Electoral Food for Thought

This article may be a little harsh on Obama, but not much in my opinion. Unlike much political opinion, the author does in fact link to supporting evidence.

None of this would go unreported if McCain had said or done it. Anyway read it and weigh it yourself. I find some of it persuasive, some not. But an Obama presidency would not be a good thing.

"Time to use the C word."

He Obviously Has No Children Around

From the "Too Much Time On His Hands" department:

The HMS Hood built to scale from Legos.

The Motto of the European Union

I just found out that the EU has a motto. Who knew?

We all know the motto of the United States "In God We Trust." It's solid, reassuring and says something concrete about the country. As mottos go, it's a good one (as are most things the Founding Fathers put out).

The EU motto also, unintentionally I presume, says something concrete about that "country." The motto is:

"United in Diversity"

That's it!? . . . what the heck is that supposed to mean? That's right out of the Oxymoron Dept.

I can hear the dialog in the committee meeting that came up with that . . .

France: "I'm glad we can come together to celebrate our differences."
Germany: "Yes indeed, we are united in our diversity . . ."
Italy: "Eureka! that's it! the new motto - 'united in diversity'"
France: "Sacre bleu! you are right. It's perfect, concretely vague . . ."
Germany: "Disturbingly reassuring . . ."
Italy: "Universally unique . . ."
France: "It absorbingly reflects all of the foreign policy, economic and social positions on which we've agreed to disagree."
Italy: "not to mention our shared individual non-binding commitment to Democratic Socialism.
Germany: "Plus it has a nice ring to it - like 'French Victory!'"

(stiffled laughter)

France: "That's not funny . . ."
Britain: "But it is seriously ironic!"

Anyway, it is the perfect motto for the EU.

Why Auto Insurance is So Expensive . . .

. . . or "Life Imitates Art" - well, at least life imitates Tommy Boy.

Ever see one of those stories that just couldn't be any more ripe to mock?

This item comes to us from one of America's best-loved newspapers - The Leaf Chronicle. (don't laugh, according to the site, it's "Your Connection to Clarksville, Tenn."). The man's name has been changed to protect the innocent idiot (and the punchline at the end of this blog post),

Anyway:

[A man] was driving home from his job in Dover Wednesday at about 11 p.m. when a beautiful red fox dashed in front of his SUV. After he ran over the fox, he stopped his GMC Jimmy . . .

You may be thinking to yourself, "Oh how nice, he wants to see if the fox is okay. Just like those two guys in Tommy Boy, when they hit the deer - Maybe he's never seen one up close before."

You would be wrong. This is Tennessee after all.

After he ran over the fox, he stopped his GMC Jimmy to get the fox to cut off its tail for a souvenir, and he put it in the back seat, said Dale Grandstaff, a Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency wildlife officer.

The wildlife officer, by way of explanation said:

The tails are real bushy and pretty and thick this time of year.

Ah, well, that explains it . . . at least he's cleaning up the roadkill. But, with the fox in the back seat, (just like the deer from the movie) the eerie parallels to Tommy Boy continue:

Things took an odd turn when [the man] heard a noise coming from his back seat and realized the fox was alive — and not happy.

Gee, I wonder why the fox was enraged?

The driver desperately searched for something to hold the fox back and prevent him from climbing into the front seat and biting him, he told [Wildlife Officer] Grandstaff.

As he looked in the back seat to get a blanket to block the fox, he took his attention from the road.

The SUV crossed the center line and wrecked in a ditch, flipping once and landing upside down in the 3900 block of Lylewood Road, Grandstaff said.

So, an enraged live animal causes the destruction of a car . . . sounds familiar.

[The man] suffered minor injuries and bruises and was treated at the scene by Montgomery County Emergency Medical Service. The fox was found dead in the SUV. Grandstaff said it was not clear whether the fox died of injuries caused by being hit by the SUV or if it died in the wreck.

Either way, a really bad day for the fox . . .

The Wildlife Officer, who obviously knows a lot about animal psychology, explained the fox's behavior:

Grandstaff said there was nothing wrong with [the man] taking the animal after striking it. But foxes don't like to be caged, especially when they are alive, he said.

The dead ones apparently don't mind . . . It's also lucky for this guy that skunk tails aren't "real bushy and pretty and thick this time of year."

And the final irony, (drum-roll please): The man's name is Tommy Fox.

P.S.

It was also not known if Tommy Fox got to keep the tail.

Christianity

No, not the kind you're thinking.

This stems from an conversation I had with my mom last night. She saw my new name badge (see previous post), and lamented that the badge had 'Chris Williams' on it.

"After all the trouble I went through to call you 'Christian.'" she lamented.

I had to explain why I started going by Chris. It began in elementary school when Night Ranger released the song Sister Christian. My class was apparently full of Night Ranger fans, and they enjoyed singing the song over and over to me - at lunch, at recess, in the bathroom, in the hall . . .

As Wikipedia explains above, the song was written about a band member's sister, Christy, he added:

the real Christy was so mortified when the song came out she nearly changed her name.

yeah, no kidding. At least she was A GIRL!

