Happy Valentine's Day

Why I Love My Wife

Most of the time, I use my blog to vent my dislike for events in our country, governmental distrust and dysfunction, and a variety of personal opinions that don't mean anything. 

Today I want to discuss with the world, the most important thing in my life, the force that propels me through time and space each day, my motivation to rise each morning...that would be my wonderful wife, Leanne.

I'm madly in Love with her; it doesn't matter how we are getting along at any moment, all I know is that she is the last face I want to see before I die.  I know that I'm in Love with Leanne, each time I inhale and exhale, each moment I'm asleep, and with each heartbeat.

Have you ever been with someone that stops time for you?  I can look at Leanne when I'm next to her, or across the room, and for a nano-second, time stops.  There are times when I tell Leanne about these 'nano" moments, and she smiles at me, resulting in more stoppages.  I can't tell her about each of these unique occurrences because when they occur, time stops for me, I'm frozen, my brain is overloaded.

Her beauty causes my internal clock to stop.  Knowing how much she loves me causes my internal clock to stop.  Hugging Leanne each morning, letting the electricity fill my body as my hands and arms hold her close, causes my internal clock to stop.  My internal clock stops so often that that I should be running hours and hours behind everyone else in the world.  You get my point.

Leanne and I have an inside joke.  Whenever I have the opportunity to meet new people, she and I refer to them as "fresh meat".  This means a fresh opportunity to tell these new acquaintances, how much I love Leanne.  It's like trying to satisfy a hunger inside of me to let the world know how much I love her.  Therefore, they are "fresh meat"' for me.

As Leanne will attest, I've found "fresh meat" while on airplanes, at business meetings, in stores...even while waiting for a shuttle bus to the car rental center.  I can't help myself. 

I usually start out by saying there isn't a man more in Love with his wife than me.  

The advent of smart-phones allows me to carry dozens of pictures of Leanne, and I can find the pictures and have a slideshow of photos going within 10 seconds.  Before anyone realizes, they are watching all the photos of Leanne, as I provide the commentary.

Yes, we have our up and down moments...every relationship must have these times.  If there were never any "down" moments, then we would actually be on a plateau...that's not good.  Yet, no matter what is going on, I'm in Love with Leanne each second of any argument, each moment of any laughter, and each day of my life.

I could go into the infinite reasons I love this woman, but that would take at least the next 7+ years, because for every second Leanne is in my life, I have another reason to be in Love with her.

So today, instead of ranting about what is wrong with the world, allow me to tell you what is right with my life...her name is Leanne.  I love you Babe.

Let's Make A Deal

Let's Make A Deal

All we have heard in the media is how we are facing a huge debt crisis that threatens to ruin our great country.  I agree 100% with this statement, and I think just about everyone I know also agrees with this statement.  The problem comes in on how to solve this crisis.

The first thing we must recognize is that "We the People" got ourselves into this mess.  One way or another, we allowed this financial debacle to develop; whether we elected officials that had "spend, spend, spend" as their agendas, or those who felt we need to go to wars that were unfunded, or asking for "perks" as if they were candy.

So now it's time to take our medicine to cure our financial ills, but like all medicine, there are side effects.  No one wants to experience side effects, but like any true medicine, they exist and we have to find the right medicine for each situation.

I know there are lots of people that will not appreciate my prescription, but I'm always open to suggestions...as long as they actually work.

Let's start with Social Security, which is a huge part of the Federal budget.  Yes, it's like a sacred cow in India...everyone knows it's a problem, but try to steer the "cow" in a definitive direction and the masses believe you are messing with unknown "mythical forces".  I'm over that crap.

I hear the masses say that we must solve the debt crisis and take the burden off the backs of our children and grandkids, but do not touch Social Security.  Sorry...can't have it both ways.

Suggested Change 1 - Change the top tax limit of Social Security.  Currently, once someone makes more than Approximately $107, 000 per year, they stop paying into Social Security.  When I was employed, I would reach this maximum limit in September and for the next few months, received a substantial hike in my take-home pay, because I wasn't paying into the fund until the next new year.  Eliminate this top limit...pay into Social Security period.

Suggested Change 2 - Raise the retirement age from to 67, then 68 years old over the next 20 years in increments.  Yes, it will take longer to reach official retirement age, but what is worse...a higher retirement age or no Social Security at all?  This is a no-brainer to me.

