The Heat burn the Thunder

I'm no big fan of the Miami Heat, but their utter destruction of the Oklahoma City Thunder in game five showed that they have finally learned how to play as a team. On the other hand, OKC forgot how to do so. Just watching Kevin Durant bring the ball down the floor and twice in just a couple of minutes attempt to dribble behind his back when surrounded by Heat players, only to have the ball stolen both times, tells you all you need to know about this game. All three of the triumverate of  Durant, Westbrook, and Hardin made critical rookie mistakes, just when it looked like they might get back in the game. The Thunder have a lot to learn before they can win a championship. I expect the Heat to dominate for the next two or three years because they have finally learned how to play together, and LeBron has finally learned how to lead a team. I wanted the Thunder to win, but after I saw how they responded to adversity, I think they are a mile and a half away from doing so.

This could be the end

I never want to say "never again". It's so final. But I've done a lot of thinking about my running lately, and I'm thinking it's time to hang up the spikes, so to speak. Here's why. For most of my life, my running has been because of my love of competition--it has been a means to an end. The end was always getting myself to the point where I could be competitive as a runner. I enjoyed the training because I enjoyed the thought of finally winning my age group.
I think I had an epiphany about this a few weeks ago while on a hike up Mount Raymond. On the way back, as I staggered down the trail, pretty tired, I saw this gazelle--a human gazelle--running up the trail. Of course the guy was maybe twenty years younger than me, but I really couldn't have done that twenty years ago either. I'm just not a distance runner.
I've always been more like a decathlete than a long distance runner, although in my late teens to early twenties, when I weighed in the mid-150s, I once did a 5k in under 20 minutes. Still, that was the pinnacle for me. At nearly 53 now, I could no more approach that than I could recite Shakespeare's Othello from cover to cover. Nor do I really think I'd like to do the training to get me there.
You see, now I just love working out to be fit. I can take a day off if I want to without feeling like it's hurting my race prospects. I can work out just for the joy of getting in shape. I can look more like a decathlete without worrying that I'm 193 pounds and there's no way I can beat the gazelles at the 5k--even in my age group--at that weight. In short, I can be me.
So, this year, I'll run my race on the 4th of July. But next year, maybe I'll do something different. It'll be a new feeling, but one I can definitely embrace. Then maybe, if I ever work out to the point where I get my body fat down below 10 percent, maybe then, I'll rethink things and wonder what I can do. Like I said, I never want to say "never". I hope this doesn't make anyone sad. I'm still the same me who wants to keep in shape to do the things I love in the outdoors. It's just that I no longer believe I can make the U.S. Olympic team. I guess my dreams have changed.

Romney is using the "rope-a-dope"

In 1974, boxing legend, Muhammed Ali defeated the then champion George Foreman using a technique that came to be known as the “rope-a-dope”. The basis of this strategy was for Ali to hang out along the ropes, covering up and letting Foreman wear himself out by raining blows against Ali’s arms which were shielding is vitals and head. Eventually because of this strategy, Foreman exhausted himself in his futile attempt to beat Ali into submission. It seems now that Mitt Romney might also be employing kind of a rope-a-dope technique. The reason I say that is that Romney seems to be laying low while the President is running all around the country doing fundraisers (at last count he’d already done 150 of them). As the President does this, it allows him to make many rhetorical mistakes along the way, highly visible to the public who will be making up their minds soon on whom to vote for in the November elections. Meanwhile, Romney is laying low, seemingly awaiting the right moment to spring forth with his own attack, giving life to the old adage “give someone enough rope and he’ll hang himself”. Obama seems to be doing a fine job of it.

What to do with my photos?

I had an epiphany a while back. In this age of digital photography, it has become so easy to get great photos that nearly everyone is doing it. Some are nicer than others, but really it's much easier for people to get great pics with the new technologies--much easier than the film cameras of years ago. I hated to see that time go, but now, I'm fully into the digital explosion. It costs so much less to be able to save many photos on a card instead of buying roll after roll of film. I guess that's what really has sold me. The question now becomes, what to do with my pictures. Not very many people are able to sell them, simply because there are just too many photographers out there. It's rare indeed to be able to make a sale, at least, to make any kind of living at it, when those needing photos can just go to wikicommons or some other site where people have put up their pics for free, and then download a photo to their liking. So, I'm thinking my photos are just being useless taking up space on my computer. I may as well put them out there for public use, as long as I retain the rights to reuse them at my pleasure.
After all, why worry about them being stolen? That just keeps me from posting many of them and sharing them with people who'd really like to see them. If I keep them to myself, only I get to see them, and that's a travesty for all involved. Not that my pics are that great. Occasionally I take a really nice shot, and I'm getting slowly better at it. One of these days I may be even somewhat adequate at picture taking, and when I do, I'll sell them to National Geographic or any number of magazines that needs great shots. Until that time though, I hope you like it when you see one of my pictures.

Time management for the clueless (me)

I need to write something…work on something…and yet I find myself hopelessly trying to keep up with all the clever, wonderful, interesting, (insert your favorite descriptive word here­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­) things that are posted on Facebook. I keep trying to keep up with the news, and find interesting articles to post myself.  I haven’t even checked my email for a couple of days at least. Sometimes I wish the internet had never been invented. I find myself thinking that at times, and yet It has been a big help too. I guess the big question is, how to organize my limited time to accomplish what’s most important. I need to ask myself the question, is what I’m doing with my time as important as what I could be doing with my time.

Self analysis is the key here. I have an agenda, and that agenda is to try and influence people to at least consider the alternatives in society. Is that more important than my other driving force to accomplish the writing and publication of a work of fiction that will stand the test of time? I always feel so guilty when I don’t work on my novels in progress, or write another short story, but is that what I’m supposed to be doing in life? Or is it to do something even larger, to be an influence in protecting democracy and freedom? That’s the conundrum I find myself in all the time.

And then there are the other things that pull me away from the important, some of them really important too. I’m love the outdoors, I’m a camper, hiker, hunter and fisherman—but that’s only the tip of the iceberg with me. Too many interests, too little time.

So, I’m considering what to do with the 45 minutes or so I have in the morning before I head off to the gym. The gym is a must. It keeps me in shape to do the things I love doing—all of them, even writing. So stopping my exercise program is not an option. I have those 45 minutes and I must decide what is most important to do with that time. It’s not much, but for now, it’s all I have. Perhaps I need to drop reposting the clever signage that accumulates on my Facebook page. I will miss it, but maybe I need to only view that stuff on my lunch break at work and call it good. If I don’t, there’s one thing that’s for sure—I will never accomplish all that I was meant to accomplish.

Terminator Beans

I just wanted to share my award winning baked bean recipe with you. It's called "Terminator Beans" because after you eat some "you'll be back" for more! Here's the recipe:

 Terminator Beans

1/2 lb. ground sausage                    1 t. horseradish
10 slices of bacon/chopped            1/2 t. salt
1/2 lb. ground beef                         1/2 t. pepper
1/2 cup chopped onion                  1/2 t. garlic powder
1/3 cup sugar                                 1 C. crushed pineapple with juice
1/3 cup br. sugar                            1 can each of:
2 T. molasses                                 kidney beans (drained)
1/4 C. barbeque sauce                   Pork and beans
1/4 C. Ketchup                             black-eyed peas
6 drops of tobasco                        2 T. mustard

Brown sausage, ground beef, bacon and onions. Drain excess fat. Add rest of ingredients and mix well. Bake uncovered in Dutch oven at 350 for 1 hour. Makes 8-10 servings. If doubled use 2 cans of pork and beans, 1 can each of pinto, great northern, black-eyed peas, and kidney beans.

