Sunday, February 19, 2006

Pleasant Surprise

I regretfully haven't posted anything since September, and suddenly I find myself with time to review this blog again, and much to my surprise, I find positive responses to it.
Thanks to those who responded.

I could not figure out how to respond personally to the posters, thanking them for the feedback. Does anyone have the process down? If you'd share with me, I'd greatly appreciate it.

I will strive to post at least once each weekend, and will try to include any helpful information I can come up with - tricks, solutions, whatever I run into that makes my life easier.

Penny Stock Investment

Penny Stock Investment

Monday, September 26, 2005

Idea to Help Katrina Victims

I know that a great many of my fellow Mainers want to help the victims of the devastation in the Gulf Coast area. Some may not have any resources to share, especially during a time when the rising gas prices are having the effect they're having on us now. I speak from first hand experience on this issue.

So I have an idea on how we can help, without bureaucracy, without grandstanding, without a need to take any credit or publicity from the effort.

When you shop, take all your recyclable containers which you may now drop at transfer stations, and just bring them with you to the grocery stores in Maine (and other container deposit states); collect the resulting moneys, then just send an equivalent check to redcross.org or salvationarmy.org.

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Filibuster Bickering Getting To Be Too Much for Me

It seems to me lately that every contest the Dems and Republicans get into is solely caused by the Dems' desire to block progress and due process, as if they're kids who didn't get their own way - "oh, I can't play with the ball, well there you go", as they stab an ice pick into it.

The filibuster contest now underway is a perfect example. A duly elected administration and legislature simply are trying to do their jobs by nominating, investigation the performance history of, and appointing judges. Instead of doing the right thing which is to do what has been done for over two hundred years now - voting on the nominations, certain Dems are blocking the process because it doesn't serve THEIR political interests. The hurdles they're throwing in the way of government business certainly are not protecting OUR interests - the people's interests, regardless of which side a citizen is on in this issue. This is because their insistence on undermining the process simply moves us toward a kind of government we founded our country on fighting against - the kind where the leaders make all the decisions based on their interests instead of acting within the established political framework. Yes it's the established political framework not to filibuster a nomination for a federal judge, because it has never been used for that purpose before. The filibuster was designed to be used when working on a legislative issue (as in, voting on a bill) not for other actions that come with the job such as appointments of officials.

Whether you agree with me on this subject or not, what is at stake here is yet another little piece of our freedom. With freedom comes responsibility - be a responsible citizen and spend five minutes to "cast your vote" with a note to your leaders in federal government, your senators and representatives. Five minutes to let them know how you want them to represent you - by 1) throwing hurdles into the process by insisting on filibustering duly nominated judicial candidates or by 2) letting the established process decide the outcome as is was designed to do.

What positive action has the Democratic party taken lately to effect any change? Why are they (seemingly) making it their business to spread poison, negativity, inaction? Instead of shooting down every Republican idea that comes along, every nomination, every administration's action, how about this - how about coming up with positive, constructive alternatives and having the guts to simply vote on the issues and actions?

Here's a helpful web address which lists all the state senators (the ones we need to do the voting on the pending judicial nominations) - http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=List+of+United+States+Senators&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1. Now what excuse do you have for not dropping them a note and letting your voice be heard?

Sunday, March 27, 2005

Militias - Don't Think So

"There is something so far-fetched and so extravagant in the idea
of danger to moderates from the militia that one is at a loss whether
to treat it with gravity or with raillery; whether to consider
it as a mere trial of skill, like the paradoxes of rhetoricians;
as a disingenuous artifice to instill prejudices at any price;
or as the serious." --Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 29


Thoughts about this from Stewie Mikkelson:

There's more room than should be in the way people refer to
"militias." In the common language today, militia refers not to the
sanctioned fighting forces of individual states, but to fringe groups
that clothe themselves in the garments of freedom and citizen justice while
using that righteous position to espouse radical, fundamentalist or extremist
positions. The disparity between the current, popular definition of
militia is analogous to the disparity in the current, popular usage of the word,
"jihad." Both words have become bastardizations of their former
selves - terms usurped by individuals and groups that have no right to use them.
The Hamilitonian definition of militia equals today's definition of
the National Guard. It's a fighting force that is state-regulated,
locally armed and trained, and used in times of emergency. It's not a blank
check for gun-owners to gather automatic weapons and massive, civilian weapons
caches to assist their resistance against over-reaching government.
It's certainly not a fundamental protection for small, unregulated groups to
gather arms and wait for an event they deem to be an emergency. My
favorite perversion of modern militias is that of the definition of the second
amendment. They always remember the "right to keep and bear arms" part,
but they never quite seem to notice the second and third words: "well
regulated."

By their own definition, today's self-defined militias fall into the
last of Hamilton's three categories, "the serious." These outland
extremists do nothing to serve the liberty of the nation, or even the
liberty of a state against the federal government. Their
ultra-conservatism proves as dangerous to the pursuit of social advancement and true
liberty as any extremist group. These groups - as any extremists groups are
(liberal or conservative)- are not only less tolerant of true freedom than any
one group has the right to be, but they're probably better armed, too.

A thought from a veteran:

Yes, I do have a thought about this. The groups who call themselves
militias today, are typical examples of folks with an agenda, usually an
antisocial one, who take a word originally perceived as a good thing and
use it to try (unsuccessfully) to make themselves look like a good
thing. Other examples: People's DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC of China, Union of
Soviet SOCIALIST REPUBLIC, DDR (Deutche DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC). Today's
militias are a mockery of what a militia used to be - a group of
citizens loosely formed to protect each other, their rights not to be
violated, their property taken away, etc. Instead, they aspire to do
just those things to others. They are populated by people who already
know deep down that they are not widely accepted in society, so they
gravitate toward others with the same affliction - the lack of the
common sense and intelligence to practice moderation or to have an open
mind. Therefore, today I am renouncing my membership in Sam's Club and
the American Automobile Association.

Tuesday, March 22, 2005

No More Terror for Schiavo

Thank God the right thing is finally being done for Terry Schiavo - and her former husband. She will pass over peacefully, and the government will not have (in effect) turned her into any more of a political prisoner than they already have. They should really have stayed out of it in the first place, in other words, done the right thing. Maybe her consciousness will return in the next world and she'll have an awareness that both Mr. Schiavo and her parents were fighting over what to do because on both sides they loved her.

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

No Financial Information Compromised?

In a news article following the recent compromise of ChoicePoint systems, MSNBC quotes an excerpt from a statement(re-quoted here) from LexisNexis about their recent computer hack incident:

The database that was compromised, called Accurint, sells reports for $4.50 each that include an individual’s Social Security number, past addresses, date of birth and voter registration information, including party affiliation.

"No credit history, medical records or financial information were accessed in the breach", LexisNexis parent company Reed Elsevier Group PLC said in a statement.

Well, I've got news for you, Reed Elsevier Group PLC: If the individuals' Social Security numbers were compromised, it's only a matter of time before some of their credit, medical or financial information can be breached as well. GMAB, as John Stossel of 20/20 would say.

GIVE ME A BREAK!

Monday, February 21, 2005

Employment Search Story

A guy walks into the local welfare office, marches straight up to the counter and says, "Hi, you know, I just HATE drawing welfare. I'd really rather have a job."


The social worker behind the counter says, "Your timing is excellent. We just got a job opening from a very wealthy old man who wants a chauffeur/bodyguard for his nymphomaniac daughter. You'll have to drive around in his Mercedes, but he'll supply all of your clothes.


Because of the long hours, meals will be provided. You'll be expected to escort her on her overseas holiday trips. You'll have a two-bedroom apartment above the garage. The starting salary is $200,000 a year."


The guy says, "You're bullshitting me!"


The social worker says, "Yeah, well, you started it."