There are other suggested changes, but I want to move on to other financial "fixes" we need to seriously consider.

Limit the time of elected officials to a maximum of 10 years for Congress folks and 12 years for Senators.  Has anyone ever bothered to look at the "perks" and retirement pensions that come with these positions, especially after 10 years in office?

Some of our elected officials that claim to be "ordinary" people have established a pension system for themselves that beats anything else in the government.

I spent 20 years in the military defending the Constitution and our country and I get a paltry 50% of my pay, when I retired.  If a Senator stays in office for 20 years, that person receives over 200% of their pay, upon retirement.  That's just wrong.

Though the savings would be a small fraction of the Federal budget, it all adds up.  Besides, why do we complain about wanting to save money, yet we pay into these accounts with taxpayer money.  Remember, these Federal officials do not pay into Social Security...all their retirement pay comes from our pockets!

Keeping people in office for a limited time accomplishes 2 things; it reduces any retirement they may have "earned", and it provides new blood and ideas to an establishment of the government that sorely needs to move ahead.

We have a constitutional amendment that prohibits the president from serving more than 2 terms, yet we allow other elected officials to serve as long as we are idiots to keep re-electing them.  We need to save ourselves from our continuing blind following.

Have a constitutional amendment that mandates that spending increases must be offset by equal or greater spending cuts that may be taken from ANY Federal agency; including the military.

Come on, in this age of modern technologies, do you really think that one more aircraft carrier will be significant if our country was truly under attack?  Do you know how many cruise missiles, attack helicopters or real-time troops can be financed for the cost of 1 aircraft carrier, or squadron of F-35s, or battalion of tanks?

Though I see these suggested changes as reasonable and thought out, I know that there will be many that just don't get it.  If you really think that my "suggestions" are unreasonable or unworkable, please leave me a comment, but please do so with factual arguments...not a bunch of rants and ravings.

Comments anyone?

Why Are We Fixating on Guns to Stop the Violence?

Why Are We Fixating on Guns to Stop the Violence?

The entire country is awash in arguments concerning the 2nd Amendment and the push for tighter gun control in the United States.  There is the camp of people that want absolutely no further restrictions on any part of the gun industry in this country.  This includes no further control in the form of background checks, the size of gun magazines, the sale of assault weapons or anything that resembles more government control over the constitutional rights of Americans.

As for myself, I don't see anywhere in the 2nd Amendment that gives Americans the right to purchase guns without a background check, or where the Constitution allows gun magazines to be whatever size the gun industry manufactures.  I believe these ideas from gun control advocates are reasonable, though the enforcement of such provisions would be extremely difficult.  

To push through new restrictions on background checks and magazine capacities would create a set of difficulties that would make these new "laws" meaningless.  For example, if every gun sale had to include some type of background check, how would this be enforced at gun shows around the country?

If background checks mandate a specific "waiting time" before the gun sale is final, how would this be enforced at gun shows?  The gun show business is huge in this country and doing something to make it more difficult to purchase a gun legally at a gun show, would place an undue burden on private businesses.  

If some type of technology was produced that would permit necessary background checks within a short time period (i.e. 30 minutes), then mandated background checks might work; otherwise anything longer would inhibit business and that would be totally unfair.

Then we have the idea of limiting the size of gun magazines.  What would be proposed for the millions of existing gun magazines considered "excessive" by gun control advocates?  What is considered "excessive"?

Americans have a strong sense of ingenuity and if someone really wants a gun magazine for an assault weapon that can hold 100 rounds of ammo, they will figure something out.  What if a gun owner didn't use a magazine, but had a "belt" of ammo, like the large caliber guns used in World War II?  Would it be illegal to have "belts" of ammunition, but not magazines?

The root problem isn't guns; it's the violence that is created by people.  I have seen riots in our streets where people were killed and not one gun was ever fired.  In our history, there have been acts of violence so horrendous and guns were not used in any way, yet we are now fixated on guns.

We have racial violence, we have organized violence, we have gang violence...where is the outcry over these types of mayhem?

I read on a semi-regular basis of people using cars to try to kill others; yet we still allow cars to be manufactured.  We have poisons readily available for purchase in grocery stores and some people use these products in their attempts to kill others.

