That's Not Right #7 - Car Defoggers

I was forced to brave the cold a bit early this morning, since the overnight drop in temperature had managed to ice over the windows of my personal transportation. I duly started the vehicle, turned the heater in the defroster mode, and pushed the button for the rear window defroster, knowing that soon my windows would be clear. The rear window defroster, being of the electric variety, had the window clear of ice and fogging within a minute. The front defroster, running off of my car heater, caught up about 5 minutes later. 

My question here is why can't I have the wires in the windshield? At a time in the automotive industry that gives us electrically heated seats, GPS systems, USB ports to plug my I-pod into, and dual DVD players for the back seats of cars, why can't I have a better system to defrost my windshield? Why some high end vehicles already have electrically heated outside mirrors , in addition to the rear window unit, but no on seems to have come to the conclusion of using this proven technology in a windshield. 

I suppose it's possible that there is a safety issue involved here, but if there is one I am unaware of it, and can't imagine what it would be. Call me silly here people, but it strikes me that auto makers place the better system in the rear window to improve visibility than they do in the front, in spite of the fact that one would think that looking out of the front one would seem to be more important.

Proper Dental Care

I was struck this morning by how complicated technology has made our society in recent years, even in the simplest things like dental care. When still but a boy, I was instructed to brush my teeth diligently with an up and down motion (even though my dentist seemed to brush from every direction when I went in for a cleaning), and I did. As I grew older, improvements were made in the toothbrush, and I was handed “special brushes" with different kinds of bristles in order to reach different parts of my teeth and gums. I didn't really understand any of it, but they told me it was better for my teeth (which I had grown rather fond of by that time) and I chose to believe them. Besides, I had been shown the pictures of what happened if you didn't take care of your teeth and realized that I had to seek an alternative. The look was not a good one, and I didn't want to spend the rest of my life hanging around at Merle Haggard concerts.

Technology refused to stand still, and soon I was handed my first powered brush and told that this, much like the one that my dentist used, was the real answer to perfect dental care. (The fact that the bristles rotated, preventing the up and down motion that I was originally trained in, seem not to matter to the manufacturers, the stores selling these devices, or health care professionals who pushed them on me.) What soon followed were a non-stop string of powered units that improved on this perfection, some with other bristles that vibrated back and forth, some with dual rotating heads, some with special sonic wave producing units; and I have to admit that I bought into a good bit of the hype. Now the latest generation in the space race of modern dental technology is out, and I hear that cavities don't have a chance. This unit not only does all of the things we have come to know and love from these motorized marvels, but also has a wireless display to inform us as to whether we are brushing too hard or whether we are brushing our teeth long enough. That's enough for me.

Now I have had teeth for almost my entire life, and in my own amateurish way, have attempted to take proper care of them (usually with little assistance from the latest technology). With the exception of my wisdom teeth, all but one of them is still with me, and that one was misplaced when someone had the notion that it would be a good idea to rearrange my features by breaking a hockey stick across my face. (Yeah I know, this admission explains a lot about my current appearance. I’ve gotten used to it over the years however, so you probably need to as well.) I have to wonder therefore, whether I would be a sucker to purchase one of these new-fangled dental devices. Likewise, I can't help but wonder if I have been duped by all of the claims of all the other manufacturers of such devices in my past. I must further question whether such technology is the answer, or whether it’s only real purpose is to part me from a fair amount of my hard-earned money in a vain attempt to gain a marginal result (or only one for the manufacturer's bottom line). Finally, I have to begin to question the sanity of putting electrical devices in my mouth in the first place.

While I am at it, I would like to question whether I really need to be brushing my teeth with a specific type of toothbrush for a specific period of time (like the two minutes in the new timer) using a fluoridated toothpaste (don't get me started on this subject, whose double-talking BS probably requires a posting of its own). Are a a pre-rinse, and a post rinse really required in the process? Do I really need to floss twice a day (and more it appears, if I choose to eat solid foods)? When did this process become so complicated? Most importantly, when did the time that we are being told to spend in caring for things like our teeth reach a point where they take up all of the time that we have?

