Monday, June 28, 2010
Sotomayor should resign
I am really sick of politicians who say what ever they need to, in order to get the public's support for an election. Although, one could argue that I should not be surprised by politicians who lie. I guess I'm an optimist. But, when a supreme court judge does it? Well, that cannot stand. Judge Sotomayor made statements under oath regarding her stance on gun control and the second amendment. Yet, the first time a vote comes up on this very important issue, she votes against the second amendment, and for gun control. Is it too much to ask to get a supreme court judge with integrity? In my opinion, Judge Sotomayor should resign.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Politicizing Top Chef
I was very surprised to find this administration involved in an episode of Top Chef. This begs the question of why the administration would find the need to be on a TV show. Particularly, when we have issues that are much more pressing (e.g. jobs, border protection, gulf cleanup, Afghanistan, etc.). Perhaps, this is why spending is so high. Perhaps, we need to get our priorities in the correct order. I digress.
In the first part of the episode, the producers had the chefs “work together” by using two person red and blue chef’s aprons. Each team member literally had one hand tied behind their backs. Cute, but this was over reaching, in my opinion. The commentary from the administration official (who was on the show) was all about how hard it is to work together in a non-partisan method; with a hint of how things work better when there is a single agenda. Well, the fact is that we are a representative republic. That means that “we the people” expect our representatives to work together on our behalf - keeping our interests as their primary impetus. The problem we have today is that our elected representatives are more concerned with their positions within their own party, than they are about things like ethics, integrity and fairness.
After the political message about working together, the Top Chef contestants were moved to a local Washington D.C. school, where they were expected to produce a nutritious lunch for a budget of $4 per child. Now, the administration official’s message was very clear: there is not enough money for the school lunch programs. Why is this a government problem? Lets analyze this. Whose responsibility is it to feed a child - the government or the parent? We cannot be guilted into a particular point of view - we need to be logical. Nobody wants to see starving children anywhere. That is beside the point. Back to the question. The answer is that the parents are fundamentally responsible for feeding their children. They can accomplish this one of two ways: they can send lunch to school with their child, or, they can provide the child with money to buy the school lunch. If a parent wants the child to have a nutritious lunch, then they should probably send lunch with the child. If a parent trusts the school to provide a nutritious school lunch, then they should send the child to school with enough money to buy the school lunch. Simple, huh?
Well, it’s not as simple as it sounds. At one point in time, I was a child attending public school in the Washington D.C. metro area. And, while I do not want to get too far off track, I need to describe some of the perils of taking money to school. When I was in school, it was routine practice to “mug” kids in the stairwells to get their lunch money. In fact, there were numbers of gangs that specialized in this kind of activity. Also, drugs have become a serious problem in the schools today. That said, these are reasons for not sending money to school with a child. These are not reasons for not taking responsibility for your child’s nutrition. As a parent, I understand wanting school lunch money to go to school lunches. That is why I made payments directly to the school for my children’s school lunches (when they were attending public school).
There is another thing to consider: some parents just cannot afford to provide a nutritious lunch for their children. Or, they cannot afford to provide nutritious food for their children in general. While I am sympathetic to this issue, this is not a role for any government entity (local, state or federal). People who have children have to take responsibility for feeding those children. Those who have children need to be the ones that make the decisions on how to take care of their families. If the government inserts themselves into this process, then they risk having future generations of people who will simply let the government take responsibility for feeding their children. And, that is not a good thing. This kind of approach will lead to a huge dependence on government and society for simple things like food. Remember the proverb about the value of teaching a person to fish, so they can sustain themselves? I think this is good advice.
As a society, we will have to provide some mechanism for governing those who are not willing to live up to their parenting responsibilities. But, that should be the extent of government’s involvement.
I found it inappropriate for this administration to use a TV show to attempt to once again manipulate public opinion. This administration is notorious for using this kind of media manipulation to advocate their liberal agenda. And, this is unacceptable. So, from this moment forward I will be boycotting Top Chef. I am sending letters to the advertisers for this show stating my objections to the politicized content. I encourage every American to do the same. In addition, every TV show that facilitates this kind of liberal propaganda will receive the same treatment. It’s time to reign in the liberal media!
Come on America - let’s make our voices heard!
