It's been 8 months since we've moved into my parent's house, and now there is hope of moving elsewhere. As our house in Detroit sells, we'll finish the relocation we started last June somewhere closer to my work in downtown Indianapolis. We plan to end up in Fishers. As someone pointed out tonight, we'll be moving from one of the "worst places to live" to "one of the best" as Hamilton County is typically highly ranked.
This will be a nice change.
This week was our one week in February, where the weather warms and the sun breaks free from the clouds for a day or two. Of course, there was wind, rain and cold as well, but those two days in the 50s were enough to lift one's mood and remind of the coming spring. It may be 4 or even 8 weeks off, but it will come. The sun will shine, Rogers will put on her Old Navy flip flops and, hopefully, we'll walk the streets of a new neighborhood.
Last movie watched: Lakeview Terrace
Currently watching: The Tudors, Season 1
Last meal: Hacienda
Last video game played: Lego Batman
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Monday, February 09, 2009
"Glasses of water"
The house is selling, praise the Lord. On Friday morning, I received a 248 area code phone call...my realtor was on the line and he said "We've got an offer."
Maybe...someday soon...I will move out of my parent's house once again.
All praises be to the Lord. The One who sells houses in Detroit when they're buried under a foot or two of snow in the dead of winter. Thank you.
Maybe...someday soon...I will move out of my parent's house once again.
All praises be to the Lord. The One who sells houses in Detroit when they're buried under a foot or two of snow in the dead of winter. Thank you.
"The hollowest of halos is no halo at all"
This article is being posted simply for my own sake...so if/when I want to look back at this time and read about what made the 2008/2009 recession a very dark time, I will have some context.
Obama and the Economy: When, If Ever, Was He Telling Us the Truth?
By John R. Lott, Jr.“Freedomnomics” author/Senior Research Scientist, University of Maryland
As the final push for the 778 page, $827 billion stimulus package faces votes today and tomorrow in the Senate, President Obama is hammering his opponents and pushing hard for the bill. On Friday, Obama pointedly reminded Republicans that he won the November election and had the right to get his policies enacted. But the stimulus bill bears little resemblance to his campaign promises. It bears little resemblance his many promises he made just a month ago.
If Obama claims a mandate, shouldn’t it be related to what he campaigned on?
President Barack Obama speaks during a town hall style meeting about the economic stimulus package, Monday, Feb. 9, 2009, at Concord Community High School in Elkhart, Ind.
At the very end of the presidential campaign Obama “proposed a $175 billion plan with tax-rebate checks for consumers as well as spending on school repairs, roads and bridges, aid to states, and tax credits for job creation.”
The current bill is not only spending 4.7 times what he promised in November, but gone are the tax-rebate checks and tax credits for job creation. The new additional programs have nothing to do with roads and bridges. Yet, a package that Obama never hinted at a couple of months ago is now considered sacrosanct. The Associated Press described Obama’s position on the stimulus plan this way: “Stopping just short of a take-it-or-leave-it stand, Obama has mocked the notion that a stimulus bill shouldn’t include huge spending.”
Take an emphatic promise that Obama made just a month ago, well after the heat of the presidential campaign had passed: “We are going to ban all earmarks — the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review.” That wasn’t a new promise. During the third presidential debate on October 15, 2008 Obama bluntly promised: “they need to be eliminated.”
But now take Obama’s testy defense of those same earmarks last Friday. Obama reportedly “also defended earmarks as inevitable in such a package.”
During the third presidential debate Obama promised to rein in the budget deficit. When moderator Bob Schieffer asked Obama what he was going to do about the deficit Obama promised to cut the it: “But there is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.”
Or take the second presidential debate on October 7, 2008. Obama noted that eliminating earmarks was “important,” but even more important “I want to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don’t work and make sure that those that do work, work better and cheaper.” This was his constant theme during the presidential debates to cut government.
So how do you go from campaigning to cut government spending and ban earmarks before the election on November 4 to start talking about a $500 to $700 billion stimulus plan in mid-November. What changed?
What exactly did he learn immediately after the election about the economy that caused him to go from a budget cutter to proposing the biggest increase in spending ever? Prior to the election, Obama was already regularly claiming that the economy was in the worst financial crisis since the depression. Do you cut spending when you are in the worst financial crisis since the depression, but massively increase it if you can claim that things have gotten a little worse?
Now Obama is saying that we will be facing trillion dollar deficits “for years to come.” There was no hint of these policies on November 4, 2008.
Some economic logic is required here. Some explanation for these changes within weeks is needed. When will someone in the press ask Obama to explain what his economic view of the world is that made him support positions right before the election that he then reversed right after he won.
I don’t know of any economic theory that explains Obama’s different policy positions. The most likely explanation is a simple one: Obama told voters what they wanted to hear during the campaign, not what he planned to do. Obama’s short Senate record tells us that he really was the most liberal member of the senate.