Now you can call me a an old fool, or simply a cynic (you certainly wouldn't be the first), but I suspect all of this effort does not have that great an impact on my oral health. I suspect that with any kind of reasonable attention to good dental care, that the condition of our teeth has a great deal more to do with our genetics than the type of toothbrush we use. I suspect that all toothbrushes and all toothpastes are pretty much created equal. I further suspect that the most impressive thing about all of this technology is the advertising campaigns used to attempt to convince us to purchase it in the first place. Don't get me wrong, this is not to dissuade you from buying a light saber in the battle against tooth decay if you think it will do any good, but if your looking for me on the front lines, look again. I will be somewhere in the back, pushing my old tried-and-true manual brush up and down, and smiling with most of my teeth and a good bit more of my money.

 

Erie St and The Blade

Well here we are folks, two weekend papers, two misguided efforts ... The Sunday Toledo Blade carried the following editorial: http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080106/OPINION02/801060307 

And rather, it appears, than cogently arguing the logic of keeping the Erie St Market as a city owned property, the Blade chooses to use paper to make this a personal issue for the mayor and to defend his position on the market. Since the Blade seems to be unable to properly define the argument, let me try to. 

Is this issue about the Mayor? - Yes, but only because he has made it so. The Mayor was the biggest supporter of buying the Market, signed the contract with Citifest to run it, and has defended its ability to make a profit relentlessly. It has not however. 

Is the Market currently making a profit? - Well I guess it's how you look at the numbers. The Blade claims that since the Market was taken over by the city on Nov 12th, that it has made $40,000 (the fact that this is the busiest part of the shopping year probably has nothing to do with this); and that the Market "projects" to make a profit of $300,000 by the end of 2008. It then lists separately that the city is paying $300,000 in utility bills each and every year. Now forgive my simple math, but $300k minus $300k equals $0. The last time that I looked, a profit of $0 dollars is not a profit. 

It should also be noted that the opportunity to break even here is only a projection, not a certainty. In addition, these numbers do not take into account the lost tax revenues, as I am sure that the city is not paying itself property taxes on this so-called lucrative downtown property. 

Is City Council stalling on this? - Of course they are! This was the first meeting of the new council, with three new members being sworn in, and the expectation that they would want to take on this political hot potato within the first hours of gathering would be unrealistic. If this was such a pressing issue for the city, why has it taken 7 weeks to bring it up? Why was it not handled by the previous council? Could it be that the Mayor found that bringing up the situation less favorable with the previous council? (I'm just asking) 

Should Council hold a public hearing? - Why not? It's not like the city seems to listen to the voice of the people when they think that they can get away with it (COSI), but listening to the voice of the voters is never a bad thing. With a little luck, the Council can hold the meeting at 4 PM on a weekday to assure proper attendance. 

Does Council need to fund the Market? - It undoubtedly does on a temporary basis. There is no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water and close the market rather than fund something to keep it open, but only until it can sell the Market. Council should predicate any funding on a demand that the city put the Market up for sale immediately. (Democrats seem to know how to place "pull out" provisions into funding measures, so this shouldn't be a problem.) This process should then be reviewed on a 90 - 180 day basis to assess the city's efforts to make this sale. 

Does Toledo need to sell the Erie Street Market? - Yes!!!! The proper marketing and operation of such a business requires an entrepreneurial spirit that no government entity can exhibit. The flexibility, creativity, and free thinking that have made such markets successful are anathema to governments, whose bureaucracy thrives on rigid adherence to the status quo. Kudos gentlemen, for at least trying to bring up the issues that matter to the city. (Maybe you read my post yesterday and are trying to change your ways. ... Nah) Shame on you for taking such a misguided and illogical position on the subject.

The News?

I'm sorry folks... I had another posting that I was working on this week with the intention of putting up today, and while it may not have been the best thing that I have ever written, it wasn't all bad. 

Unfortunately, before I could make that normal weekend effort, I picked up the Saturday Toledo Blade. Now the Blade is one of my customers, and I have even done some work with their sister paper, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette over the years. I have found the people of both organizations to be of sound mind and good character. I would also say that they are easy to do business with for the most part. I would even say that I have people that I consider friends at both sites. I am therefore concerned about their future, and my own in servicing this industry, when I see what I did in the paper today. http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/BUSINESS10/801050378  

One quarter of the front page (And this is a pretty highly prized position in a newspaper for those of you who don't know, even below the fold. Just ask any writer at a newspaper.) is taken up with how well OSU Merchandise is selling. Are you kidding me?  