Here comes the lynch mob

While details continue to emerge in the killing of Trayvon Martin incident, one thing is clear: the fans of the lynch mob mentality are being fanned. Although the details are murky, there is at least one witness who in his original testimony suggested that there was a guy in red laying on his back on the grass with another person on top of him. Zimmerman was wearing red. Apparently, the police also discovered grass stains on the back of his shirt. Yet we are being led down a path that suggests Zimmerman stalked Martin and killed him in cold blood. The media seems to be jumping to conclusions and feeding the martyr mentality. The New Black Panthers and others have suggested violence to make sure "justice" is served. It reminds me, frankly, of the black man who was wrongly charged in the great film To Kill a Mockingbird. In this case, none of us really knows what happened. Yet a huge number of people have jumped to conclusions based upon sketchy evidence. If Zimmerman is guilty of murder, he should be charged, but he shouldn't be convicted in the court of public opinion--a court which is fed by sensationalist media who often get things wrong. Let's let the investigation continue, and not feed the monster of lynch mob mentality.

For another look at things, go here: clickety-click

Why conservatives should vote for whomever the Republican candidate is

Everyone has heard it--"I'm not voting for anyone except Ron Paul." "He's the only one who supports the Constitution". It might be helpful for some of you to take a look at this article: Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar

Yeah, I've heard a lot of folks saying that. Another common comment is, "Romney is not any different than Obama." "I'm not voting for Romney if he's the candidate--no way."

Those are the two basic comments I hear or read all the time. Now, let me tell you just a couple of ways in which the latter (the part about Romney) is wrong.

If we are so unlucky, or so stupid, as to re-elect Obama, he will have the opportunity to replace perhaps two Supreme Court Justices, and will do so with people whose values do not reflect strict Constitutionality. These will be judges who believe in legislating from the bench.

Now, people should vote their conscience, and my conscience tells me that having two such members of the Supreme Court will swing the balance of power much more than electing someone like Mitt Romney. Remember, in this day and age, the Court has had much more influence than the President on the way things happen in America for generations. So, I don't see how anyone of conscience can do anything other than try to defeat Obama--no matter who the Republican candidate is.

Just as an additional response to the idea that Romney is a carbon copy of Obama. Romney has fixed companies, and was responsible for fixing the Olympics. Obama has nearly broken America in just three years. Romney knows economics far better than Obama. As for his Constitutional acumen, Mitt appears weak, but there are a lot of Tea Party congressmen and senators to help keep him on the right course when it comes to the Constitution.

As for Paul, and his Constitutional approach, I suggest you read the article linked above, and also take a look at this video: Ron Paul is a Hypocrite

Breitbart's take on Hollywood and John Wayne

I just watched a couple of youtube videos in which Andrew Breitbart was interviewed. The last one I watched was about Hollywood. Here's the link: Clickety-click

One thing that stuck out at me was when he mentioned that the flood of leftism came from Hollywood about the time of the end of John Wayne's career. That made me think about the influence of Duke Wayne on Hollywood, and on America for that matter. Flawed though he was, his gigantic charisma and huge fan following would not allow any kind of overriding of his influence, pretty much while he was still alive. Amazing the power of one man to influence a nation, and Wayne's undying belief in America swayed generations of Americans into believing that America was a source for good in the world. Today in Hollywood, those who dare to express their conservative beliefs are ostracized--many of them unable to work again in that business. Not so during Wayne's time. He was too powerful of an entity. Oh sure, there was a huge lefty movement in Hollywood, all during Wayne's career. But the man was just too much larger than life for them to bring down.

It's something to think about.

Andrew Breitbart

I admire the work that Andrew Breitbart did. He died all too young for sure. Here is a great interview with him that shows a great deal about the man: Andrew Breitbart - Media War

New e-book authors to try

I've gone into the business of giving free publicity to authors I know. Some of them will be associates and friends from Hatrack River Writers, and some are going to be people I know personally--like Robin Lythgoe who has been my neighbor for years. If you're going to be buying some e-books from someone you've never heard of, why not try these people? Anyway, here's the list. I'll be adding more as I get them.

Works of P.D. Blake

Works of Dustin Hurley

Works of Robin Lythgoe

Novel to be published soon

In the near future, my book, which has the working title of Gateway to Fear, will be out in e-book format. I'm starting the process, going through it for a final edit, formatting it, trying to come up with a title I like a bit better, getting some cover art lined up, etc. I think it's time. And as I've been reading through it, making some minor changes and fixing a few grammar mistakes, I don't think I've done a bad job at all with the book. I'll let you know when it's up and running.

What am I writing today?

What am I writing today? I should also ask, am I writing today?

I’ve always wondered if posting on blogs was considered writing. In some peoples’ worlds, it’s a definite “yes”, but in my world, I’m not sure. I’m the kind of guy who sometimes procrastinates the real stuff, with visits to websites etc.

So, is blogging writing? And if so, should I be doing it instead of other writing, like working on my novel?

I’m thinking about it. One thought that is  going through my head is that, yes, it’s writing. At least it’s keeping me writing something, instead of visiting Facebook, news sites, or other distractions from the task at hand. At least I’m learning how to put coherent sentences together.

And, if I’m going to delay going back to my novel while my sub-conscious stew simmers, and my storyline progresses in micro increments, well then, I’d just as well be writing a blog post.

So, in answer to my first questions, I’m writing about writing. And to my second question I respond, “a blog post that his helping me keep writing, even when I don’t know what to write.”

The bottom line is to keep moving, in all things. If I’m not working on my novel, at least I’m working on my grammar, and working to improve putting words together on a page. That’s worth something, isn’t it?

Why I support the Tea Party, and why you should too

I support the Tea Party movement. It was riding high for a while, but now, due to misinformation promulgated by the media, has become anathema to many people. Once supported by a majority of people, the movement is now looked at as negative by the majority. Why is that? My take is that the media has done a good job of blaming the Tea Party elected members of Congress for the stalemate that has stymied any laws from coming forth from Congress. True, there have been some stalwart Tea Party members of Congress who have resolutely stood by the decision to pass no laws that would raise taxes. So it boils down to this: they are being blamed for doing what is necessary to stop out of control spending and taxation, and to control the budget–to keep your children and grandchildren from having to pay tomorrow, the debts we are incurring today. I find that worthy of commendation, not worthy of condemnation.

This is what the Tea Party believes: they believe in the Constitution, limited government, and liberty. For a good description of what the Tea Party movement stands for, go here: http://www.teaparty-platform.com/

The left-leaning  media has done a good job of making the Tea Party folks look like a bunch of racist throwbacks to the stone age. That couldn’t be further from the truth, but those who pay little attention to what goes on around them, other than sound bites, buy into the propaganda that the Tea Party is bad for America. I am a typical member of the Tea Party group. I support all of the tenets mentioned in the link I provided above. So I ask those of you who know me to think about it. Do you consider me to be racist? Do you consider me to be a neanderthal? If not, then why think of the other members of the Tea Party in this way? I urge all of you to do some investigation into what made this country great, and why now, we are on the road to ruin, such as Greece and other nations are traveling down. You will find that our ruin is because government has been drifting from the Constitution. Instead of guaranteeing rights that are specifically mentioned within that document, government is creating new rights that never existed, and that truly don’t exist.

