I understand sometimes one can inject too much of him- or herself into a body of writings. Sometimes, however, finding a way to help some readers relate to one's principles trumps the natural human desire to not run afoul of those in one’s social or community sphere.
With that, I offer the following thought despite its mild redundancy to the opening paragraph.
It is one thing to observe the multifarious orders of business which constitute government – relying heavily on standard and online media for information as well as other opinion analysis – and then publish a semi-disconnected perspective on it all.
It is quite another to experience something in life which is tremendously analogous to a topic of particular ire to libertarians and other small-government proponents: handouts and public entitlements.
While it has taken me a couple of months to finally get around to this topic, and it goes hand-in-hand well with a previous blog entry, this is a personal experience which reinforces a core libertarian principle that freebies in life almost invariably bring with them a dehumanizing effect on their beneficiaries.
Two months ago I became a former employee of YMCA. I started off at the South Oakland Family YMCA in Royal Oak, Michigan, in 2003 and then was hired at the Lima Family YMCA in 2007. In the nearly 7 1/2 years I was a part of YMCA I have enjoyed the opportunity to see the good things the organization does for the communities its branches serve. Even after parting ways, I will continue to be a proponent of it.
As any YMCA employee can verify for you, one of the more popular benefits of working there is the free membership. Last June, when I was called back to work at Honda's engine plant in Anna, my supervisor – who oversees the Lima Y's fitness center – said he would be willing to keep me on payroll as a substitute so I could continue to enjoy a membership there at no cost.
In case you are one of the few readers who is not aware, I was the Libertarian Party's candidate in Ohio's 4th congressional district race for 2010. Also, my now-former Y supervisor is an ardent Progressive Liberal.
I'm also a weight-lifting junkie.
Well, as the months progressed after my return to (and then second layoff in September from) Honda and as the campaign entered the homestretch toward the November 2 election, he began pestering me more and more often about subbing at the fitness desk. He became especially persistent in October, roughly three week before the election.
On one occasion he called me on the road while I was out campaigning in Wapakoneta and left a voicemail message to call him back. Since I was on the campaign trail and preparing to participate in a meet-the-candidates event hosted by the Auglaize County Patriots, I made the executive decision to wait until the morning to return his call.
The next day, I awoke extra early and decided to head to the Y for a good hard workout. That evening was the first public debate with Representative Jim Jordan and I wanted to enjoy a healthy surge of endorphins before campaigning some more and preparing one last time for the debate.
When I arrived, there was the Fitness Supervisor covering for the early-morning staffer. Since I had not returned his call as promptly as he felt I should have he opted to confront and lecture me on the subject in front of several members. The fact I was out campaigning and was not in a position to call back until rather late in the evening mattered none in the conversation.
I ended-up leaving the gym even more stressed-out than I already was.
Adding to the bizarreness of the day, while I was at the auditorium on the OSU-Lima campus waiting for the debate to commence, I got a call. It was a local number but one I didn't recognize. Thinking it might be election related I decided to answer: and it was one of my coworkers asking me to sub for her the very next morning as our supervisor had suggested she call me first.
With the debate about to start in six minutes and out of the shear surprise of being hit with this at that particular moment, I quickly made another executive decision: I said, "No."
While I did come in and sub on one Saturday during that time span to keep the hounds at bay and there are even more details of this story with which to bore readers, cutting to the chase the nagging and pestering curiously came to an end on November 3.
In late October I had returned to work at Honda yet again and I did sub for a coworker a couple of times during the annual Christmas shutdown at the plant in order to maintain my employment status and enjoy the free gym access. But, in late February I received one more call from that supervisor. He simply phoned to say since I had not "subbed in a really long time" I was being taken off the payroll the next day.
If you've stuck with this treatise this far, I’m sure the obvious question would be, "Why didn’t you quit after the first time he gave you grief?"
You wouldn’t be the first person to ask me that. My answer consistently has been, "I wanted to keep the free membership."
During the stretches I was laid-off I could not afford a gym membership. Heck, there were stretches of time while I was working when I couldn't afford a gym membership.
But, after that last phone call, I made one more executive decision and checked-out Westwood Tennis & Fitness Center. I knew the first day into my one week trial access I was going to join there. After signing-up and making the first membership payment, it was during my second workout when my libertarian epiphany occurred to me.
All those months I was willing to tolerate unprofessional behavior, mild yet tempered hostility, condescension, an occasional hateful look, and the general indignity of the situation… And for what?
Simply put, I had gotten used to enjoying what amounted to a handout.
By that point, during that second paid-for workout at Westwood, I realized what it was beyond being in a superior facility that made working-out there so enjoyable. I could be there without having to wonder if I was going to be questioned about the frequency of my visits. I could go there without anyone really caring who I was or why I was there. And, I could go there because I had paid for my access to it just like everyone else in there.
And you know what: that last one just felt so good.
So, if you're a Libertarian like me and you're dealing with someone who rolls their eyes at you when you discuss how government assistance leaves recipients trapped in their situation and forced to accept the inevitable indignity of it, tell them to talk to someone who – in a roundabout sense – knows what you’re trying to convey.
In my own strange and peculiar way, I've been there.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Government, my driver's license, and the wonderful world of unintended consequences
Below is a letter I e-mailed recently to Ohio General Assembly Senator Keith Faber (12th Senate District) and later modified slightly and sent to Representative John Adams (78th House District). Let's see if either legislator acknowledges it.
Dear Sen. Faber,
I called your Celina office a few days ago and relayed the points below to your staffer there (I believe his name was Joe[?]), and he advised me to send you an e-mail detailing my concerns.
Two Fridays ago, my wife and I went to the local Bureau of Motor Vehicles office here in Lima to get new licenses. We had just moved earlier in the week and wanted to get that done promptly.
