000-07:00

All’s fair in love and politics – or so some bloggers think. The right to free speech is also being exercised with gleeful abandon. Their target-du-jour? Sarah Palin – Governor of Alaska, Republican, VP running mate to McCain and – gasp! – a woman! The Dems are having a field day, working hard to bring out into the harsh light of public scrutiny anything and everything they can find and blowing those things up out of all proportion. All in the name of running a campaign. Sounds good but…

Does any of this “pouncin’ on Palin” have validity? Is there any dirt (other than under the sofa) to find?

My theory:

The Dems, with Pelosi leading the fracas from behind the scenes (she couldn’t stand the thought of not being the most powerful female in D.C.), virtually ganged up on Hillary during the campaign for the Democrat Party nomination, and then ignored the 18+ million who voted for her by not naming her as Lord-on-high Obama’s running mate. (After all, can’t have THREE presidents – Hillary, Bill, and Barack – simultaneously.) Now, the Republicans have named a woman Veep candidate, and the Dems are sputtering, “But…but…we’re the party that advances equality for women!”

But, that’s just my humble theory.

So, all the libs are fuming and foaming at the mouth that a woman dares to go out there and compete with the “big boys” yet is not a member of the Democrat Party. (The Republicans have the “sex card” in their hand and the Dems don’t like it one bit.)

Of course, they are missing the point about women’s equality. It’s not really women’s equality. It’s gender equality.

Individuals – both women and men – should be able to live their life as they choose without restrictions due to their gender. Only in the matter of giving birth is there an exception. (Sorry, guys, but you just aren’t equipped.) However, once the baby is born, to tell a man that due to his gender he cannot be the primary caregiver is just as ludicrous as telling a woman that she has to set aside any thought other than the care of that child until the child “launches” (to use the term from the movie “Failure to Launch”).

From who can be in the kitchen, who should mow the lawn, who should drive the kids to hockey practice, etc., these decisions are up to the people directly involved, not the government, bloggers, or a bunch of do-gooding busybodies. (Remember the scene from “The Music Man” where the townswomen were gossiping in a barnyard henish manner?)

Hey, all you Dems, keep yelling about the Republicans having the “sex card.” It’s good for the country.

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good after all. (And don't forget to check out her blog site: Sounded Good.) She and her hubby also have a fun blog that takes a little lighter look at the issues: Break Time Topics (things to read while you take a break to enjoy your morning coffee of afternoon tea). Also, don’t miss her on Townhall.com.

Anti-Oil Message Oozes into the Movies

2008-08-10T13:50:00.000-07:00

The “Bourne” movies successfully transformed Matt Damon from a Hollywood actor with an image of a wimpy punk, fit only to play genius janitors (“Good Will Hunting”) or crazed rich-kid-wannabees (“The Talented Mr. Ripley”), to a real gosh-darn action hero, by golly! Sounds good, but…

He can’t seem to leave the whacko, “PC” (politically correct), anti-oil message behind.

The message in “The Bourne Supremacy” is subtly woven into the plot. As we learn more and more about amnesiac Bourne’s past, we find that he was assigned by our CIA as part of the Treadstone team to assassinate a Russian who was critical of – you guessed it – “Big Oil,” specifically, the privatization of Russia’s oil fields after the collapse of the – gasp! – U.S.S.R. (it collapsed? yes, but not forever, as recent actions in the former SSR of Georgia attest). The newspaper headlines slide by pretty fast, almost like a subliminal message, as Bourne scans for information at the local library, so it took me a couple of viewings to piece everything together. (Since I rarely go to theaters, I just caught this recently while watching the movie for the second time – the first time was about a year ago.)

It seems that, according to the movie, a Russian interested in oil field leases, teamed with his CIA buddy to arrange the assassination of someone standing in his way and trying to build up public opinion against him. They targeted this naysayer. This was Bourne’s first non-training mission. Once in his target’s hotel room, he discovered that the target’s wife was there. Surprise! He has to do some quick thinking. Aha! Kill the target, then make it look as if the wife killed him then committed suicide. (No matter that there was a young daughter who would forever live with the false knowledge that her parents died like this. Oh, well – collateral damage. Few assassinations go exactly as planned, I guess. Wouldn’t know since my career has taken another path.)

Oil is quickly replacing money as “the root of all evil” in Hollywood-controlled movie productions and from them into people’s minds.

Unfortunately, nothing reliable and without side-effects has yet replaced oil to make the fuel to run my car. Ethanol is a pipe dream that, if fully realized, could result in massive food shortages. Electric cars won’t run without electricity, and since the anti-nuke/anti-windmill/anti-anysensiblesolution crowd is still going strong, there may not be enough both to charge up our cars and maintain our modern lifestyle in our homes (refrigerators, cooking ranges, microwaves, washers, dryers, TVs, computers, etc.). Of course, we’re all just a bunch of energy hogs that need to stop using such a huge chunk of the world’s resources – not!

Matt Damon better be investing his income wisely. If he keeps up his anti-oil stance, there won’t be enough energy in any form to make movies nor to show them – whether it’s in theaters or at home.

By the way, this movie came out in 2004, and the Russian government, led by then-President Vladimir Putin, began the process of nationalizing the oil fields in 2004. Gee, what a coincidence! Here’s another: One of the “crimes” that YUKOS, the largest oil company and Putin’s first takeover target, was convicted of was “nonpayment of a tax bill far exceeding the company’s profits.”

Sound familiar? It should.

Exxon, the current whipping boy for the anti-oil crowd, will pay out $40 billion (worldwide) in taxes for 2008. They paid $19.828 billion so far this year while earning $11.68 billion in their second quarter this year (assuming that the first quarter was about the same, they paid about $14 billion in taxes MORE than the profits they earned). Yet, Congress and Presidential-wannabee Obama are calling for more taxes to cut down those “obscene profits.” Exxon earns much of those profits outside of the U.S. and pays taxes to the respective governments. (Get more details at Mark J. Perry’s blog.) But, again, Congress and Obama don’t care. Exxon pays more in taxes than the bottom half of the income earners in the U.S., but that also doesn’t matter.

How long would your local grocery store stay in business if, for every dollar they took in above their expenses (i.e., profit), they paid out $1.50? How long could you survive if, for every dollar you earned above what you need for the basics (food, housing, utilities, healthcare, clothes), you had to pay out $1.50?

It’s time for all of us to get some sense. We are following in Putin’s footsteps. Our Congress is coming closer and closer to trying to nationalize our oil companies. Don’t believe me? Check out this FoxNews item. It seemed to have slipped by the other news outlets unnoticed. Yeah, right!

Gotta go hog some energy now.

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good afterall. She and her hubby also have a fun blog that takes a little lighter look at the issues: Break Time Topics (things to read while you take a break to enjoy your morning coffee of afternoon tea). Also, don’t miss her on Townhall.com.

Free Houses Aren’t Free

2008-07-30T19:53:00.000-07:00

The show “Extreme Makeover” takes some dilapidated house, fixes it up in an obscenely short time, and turns it over to the owners. They make for some very exciting TV viewing and bring a warm glow to the hearts of their audience while lifting up the standard of living of their benefactorees. Sounds good, but…

The recipients of this largesse do not always live happily ever after. Case in point: The owners of the mini mansion in Atlanta, GA, that was built in six days in 2005, are about to undergo foreclosure. Possibly due to being inspired by the show, they decided to start up a construction business, except that they didn’t have any money with which to start such a company. Hmm, what to do, what to do? Ah! They had a house worth $450,000 – voilà, loan collateral! Unfortunately, they weren’t very good businesspeople, as evidenced by the fact that their business failed and the beautiful 4-bedroom house will go up for auction on August 5th.

My first impression when reading this was: There was a reason these people were living in a house so bad that the “Extreme Makeover” team demolished it, namely poor money management, either due to their lack of knowledge or having fallen on hard times (or, as the liberal whackos say, having been downtrodden by the evil rich). In either case, building them a huge new house is not a solution. If they have fallen on hard times, they probably don’t have the funds to keep up the new house. If they don’t know how to manage money, how will they manage the finances this new house requires? This includes the managing of the $250,000 in contributions, scholarships, and a home maintenance fund. Where did that money go?

But, gee, maybe they were an exception, not the rule.

Of course, there are the winners of the HGTV Dream Homes. These poor saps clearly are not usually aware that they are liable for income tax (state and federal) on the market value of the house and other prizes, as well as property taxes, utilities, any HOA fees, and maintenance costs. With the house being worth over $1 million, plus additional prizes such as an SUV and $250,000 in cash, the tax bill alone would be hefty, to say the least. Don and Shelley Cruz certainly found this out the hard way. Not only did they find that this splendid house was too much for them, but the financial burden was rather onerous.

Don, a stay-at-home dad, and Shelly, an administrative assistant who’s gone back to school to become an accountant, are quickly running through their winnings as they struggle to pay thousands a month for electricity, household help and other outsize bills for their outsize home.

On top of that, they had to take out a loan to pay off a $672,000 tax bill on their winnings.

Seems that they suddenly found themselves in a tax bracket reserved for those evil rich people, the ones that Democrats are declaring they will sock it to when they regain the White House (as if Obama’s coronation – uh, er, inauguration were a foregone conclusion). They finally had to put the house up for auction, selling it for $1,325,000 to Rick Mullins. The Cruz family has returned to Chicago and put this two-year fantasy experience behind them. They are probably very happy to do so, since they are no longer faced with an annual property tax bill of $25,000 (many people’s annual salary). They know what they can handle financially to feel comfortable.

Ever take a slice of cake that was way too large because the cake just looked so gosh darn yummy? Sure, we all have – either cake or pie or something else equally scrumptious. The same goes for people who grab at too much house. The Cruz’s aren’t the only winners to opt out of the “dream” after a short time.

I’m not saying that people should not enter the HGTV Dream Home sweepstakes. They should just read all of the fine print. I have and, therefore, will never enter for fear that I would win. Besides, I like the house we live in now. We resisted the loan officer’s gently persuasive techniquest to try to get us to go for more house. (“With your credit rating and financial status, you could qualify for a much higher loan.” Yeah, right, you make the monthly payment, lady.) Thus, we ended up with a house that not only suits our lifestyle but our financial goals. We don’t care to be house poor.

That brings me back to being financially responsible. Whether you win your home, get one built for you by the Ty Pennington gang, get a government-sanctioned bundle of booty to bail you out of a bad mortgage you signed on to, or just plain overbuy, you are financially responsible. Unfortunately, Bush signed that bailout bill, so all of you who didn’t read the fine print before signing, you can pop that champagne cork now. Your neighbor is going to have a gun pointed at his/her head while the politicians reach into his/her wallet and pull out a wad of money to keep your butt off the street and seated in that La-Z-boy.

Yipee – not!

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

“Ah-nold” Terminates McCain?

2008-01-31T16:55:00.000-08:00

The California “Guvernator” has thrown his muscular support behind John McCain. Unlike Governor Crist of Florida, “Ah-nold” has star power. He can bring a lot to McCain’s campaign. Sounds good, but…

Does this Republican (with very Democratic leanings) totally sink McCain as the Republican (with Democratic leanings) contender for the White House?

The thing McCain needs now, according to all of the pundits, is support among conservative Republicans. How do they support positions like these?

· The McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reform Bill – an amnesty program with a $1,500 price tag per sucker – er, criminal alien – uh, honest, upright, hard-working (does the jobs us lazy slobs won’t do) immigrants. (The McCain-Kennedy Immigration Reform Bill Falls Short)
· The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill – it wasn’t bad enough, so they made it worse, turning it into a true assault on the First Amendment, according to the James Madison Center for Free Speech. In a press release, they stated, “Besides its attacks on free-speech rights, the bill would severely impede the right of free association, which also enjoys broad protection under the First Amendment.” (James Madison Center.org Press Release 022201)
· The McCain-Lieberman Stewardship Act – a failed attempt to drag down our economy for the sake of the “global warming hoax.” Analysis showed that this would be a very costly bill, not only in terms of dollars but also jobs lost. (New Study Shows Hefty Price Tag for McCain-Lieberman Bill)

Don’t think that “Ah-nold” is a RINO (Republican in Name Only)? Check out this latest Democratic-sounding, liberal-leaning, attempted legislation since ousting Gray Davis from the Governor’s Office in the Golden State:

The latest: A failed (thank goodness) $15 billion socialized medicine bill (it took a liberal Democrat, Sen. Sheila Kuehl, to say, “It doesn’t matter how many good things are in the bill if there isn’t money to pay for them.” (California Senate Kills Schwarzenegger Health Care Plan - Biggest legislative defeat for California Governor) Of course, this hasn’t stopped the “Guvernator” from trying. (Can’t have people being self-responsible and paying for their own healthcare. They’d get the idea that they didn’t need big government for other things, too.)

Yeah, the conservatives are going to go for McCain even MORE now that “Guvernator” has expressed his approval and admiration – NOT!

By the way, if you want to read more about the Obama endorsement, check out my article.

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill
A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good afterall. (And don't forget to check out her blog sites: Sounded Good, Shame on You, and Kudos to You.)

Ted to Bill: “Phtht!”

2008-01-30T17:24:00.000-08:00

Maybe it was gentlemanly manners. Maybe he’s just slowing down in his rotund, white-haired years. Whatever the reason, Ted Kennedy announced his endorsement of Obama after his niece, Caroline. Sounds good, but…

Manners and advanced years doesn’t matter. The effect was a build-up from Caroline’s announcement to his. The press was already frenzied and waiting for the next big endorsement. They were primed and ready. How better to increase the very public nature of a big raspberry (“Phtht!”) at Bill and Hillary?

Speaking of Hillary, does anybody remember her campaign for reelection to the New York seat in the U.S. Senate? Check this article: Hillary: Love Her, Hate Her. She raised a (relatively) huge Senate race war chest, all the while poo-pooing the idea that she would not fulfill her second 6-year term and would instead seek the Presidency. That certainly deserves a raspberry: “Phtht!”

That goes double for the voters in New York who fell for her b--- s---: “Phtht! Phtht!”

The author of another article certainly got it wrong when he stated:

“…she promised New Yorkers she would serve out her Senate term, which ends in 2006. Political promises are broken all the time, but Senator Clinton, unlike her husband, is known in Congress as a straight shooter.” [“Hillary's Money Machine Love her or hate her, Clinton's dollars are driving the Democrats.” Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, December 8, 2003]

She may have served out that first term, but obviously had no intention of serving out the second one.