While the stimulus bill is going to increase federal government spending by over $800 billion, there is one place that Obama has so far announced a cut — defense spending. A 10 percent cut might be fine, but during the presidential campaign defense spending was one area where he promised to “increase” spending.
Disappointingly, no one is asking Obama to explain any of these changes. Possibly everyone has gotten so distracted or tired trying to catalogue Obama’s broken ethics promises that they are missing the littered field of broken campaign promises.
If Obama merely waited until after the election to make his policy views known, he can’t claim a mandate for his “new” policies. What should be questioned is Obama’s truthfulness to the American people.
John Lott is the author of Freedomnomics and a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland.
Obama and the Economy: When, If Ever, Was He Telling Us the Truth?
By John R. Lott, Jr.“Freedomnomics” author/Senior Research Scientist, University of Maryland
As the final push for the 778 page, $827 billion stimulus package faces votes today and tomorrow in the Senate, President Obama is hammering his opponents and pushing hard for the bill. On Friday, Obama pointedly reminded Republicans that he won the November election and had the right to get his policies enacted. But the stimulus bill bears little resemblance to his campaign promises. It bears little resemblance his many promises he made just a month ago.
If Obama claims a mandate, shouldn’t it be related to what he campaigned on?
President Barack Obama speaks during a town hall style meeting about the economic stimulus package, Monday, Feb. 9, 2009, at Concord Community High School in Elkhart, Ind.
At the very end of the presidential campaign Obama “proposed a $175 billion plan with tax-rebate checks for consumers as well as spending on school repairs, roads and bridges, aid to states, and tax credits for job creation.”
The current bill is not only spending 4.7 times what he promised in November, but gone are the tax-rebate checks and tax credits for job creation. The new additional programs have nothing to do with roads and bridges. Yet, a package that Obama never hinted at a couple of months ago is now considered sacrosanct. The Associated Press described Obama’s position on the stimulus plan this way: “Stopping just short of a take-it-or-leave-it stand, Obama has mocked the notion that a stimulus bill shouldn’t include huge spending.”
Take an emphatic promise that Obama made just a month ago, well after the heat of the presidential campaign had passed: “We are going to ban all earmarks — the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review.” That wasn’t a new promise. During the third presidential debate on October 15, 2008 Obama bluntly promised: “they need to be eliminated.”
But now take Obama’s testy defense of those same earmarks last Friday. Obama reportedly “also defended earmarks as inevitable in such a package.”
During the third presidential debate Obama promised to rein in the budget deficit. When moderator Bob Schieffer asked Obama what he was going to do about the deficit Obama promised to cut the it: “But there is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.”
Or take the second presidential debate on October 7, 2008. Obama noted that eliminating earmarks was “important,” but even more important “I want to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don’t work and make sure that those that do work, work better and cheaper.” This was his constant theme during the presidential debates to cut government.
So how do you go from campaigning to cut government spending and ban earmarks before the election on November 4 to start talking about a $500 to $700 billion stimulus plan in mid-November. What changed?
What exactly did he learn immediately after the election about the economy that caused him to go from a budget cutter to proposing the biggest increase in spending ever? Prior to the election, Obama was already regularly claiming that the economy was in the worst financial crisis since the depression. Do you cut spending when you are in the worst financial crisis since the depression, but massively increase it if you can claim that things have gotten a little worse?
Now Obama is saying that we will be facing trillion dollar deficits “for years to come.” There was no hint of these policies on November 4, 2008.
Some economic logic is required here. Some explanation for these changes within weeks is needed. When will someone in the press ask Obama to explain what his economic view of the world is that made him support positions right before the election that he then reversed right after he won.
I don’t know of any economic theory that explains Obama’s different policy positions. The most likely explanation is a simple one: Obama told voters what they wanted to hear during the campaign, not what he planned to do. Obama’s short Senate record tells us that he really was the most liberal member of the senate.
While the stimulus bill is going to increase federal government spending by over $800 billion, there is one place that Obama has so far announced a cut — defense spending. A 10 percent cut might be fine, but during the presidential campaign defense spending was one area where he promised to “increase” spending.
Disappointingly, no one is asking Obama to explain any of these changes. Possibly everyone has gotten so distracted or tired trying to catalogue Obama’s broken ethics promises that they are missing the littered field of broken campaign promises.
If Obama merely waited until after the election to make his policy views known, he can’t claim a mandate for his “new” policies. What should be questioned is Obama’s truthfulness to the American people.
John Lott is the author of Freedomnomics and a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland.
Friday, February 06, 2009
"I'm down on my mind"
Another quick update! Phil's post about the movie where communists invade America immediately made me want to write on his wall a joke about communists invading Washington DC in 2009...well at least $900 Billion dollar let's stimulate the...government(?) socialists.