In the first part of the episode, the producers had the chefs “work together” by using two person red and blue chef’s aprons. Each team member literally had one hand tied behind their backs. Cute, but this was over reaching, in my opinion. The commentary from the administration official (who was on the show) was all about how hard it is to work together in a non-partisan method; with a hint of how things work better when there is a single agenda. Well, the fact is that we are a representative republic. That means that “we the people” expect our representatives to work together on our behalf - keeping our interests as their primary impetus. The problem we have today is that our elected representatives are more concerned with their positions within their own party, than they are about things like ethics, integrity and fairness.
After the political message about working together, the Top Chef contestants were moved to a local Washington D.C. school, where they were expected to produce a nutritious lunch for a budget of $4 per child. Now, the administration official’s message was very clear: there is not enough money for the school lunch programs. Why is this a government problem? Lets analyze this. Whose responsibility is it to feed a child - the government or the parent? We cannot be guilted into a particular point of view - we need to be logical. Nobody wants to see starving children anywhere. That is beside the point. Back to the question. The answer is that the parents are fundamentally responsible for feeding their children. They can accomplish this one of two ways: they can send lunch to school with their child, or, they can provide the child with money to buy the school lunch. If a parent wants the child to have a nutritious lunch, then they should probably send lunch with the child. If a parent trusts the school to provide a nutritious school lunch, then they should send the child to school with enough money to buy the school lunch. Simple, huh?
Well, it’s not as simple as it sounds. At one point in time, I was a child attending public school in the Washington D.C. metro area. And, while I do not want to get too far off track, I need to describe some of the perils of taking money to school. When I was in school, it was routine practice to “mug” kids in the stairwells to get their lunch money. In fact, there were numbers of gangs that specialized in this kind of activity. Also, drugs have become a serious problem in the schools today. That said, these are reasons for not sending money to school with a child. These are not reasons for not taking responsibility for your child’s nutrition. As a parent, I understand wanting school lunch money to go to school lunches. That is why I made payments directly to the school for my children’s school lunches (when they were attending public school).
There is another thing to consider: some parents just cannot afford to provide a nutritious lunch for their children. Or, they cannot afford to provide nutritious food for their children in general. While I am sympathetic to this issue, this is not a role for any government entity (local, state or federal). People who have children have to take responsibility for feeding those children. Those who have children need to be the ones that make the decisions on how to take care of their families. If the government inserts themselves into this process, then they risk having future generations of people who will simply let the government take responsibility for feeding their children. And, that is not a good thing. This kind of approach will lead to a huge dependence on government and society for simple things like food. Remember the proverb about the value of teaching a person to fish, so they can sustain themselves? I think this is good advice.
As a society, we will have to provide some mechanism for governing those who are not willing to live up to their parenting responsibilities. But, that should be the extent of government’s involvement.
I found it inappropriate for this administration to use a TV show to attempt to once again manipulate public opinion. This administration is notorious for using this kind of media manipulation to advocate their liberal agenda. And, this is unacceptable. So, from this moment forward I will be boycotting Top Chef. I am sending letters to the advertisers for this show stating my objections to the politicized content. I encourage every American to do the same. In addition, every TV show that facilitates this kind of liberal propaganda will receive the same treatment. It’s time to reign in the liberal media!
Come on America - let’s make our voices heard!
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Freedom of Choice
My wife and I decided to catch a movie this afternoon. We got to the
theater, and discovered the "sit where you want" business model has
been replaced with a "reserved seat" business model.
theater, and discovered the "sit where you want" business model has
been replaced with a "reserved seat" business model.
Now, this would be novel, if it were not for:
- crying kids and not being able to move
- someone else is not smart enough to sit in their own seat, and not willing to move to the right seat, or cannot move to their own seat because someone else is sitting in it - you get an interesting social dilemma
Sent from my iPhone
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Deja Vietnam
Who are we kidding? Afghanistan is another Vietnam. The government micromanaged Vietnam - we lost. This administration is micromanaging Afghanistan. And, we are gonna lose in Afghanistan. Let me say, my opinion has nothing to do with the general being fired - I think the President made the right decision. My problem is the way this administration is micromanaging the rules of engagement. The same thing happened in Vietnam. And, we lost in Vietnam.
Another thing to think about: drugs. Vietnam was a huge source of drugs. Afganistan is a huge source of drugs. Drugs are a serious problem; not just in Afghanistan, but on our own borders. I don't think we can win in Afghanistan. Having troops in a situation where they are nothing but targets is ridiculous. Let's bring the troops home and put them on the US Mexican border.