Much to our surprise, we were turned away because we lacked proof we reside at our new address. The employee at the BMV was very cordial and let us know this was a relatively new development in Ohio within the last year and the new stipulations require we furnish a piece of official mail with our names and new address such as a bank statement or utility bill.
This is the part that puzzles us: historically, one’s driver’s license or state ID serves as proof of residency for the above functions in society. Equally perplexing is the fact our recently inked lease for the duplex we’re renting is not on the list of acceptable proof of residency.
Now begins our catch-22: our bank will not change the address for our checking account until we are able to furnish new IDs with that update. To reiterate the irony, we need an item such as a mailed bank statement with our new address on it to prove we have moved into our new home and get our new licenses but our bank requires new licenses before it will enter our new address into our account information.
So far, this merely is the inconvenience side of the issue. Even more important to consider are the unintended consequences of the new BMV policy.
Before going any further, I would like to state I get why this was implemented. First, I know Ohio has a growing illegal alien problem that is taxing the state’s resources and I can see how this would be a potentially effective means of combating it. Also, it is easy to recognize the policy is meant to be a tool for thwarting voter fraud.
But, do those two efforts outweigh the predicament in which Ohio residents – who are disabled or caught-up in the severely adverse effects of the recession – are being placed?
My wife is disabled. Simply getting to the BMV and waiting in line for a new license is very physically taxing on her. Still, her situation does not present the obstacles to personal mobility faced by many disabled and elderly Ohioans – especially those dependent upon transportation assistance.
On another personal note, I am reminded of our experience when I was laid-off from my job in February 2009 at the peak of the current recession. Without employment, we could no longer afford the rent at our residence at the time and had to move-in with my wife’s family. Since all the bills there were in their names we had no means of proving we lived at that address. Had the new BMV policy been in place then, we would have spent months waiting for the ability to update our address with the state of Ohio.
When you couple those two situations (economically displaced residents and the transportation limitations of the elderly and disabled) with the fact state law requires residents to update our addresses within 30 days of moving before incurring a penalty it becomes clear many of us will invariably be caught between a rock and a hard place with little or no means to resolve this dilemma.
I do not know if the BMV policy was enacted via legislation or was set through the internal bureaucracy of the BMV or Ohio Department of Public Safety. If it was passed as a new law, my request would be to please consider my concerns above and quickly pursue a repeal of it out of consideration of the unintended consequences it is creating for so many Ohioans. If this policy was established internally, it is my hope you and other lawmakers in the General Assembly would lobby Governor Kasich’s office to issue a directive to ODPS Director Kyle Dupler and BMV Registrar Mike Rankin to reverse this harmful policy.
Thank you for your time and consideration and Happy Easter.
Sincerely,
Don Kissick
Dear Sen. Faber,
I called your Celina office a few days ago and relayed the points below to your staffer there (I believe his name was Joe[?]), and he advised me to send you an e-mail detailing my concerns.
Two Fridays ago, my wife and I went to the local Bureau of Motor Vehicles office here in Lima to get new licenses. We had just moved earlier in the week and wanted to get that done promptly.
Much to our surprise, we were turned away because we lacked proof we reside at our new address. The employee at the BMV was very cordial and let us know this was a relatively new development in Ohio within the last year and the new stipulations require we furnish a piece of official mail with our names and new address such as a bank statement or utility bill.
This is the part that puzzles us: historically, one’s driver’s license or state ID serves as proof of residency for the above functions in society. Equally perplexing is the fact our recently inked lease for the duplex we’re renting is not on the list of acceptable proof of residency.
Now begins our catch-22: our bank will not change the address for our checking account until we are able to furnish new IDs with that update. To reiterate the irony, we need an item such as a mailed bank statement with our new address on it to prove we have moved into our new home and get our new licenses but our bank requires new licenses before it will enter our new address into our account information.
So far, this merely is the inconvenience side of the issue. Even more important to consider are the unintended consequences of the new BMV policy.
Before going any further, I would like to state I get why this was implemented. First, I know Ohio has a growing illegal alien problem that is taxing the state’s resources and I can see how this would be a potentially effective means of combating it. Also, it is easy to recognize the policy is meant to be a tool for thwarting voter fraud.
But, do those two efforts outweigh the predicament in which Ohio residents – who are disabled or caught-up in the severely adverse effects of the recession – are being placed?
My wife is disabled. Simply getting to the BMV and waiting in line for a new license is very physically taxing on her. Still, her situation does not present the obstacles to personal mobility faced by many disabled and elderly Ohioans – especially those dependent upon transportation assistance.
On another personal note, I am reminded of our experience when I was laid-off from my job in February 2009 at the peak of the current recession. Without employment, we could no longer afford the rent at our residence at the time and had to move-in with my wife’s family. Since all the bills there were in their names we had no means of proving we lived at that address. Had the new BMV policy been in place then, we would have spent months waiting for the ability to update our address with the state of Ohio.
When you couple those two situations (economically displaced residents and the transportation limitations of the elderly and disabled) with the fact state law requires residents to update our addresses within 30 days of moving before incurring a penalty it becomes clear many of us will invariably be caught between a rock and a hard place with little or no means to resolve this dilemma.
I do not know if the BMV policy was enacted via legislation or was set through the internal bureaucracy of the BMV or Ohio Department of Public Safety. If it was passed as a new law, my request would be to please consider my concerns above and quickly pursue a repeal of it out of consideration of the unintended consequences it is creating for so many Ohioans. If this policy was established internally, it is my hope you and other lawmakers in the General Assembly would lobby Governor Kasich’s office to issue a directive to ODPS Director Kyle Dupler and BMV Registrar Mike Rankin to reverse this harmful policy.
Thank you for your time and consideration and Happy Easter.