Now don't get me wrong, I don't object to the story itself. I'm sure that there is some local interest in such things. I do object however to it's placement on the front page. This is a time in our city when projects like the Erie Street Market, Southwyck Mall, and the MLK bridge are draining money from city coffers that does not appear to be there ... yet no one at the Blade seems to be looking for where it's coming from and how and why it's going to these projects. 

This is a time when City Council seems to be playing a really petty version of musical chairs with the council presidency in what appears on the surface to be a potential violation of the city charter and maybe even state sunshine laws, and no one is asking why. This is a time in Toledo and NW Ohio when jobs are leaving the area faster than Miami Dolphins fans in the 4th quarter of another losing football effort, and no one is asking our local leaders how they can call themselves "business friendly" while it happens.  

Hell they announced yesterday that Toyota had at least passed Ford in making cars in the US (and it's highly likely that they have passed GM as well), let alone the efforts of Chrysler / Jeep in the local area, and no one is asking them what they are doing to stem the tide. Perhaps this is why newspapers are beginning to become irrelevant in our current society. They were always better than TV or radio in being able to take the time to ask the tough questions and explore the answers in depth, without worrying about commercial breaks every six minutes. 

Newspapers had the staffs and the incentive to hunt out the good stories, the political villains, and the local heroes and bring them to us in as much detail as we cared to read. Now they have sunk to being concerned about why OSU gear isn't selling this year as well as it did last year. (For those of you who are actually interested in this subject, and shame on you, I suspect that it is because people don't have as much disposable income this year as last. I know that I don't.) The reduction in stature would be laughable if it weren't so pitiful. I won't go into the ills of corporate ownership and a generation that doesn't read anything ... been there, done that, threw away the T-shirt. I will merely say that the path being taken here may become a self-fulfilling prophecy of doom.  

Newspapers don't get all of the blame here either. We have become a society more concerned about Brittany Spears kids than she is, more concerned about Lindsay Lohan's and Paris Hilton's drinking than they are, and more concerned about how many houses that Brad Pitt is going to build in New Orleans than why the locals seem unwilling or unable to do so. We have become a "society of celebrity" (and yes, you can quote me on that), where everyone needs increasingly more than their 15 minutes of fame because fame is all we seem to care about. I won't get off task by discussing this particularly nasty aspect of today's society, but I will suggest that we have traditionally expected the newspapers of the world to rise above such nonsense, not pander to it. There is plenty of Tabloid journalism to fill any need that we might have. They don't need your help.

So in the end, my message here is to newspapers in general, and the Block family and Blade in particular is this. We need you out there. You can do things for us that we can't do for ourselves. When you feel the need to write stories as this, do what needs to be done and bury them in subsequent pages or sections where they belong. Give us the "journalism" that is supposed to be your mission on your front pages, and not the "crap of the moment". You can be a force for good in our cities and in our lives. Please don't make yourself as mindless, meaningless, and useless as this story suggests. 

 

In the spirit of full disclosure (which seems to be so important these days) I must say that any attempt in this posting to save the industry and career of the writer is purely intentional.

 

That's Not Right #6 - The Voting Process

Sorry people, but this one is another of those "Thoughts While Driving" postings that seem to occur to me as I make my way down the highway of life. The fact that it strikes far too close to home should not confuse the reader with the fact that it is just a bit of nonsense. 

Have you ever noticed that we treat the sacred right and privilege to vote in this country a lot like we treat attendance to our bodily functions? Don't believe me? Well take a look at the list below and see if they don't apply to both:

• People tend to do perform this function only when absolutely necessary and often wait until the last minute before doing so
• This function is always done in a small enclosed space, whether it is a special room or merely a "stall" used in a public place
• This function is always done in private, with any observance or assistance treated at best as embarrassing and at worst as offensive
• Many people seem to make a mess of it, in spite of the number of years that they have been doing it
• No one seems to be very proud of completing the process with the exception of senior citizens, who seem to treat the exercise of this function as another milestone of continuing existence.
• The results of exercising this function usually result in something that stinks

Not so incredulous now, are we? Well for those who are still disbelievers, feel free to observe the next time that you are at polling place. For those who live in my current hometown of Toledo, don't bother. With the number of you that appear to show up at the polls in any given election, I will be dead long before you prove or disprove the theory that I have just set forward.

