Fair Share of Taxes

The latest political mantra regarding taxes suggests that some American's are not paying their fair share.  Liberals have suggested that the wealthy are guilty of this sin.  Conservatives point out that 46% of income earners pay absolutely no Federal Income Tax after standard deductions and tax exemptions.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.  Lower income earners don't pay Federal Income Tax, but they do pay a variety of other Federal taxes.  Wealthy tax payers pay at a much higher tax bracket, but are entitled to a variety of deductions that reduce the tax burden significantly.  The group paying the highest percentage of their income to taxes is, and has always been, the middle class.

I'd like to see us step back from the political rhetoric and take a real look at our tax system.  The current system is somewhat unfair in that the middle class seems to be exploited by both the wealthy and the poor.  The exploitation is not extreme, but it is real.  Many people excuse the poor while vilifying the wealthy for doing this, but the reality is that exploiting people in this way is wrong regardless of your social or financial standing.  Using the government to rob someone is no more moral than using a gun or a knife.

Our current system is confusing and cumbersome.  I'd love to see it simplified.  If we'd like to simply modify, or "patch" the current system, however, there are a couple of things I'd like to see.  First, let's get rid of the capital gains tax and replace it by taxing capital gains at the tax payer's current income tax rate.  I see no reason to reward gains made through the movement of money while penalizing gains acquired through production.  We can modify this slightly to allow tax exemption for the sale of a primary residence at the time of retirement, and possibly for the purchase of another primary residence.  This would protect the middle class who often rely on their home as a primary investment.

Next, I would like to see the cap removed from Social Security obligations.  Currently, Social Security taxes are only paid on the first $110,100.  Let's tax all income for Social Security.

Finally, I would like all income earners to pay some Federal Income Tax.  It can be a token amount, but if people are going to vote for how the money is spent, I would like them to contribute to the fund.  It's easy to spend someone else's money.  I believe it's important for voters to realize they're actually spending their own.

Or we could scrap the whole system and look at a Fair Tax, a National Sales Tax, or some other hybrid system.  Maybe that would be a better idea...

Judges Should Use Judgement

Article: Judge dismisses contempt charges against truant honor student Diane Tran


Apparently, the Montgomery County judge who sentenced a 17 year old girl to a day in jail for truancy has dropped the charges.  Thank God.

Texas has some pretty tough truancy laws.  A student is only allowed to miss 10 days per semester.  Diane Tran has exceeded that limit.  She had already been warned by the courts, so when she missed yet another day, the judge charged her with a misdemeanor and threw her in jail.

Sounds like a good idea, right?

Except Tran is an A student who works two jobs to support her siblings after her parents abandoned them.  She missed school because she was simply too exhausted to go.

I'm opposed to the strict enforcement of laws and mandated penalties.  I believe that justice should be tempered by mercy.  Each case should be judged according to its circumstances.  Most of the time, a judge should simply follow the law and sentencing guidelines.  But the Tran case is an example of why we use judges rather than computers to run our courtrooms.

Judges should use judgement.  They need to assess the case to determine is the law will provide justice.  If the answer is no, as in this case, then the judge should exercise his or her authority to not enforce the law.  It's a judge's job to ensure that our legal system protects victims rather than creating them.

To help Diane Tran, a group has started a website to raise money for the family.  helpdianetran.com

9mm Parabellum is Better than .45acp

Back in the lat 1970's, the FBI got into some trouble using anemic 9mm ball ammunition.  The round has spent the last 30 years trying to live it down.

The .45acp and the 9mm deliver similar amounts of energy per round (depending on the round, with the .45acp averaging about 10% more energy), and have similar one shot stop (OSS) percentages.  Both are slightly inferior to the .357mag standard when it comes to OSS.

The .45acp certainly hits a bit harder, and is definitely superior when using ball ammo.  But the 9mm wins in everything else that matters.

9mm pistols are easier to shoot, usually have a thinner profile, so they're easier to carry, they carry more ammo, and the ammunition is cheaper, allowing you to practice more.  When using standard 2-shot to center of mass defense drills, the 9mm offers more shots, faster shot recovery, and, generally, improved shot consistency.