Our government was never meant as a means to ensure that no one would ever go hungry, or go without a job. It was designed to protect the rights of the citizens, and to not interfere in their daily lives. Sadly, the role government plays in the lives of American citizens has increased tremendously. This is one reason Barack Obama must not be re-elected. His policies, including, but not limited to Obamacare, have intruded tremendously into the lives of Americans. His czars he's appointed are clearly unconstitutional, and he has issued decrees when he couldn't get his way with Congress. Clearly he is operating more as a dictator in certain aspects than he is acting as a president.

Why is it wrong for government to help out the citizens with handouts and freebies?

One reason is, because that is going against our great Constitution. Our Constitution which is the law of the land was designed for one purpose only: to make sure the rights of the citizens were protected. And there are only certain rights that are contained therein. There is a list here: http://constitution.org/powright.htm. Notably, there is no right in the Constitution for a person’s access to healthcare or housing. Also notably, there is no right to marry, neither straight nor same sex. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be able to acquire healthcare, housing, nor be married, but what it means is, those things are not guaranteed by the Constitution.

Another reason why it’s wrong for the government to handout freebies etc., is because they are doing it with our money. The Founders knew that there would need to be some taxes raised at times for such things as national defense. But what they didn’t want is a growing monstrosity of government which would raise taxes for anything that Congress deemed necessary. They knew that there would be people in Congress that would try to buy votes, that would feel the need to help anyone (as long as it was help for one of the Congressman’s pet causes) who needed it, all with money that wasn’t their own.

The Constitution was meant to be changed from time to time. This is why the amendment process was designed into it. It has been modified over the years through this process, in fact, since its inception, 27 amendments have been added. But the process is difficult. That’s why there has only been 27 added. The framers made it deliberately difficult to amend the Constitution because it only should be changed for important reasons, and not for “light or transient causes” as Thomas Jefferson put it. For a basic summation of the Constitution, read here: http://www.usconstitution.net/constkids.html

All that being said, there are ways and means to help people who need help. Private citizens can help out any time they’d like. And it doesn’t have to be people like Bill Gates, who have large sums of money at their disposal. Frankly, the government does a horrible job of managing money, and why should we be surprised? It’s very easy to take someone else's money and spend it, which the government does with abandon. But this is the same outfit that paid $400 for a hammer and $640 for a toilet seat. Are they really the group we want taxing and spending our money? Far better for us to do it ourselves, or to combine with others in charitable giving to help those in need.

At this point maybe it would help to define those in need. Those in need are those who can’t help themselves, not those who won’t help themselves. I believe there should be a basic safety net in place to help those who would help themselves if they could, but who through life's circumstances are unable to do so. This is the way Benjamin Franklin put it: “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

The question could be asked, if we give handouts to the poor, are we really helping them? In order for mankind to grow, to become stronger, sometimes it is best for them to have to figure out how to help themselves, as Franklin suggests. For the most part, the safety net should come via family members, or members of societal groups, such as church’s or other charitable organizations. This isn’t the federal government’s job, but I can see where there might not be a family available that can help, or the person in need might not be a member of any charitable group.

The bottom line: The Tea Party movement has been trying to hold the line and get back to the original intent of the government–to preserve rights and liberty by not interfering in the lives of America’s citizens. Here’s that link again: http://www.teaparty-platform.com/ . I urge you all to study it and decide for yourselves what kind of a country you’d like to have.

Need any help in deciding whether or not to re-elect Obama?

In the remote case that some of you reading this have departed from reality, have spent too much time reading Twilight and not enough time looking at the world, have indulged in Dancing with the Stars and other programs, instead of reading news reports–here’s how I would analyze whether or not anyone in their right mind would vote to retain Barack Obama as president.

First I would analyze his foreign policy. In order to do so, I’d look at our relations with other countries and see how they’ve progressed, regressed, or remained unchanged during the President’s term of office. Here’s a partial list of what has happened:

Israel: Regressed. With our strongest ally in the Middle-east, Obama has been a scolding stepfather, and has not supported them with rhetoric in any way, shape or form.

Saudi Arabia: Regressed. Though Obama bowed to a Saudi King, they don’t like the fact that we are doing nothing to dissuade Iran in its nuclear acquisition. The bowing itself was a sign of weakness and not respected by Muslims.

Russia: Regressed. Though Bush had a meager relationship with the Russians, their relationship with us has slipped during the Obama administration, causing them to form an alliance with China in the U.N. against us.

China: Regressed. Our relationship with China continues to deteriorate, largely because there are no talks between us and them.

Egypt: Regressed. Though Mubarak was a dictator who the citizens opposed, he kept the zealots in check. Now, under the Arab Spring--which Obama originally said nothing about, but only later when the Muslim Brotherhood appeared to be gaining the upper hand did he say anything in support of the movement--we have American hostages.

Iran: Regressed. Though Bush called them part of the “Axis of Evil”, the relationship has continued to deteriorate under the Great Uniter.

Pakistan: Regressed. Once tepid allies, Obama’s lack of skill in dealing with other nations has made a simmering cauldron heat up to the boiling point.

Afghanistan: Regressed. Obama’s policies have made the situation worse in that country, not better.

Venezuela: Progressed: Obama has said nice things about Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.

Cuba: Progressed: Obama has indicated a willingness to remove travel restrictions on many people who wish to travel to Cuba. His willingness to work with nightmarish regimes should be looked upon with a great degree of suspicion.

That’s just a small sampling of the many countries around the world. If I were to grade the man on his foreign policy decisions, he’d be pretty close to an F.
Now, let’s take a look at domestic issues.  The question one must always ask at election time, is the traditional “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” I think that most of us can breathe out a collective “No!” in response to that query.

Economics: Regressed. Though Obama inherited a recession, we are stuck in a quagmire, largely fueled by the Federal government’s overreach in regulations. Our economy is tanking, largely on the national debt which reached $15 trillion in November. The president has failed to provide leadership to get the government spending in check and to balance the budget and reduce the deficit. He has wasted billions in supporting green energy companies, singling them out for government aid, only to see them go bankrupt. He has failed to act positively in promoting energy in America, keeping the Keystone Pipeline from being built to please his left-wing base, thus keeping an estimated 20,000 new jobs from happening.

He's dedicated though.He has spent countless hours working on his golf game, or world traveling while millions of Americans are out of work and while Congress has failed to come to agreement on policies that would help. He has been out of the loop, decreeing this or that, issuing edicts because his power of working together to come to common agreement is nil. His way of reaching across the aisle, is to expect everyone to agree with him. He has been an ineffectual failure that has done more harm than perhaps any other president in U.S. history. He has alienated our allies, while strengthening our enemies. He has pushed through Obamacare when the majority of Americans were against it. He is an agenda driven idealogue who cares little for the desires of Americans, only enough that he’ll say what he needs to say to get elected. And then there's the little problem with following the Constitution. He hasn't seemed all that favorable towards doing so, and he will have the opportunity in his second term, should we be so stupid, to nominate as many as three Supreme Court Justices. Don't think he won't nominate more people like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has no respect for the Constitution--at least the U.S. Constitution. Two peas in a pod--like Ginsburg, Obama doesn't have much respect for it either. (Note: I inadvertently on Facebook said that Ginsburg had be nominated by the second worst president ever, thinking that Jimmy Carter had been the one. I was in error--it was actually Clinton). Anyway, that’s my analysis. You can agree or not, it is after all, one man's opinion.