What if a deranged person barricaded a church or a school, burned it to the ground, killing dozens of people trapped inside...would we try to control gasoline, or matches?

Guns are just a prop in the commission of violence.  Yes, guns are used by some people to kill, but so are cars, poison, arson, physical beatings, baseball bats and more...yet I can go to stores and purchase any of these items without suspicion.

I do not think that anyone in this country is against stopping the violence that is at every level of our society.  This is where the common ground is for all Americans...stopping violence. 

So instead of spending valuable time and resources arguing over the details of the violence, why aren't we doing more to stop the causes of the violence?

Of course, trying to stop violence and what steps would be beneficial starts another round of arguments, agendas and opinions.  

I truly believe if we focused on root causes of our violent society, perhaps we would see an overall drop in massacres and other useless killings, no matter what "tool" is used.

More Questions

More Questions?

As we begin 2013, the questions in my head continue.  There are times when I ponder a variety of topics that either amaze or completely confuse me.  When I ask others for answers, they look at me with bewilderment, shake their heads and walk away.

For example...there is a sign being shared on Facebook as follows:

It tries to convince people that guns are less dangerous than hammers, knives, drunk drivers and doctors.  Here's the catch, how many massacres have you read about in the United States by people with hammers?  Or knives? Or drunk drivers?  Or incompetent doctors?

The large majority of deaths caused by hammers usually involved either domestic abuse or robberies; the same with knives.  At no time in our history as anyone murdered 26 people with a hammer.

The bottom line talks about 195,000 people were killed in 2011 by medical malpractice...what a deceptive number.  According to the American Medical Association, the number of deaths in 2011 that "may" have been caused by medical malpractice was closer to 98,000.  Yes, that is still too high, but to use 195,000 as a figure is pure deception on the part of whoever developed the poster.

Remember, the medical malpractice number is for 2011, and not during any time of Obamacare.  Trying to link medical malpractice in 2011 to Obamacare, which is not yet fully employed, is another turn of pure deception.

Deaths by hammers, knives, and drunk drivers are not well thought out plans to intentionally go and murder a large number of people.  

I am not here to advocate gun control, but let's look at the numbers realistically and in proper context, instead of trying to skew the figures to push an agenda.  

There are arguments from both the pro-gun and anti-gun lobbies that use numbers, to scare everyone, in order to push their respective agendas.  

In my past, I taught a course in Statistics for the Department of Defense for 4 years.  I learned that anyone can take numbers, and use "spin" to reach a pre-conceived result.

For example, based purely on existing statistics, I could find the number of drunk drivers that were right-handed.  Then, I could also use numbers to generate a statistic to "prove" that right-handed drunk drivers were the "true" cause of deaths in the majority of deaths resulting from drunk drivers.  Someone reading these numbers could come to the obvious conclusion that right-handed drivers should be a priority when screening for drunken driving performance.

I can see the furor that would create...all right-handed drivers should be profiled, or if you see someone weaving on the road, but the driver is left-handed, there is a small percentage that the driver will cause an accident resulting in deaths.

Of course, we are never given a balanced perspective, when statistics are thrown at us by the media, focus groups or anyone else pushing an agenda.  It is up to us, as the American public and as individuals to understand that the statistics being shoved down our throats are intentionally meant to sway our opinion one way or another.

Then again, we are also the same group of voters that re-elect these ineffective politicians over and over again.  If we can't understand how we are being led around by the nose, by the use of statistics, I'm afraid we have no one to blame, but ourselves for the continued chaos that plaques our country on so many levels.

End of the Year Observations

End of the Year Observations

The end of 2012 is near and I'm overwhelmed by all the stupidity that is flying around the United States.  Here are a few examples of what has occurred and my subsequent opinion.

1.  Our country is headed for a "fiscal cliff" and our elected representatives can't come to an agreement on how to avoid this financial calamity, act as adults and run the country.  The Democrats and Republicans argue over every small, insignificant point, as Americans and the rest of the world view our government as ineffective, stalled and allowing the United States to suffer.

At the same time, the US Senate voted on a resolution to "ask" the Village Voice (a New York City newspaper) to remove the Adult Entertainment section from its' content.  Apparently, the Senate is concerned that this specific portion of the Village Voice is nothing more than advertisements for prostitution.