Talk about throwing your vote away!

By the way, all of this brouhaha has focused people on whether Obama is running a race-neutral campaign or not. That’s sort of like the smokescreen cast up during the confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court. It doesn’t matter. Obama is such a horror on his own, as an individual, not as a half black-half white candidate, there is no need to bring race into the mix.

A few items in his campaign that make me shudder:

“I'll be a President who finally makes health care affordable and available to every single American” – Glad I’m not a doctor right now, about to be chained to my stethoscope for the sake of my neighbor’s “right” to treatment for every sniffle
“I'll be a President who ends the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas” – Gee, what about the labor unions, who drove labor costs artificially high, and the government, who forced companies to deal with these unions? Maybe that had a little something to do with this “jobs exodus.”
“I'll be a President who harnesses the ingenuity of farmers and scientists and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil once and for all.” – How about freeing the oil companies to go after the oil we have lying in the Gulf of Mexico and the barren wastelands of Alaska? Since it costs more in energy to process these “renewable” fuels and get them to your car or to the power company supplying your house, how does this help?
“And I'll be a President who ends this war in Iraq and finally brings our troops home; who restores our moral standing; who understands that 9/11 is not a way to scare up votes, but a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century; common threats of terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.” – This statement is so chockfull of garbage, I have to take it point by point:

Does this bozo even understand why we are in Iraq? Does he have any realistic idea of the threat we all face if our troops are pulled back home prematurely? Has he even heard of Vietnam? This would be much worse. Maybe I need to start getting fitted for that burqa now to be ready when the terrorists (almost all of whom are Muslim) take over.
We all understand that 9/11 is not a vote-getting tactic. Next, he’ll be saying that Bush planned the attack on that terrible day in 2001 so he could get re-elected in 2004. (Now, that’s planning ahead!) He seems to have some idea (or his speech writers do) of “terrorism” and “nuclear weapons” but has not been able to connect the dots with the strides we are making in Iraq. (He’s been taking in too much liberally-biased news, I guess.)
He lumps “climate change” with poverty. Hopefully, this is because he realizes the economic disaster that would befall this country if we were to sign the Kyoto Treaty. Hey, Obama, climate change happens. Get over it. (And watch the series “The Universe” on the History channel for the big picture. We’re just little specs in a vast space that is beyond our imagination.)
Finally, genocide and disease is another odd pairing. Maybe he is signaling to my American Indian relatives that they should vote for him and he won’t give them disease-infested blankets. Can’t imagine why else he is even saying this (oh, yeah, those speech writers again)

[ Remarks of Senator Barack Obama: Iowa Caucus Night,” Des Moines, IA January 03, 2008]

Bottom line: Ted may be giving the raspberry to the Clintons, but we still need to look past his endorsement and take a close, hard look at this Obama guy.

“Phtht!”

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good afterall. (And don't forget to check out her blog sites: Sounded Good, Shame on You, and Kudos to You.)

A primer on how to be a terrible Buyer's (Real Estate) Agent

2008-01-28T18:02:00.000-08:00

The following is my follow-up to my article "Is Your 'Buyers Only' Agent Really on Your Side?" posted on Saturday 5 January 2008. Unfortunately, the Buyers Only Agent that we used has behaved immorally by not facing up to the damage he and the house inspector he forced on us missed. Maybe this guide will help you avoid this and the other issues we faced.

How NOT to serve Buyers
(No, not a Twilight Zone episode, but much worse.
A primer in how to be a nightmarish Buyer’s Agent.)

Fail to:

Conduct a Market Survey
Find out how motivated the Seller is
Get a feel for what the lowest offer price should be at the very least

Just scratch your head, go with a “gut response,” and collect that big, fat commission check.

Who cares that Zillow.com has the Buyers’ new home valued below what they paid or that the Buyers find out at closing that the Seller would have been ecstatic with the lower price they had wanted to offer but you talked them out of (by claiming that it was a “hot market” and “this house won’t last long”).

Force the Buyers to use your choice of:

Pest Inspector 1
House Inspector 2
Closing Attorney 3

1 Who didn’t even want to show the Buyers his report but instead was focused on trying to get business from the Seller (to treat the existing termite infestation).

2 Even though you know he has screwed up in the past and will certainly screw up again by missing damage that the Seller should pay for fixing.

3 Who screwed up the closing by failing to get one of the Sellers to sign off on their claim to the property and then quit a week before the closing date, delaying the closing and almost losing the Buyers their rate lock at a time when interest rates had jumped up a percentage point.

Let your opinions prevail over what the Buyers want, such as:

Not scheduling certain houses to show the Buyers because you think their location isn’t suitable (after all, you’re a “housing consultant”!)
Including a request for a useless home warranty in the purchase offer.
Not pursuing the installation of a digital thermostat (an item agreed to on the repairs list) because you think “they’re a waste of money”
Letting certain items on the house inspection report slide or not pursuing getting any of the repairs agreed to by the Seller done at all
Letting the Pest Inspector also be the one who treats the termite infestation (thus giving the Buyers no real, objective assurance that the treatment was even done, let alone done correctly)

If the Buyers start squawking
about pulling out of the sale,
keep pushing the idea that
they could lose their deposit.

Don’t mention to them that in reality, Buyers almost
always get their deposit back, no matter why
they pulled out of the sale.

When problems show
up with the house
(ones that were missed
by the House Inspector),
claim it’s not your fault
and refuse to communicate
with the Buyers.

Follow this up with lies and denials to the Real Estate
Commission when a complaint is filed against you.

Think that you did a great job for the Buyers because:

You gave them a fancy binder containing duplicates of papers they already have
You gave them a $25 gift card to Home Depot (boy, that sure goes a long way toward covering all of the extra expenses the Buyers incurred – NOT!)
You invite them once a year to a mosquito-invested park to chow down on barbecued chicken (ptomaine, anyone?) along with the rest of your victims
You’re such a swell person (Gee, why can’t the Buyers see that?)

Oh well, you have that big, fat commission check to keep
you warm, no matter how unreasonable the Buyers
are about how you shafted them.

Are the ‘Racial Gloves’ off in the Presidential Campaign?

2008-01-13T10:21:00.000-08:00

Stirring speeches are being given, rousing debates are being held, well-timed tears are being shed (to show a candidate’s “human” side). Sounds good, but…

Have the Clintons misstepped on the racial front? They’re walking a fine line in their campaign for the Democratic nomination against Obama. How do they point out his failings as a contender without offending their base of black voters?

Not very well, judging by recent headlines like this one on Drudge (12 January 2008):

Clinton camp hits Obama Attacks 'painful' for black voters...

The real dilemma? According to the above article, it’s this: Do black voters who have supported the Clintons through two terms as President now get “drawn to the prospect of a black man winning the presidency”? It seems to depend on the age of the voter, with younger black voters going to Obama and older black voters hanging in there with the Clintons, generally speaking.

Actually, the dilemma is: Why are we looking at a candidate’s “group identity” (female, black, southern, Irish descent, young, old, cute, well-groomed, bad hair, etc.) or anything similar?

When did we stop looking at who can sit across the table from people like Vladimir Putin, who was (and possibly still is) part of the old regime in the now-collapsed USSR? (Remember them? The Cold War? Atomic Bomb scares?) What about facing down Ahmadinejad-the-pipsqueak-Iranian, the nation of Pakistan, and Islamic terrorists? (Nuclear threat in the hands of people who call us “infidels” who should be wiped off the face of the earth.) Giuliani certainly stood firm when New York City was ground zero for an attack on this country. Thompson comes across as a tough “hombre” who wouldn’t shrink from responding where appropriate. Even Huckabee showed backbone with his “be prepared to see the gates of Hell” remark during the South Carolina debate on FoxNews. While Clinton and Obama have both said they will yank our troops out of the Middle East virtually after taking the oath of office.

What about saying “No” loud and clear to the “gimme” crowd (“free” healthcare, government-run schools, welfare, amnesty for illegals invading this country, and on and on)? That same debate showed only one candidate who had that kind of backbone: Ron Paul. (Of course, he’s also no slouch on defending us against aggressors.) While Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are promising healthcare “free” for all (except for that pesky little matter of higher taxes to pay for it and the virtual enslavement of every healthcare provider in this country to anyone with a hangnail).

Who cares if a candidate is male, female, old, young, yada…yada…yada…? Let’s not get distracted from what is really important to this country and which Presidential candidate will be able to stand tall (figuratively speaking) in the White House and to the world. We don’t need more hijab-wearing, Islamic pandering politicians. Pelosi is enough.

Now, who has the best wardrobe…that’s important! Pantsuit, anyone?

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

Water and National Healthcare

2008-01-08T18:34:00.000-08:00

Municipalities have been putting pipes in the ground as far back as the late 1800’s in this country. Some pipes carry water to your house or business, while others take away your waste (a much better system than the chamber pots that were prevalent before then). An abundant water supply coming in to your house helps you keep your clothes, linens, and dishes clean. Waste going out of your house to the local wastewater treatment facility keeps down disease. Sounds good, but…

Municipalities have overpromised, and drought stricken states in the southeast of the U.S. are facing the consequences. This amounts, essentially, to a breach of contract (in my layman’s opinion).

When municipalities require that new houses and businesses in the municipal water district must connect with the water and sewer system, they are, in essence, saying that they commit to supplying the water and sewer services the owners will require. Instead of living up to that commitment through proper planning, they are threatening to implement 50% surcharges and accusing us of being water hogs (flushing too much, taking too many showers, keeping our clothes too clean and our grass too green, etc.). In other words, it’s all our fault. [See Florida’s government issued “guidelines” on water usage, stating that all “wasteful and unnecessary water use is prohibited.” Of course, they don’t specify what is “wasteful and unnecessary.”]

Some municipalities that have called for residents to reduce water usage are now facing a shortfall in the revenue they would have been getting from that water usage. Duh!

When government gets into the “business” of providing a service that should be handled by the private sector, they always stumble. Usually, this is due to entrenched bureaucracy, virtually guaranteed life employment for government workers, and systems that just can’t trim down and turn around as quickly as a private company can. Of course, companies, unless forced to do so by government regulations and/or pressure from special interest groups such as have been attacking the energy sector, usually don’t encourage their customers to use less of their product.

Well, you may be asking, what does this have to do with national healthcare (a.k.a. socialized medicine)?

It has to do with the government making promises, commitments, contracts, or whatever you want to call it, saying that they can do the job better (than the private sector). They’ve done it with government schools (and keep sucking up tax dollars as the bloated education system demands more while grades fall in reading and other subjects compared to other countries). They’ve done it with roads, where funds raised through bonds never seem to be there or to be sufficient to cover keeping existing roads in good repair. They’ve done it with parks and recreation, which are lagging behind in maintenance due to the staggering cost. Again and again, government is taking on things that should be handled by the private sector and stumbling miserably.

Now, they want to take on providing healthcare. The very idea makes me queasy!

Time for us all to realize that too much is shifting to the public sector, to the detriment of us all. Time for municipalities to get out of the water and sewer business and most definitely never get into the healthcare business. Then, we can have clean, safe water, free flowing sewers, and doctors who can make medical decisions without checking with their government watchdog. (If you want to read a fascinating, well-researched and well-written, romantic drama that shows exactly how this would work, read Noble Vision by Gen LaGreca, available from Winged Victory Press and Amazon.com.)

Excuse me while I go take some of that pink stuff (some of that self-medicating like what is being advocated in Britain). Urp!

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good after all.

Is Your ‘Buyers Only’ Agent Really on Your Side?

2008-01-05T09:30:00.000-08:00

You want to buy a house. You’re tired of renting…want to move to something bigger/smaller…had a job change/relocation… No matter the reason, the first step is to get a Real Estate agent who will work for your best interests, not the seller’s. So, you get a ‘Buyers Only’ agent. Someone dedicated to making sure you get the best end of the deal. Sounds good, but…

Is there really such a thing as a Buyers Only agent? We thought so until our latest house buying experience.

No, this isn’t a gripe column about how we were left hanging, how the agent did not fulfill the promises touted on the company’s website, how our complaints to the agency owner have been responded to with a “we’re not responsible” letter and then total silence. We have already addressed these issues through the proper government regulatory agencies and legal authorities.

This is a column dedicated to helping you avoid the pitfalls we fell into, even after we had been through several experiences both buying and selling houses over the past 10 years.

First, don’t believe the hype on the agent’s (or the agency’s) website. No matter what the claims, the reality that every buyer has to face is that the agent’s goal is to collect a commission. As a laissez-faire capitalist, I am not opposed to people wanting to get paid for their time and energy. You just need to be aware of what their true motivation is. There is no altruistic drive on their part to find you the perfect house in which you and your family will live happily ever after. That is your job – one you should undertake with the utmost seriousness.

Second, realize that any real estate agent is working with multiple clients at a time. Don’t rely on him/her to keep your buying transaction on track and enforce items in the buying contract. Just as the most important feature in a house is “Location! Location! Location!,” your most important job as a buyer in dealing with your agent is: “Follow up! Follow up! Follow up!” In other words, bug ‘em until they holler “Uncle!” Then, bug ‘em some more!

Third, don’t be fooled by the line “I have a whole team working for you.” This, at least in our personal experience, usually means that the agent will hand off your transaction to this team. These aren’t the people you signed on to deal with. You don’t know their background and experience. Ask the agent about them before you even start looking at houses. Also, when you do get into a buying contract, don’t let the agent keep referring you to this “team” with such phrases as “So-and-so is handling that. You can call her/him directly.” Just say, “No, you’re my agent. You’re the one who has a commission at stake. Get me an answer.” (There’s no harm in playing the “motivation” card by bringing up the commission!)

Fourth, NEVER NEVER NEVER let your agent even recommend – let alone select – the house inspector you use, not to mention the pest inspector, the lender, the closing attorney, or anyone else. House inspection has become a joke, at least in North Carolina. It is extremely limited, and most inspectors do a haphazard job at best. Realize that this inspection is your most important protection as a buyer. The report the inspector prepares for you is your tool to negotiate with the seller – whether it’s for getting repairs done, getting a credit in lieu of those repairs, or getting a drop in the purchase price. Remember, your agent gets a commission based on the purchase price, so he/she will not want to pursue the last option, since it would lower the commission the seller pays. You’ll have to be the one to push for what you want.