Sincerely,
Don Kissick
Sunday, March 27, 2011
The logic flaw no one ever questions
"New" liberals in their embrace of Progressivism over the last 100 years have created an astounding paradox. For some reason, however, no one seems to feel the need to shine any light on it.
They so proudly trumpet themselves as unfailing champions of the individual's right to privacy. And, to listen to them and take them at their word, one would be led to believe that crowd is privacy rights' lone champion in America.
All the while, though, the progressive liberals also believe in and have promoted a broad-reaching public assistance system – more simply, welfare.
But, you cannot have a society with a supposed institutional respect for privacy rights at the same time as a society of vast public entitlements.
Herein lies the contradiction the American Left so desperately wants us all to ignore: have you applied for assistance lately?
If you have, how much of your privacy that you cherish can you honestly say you still have left? After all, when you file for assistance the government expects you to divulge information about yourself and your family most people would not be comfortable sharing with neighbors – and even information that in many instances can get you fired for discussing in one’s workplace.
How much have you made on a week-to-week basis over the last year?
How much has your spouse made on a week-to-week basis over the last year?
What is your current bank balance?
Do you own your home?
If so, how much do you still owe on it?
How much is it worth?
What kind of car(s) do you drive?
What are they worth?
What is your social security number?
What is your driver's license number?
How much do you have in monthly utility bills?
What other monthly expenditures do you have?
But if you wish to qualify for aid, your choice of comfort zones narrows drastically.
And, ultimately, we are expected to handover various personal concerns and documents to complete strangers whom we are supposed to trust because they have signed a piece of paper stating they agree not to misuse knowledge of your personal affairs under any circumstances.
Then again, our presidents and members of Congress have been swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution at each inauguration ceremony. In just looking back over the last 20+ years, how would you say that's worked out for us?
They so proudly trumpet themselves as unfailing champions of the individual's right to privacy. And, to listen to them and take them at their word, one would be led to believe that crowd is privacy rights' lone champion in America.
All the while, though, the progressive liberals also believe in and have promoted a broad-reaching public assistance system – more simply, welfare.
But, you cannot have a society with a supposed institutional respect for privacy rights at the same time as a society of vast public entitlements.
Herein lies the contradiction the American Left so desperately wants us all to ignore: have you applied for assistance lately?
If you have, how much of your privacy that you cherish can you honestly say you still have left? After all, when you file for assistance the government expects you to divulge information about yourself and your family most people would not be comfortable sharing with neighbors – and even information that in many instances can get you fired for discussing in one’s workplace.
How much have you made on a week-to-week basis over the last year?
How much has your spouse made on a week-to-week basis over the last year?
What is your current bank balance?
Do you own your home?
If so, how much do you still owe on it?
How much is it worth?
What kind of car(s) do you drive?
What are they worth?
What is your social security number?
What is your driver's license number?
How much do you have in monthly utility bills?
What other monthly expenditures do you have?
But if you wish to qualify for aid, your choice of comfort zones narrows drastically.
And, ultimately, we are expected to handover various personal concerns and documents to complete strangers whom we are supposed to trust because they have signed a piece of paper stating they agree not to misuse knowledge of your personal affairs under any circumstances.
Then again, our presidents and members of Congress have been swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution at each inauguration ceremony. In just looking back over the last 20+ years, how would you say that's worked out for us?
Thursday, March 24, 2011
No pre-wedding jitters...
Today marks four years ago Marcy and I exchanged our vows. In a small way to commemorate our anniversary, I have opted to republish this old blog entry I wrote about it. I originally authored this on April 7, 2007: two weeks after our wedding. It initially was written as a MySpace message to an old friend I knew while I was in the Navy and stationed at Newport, RI. When I was almost finished typing it, it occurred to me that this would make a nice item to share with everyone and so here it is, a little revised and with an item or two added.
Also to all who see this and attended our wedding and reception, for being there with us to share in our most special day, THANK YOU! Words cannot express how grateful we still are.
Well, we only got half the crowd we expected (we paid for a minimum attendance of 125 guests). But that's okay. The folks who showed and stayed through the evening had an absolute blast.
Just like everyone said it would be, the day went by much too quickly and it was over before I knew it. In looking back two weeks ago, now it seems like a whirlwind (although I know it didn't have that feel while it was happening).
I have to say, watching her walk down the aisle was the most magical moment of my life.
It was funny, in retrospect, because I remember how glad we were to get out of our formal wear once we got home... and she was saying all the while in the weeks leading up to our wedding that she's waited all her life to don her wedding gown but that was going to mean wearing upwards of 30 pounds of clothing and she knew she would be soooo ready to take the thing off.
She had her gown on by about 2:30-3 p.m. that afternoon, I had on my tux shortly after 3, and we were out of our gear sometime close to midnight. Nine hours in a tux and gown. Yeah, I couldn't wait to get in a T-shirt, sweats, and my worn-out sneakers I use for slippers.
In fact, not long after the ceremony her feet were hurting her so bad in her shoes my brother Todd ran really quickly to the Kmart next door to the Crystal Gardens hall and grabbed her a pair of nice slippers to wear the rest of the day and evening. Our photographer got some photos of me helping her out of and then into footwear out in the lobby area. As soon as we get them from him, I'll be sure to post those on my profile.
Another anecdote that Marcy will never live down to some degree came during the ceremony. Our officiate, Tony, later admitted that ours was only the second wedding he's done this year and so he was a little rusty. Where that came into play is that during the part where we say after him, "I take thee..." he was kinda hesitating a little bit. She was waiting for him to say my name in the process, waiting for his prompts, and it caused just enough of a hiccup in the proceedings that she called me by my middle name since in her mind she'd already said my first name several times: "I take thee (hesitation for a split second) Charles..."
So now, my best man keeps calling me Chuck. And Marcy is "Bride of Chuckie."
