Here's what I think....

Gonna give Mensa a try!

2010-04-05T19:14:00.001-07:00

I am taking the text for Mensa in a few weeks. Wish me luck! Since I know everything, this should be super easy.

The Myth that Government Can't do Anything Right

2009-08-04T11:12:00.000-07:00

We’ve all heard the condescending retort to the proposal of any government program. The scariest words anyone can hear are, “Hi, I’m here from the government, and I’m here to help. “ Thanks, Reagan. We’ve heard this so often that it’s become kind of a “known” thing. Everyone knows the government screws up everything, right?

Look at social security. It’ll be insolvent by 2017, right? Here’s the problem: this isn’t true. Don’t believe me? Liz Pulliam Weston wrote an article entitled 5 myths about Social Security that addressed, well, 5 myths about Social Security. Reading the article proves that most of what we’ve been told by pundits and talking heads is just wrong. Sadly, I don’t think even they know or understand how it works.

From the article:

Here's how the Social Security Administration projects the timeline:

In 2017, Social Security will begin paying out more than it takes in. For the first time, it will have to use the interest being paid on the securities it holds in order to meet its obligations.

In 2027, Social Security would have to start redeeming the securities themselves.

By 2041, Social Security would have cashed in the last security, and the system would have enough revenue to pay out only 75% of promised benefits. That percentage would drop over time if Congress failed to act.

What’s this about interest paid on the securities held by Social Security? Everyone knows that Congress has been spending the Social Security trust fund for years, right? Oops.

Three-quarters of the money that's collected in Social Security taxes goes right out the door again in the form of benefits to Social Security recipients. The surplus that isn't needed to pay benefits is loaned to the federal government to pay for other programs. In return for this loan, the trust fund gets IOUs in the form of special-issue, interest-paying Treasury bonds. The interest isn't paid in cash, however; the Treasury issues the fund additional bonds for the interest amount. In 2006, the fund was credited with more than $102 billion in interest; the total value of the securities is about $2 trillion.

So far, what we have is a program that might fail in 32 years if Congress doesn’t act in that time to save one of the most important and popular government programs. Why is it so popular? According to The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, in 1997, the Social Security program lifts more seniors out of poverty than all other programs combined. “Of the 12.9 million elderly people lifted from poverty by the full array of government benefit programs, 11.4 million — nearly 90 percent — are lifted out by Social Security. “

Social Security is not a failure because it might be insolvent in 32 years. It’s a success because it meets the end goal of the program itself - poverty among the elderly has been reduced - from 35% in 1935 to less than 10% today. In fact, those repeatedly saying it’s a failed program often rely on it for themselves and their parents.

When it misses a payment, call it a failure. When it becomes insolvent, call it a failure. When 35% of the elderly are living in poverty again, call it a failure. Until then, what’s the balance of your 401K? Just enough to make sure that combined with social security it will be enough to sustain you? Or do you plan on living on only social security and have no retirement savings of your own? Not so "inefficient" when it's paying your bills, is it??
　

Reform Health Care like it's Nineteen. . . Sixty-Nine?

2009-08-03T06:46:00.000-07:00

Let’s face it. The healthcare system in America is a nightmare. Reform efforts are quickly becoming a nightmare, as well. On the left, we have blue dog Democrats selling their mandate down the river (while accepting millions from health industry related special interests) and on the right you’ve got a party so adamant about “breaking” President Obama that they’re going to say no, filibuster, and fear-monger any way they possibly can in order to keep any type of reform from happening, whether it’s good for the country or not.

Sometimes, looking to the past is the best way to move forward. Time Magazine offers archives online back to 1923. I thought it would be interesting to look at a few excerpts throughout the years and see how health care has changed - or stayed the same - as our country has matured.

June 1923: “Medicine: No Mean Goal”

A thorough physical examination for every man, woman and child in the United States once a year on his birthday is the goal set by the National Health Council, which will open a year's campaign on July 4 for health examinations to forestall disease. The Council has the backing of the organized medical profession.

The first of the fear mongers that I found in the archives..

June, 1937: Medicine: Nationalized Doctors?

Roared Dr. Morris Fishbein of Chicago, editor of A.M.A. publications and spokesman for medical orthodoxy: "The tradition of medicine since the earliest times has been one of service—a service dependent for its success in the curing of disease on mutual responsibility between the doctor and his patient. The American Medical Association has established principles which must govern this relationship between doctor and patient. The purpose of these principles is to maintain for the public the highest possible quality of medical service. As long as human beings are themselves not standardized it will not be possible to provide them with a standardized doctor. Every system of medicine and every change in the nature of medical practice which breaks down this relationship tends to lower the quality of medical service. It is characteristic of medicine, therefore, that it is practiced as an art and as a science, without any reference to hours of work or any fixed formula for its administration. These are the characteristics of the profession and the question which we must answer for ourselves and for the people is simply the question as to whether medicine shall remain a profession or become a trade."

September, 1948: Medicine: Ten Year Prescription

Last week, after seven months of study, [Oscar Ross Ewing] presented the President [Truman] with a 186-page report. To nobody's surprise, he recommended compulsory Government health insurance.

The nation's health, Ewing began by saying, is not what it should be (neither doctors nor Republicans were likely to argue that point). Every year, he estimated, 325,000 Americans die for lack of medical and health services: 120,000 from communicable diseases that might have been cured, 115,000 from cancer and heart disease that might have been prevented, 30,000 unnecessary maternal and infant deaths, 60,000 from other causes.

Ewing also outlined his case for compulsory insurance. He is convinced that voluntary plans are not and never will be enough (even though Blue Shield increased its membership 3,500% in eight years and, with Blue Cross, now has 37,500,000 members). Only about half the families in the U.S., Ewing argued, can afford even moderately complete health insurance on a voluntary basis.

August, 1956: Medicine: Paying the Doctor

Medical costs have been rising faster than any other item on the cost-of-living index, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A patient must now pay 25% more for treatment than in 1950, as compared to an 8% rise in the overall price index. At the same time, benefit payments from health-insurance programs are running a fifth higher this year than last, are expected to go well beyond $2.5 billion. All told, reports the Health Insurance Council, some no million Americans are now covered by hospital insurance-6% more than were covered last year, nine times as many as were covered in 1941.

February, 1969: “Medicine: The Plight of the Patient“:

All or virtually all Americans are now medically indigent," says Economist Pollack. "Health insurance for all has become a necessity." Dr. Philip Lee says: "The Federal Government will have to fill in the chinks of the private system. Private insurance does fine during the years when people are employed, but it doesn't do well for the aged or the unemployed. The Government must fill those needs." Before last November's election, Lee's former boss, ex-HEW Secretary Wilbur Cohen, had on his desk a plan to extend Medicare to provide "crisis care" for all Americans. Some suggest extending it to children, to the handicapped, and perhaps to all the indigent (Medicaid having proved to be no more effective than a bread poultice in most states). McNerney is pressing all Blue Cross plans to broaden their coverage. A practical man, he notes that merely shortening the average patient's hospital stay by one day would save well over $1 billion.

May, 1977: A Bitter Pill for U.S. Hospitals

Now, in his first major health legislation, President Carter has decided to intervene on behalf of the impoverished medical consumer. In a program expected to be sent to Congress this week, the Administration is demanding tough restraints on the fastest growing U.S. medical bill, hospital costs, which last year totaled $55.4 billion. What is more, the proposal is only the first step toward Carter's long-range goal: comprehensive national health insurance.

July, 1982: Those Sky-High Health Costs

The runaway cost of health care has played havoc with the federal budget, which has seen outlays for federally financed medical coverage under the Medicare and Medicaid programs rise from $26 billion in 1976 to $56 billion in 1981. In a desperate effort to slash expenditures and trim a projected overall budget deficit of at least $103.9 billion for the fiscal year that begins in October, Congress agreed to slice $15.2 billion off projected spending of $270 billion for the programs over the next three years.