Fifth, don’t let your agent’s preferences become yours. The agent we used, for example, thinks that programmable thermostats are a waste of money, so when the seller needed to replace the thermostat and we pushed for a digital thermostat, our agent refused to pass this on to the seller. We got stuck with the $10-analog-thermostat-special that the seller chose. (Yes, buyers can specify what they want, but our agent refused to listen to us.) He also refused to ask for a credit in lieu of repairs, even when we had performed a walk-thru to verify the agreed-on repairs had been done and had discovered most were not. Be tough with your agent. You worked hard for the money you are paying down. You will work hard for the money you will use to make your house payments. Stand firm for what you want. And if the agent won’t listen, go directly to the seller. There is no law preventing this (of course, you may start to wonder why you have an agent in the first place).

Sixth, consider not using an agent. I know it can be a little daunting to go it alone when making the most major purchase of your life. However, we found that the seller was much more agreeable to what we were asking for (unfortunately, it was at the closing). It was clearly the real estate agents (keeping our wishes from being presented to the seller), who often seemed to be talking back and forth among themselves without any input from either us or the seller. If you live in a state that uses closing attorneys, often that is all you need. Considering that most house listings are online, you can screen them yourself. Our agent didn’t do any of the leg work. We did it all, even pulling listings off the Internet and letting him set up the schedule (which we could have done ourselves). He even refused to set up a viewing of some, proclaiming himself to be a “housing consultant” and seeing the area in which the houses were located as unsuitable for us (he never did explain exactly what that meant).

By the way, is there anyone out there reading this who, if given the chance to design their own home, would really want to have the laundry facilities in a little closet off of the kitchen? Our agent and his buddy, the house inspector, think it’s a pretty nifty arrangement, even including this non-structural opinion in the inspection report. Personally, the idea of dirty, smelly clothing, plus scented laundry detergent and softener, and the oh- not-so-pleasant industrial smell of bleach doesn’t quite go with the aroma of my fried chicken or pasta dish. Am I being a bit overly sensitive?

Time to put in that load of dirty socks. Ew! Suddenly, I’m not hungry.

Copyright © 2008 A.C. Cargill

Those Nasty Developers

2007-03-22T19:43:00.000-07:00

They push us around, ignore local building codes, swallow up empty land, and spit out huge developments. They create “urban sprawl.” Who are they? Those “nasty developers.” Town Planning Commissions, who regard our urban environment as their sacred trust, have sprung up across the country to battle these scourges and preserve “Open Space.” Sounds good, but…

…let’s back up a minute. What’s so “nasty” about a developer? Most of you reading this probably live in a house built by them, work in an office built by them, send your children to schools built by them, and shop at stores built by them. Hmm, doesn’t sound too “nasty.” Sounds pretty beneficial. Golly! Food, shelter, jobs, etc., all made possible by those “nasty” developers.

“But, that nice empty field behind our house got turned into a housing development!” you cry. And what was the land on which your house sits before it was built? You can have yours, but the people who would buy and live in the new houses on that once-empty field can’t have theirs? As part of the deal when you bought your house, did you pay the owner of that empty field a fee to guarantee that it would never be sold to a “nasty” developer and become housing for other families like yours? If not, why do you go to your local Planning Commission when public hearings are held and speak out against the development? By doing so, you are infringing on the right of the landowner to decide what he wants to do with his own property, including making a profit from it. What if he kept you from selling your house because he was worried about who would buy it and feared a change would upset the neighborhood? All this infringement on property rights doesn’t work so well when the shoe is on the other foot.

“I have a right to a view!” you proclaim. Yeah – sure – whatever. I have a right to clear, blue skies. Time to call a lawyer and file a lawsuit against all those pesky clouds. Saying you have a right to something doesn’t make it so. Everyone saying it together in unison doesn’t make it so. Having your local Congressman push a bill through Congress and getting the President to sign it into law doesn’t make it so. In other words, you have no more “right” to a view than you have a right to anything beyond life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and your property (the one that somehow got left out of the Declaration of Independence – an omission that has led to such niceties as the US Supreme Court decision in Kelo v New London).

“We must fight ‘urban sprawl’!” you yell, fist clenched and held high. Yikes! Only 75% of the land in the U.S. is undeveloped – no houses, no offices, no shops or schools, and no agricultural (farming, livestock). Of the remaining 25%, only 5% is “urban.” Yup, sounds like “urban sprawl” alright. Round up a posse! Seriously, if people in urban areas have such a yen for wide open spaces, there’s Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska, etc. Hang a map of this nation on the wall, put on a blindfold, and toss a dart at it. Assuming you actually hit it, the odds are very good you will find some “open space” to move to.

“Developers are just a bunch of pushy money-grubbers!” you holler, red-faced with indignation. Simmer down. That’s quite a statement and deserves careful dissecting. First, are they really pushy or do they get pushed around more and more? I venture to say the latter. For example, in Mesa, Arizona, developers pay “impact fees” up front before one weed is cleared or one clod of soil is overturned.

“The developer pays impact fees when obtaining permits or water service and helps offset the costs of new growth to the City. There are nine impact fees: water, wastewater, parks, cultural, libraries, public safety, fire, general government and storm drainage.

“There is also a fee for solid waste that is a residential development tax.”

(http://www.cityofmesa.org/building_safety/Development_Impact_Fees.aspx.)

(“Cultural” fees?) Let’s not forget fees charged for submitting plans, the cost of “Environmental Impact Studies,” etc. (Too bad there isn’t a “Business Impact Study” before some of these silly fees, laws, and other restrictions get put into place.) Nothing could be more unfair or ridiculous. Far from “impacting a community,” developers create that community. Again, where would you be living, working, learning, etc., if some developer hadn’t built a building?

Second, are they really money-grubbers or just like you and me – trying to get fair pay for a day’s (or week’s or month’s) hard labor? Again, I say the latter. Most business people are. Do you run your store, restaurant, service company, etc., to have a loss? If you do, take a course in basic economics (or read Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt), and don’t be surprised if you end up trying to live off of the meager Social Security checks you’ll be getting when you retire.

Feng Shui is an ancient superstition originating in China that says our happiness rests in the arrangement of our furniture, whether a mirror is across from our bed, etc. (You can read a rather biased description in Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feng_Shui. Don’t expect any semblance of reason here.)

Detached garages are coming back into vogue as an attempt to get back to some imagined better and simpler times. Actually, detached garages started out as livery stables that turned into a place to park the “horseless carriage.” (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Role%20of%20the%20garage%20in%20suburban%20American%20culture) In the 30s attached garages were an innovation in modern home design, as the Ranch style of house was developed. They made sense, especially in climates with lots of extremes, such as Minnesota. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranch-style_house)

Homeowner associations go back as far as 1914, when covenants and deed restrictions were imposed on a housing development by the builders as a way of assuring buyers that the property would retain its value. Unfortunately, a lot of the restrictions appeared to be racially motivated and have since been banned. Still, there can be a lot of rules to follow when buying a property in such a development. Buyers have to decide which is more important: Their rights as property owners for deciding such things as what color to paint their house versus assuring that their neighbor doesn’t paint his house a color they don’t like. Sadly, many have traded in those rights for a pleasing house color next door. (Our recent experience with neighbors in our non-HOA neighborhood has us thinking this might not be such a bad trade-off afterall. The renters there, in what is an otherwise owner-occupied cul-de-sac, have turned their front yard into what can best be described as a 3-ring circus zone.)

Historic districts and preservation date back to 1813, when the Philadelphia State House (Independence Hall) was closed off to becoming much-needed housing. (http://www.emich.edu/public/geo/history.html) Basically, every time an old structure is slated to be removed in favor of a newer structure that would provide housing, shops and other buildings beneficial to man, it is prevented in the name of preserving the past. (Soon, anything built in the 1970s will be considered historic.) In my current town of residence, a small, delapidated structure that was to be torn down came to the attention of those who get such buildings declared “off limits” to improvement. So, now the town is stuck with this eyesore and possibly will have a tax-burden for the next millenium.

By all means, we desperately need developers, as we continue to have children who grow up and need a house in which to start their own family. And where will your children work if no new stores, offices, and factories are built? Far from being “nasty,” developers give us shelter and a place to be productive. It is unfortunate that they have been forced often times to play along with the government game of “squeeze the developer.” If you have any sense of the true impact on your lives, you’ll go to your “Town Leaders” and tell them to back off. Then, go to your county, state, and federal officials with the same message.

It’s time to recognize developers for what they really are: Creators of Communities.

Are the Oscars Relevant Anymore?

2007-02-28T17:36:00.000-08:00

Jewels, designer gowns, black tuxes, and a red carpet have come and gone while the flashbulbs “flashed” and reporters and fans shouted. All the envelopes have been opened, the winners announced, and the statuettes clutched while acceptance speeches were mouthed and sometimes cut short to keep a long program from lasting forever. Another Oscars presentation ceremony has come and gone. This was the 79th Annual Academy Awards. That means next year will be the 80th. Expect the glitz-and-glamour-crowd to pull out all the stops. Sounds good, but…

My hubby and I bypassed what turned out to be several hours of tedium (according to headlines on The Drudge Report) by not watching the Oscars. Instead we caught “Reel Politics: If Hollywood Ran America” on Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254039,00.html). Seems that we weren’t alone. With an Oscars audience share of 24.7%, the lowest in the last few years, interest in all of this falderal seems to be waning. Considering some of the winners, it also seems the Oscars are becoming irrelevant.

Over the years, the shine reflecting off some tremendously talented and classy people, like Cary Grant, Elizabeth Taylor, David Niven, Sidney Poitier, Grace Kelly, and Hattie McDaniel, has been replaced with grandstanding and politicizing. Here are a few examples from Allstarz.hollywood.com:

1969 – Amazingly, film legend Kathryn Hepburn ends up tied with Barbra Streisand for Best Actress. To my thinking, Babs’ nasally rendition of some otherwise memorable songs (many of which I sang in High School Choir) in “Funny Girl” doesn’t quite compare with The Great Kate’s tour-de-force portrayal of Anne of Aquitaine opposite Peter O’Toole in “The Lion in Winter.” Kate had the good sense to be absent from all the ballyhoo.
1973 – Marlon Brando declines his Best Actor award through proxy Sacheen Littlefeather (supposedly an Apache, but in reality aspiring actress Maria Cruz). The beef? The “treatment of American Indians ... by the film industry.” As one-eighth American Indian, I personally find no fault with how my ancestors have been portrayed. The real issue is such false grandstanding by someone who has very different motives and who presents himself as speaking for a whole bunch of people with a common genetic background. His little stunt certainly didn’t speak for me. My grandmother and her mother would have been put off by such actions. They were very down-to-earth people (according to my father, who knew them a lot better than I did).
1974 – A streaker flashes the peace sign as he runs across the stage while David Niven introduces Elizabeth Taylor, one of the presenters. (Hey, it was the 70s. Sounds like a TV show.) Ever the suave gentleman, Niven quipped “Probably the only laugh that man will ever get in his life is by stripping off and showing his shortcomings.” In my view, streakers put everything out in the open (bad pun – sorry).
1977 – Muhammad Ali grabs the spotlight from Sylvester Stallone. “Sly” was trying to accept his award for “Rocky” when “The Greatest” came onstage and started sparring with him, declaring “I'm the real Apollo Creed!” Totally classless.
1998 – James Cameron displays aplomb and modesty by declaring, with statuette held high, he’s “king of the world!” Sure, “Titanic” was a, well, TITANIC achievement, but a little of Niven’s suaveness would have gone a long way here. Thank goodness the streaker fad has been put behind us (another bad pun). [Now, he is “James Cameron, Tomb Raider.” (Wait, wasn’t that supposed to be a woman?) He is producing a documentary that claims to have found not only the burial place of Christ, but the remains, which shouldn’t be there because, well, he didn’t stay buried.]
2002 – Halle Berry is the first black woman to receive the Best Actress award. Hmm, Jennifer Connelly played the wife of Russell Crowe’s lead character in “A Beautiful Mind” but was nominated for, and won, Best Supporting Actress (not Best Actress as you might expect). I guess, if she had been nominated for Best Actress and had lost out to Berry, it would have looked a little odd. A movie that took Best Picture and Best Director would have lost both Best Actor* AND Best Actress.

*Crowe was nominated for Best Actor, but lost to an inferior performance by an otherwise excellent actor, Denzel Washington.

Let’s not forget the memorable acceptance/activism speeches such as in 2003 when Michael Moore lumbered up to the podium to accept an award for a documentary about the Columbine High School shootings. He took that opportunity to call President George Bush “a fictitious president” who was in office due to “fictitious election results.” In grade school, we called that being a poor sport, Mike.

Looking at where some of the awards have gone is even more revealing. A few examples for Best Picture:

1947, “A Double Life” – A dark drama where Ronald Coleman portrays an actor who can’t quite sort fact from fiction. Gee, sounds like a common problem in Hollywood, especially among documentarians like Moore.
1999, “Shakespeare in Love” – A fun romp through the Elizabethan era in England. Not very factual to Bill S.’s life, but hey, it’s wasn’t meant to be. It was meant as a series of filmdom insider jokes. Chances are that the person laughing loudest in the theater was “in the business” [of making movies].
A series of movies that glamorize deviants and criminals, such as: “Bonnie and Clyde,” “Dog Day Afternoon,” “The Sting,” “Pretty Woman,” “Baby Doll,” “Malcolm X,” and “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.” (Note: This year’s Best Actor award went to Forrest Whitaker for portraying a murderous, hellish dictator – Idi Amin – in “The Last King of Scotland.” What a denigration to a fine country to have it’s name used in the film title.)
Let’s not forget that tender love story, “The Piano” where a man thinks that the way to get his mail-order bride to behave more lovingly toward him is to chop off one of her fingers. (Maybe that’s why he had to get a bride through mail-order. The local eligible ladies objected to such extreme motivational measures. Makes holding an embroidery needle somewhat awkward.)

This year, the biggest disappointment (although the least surprising) is having Best Documentary award go to “An Inconvenient Truth,” a mockumentary full of distortions and skewed statistics. (At least Gore got to cozy up with buddy celebs like DiCaprio and later declare to reporters that his “carbon footprint” is small. Of course, an item from the Tennessee Center for Policy Research Website states that his estate uses energy at 20 times the national average rate.) When something so undeserving wins an award, the relevance of that award is greatly diminished. Just as “diploma mills” drag down the value of a hard-earned degree from a legitimate institution of higher learning, calling such a film a documentary drags down real documentaries. I feel sorry for those real documentarians who were nominated but stood no chance of winning.