That's OK, though, since when we said our own personal words to one another I had a brain fart (which I knew I would; that's why I try to stick to writing instead of public speaking) of my own. What I had intended to say and had rehearsed in my head for during my part was:
Marcy, very simply you are the one.
You are the one I know who loves me unconditionally.
You are the one who brings out the best in me.
You are the one who makes every morning worth waking up to.
And you are the one who makes every evening something to look forward to.
And, you are the one and only one I see spending the rest of my life with.
You are the one.
Well, after the opening line, I had a brain freeze and couldn't remember the second stanza (which, I felt, was the most important to say) and skipped to part 3, then four, and then finally remembered the second part -- and in my sense of relief I believe I ended up omitting the fifth line.
One other thing that is a little amusing is the minor controversy that has taken on a life of its own in my workplace. I teach a teen weight training class where I work at the South Oakland Family YMCA. The weekend before the wedding I called in sick and so there wasn't any class. Well, I could have tried to arrange for someone to be there but felt I owed it to the kids, having missed the week before. During the rehearsal dinner the night before the wedding, other members of the bridal party convinced me to pursue a sub to teach the next day's class (what if there's a traffic jam, what if you're in an accident, what if your truck breaks down) -- and I earnestly tried to call someone and make those arrangements.
Well, no one was available. So, I went in around 8:30 that next morning (class is at 11) to the "Y" and got in the workout I was hoping to have. And I taught my class, but being the thinking man I am, I cut it short at 11:30 and let no one interfere with my departure. Of course my boss, Michele, marveled at my presence while I was working-out and apologized for not being able to cover the class herself; but she needed to be able to scoot early that morning since she needed the time to get ready so she could attend the wedding herself!
And a number of people remarked about me being there and working out and doing the class the day of my wedding. What I began telling people is I wanted to get the after-workout endorphin rush as a preemptive strike against potential pre-wedding jitters. At least I think it worked.
Anyhow, since then people have been coming up to me saying things such as, "What's this I hear about you having to work on your wedding day?!?" and, "I can't believe they made you come in to work on your wedding day!"
What adds a little to the confusion on the subject is that I used to work Saturday mornings in the Wellness Center. Now, the only time I come in on a Saturday is to teach my class (which is very rewarding).
But, getting back to the subject of avoiding the jitters... Once I got out of the YMCA and hit the road, I had to swing over to Ecorse and pick up Keith, my Best Man, at the truck stop on Ecorse Road. He had to drop-off his rig that morning as he had to deal with some rocket scientists in Ohio at his final point of destination along his run down south.
So, I meet him at the diner there at the truck stop. And I figure he's going to be ready to get going fairly shortly after I get there. No, he's just getting ready to place his breakfast order. Well, I went ahead and had something as well. I was anxious to go, so I had my plate cleaned off well before Keith did. And then he wants to sit there with his boss and shoot the $#1+ and smoke cigarettes for a while -- meanwhile I'm getting antsier... and antsier. Finally I had to blurt out, "Dude, I really, really don't want to be rude, but we really, really got to go."
So, we head over to where his rig is parked, he gets his tux and other needed items out of his truck. As best we can in my well-worn Dakota, I'm flying down I-94 to Southfield Road, I'm cruising the streets as fast as I can without needlessly risking a stop by a cop, and get our nappy asses to the house, where I now need to get groomed (no pun intended) and a shower (another unintended pun). As bald as I am, I just shave my head anymore and for some reason that day, things just seemed to take longer to accomplish than normal.
We got to Crystal Gardens at 3 -- mind you the wedding is at 3:30 p.m. and we had determined that all my groomsmen and I should be there by 2:30. When we get there, Amy (Marcy's Matron of Honor) is standing there in the lobby and says, "I was getting ready to send out a search party for you!"
We race into the area we scouted as a good changing place. My first groomsman, Larry, is helping me get changed and all set up while Keith's wife, Lana (Marcy's Second Bridesmaid), is helping him do the same. I am trying like hell not to work up a sweat and get all grubby as a result. But, we probably got me tuxed-up in near record time.
After that, then I had to help with getting my two absentee fellows (Larry and Keith) up to speed on things since they weren't able to be there the night of the rehearsal (Keith was on the road and Larry lives up by Clare): the order of procession, where we're all standing when we get to the altar, and so on.
Now, for all of you who have known me for some time and have marveled at my sense (or lack thereof) of punctuality, you need only look at my family... At this point in the day, my brother Brian (the second groomsman), has not yet arrived. In fact, since he, my oldest brother Michael, and my mom are all riding together, I'm now starting to wonder whether they will be there at least in time for the ceremony or perhaps sometime before dinner during the reception. Time is ticking away and in the design of entrances for the ceremony Michael is supposed to be escorting Mom to her seat, followed by Marcy's brother Jason with their mom, Brian, Larry, Keith, and then Tony and me, and the bridesmaids one by one before Marcy and her dad make their entrance.
Making the moment even more interesting is that Tony hadn't even arrived yet (although, if memory serves me correct, he did get there before my family). Of course, on our wedding day, there had to be construction on I-75. That caused a lot of people to miss the ceremony but at least be there for the reception. My family, though, was taking the Southfield Freeway, which was flowing quite smoothly when I was on it around noon. They pulled-up at 3:21 by my watch.
Between anxiously awaiting for their arrivals and doing pre-photos in the lobby area with the photographer, and saying "hello" to invitees, I was too busy to even think about being nervous.
But, all in all, I'm inclined to think the day went well. I couldn't be happier.
Also to all who see this and attended our wedding and reception, for being there with us to share in our most special day, THANK YOU! Words cannot express how grateful we still are.
Well, we only got half the crowd we expected (we paid for a minimum attendance of 125 guests). But that's okay. The folks who showed and stayed through the evening had an absolute blast.