Ultimately, the solution to the nation's health-care woes must come from Washington, which alone has the power to deal with a dilemma that far transcends individual states or health organizations. Congress, however, has been unable to agree on a plan of attack. In 1978, the legislators rejected a cost-containment drive led by former Health Education and Welfare Secretary Joseph Califano. More recently, President Reagan himself campaigned on promises to curb health-care costs by 1982, but his Administration still has not produced a comprehensive program.

Over the long term, there is no prospect of success in the fight against skyrocketing health-care costs unless the Congress and the Administration work together to give the problem the priority it deserves. So far, that has not happened, and the longer the subject is postponed, the worse it seems destined to get. The fact is that as long as the fever of rising costs burns in the business of medical science, the economy can never be totally cured of inflation.

You will all take away something different from this potpourri of U.S. health history. I will stop the article excerpts in 1982, because I thought no point was more fitting to end with than that of Congress and the President working together to give the problem the priority it deserves. Had they listed to the author of the article, John Greenwald, perhaps we’d be having a different type of debate today.

The Conservative "Are you with us or against us" mentality

2008-10-20T20:56:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama's fight with conservatives can be summed up with a quote from Albert Einstein: "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence." The prevailing attitude of the vocal conservative movement in this country has been that intelligence is elitism. Barack Obama is called an elitist because he is an ivy league graduate, a former college professor, and supports progressive policies. Ignoring the fact that President George W. Bush holds an MBA from the same ivy-league institution Senator Obama attended, the GOP has labeled Obama as an intellecual elitist who can't possibly know how to govern middle America. What the GOP fails to mention is that Obama came from modest means, and was able to better himself and work his way into the living room of Americans using brains, hard work, and resourcefulness.

In other words, Barack Obama symbolizes the American dream. His story tells any child who has a rough start in life, due to the choices their parents made, can overcome any circumstance and fulfill any dream, no matter how large.

Senator Obama did not have a name like Bush or Kennedy to give him a hand up. He did not marry an heiress to finance his lifestyle and support his family while he ran for office. John W. Dean, former counsel to the President, summed it up by saying,

"Ironically, Obama has done exactly what conservatives preach: pulled himself up to the top by his own hard work, and taken advantages of his God-given gifts. He was not only president (in essence, editor-in-chief) of the prestigious Harvard Law Review – an exceptional accomplishment for any Harvard Law student, but also the first African- American ever to hold the post. Yet this is just one of many distinctions that will be used as evidence of his elitism. "

Is Obama an elitist because he was a lawyer? Are conservative doctors and lawyers elitist as well? These are questions we should ask ourselves and our neighbors - try to provoke thought and challenge these stereotypes as presented by either party.

Failing to question the failures of the most recent conservative President and Congressmen are why the Republican Party is struggling to maintain control of their most historically reliable supporters. Conservative pundits rarely question actions of their representatives in government in public; to do so is to betray the Republican Party. When Kathleen Parker, a well-known conservative columnist, correctly suggested in late September that Sarah Palin should respectfully bow out of the race so as to not be a liability to the McCain campaign because she was not qualified to be president, she recieved over 11,000 e-mails from conservatives that berated her for being a traitor. Christopher Buckley, son of William Buckley, endorsed Obama and had to subsequently resign his post at his late father's conservative magazine - a resignation that was happily accepted.

The most recent public figure that has acknowledged the failures of the Republican party is perhaps the most shocking and the most extreme. Colin Powell, a four-star Republican general and former Secretary of State, was for years billed as a race-neutral public official who could be relied on to legitimize conservative policies because of his wealth of experience and superior intellect. The same thought process that was accepted and respected for years by conservatives is now being dismissed and criticized because he's publicly questioned the Republican campaign strategy, economic policy, and vice-presidential selection and endorsed a Democrat. High visibility conservatives immediately went to the race card - Powell's concise, detailed, and thoughtful endorsement was dismissed as simply one black man supporting another.

Are Parker, Buckley and Powell traitors? Ronald Reagan said "Don't be afraid to see what you see." Perhaps it's ok to see what you see as long as you don't say anything that contradicts the current party talking points. Are they less American today because they've acknowledged the Republican Party is not the same party they've supported and believed in? These public figures have reached across the aisle for what they see as the best direction for their country. Conservative pundits have questioned their patriotism, credibility, and motives for doing so publicly. I'd contend they're exhibiting the type of integrity that our country was founded on. Had early British settlers not questioned their government, America wouldn't be the great nation it is today. It is the appreciation of free thought and honest rebellion that allows America to constantly change into the country it needs to be to allow the best security and quality of life possible for the very citizens that refuse to question it. Does questioning your party make you a traitor or a patriot? Those who have the courage to speak up to those who are hurting our country for political gain knowing they'll be ostracized for doing so are the most patriotic, in my opinion.

Why isn't Fox News reporting voter fraud in Republican states?

2008-10-17T20:06:00.000-07:00

This article appeared in the Houston Chronicle last week. All I'll say about it is that Waller County is heavily Republican. The county itself has admitted breaking federal law in denying Prarie View A&M students voter registration cards based on non-essential information being filled out "correctly." Prarie View, for those of you who don't know, is a predominantly black college. So - is it only voter fraud in swing states or states that go democrat? There's another example after this lengthy article - so keep reading.

Waller County admits voter error
If court agrees, Prairie View A&M students' forms must be processed
By CINDY GEORGECopyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Oct. 10, 2008, 11:17PM

Waller County officials acknowledged in court papers that they rejected voter registration applications from Prairie View A&M University students through practices the U.S. Justice Department described as violations of federal laws.

Justice officials filed suit in Houston federal court Thursday against the county and Waller Registrar Ellen C. Shelburne. The complaint, alleging voting and civil rights violations, was followed by a consent decree to settle the case.
The agreement must be approved by a panel of three federal judges.

The lawsuit stems from voting changes the county made in 2007 without the required federal clearance. The county's new rules included refusing any application the registrar's staff deemed incomplete. Most of those registrations were filed by students who attend PVAMU, a historically black college.

Under Texas law, a person cannot be denied the right to vote because of a registration error or omission if it is not material to the person's qualification to cast a ballot.

According to the consent decree, Waller County officials rejected applications without a ZIP code and registrations that weren't filed on the most current form.

The county has seven days to re-process voter registrations rejected since 2007. Applicants who meet the requirements of state law and are not registered elsewhere will be able to vote in the Nov. 4 general election.

Houston attorney Debra Mergle, who represents the county and Shelburne, said she didn't know how many voters might be added to the county's roll as a result of the decree.
"I don't anticipate there will be very many at all," she said.

But Waller Justice of the Peace DeWayne Charleston estimates that the county's review will turn up several hundred voters who were illegally left off voting lists.

"The Justice Department has given validity to the fact that many students were denied the right to register to vote," said Charleston, a critic of the county's voting practices.

"That the county owned up to it lends credence to our rush to try to slow down that Waller bond election because the Waller County rolls were not legitimate."

A $49 million Waller ISD school construction bond passed by 300 votes in May 2007. Charleston estimates 200 to 300 potential voters, mostly PVAMU students, were illegally rejected prior to that vote.

Shelburne, the county tax assessor who also serves as voting registrar, was sued in her official capacity. Neither she nor County Judge Owen Ralston could be reached for comment.
Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act requires certain local governments, including Waller County, and some states, including Texas, to get federal approval before changing voting procedures. Created to remedy documented discrimination, the provision requires a jurisdiction to prove that election changes do not have the intent or effect of discriminating against minority voters.

Waller County's voting age population is 52 percent white and 31 percent black, according to the federal lawsuit.

"By promptly agreeing to settle this matter, the county has demonstrated a commitment to addressing past problems and to complying with federal law in the future," Grace Chung Becker, acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's civil rights division, said in a news release.

The agreement also requires Waller County officials to hold voting registrar training on the Prairie View campus and conduct voter registration drives at the campus student center.
Special monitoring of Waller County's voting practices lasts through Dec. 31, 2012.

The county has faced numerous voting rights lawsuits over the last 30 years and is under a criminal probe by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.

The following article appeared in the Texas Observer. You can verify this information by simply googling "escapees rainbow rd texas" and you'll find the official website.