Happy New Year

Well ladies and gentlemen, today is the first day of the year 2008, and I would like to extend to you my best wishes for that new year. 

 I had thought that such an auspicious occasion merited some form of special posting as a consequence. Then I realized that I was probably not capable of such a posting and that unfortunately you were going to have to settle for what normally passes for wit and wisdom on these pages instead. 

Besides this is not a regular posting day for me and I am far too limited in both talent and ability to squander it, even for good reason. Let me simply use this occasion to share two things with you:  

First, my only New Year's Resolution - to be more consciously aware of the world around me. You see, I think that like most of us, I've spent most of my life living in, but barely aware of most of the things going on around me. There is so much in the way of folly, chicanery, and just plain meanness going on out there that I have let slip under my radar that I am often embarrassed by it. Those out there attempting to do evil to us all count on that inattention and ignorance to perpetrate their plans and schemes upon us. 

My hope is that by making just this small change in focus, that I might help to foil them at some of their ends and affect some positive action in the world around me. Second, my wish for you all - that you be allowed to live in more hope, more prosperity, and more freedom than you did in 2007. You have a right and an expectation to such a life, so long as it is tempered by a respect for the rights of your fellows to do so as well. My hope is that when and if presented with the opportunity, that you show an ability and a strength to choose to do so.

The Cost of Education

I have recently been looking at the education system in America, and the picture is not a pretty one. I don't want to seem particularly negative here, but this is where I see the education system of the US today:

• Government regulations at the state and federal level stifle discipline, creativity, competition, and prevent any real effort at improvement.
• Taxation that creates funding levels that should provide plenty of financial support (my local school district in Toledo spends over $10,000.00 per pupil, per year); but never seem to provide enough (even with supplemental income provided through the state-organized gambling more commonly known as The Lottery).
• Local governments that seem to be in bed with the Teacher's union. With the two of them feeding off of each other in a rather disgusting bit of symbiosis, resisting any change in the failed status quo of education.
• Teacher's unions doing what unions do best, getting a better deal for their members, even if it at the expense of "the children".
• Teachers' contracts with more twists and turns than the Monaco race track and rivaling the tax code for sheer bulk and complexity.
• School boards that are handcuffed by the federal regulations on one side and the contracts that they have signed in the past on the other; who have become at best apathetic, and at worst corrupt.
• Parents who won't or can't take enough time to find out what's actually happening in the schools that there children attend, but complain about their children's education and what they have to pay for it.
• Kids who can't excel in the current system, either because we don't measure success or are unwilling to accept the achievement of the few as being unfair to the rest.
• Kids who fail in the system and are knowingly passed along anyway as a self-esteem issue, allowing a small failure to snowball into a lifetime of ignorance and illiteracy.
• The small part of the system that is working (privately funded education, either through religious based schools, home schooling, or charter schools) being written off or demonized in spite of their successes.

The sheer momentum that has been allowed to build up over the years is like a super tanker with a crazy, drunken captain (can we all say Exxon Valdez?). It can't slow down, stop, or even change direction without a huge amount of effort; and that effort will never be made because the one at the controls has lost his mind and is out of control himself.

Now I grew up in the dark ages, when all children were forced to walk to school in the snow year round, up hill, both ways. Actually I am a product of a mostly Catholic education. Eight years of Catholic grade school, three years of Catholic High School, and year of Catholic College (DePaul, for those interested). The interesting part of this personal process is that I spent my freshman year (9th grade) in a public high school. The lack of discipline, disinterest of the teachers, 'dumbing' down of the curriculum, and time wasted following federal mandates almost ended my ability to be educated right there and then. It took me three years of fairly intense effort, while being challenged at an unprecedented level, to bring my GPA back up to a respectable level. Even then, the damage done caused me to place 17th in my graduating class. (Of course this is when we competed for such things instead of simply patting every student on the fanny.)