John Browning created a great round in the .45acp.  But once modern ammunition came on line, Georg Luger's 9mm Parabellum beat is.  Hands down.

Maybe that's why Browning chambered his Hi-Power in 9mm...

Straight White Middle-Class Married Men Are OK

I'm a straight, white, middle-class, married man. 

If you listen to the media, that means I am:

A racist
Oppressive
Sexist
Stupid
"Whipped"
Cowardly
Sexually impotent
Corrupt
etc...

The truth is, I'm none of these things.  Like most people, across the demographic spectrum, I'm a reasonably nice, reasonably competent guy who tries hard to be productive, to take care of my family, to treat others fairly, and to be the best person I can be.

I hear minority groups rally against people like me, claiming I oppress them, and I'm left confused and a bit hurt.  I see racism perpetuated by people who insist on separating themselves from mainstream society, then blame me for the consequence.

I don't personally know anyone who is overtly prejudiced.  I personally would welcome any good, honest person to be my neighbor.  I try hard not to judge or pre-judge people, but to accept them for who they are.  I love people and would never deliberately oppress anyone.

Our culture does have some intrinsic racial and sexual oppression built in, but I've seen major advances in this area over my lifetime.  I have hope that one day demographics will not play a part in a person's social status or opportunity for success.

Unfortunately, I believe this intrinsic oppression is sometimes perpetuated by the oppressed people themselves.  We see voluntary segregation in every population area of the country.  We see militant activists causing division between groups.  We see movements to give certain groups preference over the supposed "oppressive" groups of our society.  We see over-sensitivity among minority groups that cause real complaints of oppression to lose credibility.  These things create animosity and work against positive change.

Personally, I believe the worst obstacle to equality, however, is this attack on the majority group -- straight white males.  Historically, we have held the power and controlled the money in this country.  To a large extent, we still do.  I fail to see how this inequality can be addressed by threatening the group in power.  Most white men are willing to extend opportunity to anyone willing to follow the same rules we follow.  Racism and sexism still exists, but it improves daily.  The vast majority of us don't deserve to be vilified.

RIAA and Media Piracy

See Article Here: No Supreme Court Relief for Joel Tenenbaum’s $675K Piracy Fine


Just to be clear, I do not support intellectual piracy.  I believe it's wrong to make electronic copies of books, movies, and music unless you own the item.  Copying an item you own for the sake of convenience or to protect the original is OK.  Enjoying the item without compensating the owner of the intellectual property, however, is never OK.

That said, charging a college kid over half a million dollars for pirating a few songs is not OK.  Tenenbaum didn't set up a business competing with the music industry using stolen property.  He was never a real threat to their profits.  He needed to be shut down and his files erased, not financially beaten to death for the rest of his life.  I'm praying the courts will come to their senses and reduce this penalty to something more reasonable.

I believe RIAA (The Recording Industry Association of America) is tacking this problem all wrong.  Yes they need to continue their current model and close down pirate rings.  And I'm glad they've stopped prosecuting people like Tenenbaum, but what they really need to do is adapt.

It's become incredibly cheap and easy to distribute media.  I say use that.  Knock the price of music down to $0.10/song.  Movies to $5.00 each, or less for less popular titles.  Offer books for about a tenth of the hardcover price.

Cheap media will discourage black market piracy and encourage impulse and excessive purchase.  Augment this through album and DVD (or better yet, USB drives with installed files) packages with collectable covers, inserts, posters, autographs, concert tickets, contests, etc.

I believe this will work far better than prosecuting teenagers and making them paupers for life.

George Zimmerman Should Not Be Prosecuted

See a transcription of the 911 call HERE.    Click the link below the transcript to listen to the call.


I've done a bit of research on George Zimmerman and the Trayvon Martin incident.  It's caused me to draw a few conclusions...

George Zimmerman is an idiot.  I believe he is a frightened little man who tries to feel better about himself by putting other people down.  He is threatened by the world and believes he can control that fear by lashing out against people he perceives as criminals.  His self promotion to neighbor security guard was simply a manifestation of his low self esteem and cowardice.

That all said, he didn't commit murder.