Are you telling me that the Adult Entertainment section of a newspaper is more important to discuss and vote on, instead of trying to fix the huge problems of our country?  Is this why we elected these officials (over and over and over)?

Our country is so polarized that any movement towards a center-based and sensible solution is fought with such hatred that no movement is the result.  I don't care what people think, but we must make some changes that are necessary.

Hike the Social Security age from 65 to 67 over a span of 5 years.  We can cut the military by one aircraft carrier, one fighter squadron and 10,000 troops and still be the strongest nation on Earth.

Taxes on incomes over $400,000 will provide some relief to the national debt, but we must also eliminate loopholes that allow companies to pay nothing at all.  General Electric had an income over $10 billion in 2011 and paid nothing for corporate taxes.  That is plain crazy, but legal under the current tax code.

2.  The tragedy in Newtown Connecticut was horrific; the deaths of 20 children and 6 adults clearly indicates the country must do something to slow down the occurrences of such massacres. 

It doesn't happen in just Newtown, but all over the country.  Since the Newtown massacre, over 100 other Americans have been killed by guns.  

I am not advocating for taking guns from Americans, or trying to eliminate the right to bear arms...all I want to do is explore ways to slow down this violence.

How did America react to this tragedy?  With an explosion of rhetoric about how guns don't kill people, people kill people.  The National Rifle Association (NRA) wants an armed guard in every school.  How many armed guards are needed in a large high school of 4000 students?  1, 5, or 20?

At the same time, the NRA backs political measures to cut, cut, cut the Federal budget.  How can we place armed guards in schools, while cutting the budget so drastically?

The South Carolina legislature passed a bill this past week allowing school teachers to carry concealed weapons in the classroom. This is one of the stupidest things I have heard in my life.

We read in the newspapers how stressed out teachers are due to class sizes, unruly children, low pay and more...and now these over-stressed teachers can carry a gun in the classroom?

How will the NRA react, if one of these armed, over-stressed teachers go berserk and takes it out on the students?  What's the answer to that...another armed guard, watching the teachers?

I don't know the answer to this problem, but can't we as a nation, have a discussion to find common ground and attempt to protect all of our citizens, adults and children, a bit better?

3.  The Iowa Supreme Court ruled that an employer can fire an employee for being "too irresistible"...are you kidding me?  A dentist in Iowa hired a woman 10 years ago and after this extended period of time, he decided this woman was "too irresistible", he terminated her employment with him.  The case went to court and the dentist was told that his actions were legal.  Sounds more like sexual harassment, (or sexual denial) to me.

This story generates so many questions that need answers.  such as...if this woman was so irresistible, why was she hired in the first place, 10 years ago?  Did the firing have anything to do with the fact that the wife of the dentist found personal text messages between the female employee and the dentist?

Since the was an office dress code, why wasn't the female employee adhering to the dress code?  According to court documents, the female employee wore her "scrubs too tight and in a provocative manner".  Why didn't the dentist tell the female employee to buy larger scrubs for the office?

Then the final straw occurred when the Iowa Supreme Court allowed the termination for being "too irresistible".  

Come on...with no record of counseling to the female employee about her dress, or any mention in her work record of sub-standard performance, this sounds like a disgruntled wife telling her husband to fire a female employee that may cause problems for her marriage.

 

This wasn't a firing over being too irresistible, this was the result of a jealous wife, ridding herself of a potential opponent for her husband's attention (and money).  The entire situation could  have been resolved in a better way.

That's the main problem in our country....everyone reacts, yells and screams, but no one wants to sit down, find common ground and act responsibly.

The Time for Action is NOW!

The Time for Action is NOW!

Like most other Americans, I am not pleased by the results of the 2012 election.  I am not speaking about the re-election of President Obama...I'm upset with the blind re-election of the career politicians that brought America to this point in time.

Presidents come and go, that's a given, but when we continue the careers of politicians that have their own personal agendas (think continued re-election), we are making the decision to keep our country from moving forward.

For example, think of those politicians in office that have careers spanning more than 10, 20 or even 30 years in office.  Do you know how many presidents we have gone through in that amount of time?

The late Robert Byrd, from West Virginia, served over 57 years in office, that is at least 7 presidents during his tenure.  Or the late Strom Thurmond from South Carolina...he was in office for 47 years...does anyone believe these people were in touch with average Americans, after being career politicians all their lives?