It was only in the disciplined and rigorous environment of parochial schools that I found the framework necessary to excel at learning. It was only in an environment that separated students by their ability to learn that I was able to be exposed to a curriculum not designed for the lowest common denominator. It was only when I was able to be challenged by knowledge outside of the basics and allowed to stretch myself to the limits of my abilities that I was able to discover what they were and how much fun learning could be. Now my experience may not be typical, but I suspect that it could be. Likewise, I don't have all of the answers for the ills of the public education system; but it is obvious that as analogies go, this patient is hanging on by life support. Only drastic change will hold any hope of bringing it back from the deaths-edge coma that it is in.

So here are my solutions:

• Abolish the NEA and every other federal bureaucracy that has to do with education. This is far too important to allow the government to experiment in more failed social dynamics. The only way to understand and serve the needs of a community is to put the process back in the hands of the community that the process serves.
• We need to get the government bureaucracy, the constant regulation, and union restrictions out of education entirely. Too much of the money that could be spent on education is spent on administration instead. Eliminate the paperwork that shows compliance with government rules and regulations and the people required to fill it out and put the money spent back into true education, and you cannot help but make the process more efficient.
• Take taxation of of school funding. It is unfair and tantamount to theft to charge people for services that they do not need or receive, even in the common good.
• Give people back this tax money and let them purchase the education for their children that they want. Let public and private education compete on a level playing field and "the children" cannot help but be the winner.
• We need to put parental choice back into the education process, choosing the amount and the type schools that they want for their children. Who knows better than they what the talents and abilities of those children are, and by what right do we choose to usurp it.
• We need to bring back classroom discipline and competition. No one can learn to succeed without facing and overcoming challenges. They provide true self-esteem and life lessons that will serve them well in their future.
• We need to separate children in school based on their ability to learn. As painful as it might be to their egos, we cannot hold all students back in the name of equality and fairness. Those who can learn more should be given the opportunity to do so. Such an opportunity is their right in a free society and that society will benefit from it.
• We need to build schools to be run like businesses, which in fact they are. They are businesses that provide a valuable service, but need to be held accountable for the service that they provide like any other.
• We need to hire and pay teachers well, but like the employees of any other business, hold them accountable for the job they do. Pay scales should be based on ability and performance, not the number of their degrees or their tenure in service. Let teachers compete for better pay like the rest of the world and they and their students will benefit.

The true cost of education is not that of the value of the money we spend on it, but the futures that we jeopardize by doing it improperly. We need to step up and take control of the ship before it's too late. In case you hadn't noticed, there are icebergs ahead.

 

Smoking Protection

I was reading an editorial in the December 20th Toledo Blade about the debate for anti-smoking legislation under consideration in Michigan http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/OPINION02/712200304/-1/OPINIONand a couple of things struck me about the arguments presented in the piece. Now my opinions on smoking bans are well know from previous postings. and I won't bother to repeat information that I have already shared (though I will encourage you to go back through the archives of this blog to take a look at them). And I have to say that I am not particularly worried about the public reaction to my nasty habit. I tend to enjoy my version of this behavior like anything which society is attempting to make us feel guilty, aloone (no comments about what other nasty little habits that I might be doing alone, please). No, I have new angle on this discussion, as it pertains to this specific editorial, and it takes the form of two questions:

1. If the smoking bans are the good thing that this editorial describes, and "patrons are relieved to visit local businesses without being forced to inhale a choking haze", why is the Restaurant and Bar Association fighting it so hard? I don't own a business, nor do I belong in any meaningful way to a business organization; but it strikes me that such organizations would not work against the best interests of their members. In this particular case, according to the editorial "lobbyists from the Michigan Restaurant Association and Michigan Licensed Beverage Association vowed to intensify their efforts against the ban in the Senate and win". Such incongruous behavior in a professional business organization simply makes no sense to me if the ban is good for these businesses. In fact, I would expect that what the anti-smoking crowd has told is true, that the flood of cutomers into bars and restaurants since the ban would tell such association to stand firm in getting such bans passed nationwide. So I am forced to believe that The Blade may not have all of their facts straight regarding the benefit to business that this ban presents and the position that this lobbying group holds.
2. This editorial also talks about the fact that "separate smoking sections and ventilation systems simply do not fully protect nonsmokers", and that the law is necessary then in order to offer this protection to non-smokers. My question here is, is such protection actually required, and is the government obligated to provide it? Well I believe that the government is required under the Constitution to protect its citizens from physical harm, but I am not sure that second hand smoke from smoking falls under this category. If it does, that the government is required to protect us from city bus exhausts, burning leaves, fireplaces, and power plants; all of which produce smoke as well. And if smoking is the danger that is being portrayed in the study sited in the editorial, why is it legal to do so in the first place? No, the type of protection that we are talking about here is more akin to a "protection racket", something our government is becoming far too familiar with these days. This type of protection involves forced (substitute strong-armed) behavior modification, and usually extortion (in the form of taxes and egregious legislation), in order to achieve a desired goal for a vocal minority.

So my conclusions, based on the questions that I have put forward, is that:

• The Blade must in fact be wrong on this particular issue as it relates t the interests of both the owners of bars and restaurants, and their patrons. If they are not, the these owners would have been forced into banning smoking long ago, or the states (like Ohio) that had smoking bans would be seeing an unparallelled increase in business since the ban in this state passed instead of the decrease in such business and the closing of some businesses. The Blade presents no argument to this effect, so it must no be the case.
• Government protection against smoke of any kind is not guaranteed in the Constitution, and therefore does not exist. Government does not have the right, and should not intrude in the operation of businesses that allow behaviors like drinking and smoking that are perfectly legal. If they do, they exceed their authority and violate the very principles which created them.
• Debates on any subject must be based on logic and facts in order to be of value in the greater scheme of things. The Blade seems to have neither on this side in this particular case and seeks to present arguments based on a unsupportable emotional position. We think that smoking is bad for you and so we want it stopped. Now I concede that this was an Editorial and not a news story, but even opinion must be based on more than feelings if we are to take it seriously. I also find it fascinating that a business that is protected by the Bill of Rights in the Constitution should choose to support government denying rights to citizens in another area. Should they not be concerned that if these rights do not exists for business owners of bars and restaurants, that newspapers might be next on the list for encroachment.
  Thanks for the attempt to sway my opinion by appealing to my compassion for my fellow man, but in this case you have failed. Perhaps you will think it is because I am a smoker myself, and therefore unwilling to accept the argument presented; but that again would simply be your opinion.

Checking My Baggage

I am traveling for the Holidays this year, though not by airplane. I find these days that almost no matter how long the drive, I prefer the mindless tedium of of being behind the wheel to placing my life and my schedule into the hands of the airline industry, probably because my experiences which have never been entirely satisfying. (The fact that I allow myself the guilty pleasure of smoking cigars as I drive alone on the highway has nothing to do with anything except as an illustration my own self-indulgence and selfishness.) 

I will be checking my baggage before leaving home however, in spite of my method of transportation. I am not talking about my luggage, which will be attaining the temperature of a fine glass of whiskey over ice, while secured in the trunk of my car; but of the emotional baggage, of which I seem to be carrying around far too much of far too often these days. 2007 has been a rather challenging year both personally and professionally for your humble writer, as I am sure that it has been for many of you. These challenges may have been something that I have accepted either grudgingly, gratefully, or not at all; but no choice makes them any easier to deal with. Some of these challenges have left me with what I would choose to call "a bit of negative afterglow", but that's just life. 

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not really complaining about the situation. They say that only those able to deal with such challenges are presented with them. If that's the case however, then someone has greatly overestimated opinion of my abilities. Like most of us however, I was never asked if these situations were something that I was OK with. I was merely presented with these packages and left to deal with them as best I could.

And then there is the timing of some of these little blessings, and I don't mean of the good kind. We are never presented with these "opportunities" when we are ready, and often find ourselves in the middle of them when we are least prepared. Likewise, the quantity sometimes seems a bit more than most of us would seek for ourselves. A part of Murphy's Law seems to come into play providing us with overwhelming opportunity to deal with stuff that no one should have to deal with, and to do it immediately. 