I believe Trayvon Martin was also an idiot, but I'll cut him a little slack.  Martin was a teenage with typical teenage angst.  He got into some trouble here and there, and tried to project a tough image.  He probably was a fairly tough guy.  But he was essentially harmless and would likely have grown into a reasonably productive adult.

Reading between the lines, I believe this is what happened:

George Zimmerman decided to prove his manhood by patrolling his neighborhood.  The neighborhood had experienced some burglaries and Zimmerman was going to put a stop to it. He had a CPL, so he took his gun along.  It made him feel tough and less vulnerable.  He occasionally daydreamed of becoming a hero by pulling his gun and justifiably killing someone.  This would make him feel manly.  Powerful.  In control!

Trayvon Martin, for his own reasons, trespassed into Zimmerman's neighborhood.  He was minding his own business, but he was somewhere he didn't belong.  To look tough, he had dressed like a street tough and tried to carry himself like someone you wouldn't want to mess with.  He thought this is how a man proves he's a man.

When Zimmerman saw Martin, he figured he had his man.  The kid fit his profile.  He called 911, but they didn't respond fast enough for him.  He was told to disengage and let the police handle it, and he agreed.  He then hung up.  Now this is where my assessment becomes pure speculation.  Zimmerman didn't do as he was told.  With fantasies of heroism running through his head, he pursued Martin.  Martin noticed.  Being a typical teenage boy, Martin got cocky.  He tried to intimidate Zimmerman.  Zimmerman, afraid of confrontation, but even more afraid of his fear, engaged Martin.  They exchanged words and got into each other's faces.  Zimmerman, being the adult, should have deescalated the situation, told Martin police were on the way, and asked him to wait.  Instead, he escalated the argument until Martin hit Zimmerman.  Zimmerman struck back, and Martin tore into him.  Zimmerman was in over his head and became in fear for his safety, and possibly his life.  At this point, Zimmerman unholstered his gun and killed Martin.

Zimmerman is an idiot.  Martin was a typical kid who made some bad choices.  Both made a lot of mistakes, and a young man lost his life.  But Zimmerman didn't murder Martin.  He acted in self defense.  The shooting is justified, if just barely.

Millions of CPL holders across the country carry pistols daily without incident.  People like Zimmerman are a very small minority.  It's a shame this idiot has made the rest of us look bad.  The vast majority of us are completely responsible with our firearms.

Zimmerman could possibly be charged with a lesser crime.  He will certainly be sued.  But he did not murder Trayvon Martin.

Scholarships Should Benefit the Nation

The US spends millions a year on college grants and scholarships.  We spend tax payer dollars with no regard for whether this money benefits the taxpayers.  I believe this should change.

Many kids want to go into fields that are saturated and often without a lot of income potential.  We have plenty of journalists, psychologists, sociologists, and lawyers.  I believe government funded scholarships should only be available for fields that meet our nation's needs.  At the moment, we need chemists, engineers, physicists, nurses, doctors, etc.  We currently fill these roles with immigrants, but that isn't going to work for much longer.  Many immigrant scientists educated in the US are returning to their home countries.  It's projected that by 2018 there will be a severe shortage of scientists in the US.

Free money for college isn't a perk or an entitlement.  Scholarships and grants are an investment in our nation's future.  To allow money to be spent without a thought for the future needs of the country is not only a disservice to the student (who may have trouble finding a job), but it ultimately harms our nation through loss of funds, loss of tax potential, and artificial distortion of the market.  Misspending money this way is irresponsible.

Leave Our Kids ALONE!

Article:  NJ Test Asked Children to Reveal Secret




Our schools were in the news again last week.

It seems New Jersey thought it would be a good idea to ask third graders taking a standardized test to "tell a secret". 

I don't know if this was a true fishing expedition, or if the creator of the test was thinking 9-year olds would simply reveal secrets about what little girl liked which little boy.  Maybe it was simple foolishness and naivete.  Maybe.  Or maybe it was an attempt by the education system to intrude on parent authority and family privacy.

Either way, parents were outraged, and rightly so.  The question has been removed from the test.

Things like this make be feel much better about our decision to homeschool next year.  More and more Americans are choosing this option.  Any wonder why?