..TR>
Oct 3, 2008 -- The Texas Observer: The Winnebago VoteHow 12,000 RVers tilt East Texas elections.By: Forrest Wilder

In a place called Rainbow's End, amid towering East Texas pines and hulking Winnebagos, sits an unremarkable, gray-brick building that is home to the biggest and most influential voting bloc in ..:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Polk County. No one actually lives at 100 Rainbow Drive, but the building hosts 12,000 registered voters.
The 10,000-square-foot building houses a massive mail-forwarding service, the largest in the nation. The service is geared toward recreational vehicle enthusiasts and allows them to receive mail—and vote by mail in Polk County elections—from wherever they happen to be. Known as the Escapees, the mostly white-haired RV owners have—in theory at least—exchanged fixed abodes for a life zipping across America in mobile mansions. These 12,000 overwhelmingly Republican voters—some of whom have never even set foot in the area—have helped erode what was once a stronghold of yellow dog Democrats deep in the Piney Woods of Texas. To some, the operation allows the Escapees to enjoy life on the open road. To critics, it is voter fraud on a grand scale.

The ballot-mailing service is run by Escapees Inc., a family owned business that operates eight RV parks around the country, including its headquarters at Rainbow's End RV Park outside Livingston, about 80 miles northeast of Houston. This 140-acre, deluxe RV park boasts a swimming pool, more than 150 RV lots, a clubhouse, library, even an adult day-care center. Only a couple hundred souls live here. Some Escapees make annual pilgrimages; others have never so much as peeled out in East Texas. They hail from Kansas, California, wherever, yet they're all considered Livingston "locals" who vote in Polk County elections by mail ballots forwarded to them from the warehouse at 100 Rainbow.

The state of Texas, with its notorious residency requirements, recognizes the Escapees as Polk County residents even though many have never been here. In fact, they need only enter Texas once—to get driver's licenses—to become residents.

Some Escapees aren't even full-time RVers. They own homes elsewhere, spend seasons in other states (Arizona and California are popular), and though technically Texas residents, probably couldn't tell a bluebonnet from a bluebird. What Escapees have escaped from is a state income tax, which is levied in 43 states, but not in Texas.

The Escapees account for more than 30 percent of registered voters in Polk County, giving them significant sway over who gets elected to county and even state legislative offices.

The cache of mail order voters has long irked some local Democrats, who accuse the group of distorting East Texas politics. They filed an ultimately unsuccessful legal challenge in 2000 to strip the Escapees from the Polk County voting rolls. With Texas Republicans talking tough about cracking down on voter fraud, some Democrats say the Escapees operation warrants new attention and even an investigation.

Angie Carr is the executive director of Escapees Inc. (Motto: "Adventure Awaits. It's Time to Escape."). A prim woman with long, reddish hair who married into this third-generation business, Carr leads me on a tour of the mail warehouse. This is, in essence, where the 12,000 voters "live." Hobbled on crutches from an injury she sustained on a recent RV road trip, Carr proudly shows off the highly efficient operation.

Each morning at 9 a.m., an 18-wheeler postal truck bypasses the Livingston post office to deliver mail directly to the Escapees, who have their own zip code. In the back room, a sophisticated machine sorts the mail (2 million pieces every year). Meanwhile, 40 employees are busy answering phones, filing mail, and readying packages to be forwarded all over the world. Thousands of folders—one for each Escapee account—fill three separate rooms. Each folder represents a unique address, with a Rainbow Drive street address that doesn't exist and personal mailbox number. That address appears next to the voter's name on the voter rolls and on the Texas driver's licenses of residents.

None of these addresses actually exists—there are no buildings to be found. Yet these "paper" addresses allow Escapees to register and vote by mail in Polk County, whether they're in East Texas or touring through Maine.

The mailroom is the hub of the Escapees' voting system, the intermediary for registration applications and ballots moving between government and voter.

State law mandates—with some exceptions—that an absentee ballot must be sent out of county. For this reason, Carr maintains a post office box in Shepherd, a small town 15 miles south in neighboring San Jacinto County. The box's sole purpose is to receive ballots mailed by the county clerk a few miles up the road from Rainbow's End. An Escapees employee periodically picks up the ballots in Shepherd and drives them back to the mailroom, where they are processed and mailed to Escapees around the world.

It's an impressive, if jury-rigged, operation, and its impact may be widening. With a presidential election less than two months away, the flow of applications for mail ballots has picked up dramatically—some 200 to 300 each day, according to the county clerk's office.

Carr is proud of the operation her family has built. "We started out with a file cabinet," she says of the mail service's inception in 1985. How did her business come to this strange state of affairs? "I assume, like everything else in our business, it arose from a need," Carr says.

Later, Carr's mother-in-law and Escapees CEO Cathie Carr tells me: "We're not just paper. We are real people."

To Sharon and Dennis Teal, Livingston Democrats, the idea that the Escapees are legitimate Polk County residents and voters defies common sense. "I don't know what your idea of a permanent resident is, but it's not someone who visits once every nine years," Dennis Teal says over a dinner of fried catfish at a Livingston restaurant. "They have no vested interest in this community other than to use it to avoid paying a state income tax."

Buck Wood, an Austin election-law attorney who mainly represents Democrats, estimates—based on interviews he and his staff did with about 100 Escapees—that roughly half the members have never been to Rainbow's End. "That is deadly," he says. "You cannot register [to vote] in a place you've never been." Only about 10 percent, he contends, are even full-time RVers, people so committed to the RV lifestyle that they no longer rent or own a home. (A cross-check of Polk County voter rolls and out-of-state property records confirms that at least several Escapees members own homes or RV lots in other states.)

Cathie Carr, who calls Sharon Teal "vicious" and "irritating," insists that most Escapees are plugged into Polk County, serving on juries, volunteering in the community, and attending church services. "These people are the very people you would want in your community," Carr says. "Just because they choose to travel the majority of their time is no reason to shun them or exclude them from voting." Individuals who have never been to Polk County are "very rare," she says.

In 2000, attorney Wood represented several local Democrats in an unsuccessful challenge to the Escapees' residency status. The case, which bounced among three courts, was carefully tracked by both parties. In that election, control of the Texas Senate—where Republicans held a one-vote majority—had come down to a single, nasty East Texas contest between Republican Todd Staples (now agriculture commissioner) and Democrat Todd Fisher. Staples accused Fisher and the Democratic Party of orchestrating the lawsuit to bump reliable Republicans out of the election. In the end, a three-judge panel of the federal Fifth Circuit shot down the residency challenge and allowed the Escapees to vote. Staples won the election by a landslide, and the RVers' votes were not decisive.

After the election, Wood filed another suit contesting the results of a county commissioner's race in which Democrat-turned-Republican Bob Willis bested incumbent Democrat B.E. "Slim" Speights by almost 2,800 votes. In that race, the Escapees votes proved critical, favoring Willis 4-1. Willis had previously served as the tax assessor-collector—an office that includes voter registration duties—and had rallied to the Escapees' defense. Wood and Speights sought to overturn the election results by proving that the Escapees were not legitimate residents of Polk County.

In part, the case hinged on the definition of residence. The election code refers to residence as a "fixed place of habitation to which one intends to return after any temporary absence." In depositions Wood collected, some voters testified they had never been to Rainbow's End, and that they owned homes in other states and had no clear intentions of ever living in Polk County. But a 2-1 majority of a state appeals court sided with Willis, ruling that Wood had failed to show the individual circumstances and intentions of the more than 5,000 absentee voters. The majority also noted that county officials had allowed Escapees to register and vote at the fictitious Rainbow Drive addresses for years.

Wood, on the other hand, dwells on the cases he lost. He quotes a bit of election lawyer wisdom: "If you're gonna steal an election, steal it big ... You can contest an election where there are 10 illegal votes or 20 or 50, but once it gets much bigger than that, it's impossible."