But I decided it'd be better to put my opinions on my own blog. Joking aside, let's hope the stimulus bill doesn't pass in it's present form. There's a bunch of crap in it, and I'm told it's a massive expansion of government. Surprise, surprise. (Full disclosure, I haven't read the bill...I've skimmed some of the lowlights and heard some of the results of studies from the CBO.)
Hooray for socialist health care: Man pulls out 13 of his own teeth with pliers 'because he couldn't find an NHS dentist' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1135582/Man-pulls-13-teeth-pliers-NHS-dentist.html?ITO=1490
In other news, it's ridiculous that so many of our appointees have these tax issues. It's no wonder democrats are likely to raise taxes over the next few years -- at least on the "rich." Why wouldn't you vote to raise taxes on the rich if you are rich, but never plan to pay your taxes anyway? Obama: I "absolutely" stand by Daschle.
The next day Daschle steps down. How about our Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner? Are there no law-abiding citizens who can take these jobs. Are we appointing criminals on purpose? Can I wait to pay my taxes until I'm appointed to a high government position?
But I decided it'd be better to put my opinions on my own blog. Joking aside, let's hope the stimulus bill doesn't pass in it's present form. There's a bunch of crap in it, and I'm told it's a massive expansion of government. Surprise, surprise. (Full disclosure, I haven't read the bill...I've skimmed some of the lowlights and heard some of the results of studies from the CBO.)
Hooray for socialist health care: Man pulls out 13 of his own teeth with pliers 'because he couldn't find an NHS dentist' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1135582/Man-pulls-13-teeth-pliers-NHS-dentist.html?ITO=1490
In other news, it's ridiculous that so many of our appointees have these tax issues. It's no wonder democrats are likely to raise taxes over the next few years -- at least on the "rich." Why wouldn't you vote to raise taxes on the rich if you are rich, but never plan to pay your taxes anyway? Obama: I "absolutely" stand by Daschle.
The next day Daschle steps down. How about our Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner? Are there no law-abiding citizens who can take these jobs. Are we appointing criminals on purpose? Can I wait to pay my taxes until I'm appointed to a high government position?
"Learn not to hear keys"
I've been playing on the church basketball team over the past couple of months. I'm a legacy member of Madison Park Church of God, so they let me play. It's been enjoyable, although it is a little sad, how bad I am. Mostly in bad shape, but definitely lacking in some of the skills I used to have. There are ocassional impressive flashes, but they are few and far between.
Football season is over and I'm jonesing to play some Madden Football on the Wii. I've never played it, but I'm confident I would enjoy it. It would be the perfect game for that time of the day when it is 11 p.m. -- not quite ready for bed, but will be in 45 minutes. In my early teens, I played Madden 96 on the Sega Genesis all the time. I was always the Colts, and it was the days of Craig Erickson...sad days. I had that game down. I would set up my audibles and do a no huddle the whole game in hopes that I could score a ton of points.
Another classic game around that time was World Series Baseball on the Genesis. My mistake was beginning a full season thinking it would be fun to see the stats from 162 games. I think I made it to game 40 or 50 before my attention turned elsewhere.
Perhaps the best Genesis game I played was Phantasy Star IV...thanks Ricker. He let me borrow it, and it was a great RPG. Perhaps someday, I'll download it for the Wii as well and revisit the glory days.
In other gamer news, on February 4, 2009, I canceled my Xbox Live Account. Reckless Jon will never capture the flag again. It was awhile overdue, I suppose and the $50 charge just didn't seem worth holding on to since I don't think I played once in 2008. Maybe I'll use that $50 bucks to go get Madden and play on the Wii's wi-fi for free.
Football season is over and I'm jonesing to play some Madden Football on the Wii. I've never played it, but I'm confident I would enjoy it. It would be the perfect game for that time of the day when it is 11 p.m. -- not quite ready for bed, but will be in 45 minutes. In my early teens, I played Madden 96 on the Sega Genesis all the time. I was always the Colts, and it was the days of Craig Erickson...sad days. I had that game down. I would set up my audibles and do a no huddle the whole game in hopes that I could score a ton of points.
Another classic game around that time was World Series Baseball on the Genesis. My mistake was beginning a full season thinking it would be fun to see the stats from 162 games. I think I made it to game 40 or 50 before my attention turned elsewhere.
Perhaps the best Genesis game I played was Phantasy Star IV...thanks Ricker. He let me borrow it, and it was a great RPG. Perhaps someday, I'll download it for the Wii as well and revisit the glory days.
In other gamer news, on February 4, 2009, I canceled my Xbox Live Account. Reckless Jon will never capture the flag again. It was awhile overdue, I suppose and the $50 charge just didn't seem worth holding on to since I don't think I played once in 2008. Maybe I'll use that $50 bucks to go get Madden and play on the Wii's wi-fi for free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)