God Given Right to Sin

I believe in free will.  I believe one of the ways God made us in his image is through our ability to choose.  By giving us a choice, God gave us the ability to choose Him.  He also gave us the ability, and the right to not choose Him.

We have a God-given right to sin.

This is why I oppose laws that regulate behavior based strictly on the morality of that behavior.  I would never support a law requiring one to be a Christian.  I believe such a law would likely increase the number of Christian in our society, but at a cost.  These people would not have truly chosen God, because they would have never had the option of not choosing.  Without a choice, one cannot choose.

I oppose enforced morality for the same reason.  How can someone have the opportunity to obey and serve God if he is never given the option of disobedience?  Are his actions as worthy as those of a person who was free to make another choice and chose God instead?

God gave us free-will, and with it, the right to sin.  We as a society should respect that and avoid the legislation and enforcement of morality.

A Living Barbie Doll? Really?

Article: The Real-Life Ukrainian Barbie Doll

Valeria Lukyanovais beautiful.  She outta be... She's the epitome of what millions of people around the world have been taught is beautiful.


Whether Lukyanov's beauty if real, Photoshopped, or acquired through plastic surgery, I believe she is really the epitome of modern vanity.


Humans are unique in that we can appreciate beauty.  Unfortunately, our concept of beauty is often taught rather than allowed to occur naturally.  This means women like Lukyanovacan be considered beautiful while woman like Meg Whitman are considered acceptable at best.  Of the two, Whitman is of much greater value to our society in general, but people tend to be drawn to Lukyanov.  It's sad.

I would like to see our society embrace beauty in a way that values more than just outward appearance.  Productivity, loyalty, sacrifice, generosity,  all of these traits have value.  Perhaps even more value than a pretty face.

Divorce and Kids

See the KickStarter Link Here: "Monkey in the Middle" Divorce Book Series


Fifty percent of US marriages will end in divorce.  Many of these divorces will affect children.

When a divorce occurs, it's not uncommon for one spouse to want to save the marriage while the other spouse seeks to end it.  The spouse fighting to save the marriage may feel powerless, hopeless, abandoned, unloved, and hurt.

If an adult can experience these helpless feelings, imagine what a child feels.

Children of divorce experience all the emotions adults do, but with far less power and control.  They often feel guilty and lost.  Their lives are forever changed and there is nothing they can do about it.

Jontie Hays and Sarah Ulmer have decided to do something to help children affected by divorce.  They have started a series of children's books specifically designed to help kids address the questions, fears, and emotions they experience as they transition into their new lives.

These books won't replace a healthy marriage with loving parents.  The best gift parents can ever give their children is to love each other.  But if divorce is going to occur, this project can help ease the pain and anxiety children experience when going through such a difficult time.

The project is being funded through donations.  They have a minimum target of $4000 to keep the project going, with an ultimate target of $195,000 to see it through to completion.  At the time of this writing, they are half way to their minimum goal.

Please take a moment to check out the website (the link is at the top of this page) and consider a donation.

Breastfeeding is normal. This picture is not.

See article here: Time Magazine Cover Stirs Breastfeeding Controversy


I'm all for breastfeeding babies.  I fully support women who choose this for themselves and their children.  I support the practice in public, so long as the mother uses a reasonable amount of polite discretion.  I'll even support breastfeeding a child until fully weaned (about 3 years old).  But I don't think any of these were the true reason for Time's recent controversial magazine cover.

I think this cover was for one reason only... to sell magazines.  It was chosen for shock value.  An attractive mom is feeding a fairly mature 3 year old dressed in play clothes suitable for a school classroom.  They're both looking at the camera as if to say "Yeah... what're ya gonna do about it?"

I have no idea why all this is a controversy.  Breastfeeding is normal and healthy.  There is absolutely nothing sexual about the practice.  This "controversy" makes about as much sense as arguing whether one should use a public restroom to relieve their bladder.

Let's just let it go.  We have much more important things to worry about.  If I want to look at undressed women, there are better options than Time Magazine.  Personally, the only woman who interests me is my wife.

Stop Prohibiting Cell Phones on Planes and in Hospitals

Forbes Article: Electronics on Airplanes: It's the Bureaucracy, Stupid!