Truly, the Oscars, once symbols of high achievement in the film industry, have become just a pat on the back from one good ole buddy to another. No wonder Fox News’ program was such a great alternative. Heck, watching “The Paint Drying Channel” would also have been more meaningful – not to mention exciting.

Sigh! There’s always next year. Can’t wait for the Nobel prize awards show.

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and now uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out good ideas that aren’t so good after all.

The ‘Inconvenience’ of Truth

2007-02-19T08:20:00.000-08:00

Al Gore, former Vice President and failed Presidential candidate, took on a new purpose in life (thanks to a suggestion from his wife, Tipper): Global Warming. [note 1] He, along with such notables as Heidi Cullen of the Weather Channel and multibillionaire Sir Richard Branson, who recently contributed $3 billion to “the cause” [note 2], are busy spreading their “inconvenient truth,” i.e., that we are destroying our home planet in the quest for a civilized life. They’ll save us all from ourselves. Sounds good, but…

Skeptical scientists pointing out the real truth on global warming are proving to be quite an “inconvenience” for Gore, Cullen, Branson, and other promoters of the theory. The global warming crowd’s solution: Threats and intimidation.

Let’s start with a little background information.

How Al got started in this whole thing:

First, it’s tough being Vice President, especially under someone as flamboyant as Bill. Solution: Start calling the Internet the “Information Super Highway.” [note 3]

Second, it’s tough being a failed Presidential candidate. There’s not much to do but sit around the house moping and putting on the pounds. [note 4] Solution: Listen to a well-meaning spouse that wants to pep up her ‘tubby hubby’ by giving his life purpose and meaning when she suggests that he pursue his interest in a flawed scientific theory. [note 1]

Too bad he didn’t stick to being a sportscaster, like he told Larry King in a live interview, or appear on more TV shows like “Saturday Night Live” (Dec. 14, 2002). [note 5] At that time, he was merely content to write books like “Joined at the Heart: The Transformation of the American Family” and “The Spirit of Family.” Alas, that contentment did not last long.

Where Heidi comes in:

In 2003, The Weather Channel, heretofore seen as the leading scientific authority on all things weather (at least on cable TV), hired Heidi Cullen as their “climatologist” and host of “The Climate Code.” Since it was easy enough to change channels when she came on, I wasn’t too alarmed, just annoyed. A station that we used to be able to leave on all day (as true weather junkies are prone to do) now was being peppered with shows like this one, “Forecast Earth,” and “It Could Happen Tomorrow,” all designed to promote an agenda of fear over predictions that are questionable at best from people who can’t accurately tell us what the high temperature will be tomorrow.

Sir Richard jumps onboard:

Branson not only donated $3 billion dollars to further hyping the theory of global warming [note 2], but put up $25 million for the The Virgin Earth Challenge, to “be awarded to an individual or a group who can demonstrate a design to reduce atmospheric pollution and contribute to the stability of the earth's climate.” [note 6] Considering the dynamics of the earth’s climate and the role played by such minor things as, oh, gee – THE SUN! – I am not sure how such a feat is to be accomplished. Should be interesting to watch, though. (Sort of like The Amazing Randi’s million-dollar challenge to anyone who can demonstrate scientifically to having paranormal abilities. [note 7] The difference is that, in Randi’s case, there is a possibility of actually claiming the prize. No, not really!)

By the way, how much “pollution” did the Global Flyer’s two around-the-world flights spew into the atmosphere? (The second flight used 18,0000 lbs. of JP-4, of which 3100 lbs. was jettisoned directly into the atmosphere shortly after takeoff.) Branson backed both. Sounds a bit like Gore isn’t the only environmental hypocrite.[note 8]

The Bandwagon grows:

Of course, the politically hot issue of “global warming” is certainly attractive and “convenient” to journalists such as Tom Brokaw [note 9], Plug Power Inc.'s CEO Roger Saillant (who paid for 231 employees to see Gore’s magnum opus) [note 10], and scientists wanting to further their careers [note 11].

Let’s not leave out “Governator” Schwarzenegger, who is trying to “position himself as a leader on climate change while maintaining support from business leaders” (no fence-sitting here – yeah, right!). [note 12]

Of course, we can’t forget the French. Their president, Jacques Chirac, is pushing the issue hard, threatening a “carbon tax” on any country that does not sign and abide by the Kyoto Protocol. [note 13] (For those of you who think this tax is all about siphoning money out of our economy, which is stronger than theirs by a long shot [note 14], shame on you. The “honorable” French would never do such a thing!)

Meanwhile:

Talk of global cooling and a new ice age are surfacing, prompting headlines such as “Scientist predicts ‘mini Ice Age’.” [note 15].

The Threats and Intimidation Start:

On December 21, 2006, Ms. Cullen upped the ante in her blog[note 16] where she put forth this opinion:

“If a meteorologist can’t speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval.”

(How about this: “If a meteorologist can't stick to true science – and get off the soapbox of the global warming crowd – then maybe the AMS shouldn’t give them a Seal of Approval.” Ouch! That shoe sure does pinch when worn on the other foot!)

The blog entry generated so much negative response, that Cullen had to come back with something. All she could muster was a limp-wristed protest that her statement had no political motivation and everybody should get over it already – sheesh! [note 17]

Other pressure from the global warming crowd (these are just a representative sample to save space):

According to Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), “if a climate skeptic receives any money from industry, the media immediately labels them and attempts to discredit their work.” [note 18]
Funding dries up. [note 19]
William O'Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, which assesses scientific issues that shape public policy, “In general, if you do not agree with the consensus that we are headed toward disaster, you are treated like a pariah.” [note 20]

Now for the skeptics:

Marc Morano, U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, points out inaccurate claims in an AP article [note 21] about how scientists reacted to Gore’s flick [note 22].
David Harsanyi, Denver Post Staff Columnist, interviewed both Colorado State University's Bill Gray (“perhaps the world's foremost hurricane expert” whose “criticism of the global warming "hoax" makes him an outcast”) and climatologist Roger Pielke Sr. at the University of Colorado, who “is also skeptical” in a lengthy and meaty article. [note 23]
Professor Bill Gray. (See Harsanyi’s article.)
Professor Roger Pielke Sr. (See Harsanyi’s article.)
George Reisman, Pepperdine University Professor Emeritus of Economics. [note 24]
Czech president Vaclav Klaus. (Hey, his scientific credentials are a match for Al Gore’s any day – probably better!) [note 25]

High-stakes Issue:

Why does all this matter? Is it really about your children’s future? (They’re the ones who will be around in 2050, when the big meltdown is supposed to happen. [note 26]) Or is there another motivator at work? Can you say “grant money”? How about “political power”?

By the way, to the folks at the Weather Channel, you have lost a couple of viewers in my household! As for your Website, it’s no longer in my Favorites list. I replaced it with Accuweather.com.

Notes:

1. Tipper Gore Ready to Support Another White House Run, http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2069724&page=1.
2. Branson Pledges Billions to Fight Global Warming, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/21/science/22warmcnd.html?ex=1316491200&amp;en=282ea6fc58594550&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss.
3. Wikipedia: Information superhighway, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_superhighway.
4. Photo of Al Gore arriving at Los Angels premiere of his “documentary,” http://www.imdb.com/gallery/granitz/4757/Events/4757/FormerVice_Grani_8663108_400.jpg.html?hint=nm0330722 ; and arriving at pre-grammy party, http://www.daylife.com/topic/Al_Gore/gallery/1/04FFfaQ5ZE8B4.
5. Interview with Al, Tipper Gore, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0211/19/lkl.00.html.
6. Photo of Branson and Gore, http://www.daylife.com/topic/Al_Gore/gallery/1/0eLQ6uC0d8dJZ.
7. One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, http://www.randi.org/research/index.html.
8. Gore isn't quite as green as he's led the world to believe, http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm.
9. Brokaw Joins Fight Against Global Warming, http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060709/D8IOP53G0.html.
10. Plug Power employees take in Gore flick, http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2006/07/03/daily31.html.
11. Science Panel Backs Study on Warming Climate, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/science/22cnd-climate.html?ei=5065&en=b1788f2a40214842&amp;amp;ex=1151640000&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print.
12. Schwarzenegger Eager to Sign Climate Bill, http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SCHWARZENEGGER_GLOBAL_WARMING?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-08-10-04-13-31.
13. Report: Chirac eyes carbon tax for U.S., http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1103AP_France_US_Carbon_Tax.html.
14. New study compares GDP and growth: EU versus USA, http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/.
15. Scientist predicts 'mini Ice Age', http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060207-041447-2345r.
16. Junk Controversy Not Junk Science, http://climate.weather.com/blog/9_11396.html.
17. A Very Political Climate, http://climate.weather.com/blog/9_11592.html?cm_ven=one_deg_blog&cm_ite=one_deg_commentary&amp;amp;from=one_deg_commentary.
18. Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics, http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=32abc0b0-802a-23ad-440a-88824bb8e528.
19. The Tempest, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html [Read this article carefully. It’s written by an author who is a true believer in the veracity of global warming, with a lot of acidity towards skeptics.]
20. Global-warming skeptics cite being ‘treated like a pariah’, http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070211-112902-4433r.htm.
21. Scientists OK Gore's movie for accuracy, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060628/ap_on_sc/gore_s_science_3.
22. AP Incorrectly Claims Scientists Praise Gore’s Movie, http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257909.
23. Chill out over global warming, http://www.denverpost.com/harsanyi/ci_3899807.
24. The Environmentalist Noose Is Tightening, http://www.georgereisman.com/blog/.
25. President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a ‘Myth’ - Questions Gore’s Sanity, http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm.
26. By 2050 Warming to Doom Million Species, Study Says, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/01/0107_040107_extinction.html.

Copyright © 2006 A.C. Cargill

A.C. Cargill resides on the East Coast for now, has lived in several locations, including Europe, and now uses her background in technical writing, including researching topics online, along with her degree in Philosophy and English, to point out “good” ideas that aren’t so good after all.

Young Achievers Abound

2006-07-11T14:26:00.000-07:00

Recently, a young man was lauded for his achievement of being appointed to the Parks, Recreation and Culture Resources Department Advisory Commission. At 19, this son of an also-ran candidate for Town Council is well steeped in politics and on the first step of a life path that could possibly lead to bigger political achievements. Sounds good, but…

This politician-in-training is not alone in the group of young achievers in this country. In both politics and, more importantly, in business, teens are showing they are more than just iPod listening, baggy pants wearing, underage drinking sociopaths (not that any of us ever thought that – wink!).

A few political examples:

Michael Sessions, who turned 18 in September 2005, waged and won a write-in campaign on a mere $700 for mayor of Hillsdale, MI, in the November 2005 election.
Also in November 2005, Sam Juhl was elected mayor of Roland, IA. The normally lackluster mayoral election was stirred by Juhl’s write-in candidacy, prompting almost three times as many voters to the polls as a neighboring town the same size.
Pennsylvania teens are hopping – into politics, that is. Chris Portman ran a successful campaign in 1999 for mayor of Mercer, PA. In 2001 Jeffrey Dunkle was elected mayor of Mount Carbon, PA, and in 2005 decided to run for another 4-year term. In March 2005, David Hoogstad filled a vacancy on the Linesville, PA, Burough Council at the tender age of 18. In November 2005, Christopher Seeley garnered almost twice as many votes as his opponent to become the 18-year-old mayor of Linesville, PA.

Clearly, it seems that “lifer politicians” (who have done nothing but politics) like Ted Kennedy (D – Mass.) are losing their ability to bring voters to the polls. They have nothing new to offer.

Politics isn’t the only arena in which teens are excelling. Here are a few business examples:

Five teenagers in Seattle, WA, won the city’s “Youth IT Challenge” with the business plan for their spice company, “Joie de Vivre,” that focuses on facilitating immigrants here buying spices from their homelands in East Africa, Japan, and the Middle East online.
The Internet offers business-savvy teens a way to shine. In the Spring of 1999, Michael Furdyk (then 16) and his partners sold their Web site for over $1 million. He used his share of the sale to start up another company and hired his father to work for him!
Angelo Sotira was obsessed with his music Web site. In 1999, right after graduating from high school, he moved from Poughkeepsie, NY, to Hollywood. Sotira’s site was bought by Michael Ovitz, head of Artists Management Group, a Hollywood power brokers.
In Prague, Czechoslovakia, Lukáš Codr (25), Jan Rambousek (17), Jan Řežáb (18), Jan Bárta (19), Naďa Rysková (21), Zdeněk Cendra (19), and Marek Antoš (25) are cranking up a tech storm in the former Soviet Republic.
The NFTE (the National Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship) is teaching teams of teens to build their own businesses, a step up from a summer job. These skills will last their lifetime and could help them build then next Amazon.com, eBay, or Microsoft.
In Lawrenceville, PA, teens get practical business experience running the Outlet Connection. Under adult supervision, they do everything from running and closing the cash registers, serving customers, cleaning, and even helping decide items to stock, their cost, and their placement in the store. Today, Outlet Connectio. Tomorrow, Macy’s or Target.
’Had to Be There’ is a business run by teenagers for teenagers in Bedfordshire, PA. They promote bands that might not otherwise make it out of their basement or garage. We all have to start somewhere.
Of course, let’s not forget the billionaire twins Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, who at 18 took control of their merchandising empire.

Of course, there are other areas where teens are achieving, like these:

Last August, Julie Doran (then 13) won the Speedo National Junior Diving Championships one-meter diving event in the 13-and-under category. At a time when so many of our young people are overweight and sitting around the house playing video games, such physical achievement is heartening.
Twelve youths aged 14-21 are running YouthTech in Denver, CO. They fix, sell, ship, and promote computers to low-income families and not-for-profit organizations.
Lastly, I don’t want to leave out the teens in the Raleigh, NC area who are helping fix up homes for people not physically able. We all need a helping hand some times, and getting it from these teens is a sign of hope for their generation.

And there is lot of evidence that teens and business have a growing relationship.

On the other hand, in Cary, NC, a teen council with over 100 members just got a reward for being the most “diverse” (translation: “we turned away most of the white folks that showed up to be in the council and went out and grabbed some blacks, asians, hispanics, and – well, you know – non-white folks”). If that isn’t a sham award, I don’t know what is, except maybe an award for giving out diversity awards.

There’s a ton more stories like these, but I’m suddenly feeling too old and tired to go on. Can’t imagine why.