Just like everyone said it would be, the day went by much too quickly and it was over before I knew it. In looking back two weeks ago, now it seems like a whirlwind (although I know it didn't have that feel while it was happening).
I have to say, watching her walk down the aisle was the most magical moment of my life.
It was funny, in retrospect, because I remember how glad we were to get out of our formal wear once we got home... and she was saying all the while in the weeks leading up to our wedding that she's waited all her life to don her wedding gown but that was going to mean wearing upwards of 30 pounds of clothing and she knew she would be soooo ready to take the thing off.
She had her gown on by about 2:30-3 p.m. that afternoon, I had on my tux shortly after 3, and we were out of our gear sometime close to midnight. Nine hours in a tux and gown. Yeah, I couldn't wait to get in a T-shirt, sweats, and my worn-out sneakers I use for slippers.
In fact, not long after the ceremony her feet were hurting her so bad in her shoes my brother Todd ran really quickly to the Kmart next door to the Crystal Gardens hall and grabbed her a pair of nice slippers to wear the rest of the day and evening. Our photographer got some photos of me helping her out of and then into footwear out in the lobby area. As soon as we get them from him, I'll be sure to post those on my profile.
Another anecdote that Marcy will never live down to some degree came during the ceremony. Our officiate, Tony, later admitted that ours was only the second wedding he's done this year and so he was a little rusty. Where that came into play is that during the part where we say after him, "I take thee..." he was kinda hesitating a little bit. She was waiting for him to say my name in the process, waiting for his prompts, and it caused just enough of a hiccup in the proceedings that she called me by my middle name since in her mind she'd already said my first name several times: "I take thee (hesitation for a split second) Charles..."
So now, my best man keeps calling me Chuck. And Marcy is "Bride of Chuckie."
That's OK, though, since when we said our own personal words to one another I had a brain fart (which I knew I would; that's why I try to stick to writing instead of public speaking) of my own. What I had intended to say and had rehearsed in my head for during my part was:
Marcy, very simply you are the one.
You are the one I know who loves me unconditionally.
You are the one who brings out the best in me.
You are the one who makes every morning worth waking up to.
And you are the one who makes every evening something to look forward to.
And, you are the one and only one I see spending the rest of my life with.
You are the one.
Well, after the opening line, I had a brain freeze and couldn't remember the second stanza (which, I felt, was the most important to say) and skipped to part 3, then four, and then finally remembered the second part -- and in my sense of relief I believe I ended up omitting the fifth line.
One other thing that is a little amusing is the minor controversy that has taken on a life of its own in my workplace. I teach a teen weight training class where I work at the South Oakland Family YMCA. The weekend before the wedding I called in sick and so there wasn't any class. Well, I could have tried to arrange for someone to be there but felt I owed it to the kids, having missed the week before. During the rehearsal dinner the night before the wedding, other members of the bridal party convinced me to pursue a sub to teach the next day's class (what if there's a traffic jam, what if you're in an accident, what if your truck breaks down) -- and I earnestly tried to call someone and make those arrangements.
Well, no one was available. So, I went in around 8:30 that next morning (class is at 11) to the "Y" and got in the workout I was hoping to have. And I taught my class, but being the thinking man I am, I cut it short at 11:30 and let no one interfere with my departure. Of course my boss, Michele, marveled at my presence while I was working-out and apologized for not being able to cover the class herself; but she needed to be able to scoot early that morning since she needed the time to get ready so she could attend the wedding herself!
And a number of people remarked about me being there and working out and doing the class the day of my wedding. What I began telling people is I wanted to get the after-workout endorphin rush as a preemptive strike against potential pre-wedding jitters. At least I think it worked.
Anyhow, since then people have been coming up to me saying things such as, "What's this I hear about you having to work on your wedding day?!?" and, "I can't believe they made you come in to work on your wedding day!"
What adds a little to the confusion on the subject is that I used to work Saturday mornings in the Wellness Center. Now, the only time I come in on a Saturday is to teach my class (which is very rewarding).
But, getting back to the subject of avoiding the jitters... Once I got out of the YMCA and hit the road, I had to swing over to Ecorse and pick up Keith, my Best Man, at the truck stop on Ecorse Road. He had to drop-off his rig that morning as he had to deal with some rocket scientists in Ohio at his final point of destination along his run down south.
So, I meet him at the diner there at the truck stop. And I figure he's going to be ready to get going fairly shortly after I get there. No, he's just getting ready to place his breakfast order. Well, I went ahead and had something as well. I was anxious to go, so I had my plate cleaned off well before Keith did. And then he wants to sit there with his boss and shoot the $#1+ and smoke cigarettes for a while -- meanwhile I'm getting antsier... and antsier. Finally I had to blurt out, "Dude, I really, really don't want to be rude, but we really, really got to go."
So, we head over to where his rig is parked, he gets his tux and other needed items out of his truck. As best we can in my well-worn Dakota, I'm flying down I-94 to Southfield Road, I'm cruising the streets as fast as I can without needlessly risking a stop by a cop, and get our nappy asses to the house, where I now need to get groomed (no pun intended) and a shower (another unintended pun). As bald as I am, I just shave my head anymore and for some reason that day, things just seemed to take longer to accomplish than normal.
We got to Crystal Gardens at 3 -- mind you the wedding is at 3:30 p.m. and we had determined that all my groomsmen and I should be there by 2:30. When we get there, Amy (Marcy's Matron of Honor) is standing there in the lobby and says, "I was getting ready to send out a search party for you!"
We race into the area we scouted as a good changing place. My first groomsman, Larry, is helping me get changed and all set up while Keith's wife, Lana (Marcy's Second Bridesmaid), is helping him do the same. I am trying like hell not to work up a sweat and get all grubby as a result. But, we probably got me tuxed-up in near record time.