NY Times Article: Disruptions: Time to Review F.A.A. Policy on Gadgets


I fly a lot.  On every flight, before takeoff and landing, I am required to turn off my smartphone.  Airplane mode is not good enough.  The phone has to be completely off.  Why?

In the 1990s, most phones were analog.  This required a higher powered signal to make cellular calls.  When I worked on a monitored unit in the hospital, we would know when someone was using a cell phone because the EKG tracings for our patients would be disrupted.  We'd make an overhead announcement asking people to turn their phones off and the EKG would start working again.

Electronic devices in general put out electromagnetic radiation that can affect sensitive equipment.  To keep cell phone transmissions and electromagnetic radiation from electronic devices from affecting aircraft avionics during crucial times of the flight, the FAA ruled years ago that all cell phones and electronic devices must be fully turned off during takeoff and landing.

Today, cellular phones are digital and put out a much lower powered signal than in the old analog days.  Also, manufacturers have started shielding sensitive electronic equipment against electromagnetic radiation.  Electronic devices no longer pose a threat to aircraft or to hospital monitoring equipment.

It's time to review out laws and policies on this.  Pilots are using iPods in the cockpit while requiring their passengers to turn off similar devices in the cabin.  Hospitals still have signage prohibiting cell phone use, but seldom enforce the rule.

Our bureaucracy needs to catch up with our technology.

Why Does Our Government Define Marriage?

View the CNN article here: Obama: Biden comments pushed up same-sex marriage announcement

I have a problem with President Obama's announcement that he is in support of Gay Marriage.

As a Christian, I have certain beliefs related to my religion.  There are activities allowed by our society's laws that I believe are contrary to God's will. But that doesn't mean I necessarily want to change the law to reflect my perception of God's will.

We live in a secular society with religious freedom.  Different religions have different traditions regarding marriage.  Non-religious people have their own beliefs and traditions.  Our government should not give preference to any one of these groups, even if that group is the majority.  To do so is in direct defiance of our country's tradition of personal liberty.

We should not recognize "gay marriage".  We should also not recognize "heterosexual marriage", or polygamy, or line marriages, etc.  Every "marriage" should be a civil union defined by marriage contract.  The government should regulate these contracts by requiring that certain factors be addressed (i.e. allocation of assets, grounds for dissolution, child rights and responsibilities, etc.).  To have a government recognized marriage, the marriage partners would see a lawyer, draw up a contract, sign and notarize it, and file with the County Clerk's office.

If the married couple (or group) wants to be married according to their religious traditions, they would then see their spiritual leader and be married according to the doctrine of their church.

Government recognized marriage and religious marriage should not be considered the same thing.  They are distinctly different.  One is legal, the other is spiritual.

Get Out of the Way of Emergency Vehicles!

Generally speaking, when you see an ambulance, fire truck, police car, or any emergency vehicle with blue or red lights flashing, you should pull to the right shoulder or curb and stop.

But not always.

The idea isn't to pull over.  It's to get out of the way.  Pulling to the side and stopping is only appropriate if it gets you out of the way!

I've seen people pull over for emergency vehicles in the opposing lanes of 5-lane, or even divided highways.  I've seen them pull over when the emergency vehicle is the only vehicle in the opposing lane on a quiet country road with no crossroads or driveways nearby (not wrong, but probably not necessary).  I've seen them pull over when the emergency vehicle is still a quarter mile away, only to have the ambulance or fire truck turn before it ever catches up to the private-owned car.

I've seen people stay in front of a police car, thinking they're being pulled over, only to have the cop speed past when the private-owned car finally gets out of the way.

We all want to help emergency vehicles, but we have to do it smart.  If you're not in the way, try not to become an obstacle.  Don't block traffic unnecessarily; don't block side roads, driveways, or access roads; when and emergency vehicle comes up behind you, move to the right to let them pass; if you are not in the way, but could get in the way, stop and wait for the emergency vehicle to go by.  Never pass stopped cars or the emergency vehicle itself.  Never turn in front of an emergency vehicle.

Basically, use intelligent discretion.  If you are unable to figure out the best thing to do, simply pull to the right and stop -- without blocking driveways.