Backsliding on Women’s Lib

2006-05-04T13:33:00.000-07:00

Women in the U.S. have choices these days, not like in the Victorian era and similar times. (Men, by extension, have also been freed from male roles to some extent, at least in the U.S.) These choices include a woman’s sexual life, expanding her options beyond chaste virgin or prostitute. Sounds good, but…

Signs abound that we’re backsliding on women’s (and men’s) liberation. We see it in commercials showing the “Mom” wondering what to fix for dinner, how to get stains out of the laundry, or cleaning the floors after the kids have tracked in mud. Let’s not forget the “Dad” who has fallen off the roof trying to realign the satellite dish, kills the dandelions while leaving the grass green, or stumbles around in the kitchen to feed the kids when “Mom” is sick and ends up calling for pizza. (Yes, there are exceptions such as “Father Sun” cooking up a batch of eggs and sausage before heading out to his job of lighting and heating the Earth, as he explains it to his cute-as-a-button young daughter. Of course, she’s used to seeing “Mom” cook breakfast.)

Having grown up during the time when women in this country were in a battle to get out of their restrictive roles and into being human beings, I am rather alarmed at this trend. In addition, the streets of many U.S. cities are starting to look like Tehran, at least in terms of “shrouded women,” i.e., Muslim women who wear a range of cover-ups. Most just wear hijab (loose clothing topped by a type of scarf worn around the head and under the chin). The other day, however, while my husband and I were enjoying gyros and kafta at a small Mid-eastern restaurant, in walked a being covered in a black head-to-toe burqa, with the only anatomical feature showing being two eyes from behind a pair of glasses.

My first thought was that this creature looked like the creepy Ghost of Christmas Future from the 1951 version of “A Christmas Carol,” starring Alistair Sim. My second thought was that it could be either gender. (The burqa hides both the male and female anatomy equally well. In a Muslim country, where tolerance of homosexuality is zero, this is a very handy thing.) My third thought was how I never wanted to be forced to smother under such coverings, especially having been part of the movement in this country that brought women out into the world while bringing out the “househusband” in any man that wanted to be one (see The Kitchen Sink Papers: My Life as a Househusband by Mike McGrady, published by Doubleday in 1975).

Sharia law says that a woman must cover herself in public so as not to draw sexual attention from men. ["O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them. That will be better, so that they may be recognized and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful." (33:59) from Wikipedia] Women raised in a Muslim household are taught this from birth and many accept it. I can understand that. After all, I was raised to wear my bra and other undergarments – well, UNDER garments. Unlike some performers who prance around on stage and sing lyrics about sucking parts of male anatomies, I dress fairly modestly. Yet to a Muslim – man or woman – I am dressed obscenely in public if my femaleness can be clearly ascertained and my hair is uncovered. I am, therefore, in their eyes, a “whore.” (Knowing this makes dealing with such “shrouded” women at the bank or store to be unsettling.) Wearing slacks, a high-necked top, and a sweater is not like wearing a tube top, mini-skirt and stiletto-heeled pumps. In other words, standards vary.

The concept of “whore” (or “slut” or whatever similar word you choose) is a big slide backwards. It says that women don’t have a right to choose when and where they will have sex if they want to be seen as “decent.” It also keeps women in the role of “sexual partner and baby maker.” And, no, I am not advocating that women go out bed-hopping. There are some very good, self-responsible reasons for a woman choosing her sexual partner(s) wisely. First and foremost is the chance of becoming pregnant from the encounter. Second is the possibility of contracting an STD (sexually transmitted disease) or HIV (which usually leads to AIDS).

The real problem is thinking that women are divided by society into those that are sexually chaste and those that are sexually whoring. This is expressed well in an article by Karen Green. This either/or view of women has gone on for centuries, and is only heightened by the “specter women.” Such segregation also keeps women and men from interacting socially. Many men enjoy just being around women, being friends. Many women likewise enjoy the company of men, not necessarily in a sexual way. I have had mostly male friends in the past.

Also, there were several excuses – er, reasons why men wanted women to be virgin when they married and remain a “one man woman” after the nuptials. None of them are legitimate today. First, performance comparison – a man would be concerned about his bride comparing him to past lovers. (All I can say to any man who still thinks this way is: “Grow up!”) Second, offspring fatherhood – making sure the husband was the genetic father of the child his wife was baring. (Simple paternity tests are available now.)

My husband and I have a pact between us, signified by the vows we spoke before a Justice of the Peace and the rings we both wear on the third finger of our left hands. That pact says, among other things, that we choose each other sexually and otherwise, and no others. Who we were with before that is irrelevant. As rational beings, we focus on what is important – our lives together now. Others must decide for themselves if this is the approach they want to take, or if they want a life more like Hugh Hefner or Ivana Trump.

As for the “shrouded women,” until they can throw off the “burqa,” figuratively and literally speaking, they will not be thought of as human beings (individuals) first and females second. By first being individuals, women – and men – will be thought of as self-responsible and having rights. They can function as equals in society. While women “activists in the Muslim world are less preoccupied with what women wear than with securing other freedoms such as access to education, better health care for their families, or wider opportunities for work,” in reality, wearing hijab keeps them from these things, since it enforces the view of them as sex objects and reproduction machines. I have to differ with those who are in effect putting the cart before the horse. Throwing off the restrictive clothing will help Muslim women throw off the limits on their rights. The dress is also an interference to getting a good job, to moving freely in society, to being seen as just as capable as a man. Why did women in the ‘70s adopt a softened version of a man’s business suit? So that in a office of men wearing suits, the women could fit in and be seen as being there for serious matters, not to party.

Just something to think about next time you see one of these “specter women” haunting the streets, with their sons and little “specter” daughters in tow.

School Bus Daze and the Black Hole

2006-01-21T16:00:00.000-08:00

Unfortunately, I missed John Stossel’s piece on ABC’s “20/20” on Friday 13 January 2006. (My husband and I rarely watch the “big three” networks, since they have so few programs on worth the precious life-moments we would spend watching them.) But I did see his article on Townhall.com. Apparently, the sparks have been flying, with teachers around the nation protesting their innocence (“We work hard at our jobs”) over Stossel’s claim that our money spent on schools is being wasted. The teachers are fighting back. Sounds good, but…

They’re dead wrong, and Stossel is absolutely right. (Ever hear the expression “Me thinks thou dost protest too much”?)

My article (posted here since the paper doesn’t put its opinion page on the Web) for the local paper addressed the busing “checker game” being played with our children by the Wake County School Board. This article goes beyond that into the “Black Hole” that is the pocketbook of the Wake County School System.

In Wake County, NC, the School Board is debating how high they can go on their bond referendum [article 1, article 2] so that voters will go for it on November 7th. Bring it on a little at a time. (Sounds like putting a lobster into a cool pot of water and turning up the heat slowly, with taxpayers in the role of the lobster.) Well, parents are already up in arms about their children being bussed around the county. So, you’d imagine that they’d really be enraged by this. Think again. As a North Raleigh resident put it in article 1 above, “I'm not thrilled to raise taxes, but the people are coming. We have to do something about it…That's money well spent.” (She was probably even straight-faced when she said it.)

What she forgets is that taxes are being raised on every property owner, even couples like us who have no children. Gee, I just love paying for our neighbors’ children learning such useful skills as how to feel about two and two or mastering tree-hugging so they can become the envirowhackos of tomorrow. Meanwhile, our police and fire personnel are underpaid.

The bond referendum will pass, of course. Too many people are committed to “That Hillary Woman’s” idea that “It Takes a Village…”

One proposal that has been put forth to keep taxes lower is changing at least one school to a year-round schedule (nine weeks of classes followed by 3-week breaks, with no long summer vacation). It’s a schedule more in line with our modern times, not the mostly agrarian society that spawned the original set-up. But no, this will not do. In fact, the idea is so unpopular that, as one parent put it in article 1, “I'm willing to dig deep into my pockets to make sure that doesn't happen.” Pardon me, but I think that’s MY pocket you have your hand in.

The big issue that’s getting missed in Wake County and across the nation is, as Stossel pointed out, government (“public”) schools. If everyone who had children knew that he/she would be responsible for the total cost of that child’s education, i.e., that they could no longer force their neighbors to pay for it, I suspect we wouldn’t be having this mess going on right now. The issue of how much to tax wouldn’t exist.

(By the way, did you know that having the government in charge of our children’s education is a tenet of Communism? It’s true. Check out the Manifesto of the Communist Party by Marx and Engels. That way the government is pretty much in charge of whatever goes into your child’s brain. Think about it.)

Another thing I would like to see is a switch away from using property tax as a way of getting revenue for schools. Of course, if all schools were privatized, this issue would be moot, since only the parents of children attending the school would pay (unless people wanted to donate money to their local elementary, middle, and/or high schools just to show support for local education).

Ah, the Black Hole that is our Government-run Education System. All hail!

School Bus Daze

2006-01-21T15:48:00.000-08:00

I wrote this for a local paper in North Carolina and wanted to post it here, too:

Realtors tout schools as selling points for houses with ads like: “Lovely family home walking distance to top-rated school in county.” In fact, the schools near a house can be more important than essentials like square footage and “views.” This shows the priority in people’s minds of their children’s education. Sounds good, but…

Children in Wake County are currently undergoing the “school bus shuffle,” being reassigned to schools across town (or in another town) instead of the one a block or two away. So much for the extra tens of thousands their parents paid for that house in just the right school district.

Two factors seem to be driving the bus: 1) Balancing the number of students per school to prevent overcrowding in areas that experienced a growth boom (including Apex) and 2) Maintaining socioeconomic balance by ensuring that students in “affluent” neighborhoods mingle with those in “less fortunate” ones – a rather subjective standard (“less fortunate” might mean your kids still use last year’s iPod).

The first is an economic necessity brought on by people demanding that the government educate their children. The second is a high-sounding idea that shuffles children around like checkers on a board so people can pat themselves on the back and say, “Look at how fair-minded we are.”

Of course, there is a bright side to busing.

For the children:

Conditioning for adulthood (commuting an hour or more daily to and from work).
Preparing for a career in road design, studying the roads they travel – day after day after day.
More time to listen to tunes downloaded on their iPods.
Extra sleep time (they might wake up missing their lunch and a few other things, though).

For local business:

Selling lots of colored markers, easel pads, and sticky notes to draw up new busing plans.
Charging Mom and Dad’s credit cards for replacing all the stuff that went “missing” while their little “checker” – uh, child – slept on the bus.

How about stopping the checker game and recognizing that our kids have friendships and other associations (sports teams, etc.) that would be lost with a move, even at the elementary school level? Nah, too rational.

We could always turn the table on school board members by busing them all over the county – one year here, one year there. That should keep them on their toes, especially if they just bought a house to be near their office.

As for proposing a “school toll” on new residents, they already have one. When they buy a house, they pay next year’s property taxes at closing. Most of that goes to Wake County Schools, at least according to my latest bill.

Also, not everyone has children. Yet, if they own property, they have to pay property taxes. We are, in essence, forcing our childless neighbors to pay for our children’s education. Gee, how equitable.

Here’s a thought: Privatize schools. No more treating children like checkers in a game of “fair-mindedness.” They might even get an education.

No wonder homeschooling is becoming popular. Jump. Jump. King me!

Teatime in “New California”

2006-01-12T12:05:00.000-08:00

Tea drinking has always been a part of our history, such as the Boston Tea Party in 1773, a protest of tea tax. Tea rooms have sprung up across the country. You may even know a “tea aficionado.” (Our cousin set up a little shop in Pennsylvania, serving the finest Assam teas and others.) Yes, tea is part of our heritage. Sonny and Gloria Kamm of Pasadena, California, sure thought so. They amassed a collection of over 6,000 teapots. Sounds good, but…

Now, these avid collectors have turned to taxpayers to fund a chunk of the projected $10 million cost of building a home for their “children” in the town of Sparta in Alleghany County, North Carolina, thanks in large part to the efforts of Jean McLaughlin, director of the Penland School of Crafts in Penland, North Carolina. On behalf of taxpayers everywhere who keep getting stuck with the bill for these projects, I say, “Gee, thanks, Jean.”

If you’re asking why you should care, think about the money your child’s school needs and other legitimate uses for taxes. Further, think about what YOU could do with that money.

Guess who the Executive Director of the museum is. Yep, Patrick Woodie, a former Alleghany County commissioner. Seems like Woodie wrangled a new job at taxpayer expense. Simple for someone used to collecting a taxdollar-funded paycheck. Of course, he claims it’s all for the county residents, after several expensive attempts to bring manufacturing back to the county failed. Tourism is the answer. Works every time. Well, sort of. The museum will take a dozen people in Sparta off the unemployment line AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. Whoopee.

This definitely falls under the classification of “What Were They Thinking?” Of course, the answer is: “They Weren’t”!

With government pork at an all-time high, this seems to even the most spendthriftiest among us to be a real head-scratcher. I guess if Alaska can get $200 million to do with as it pleases (originally for building the now-infamous “bridge to nowhere” to connect Ketchikan to Gravina Island, a community of 50 people that has no roads), then us tea drinkers can have an edifice housing the finest bric-a-brac around.

Woodie claims that getting money from taxpayers (both state and federal) will jiggle loose the private donations. Just because it hasn’t worked in the past…

I’m all for people having jobs but don’t see this as a solution. It also begs the question: If the Kamms want a home for their “children,” why don’t they fund it?

Further, why is the Gold LEAF Foundation using funds wrested from the tobacco industry for this porkish homage to tea? Sounds like a small town I knew in California where they used tobacco funds to pay for having live reindeer at their Christmas Festival.

So much for helping counties, including Wake, that have watched their economies go up in smoke when lawyers were successful, after decades of trying, to get tobacco companies to pay for the poor choices of their customers, putting many tobacco farms out of business. Too bad the tobacco farmers couldn’t get FDA approval of tobacco as a food additive like the soybean growers did.

Gotta go now. It’s teatime.

Babs Watch I

2005-12-07T06:08:00.000-08:00

This is part of an ongoing series that keeps an eye on America’s favorite singer-turned-pseudo-intellectual, Babs (Barbra) Streisand. Awhile back when checking the Drudge Report (www.drudgereport.com), I saw a link to a story about Babs calling to impeach President Bush. (Where was she when Clinton was unzipping his fly whenever anyone with an XX chromosome came within arms distance?) The link took me to this songstress’ own blog site, and judging by what I saw there, I’d say she is certainly putting this latest technology to use. Sounds good, but…

Before continuing, I have to warn some of you that “Babs Watch” has no jiggling babes or hunky lifeguards. Pamela Anderson and David Hasselhof are nowhere to be found. This is strictly about that “Funny Lady” who has been regaling us for decades with her nasally renditions of such hits as “Don’t Rain on My Parade” and “People.”