After that, then I had to help with getting my two absentee fellows (Larry and Keith) up to speed on things since they weren't able to be there the night of the rehearsal (Keith was on the road and Larry lives up by Clare): the order of procession, where we're all standing when we get to the altar, and so on.
Now, for all of you who have known me for some time and have marveled at my sense (or lack thereof) of punctuality, you need only look at my family... At this point in the day, my brother Brian (the second groomsman), has not yet arrived. In fact, since he, my oldest brother Michael, and my mom are all riding together, I'm now starting to wonder whether they will be there at least in time for the ceremony or perhaps sometime before dinner during the reception. Time is ticking away and in the design of entrances for the ceremony Michael is supposed to be escorting Mom to her seat, followed by Marcy's brother Jason with their mom, Brian, Larry, Keith, and then Tony and me, and the bridesmaids one by one before Marcy and her dad make their entrance.
Making the moment even more interesting is that Tony hadn't even arrived yet (although, if memory serves me correct, he did get there before my family). Of course, on our wedding day, there had to be construction on I-75. That caused a lot of people to miss the ceremony but at least be there for the reception. My family, though, was taking the Southfield Freeway, which was flowing quite smoothly when I was on it around noon. They pulled-up at 3:21 by my watch.
Between anxiously awaiting for their arrivals and doing pre-photos in the lobby area with the photographer, and saying "hello" to invitees, I was too busy to even think about being nervous.
But, all in all, I'm inclined to think the day went well. I couldn't be happier.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
I'd like an order of St. Patrick's Day, and please hold the stereotype...
(Originally published on March 18 in the Notes of my personal Facebook profile; but, over the last few days the urge to publicly publish this has taken hold...)
As I get older, I do find the blind association of St. Patrick's Day with excessive libation disquieting. Also troubling for me is the harsh criticism of Christians (Catholics in particular) for "allowing" such a development.
The problem with that observation is it ignores two key points:
First – the entire history of St. Patrick (or Pádhraig if you go with the Gaelic spelling) and how his holiday became a Holy Day of Obligation for observance in Ireland;
Second – the fact it was not Catholics who steadily evolved this holiday into an excuse for alcoholic debauchery but secularists who seem to take bizarre pleasure in ruining Judeo-Christian traditions.
The notion of drinking being associated with St. Patrick’s Day is based in part on the old (very old) tradition of the men in the towns across Ireland coming together for a round of ale at the end of a long day spent commemorating and honoring his bringing Christianity to the Emerald Isle. In olden days (and even in a number of instances back in Ireland today), the holiday was begun with a long mass dedicated to Patrick’s memory and legacy. Families came together in a manner much like how Thanksgiving and Christmas used to be observed many moons ago. The work involved in making the day what it was meant to be left most of the Irish people feeling a bit deserving of a spirit of some sort (usually a pint) at the end of the day.
The other component of alcohol consumption being tied to the holiday is the result of people gradually expanding upon the stereotype of the Irish nationality and its reputation for alcoholism.
But to revisit the subject of secularism wrecking time-honored traditions and holy days of obligation for recognizing certain saints, this is the same process that played-out with St. Valentine’s Day.
The St. Valentine for whom February 14 had been set aside for remembrance (there are several saints named Valentine) was a priest who was martyred in the 3rd century AD for marrying Christian couples – this was before the conversion of Rome, so aiding Christians was a crime punishable either by imprisonment or death. His order for execution was handed-down by Roman Emperor Claudius Gothicus after Valentine attempted to convert him during his imprisonment.
This is why the date is associated so inextricably with romance. Observance of February 14 began in England during the late 15th century.
And, of course, there is the obvious manner in which secularists turned Christmas into a near-orgy of commercialism. Enough said on that, basically.
As I get older, I do find the blind association of St. Patrick's Day with excessive libation disquieting. Also troubling for me is the harsh criticism of Christians (Catholics in particular) for "allowing" such a development.
The problem with that observation is it ignores two key points:
First – the entire history of St. Patrick (or Pádhraig if you go with the Gaelic spelling) and how his holiday became a Holy Day of Obligation for observance in Ireland;
Second – the fact it was not Catholics who steadily evolved this holiday into an excuse for alcoholic debauchery but secularists who seem to take bizarre pleasure in ruining Judeo-Christian traditions.
The notion of drinking being associated with St. Patrick’s Day is based in part on the old (very old) tradition of the men in the towns across Ireland coming together for a round of ale at the end of a long day spent commemorating and honoring his bringing Christianity to the Emerald Isle. In olden days (and even in a number of instances back in Ireland today), the holiday was begun with a long mass dedicated to Patrick’s memory and legacy. Families came together in a manner much like how Thanksgiving and Christmas used to be observed many moons ago. The work involved in making the day what it was meant to be left most of the Irish people feeling a bit deserving of a spirit of some sort (usually a pint) at the end of the day.
The other component of alcohol consumption being tied to the holiday is the result of people gradually expanding upon the stereotype of the Irish nationality and its reputation for alcoholism.
But to revisit the subject of secularism wrecking time-honored traditions and holy days of obligation for recognizing certain saints, this is the same process that played-out with St. Valentine’s Day.
The St. Valentine for whom February 14 had been set aside for remembrance (there are several saints named Valentine) was a priest who was martyred in the 3rd century AD for marrying Christian couples – this was before the conversion of Rome, so aiding Christians was a crime punishable either by imprisonment or death. His order for execution was handed-down by Roman Emperor Claudius Gothicus after Valentine attempted to convert him during his imprisonment.
This is why the date is associated so inextricably with romance. Observance of February 14 began in England during the late 15th century.