At the 4 p.m. social hour in the comfy Rainbow's End clubhouse, partisan politics is the last thing on anyone's mind. About 20 RVers have gathered to tell bad RV jokes (Have you heard the one about the guy who thought he had won a Winnebago from one of those peel-off tab contests?—turns out he had "won a bagel") and discuss movies ("All I remember about Braveheart is Mel Gibson's bare tush"). As it turns out, most of the attendees are part of the small percentage of Escapees who actually live at Rainbow's End. Politicians campaign for their support, and they vote at a real polling place. They are a proud, friendly group. Dottie Piercy, a young-looking 83-year-old with bright blue eyes, explains the appeal of Rainbow's End. "I live here as a widow," she says. "I feel safe. I have friends here, and the ones who don't [live here] come through and see me." A woman wearing a jaunty hat walks into the room carrying an Obama-Biden sign. A man wearing a U.S. Navy cap boos lustily. Everyone laughs. This is a real community, real politics, but what about the rest of those 12,000 voters who aren't here? The Teals view the Escapees as interlopers who have artificially shifted the area's political balance toward the GOP.
There is evidence to support this assertion. The 12,000 registered Escapees—up from 9,000 eight years ago—account for 30 percent of the county's registered voters, certainly enough to tilt the balance in close races. Roughly two-thirds of them vote Republican, often straight-ticket. In 2004, Republican John Otto beat the Democratic incumbent, three-term state Rep. Dan Ellis of Livingston, by a little more than 1,400 votes in Polk County. If you took the Escapees out of the equation, Ellis would have won the county by more than 500 votes. Otto would have been elected anyway because of his advantage elsewhere in the district, but the Teals say the Escapees machine poses real hurdles for Democratic candidates.

Arlan Foster, a long-shot Democratic candidate to unseat Otto and president of the Correctional Employees Union, AFSCME Council 7, sees the problem from a candidate's perspective.
"It's hard to take a pulse on a voter that lives out of state and you can't communicate with," Foster says. "From my standpoint, I believe the job description is in the job title—state representative means just that—you represent the people. How can I represent someone in Illinois who's never been to Texas? And what would I be doing for that person?"

The Escapees effect is even more measurable at the local level. Since Reconstruction, no Republican had held a local office until Willis won a seat on the county commissioner's court in 2000. Since 2002, six other local Democratic officials have switched to run as Republicans.
"What Democratic officials we have here are scared to death of this thing," Dennis Teal says. "The Democrats are frustrated because they know the system is rigged."

That may be so, but other elected Democrats in town seem to have made peace with the Escapees, if only out of fear, perhaps, of provoking them.

"You learn to do your job and do it well as you can," says Marion "Bid" Smith, the Democratic tax assessor-collector, whose duties include registering voters. "You make sure to provide services in their favor."

Benny Fogleman, the county Republican chairman, is more than happy with the Teals' assault on the Escapees. "Sharon's been very good for the Republican Party," he says. "I could have never brought the party to where we are without her."

Among some Democrats, though, the Escapees represent the one type of "voter fraud" that Texas Republicans are willing to tolerate.

Since 2005, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has spent millions criminally prosecuting Democratic Party activists, almost all minorities, for infractions such as not including their signatures and addresses on the backs of ballots they mailed for senior citizens (see "Vote by Mail, Go to Jail," April 18, 2008).

In a lawsuit against the state of Texas that was settled in May, Gerry Hebert, an attorney with the Campaign Legal Center, represented several of the Democratic activists whom Abbott had prosecuted. One of the provisions the state had used against the activists made it a crime to possess the mail ballot of another voter. Another stipulated that the ballot envelopes had to include the helper's signature.

The Escapees' mail-forwarding service involves the possession of thousands of ballots. The envelopes aren't signed.

"It just struck me as odd that you would have the AG taking a somewhat inconsistent approaches to two different groups of people," Hebert says. The case was settled before Hebert could raise the issue in a trial. But he contends that Republican attorneys general have a track record of protecting the Escapees.

Hebert cites a letter from Andy Taylor, then an assistant attorney general, to Cathie Carr. Taylor represented the state of Texas in the 2000 litigation. In the November 2000 letter, Taylor thanks Carr for a "monogrammed polo shirt and honorary membership into the Escapees," and confesses that he has "felt sorry for you and your fellow RVers during this controversy—you have been treated like pawns in a political chess game."

Last year, Republicans in the Texas Legislature came within one vote of passing legislation that would have required voters to present picture identification at the polls, a measure that Democrats contend would present unwarranted hurdles for low-income and minority voters. The measure is likely to be taken up again next year.

Wood compares the Escapees to the Chicken Ranch, a brothel near La Grange that operated in the open for nearly 70 years. "It was illegal, but everyone said, 'so what.' No one did anything about it. The situation with the Escapees in Polk County is the same thing ... If the Democrats had an operation like that, the attorney general would be down there tomorrow, and everybody would be indicted."

Random funny observations

2008-10-17T20:03:00.000-07:00

My sister and I went to see the Texans vs. the Dolphins Sunday. Good game. Nice to see the Texans win. Sorry, James.

Reliant Energy and the Houston Texans might want to re-think how they name their promotional items. I'll have a picture soon to back this up (upload it, Casey!).
Seen on jumbotron several times throughout Sunday's game:

"White Power Towels provited by Reliant Energy."
'nuff said.

Second funny observation - although it's more sad than funny.

Hank Williams Jr. opened for Sarah Palin at a rally over the weekend. He didn't sing "If the South Would have Won, We'd've had it made." That would have been too obvious.

Texas Obama Supporter has Vehicle Vandalized with Dirty Diaper

2008-10-17T20:00:00.000-07:00

I live in Texas. I was born in Texas. Educated in Texas. The major events of my life all took place in Texas. The formation of my beliefs; prejudices; hopes; all from Texas. Got it?

I have never been so disgusted with the way of thinking in this state.

After years of reading, learning, watching truth vs. talking points, I've decided that I'm a democrat. I am voting for Barack Obama. Republicans had complete control and their policies FAILED. Period.

After watching tactics by the McCain campaign I personally find reprehensible and IGNORANT, I decided to finally place the Obama '08 sticker I recieved in MARCH from my brother onto my vehicle.

One week later, I came out to my car to find a URINE FILLED DEPENDS DIAPER under my windshield.

Coincidence? My car is the only car in the 'hood with my Obama sticker on it.

Could be a coincidence. Sure.

So, two days later, another URINE FILLED DEPENDS DIAPER is under my windshield again.

What the HELL is wrong with ignorant ass people that think because I support Obama for president I deserve TWO piss diapers on my truck?!

Those of you that support McCain, buy into the Ayers BS (and turn your head away from the Keating 5) please tell me how this tactic is supposed to change my vote?

I have kids in my house. How would my 7 year old have felt if she'd seen that? Thank GOD she didn't.

I am NOT intimidated. You can kiss my Obama - loving - ass.

I used to be proud to be a Texan. After listening to enough Hannity and Rush and watching some Fox News I am disgusted that a propaganda machine and a campaign that encourages this type of behavior through political rallies that allow "kill him" and "terrorist" and "off with his head" to be shouted into the television that is given any credibility as an actual campaign.

You can never say you sympathize with modern prejudice until you've seen it. Now I know why black people believe prejudices are so prevalent. Because I wasn't racist I didn't really understand and had an overall optimistic view of our country's beliefs. But to be harrassed like this because I support a Democrat, or a black nominee, is ignorant, sad, and you who identify with this party should be horribly ashamed of your like-minded-Texans.

Enough spin and lies, McCain

2008-10-17T19:44:00.000-07:00

Originally posted early September on my myspace blog. Enjoy, it's long!

Let me begin by stating my opinions clearly and succinctly. I will give supporting information, supported by factcheck.org and snopes.com. McCain has shown he is not qualified to be an honorable, honest public servant by refusing to talk about issues and by flat out lying time and time again in this campain to the American people. Palin has also continually lied, albeit at the behest of McCain's campaign managers - even after her lies have been proven, she has still repeated them. Obama has tried again and again to take the high road; ignoring most of the lies and trying to keep the campaign on the issues. I will also be searching for information regarding misleading ads by Obama to be fair in this blog. This will be long, biased towards Obama (although how anything honest and fair couldn't lean towards Obama fails me). I would love to hear other opinions and comments, but please keep them clean and fair.