Now that the jiggle and hunk fans have moved on, for the rest of you I want to fill you in on Babs’ latest spewings. She doesn’t have the nerve to allow comments on her site, so this is the next best thing.

The first thing to address is Babs’ quote from Thomas Jefferson: “Dissent is the essential aspect of patriotism.” Interesting. Looks like Babs has fallen victim to a scam by historian Howard Zinn (according to About.com at http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/a/146858.htm). Actually, this quote is his, not Jefferson’s, at least according to The Etext Center at the University of Virginia Library (http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/). Of course, even if she did fall for this distortion of Jefferson, she has the right to voice her opinions. Too bad she doesn’t want us to do the same by posting comments on her blogsite.

A good definition of “patriotism” can be found in Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary: “Love for or devotion to one’s country.” I guess Babs is using “tough love” on her country, beating us all into submitting to her ideas of right – or should I say far left?

At one point, she states that “Saddam Hussein had begun to comply with the administration's demands.” I’m not quite sure where she got that idea. What intelligence was she privy to that Congress and the President were not, and why didn’t she show it to them? Or is she saying that they were privy to this intelligence and shared it with her, just to show their appreciation for her long career in show business? Maybe she got the idea in the same place she bought the black, off-the-shoulder gown she is wearing in the queenly photo of herself (holding pink roses and sitting on a pink throne – er, chair) on her blogsite. Clearly, Hussein was a threat to this country and to the very freedom that Babs is abusing with her emotional tirades (not factual dissent or criticism). He certainly seems to have had a lot of liberals in this country, including Sean Penn, convinced that he was just a nice guy trying to do the best he could for his people, just like Castro (according to Chevy Chase).

Some more definitions of patriotism:

The Free Dictionary (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/patriotism) - Love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it.

Datasegment.com (http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/patriotism) - Love of country; devotion to the welfare of one's country; the virtues and actions of a patriot; the passion which inspires one to serve one's country. --Berkley. [1913 Webster]

I also came across an interesting “musing” on the definition of patriotism at http://www.headlinemuse.com/Politics/musingonpatriot.htm. Good reading.

As for impeaching President George W. Bush, we have to keep in mind that Babs is in the camp that supported Al Gore and then John Kerry, two Democratic candidates that couldn’t go the distance and convince the American people to vote for them. Even Democratic attempts to keep military members’ absentee ballots from being counted in Florida did them no good in keeping the White House in their party’s hands. A lot of boo-hooing has gone on since then, with Babs wailing as loudly as any of them.

My guess is that Babs just needs a stronger sleep aid. Then, she won’t be online spewing her liberal pea soup at the world. The latest is her disappointment with the editors of the L.A. Times for cutting down her overly long letter. Gee, Babs, they do it to us, too. Get over it.

Reboot This and Replace That…

2005-12-03T14:20:00.000-08:00

Gadgets are definitely advancing. Computers are prevalent in offices as well as homes. High Definition TV is getting closer and closer to being the standard. Cars have computers running them (too bad they can’t drive them). Everything is going high-tech. Sounds good, but…

Your personal computer is no longer the only item in your home or office that needs to be rebooted to work out some electronic “kink” or replaced after only a short operating life.

Sometimes, the “unkinking” involves an act as simple as turning the device off, then on. Sometimes, you have to actually pull the plug out of the socket and reinsert it. In my husband’s office, they have a coffeemaker that occasionally quits with no rhyme or reason. They have learned to do the “plug out-in” trick. A co-worker’s stereo is just as finicky. Friends of ours have a Honda Prius hybrid car which occasionally doesn’t start until they turn it off totally and then back on. These fixes are easy. Many are more complex.

High-tech devices, like our 32” Sony TV, don’t respond to either action. Nor to banging on the side like the old tube TVs. Our set went belly-up after 14 months, about two months after the manufacturer’s warranty had expired (our previous 29” Sharp TV lasted 10 years with no problem). We had extended coverage with the retailer (Circuit City) but nevertheless had to endure a five-week-timeframe to get the set repaired. (Thank goodness we have spares.) The repairman wasn’t very sympathetic, stating: “Your more advanced electronics are going to break down more. You just have to expect it.”

Oh, goodie, I can’t wait to see what’s next.

Even our toaster is far more complex than the ones my father used to repair on our dining table for friends and neighbors. Don’t even get me started on the microwave that began making a mysterious rattling sound about two weeks after we bought it (the repairman just scratched his head and said maybe we were using it too much – gee, sorry). Then, there’s the clothes dryer that wouldn’t start except when we took it back to the retailer. (Turns out that the power cord had been installed wrong at our house but at the store they bypassed the cord and hooked up the electricity directly to the dryer, thus missing the problem.)

Sure, some of the problems are user error. Still others are poorly trained repairmen. However, my money is on increasingly poor quality and rushing a product to market before it’s thoroughly tested. This is an old Microsoft trick, where software often is released with “bugs” in it, which they then fix by sending out “patches.” Their track record on hardware such as the newly-released Xbox 360 is apparently no exception, with mid-game crashes a common complaint by the “lucky” customers who were able to buy one before they disappeared off of store shelves. (See what a billion dollars of marketing will do for product demand?)

You’re probably looking around your home or office right now with a wary eye. Have no fear. It’s part of our high-tech lifestyle. Be prepared to reboot or replace. As the repairman said, “You just have to expect it.” Yippee.

Not to add to your feelings of apprehension, but on top of such kinks, there are the patent fights, such as the one going on between NTP and Research in Motion (the maker of the popular “Blackberry” PDA). In a move straight out of a fairy tale, NTP attacked the golden goose, claiming patent infringement. So far, they seem to be in the right, but by rejecting a $450 million settlement as being chump change, they could end up shutting down the “Blackberry” network and lose not only the original settlement amount but any possible future revenues share, since there’s already talk that company IT managers are looking at switching to Palms instead. No amount of turning on then off, unplugging and replugging, jiggling, juggling, and banging would work that kink out.

Mired in Miers

2005-10-19T08:41:00.000-07:00

When President Bush nominated his legal advisor to the Supreme Court, the hue and cry arose from conservative Republicans with a media presence, such as Ann Coulter. They all cried “Cronyism!” and expressed great disappointment with the President. All in the name of wanting a judge on the highest court in the land who would rule as they wanted. Sounds good, but…

The first tenet of our judicial system is “Innocent Until Proven Guilty.” Jumping on Miers as an unfit candidate solely on the basis of her relationship with Bush is insufficient. It’s sort of like seeing a child standing over the pieces of a broken vase and concluding that the child (not the dog or cat) knocked it off the table.

Well, I have withheld opinion on this nomination until having a chance in my busy schedule to look into the facts. Now, armed with those facts, I can confidently say that I would not support her, and will encourage the Judicial Nomination Committee not to support her, as a Supreme Court Justice.

My reason, however, differs widely from Coulter and the rest of the “hue and cry crowd.”

Harriet Miers, regardless of whether I agree with her decisions or not, does not reach those decisions through reason. She is overly reliant on non-reason in her mental capacities. The law is all fact or it is useless. To base legal decisions on non-reason lowers us to the level of the very people we are fighting in our “War on Terrorism.”

It is amazing how frequently I reach decisions through reason that happen to agree with decisions others make through non-reason. For example, I don’t drink alcohol or use tobacco products and addictive substances such as heroin. I know many others who similarly refrain. They do so based on non-reason, i.e., the threat of punishment in the “afterlife.” I do so for my benefit now, since reason states that engaging in unhealthy, expensive behaviors leads to shortened lifespan, poor health, and poverty.

Unfortunately, people often use this coincidence to say that their non-reasoned path to a reasonable conclusion is valid.

It reminds me of Algebra class in High School. Even though it was decades ago, I still remember coming up with my own “formulas” for reaching the same conclusion as the teacher. While he said he admired my creativity, he strongly encouraged me to learn and use the mathematical formulas. That way, he assured me, I would come up with the right conclusion every time, not just happen on it by chance.

As for Miers, she seems to have come up with some legal decisions with seem reasonable, and many more that seem not. Setting her aside and nominating someone who can reach conclusions through a “formula” of reason will give us all more consistently legally sound decisions. I encourage President Bush to do so without further delay. It’s time for the nation to stop being “Mired in Miers.”

Trashy Ordinance

2005-10-16T15:53:00.000-07:00

In the name of fastidiousness, obsessive/compulsive disorder equality, or possibly just too much free time at the City Council meeting, North Carolina’s capitol city of Raleigh took a giant leap forward early this year in the field of making itself a more beautiful place to live. A new ordinance was passed, and police have been issuing “tickets” in enforcement of that ordinance to homeowners who don’t pull their trash carts up from the street before sunset the day after collection day. That means no more unsightly empty trash carts sitting on the curb (for more than 24 hours). Sounds good, but…

Is this really a secret plot by Inventaholics Anonymous, a highly guarded self-help society with a 12-step program for people hopelessly addicted to tinkering? (Several members are even winners of the much-sought-after Rube Goldberg Award.) Or maybe the neighbor kids are behind this as another way to raise money for that class trip. (After all, how much cookie dough can you eat?) Is this a sign of things to come? Will Raleigh’s neighbors, such as Durham, Cary, Wake Forest, and Apex, follow suit? Can you say “Conspiracy Theory”?

First, the residents of Raleigh were forced into a physical fitness program called trash cart hauling, after the city abandoned the practice of having trash collectors pick up trash from residents’ backyards. Now, the pace is being quickened. Residents will have to double-time it to the curb and back. No stopping to catch their breath. Before sunset the day after collection, they have to haul the cart to the backyard. Hup! Hup! If not, the Raleigh police (motto: “We need more silly laws to enforce – yeah, right!”) will issue a “ticket.” Three of those and you’re in the hole for a whopping fifty bucks. There goes dinner out with your sweetie.

Solution for homeowners: Hire-a-hauler – a program where you can hire your neighbor’s kid to haul your trash cart up to the backyard when he/she gets home from school, which is usually before sunset (don’t hire one that is in an after-school sports program, though). Or, for you technophiles, Inventaholics Anonymous founder Henry “Just call me Jake” Harris introduces “Robocart” – a truly high-tech cart that automatically rolls itself out to the curb by 6:00 a.m. on trash day and back up to your house before sunset the next day. Of course, the prototype had a minor flaw – a robotic arm designed to take the trash out of the cart and put it into the trash truck. But the arm kept grabbing the trash collectors instead. Don’t worry, “Just call me Jake” will have the kinks worked out soon.

And for the overworked and underpaid Raleigh police force, there’s “InstaTicket,” a tamper-proof device with a timer/light sensor combo that, when installed on trash carts, functions similarly to parking meters, except this one will automatically pop out a ticket if the cart isn’t rolled back up to the house before the second sunset after trash is collected. (Since the time that sunset occurs varies every day, a model using just a timer had to be scrapped.) Of course, homeowners could always install floodlights in their yard to fake out the sensor – not to mention keeping the neighborhood well-lit, neighbors awake, and their electric bill equal to the state budget deficit. But, hey, it’s worth saving that fifty bucks to take your sweetie out to dinner.

Maybe next time the Raleigh City Council has a gap in its agenda, they can consider a few other earth-shattering issues, such as: How many more times to open, then close, then open the downtown area to traffic; where to post more signs on the beltway to “clarify” which way people are traveling; and how to make parking for the next State Fair even more inconvenient and confusing.

Don’t be surprised if we see a new competition at the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, China: Trash cart hauling, part of the track and field events. Can you imagine winning that gold medal?

Back to Basics

2005-10-14T12:30:00.000-07:00

Despite what you might think after reading articles like “20% of Seniors Flunk High School Graduation Exam” by Duke Helfand, Times Staff Writer, people in the U.S. are still among the most highly educated in the world. In October 2004, the number of high school graduates that went on to enroll in college reached 66.7%, up almost three percentage points from the previous year and almost at the historical high set in 1997 of 67% (see “College Enrollment and Work Activity of 2004 High School Graduates”). Sounds good, but…

It’s amazing how a nation that is supposedly so highly-educated can sport so many people who have such poor reading and writing skills. Often, they don’t fully read something, or read it but don’t understand it, then feel qualified to comment on it. Their comments are, obviously, inappropriate and sometimes even unintelligible.

The popularity of the Internet and blogging should help in this area. After all, “practice makes perfect.” But it doesn’t seem to. Maybe that’s because access is so easy. I was up and blogging in about an hour (I tweaked my Template, changing colors, text size, etc., and implemented some special features). So, anyone who knows how to turn on a PC or how to sit down in front of one in an Internet café can, in very little time, start spewing out poorly written, poorly researched “stuff” to fill up their blog.

The problem doesn’t stop there.

Photos can be posted to a blog. One person actually posted a photo of the placenta after his son’s birth. I only expect to see such things on Discovery Health channel, and then only briefly as I’m cruising through the channels trying to find something aimed at the intelligent mind.

Spammers can post to blogs in the comments feature. There is a filter to help with issue. Now, if we could only filter out the gibberish posted by those who look in the mirror every morning and see a much more intellectual person than is really staring back at them.

Some “Ivory Tower” thinkers are totally adverse to someone commenting on one blog and mentioning that he/she has a blog. To them, I say,

“It’s called Marketing, a cornerstone of Capitalism. Get over it.”

After all, people like me don’t have TV shows to announce our blog to the planet. We have to get the word out in other ways.

Here’s hoping you’ll have a fun time with your own blog. And thanks for reading mine. Read carefully and thoroughly. Write even more carefully and thoroughly. What you post will be out there in cyberspace for a VERY long time.

“Supply and Demand” Alive and Well

2005-10-06T07:08:00.000-07:00

The call has gone out across the nation, in the wake of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, to conserve. In an article on The Drudge Report (“Americans asked to drive slower, conserve energy” by By Kevin G. Hall, Knight Ridder Newspapers), “U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman urged Americans Monday to drive slower, turn down the thermostat and conserve energy…”. Sounds good, but…

I like to save a buck as much as most people. Unfortunately, economics isn’t that simple. Reduce how much you drive, and they’ll reduce how much they refine. Turn down the thermostat or install a more efficient furnace, and they’ll raise the price of a “therm.” It’s a balancing act called “Supply and Demand.” So, what do we do?