Anyway, the wisdom of my decision was confirmed years later after I met Becky, and she told me about a high school classmate of hers named Christian who referred to himself, completely missing the irony, as 'Christian the anti-Christ'

So now there are two good reasons . . .

Where The Heck Have I Been?

I keep getting comments form my loyal readers (all three of you) welcoming me back to blogging.

First of all, thank you. Second, I should probably update everyone on why I took some time off posting. Let's go through the chronology:

July - we decided to move about July 10th. We spent the following days packing and preparing. All this time I was also studying for the bar exam. We actually moved between July 16th and July 19th. (many thanks to Mike and Melissa for their help). We spent the next few days unpacking while I continued to study for the bar.

July 29-30 - I took the bar exam in Salt Lake City. (and mentally recovered for the next week). I did pass, btw.

August - I . . . hmmm . . . don't remember much but stress, and applying for jobs all month. I had a couple of interviews, but was always rejected. The closest were SirsiDynix and the State Legislature. I really would have loved the State job.

September - More of the same stress. I eventually got one offer from a Tech company in SLC called SIRE Technologies. It wasn't enough money for us long-term, and it utilized only a small subset of my skills. We were at the point, though, where it was Friday afternoon, and I was ready to take the job on Monday if nothing else came up. I sent out a few last applications and went to sleep. Anyway, I got a call back on Saturday, an interview at 7:00am Monday morning, and an offer right there on the spot. Needless to say, I declined the first offer. I eventually did accept the new one.

Now I'm a Network Administrator for Messaging Architects in their Provo office on the Novell campus. It's a good opportunity and I hope to grow into a legal/tech hybrid position. this will serve our needs for the time being. We aren't thrilled at having to move again, but we'll be OK.

Anyway, that's why posts have been scarce. I hope to be more regular from now on.

A Silent Killer - Golf

I hope Becky doesn't read this item. She'll never let me golf again. Here's just one of the seven golfing deaths you can read about by following the link:

1995 - Jean Potevan of Orleans, France was so irate after missing 3 straight puts that he threw his bag into a lake out of sheer frustration. Only problem: his car keys were also in the bag. He dove in and proceeded to drown after getting entangled in the weeds. According to his golf partner, his last words were “I’m going back for the keys, but I’m leaving the clubs down there.”

I'd never do anything potentially dangerous on the golf course, right sweetie?

The Milk of Human Stupidity

PETA is usually good for a laugh, but lately they've been good for little more than a nauseous shudder. Their latest crusade? to convince Ben and Jerry's to use human beast milk in their ice cream.

The fact that human adults consume huge quantities of dairy products made from milk that was meant for a baby cow just doesn't make sense," says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman. "Everyone knows that 'the breast is best,' so Ben & Jerry's could do consumers and cows a big favor by making the switch to breast milk.

uh.... Why?

Using cow's milk for your ice cream is a hazard to your customer's health. Dairy products have been linked to juvenile diabetes, allergies, constipation, obesity, and prostate and ovarian cancer. . . it may play a role in anemia, allergies, and juvenile diabetes and in the long term, will set kids up for obesity and heart disease-America's number one cause of death.

So... linked by whom? and, human milk isn't dairy? and shouldn't someone warn the calves not to drink such dangerous stuff?

Animals will also benefit from the switch to breast milk. Like all mammals, cows only produce milk during and after pregnancy, so to be able to constantly milk them, cows are forcefully impregnated every nine months. After several years of living in filthy conditions and being forced to produce 10 times more milk than they would naturally, their exhausted bodies are turned into hamburgers or ground up for soup.

So... humans are mammals, and we should milk them instead? Wouldn't taking mothers' milk deprive human babies of something important? After all "the breast is best," right?

I must be missing something. PETA can't be that stupid, can they? Not to be indelicate, but I'm a father. I know about how much milk a human mother produces in a day, and it isn't 30 liters (the average for a dairy cow). I wonder how much a liter of milk would cost if PETA got its way?

Happy Independence Day

Independence Day seems to me to be more than an American holiday, but one the whole world can celebrate. One of the fruits of this country's declared independence is religious freedom. In the 1st amendment to the constitution we read:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Because of this religious freedom, the 14-year-old Joseph Smith was introduced to many religions. With so many churches to chose from, he learned much and, in his own words, he "attended their several meetings as often as occasion would permit." But, he wanted to know more. If not for religious freedom, perhaps he would never have had the desire to know which of all the churches was true. He would certainly not have had the freedom to investigate many churches, let alone to follow the Lord's instructions and organize His church in this dispensation. 

God prepared the way for His gospel to be restored and the opportunity for all to receive it. The establishment of this nation was a part of that preparation. The Lord has encouraged us to honor the law of the land

and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles (D&C 101:77)

Our religious liberty is essential if we are to have the chance to exercise our moral agency. The Lord has told us the reason he established this Constitution and this nation.

That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. . . And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood. (D&C 101:78, 80)

There are forces today who wish to take away our freedoms. Our nation can be attacked and brought into physical bondage, but the more immediate challenges we each face are daily attacks on our own personal freedom.