One day that ambulance could be trying to help you.

(BTW: Most states have laws requiring drivers to yield the right of way to emergency vehicles.)

God Is Above Paradox

Can God create a rock bigger than He can lift?  Yes.  And He can lift it.

This is a silly question with a silly answer.  How is it relevant?  And how can He both create the unliftable rock and lift it at the same time?  It doesn't make sense!

It is silly.  But important for one reason only...

We often try to define God in terms we can understand.  We want to limit Him by saying He is either incapable of creating the rock, or He is incapable of lifting it.  To our human understanding, even an omnipotent God can't do both.  But calling God "omnipotent" and limiting Him is really the greater paradox.

Unfortunately, we don't confine our limits to rocks.  We often expect God to bless the righteous and punish the wicked.  To behave in certain ways that make sense within the limits of our human understanding.  We need to understand the God is smarter and more capable than we are.  He is what He is, not what we believe He should be, or what seems logical to us.

God is powerful enough to perform paradoxical acts.  He is beyond our limited ability to understand Him.  By trying to limit Him to our understanding, we subject ourselves to the same reprimand Job received from God in chapters 40-41.  God wouldn't allow Job to judge His actions, and He won't allow us to define His omnipotence.

Marvel Beats DC Hands Down!

Superman and Batman are great superheroes, especially Batman, but DC Comics just can't compete with the creative genius of Marvel.  Spiderman was my all time hero when I was a kid.  I still have the bronze medallian my dad bought me when I went to get my picture on Spiderman's lap.  X-Men, Thor, Fantastic 4, Hulk, Ironman, how do you compete.  With Aquaman?  I don't think so...

I haven't see "The Avengers" yet, but soon...

Marriage is a life long commitment.

The Bible gives us a couple of reasons for divorce, but it's apparent that God would prefer we not use those excuses to end our marriages.

I've heard people give excuses for having affairs.  I'm not sure how one justifies an affair.  The excuses I've heard would explain leaving, but not an affair.  You really can't justify an affair.  It's the betrayed spouse who has grounds for the divorce, though, once an affair has occurred.

I've heard people say they've fallen out of love.  But love is an action, not simply a feeling.  And marriage is about commitment, not love.

I've heard folks say they are unhappy in the marriage.  But God didn't make marriage, nor life in general, to make us happy.  All of this is to make us holy, and to bring us closer to Him.  Our happiness is a byproduct of blessings, not the reason for them.

I've heard people excuse divorce for abuse.  I can't really argue with this one, even if I can't find Biblical grounds.  I don't believe anyone should have to tolerate abusive behavior.  But the abuse has to be real.  Calling uncomfortable behavior "abuse" as an excuse to end a marriage is dishonest.

I've known people who have divorced over adultery or abandonment without trying to mend the marriage or even to look at their own role in the breakdown of the marriage.  These folks have Biblical grounds, but will God approve of their quick action to divorce without attempting to repair His holy institution of marriage?

I've also known people who have experienced abuse, abandonment, infidelity, loss of connection, or unhappiness in their marriages, but stuck it out.  I've seen God bless these marriages.  Especially when the couple has sought help rather than trying to run from their vows.

I know people who have run from one marriage only to experience similar problems in their next.  These folks have an obligation to their current marriages and should attempt to make repairs rather than running again.

This is a heart issue.  People will read this and decide I'm judging them.  I'm not.  I believe this is a judgement of God.  He is the one who wants us to be more responsible in our marriage commitments.  I'm not saying to never divorce.  That decision is between the couple and God.  I'm just saying we should stop listening to the World and listen to Him instead.  God hates divorce.  He understands that wrestling with a broken heart is hard work.  But He will provide the strength to follow His will if we submit to that will.

God bless.

Obama needs to stop politicizing the SeALs.

Article: SEALs slam Obama for using them as 'ammunition' in bid to take credit for bin Laden killing during election campaign

I really appreciate Obama's continuation of the mission to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden.  I've supported his efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.  I believe he has made the right choices in supporting the CIA and the military in their effort to protect us from terrorism and to bring down the organizations that led to 9/11.