Another thing to think about: drugs. Vietnam was a huge source of drugs. Afganistan is a huge source of drugs. Drugs are a serious problem; not just in Afghanistan, but on our own borders. I don't think we can win in Afghanistan. Having troops in a situation where they are nothing but targets is ridiculous. Let's bring the troops home and put them on the US Mexican border.
Enforce the Law!!
What is the deal? First, our elected officials decide to pass healthcare reform against the will of the American people. Now, our elected officials are refusing to enforce the immigration laws. Why bother having laws? To make it even worse, our elected officials are refusing to protect our borders, until they get an agreement on comprehensive immigration reform. That's just plain sick! Tell me, what is the federal government supposed to do? How can we trust the government with our healthcare? How long before our healthcare is held hostage? Think I'm joking? Well, I would have never thought it possible. But, it seems this administration has an agenda. And, it's clear this administration is going to get what they want AT ANY COST to the American people. At this point, I can see this administration holding Americans hostage, in order to get their agenda put in place. We need checks and balances. November cannot come soon enough!
I heard some Democrat saying that the Arizona law is unconstitutional because some law enforcement officer might profile some innocent driver. Well, at this point, I would trust any law enforcement officer before I would trust this administration. It's ridiculous. This administration has put their agenda above everything - especially the American people. Pretty bad when you consider the elitists are supposed to be working for the American people. So, we should believe that we can trust the federal government with our healthcare more than we can trust a law enforcement officer. I choose the law enforcement officer. Hey Mr. President, Enforce the damn border!
I heard some Democrat saying that the Arizona law is unconstitutional because some law enforcement officer might profile some innocent driver. Well, at this point, I would trust any law enforcement officer before I would trust this administration. It's ridiculous. This administration has put their agenda above everything - especially the American people. Pretty bad when you consider the elitists are supposed to be working for the American people. So, we should believe that we can trust the federal government with our healthcare more than we can trust a law enforcement officer. I choose the law enforcement officer. Hey Mr. President, Enforce the damn border!
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Oil War?
I am simply disgusted.
How in the world can the president compare this environmental disaster to a war? Oh, I get it. This administration does not want this disaster characterized as "Obama's Katrina". Haven't you heard the administration trying to compare this disaster to Bush's 9/11? That is why they are using the war metaphors. How despicable. And, how is it that this president is willing to put 17,000 National Guard troops to work on this problem? Are you serious? This president is not wiling to put 6,000 troops to protect the US borders. But, they are willing to put 17,000 National Guard troops to work on this disaster? I think comparing this disaster to a war is disrespectful to the men and women who have and are continuing to fight on behalf of the nation.
While I am giving my opinion on the president's speech, I would also like to comment about the "we don't know where we are going or what we want" comment. Mr. President, once again you are demonstrating that you are out of touch with us working class Americans. We know what we want, and we know what we do not want. Why don't you try listening for a change? Oh, that's right: we (the American people who you work for) are too dumb to know what we want. That is why elitists like you have to make decisions for us. Well, November is just around the corner. I think you will find out what we want then. Just in case you have not followed my blog before, I voted for a Democratic Congressman in the 2008 election. I am not only voting AGAINST that person in 2010, I am donating money and time to the campaigns of all the other candidates in the race - I am actively campaigning AGAINST the democratic incumbent.
Mr. Obama, no matter how much your spin doctors try to spin this, the gulf oil disaster will always be your Katrina. I just made another post about "Arm Chair Quarterbacks", where I said that I did not appreciate the media bashing you about things that were beyond your control. But, you are the one who is supposed to be demonstrating your leadership. And, I just don't see anything from your administration but politics as usual.
How in the world can the president compare this environmental disaster to a war? Oh, I get it. This administration does not want this disaster characterized as "Obama's Katrina". Haven't you heard the administration trying to compare this disaster to Bush's 9/11? That is why they are using the war metaphors. How despicable. And, how is it that this president is willing to put 17,000 National Guard troops to work on this problem? Are you serious? This president is not wiling to put 6,000 troops to protect the US borders. But, they are willing to put 17,000 National Guard troops to work on this disaster? I think comparing this disaster to a war is disrespectful to the men and women who have and are continuing to fight on behalf of the nation.