And, of course, there is the obvious manner in which secularists turned Christmas into a near-orgy of commercialism. Enough said on that, basically.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Japan: condolences and caution
First and foremost, it must be said my thoughts and prayers are with the people of Japan. I cannot even begin to imagine what their ordeal must be like – and was like for those whose lives have been lost so far.
Justifiably so, the news and images that have streamed out of the West Pacific have been a source of immense anxiety and sorrow for those who have kept-up with them. We need to give – and give generously.
Unfortunately, there must come a time to begin the distasteful portion of the Japanese story: discussing the economic impacts of the string of massive natural disasters which have taken their toll.
In short, the United States either will face great peril or tremendous opportunity. I do not see much potential for middle ground on this.
The peril stems from the fact Japan currently is the second-largest foreign holder of the United States’ national debt. The Japanese nation presently owns just under $890 billion in U.S. Treasury Bonds.
In the very, very near future, the Land of the Rising Sun’s government will be selling those treasuries in significant chunks as a means to afford the enormous rebuilding effort which must begin there. Another viable option for Japan simply doesn’t exist.
Don’t be surprised to read or watch in the coming weeks (or days) about the Japanese selling U.S. debt in chunks of tens-of-billion-of-dollars at a time. When you consider the U.S. federal government now is running monthly deficits in excess of $220 billion , our picture here at home has the potential to look almost as bleak as Japan’s (I reiterate: almost!).
A run like this on the U.S. dollar in the international currency market creates the potential for interest rates on our national debt to rise sharply, further erode the dollar’s value, and spike inflation rates – all placing even greater pressure on our economy.
The worst-case scenario is if Japan struggles to find buyers and its leadership comes knocking on the doors of the U.S. Treasury insisting upon emolument for anywhere from $100 billion to $200 billion. A cash-out demand of that size could very well put the United States on the brink of defaulting on its debt.
If that happens, the next big meltdown to hit the headlines will be in Washington.
Averting this disaster will require urgent but very careful negotiating on the part of the Obama Administration’s top economic minds. When you consider the present crew has demonstrated more economic incompetence than the Carter and Bush 43 administrations combined, all I can think of at this point is God help us… God help us all.
The silver lining?
The operative question – now – centers on what the potential “tremendous opportunity” could possibly be.
While the economic news out of Japan at times seems to be changing on an hourly basis, the latest reports I read as of this time of writing state widespread plant closings for that country’s top manufacturers. Toyota has shut down all 12 of its plants there, Honda, Nissan, and Subaru have suspended operations at multiple locations, and Sony has had to initiate closings as well.
The shutdowns have had to do as much with electrical power concerns due to the multiple nuclear reactor crises as with assessing structural damage and other earthquake-related concerns. Some – but not all – timelines for reopening plants remain unclear.
Any long-term closures by Japanese manufacturers inevitably will lead to immense voids in the respective market shares they control. Toyota alone, shutting-down all 12 domestic plants, represents a massive drop-off in the country’s overall exports. Add to the mix Sony – one of the top electronics and entertainment producers in the world – and the cross-section of industries impacted beyond automotive is tremendous.
While this is not how a civilized mind would anticipate an opportunity for a resurgence in America’s manufacturing sector, the fact remains that the unavoidable shortfall in Japan’s ability to meet its present market share for exports means someone must poise themselves to fill those voids.
Here on our shores, government at all levels can greatly aid our own manufacturers by vastly reducing the red tape required to build either new businesses or new locations for present companies.
Otherwise, I have no doubt China, Russia, and India will be more than happy to fill-in the worldwide gaps for us.
Justifiably so, the news and images that have streamed out of the West Pacific have been a source of immense anxiety and sorrow for those who have kept-up with them. We need to give – and give generously.
Unfortunately, there must come a time to begin the distasteful portion of the Japanese story: discussing the economic impacts of the string of massive natural disasters which have taken their toll.
In short, the United States either will face great peril or tremendous opportunity. I do not see much potential for middle ground on this.
The peril stems from the fact Japan currently is the second-largest foreign holder of the United States’ national debt. The Japanese nation presently owns just under $890 billion in U.S. Treasury Bonds.
In the very, very near future, the Land of the Rising Sun’s government will be selling those treasuries in significant chunks as a means to afford the enormous rebuilding effort which must begin there. Another viable option for Japan simply doesn’t exist.
Don’t be surprised to read or watch in the coming weeks (or days) about the Japanese selling U.S. debt in chunks of tens-of-billion-of-dollars at a time. When you consider the U.S. federal government now is running monthly deficits in excess of $220 billion , our picture here at home has the potential to look almost as bleak as Japan’s (I reiterate: almost!).
A run like this on the U.S. dollar in the international currency market creates the potential for interest rates on our national debt to rise sharply, further erode the dollar’s value, and spike inflation rates – all placing even greater pressure on our economy.
The worst-case scenario is if Japan struggles to find buyers and its leadership comes knocking on the doors of the U.S. Treasury insisting upon emolument for anywhere from $100 billion to $200 billion. A cash-out demand of that size could very well put the United States on the brink of defaulting on its debt.
If that happens, the next big meltdown to hit the headlines will be in Washington.
Averting this disaster will require urgent but very careful negotiating on the part of the Obama Administration’s top economic minds. When you consider the present crew has demonstrated more economic incompetence than the Carter and Bush 43 administrations combined, all I can think of at this point is God help us… God help us all.
The silver lining?
The operative question – now – centers on what the potential “tremendous opportunity” could possibly be.
While the economic news out of Japan at times seems to be changing on an hourly basis, the latest reports I read as of this time of writing state widespread plant closings for that country’s top manufacturers. Toyota has shut down all 12 of its plants there, Honda, Nissan, and Subaru have suspended operations at multiple locations, and Sony has had to initiate closings as well.
The shutdowns have had to do as much with electrical power concerns due to the multiple nuclear reactor crises as with assessing structural damage and other earthquake-related concerns. Some – but not all – timelines for reopening plants remain unclear.