When we give in to temptation, our freedom of choice is diminished and we put ourselves in spiritual bondage. During these times we must again and again use our freedom to worship God by choosing to repent and obey God. The freedom to worship God means nothing if we do not in fact worship Him.

The personal battles we are facing don't necessarily require physical weapons, but new tools, obedience, testimony and the courage to share it. With these gifts, we have the chance to exercise our freedom to worship, and to help our friends and neighbors to do the same by sharing the truth of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world.

Change You Can Believe In - Part I: Economics.

(Sorry, this is a little long).

I was glancing through Senator Obama's "Blueprint For Change" which outlines his policies and priorities, when I began to wonder how much spending has been promised. I decided to search to whole document and find out. All quotes are directly from Obama's Blueprint. Keep in mind that these are only the items that Obama has promised that include a specific dollar amount. I've done my best to weed out duplicate spending and to be generally fair. Let's start with a piece of Obama's plan I agree with:

Obama will reinstate pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budget rules, so that new spending or tax cuts are paid for by spending cuts or new revenue (ie tax increases) elsewhere.

Well, it's about time! Keep this in mind. I'll come back to it later. Let's take a look at how much spending Senator Obama will need to offset.

---

First direct spending promises:

reduce a typical family’s premiums by as much as $2,500 per year (through government-funded health care)

Cost: 100 billion dollars/year (400 billion for his first term)

(Guessing conservatively, at an average of $1000 times 100 million families; this jives with Obama's own estimated cost for his health insurance plan).

$10 billion a year over the next five years to move the U.S. health care system to broad adoption of standards-based electronic health information systems.

Cost: 10 billion/year (50 billion total)

Obama will provide a $1.5 billion fund to assist states with start-up costs (of FMLA reform)

Total cost: 1.5 billion total

Create Automatic Workplace Pensions -employers who do not currently offer a retirement plan, will be required to enroll their employees in a direct-deposit IRA account that is compatible to existing direct-deposit payroll systems...His plan will match 50 percent of the first $1,000 of savings for families that earn less than $75,000.

This one is hard to price. Considering the number of families earning less than 75,000 (a large majority) the cost could be enormous. Besides, I thought social security was the answer:

“We … have an obligation to protect Social Security and ensure that it’s a safety net the American people can count on today, tomorrow and forever.
–Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA, October 27, 2007

So, we won't count that one.

Obama will invest $150 billion over ten years to deploy clean technologies

Cost: 15 billion/year (150 billion total)

Obama will create a Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund to fill a critical gap in U.S. technology development. Obama will invest $10 billion per year into this fund for five years

Cost: 10 billion/year (50 billion total)

Obama will invest $1 billion over five years in transitional jobs and career pathway programs

Cost: .2 billion/year (1 billion total)

He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees

cost: 2 billion total

he will double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to achieve that goal (cutting world poverty)

Total cost: 25 billion/year

Total Spending: 679.5 billion dollars.

Total ongoing yearly spending: 160.2 billion dollars.

---

Now let's look at new tax cuts:

Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they pay

Cost: 20 billion/year (if 20% of families are "working").

Obama will create a new “Making Work Pay” tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family.

Cost: 20 billion/year (see above assumptions)

Obama will create a 10 percent universal mortgage credit to provide tax relief to homeowners who do not itemize. This credit will provide an average of $500 to 10 million homeowners

Cost: 5 billion dollars

an immediate tax cut averaging $1,400 to 7 million seniors

Cost: 9.8 billion dollars

Obama will create a new  American Opportunity Tax Credit...This $4,000 tax credit will be fully refundable...

Also very hard to value. Potentially huge. We'll ignore this one too.

Total tax cuts per year: 54.8 billion dollars.

---

So, by Obama's own reckoning, every year (for at least 5 years)the federal government will need to come up with a minimum of 215 billion dollars additional tax revenue (54.8 billion + 160.2) if Obama is really going to offset these expenses. Of course this also assumes zero spending growth for every other government agency and program: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Military spending, interest on the debt, Education, etc . . . . or Obama could cut spending . . . (yeah, that's going to happen).

Total federal tax revenue for 2007 was 2568 billion dollars. The needed tax increase will, therefore, be 8.4% on average for every taxpaying entity in America. The reality will be much greater for some taxpayers and corporations than others given the fact that nearly 50% of taxpayers pay no income taxes, and Obama's stated preference for raising taxes only on corporations and "the rich."

This minimum increase excludes onetime spending and several ongoing programs I listed above. It also excludes many other programs, funds, grants, commissions and panels which are promised but not given a dollar value.

It also does not include the "cap and trade" carbon reduction program which amounts to an enormous tax on energy production. It also excludes the "windfall profits tax" on the oil companies. It does not include the cost to business of increasing the minimum wage or of compliance with any of the additional regulations Obama proposes.

Finally, this assumes that nothing goes over-budget - this is the government we're talking about here.

This is the minimum cost of "change you can believe in."