I do not, however, appreciate his attempts to politicize the efforts of our nation's heroes as a campaign strategy.

The capturing of Bin Laden was the result of about ten years of intelligence work coupled with some highly skilled military technique.  The SeALs involved were completely professional and conducted their mission flawlessly, even adapting the plan when the insertion helicopter crashed.  This was a surgical strike and never a kill mission.  If they had wanted to kill Bin Laden, they would have used a missile.

Unfortunately, the political wealth of the SeALs' success was more important to this administration than the intelligence discovered or the anonymity of the strike team.  By announcing the death of Bin Laden so quickly, Obama quite possibly allowed several other terrorist heads to escape capture.  By focusing so heavily on his role in the operation, he drew attention to SeAL Team Six, a group of men who would rather have stayed under the radar.

Obama should give credit to the military for a job well done.  He should have waited for the go-head from the CIA before announcing the success of the mission.

Obama most certainly should not be using the mission as a cornerstone for his campaign.  He can take credit for Bin Laden's death during his presidency, but he needs to keep in mind that he did not capture or kill Bin Laden himself.  GW Bush was responsible for establishing the mission.  The CIA gathered the intelligence.  The SeALs killed Bin Laden.  Obama simply stayed out of the way and was in the right place at the right time.

Obama taking credit for this kill is like a Lotto winner bragging about his economical success.

Related article: Obama Exploits the Navy SEALs

Spirit is Right to Deny Refund

Read article here:  Vets mull boycott of Spirit Airlines after dying former Marine denied refund


Spirit Airlines has rightfully denied a refund to a dying veteran.

Former Marine Jerry Meekins, 76, of Clearwater, FL requested a refund when his doctor told him it would be dangerous for him to fly due to end stage cancer.  Meekins wanted to travel to be with his daughter while she undergoes surgery.  He drove instead.

While it would certainly have been kind of the airline to refund Meekins' money, and I personally would have done it, I believe Spirit was right to deny his request.

I fly Spirit a lot.  They are a discount airline with cheap tickets.  They make their profit by selling services a-la-cart.  Upgrades to preferred seating (aisles, windows, etc.), carry-on bags, checked bags, snacks, beverages, virtually everything is sold at an extra cost.  The carrier offers trip insurance for $14 when you check out.  If you elect not to buy the insurance, you accept the risk if your trip is cancelled.

Meekins accepted the risk.  He chose a discount carrier to save money.  He chose not to buy insurance to save money.  He accepted the risk and lost.

The fact that Meekins is a former Marine is a non-issue.  This story is not military related in any way.  Spirit's refusal to refund the ticket is not disrespectful to veterans.  For veterans to try making this a veteran issue reduces the credibility of real veteran issues.  Meekins wasn't denied because he was a veteran.  He was not denied customary veteran courtesies.  He is just a customer who took a risk and lost.  Using his military service in an effort to gain special privilege is wrong.  (As far as I know, this part of the controversy has been created by veterans groups and not Meekins himself.)

Spirit should stick to its guns.  We the public should stop trying to pressure Spirit Airlines to violate its policies and refund this ticket.

Yeah... Her boyfriend's a jerk...

 

See video here:  Jerk Boyfriend Scares Girls Silly by Dressing as a Burglar

It makes me feel guilty, but I’m really amused by this video.  I love a good prank!

But the video does offer us something to consider…

The girls coming through the door are entirely unaware of their environment.  We all get a bit too comfortable at home, but these three never get it together.  They shove each other out of the way and RUN.  Then they sit down and cry.

These girls are victims waiting to happen.  They have no awareness and no defense strategy.  Their response was pure reaction with no thought or plan.

It’s important to consider dangerous scenarios in our daily lives.  Many families have fire drills, but how many hold burglary drills?  What should our families do in the case of a home invasion?

Every family should have a basic plan.  There should be a designated safe room where everyone will meet.  Adult bedrooms should have cell phones.  A firearm should be considered.  The family should discuss ways to tell if a stranger is in the house.

A few basic protocols and a couple of drills can keep a dangerous situation from becoming a lethal one.

Of course, in this video’s case, I guess it’s good his girlfriend doesn’t have a defense plan that includes a firearm…

:')