Your excuse is invalid

Someone posted this on Facebook the other day. I reposted it, of course. We all come up with reasons for why we can't do something. Let's come up with reasons why we will.

Writing, goals, and how life turns out

When I was much younger, my expectations of my future life were high. I thought that one day, I'd be a writer, at least be able to make a living as a novelist. I thought that I'd quit my job working for the U.S. Postal Service, and be able to have a lucrative and fulfilling career as a novelist. Now at 52, I look back and am dismayed and depressed that the dream has gone unfulfilled. Of course, one has to realize that other more important things may have kept me from accomplishing that dream. Raising a family and making sure that they were taken care of (which I wouldn't trade for all the writing in the world), doing my duty to God and other responsibilities, exercising for good health, and of course, my full-time job. All those took me away from writing for long stretches of time.
I'm not the kind of writer who can easily sit down for five minutes and have something good written. I need at least an hour or two of free time, which throughout my adult life, has been difficult and sometimes impossible to find. And I get down on myself to easily, whether or not it's the writing aspect or the exercising aspect. Somehow, through all that though, I've been able to write one novel (still unpublished), and complete large chunks of two others (still in the process of completing them), a bunch of short stories, and numerous articles on my real passion in life--outdoors activities. So, I've written. I've even published one of my short stories for money.
But that isn't what my goal originally was. My goal was to be making a living writing. My goal was to be out of the postal service at a young age, living my dreams. So what am I trying to say? That sometimes dreams don't come true. That sometimes a modification is in order, and in order to be happy with those modifications, we need to decide to. We need to try and be happy in other ways. I think I can do that. I just need to figure some things out and decide where I'm going with my writing. Should I continue floundering in the world of fiction, or should I go where I've been more successful in my writing career, writing the outdoors articles? I'm leaning toward the outdoors articles, but then a part of me will always be wondering, could I have been good enough to be a novelist had I only persevered?

Contradictions in liberal thinking

Just contemplating today that liberals rarely make sense. One liberal point of view is that there should be light-rail trains and high speed trains everywhere in America, replacing cars, trucks, motorcycles and the like. But this idea would never work. The reason why? Other liberals would stop it. Yes, liberal environmentalists would find a gopher burrow, or a rare aphid colony--years of study would need to be done to figure out the environmental impact, new routes would need to be changed, involving more studies of the impact on the newly proposed routes, on and on and on. But wait a minute...it just might work. I nearly forgot that the environment can be overlooked as long as the liberal agenda is pushed forward. Just look at how many windmills around the country went up without a thought in the world about the displacement of kangaroo rats, jackrabbits, or horned toads.

Kind of like...

Liberals are in favor of equality. Take from the rich, redistribute to the poor. In favor of equalizing the money supply. In favor of taking from the haves and giving it to the have-nots. Yep, in favor of equality. So in order to get it, they'd like the rich to pay 30 percent or more of their income in taxes, and the less fortunate to pay next to nothing. How is that equal treatment under the law? So, as long as equality means what they define it to mean, then they believe in it.

Another thing is...

Work. Many liberals believe that traditionally low-income jobs, such as dishwashers, or parking lot attendants, should be getting paid a lot more, like twenty dollars an hour. I heard that from one of the Occupy Wall Streeters. And NBA players should be getting a lot less. The liberals want to take from the NBA players, and Oprah (wait a minute, Oprah is one of the rich that they don't want to take anything from because she agrees with them), and give that money to those on the low end of the financial scale. Sound like a nice concept, only can't we ask the wealthy to help the poor voluntarily? But it's not only that. Liberals would like those who refuse to work to be subsidized  in their efforts by those who do the work. That's you and me. As Dennis Miller says, "I'm fine with helping the helpless. I just don't want to help the clueless." Equal work for equal pay, how about that? If you can play a sport well enough to draw thousands to watch you, employing hundreds if not thousands of other employees to sell snacks and beverages, show you to your seats, provide security--well if the job you are doing provides so many jobs for so many other people, maybe you might be worth a little more on the job market than the guy who stocks shelves at Wal-mart for a living.

Here I am writing blog posts again instead of working on my novel

There are just too many important things to comment on and not enough hours in a day to do it. So my novel sacrifices, and thus my chance of making a living writing, goes out the window with it. Too bad, I guess. I've just got to get certain things out there that are bothering me. I hope you have a great day.

We live in a world of two-year-olds

"That's mine!"
"No. It's mine!"
The cries are heard everywhere now. Whether or not it's the new Michael Jordan shoes people are fighting about, or violence breaking out over the iPad 2. Here's a clip of another incident in China: Hysteria as Beijing iPhone Release Canceled. Each year we hear of more people being involved in tussling over the good deals on Black Friday. The world has become more narcissistic and it's not pleasant to look at.
Our own Congress has shown plenty of signs of this trend, with Harry Reid of the Senate blocking every spending bill the House sends him. Under Reid's "leadership" the Senate has failed to pass a budget for nearly 1000 days. That's approaching three years. By law, they are required to pass a budget every year.

People everywhere are slowly, inexorably, reverting to the toddler stage. They either want government to take care of them (feed me, clothe me, wipe my rear end), or they expect something for nothing from the world. With an ever increasing pace, more and more people are deciding that they shouldn't have to work for what they get. "Mommy," they seem to say, "Pick me up. Take care of me. I can't do it by myself."

Remember when it was shameful to have someone else do something for you that you could and should be responsible for doing yourself? Remember when your mom made you clean your room? If she did it for you, she's part of the problem we have today.

Whatever happened to self-respect? Whatever happened to character? Somehow, it has been replaced by greed, avarice, and a self-centered "me first" attitude that's destroying the world, slowly, like an advancing cancer. How can anyone have any self-respect when they react in such a manner? They can and do certainly have self love. Sadly, most lacking is the love for their fellow travelers here on the earth. Things have become more precious to them than others. Having "mine" is all that is important.

 What to do about it? Well, we could start a war that would send us all back into the stone age. Then people would either have to learn to work again and cooperate again or they would perish. But that's a drastic measure that no one wants. So the only solution is to have a truly vibrant leader, leading from the top, showing the way. That and a return to being a religious and principled people. Not that you can't be principled and void of religion, however, evidence has shown that for the most part, those who follow a code of ethics inspired by godly principles have been more responsible and self-reliant. With them, giving is for the truly needy, not the indolent.

Gorilla glue, plantar fasciitis, and the depths of despair

Yup. I'm feelin' sorry for myself this morning. I'm tired. Last night I came home from work at about 6:00 and did nothing for myself except take a bath. The rest of the time I worked--dinner, dishes, bills. I finally said, "I'm going downstairs to play my guitar," and then couldn't really play it, because I have a dry-skin crack right under the thumbnail of my picking hand. Frustrating.

So, I woke up this morning tired from yesterday, not really wanting to go to the gym. Well, really, tiredness isn't all of it. I've also developed a nasty case of plantar fasciitis over the past week, and I don't like doing things other than running for my aerobic exercise--things that would cause less stress on my plantar. So I wussed out. Honestly, I'd like to call in sick today, but I won't do that. I'd like to go back to bed, but no. I've accomplished something though--I got my writing done for the day. Worked on my novel a bit. Not much though. Not enough. My depression has deepened and is causing me to lose my drive. I think I'm going to put some Gorilla glue on my crack, so that I can at least be pain free (ha!) for a day. What a whiner I am. I really need a vacation.