Let me also begin with a short political history of my personal beliefs - so that you see I'm not just some yellow dog democrat. I always vote the candidate who will be best for the country in my opinion. In 2000, the first election I was of age to exercise my voting privilege, I voted for George H. W. Bush. He was a wonderful governor of Texas. I had personally benefited from his policies; he made health care affordable for my daughter when I was a single mother, he funded schools in a manner that made my entry to college easier, and overall, did the right thing for the state. In 2004, I voted for Kerry. The reason behind that was simply a vote against Bush. I knew, even then, that Bush was leading our country down an economic path that would lead us into really hard times. Unfortunately, I was correct. I am personally pro-life, pro-gun (to a point), pro-death penalty. I am all about fiscal conservatism. Above all, I advocate a smart fiscal policy that keeps taxes as low as they can be, spending low, and eliminates deficits.

So why am I not voting Republican?

I'll start issue by issue, gaff by gaff, misstatement by misstatement.

1) McCain's ad on Iran.

"Obama says Iran is a "tiny" country, "doesn't pose a serious threat." Terrorism, destroying Israel, those aren't "serious threats"?"

Obama's actual words: Strong countries and strong presidents talk to their adversaries. That's what Kennedy did with Khrushchev. That's what Reagan did with Gorbachev. That's what Nixon did with Mao. I mean think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela – these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. And yet we were willing to talk to the Soviet Union at the time when they were saying we're going to wipe you off the planet.

From factcheck.com: "
Obama didn't say Iran is tiny – except in comparison to the once-huge Soviet Union. Iran's population is estimated to be about 72.2 million by the Population Reference Bureau. Iran's own statistics put it at 70,495,782 in 2006-2007. Either way, that's about one-fourth of the 270 million people estimated to be living in the U.S.S.R. in 1982, according to various sources.
Nor did he say Iran doesn't pose a serious threat, except in comparison to the former Soviet Union. And that's a fact. "

I'll take your attention back to McCains claim that "destroying Israel.. those aren't serious threats?"

Obama's words on Iran on June 4: "The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat."

FactCheck.orgs summary of this ad: "By separating Obama's words from their context, and from his other comments on the subject, McCain's ad distorts Obama's stated views on Iran. "

I agree. This is one of the "spins". I won't call it a lie. We'll get to those shortly.

2) There have been four ads by McCain talking about Obama's tax policy.

The first ad said Obama once voted for a tax increase on people making $42K a year. The ad showed a woman with two children. According to factcheck.org, the tax increase would have been $15 a year for a single person making $42K and the mother with two children in the ad wouldn't have had an increase unless she made over $62K a year. Plus, it's not part of his proposed tax plan now. So it's a spin (not a lie) but a moot point and very misleading. How's that for honorable?

I'll just copy factcheck.org's review of the second ad instead of paraphrasing it for you: A Spanish-language radio ad claims the measure Obama supported would have raised taxes on "families" making $42,000, which is simply false. Even a single mother with one child would have been able to make $58,650 without being affected. A family of four with income up to $90,000 would not have been affected. Again, let me point out this is not part of his current tax plan either.

McCain's third ad, as presented by factcheck: The TV ad claims in a graphic that Obama would "raise taxes on middle class." In fact, Obama's plan promises cuts for middle-income taxpayers and would increase rates only for persons with family incomes above $250,000 or with individual incomes above $200,000.

So...that one's a blatant lie.

Fourth ad, as presented by factcheck: The radio ad claims Obama would increase taxes "on the sale of your home." In fact, home-sale profits of up to $500,000 per couple would continue to be exempt from capital gains taxes.

If you sell a home over $500,000 as a married couple, you now pay a tax rate of 15% on gains over $500,000. After 2010, based on the Bush tax cuts that McCain supports anyway, the capital gains tax above that $500,000 threshold ($250,000 for non-married) will be raised to 20%. According to the L.A. Times and BarackObama.com, Obama will raise the capital gains tax to 20%. So... McCain put out an ad that slams Obama for using the same plan he's supporting. So, if you are so fortunate as to have a home that you bought for $100,000, and it sells for $700,000, you've made a $600,000 profit. $500,000 is non-taxable. Of the remaining $100,000 that is taxable, you'll pay $20,000 in taxes regardless of whether you vote for Obama or McCain. So a $20,000 tax bill on a $600,000 profit amounts to a 3.3% tax rate.

Yes, it's confusing. That's why McCain thinks he can get away with lying to us about it. It's working, as most blogs I've seen talk again and again about Obama raising our taxes.

Now here's the DOOZY! Ready?

McCain ad: "
Crowd: Obama, Obama…
Announcer: Take away the crowds, the chants. All that's left are costly words. Barack Obama and out of touch congressional leaders have expensive plans. Billions in government spending, years of deficits, no balanced budgets, and painful tax increases on working American families. They're ready to tax, ready to spend, but not ready to lead."

FactCheck.org: The ad says Obama and "out of touch Congressional leaders" plan to implement "painful tax increases on working American families," and it shows an image of a family presumably upset about an impending tax increase. But, as we've reported numerous times, Obama proposes a tax cut for the vast majority of households.
Len Berman, director of the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which has produced one of the most authoritative analyses of the two candidates' tax plans. When we asked him if Obama's claim that he would "cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families" was true, Berman told FactCheck.org that it was "consistent with our estimates." Overall, the TPC found that Obama's plan would produce a tax cut for 81.3 percent of all households, and a cut for 95.5 percent of all households with children.Under Obama's plan, the TPC estimates that people (or couples) making between $37,595 and $66,354 a year would see an average savings of $1,118 on their taxes.
Here's the best part!!!!!!!Under McCain's plan, on the other hand, those same individuals would save $325 on average — $793 less than the average savings under Obama's plan.

Ok, so I think I've successfully debunked the McCain tax myths about both himself and Obama. Just for fun, I'll allow to McCain to defend why he got all that stuff wrong. McCain: "[the] issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should"

Lets move on to the Republican Convention.

Cl.. Lieberman said Obama had never reached across party lines to accomplish anything significant.

Verdict: Lie. Obama worked with Sen. Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar to pass laws enhancing government transparancy (ie trying to prevent cover-ups) and "curtailing the proliferation of nuclear and conventional weapons."

Cl.. Thompson said he would bring "one of the largest tax increases in American history."
Verdict: Lie. See above tax claims.

Cl.. Obama voted against funding for Iraq war.

Verdict: Spin. The only vote Obama ever made against a war funding bill came after the version of the bill Obama supported was vetoed (McCain supported the Veto but never showed up to vote on the bill). I love this line from factcheck.org: "Based on those facts, it would be literally true to say that 'McCain urged a veto of funding for our troops.' But that would be oversimplified to the point of being seriously misleading." And the same goes for Lieberman's claim at the convention.

On to night three of the convention!

Factcheck.org:
Palin may have said "Thanks, but no thanks" on the Bridge to Nowhere, though not until Congress had pretty much killed it already. But that was a sharp turnaround from the position she took during her gubernatorial campaign, and the town where she was mayor received lots of earmarks during her tenure. "The window is now," she wrote, "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." (ie, while we have Republicans in office who will send us this money) It was only after she won the governorship that Palin shifted her position. And even then, it's inaccurate to say that she "told the Congress 'thanks, but no thanks.'" Palin accepted non-earmarked money from Congress that could have been used for the bridge if she so desired. That she opted to use it for other state transportation purposes doesn't qualify as standing up to Congress. My addition: She kept the money for other Alaska highway projects. While writing a check to citizens of Alaska for $3200 each. McCain himself said recently that that bridge to nowhere money could have prevented the 35W collapse had the funding gone where it was actually needed.

Palin's accusation that Obama hasn't authored "a single major law or even a reform" in the U.S. Senate or the Illinois Senate is simply not a fair assessment. Obama has helped push through major ethics reforms in both bodies, for example.

Giuliani distorted the time line and substance of Obama's statements about the conflict between Russia and Georgia. In fact, there was much less difference between his statements and those of McCain than Giuliani would have had us believe.

Giuliani also said McCain had been a fighter pilot. Actually, McCain's plane was the A-4 Skyhawk, a small bomber. It was the only plane he trained in or flew in combat, according to McCain's own memoir.