Any long-term closures by Japanese manufacturers inevitably will lead to immense voids in the respective market shares they control. Toyota alone, shutting-down all 12 domestic plants, represents a massive drop-off in the country’s overall exports. Add to the mix Sony – one of the top electronics and entertainment producers in the world – and the cross-section of industries impacted beyond automotive is tremendous.
While this is not how a civilized mind would anticipate an opportunity for a resurgence in America’s manufacturing sector, the fact remains that the unavoidable shortfall in Japan’s ability to meet its present market share for exports means someone must poise themselves to fill those voids.
Here on our shores, government at all levels can greatly aid our own manufacturers by vastly reducing the red tape required to build either new businesses or new locations for present companies.
Otherwise, I have no doubt China, Russia, and India will be more than happy to fill-in the worldwide gaps for us.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Barack Obama: Divider in Chief
America is facing a number of political showdowns which stand to further reshape the nation's ideological landscape beyond what we’ve seen over the last two years.
Budget battles have been popping-up in almost domino fashion in state capitals over the last couple of weeks, threatening the financial predominance of the Democratic Party's – particularly President Barack Obama's – stalwart union base. And, this administration's inconsistency in its responses to the popular uprisings taking place in the Middle East is causing the White House to take a PR beating.
So, what is Obama's plan for putting out the fires?
"Hey, look over there!"
On Wednesday, February 23, he got almost every conservative in America to reach for the bait and work themselves into an uproar over the announcement by Attorney General Eric Holder that the Justice Department would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court if a case should arise.
I find myself reminiscing about a line made popular by the old Monte Python troupe: "And now, for something completely different…"
Instead of stepping up and demonstrating himself as a true leader, Obama opted to fall back on his life as a lawyer-turned-career-politician and give good old fashioned misdirection a try. Just when any semblance of success anywhere seemed out of his reach, our president took a chance on trying to create division among his opposition.
So far, it seems to be working out for him fairly well. After all, when a crisis erupts you never want it to go to waste; if there's no crisis to exploit, invent one.
There are two key camps within the tide of popular sentiment rising against progressive establishment dogma over the last two years: the mainly libertarian-leaning crowd that got the snowball which is the Tea Party rolling and the Republican establishment camp which has not only jumped all over that bandwagon but is trying to wrest the reins away for their own use. If there was one issue that could get tossed out there and create in-fighting, DOMA was it.
In fact, even libertarians are experiencing rifts over the topic. One libertarian blogger whom I recently began following has chosen to take Representative Ron Paul to task for his criticism of the Obama Administration over the DOMA announcement.
Now depending on with whom you talk, there are two key opposing arguments in this discussion: "DOMA is unconstitutional" vs. "government has no business redefining marriage."
At this point I am taking a stand and examining those points no further. I will leave it up to anyone who reads this to do their own research on them. I refuse to reach for that hunk of cheese positioned on the wooden rectangle or bite into that worm bouncing magical through the water.
Instead, I am going to re-emphasize the deliberately ignored third argument on this issue – one that I tackled already: why does government at any level need to concern itself with any situation regarding who marries whom in the first place?
Until that argument reaches more audiences across the nation, we leave ourselves in a position to be unnecessarily divided on a truly peripheral issue.
Let there be no doubt how clear Obama's mindset is: if he can’t get you to drink his Koolaid, then he will poison your tea!
Budget battles have been popping-up in almost domino fashion in state capitals over the last couple of weeks, threatening the financial predominance of the Democratic Party's – particularly President Barack Obama's – stalwart union base. And, this administration's inconsistency in its responses to the popular uprisings taking place in the Middle East is causing the White House to take a PR beating.
So, what is Obama's plan for putting out the fires?
"Hey, look over there!"
On Wednesday, February 23, he got almost every conservative in America to reach for the bait and work themselves into an uproar over the announcement by Attorney General Eric Holder that the Justice Department would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court if a case should arise.
I find myself reminiscing about a line made popular by the old Monte Python troupe: "And now, for something completely different…"
Instead of stepping up and demonstrating himself as a true leader, Obama opted to fall back on his life as a lawyer-turned-career-politician and give good old fashioned misdirection a try. Just when any semblance of success anywhere seemed out of his reach, our president took a chance on trying to create division among his opposition.
So far, it seems to be working out for him fairly well. After all, when a crisis erupts you never want it to go to waste; if there's no crisis to exploit, invent one.
There are two key camps within the tide of popular sentiment rising against progressive establishment dogma over the last two years: the mainly libertarian-leaning crowd that got the snowball which is the Tea Party rolling and the Republican establishment camp which has not only jumped all over that bandwagon but is trying to wrest the reins away for their own use. If there was one issue that could get tossed out there and create in-fighting, DOMA was it.
In fact, even libertarians are experiencing rifts over the topic. One libertarian blogger whom I recently began following has chosen to take Representative Ron Paul to task for his criticism of the Obama Administration over the DOMA announcement.
Now depending on with whom you talk, there are two key opposing arguments in this discussion: "DOMA is unconstitutional" vs. "government has no business redefining marriage."
At this point I am taking a stand and examining those points no further. I will leave it up to anyone who reads this to do their own research on them. I refuse to reach for that hunk of cheese positioned on the wooden rectangle or bite into that worm bouncing magical through the water.
Instead, I am going to re-emphasize the deliberately ignored third argument on this issue – one that I tackled already: why does government at any level need to concern itself with any situation regarding who marries whom in the first place?
Until that argument reaches more audiences across the nation, we leave ourselves in a position to be unnecessarily divided on a truly peripheral issue.
Let there be no doubt how clear Obama's mindset is: if he can’t get you to drink his Koolaid, then he will poison your tea!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