We have Senators and Congress members that are currently serving terms in office that have been there for over 30 years...none of whom have really done anything , except get re-elected and continue to accrue benefits, pensions and votes.

I hear it all the time..."we need change in Washington", so why are we being idiots and re-electing the same people all the time?  That's not change, that's insanity, as defined by Albert Einstein, who said, "if you continue to do the same thing all the time, yet expect a different result, that's insanity."

I am suggesting that we begin a citizen advocacy group that provides Americans with a voice in making "real" changes in Washington DC by ridding ourselves of any and all elected officials after a maximum of 10 years in Congress and 12 years in the Senate.  Of course, I believe this line of action should apply to all levels of elected officials.

There would be several immediate benefits from this philosophy.  First, we would rid ourselves of the parasites that use elected offices for their own gain.  How many millionaires are in Congress making themselves richer? 

Remember, only recently Congress voted not to allow themselves to gain from inside financial information, and even that backfired when the wording of the resolution excluded family members from this action.

Second, we could save millions over time by having the level of benefits and lifetime pensions reduced.  Did you know that a member of Congress only has to serve a minimum of 5 years before qualifying for a lifetime pension paid for by our taxes?

Most importantly, is instead of having candidates run for office that want to make a career in politics, we would find real leaders wanting to serve and do what is good for the country. 

Nearly all current office holders (at any level of government) want to stay in office as long as possible; none of which believe their effectiveness erodes after a long period of time.  These politicians have the mindset that they have a "lifetime" in office to work to make changes.

If we had elected officials that knew their time was limited in office, they would understand the real need to make effective change within a specified time period.  We would have leaders that want to make changes in positive ways, instead of "kicking the can down the road" every 2 years.

Of course, this is only the initial step in trying to make positive changes in Washington DC.  We need to push for "common sense" solutions on all problems.

At the moment, the country is facing a "fiscal cliff" due to the stupidity of career politicians in Washington DC.  We need to find ways to balance our budget...the operative word is "balance".  This is the type of solution we need to utilize.

The president wants to raise taxes on those who make over $250,000 per year, the Republicans do not want any tax increases, everyone accepts that spending must be reduced, but no one agrees where to start...there is plenty of room for "balance".

I see no reason why the eligibility age for Social Security shouldn't be raised to 67 over a span of years.  This is a no-brainer and anyone that is against it doesn't want true reform.

I see no reason why we can't raise the limit from $250,000 per year of income to at least $500,000 before higher taxes are enacted.  This would reduce the number of small businesses that would be adversely affected by the lower standard of $250,000.

I don't see any reason why we can't give up a battleship, an aircraft carrier, and about 10,000 troops from the military, or how about a reduction of foreign aid to the dozens of prosperous countries we still send money?  This step alone could save well over $100 billion dollars a year and over $1 trillion over 10 years.

I am going to attempt to start an advocacy group for these, and other, common sense solutions for the United States.  Only by acting as a group with one voice, can we make real changes in the way our government (at all levels) operates.

At the bottom of this blog is a Feedback button.  If you have comments, thoughts or suggestions for me, please press the Feedback option and leave your comments.

As I continue down this road, I hope to empower  hundreds, then thousands and more Americans into working together for "real" change.  Remember, change is in the hands of Americans and we must begin to use it effectively.  Otherwise, we can only blame ourselves.

It's Time for 'We the People' to Act

   It's Time for 'We the People' to Act

Several years ago, a group of Americans banded together and formed the Tea Party.  I don't believe I need to go into what the Tea Party stands for or their affect on American politics.  In a short period, the Tea Party has played a profound part of American politics within only a few years.  I applaud the Tea Party for their ability to develop such a large voice within the political community in such an abbreviated time.

Now it's time for others to do the same thing, but follow a different path.  I believe there are millions of Americans that want this great country of ours to move forward, without the extremism that besets the other major political parties.  I believe we can establish a community of Americans that seek a common ground with all concerned and push forward with an agenda that provides fair and balanced approaches to the problems of today.

I am not trying to start a new political party; one that selects their own candidates for election, tries to persuade voters through "facts" that are skewed and uses fictional scare tactics on the public to garner votes.