Finally, Huckabee told conventioneers and TV viewers that Palin got more votes when she ran for mayor of Wasilla than Biden did running for president. Not even close. The tally: Biden, 79,754, despite withdrawing from the race after the Iowa caucuses. Palin, 909 in her 1999 race, 651 in 1996.

Now I'll be fair. Here's the Dem's convention spins. Fortunately, they didn't blatantly lie. But they did spin a bit.

Obama said he could "pay for every dime" of his spending and tax cut proposals "by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens." That's wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain's, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts. Is it wrong for me to be just happy he plans on finding SOME of the money he needs to pay for this stuff? I'd prefer him to find ALL of it...

He twisted McCain's words about Afghanistan, saying, "When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources." Actually, McCain said in 2003 we "may" muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there. My addition: The day after Obama called for two more combat brigades in Afghanistan, McCain called for three.

Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..." My addition: I saw the comment, and it was a joke. He then failed to answer the original question "what constitutes the middle class" by giving a feel-good answer of "it's not money that makes us rich, it's family and love". He's yet to answer the "middle class" question.

Obama noted that McCain's health care plan would "tax people's benefits" but didn't say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families (although a normal health insurance policy is about $12K)

Obama also pulled some sleight of hand when he stated that "the average American family" saw its income "go down $2,000" under George Bush. That's not correct. Census figures show average family income went down $348. My addition: I'm appalled that average income went down $348 in eight years! Productivity has gone up and wages have gone down!? As the dollar loses value, adjust that number with inflation, gas, and energy costs and I'm sure $2000 is closer to the real number.

Now it's McCain's turn. Here we go with his acceptance speech:

Cl.. Obama's health care plan would "force small businesses to cut jobs" and would put "a bureaucrat ... between you and your doctor."

Verdict: Lie. In fact, the plan exempts small businesses, and those who have insurance now could keep the coverage they have.

Cl.. McCain attacked Obama for voting for "corporate welfare" for oil companies.

Verdict: Blatant Lie. In fact, the bill Obama voted for raised taxes on oil companies by $300 million over 11 years while providing $5.8 billion in subsidies for renewable energy, energy efficiency and alternative fuels.

So we've got an absolute liar and flip-flopper in McCain (does anyone else remember when he almost left his party to become a Democrat in 2000???? IF that isn't flip flopping what is?) with a VP candidate who is currently under investigation for abuse of power (and just got her first passport in 2007- how's that for foreign policy experience). UPDATE: it's been concluded she abused said power.

On the other hand, we've got a candidate who's trying his damndest to actually talk about issues while taking the high road about all of these attacks and a VP candidate with 36 years of foreign policy experience. Why isn't McCain failing in the polls? UPDATE: McCain is failing in the polls! Yeha!!!

Please don't tell me it's because Obama is black. Please. Please. Please.

Why lying about something on factcheck.org is a bad idea.

2008-10-17T19:41:00.000-07:00

Originally posted on my MySpace blog on September 11, 2001:

McCain-Palin Distorts Our Finding
September 10, 2008
Those attacks on Palin that we debunked didn't come from Obama.
Summary
A McCain-Palin ad has FactCheck.org calling Obama's attacks on Palin "completely false" and "misleading." That's what we said, but it wasn't about Obama.Our article criticized anonymous e-mail falsehoods and bogus claims about Palin posted around the Internet. We have no evidence that any of the claims we found to be false came from the Obama campaign.The McCain-Palin ad also twists a quote from a Wall Street Journal columnist. He said the Obama camp had sent a team to Alaska to "dig into her record and background." The ad quotes the WSJ as saying the team was sent to "dig dirt."Update, Sept. 10: Furthermore, the Obama campaign insists that no researchers have been sent to Alaska and that the Journal owes them a correction.
Analysis
We don't object to people reprinting our articles. In fact, our copyright policy encourages it. But we've also asked that "the editorial integrity of the article be preserved" and told those who use our items that "you should not edit the original in such a way as to alter the message."
McCain-Palin 2008 Ad:"Fact Check"Announcer: The attacks on Governor Palin have been called "completely false"..."misleading."On screen: Photo of Obama, FactCheck.org banner, "'completely false' . . . 'misleading' 9/0/08"And, they've just begun.The [Wall Street] Journal reports Obama "air-dropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers" into Alaska to dig dirt on Governor Palin.As Obama drops in the polls, he'll try to destroy her.Obama's "politics of hope"? Empty words.McCain: I'm John McCain and I approved this message.
Less Than HonestWith its latest ad, released Sept. 10, the McCain-Palin campaign has altered our message in a fashion we consider less than honest. The ad strives to convey the message that FactCheck.org said "completely false" attacks on Gov. Sarah Palin had come from Sen. Barack Obama. We said no such thing. We have yet to dispute any claim from the Obama campaign about Palin. My comment: Because Obama doesn't seem to be a blatant liar. They call the ad "Fact Check." It says "the attacks on Gov. Palin have been called 'completely false' ... 'misleading.' " On screen is a still photo of a grim-faced Obama. Our words are accurately quoted, but they had nothing to do with Obama.Our article, posted two days earlier, debunked a number of false or misleading claims that have circulated in chain e-mails and Internet postings regarding Palin. There is no evidence that the Obama campaign is behind any of the wild accusations that we critiqued. There is no more basis for attributing these viral attacks to the Obama campaign than there is for blaming the McCain campaign for chain e-mail attacks falsely claiming that Obama is a Muslim, or a "racist," or that he is proposing to tax water. The anti-Palin messages, like the anti-Obama messages, have every appearance of being home-grown.
Digging for "Dirt"The ad also quotes the Wall Street Journal as saying that the Obama campaign "air-dropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers to dig dirt on Governor Palin." That's also a distortion. The Wall Street Journal opinion article did not say that the Obama team was there to "dig dirt." It said they were there to "dig into her record and background." Maybe the McCain-Palin campaign knows something we don't about what's in Palin's record and background.The full quote, from an item by conservative columnist John Fund, dated Sept. 9:
WSJ's John Fund, Sept. 9: Democrats have airdropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers into Anchorage, the state capital Juneau and Mrs. Palin's hometown of Wasilla to dig into her record and background. My sources report the first wave arrived in Anchorage less than 24 hours after John McCain selected her on August 29.Fund said the opposition researchers were mainly interested in a controversy surrounding Palin's firing of her public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan. Monegan has claimed he was dismissed because he wouldn't fire a state trooper who was in a divorce battle with Palin's sister; the Alaska Legislature is investigating whether Palin acted properly. Fund also stated that the Palin family has accused the trooper of "using a Taser on his 10-year-old stepson, drinking in his patrol car and illegally shooting a moose." Now, that's "dirt."Update, Sept. 10: After this article was posted, the Obama campaign contacted us to say that John Fund's article is wrong.
Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor, Sept. 10: John Fund's claim that we "air-dropped" 30 lawyers into Alaska is false. No one from the Obama campaign or the DNC has been sent to Alaska. We've asked Mr. Fund for a correction.Footnote: At least one Obama spokesman has repeated an allegation that we debunked in our story, that Palin was a supporter of Pat Buchanan. However, the Obama campaign was not the originator of the claim. –by Brooks Jackson

Why Senators McCain and Clinton have it wrong about the gas tax holiday

2008-05-05T07:17:00.000-07:00

I know the idea of a gas tax holiday sounds great. In reality, it's a counter-productive idea meant to pander to voters. A gas tax holiday during the summer months will save voters about 30 cents a day, based on average mileage per American. It's a small, small savings. The problem with this small savings is that it will give Americans a false sense of security about gas prices and demand will increase, which will send gas prices up even higher!

McCain isn't worried at all about how to pay for it, even though it will cost 300,000 construction jobs this summer. You see, that 30 cents a day we pay on Federal gas taxes employs that many Americans in road maintenance and construction. (Might it also make you more likely to have an accident if a road isn't maintained and you spin out on a pothole?)