Mitt Romney, can you lead us out of this morass?

I sent this message to the Mitt Romney Facebook page this morning:

We definitely do need to ask these questions. Are we going to continue to be the free-loading loafers who despise the wealthy job creators because they are wealthy, or are we going to kick government out of our lives and stand on our own two feet like the rugged individualists of yesteryear? I propose that those of us who are wimps quit crying, and get to work supporting ourselves, and that we throw those people out of government who want to handcuff future generations with the lead weight of a massive national debt spawned by entitlements. Rise up and be men, you men, and rise up and be women, you women. This is not the day to forget our roots and depend upon a despotic government for our every day care. It's not the time to turn away from our God-given rights guaranteed by the Constitution. It's the time to stop the taking away of a man or woman the right to live and breathe free. It's the time to remove the shackles from the feet of the American businessmen and the citizens. It's the time to return to the Constitutional free market system that made us great. Mitt, I hope you will spend more time talking about returning to a time when our Constitution wasn't battered about like a flag in a hurricane. Many of us would love to vote for you if you would emphasize your desire to return to the laws and rights that were created at the founding of this great country. I pray for such a man to lead us in this great nation of ours.

Time, resolutions, and goals

As I reflect on the things that I've done this past year, and contemplate what I'd like to do the coming year, I feel that many of them are the same things. I've been thinking about the words Jesus Christ spoke, when he said, "for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." In many ways, my treasure hasn't been where I'd like it to be. I've focused too much on the trivial, and not given enough time to the truly significant. In some ways, this is because my time is so limited that I think I can't do something because I would just get started and have to quit to go and do some mundane task, that however ordinary it is, still needs doing. Many of us have the same challenges, and yet, with a little effort, with a little whittling of the stuff that's of no worth or of small value, we can find more time in our days in which to work on things that are more important. I suggest in my life that the things that are most important are 1) God, and 2) Other people. My focus needs to be strengthened in those two areas.

With that in mind, I go forward, attempting to be a better follower of Christ, and in so doing, I will quite naturally become better at serving others. Sure, I have other goals. I will spend some time on them. But they are far less important than the God I love, and the people I love, who after all, are His children too.

I have always been a reactionary, instead of a good planner. Which lends itself well to rescuing people who are in danger, but does not always bode well in encounters with irate people. Responding to anger with anger isn't a Christlike attribute, and when I do such things, I don't have much self-admiration. So, I guess I need to try and keep the good qualities of being reactionary--such as being able to jump into a burning building should the need arise--but jettison the bad qualities of reactionism--the swift anger response in particular. That's what I will work on this year.

I have other goals, but  I will need to think more about them before I can put them down in written form. No one says that you can only start goals at the beginning of the year, after all.

By the content of their character

When Martin Luther King Jr. said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character," it was a pivotal moment in history--or should've been. The greatness of that one line transcends time, and yet millions of Americans cannot discard the racial divide that has plagued us for so long.


There are groups such as the Black Caucus, and other groups associated with Black Americans. There are Latino groups, such as La Raza. There are many, many different groups all aligned with one race or another. Why? Why do we have to keep dividing each other by the color of our skin instead of only judging each other by the way we act and the things we say?

This isn't a game. This isn't like elementary school when the teacher asked the girls to line up along one wall, and the boys to line up against the other, opposite wall. Why do we have to keep acting the child, instead of the grownup? 

Those searching for would-be terrorists are asked not to profile, because profiling sometimes puts more emphasis on one set of physical characteristics (skin color) than another.  Yet many of those same people who ask for profiling to be abandoned as a tactic for discovering terrorists, huddle in groups of their own racial type, and fail to meld into society, not as a latino, arab, asian, or black, but as an American. E pluribus unum--from one many. Skin color should only be used as a description of what a person looks like for either solving crimes, or helping to find someone who is lost.


The fact is, King's dream may be fading as those who most prospered by it are forgetting its importance. If racial divisiveness continues, we can never be a united nation. Can we just forget about the color of our skin and think of each other as the human race instead?

Taking a break from the novel

I don’t feel like working on my novel today. I think it’s because I feel rushed. I have to get ready in about 20-25 minutes, in order to hit the gym before work. For this reason, I’m writing a blog entry instead of working on my novel. I’m looking forward to the day when I can have more time to just relax and write. That should happen in about three months from now when I no longer have to be on the overtime list–at least for a few months. I may have to be on the list for the last three months of the year, but that should put an end to it for good, as we’re only a year and a half away from having our house paid off.

That will be so great to have the house paid off. I’ve been looking forward to that for a long, long time. We have sacrificed in many ways doing upkeep and buying things many of the Joneses have bought. We have tried to stay out of debt, only getting in debt for much needed cars, at least for the last ten years or so. Soon, if all goes well, we won’t even need to get into debt for cars when we need them.

I’m not sure though that we did everything right. I know we tried to be frugal for the most part, but there were splurges. Actually, I think there have to be some splurges–some surprises and rewards for all the hard work from time to time. Otherwise, depression and drudgery can set in.

So really, I kind of needed to take a break from trying to squeeze in a half hour of working on the novel. Actually, it’s going pretty well. It’s my second book and I’ve basically rewritten it through about 38,000 words. I’ll need to at least double that in order for it to have a chance of selling. That’s okay though–the story is far from over. I have many more scenes to add, and an exciting conclusion. I hope when it’s finished, and if I sell it, that you’ll take the time to read Last Stand at Cibola. It is a work of my heart. It’s a fantasy set in the Old West, full of Hopi mysticism and magic. I’ll let you know when it’s available.

As for my already completed novel, I think I’m going to go through it once more and think of a new title for it, as the title I have for it now I’m not satisfied with. I’m looking to publish that too, but maybe as an e-book. I really just need to get some cover art for it.

America and the Reconquista

I think most of the people coming here illegally from Mexico are trying to escape a bad government, and horrible living conditions. There are some evil people coming as well, that is true. I believe though, that most are fleeing evil.

So, I wonder, if they are fleeing evil, do they want it to follow them? In Pat Buchanan’s book, Suicide of a Superpower, he cites stats that show a majority of Mexicans, even to the second generation, would like to Mexicanize America. I can’t help but wonder, if they’ve really thought it through. Here they are, fleeing corruption, discouraged by the lack of opportunity, only to show up and want to change the United States to be like that?

Not that America isn’t becoming more like that anyway. The corruption in politics has come more and more into the light, and Americans feel powerless in many ways to do anything to change the status quo. Frankly, we don’t need people here who only want to take advantage of the system, live off of welfare, and try to destroy the last vestiges of the idea of America.

I like people who aren’t like that. I like people who want to come here because they love liberty, and because they know that working hard and giving your best yields the best results. So, for those who come here and want those kinds of things, I could be persuaded that they should stay, at least, that they should be given the opportunity to apply for citizenship. For those who want to live off the public dole, who want to commit crimes, who think it’s okay to drive drunk and kill people, who want to trash America and Americans, and who want to reconquista their former lands–well, I have no good words to say for you. Go away. There is no place for you here. Take the drug cartel people and throw them out of the country, forcibly if necessary, maybe even have them break rocks for a few years first.

But let’s preserve the idea of America first. Without the idea, the last remains will escape us, like sand in a whirlwind.