I am trying to gather enough Americans that want to work together and find sensible and common ground solutions to the vast differences that are holding back the United States from moving forward.

The Tea Party started this exact same way and their approach to gathering strength and size was remarkable.  It told me that the majority of Americans want more choices, the majority of Americans want progress in solving our national problems and the majority of Americans are tired of how Washington works.  This tiredness allows engaged Americans to present new ideas, procedures and opportunities to the millions of Americans that feel our national problems are beyond our ability to affect change.

My proposal is to establish a "common ground initiative" for Americans to review and determine if our new thoughts, ideas and opportunities make more sense than what our political leaders are willing to do for our country.

For example, I believe most Americans want term limits, and a Federal, state and local pension system that is equal to what is offered to the millions of American military members that have served our country.  No more of these pension plans that profit politicians for doing nothing while in elected offices.

Everyone is screaming about the deficit and raising taxes on the richest of Americans.  We must see through all the rubbish being thrown at the public and determine what is the expected result...are we trying to raise taxes on wealthy Americans out of spite because they make more than 98% of us, or do we want to actually reduce the deficit?

Raising taxes sounds politically savvy, but if you allow deductions to continue, the revenue raised through increased taxes slips through our fingers like trying to hold water in our hands...can't be done.  We need to find a common ground for this problem and develop a solution that the majority of American believe is fair, balanced and a real fix to a specific problem.

Perhaps a workable solution would be to have a "sliding" scale on tax deductions.  If you make more than $500,000, you are allowed a smaller percentage of deductions than a person making only $40,000 per year.  I'm positive that Americans could find a way that helps to resolve this problem, reduce the deficit and be considered fair for all concerned.

Everyone is screaming about the need to cut entitlements and I agree with this philosophy, but there are ways to work on this problem without making major changes that will scare millions of Americans.

Forgive me for being blunt, but I think raising the age for retirement for Social Security benefits should be raised.  Currently, we can claim "early" retirement at 62, or scheduled retirement at 65 and if we put off retirement to 67 or even 70, a person can receive over 100% of their anticipated benefit check.  This doesn't make fiscal sense for the country.

If there must be an "early" retirement age, raise it to 64, then have scheduled retirement at 67 and there should not be any procedure to provide more than 100% of your retirement benefit.  This simple move would save hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 20 years...isn't this what we are trying to achieve?

Over the years, there has been discussion of having a "means" testing method in order to determine whether or not, wealthier Americans should receive Social Security upon retirement.

The argument that if someone pays into Social Security, they are entitled to receive Social Security...hogwash.  When Social Security was devised, it was meant to be a "safety net" for those Americans that needed assistance to survive daily life and associated costs.  Does anyone really believe that a retiree that is receiving over $250,000 a year from other income really needs that Social Security check?

As for those people receiving a Social Security Disability Income (SSDI), we need to reform several aspects of that payment.  Many people receiving SSDI are drug addicts, which infuriates the general American public. 

Instead of being angry, let's have these identified individuals  be drug tested on a recurring basis to ensure our money isn't paying for drug habits.  If someone tests positive for drugs, their SSDI is cancelled for a minimum of 6 months and they must pass a series of drug tests before re-instatement to the SSDI program.

As for those who receive SSDI for medical and other physical reasons, a simple reassessment every 2 years should provide a method to assure us that receipt of SSDI for these individuals is warranted.  In the spirit of full disclosure, this would affect my own family members, but I believe it is necessary, fair and would save more money than it would cost.

Over time, the money spent on SSDI would be reduced significantly.  There are those people that will worry about these drug addicts being homeless, without any way of support, and to those people I would say...come up with a better method to combat drug usage and addiction.

Of course, there are dozens of other entitlements that must be reviewed and reconsidered in order to bring down our dependence upon government entitlements.  What is necessary is to remember that there are millions of Americans that use these entitlements in order to survive on a daily basis. 

I do not believe I have all the answers or even understand the questions, but there has to be a sensible start to changing the way we operate as a country and government.  What we have in Washington is broken and won't be fixed unless 'We the People' act.

Of course, I believe we can make significant strides towards a working government by throwing out all elected officials that have been in office for 10 years or more.

I'm looking for ideas, thoughts, comments and suggestions on how we can begin to organize as a nationwide group and work to save our country from politicians.