First, R E L A X.

Panic is always to the panicker’s disadvantage and to the calm person’s advantage.

Remember the scene from “It’s a Wonderful Life”? There was a bank run. People were suddenly convinced that their money was at risk in the building and loan. Jimmy Stewart tried to explain that the money they had deposited with him had, in turn, been invested in loans to others, which would be repaid with interest. Some people listened to him. Others didn’t. When Old Man Potter (Lionel Barrymore) offered to buy up shares people held in the building and loan for cents on the dollar, some took him up on it, thinking something was better than nothing. They were wrong.

Panic caused the run. Customers got only a fraction of their money back. And people like Old Man Potter won, ending up owning more of the town than before.

Similarly, people see gas prices at the pump going up. They panic and rush to fill their car’s tank. The station owner may panic and think he has to raise his price further to slow down demand. People panic more and rush in more.

It’s a vicious cycle.

If they, instead, remained calm, said to themselves that they didn’t really need to top off their tank right now, that the price may be going up because of the weekend (which happens a lot around here), then they will not artificially inflate demand by panic-purchasing.

An article this morning on The Drudge Report is a good illustration that this works. In “Oil Hits Two-Month Low on Falling Demand” by Brad Foss, stated:

New data from the Energy Department show that fuel consumption over the past month declined by almost 3 percent compared with last year. Analysts attributed the trend to soaring pump prices and a slowdown in economic activity, particularly among Gulf Coast states that were affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

This shows that people are not panicking and topping off their tanks.

Foss continues:

Gasoline demand over the past month was 2.6 percent below year ago levels, the Energy Department said Wednesday in its weekly petroleum supply report. Demand for jet fuel and diesel were also lower over the same period.

and

Societe Generale [sic] said in a research note Wednesday that the decline in demand over the past month was twice as large as the usual end-of-summer dropoff and it expects to [sic] the trend to continue, even if prices fall.

Bottom line: Stay calm. Don’t rush to buy gas because you hear a rumor that prices are headed up or that there is a shortage. But don’t expect prices to stay low just because you don’t drive to the grocery store. Nor do you need to rush out and trade in your SUV for a hybrid car. If demand goes down, supply will go down by necessity to keep prices up. That’s economics.

Got errands to run now. See you later!

Cronyism and Media Presence

2005-10-05T10:11:00.000-07:00

Suppose you’re someone with a little bit of “media presence,” i.e., you get mentioned in the news once in awhile in the performance of your public or private job, or you have your name and photo at the top of a news column. Now, suppose you don’t think that’s enough. Time to engage in a campaign to increase your media presence. Pick a high-profile target, someone who is legitimately in the spotlight, and latch on. Sounds good, but…

Is it ethical? Is this why we vote people into office or read their syndicated column?

A prime example of such behavior is Eliot Spitzer (check out his political ambitions at his campaign site). He picked Martha Stewart as his star to hitch to. She was perfect: a hard-working, wealthy, self-made woman who was loved (and hated) by hundred of thousands. She was very much a celebrity with a bull’s eye on her back. And Spitzer took aim.

First, he charged her with insider trading. Then, when he couldn’t make those charges stick, he had to fall back on that tired cliché of “Obstructing Justice.”

It worked.

Martha went to prison and – Poof! – like magic, Eliot became a household name. She got a cell and an ankle bracelet. He got a leg up in his political ambitions. (Anyone who thinks only corporate moguls step on others on their way up the ladder of success should think again.)

Now, Ann Coulter is playing the game, possibly to promote sales of her latest book. (I guess if Star Parker can go on Bill O’Reilly’s show and plug her new book during a debate, Coulter can promote hers while ragging on Bush’s pick for the Supreme Court.) As a dyed-in-the-wall Capitalist, I see Marketing as a cornerstone of that economic philosophy. However, Coulter is a columnist who supposedly speaks for conservatives and, therefore, what issues she picks to focus on reflect on other conservatives.

Coulter, in an appearance last night (4 October 2005) on Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” stated that there was clear “cronyism” in Bush’s selection of Harriet Miers for the latest Supreme Court nominee.

Not very logical. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it could be Robin Williams rehearsing a new comedy routine. Based solely on Miers relationship with Bush as justification for such an accusation overlooks an important fact: We know best the qualifications and temperament of those we have worked closely with over the years. Bush picked a nominee that he knows very well.

As for Miers’ qualifications, that has yet to be seen. But for now, let’s hold off on the cries of “cronyism,” even if it does get us a few extra readers or book sales.

At the very least, you don’t speak for this independent, yet basically conservative, thinker.

What’s Fair About Tax?

2005-10-04T07:23:00.000-07:00

Leave it to Neal Boortz (in-your-face radio talk show host) and Congressman John Linder of Georgia to find a way to make tax fair. Actually, they just wrote a book (The FairTax Book) about a plan developed by a bunch of really smart guys on how to scrap our current tax system (yes, that includes getting rid of the IRS) and instituting a system at once simple and yet adequate to finance our bloated government. Sounds good, but…

Can it get passed? And, if passed, can we keep it from getting as out of control as our current system? I like to think the answer is a resounding “YES!” Of course, that “yes” depends on all of us.

You’re probably thinking, “Hey, we have a huge Federal deficit, a huge cleanup effort in the Gulf Coast, pork projects bulging out of the Transportation Bill and the Energy Bill. How can we even think of switching to the FairTax now?”

Wrong question.

The right question is: “How can we get the FairTax bill (H.R. 25) passed as quickly as possible?”

Here are a few things you can do (not necessarily in this order):

Buy the book (this will help keep the book high on the NY Times Bestseller List and keep it in the eye of our “public servants” in D.C.).
Read the book so you’ll be informed on why passage of the FairTax bill (H.R. 25) is vital to our economy.
Write to your Congressmen/women in support of the FairTax bill (H.R. 25).
Buy several copies of the book to give to family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, strangers at the mall, etc.
Talk to your family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, strangers at the mall, etc., about the benefits of the FairTax and how vital its passage is to our economy.
Visit The FairTax Website for more information and to volunteer.
Write again to your Congressmen/women again to make sure they don’t forget.
Reread The FairTax Book

Phew! That should keep you busy for awhile. But it will be effort that will pay off BIG TIME!

Oh, by the way, if you’re worried about what all those IRS employees would do for jobs if the agency were disbanded, I can assure you they’ll be fine. There are plenty of jobskill retraining programs out there, funded with our tax dollars.

Ready – Set – Go!

Tax That Gas!

2005-10-03T12:31:00.000-07:00

Mike Jackson, Chairman and CEO of Autonation, Inc., appeared today (3 October 2005 around 11:20 a.m. EDT) on CNBC in an interview with Liz Claman. The interview was, quite probably, prompted by his remarks last week at the Reuters Autos Summit in Detroit. He stated that “a tax hike was ‘long overdue.’” This tax, he explained, would “raise the demand for fuel efficiency” and “justify the cost of the technology” (hybrid cars). Sounds good, but…

Is that what taxes are for? A reverse-carrot ploy? A new twist on the “sin tax” on cigarettes and alcohol? Instead of motivating us with a reward (the carrot dangled in front of the rabbit), a tax motivates us to avoid. Sort of like shock treatment. Is this really a viable answer to reducing oil consumption and, therefore, reliance on foreign oil? Or just fill tax coffers to fund more pork projects?

Worse still is the idea that such a tax will make us independent of foreign oil (based on the warped concept that the reason we are dependent on foreign oil is that we all drive too much, not that environmentalists keep us from getting at our own oil or that choking governmental regulations keep new innovations from being developed and/or implemented.

Add to that the reasoning of Jackson and others, in an article titled “HybridCars.com, up to 135,383 by the end of August 2005, an increase of over 14 times from 9,350 in 2000.

Do we really need a gas tax to spur the numbers higher?

Dr. Michael Tamor, manager of Ford’s Sustainable Mobility Technologies, stated in that same item, “‘If you think about the 15- to 20-year timeframe, you could argue that all vehicles are going to be hybrids.’” Part of the problem with hybrids is the price, but Toyota is making “hybrids much cheaper and in greater numbers.” This seems like a better solution than a gas tax.

By the way, Jim Press, who heads the U.S. arm of Toyota Motor Corp., is one of the backers of the tax hike, claiming that to get the real cost of gas, we have to “add to that $3 a gallon the cost of a war in Iraq, the cost of losing American soldiers to keep a pipeline of oil going.”

Yeah, right, Jim, that’s why we’re in Iraq. Just another war for oil – like Kuwait. Freedom for the citizens of those countries and stamping out terrorism is a total smokescreen, but no one has you fooled. Wink!

Supreme Domain

2005-10-03T05:53:00.000-07:00

The Supreme Court ranks got a little “thin” recently with the death of Rehnquist and retirement announcement of O’Connor. Not for long, though. The court is “plumping back up” with the swearing in today of John Roberts. Now, Bush has nominated Harriet Miers to replace O’Connor. Sounds good, but…

Where does this leave “Eminent Domain”? Do all property owners in this supposedly great nation still have to live with that sword of Damacles over our heads, worried that governments from whom we ask more and more will take our property for redevelopment to generate more tax dollars to give us what we ask for? It seems so.

An item on the Drudge Report today shows that “Eminent Domain” is being wielded as freely and broadly as ever. The article, titled “Florida City Considers Eminent Domain,” states that Riviera Beach Mayor Michael Brown (no, not that Michael Brown) sees “Eminent Domain” as one of the “‘tools that have been available to governments for years to bring communities like ours out of the economic doldrums and the trauma centers.’”

Well – yeah – he does have a point. Eminent Domain has been the big club used in the past to mow down anyone who “stands in the way of progress.” Does that make it right?

In an article I posted to Townhall.com titled “Blighted Neighborhoods,” I talked about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo vs. New London, Connecticut, on Thursday, June 23rd 2005 (a day that, as FDR once said, “will live in infamy”). Mayor Brown cites this very decision to justify displacing about 6,000 poverty-level residents to build “a billion-dollar waterfront yachting and housing complex.” All in the name of creating jobs.

Yeah – right – jobs.

Hopefully, the Institute for Justice will join the fight. Dana Berliner, senior lawyer with the Institute for Justice, stated that Mayor Brown’s plans are typical “‘pie in the sky’ expectations” for such redevelopments. A more realistic scenario will be that the 6,000 displaced residents will huddle in some other corner of the county or state or country until more local officials decide to redevelop that spot.

Do you see the pattern emerging here? Moving poor people around to create more tax revenue to provide assistance to those poor people is just a shell game.

As I stated in that previous article, we created this mess through our votes and by demanding that the government pay for our needs. The money they pay us has to come from somewhere. It seems that Mayor Brown plans to take it out of the houses of the poor in Riviera Beach, Florida.

All in the name of jobs, progress, and increased tax revenue.

We created this monster. Let’s go to the polls and kill it. And – oh, yeah – by the way, let’s make sure the next Supreme Court Justice sworn in respects our property rights more than Mayor Brown does.

Wind Out as Energy Alternative?

2005-09-30T09:53:00.000-07:00

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita have awakened the nation at last to the need to develop our own oil resources as well as the need to investigate other forms of energy, such as wind, solar, and one that’s been around awhile – nuclear. Sounds good, but…

Now, bird aficionados are attacking wind as one of the alternatives. Wind farms are being targeted as threats to birds. What’s next? Attacking solar panels as threats to plants with claims that the panels soak up all of the sunlight in their vicinity and thus rob everything around them of this “renewable resource”?

Dr. David Horn, bird “expert,” has an article in the latest issue of Wild Bird News®, titled “The impact of wind farms on bird populations.” (Sorry, article does not seem to be available online or I would have linked to it here.) He states, “The presence of wind turbines…can negatively impact bird populations if turbines are not properly placed.”

“What’s a proper location?” you ask. Good question, but complex answer.

Dr. Horn explains it this way:

In order to determine whether proposed wind farms will have an adverse impact on bird populations, it must first be determined whether proposed wind-farm areas contain bird populations that are endangered, threatened, or considered of local importance. Information is needed about where a wind farm would be located relative to migratory flyways and if the area serves as a stopover site for migratory birds.

We’re talking years of Environmental Impact Studies here.

Of course, Dr. Horn isn’t too thrilled with coal as an energy alternative, either:

The use of coal and other nonrenewable resources adversely impacts bird populations by contributing to global warming, promoting acid rain, emitting mercury, and causing the loss of thousands of acres to mining activities.

Definitely, this biology professor is spouting bad science. See the following sampling of articles obtained with simple Google searches (there are plenty more where these came from):

Global Warming Bombshell
Global Warming: Charges and Responses
Wild Species Threatened By Low-Yield Farming, Not Global Warming, Expert Says (Dr. Horn should read this one if he really cares about wild birds.)
Popper, Hayek and Environmental Regulation
Victimless Catastrophes
Senate Barely Squelches Mercury Panic (in the “Junk Science” section)

He also notes “the estimated 1 to 10 fatalities per building per year due to window/bird collisions.”

Maybe the next step is to have windowless buildings – that is, buildings that have no windows in the walls or openings with no panes (“wall-holes”). Gee, maybe we could have bars on the “wall-holes” to keep out the burglars and screens to keep out the bugs (wind, rain, cold, and heat are another matter) – unless, of course, the birds would get harmed flying into either of these. The bars could come in designer styles and colors. Imagine, the Ralph Lauren Polo or Vera Wang line of “wall-hole” bars with matching screens. What we do about the glass and steel office buildings is another dilemma.

Maybe we should all get used to sitting in the dark in our windowless houses without TVs, computers, refrigerators, etc. In other words, like the recent hurricane victims have had to do.

On second thought, let’s put humans back at the top, priority-wise.

Man seems to be increasingly taking a back seat to Nature. The Endangered Species Act and the Environmental Protection Agency are the most adamant about shoving us towards “the back of the bus” (to borrow a civil rights phrase). Houses, offices, stores, schools, churches, roads, etc., cannot be built without an Environmental Impact Study (EIS), holding up construction for months or even years and quite often halting it altogether.

Think I’m exaggerating? Okay, here’s an example:

A couple of years ago, I heard of a man who had purchased land in California with a view of the Pacific. He had recently retired and started planning to build his dream retirement home on his land. He had the house designed, the exact location selected on his land to give him and his wife the perfect “view.” However, the biggest hurdles lay ahead.