A friend of mine died yesterday

A friend of mine died yesterday. Charlie Workman, who would’ve been 91 next month passed after many years of health trouble. I’ve known him for probably more than twenty years, and I’ve been his home teacher for maybe fifteen of those years. I really got to know him and love him. Charlie used to tell us about his life as a young boy. Born in Manila, Utah, he lost his mother at the age of five, and was shuffled around from family to family who raised him. He lived through the heart of the Great Depression, served in the Merchant Marines in World War 2, and worked a variety of manual labor jobs throughout his life. He was fond of recalling his experiences about working for the railroad, and in fact had a model train set attached to a board in his garage that he could lower with a crank. He got rid of that several years ago. He told us of one time when he was working for a refinery and the part of it that he was working on exploded and he was miraculously preserved from death.
He spent time in his later life working for the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s department. He loved his motorcycle and could be seen riding around the streets of our neighborhood until old age and health kept him from doing that anymore. Those who saw him thought it was Santa Claus riding a motorcycle.
I remember the times when he would drive up in front of my house in his truck, when I was working outside and would stop and chat for several minutes. As his age and time caught up with him, he needed to get something to help him get around when he went to stores, and he was excited to tell me about his scooter and the lift for it that he had added to the bed of his truck. Eventually, he had stop driving that as well.
As he got older, I began trying to help out more with his yard, especially snow shoveling in the winter time. At first, I tried to be sneaky, doing it in the wee hours when they were asleep, so as not to get caught. Eventually, he caught me at it and chided me for doing it. He was a man of pride and didn’t like to think he needed help. I kept it up though and eventually, he came to appreciate it openly.
He loved his family and took great pride in many of his kids and grandkids. He missed those who had died before him. He had a great heart, and though opinionated, and though he could be prejudiced and cantankerous, he was a good man and will be missed. I have lost a great friend this year, but on the other side, his loved ones are waiting. It will be a great reunion.

A guy tried to get me to fight him today

So I began my first mail delivery of the day stopping as I usually do at 7-11, which is the first stop on my route. Trying to be courteous to those whose cars were parked in front of the store, I parked in front of two empty stalls. No sooner had I turned off the engine, than I heard a honk. I looked to my left and a guy was trying to get me to move so he could pull into one of the empty stalls that I had parked in front of. I gestured to another empty stall down the way and went in and made my delivery. When I came out he was swearing at me: "You blankety-blank think you can take up the entire blankety-blank parking lot."

I should've just let it drop and ignored him, but I couldn't. I didn't like his attitude, and I didn't like his assumption. I had intentionally avoided causing inconvenience to the people already parked there. As I passed him, I spoke up: "Up yours," I said. And continued to my truck.

That was when he turned around and challenged me to a fight. Okay, I kind of wanted to kick his butt, but I didn't think it was worth losing my job over, which would've happened had I engaged in a fight with him. So I just told him to get lost and drove away.

I'm feeling kind of bad about it though. The guy was a jerk and all, but I shouldn't have escallated the situation. I'm sorry that happened.

The Penn State death threats

As more and more details of the Grand Jury Testimony in the Penn State child abuse case come out, those of us with any sense of decency are rightly appalled and angered at what took place. Allegedly, Mike McQuery, who has been identified as the graduate student who first caught former defensive coach, Jerry Sandusky sexually abusing a 10 year old boy in the showers, has received multiple death threats in regards to his failure to do something more, like attack Sandusky, or immediately call the police. Sadly, it appears that there have been other death threats made to McQuery, from angered fans who are furious that he did anything at all that led to the firing of Head Coach Joe Paterno. That, my friends, is appalling. That there are actually people out there walking around that put the career of Paterno above the safety of children is simply too terrible to contemplate.
Frankly, McQuery was negligent in not directly attacking and trying to stop the incident when it first occurred. Anyone with children can understand the fury a parent would have at his lack of appropriate action. As Jim Rome put it (and I'm paraphrasing here), "McQueary was 28 years old and 6'5" and Sandusky was 58". He could have and should have done something. It doesn't warrant death threats though. If anything, the death threats should be against Sandusky. As a parent (now grandparent) myself, nothing infuriates me more than someone wanting to hurt my children and grandchildren--or anybody else's for that matter.
Of course, the threats against McQueary for getting Joe Paterno fired are from morons and cretins of the lowest order. These are the kind of people who put sports and winning above all else and make head coaches their personal gods.

Editing Cibola

I'm back at it again with a fury. Rather, a sputtering fury, but a fury none the less. I've been going through my old novel Showdown at Cibola and trying to get back into the flow through editing what I had already written extensively. It seems to be working. Already it's at nearly 27,000 words, which is about one third of the total length it will end up needing to be in order to get published.

On a related note, I'm thinking of publishing my novel, Dome World (I'm also trying to think of a better title) on Smash Words. I've never published anything in e-book form, so it's finding the time to learn the ropes that's the difficult part for me. I guess the main thing is getting someone to do cover art.

I'm finding some time to do this--maybe 30 to 40 minutes, in the mornings before heading off to the gym and from there to work. At 30-40 minutes it's going slower than I would like, but I think it's good to just plug away with whatever time one has. Hopefully, I can soon dedicate some time in the evenings as well to work on this stuff.

The U.S. Owns the Moon

So, this argument is a natural progression from the "we were here first" argument put forth by Native Americans. Logically, since they were here first, the land was "stolen" from them. But as an extension of this logic, the Moon belongs to the U.S. on the same basis. The United States owns the moon. So there.

All that being said, I think it's rather ridiculous to assume that because the native peoples were displaced by the Europeans in North America, that it was the first time such a thing has ever happened on this planet. People have been pushed out, conquered, assimilated, and replaced throughout the history of humankind. To the victor go the spoils, as the saying goes, and it's been that way as long as life has existed.

The U.S. Government Needs a New Agency: The People Protection Agency

Today I'm advocating for a new governmental agency. Yes, I know--that's more government intrusion. However, I'm advocating for a People Protection Agency. This agency would have specific powers, namely, to grab all regulations passed by the EPA by the throat, and stomp them into the ground until they're dead. Well maybe not all of them. My proposal would be to have this new agency oversee the EPA and toss out any law that causes harm to people. For example, an EPA statute that protected an endangered form of snail, would be jettisoned if people were losing jobs because of that statute. My reasoning is simple. Most individuals believe that human beings were the final stop on the evolutionary chain, making man the highest order of animal. It stands to reason that the highest form needs to do whatever it takes to survive. Losing ones livelihood because of a snail, fish, or insect, or any number of lower forms of life, is detrimental to the survival of the species. Therefore, I'm recommending that such an agency be created--to stop the over regulation and red tape associated with protecting endangered species, and that the highest form of life on the chain be given top priority when it comes to survival.

Writing to be writing

I'm writing here in my blog because to day I'm avoiding writing. In other words, I'm writing to avoid writing. The writing I'm avoiding is my novel, Last Stand at Cibola. The reason I'm avoiding working on my book, is because this morning the furnace went out and I spent all my time replacing the thermocouple, and now it still won't light, so I'm giving it ten minutes and trying it again. Basically, I can't really get into my novel writing in that short of a period of time--at least, I'm telling myself that. The reality is probably different, but as the saying goes, perception is reality. I'm going to try and find some extra time this evening to work on the book.

On taxing the "rich"

When I've posted links on Facebook, at least in the last several months, several of them have been about President Obama's plan to tax the "wealthiest" among us. Repeatedly in speeches, the president has made references to making sure that "millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share". Several of the links I've referenced to in my Facebook postings have been about how the wealthiest Americans are already paying the lion's share of taxes in America. Here's an example of one of those links: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2039767/Obama-tax-increase-Do-wealthy-Americans-pay-middle-class.html
The answer is simple: those whom Obama considers rich, already pay more than the rest of us, both in total dollars, and in tax rates. But why should that matter? In this time of economic disaster, shouldn't they be asked to pay even more? The answer, again quite simply, is no. Here's why.