While I am giving my opinion on the president's speech, I would also like to comment about the "we don't know where we are going or what we want" comment. Mr. President, once again you are demonstrating that you are out of touch with us working class Americans. We know what we want, and we know what we do not want. Why don't you try listening for a change? Oh, that's right: we (the American people who you work for) are too dumb to know what we want. That is why elitists like you have to make decisions for us. Well, November is just around the corner. I think you will find out what we want then. Just in case you have not followed my blog before, I voted for a Democratic Congressman in the 2008 election. I am not only voting AGAINST that person in 2010, I am donating money and time to the campaigns of all the other candidates in the race - I am actively campaigning AGAINST the democratic incumbent.
Mr. Obama, no matter how much your spin doctors try to spin this, the gulf oil disaster will always be your Katrina. I just made another post about "Arm Chair Quarterbacks", where I said that I did not appreciate the media bashing you about things that were beyond your control. But, you are the one who is supposed to be demonstrating your leadership. And, I just don't see anything from your administration but politics as usual.
Arm Chair Quarterbacks
We've all done it. It's a normal human behavior to express one's opinion. The problem is when these opinions become confused with the facts. And, it's even more dangerous when aggressive (or arrogant) individuals try to represent their opinion as fact. Throughout my career, I have been amazed by the number of people who think they can do a particular job just by reading a book. I guess it is possible that, in my youth, I was arrogant and naive enough to think that experience did not matter. I am much wiser now. :-)
But seriously; the term expert applies to an individual with knowledge, experience and skills in a particular domain. An individual's expertise is based on their knowledge and skills. And, the way an individual gets expertise is by learning and applying their skills to real world problems. Experts are not elected or assigned based on political methods (like most managers). Thus, an individual's expertise has nothing to do with whether they are "in charge" or not. And, clearly, individuals cannot gain experience (or expertise) simply by being put in charge of something.
So, where am I going with this, you might ask?
Well ... it's like this: I see lots of people "arm chair quarterbacking" the Gulf situation. Instead of doing that myself, I just want to say that this is a difficult situation for all parties. And, I think we need to let the folks with the knowledge of these kinds of wells do their job. I am not at all happy with the news media that has been attacking this administration for lack of action; particularly when this particular set of media is very quick to scream whenever the government attempts to do anything that could be perceived as "anti-business". Nor am I happy with the oil company's response to the situation. But, I still believe in letting the experts do their job. And, I am quite sure that this administration does not have any expertise in deep water oil wells. This is a perfect opportunity for this administration to demonstrate its leadership abilities, by working with the oil company to resolve the problem. Of course, that is not what is happening. I guess it was too much to expect leadership from an administration that sees itself as a monarchy. So, I guess you could say that I am also not happy with the way this administration has handled this crisis. Basically, I am not happy with the situation. I think the media should shut up. I think the administration should demonstrate leadership rather than it's regular political manipulation. And, I think the oil industry at large should make a commitment to deal with this economic and environmental disaster; so this administration does not use this as an excuse for more big government.
Hmm ... I guess that was still "arm chair quarterbacking". I just hope it was in perspective.
But seriously; the term expert applies to an individual with knowledge, experience and skills in a particular domain. An individual's expertise is based on their knowledge and skills. And, the way an individual gets expertise is by learning and applying their skills to real world problems. Experts are not elected or assigned based on political methods (like most managers). Thus, an individual's expertise has nothing to do with whether they are "in charge" or not. And, clearly, individuals cannot gain experience (or expertise) simply by being put in charge of something.
So, where am I going with this, you might ask?
Well ... it's like this: I see lots of people "arm chair quarterbacking" the Gulf situation. Instead of doing that myself, I just want to say that this is a difficult situation for all parties. And, I think we need to let the folks with the knowledge of these kinds of wells do their job. I am not at all happy with the news media that has been attacking this administration for lack of action; particularly when this particular set of media is very quick to scream whenever the government attempts to do anything that could be perceived as "anti-business". Nor am I happy with the oil company's response to the situation. But, I still believe in letting the experts do their job. And, I am quite sure that this administration does not have any expertise in deep water oil wells. This is a perfect opportunity for this administration to demonstrate its leadership abilities, by working with the oil company to resolve the problem. Of course, that is not what is happening. I guess it was too much to expect leadership from an administration that sees itself as a monarchy. So, I guess you could say that I am also not happy with the way this administration has handled this crisis. Basically, I am not happy with the situation. I think the media should shut up. I think the administration should demonstrate leadership rather than it's regular political manipulation. And, I think the oil industry at large should make a commitment to deal with this economic and environmental disaster; so this administration does not use this as an excuse for more big government.
Hmm ... I guess that was still "arm chair quarterbacking". I just hope it was in perspective.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)