Senator Clinton wants to pay for it by putting a profits tax on big oil. I agree that there should be a profits tax on big oil. But, Oops - Mrs. Clinton must have forgotten that she's ALREADY proposed a profit tax on big oil, and that $9 billion in revenue is ALREADY pledged to develop alternative fuels. She wants to spend it twice, I guess.

Yet another reason I'm for Obama - he won't sell out the country with nonsensical proposals to pander for votes. Imagine that; a candidate that understands economics and basic supply and demand.

Random Acts of Kindness - I was the recipient!

2007-11-07T04:45:00.000-08:00

It's been a while since I posted, but something happened to me yesterday that was absolutely in the spirit of my last blog. I blogged about performing random acts of kindness in the name of Alexander Evertson, an infant who died of a broken heart.

Yesterday I was at the grocery store, and I received horrible, horrible service. I was extremely frustrated, and on top of that, I had my eight month old baby girl with me. I was in such a hurry to just get OUT of there that I left the 20 oz. Diet Coke I bought on the counter. I didn't realize this, of course, until AFTER the baby was strapped back into the car seat and half the groceries were put away.

The woman who was in line behind me came out of the store and saw me in the parking lot and ran over and asked me if I forgot my diet coke. I told her yes, and she told me to watch her groceries and she ran back in the store and got it for me. She said "You shouldn't have to unload the baby."

She brought me the Diet Coke and I thanked her profusely. She did something that took her less than two minutes but it absolutely made my day.

Now I've got to figure out a way to pay it forward. :-)

Random Acts of Kindness

2007-10-10T10:19:00.000-07:00

The family of Alexander Evertsen, an infant who passed away last year, has started a random acts of kindness campain. I read about it on a message board I post on and visited the family's caringbridge website (http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/alexanderevertsen), and I am incredibly inspired by the strength and will to do good in the world that this family has. I can't imagine losing a child. Through all the grief, they've thought of others - asking that each and every one of us perform random acts of kindness in Alex's name. I'd like to encourage all of you to visit the site and read more.

There is a request to print this out on a slip of paper when you perform the act of kindness:

*******************************************
This random act of kindness was done in memory of Alexander Evertsen 1/28/06-3/16/06 who was born with a broken heart to teach us ALL to Have a heart! Visit http://www.alexandersheart.blogspot.com/ and pass this slip on with your next random act of kindness!
*******************************************

Here are a few acts of random kindness you could perform, some harder than others - that can brighten someone's day, and help ease this family's pain. I'd encourage you to email the family and tell them what you've done. The family has small children and it would make them very happy to know that they're making a difference in people's lives.

1) Pay for the person's food/coffee/dry cleaning/toll behind you at the drive-thru. Ask the cashier to give the paper to the person.

2) Help a senior citizen or mother with small children out with her groceries. (Be careful with this one as they may be uncomfortable).

3) Have a neighbor that's busy all the time, has an illness, is elderly, or has lots of small kids? Prepare twice the meal you normally would and take half to them. Make it freezable so if they've already got dinner, they can save it for another day.

4) Buy the cashier at Target, Wal-Mart, or Grocery a bottled water or soda. Ask the manager if it's ok first in case they can get in trouble for accepting something from a customer.

5) Let people in front of you in traffic.

6) Take any opportunity you see to brighten someone's day. You'll be surprised how it brightens yours, too.

Topomax side effects?

2007-10-09T06:53:00.000-07:00

I've been on Topomax for migraines now for about 5 months, and it's been an overall wonderful experience. It's the first medication I've ever had that worked wonders. I've not had a single migraine headache in the five months I've been on it. Before I was incapacitated for 10 days a month with a jackhammer beating my head. Try raising two kids while being unable to open your eyes due to light sensitivity. I was popping upwards of 15 Advil a day after my "good" meds ran out and the Dr's wouldn't refill them anymore. I can't complain, if the Dr. refilled the narcotics as much as I needed to take them I'd be a junkie right now..

That being said, I think I'm starting to experience some pretty negative side effects. I have not been to the gym now but once or twice in the last few weeks because I've got an overall feeling of numbness/pain all over my body ALL THE TIME. It never ends. No amount of Advil, Aleve, or Tylenol works. I had some Vicodin cough syrup for strep throat a few weeks back and that relieved it for two days. But a few weeks later, I'm still feeling it.

I did some online research and it fits the bill for some of the Topomax side effects - confusion, weird numbness, etc. There's one condition called metabolic acidosis that fits the "weird feeling" I've been having. I called my Doctor and asked them what I need to do to wean myself off the Topomax. They should call me back "within 24 hours".

I asked them to call me in my good ole' trusty prescription for Ultracet to help with the pain in case the migraines come back. This should also help with the "weird feeling" this crap is giving me while I wean off the Topomax. The scary thing about weaning off this stuff is the risk of seizure is pretty darn high. I'm hoping the changes in my diet and exercise routine in the last six months will mean the migraines don't come back at all.

I'll elaborate on that comment for those of you that don't know me at all - in the last six months, I've changed my life style dramatically. I only eat whole grains now. I do not eat fried foods anymore - rarely do I eat sugars. No more processed foods (well, only in moderation). I work out 6 days a week, about 2 hours a day. I eat 2 cups of vegetables and fruits each per day. Bad diet is the usual migraine trigger, so lets hope I'll get to let that Ultracet sit right there in my medicine cabinet until after baby #3 is born in a few years, eh?

Should Sex Offender Parents be Allowed in their Child's Schools?

2007-10-08T12:17:00.000-07:00

I read an article today about a father in North Dakota who was convicted of a 2005 rape. He is a registered sex offender and a father of three. He is allowed on school grounds to vote in school board elections and for other official business, but he is not allowed to attend any extracurricular activities for his children. I'm going to look away, albeit painfully, from the fact that he raped someone two years ago and he is now free. I'm just going to focus in on the issue of sex offenders rights. As hard as it is to say, there are some parental rights everyone has, correct? The question is, where is the line drawn?

I couldn't find the copy online, but my daughter's district policy is as follows: If the offense was not against a child, the parent can come on campus during school hours to meet with a teacher in a private office away from children with an adult escort at all times. They are permitted to eat lunch with their child, also in a private office away from other children. If the offense was against a child, there are no school priveleges whatsoever, as the terms of their registration should keep them away from schools anyway.

Do sex offenders have a right to complain? Once time is served, and they are back out into society, their debt is paid, is it not? I'm trying to play devil's advocate here, because I am trying to think about the child here, and not the parent. How terrible is it to punish a child who's already got enough going against them because the parent is a criminal? Little Sue or Billy can't really participate in extras because Daddy did bad things to someone? The sins of the father...

Then there is the other side of me that is screaming "don't let a sex offender get anywhere NEAR MY DAUGHTERS!"

This is all I can write for now but I'd love to hear some other thoughts. That is if anyone reads my blog at all. LOL...

Spam Text Messaging?

2007-10-08T09:28:00.000-07:00

I am normally pretty mellow when it comes to spam. It's mostly filtered out, and I can just delete the crap I get. Junk mail, I can throw away. No problem. But you know what really gets my blood BOILING?

At 12:26 AM, I get a text message. A LOUD F-ING TEXT MESSAGE. I have FINALLY fallen asleep after a crazy night involving my infant having a fever of 103.5, a trip to the ER, a long wait at a pharmacy, an almost-anxiety attack, and an all around piece of CRAP day, but I wake up anyway, open my phone (quite groggily at that) and open it up to see what idiot is sending me a text message at half past midnight on a Sunday.

TEXT MESSAGE
FROM: lvipbs@family.cc-net.or.jp
you cant argue with this business, RPDM, Rapid Fire Marketing Margie HTyson
Mon Oct 8 12:26 am

If I ever find Margie HTyson, she's going to have my cell phone removed from her rectum shortly thereafter.

Secondly, the exact same message came through exactly 8 minutes ago, prompting this blog. So now, I have to sleep with my phone on silent? Which voids my alarm clock, which means I have to buy an alarm clock? So I don't get TEXT MESSAGE SPAM? This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen and I am L-I-V-I-D.