Those who earn over $200,000 per year, which seems to be the income level that Obama begins thinking of them as "millionaires", include the vast majority of employers. Entrepreneurs, most of whom are taxed at an individual rate, do most of the hiring in America. The question then becomes, will they still hire as many people if their bills (including taxes) are higher? It's a question that must be asked because it's highly relevant to the discussion. Let's take the average citizen as an example. Let's say Joe Johnson is humming along, happily earning $50,000 per year, buying things as needed, and sometimes as wanted. He's really got his eye on a nice fishing boat, selling for about $5000. Now Joe's a good saver, and has saved most of the money to purchase the boat, but then the unthinkable happens---he loses his job. Try as he might, he can't find a job that pays as well as the job he had before and he winds up at a job paying $42,000 per year. Suddenly the extra he had for paying off the rest of the boat is needed for basic necessities: food, house payment, gas for his car. He decides to put off buying the boat, although he really still wants it.

In the same way Joe has decided not to purchase the boat, employers must make decisions on whether or not to hire future employees. If their bills increase, they have less money with which to do this. At a time in which our unemployment rate is very high, to decide to increase taxes on those who do the hiring is foolish at best. Even President Obama has said this in the past. Obama says you don't raise taxes in a recession

Another reason for not raising taxes, on the rich or anyone else, is that it reduces the incentive to stop the outrageous spending. If I'm getting $1000 more per month, as an individual, am I going to be more likely to spend, or less? I think the answer is clear.  And that's even more problematic when the money you're receiving is a gift from someone else. Someone once said that it's always easy to spend someone else's money, and it is. Frankly, as a citizen, I don't trust my government to spend my money wisely. Remember, these are the same people who spent $400 for a hammer and something like $1000 for a toilet seat. Do we really want them collecting and spending more of our money for wasteful things like this? I'd rather stop the inflow and make them reduce the outflow.

All that being said, there's nothing wrong with asking those who have the means to contribute more. Warren Buffet and some others who have a lot of means have said that they don't pay enough in taxes. Fine. They can cut checks and send them in to pay more. It's easy to do. They should put their money where their collective mouths are. Frankly, I'd rather see them contributing to the Food Bank, or the homeless shelters, or any number of privately owned charities that actually do more with less money than our federal government. I'd rather see them going around helping individuals and families, than sending in more money to be squandered by government agencies.

The bottom line is, heaping more taxes on job providers doesn't help in an ailing economy. Cutting spending does. Asking people who have the means  to voluntarily help their neighbors goes much further than any increase in taxes ever could. Remember what Ronald Reagan once said: "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money". Think about it.

I am an American

I am an American and yesterday was September 11th. For one brief span of time ten years ago, nearly everyone came together in unity. As a nation, we had been attacked. As a people, we seemed in that moment to become united. Sadly, that has drifted away. The liberals fight the conservatives, and politics is a cess pool of invective–civility has fled like animals fleeing from a forest fire. We think it has not always been like that.

I will not forget 9/11. I won’t forget the planes plowing into the towers of the World Trade Center, nor the horror of watching bodies jump or fall from the windows. I won’t forget the heroism of the firefighters, and others, who devotedly continued on trying to save as many as possible, even as the buildings collapsed on top of them. How can one ever forget that?

But there’s another thing I won’t forget. I won’t forget how we came together as a people, united, caring and loving. Determined. I won’t forget how we are all much more alike than we are different. And I would like to think that no matter how you believe, whether you agree with me or not on any number of topics of vital interest, that I would bust down a door to pull you out if need be. For the common cause that unites us all, is freedom and liberty, the sense that humanity matters and people’s opinions are valuable, that the rights of an individual are vital to the continued liberty, and even humanity of us all. I am an American. We are Americans.

The rich and taxes

So the basic supply-side economist will say that if you raise taxes on the rich, they will create less jobs. The counterargument to that is that trickle-down approaches to the economy have never worked, and that the stinking, evil rich don't create jobs even when their taxes are lowered. They instead pocket the money and make themselves richer.
Don't buy it.
Take the case of the late Larry Miller,  former owner of the Utah Jazz. Before Miller owned the Jazz, he was a car dealer, with several dealerships. But he hadn't begun with several. He began with one. As he became more successful, he added dealerships, which added jobs. In time, he bought into the Utah Jazz, and eventually became full owner of the Jazz. Under his ownership, the Jazz became more successful, which created more wealthy for Miller, but also created more job opportunities.
Miller continued his holdings as he bought into other enterprises, like the Salt Lake Stingers (now the Bees), and the Larry Miller Sports Park. All of these created more jobs.
Now, some would say that he would have done the same, even if taxes were raised. Maybe. We don't know. What we do know is this: Larry Miller continued to create jobs instead of lining his own pockets as he grew richer. Yes, he became wealthier, but his wealth helped out normal people who needed work. This is the exact opposite of what the anti-supply-side supporters will tell you. They have argued with me that the rich don't create more jobs, they just line their pockets. Larry Miller is proof that they are wrong.

Old Yeller

This past week I watched Old Yeller for maybe the 4th or 5th time in my life. What a wonderful story of friendship, growing up, and taking responsibility. Near the end, after Travis has had to put his dog down and he and his pa are sitting there talking to each other, there is a great statement made by the pa. I don't have the book in front of me but he says to Travis: "Now and then, for no good reason, life will haul off and knock a man flat." And then he goes on to say that, and I'm paraphrasing here, "life has good times too. And if we spend all our good times thinking about the bad, then it all becomes bad". I really like to look at life that way, and I thank Fred Gipson, author of Old Yeller for the lesson he continues to give me long after his death.

How I've lost 7 pounds since Christmas

As someone who has always wanted to be healthy, in order to do the things I love to do, I spend a bit of time every once in a while searching the web for a better exercise program. I have thus created my own program from various sources, and if it can be useful to others, that's great. That's why I posted it here. Granted, this method isn't for everyone...maybe it's not even for me in the long run. One thing's for sure, it works. I have been able to lose weight and become more fit at the same time, and that's important to me.

Mondays: On Mondays I have to be to work a half hour earlier, so I do one of my easier workouts. I get on the treadmill and run at a fairly easy pace for a while, then I speed it up incrementally, like up a tenth every four to five minutes. I do this for 40-45 minutes with the goal to use up at least 500 calories, according to the treadmill instrument panel. Depending on the treadmill--there are some made by different companies at the Kearns Oquirrh Park Fitness Center--I either burn 500+ or 600+. I imagine the real total is somewhere in between.

Tuesdays: I begin again on the treadmill, running gently for five minutes to get warmed up. Then I jack up the pace, going from about a 9:30 mile pace to about an 8 minute per mile pace for about a minute. I slow back down, but not quite to the 9:30 pace, maybe 9:20 or so for four minutes, and then run 1 minute at about 7:50. I keep this up, each time slowing down but slowing down a little bit less, and speeding up a little bit more, until I've used up 600 calories. Then I go to part B of Tuesdays workout when I do a variety of pushups, found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPLoCnuam7c . After that I do two sets of bench dips, and two sets of any kind of triceps exercise. Sometimes my interval training changes to a slower pace but with a steep incline, changing the incline every four minutes instead of changing the pace. It adds variety when I'm feeling like not doing my workout.