At times like these, it often seems that in our headlong pursuit to deal with the issues of life as best we can and move on in a timely fashion, we sometimes leave a little something behind that we were simply not prepared to deal with at the time. Operating with such a philosophy serves us well enough in the moment; but one day as we look around us, we discover a few things lying around in the those dirty little corners of the attics or our mind that we can't keep from tripping over. Anger, resentment, bitterness, and sorrow are suddenly discovered amongst our treasured memories, where nothing was previously suspected. 

This unexpected clutter, must unfortunately now be dealt with, and while we weren't paying attention, it has managed to become a good deal more unmanageable through the passage of time. I don't know about you, but brushing off the dust and taking a hard look at these things may be the most difficult thing that I have to confront in life. Dealing with emotions (especially strong ones) has never been my strong suit, and usually if I have chosen to ignore something, there was a damned good reason for doing so. The fear and trepidation that I feel as I cast my glance at this unwanted clutter makes me hesitate, even as I move ruthlessly and relentlessly forward to do what can be done. The necessity of dealing with this may now be readily apparent, but I have never let necessity get in the way of procrastination when I can get away with it. With the end of the year fast approaching, I feel that my unwillingness to leave things undone or half done will overcome my desire to let sleeping dogs lie. This upcoming holiday travel simply provides me with the final excuse that I need to tackle the project.

So I am sorting through the mess that I have left myself and am throwing away as much of the intellectual and emotional clutter as I can manage. Looking at a good part of it, I realize that most of it was nothing but intellectual laziness and "emotion of the moment", carelessly set aside and rather easily discarded. There are one or two items that may take just a bit more time, and I recognize that I am not quite ready or able to make the effort required to put them in their proper perspective. But time and help heal even the deepest of wounds, and their time will come.

By the time that I leave, I will have packed away as much of the nonsense of my life as is humanly possible. All of this, carefully packed in bags and boxes, I expect to check at the door before I depart on my journey west. It is certainly baggage that I no longer need to carry with me everyday and my hope is that the burden that I have placed on myself (and no doubt on others because of it), will be much lighter as a consequence. If there is any way that you can do the same, I certainly recommend the process to you. The time that we will spend with family and friends at this time of year begs us to make the effort, for their sake as well as our own. So leave whatever baggage behind that you can, and have a safe and Happy Holiday! 

EPA Ruling - Unconstitutional

I was flipping through the news this morning when I spotted this article in the New York Times (something that you normally wouldn't get me to read on a bet) http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/washington/20epa.html?em&ex=1198299600&en=3374f6deadedfb89&ei=5087%0A .  What struck me about the article was that an agency, not even a branch of the Federal government, has ruled on the rights of California and 16 other states to decide on the emission levels of automobiles. 

Now I'm not sure that I agree with the levels that all of these states are trying to force on the automobile industry, but that's not the point here. The point (having recently been schooled on the Constitution by a radio station program director who will remain unnamed) is that this decision of the EPA is Unconstitutional. Quoting the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."  

Call me crazy, but unless I missed a section or amendment, I don't recall air quality standards or emission levels being specifically mentioned in the Constitution, nor do I recall any section or Amendment giving the EPA the power to rule on the Constitution, or to modify it at their whim.  

This is one of the biggest problems that we are facing in America these days. We have created a bureaucratic monstrosity in Washington, and this monster answers to no one but itself. It creates rules, interprets them, and acts as judge, jury, and executioner for anyone it considers violators. These bureaucratic fiefdoms are becoming increasingly intrusive and oppressive in the lives of citizens. They seek to insinuate themselves into every aspect of our lives in order to protect us from big business, the world around us, and ourselves. 

What they do not protect us from is the "big government" which has become the most dangerous challenge to personal liberty in this country since the British left. It is time that we woke up and recognized that these monsters, fed and financed by our taxes, have no power to regulate the behavior of states under the Constitution. We may not agree that the decisions that the states may make on their own behalf, but unless specifically prohibited in the Constitution from doing so (which they are not), they have the right to decide these issues for themselves.