In case you are wondering, in 2003, Congress did pass a law making this illegal. This is from the FCC website: In 2003, Congress enacted the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing (CAN-SPAM) Act to curb spam. As required by the Act, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted rules that prohibit sending unwanted commercial e-mail messages to wireless devices without prior permission. This ban took effect in March 2005. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) adopted detailed rules that restrict sending unwanted commercial e-mail messages to computers. To find out more about the FTC’s rules, visit http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/spam/consumer.htm.

There is a complaint form I will fill out, which the FCC won't really do anything about because these people don't exist or don't use their real names or they just hacked some poor schmuck who was looking at "free porn" that got spyware downloaded to his computer, and I'll still get the text messages, which will prompt me to turn off my text messages eventually, which sucks, because I really like texting my friends and family all day long. F U SPAMMERS! (Maybe if I speak their language, they'll listen?)

In the meantime, I'm going to google-hunt Rapid Fire Marketing and Margie H Tyson, and set my alarm for every hour tonight between 12 and 5 am and call them, text them, and drive by their homes and honk my horn. See if they text ME IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

7 foods you should never, ever eat!

2007-10-05T07:20:00.000-07:00

I stumbled across this article today - the advice is from eDiets. Read on:

-- eDiets has compiled a list of foods that they advise you to never eat. What made the list? Doughnuts, for being high in fat and sugar and low in nutrients; Cheeseburgers and fries, for being high in saturated (and possibly trans) fats, cholesterol and refined carbs; Fried chicken for also being high in saturated and trans fats; Oscar Meyer Lunchables, for containing processed meats and cheese that are high in saturated fat, not to mention refined carbs, sugary treats and massive amounts of sodium; Sugary cereals, for being low in nutrients, high in processed carbs and extremely high in sugar; processed meats for containing the least appetizing parts of the animal (blech) and being high in carcinogens (yikes!); and finally canned soup (really?!) for being often containing trans fats and being extremely high in sodium

So, the doughnuts aren'ts a surprise. Nor are the chicken wings or fried foods. Lunchables? Canned soup? Dare I say... lucky charms? Ok, I knew Lucky Charms were bad. I know. I won't buy them anymore.

Since losing 30 lbs in the last 4 months (excuse me while I brag a bit, I'm totally proud..) I've already cut out all these foods. I buy whole grain/flax cereals (Zoe's O's tastes WONDERFUL and if you have kids, feed them this instead of the regular crap- see amazon.com to order if you can't find it in a store) and turkey EVERYTHING - and we stopped eating most processed foods. After reading this, we'll cut out processed lunch meats, as well. Even on the weeks I've not been to the gym I've lost weight.

I think the secret is to find the things you like to eat and tweak them a little bit. And I'm sorry, but if you buy pre-packaged convenience foods, regardless of the reason, you will have struggles with your weight. Here are my suggestions for working families.

1) Buy 7 bags of frozen vegetables a week. Every night, zap one, split the WHOLE bag between everyone in your family, and EAT THEM! Don't add Velveeta please, your heart will thank you.

2) Turkey bacon, Turkey ham, Turkey burgers, Turkey Pepperoni, Turkey Sausage, Turkey hot dogs. Get all the protein you need, none of the calories, and nothing fried!

3) Shop the perimeter of the grocery store. The fresher the food you buy, the better you will do.

4) Stop buying boxes of crackers, bags of chips, etc. Instead, spend ALL that money you're throwing away on junk and buy fresh fruit. Put it in a pretty glass bowl on the counter so it's easily accessible to all in the family and let them snack from that. Do you know anyone who hates fruit? Besides, if the crap isn't in your house, you won't eat it. Imagine that!

5) Buy Dreamfields pasta. For a coupon, visit www.dreamfieldsfoods.com. They have a wonderful pasta with barely any carbs, tons of protein, and it tastes the same as yucky processed pasta. You may leave the perimeter of the grocery store to buy this. :-)

6) If you positively can't spend 15 minutes preparing some type of healthy meal at the end of the day, make two or three large meals on Sunday and freeze or refridgerate. Your grocery spending will go down, even with buying healthy food that is supposedly "more expensive" and your whole family will add years to their lives.

7) Get moving. None of this matters if you don't get your heart pumping and healthy.

The Loss of a Dream ... or is it?

2007-10-05T06:25:00.000-07:00

Recently, my husband and I took an opportunity in Memphis, TN, and planned to move our two little girls to a part of the country that we knew nothing about. We visited the community and found that Memphis itself lacked the environment in which we wanted to raise our children. Just a hop away, however, was the beautiful community of Germantown, TN. We stayed there for several days, driving around looking at homes and schools, eating at local restaraunts, and admiring the sophisticated shopping offered in the tiny town. We fell in love. Absolutely in love - with this little town.

I had the biggest hopes and dreams about the type of people my children would become raised in such a quaint community - so close to city living - yet with the best schools and a close knit comminity. I would be a PTO mom - in a school where the PTO had 100% participation from parents for the last 8 years - and my children would grow up smart, confident, involved in extracurricular activities, etc. This would give them the foundation to go on and do whatever they wished, to be as successful as they wanted - we would be able to give them everything in this beautiful affluent community that was everything I'd ever dreamed of.

Fast forward to a couple of weeks ago. My husband's employer found that his services were too important to the company to let go, and they gave him an offer we simply couldn't refuse to stay. So here I am, still in the kind of nice suburbs of Houston, TX. Did I lose my dream?

Look at everything I stated was important to me when I was fantasizing about the beautiful community of Germantown, TN. The dreams and excitement I felt weren't really about anything different from what Houston offered, other than the weather. Looking around the city, we've found several communities that are pretty darn close to Germantown in school quality, quality of life, and way better than Germantown in shopping. We're selling our home in the northwest suburbs of Houston to relocate to a different area. So the answer is no, I did not lose my dream. I just moved it about 10 hours south, by car.

Dan Rather sues CBS for $70 million

2007-09-23T14:16:00.000-07:00

Dan Rather is suing CBS News for $70 million dollars, alleging that they made him a scapegoat for the news story attacking George W. Bush's military service during Vietnam.

The story documented Bush shirking some of his duties when he was with the National Guard and that his commander was pressured to document his service to make it look better than it really was. There was an ensuing controversy over four documents; experts disagreed over their authenticity. The producer of the story and several others were fired, and Dan Rather made a public apology at the time.

The lawsuit alleges that he was forced out, scapegoated, and lied to about his anticipated duties after he was removed from the anchor chair. He was told he would "save 60 minutes II" by becoming a correspondent on the show, when executives knew at the time that the show would be cancelled due to low ratings and they had no intent to "save" it.

When I first heard of the lawsuit, I thought that Rather was off of his rocker. I figured the lawsuit probably had some merit, but not $70 million worth. The breakdown is $20 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive damages.

I watched Rather on Larry King Live the other night, and my thoughts on the lawsuit have changed. Rather, speaking not as eloquently as he had in the past, yet still getting his point across, spoke of the whitehouse and big business interfering with investigative journalism and how that is against the very foundation of our democracy. He alleges that then owner of CBS, Viacom, was pressured by the whitehouse to condemn the story and spin the alleged "bad" documents to show that the story was false, when the story was most definitely true.

The reason he has brought this lawsuit, over two years later, is because he believes that hard investigative journalism is one of the checks and balances our nation relies on to keep the government in check. He will not take a financial settlement unless he gets a public statement from CBS and Viacom admitting to interfering with the news for financial and political gain. The $70 million will be used (after legal fees and expenses) to fund organizations who support and help young investigative journalists.

He spoke about this with all the passion you see a young college student, fresh and optomistic, speak about the reason our country and democracy is great. He said that because of his age and reputation he has the power to bring about change in an industry that needs it. He spoke about how big business and profit should never, ever influence the content of a news story. A story about the President of our nation, if it is true, should run, no matter how unsettling. If corporate America bent to the Whitehouse when Nixon was president, would we have seen Watergate?

I think it's wonderful that Rather has put himself out there and is using his name and financial power to stand up for what he believes in. He's risking people saying "he's off his rocker" like I did when I first heard of the lawsuit. Hopefully all of you who read this blog will stand up for him, as well. Even if you do not agree with what he's asking, I think the fact that he is trying is inspiring.