Wednesdays: Once again I'm on the treadmill, this time to run at a comfortable pace for the entire time, not too fast, not too slow...more of a recovery day, so I try to keep it slow enough that I could still talk if I wanted to, without getting out of breath. Since Wednesdays are my arm and back workout, I then move to the machine and do two sets of 12  bent "V" rowing, with 100 lbs. Then, because I'm having trouble with my left elbow and biceps tendons, I do two sets of 12 on the lat pull-down machine with 60 pounds. Then I do two sets of 12 curls with the curl bar at 45 pounds. So much for the easy day! When I really need a break, I eliminate all the cardio on Wednesdays, but I haven't done that in February because it's fitness month at the gym and I'm trying to go every day except Sundays. The 12 reps is just what I'm on now. I'm building from 10, trying to make it to 15, but going up a little at a time.

 Thursdays: This is another killer day! It begins with ten minutes of a warm up jog on the treadmill. Then I walk around and stretch for a few minutes getting real loose. After that I do M100s, which you can see here: M100s . BTW, I cannot do 100 without stopping. The most I've been able to do without at least stopping for a few seconds is about 34. So, when I get to that point, I walk to the next corner in the basketball court area, and go again until I can't do any more, on and on moving to another corner until I complete the 100. After that I go back into the treadmill area and try to get my 600 calories burned off (I estimate the M100s burn off about 200, but I have no way of knowing how accurate that estimate is). Then I do a variety of abdominal exercises that I don't know the names of, except one is called "Roman Chair Situps". Then I'm done. I was so worn out after Wednesday this past week that I abandoned the M100s and instead did an extra interval workout.

Fridays: By Friday, I really need an easier workout so, like Wednesday, I run at a fairly easy pace for 45 minutes. Then I do two sets of leg press with 200 pounds, two sets of lunges with each leg, two sets of 20 calf raises, two sets of leg extensions, and two of leg curls. Then Friday is done.

Saturday: The gym opens at 7 on Saturday and I have to be to work at 8. So I do a five minute warm up run, and then do a race pace 5k on the treadmill. That's it and the week is done I can go on to Sunday when I

REST!!! It's not enough rest, but it's REST!!

For my diet, I just try to eat healthfully, avoiding red meats more than I used to, eating less goodies, eating Clif Bars to supplement my diet. More bananas for potassium etc. Yes, I still eat desserts, but I keep it under control. That's about it. I'm needing a break, so after next week I'll do an easy week, and hopefully be back to killing it by the next week.

I hope this has helped anyone looking for an exercise program. In a perfect world, I would definitely recommend alternating this with an easier week, as far as the treadmill stuff goes.

Utah Bear Trial: Questions that affect us all

This week the trial began in the case of the Ives family who lost their son to a bear last year versus the U.S. Forest Service. Sad though it is that this family lost their son, it brings up two questions in my mind that must be answered. Number one is, who has responsibility for the death of the boy? And number two is, should the parents be suing?

So, who has the responsibility? First of all, the family does. As the Forest Service claims, there are signs everywhere reminding people that bears frequent the area, and to use precautions necessary for such an area. That being said, the area in which the people were camping was in particular danger–increased danger, because a bear had been in the very campground earlier in the day on which Samuel Ives was dragged from the tent and killed. This specific danger required specific warnings.

Here’s an example of why. Suppose that on your street in your neighborhood a known child molester had been spotted earlier that day trying to get a kid into a car. Now, suppose that nobody let the families living on that street know about the incident. Suppose further that your child was abducted and killed by this creep. What if you then found out that the police had known about the molester trying to pick up another kid earlier that day, and didn’t bother to tell anyone. Would not the authorities share the blame for what happened for not warning the people about a specific threat in the area? Sure, they could use the excuse that there are always bad guys out there, and people need to be vigilant all the time. They could say that. But there are times when people need to be more vigilant than at other times.

Like the anecdotal child molester story, the bear incident shows that in this case, more stringent warnings should’ve been given. And who should they have been given by? The people who knew what had happened earlier in the day–the U.S. Forest Service.

That brings us to question two: Should the family be suing? My initial response is yes. That’s the only way the Forest Service will do things differently when confronted by a similar situation in the future. On the other hand, maybe the things they do differently will effect large numbers of people, like closing whole canyons down because a bear has been seen–just to avoid potential law suits. And another thing that bothers me about suing, is that it comes out of taxpayer’s pockets. Granted, there are a bunch of things that my money goes for via the Feds that I don’t like, that I probably don’t like much more than giving this poor family who has lost a son some money.

It’s a complicated question with no easy answers. Now that it’s in court, I’m not even sure that I hope they win the lawsuit. I’d like to see the Forest Service admit they should’ve done more to warn people, but I don’t want to see more and more people suing for incidents such as this.

Questions of Life

The questions of life...why are we really here? Obviously, I have my own thoughts on this. For many years of my youth, I struggled with various opinions and theories, flitting this way and that like some kind of bird that had lost its bearings. It’s not easy being sure about things in life. What I became more sure of as time went by is that things matter. What a person does effects not only himself, but those around him. When I act, there is a reaction, and it’s not always what I intend it to be.

Funny, but people can change over time, without a really good explanation as to why, or at least, maybe we don’t know what happened in their life to make them change. That can make it difficult for those of us trying to understand why that person changed. Was there an event that triggered it? Was it the influence of persuasive friends or mentors? Did they just drift because they weren’t sure about things, finding themselves much further off course than they had originally intended?

I ask myself this knowing that when some people reject God, they not only become ambivalent towards believers, but eventually come to despise them. Atheists, who don’t believe in God, many times make it a large part of their lives to convince, or at times, even force people to not worship the God they believe in. Why is this? Could it be that some become atheists because of their trials, and can’t believe that a loving God would’ve put them in this situation, therefore making it easy to rail against the God they once believed in, or at least tried to believe in? That’s really the only way to explain the irrational hatred of believers by non-believers.

I pity those who have lost their way. I hope for a change in them. It bothers me to see such railings against people whose desires are basically good—Christians want to love others, and serve them. They want to be good and moral people. Yet we often fail in these attempts because mortal weaknesses get in the way. Mortal weaknesses also plague atheists, but since they profess no beliefs, they are not failures at living up to them.

I wonder, who is better off, the man who has ideals and tries to live up to them, but fails often, or the man who has no ideals to live up to, and thus never fails to live up to any because he doesn’t believe in any. For example, a guy might believe that it’s wrong to lie, and then find himself doing just that for fear of telling someone the truth. He has failed, true, in not lying, but perhaps he has lived a higher ideal, like not hurting someone’s feelings. Who can know? On the other hand, a guy who has made no such goals as to not lie, has not failed at anything if he lies. Kind of like, if I don’t plan on exercising, I haven’t failed when I don’t do so. The other guy who made an exercise plan and failed to strictly follow it has failed. He may have exercised only five days of the week instead of six. Yet which person is better off really? The guy who exercised some, but not up to his goal, or the guy who never had the goal, and never exercised?

Well, I’m drifting. Needless to say, there’s a lot that goes into life. But let’s not get off track for the wrong reasons. If we don’t make an exercise plan ourselves, let’s not rail against those who have the compunction to do so, for the bigger failure is not the guy who takes a day off from his plan once in a while, but the person who never makes the plan in the first place.