You may not know this, but the coastlines of the U.S. are guarded not just be the Coast Guard, but by Coastal Commissions. The California Coastal Commission is particularly vigilant. Unless you have very deep pockets to keep paying the fees they require, you don’t have a hope of building along the coast or even, as the retiree found out, within view from the ocean. Since the planned house would have been visible to boats on the ocean, the commission demanded that the house be moved back. They also didn’t want it to be seen from the road.

Then came the Endangered Species study. Lo and behold, there was an endangered species on this poor retiree’s land. (Big surprise, considering how the list has bloated up since it’s inception.) Some snail or slug was discovered. It had to be preserved no matter what the cost to the retiree who had worked hard all his life, saved his money, purchased this land, and dreamed of a carefree retirement, enjoying that house and the ocean view with his wife. The long driveway to the house had to be redesigned to route around this critter’s habitat. Of course, this increased construction costs by about a third, not to mention the extra surveying and civil design fees.

One after another, roadblocks were put in the retiree’s way to keep him from building on his land. Cost estimates kept rising while he continued to pay fees just to get an approved design. After about a year, the ultimate goal was accomplished. The retiree gave up trying to build on the land and sold it. Let some other poor sucker deal with these tyrants. He had had enough.

This is not just an isolated incident, but one of many examples. I’ll be presenting more in future blogs as time permits.

Let’s face it. There is no way for man, nor any other creature, to exist on this planet without having a negative impact on some other creature (plants included). If we don’t call a halt to such burdensome regulations and restrictions, man will be squeezed, despite higher population numbers, into increasingly smaller areas while the rest of the planet lies fallow, useless, and “protected.”

Now, that’s a “Brave New World.”

If you have a tale similar to the retiree above, please post it here. I'd love to hear about it. Thanks.

Future of Floating Casinos Afloat

2005-09-28T10:35:00.000-07:00

A New York Times article, referenced in the Drudge Report (www.drudgereport.com), states that Mississippi state Legislature “opened a special session Tuesday devoted to how and whether to salvage an industry that has been central to the economy of the Gulf Coast.” All the employees who earned the money to buy food, keep a roof over their heads, clothe themselves and their children, etc., will once again be able to do so if the Legislature votes to allow rebuilding of the casinos that floated on the water “to keep them physically separate from nearby communities.” Sounds good, but…

Religious leaders, opposed to gambling in the name of forcing people to live life in the way those religious leaders see as “right,” are up in arms.

WARNING: Lecture on choices starts here.

As someone who is adamant that we are each responsible for ourselves and should, therefore, take the consequences – good or bad – for the choices we make, I see the position of the religious leaders as tantamount to stripping away such responsibility and replacing it with blind obedience. Not even a child should be treated this way, let alone adults.

Children are taught by their parents and teachers about the world around them and how to navigate safely through it. As they grow, they get to make more and more decisions for themselves. If parents and teachers have done a good job and if the children have learned well, the decisions will be good ones with good consequences.

Bad decisions are often made, though, for the most part simply because of human error or not knowing all of the facts. Sometimes bad decisions are made because of bad epistemology or bad premises. As long as the person making those bad decisions accepts the consequences (including responsibility for the impact of those decisions on others), he/she should be free to make them.

Gambling is a choice. Deciding to gamble is not either good or bad. It can be a poor decision or not, but more context is needed to determine that. For example, how much does the gambler earn per year and how much of that does he/she gamble away? Martha Stewart, Donald Trump, Bill Gates, or Sir Richard Branson could gamble millions in a casino, lose it all, and still have enough to meet their basic needs. Someone serving up coffee at Starbucks or bagging your groceries at the local supermarket who lays his/her week’s pay down on a roll of the dice and loses will be in dire straights.

The risk taken on that roll of the dice, a game of cards, a spin of the roulette wheel, a pull of the slot machine arm, or spending every penny you have on lottery tickets has to be carefully weighed. Unless you can really afford to lose the money you’re laying down and not have to impose on others to make up your loss, don’t lay it down.

LECTURE ON CHOICES OVER. Now, back to whether or not Mississippi should allow the gambling industry to rebuild there.

Here’s my two-cents’ worth: Mississippi should not be regulating business. The free market does that all by itself very well. Therefore, the matter should not even be before the state Legislature. However, since it is, let the voters decide. After all, they are the ones that the state Legislature is serving. It’s their state and their livelihood. To them, I say, “Ball’s in your court.” As for the religious leaders, they can have their say (free speech). They should not, however, drown out the voices of the voters. They should make their pitch and step aside to let the voters decide.

“Feed Me, FEMA!”

2005-09-27T10:33:00.000-07:00

Katrina and Rita have “victimized” a lot of people. They are without shelter, food, gas, and all the “stuff” of their lives. The media is doing its part to show them on camera screaming for help from FEMA. And FEMA is ready to help. Sounds good, but…

Are the people hit by these stormy “sisters” really victims? Can someone be a victim who chooses to place him/herself in harm’s way? I’m talking strictly about the regular residents, not the owners and employees of oil, natural gas, and chemical plants. They have to go where the oil and gas are, and where the EPA and local building restrictions allow.

Thanks in large part to FEMA, founded in 1979 by Jimmy “I’m a Peanut Farmer” Carter, almost 50% of the U.S. population lives on our coasts, per a report on CNBC Monday 26 September 2005. People can now live in harm’s way because FEMA will be there to

“lead America to prepare for, prevent, respond to and recover from disasters with a vision of ‘A Nation Prepared.’” (from http://www.fema.gov/about/history.shtm)

Of course, you may have noticed, as I have, the key phrase above “lead America.” To me, and maybe to you, too, this means that I still have responsibility for myself, that FEMA is my backup plan, not my only plan. To all those folks who chose to live in a city that sits 12 feet below sea level, or build a million dollar beach house 100-150’ from the water’s edge, or that flock to the shore for whatever reason, I have only this to say:

Pay for your own decisions. FEMA is funded by tax dollars, paid for by you, me, your neighbors, my neighbors, and everyone else in this country who works hard and gets a paycheck. We are all tired of paying for your irresponsibility and poorly-thought-out choices.

In addition, the existence of FEMA seems to be a call for local and state officials to eschew their first-line-of-defense duties. Certainly, Gov. “Blank Stare” Blanco of Louisiana and Mayor “Nuttin’ Head” Nagin heeded that call.

Right now, Michael Brown, former head of FEMA, is facing a Congressional hearing and being asked assinine questions. Clearly, he is the latest scapegoat for a situation caused by the failure of others. Once FEMA was called in is another matter. How well he acted then is a legitimate matter to look into.

Bottom line: FEMA does not replace common sense. You still have to consider carefully where you build your house or business. You have to accept the consequences if that decision ends up being a poor one. We (the taxpayers of America) are tired of being your deep pocket.

"NIMBY" No More

2005-09-26T18:36:00.000-07:00

People want greenspace or parks backing up to their property. Greenery is irresistible and soothing. It looks alive, growing, vital, inviting, and fun. Sounds good, but...

First, Katrina plowed through refineries in the New Orleans area. Then, Rita took aim at the Galveston and Houston refineries. Shutdowns and damages resulted. Both will have a negative impact on us all, not just at the pump, but when heating our homes this Winter, when we buy something at the store, when we purchase a house, virtually everything.

So, of course, the folks at CNBC, a supposedly pro-business station, keep saying that more refineries are needed but that everyone says, "Not in My Back Yard!"

The NIMBY crowd has held sway for a long time and have made building any refineries very difficult to get approved, let alone built. This crowd are backed, at least philosophically, by environmental radicals. One of the radicals was on CNBC today, claiming that "We can't back off of the environmental protections that have been put in place." Why not? Will we have a clean environment but no food to eat and no heat in our homes? I, personally, would live next to a refinery if it meant having affordable gasoline to fill up my car's tank.

Katrina and Rita are wake-up calls. They are telling us that if we want to have our Hummers and SUVs, if we want affordable heat in Winter and air conditioning in Summer, if we want to keep more jobs from migrating offshore as businesses try to keep their overhead low, if we want affordable food, then we all have to rethink "NIMBY."

Green is good, but not just when it's grass. Green is also good in our wallets, especially when it buys us the things that keep us civilized.

Maybe NIMBY should be revised to stand for: "Now Income Means Business 'Yes'."

It Doesn’t Take a Hurricane

2005-09-22T07:01:00.000-07:00

Virtually every man, woman, and child in the U.S. – not to mention most of the world – knows that New Orleans and areas east and west of them along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico got dumped on by Hurricane Katrina. The city of New Orleans is awash with raw sewage, among other things. However, with Adm. Thad Allen in charge of FEMA’s efforts, clean up is underway, despite the threat posed by Katrina’s angry sister Rita. Sounds good, but…

It doesn’t always take a hurricane to dump raw sewage on people’s property. Sometimes it just takes Eminent Domain.

As I wrote in a blog on Townhall.com in “New Hill becomes Poo Hill” (you may have to scroll down to see it), the tiny community of New Hill, about 25 miles southwest of Raleigh, NC, is under threat of having a lot of raw sewage washing over them. The threat doesn’t come from a hurricane. It comes from the nearby towns of Apex, Cary, Holly Springs, and Morrisville. And the sewage wouldn’t be a one-time, with FEMA coming in to clean up. It would be continuous.

Since I posted that blog, the “fab four” towns named above have not relented in their efforts, despite very vocal and strenuous opposition from the residents of New Hill, joined by many residents of the “fab four.” One Apex Town Board member, Bill Jensen, in a letter to the Editor of the Apex Herald, asked a very important question, especially in the dark shadow of the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London, CT:

Just because towns have the power to condemn property in another community, should they wield the sword and ruin a community that has few alternatives for fighting back?

Thanks, Bill. We all needed that, i.e., an indication that there is a public servant out there that understands what being a “public servant” is and serving ALL of that public, not just some.

Of course, someone will point out that the sewage will come into New Hill via sewage pipes, and will not be washing into the residents’ houses. Small difference when you consider the large, open air vats into which those pipes will dump the sewage. Try being downwind of that, smelling it, even with the windows shut, in your office, your home, your school, your church. You’d feel like the folks in New Hill do – that they’re getting the “royal flush” from the “fab four.”

The fight’s not over. It’s just getting dirtier. Maybe we need to call in FEMA.

Extreme Reserved Parking

2005-09-20T15:56:00.000-07:00

A new grocery store has opened in our town, right across the street from Lowe’s Foods. It’s Harris Teeter, complete with a Starbucks inside for your caffeinated shopping pleasure. And plenty of reserved parking for the Disabled. Sounds good, but…

Has the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) opened the door to a host of other reserved parking? Are these “new signs” of things to come? Have I just had too many lattés?

The ADA took effect July 26, 1992. Along with that came The Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities. Item 4, paragraph 4.6 of these guidelines specifies Parking and Passenger Loading Zones, one result being the requirement of setting aside parking spaces for the disabled. While I can’t find fault with giving disabled drivers and passengers special consideration, I can and do find fault with having to force making these considerations down the throats of business owners.

Maybe my view of human nature is more positive. After all, any store manager worth his/her salt would most likely institute special parking without legislation such as ADA to more fully accommodate his customers. That’s good for business. The ADA requirement is just a short cut for people who want to bully their way through what should be a mutually cooperative situation. It’s also opening a whole can of worms. Harris Teeter, for example, has gone one step further in setting up spaces reserved for people with other special conditions, which my husband and I recently experienced.

As soon as we saw the sign announcing that Harris Teeter was coming soon, we kept an eye on construction progress. (I’m sure the folks at Lowe’s Foods were watching, too.) When the store finally had its grand opening, we went to check it out, picking up a few items and browsing the well-stocked shelves. However, parking was another matter. We had to pass up one empty parking space after another. Each of those spaces had a portable sign in front of it. Some read “For Expectant Mothers.” Others read “For Mothers With Children.”Hmmm… Seems like Harris Teeter is working hard to be considerate of mothers and wants them to have the best parking spots – aside from the ones already reserved for the disabled. (It isn’t happening just here, though. Friends in Arizona emailed me a photo of a sign with a stork on it. The sign says “Expectant Mom’s Parking Only,” at least, I think it does. The sign is covered in graffiti.) As we drove by the Harris Teeter signs, we wondered where the others were. Other signs, you ask? Why, yes. Consider…

The 2000 U.S. Census shows that there are currently over 6 million children in the United States today who are living in “grandparent- or other relative-maintained households.” So signs like “Fathers With Children,” “Grandparents With Children,” “Aunts and Uncles With Children,” and even “Teens With Children” would be appropriate. In fact, we saw a dad with his cute, little daughter walking toward the store – from a parking space twice as far from the store entrance as the one reserved for Mothers With Children. Guess fathers and others don’t count.Perhaps the folks at Harris Teeter can make it easier for any childcaregiver shopping in their store to get to and from the car more easily with children. But why stop there? As long as we have taken one step down this slippery slope, might as well take another. (How to enforce the various restrictions is another article altogether.)

We live in an age when just about any condition, physical or familial, could be considered in need of special parking. Certainly, being an expectant mother qualifies. But don’t forget these: “Parking for People With Tight Shoes,” “Parking for Agoraphobics,” “Parking for Peg-Legged Pirates,” “Parking for Runaway Brides,” and "Parking for Crazy Women Who Like to Camp Out in Crawford, Texas."

Soon, as the categories get expanded further, Harris Teeter will have to resort to setting up satellite parking on the other side of the street by Lowe’s Foods for the rest of us with a shuttle back to their store. Oh, darn, that parking is for “Starbucks Addicts” only. Guess we’ll have to shop at Lowe’s Foods after all.

Getting off to a rousing start

2005-09-19T12:27:00.000-07:00

As my first posting, I want to set forth the purpose of this blog. This is no personal journal, no posting of photos of my cat or our last vacation. As worthwhile as such things are, I am focused in another direction.

Our country is sliding into a morass of socialism, with government proposing one ridiculous thing after another. I want to bring them to your attention and point out things that "Sounded Good at the Time" but that are really quite potentially harmful. Hopefully, my infusions of humor will be like that spoonful of sugar that helps the medicine go down (to quote Mary Poppins) and amuse you along with stirring your awareness of what your public servants are up to.

Your comments are very welcome and will hopefully be presented in the same vein and intent as my postings. I may not be able to respond in all cases, but I will be reading them all, good and bad.

One note: Some of these postings have also appeared on Townhall.com. While I will continue to post there, most of my articles will be here.

Thank you for taking a bit of the precious time we call life to read through these.

Copyright © 2005 A.C. Cargill