- 100 Club
Local clubs nation-wide. Check the web page for one near you. - American Cancer Society
PO Box 149186
Austin, TX 78714 - American Diabetes Association
PO Box 1834
Merrifield, VA 22116 - American Heart Association
PO Box 143089
Austin, TX 78714
Even better than donations, learn CPR! Find a class near you. - American Legion
P.O. Box 1055
Indianapolis, IN 46206 - American Lung Association
PO Box 7001
Alberta Lea, MN 56007 - The ALS Association
PO Box 8925
Pueblo, CO 81008 - Cal Farley's Boys Ranch
PO Box 1890
Amarillo, TX 79105 - Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
6531 Arlington Dr.
Bethesda, MD 20814 - Disabled American Veterans
PO Box 14301
Cincinnati, OH 45205 - Girls and Boys Town
PO Box 6000
Boystown, NE 68010 - Habitat for Humanity
PO Box 1167
Americus, GA 31709 - Hunter Topping Second Chance Scholarship
608 East Prairie Ronde
Dowagiac, MI 49047 - The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society
PO Box 8925
Pueblo, CO 81008 - March of Dimes
PO Box 226585
Dallas, TX 75222 - Muscular Dystrophy Association
PO Box 79069
Phoenix, AZ 85062 - National Muscular Sclerosis Society
PO Box 816148
Dallas, TX 75381 - National Wildlife Federation
PO Box 1637
Merrifield, VA 22116 - Operation Smile
6435 Tidewater Dr.
Norfolk, VA 23509 - Paralyzed Veterans of America
7 Mill Brook Rd.
Wilton, NH 03086 - Shriner's Hospital
PO Box 1510
Ranson, WV 25438 - The Smile Train
PO Box 96231
Washington, DC 20090 - Special Olympics
PO Box 143806
Austin, TX 78714 - St. Josephs Indian School
PO Box 200
Chamberlain, SD 57325 - St. Jude Hospital
PO Box 50
Memphis, TN 38101 - Toys for Tots
PO Box 227
Quantico, VA 22134 - Veterans of Foreign Wars
PO Box 8942
Topeka, KS 66608 - Warrior Weekend
31768 Legion Road
Millsboro, DE 19966
Monday, September 01, 2008
Charities We Support
Here's the list of charities we support. I invite you to check out their web sites and learn if there are any you'd also like to help:
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Being Deliberately Generous
I'm not writing this to brag on myself or my spouse. I'm also not writing this to put a guilt trip on anyone, either. What I hope is to influence others to be more generous in their life and make the world just that much better.
As my wife and I were discussing our finances before we married, we agreed that we would tithe to our local church. That means we give 10% of our incomes to help support our local church. One can argue this way or that to prove tithing isn't necessary under the new covenant, or that churches are "just out for the money." Certainly, there are Biblical arguments for not tithing and there are churches which are only interested in profit, both of which sour many on giving to the "church." Still, I believe there are good arguments in favor of tithing.
First, it's a practical thing: bills need to be paid. Personally, I like having lights, air conditioning, heat and coffee in the church's building. There's a mortgage to pay, water bill, salaries, etc. That money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is supposed to be from the donations of the people who call that church "home."
The next reasons are more spiritual. This is, perhaps, the most oft-quoted verse when it comes to tithing: "'Bring all the tithes into the storehouse so there will be enough food in my Temple. If you do,' says the LORD Almighty, 'I will open the windows of heaven for you. I will pour out a blessing so great you won't have enough room to take it in! Try it! Let me prove it to you!'" (Malachi 3:10 - New Living Translation)
The God of the Universe is offering a challenge: "Try it!" This isn't a command, this isn't a guilt trip, this isn't some kind of religious zealousness. God is simply telling us to give 10% and see if He doesn't return it and more to you. It's like an investment. I can honestly say from my own experience, I live a whole lot better on 90% of my income than I ever did on 100% of it.
There is another spiritual aspect to this I call "God Karma." In eastern religions, Karma is the process by which when you do good things, good things are returned to you. In Christian circles this is known as "sowing and reaping." St. Paul wrote to the Galatian church: "Don't be misled. Remember that you can't ignore God and get away with it. You will always reap what you sow." (Galatians 6:7 - New Living Translation)
By sowing generosity in your life - not only in tithing but in all you do, generosity will come back to you. I can't explain why and how - I just know it works. For the past four years, my wife and I have taught ourselves to be generous in all circumstances. We give to our church, we give to many charities, we over-tip (even when the service is bad), we give to those we find in need, we try to pick up dinners for our friends and family members when we go out, and the list goes on. This isn't a way to show off or to make people think we have more money than we really do. This is all done on a "cash basis" using very little, if any, credit or borrowing.
One thing we find is that we don't worry about money. We never have to because we always have more than enough to meet our needs and have plenty go give away. This takes a lot of the stress our of our lives and out of our marriage. It's wonderful that when we see a need, we always seem to have enough in our savings to make things happen. My friend's son passed on; I was able to buy plane tickets with little notice so I could attend the funeral. My sister's son passed; we were able to pay for a part of the headstone. Another friend needed gas money to take his son to a missionary event 12 hours away; we were able to help out.
We believe that out of this generosity comes things which benefit us personally. When we want to take a trip, we have money for it. On gift-giving occasions we're able to give wonderful gifts. When our cars need repair, we have the money to get them done. From where all this largess comes from we can't really calculate because it doesn't make sense. When we need or want it, the money's there.
Now, I will caution against taking this too far and falling into the "Prosperity Gospel." I've heard preaching which instructs people to give because God has to return to us 100 times what we give. I don't believe, though, that God "has" to do anything. As in many spiritual matters, I believe it's the attitude about the giving rather than the hard numbers. Give because you want to give, because it's the right thing to do. If you give out of greed you won't get the "God Karma" going. It's a delicate balance in your heart and in your head, but it can be done.
"You must each make up your own mind as to how much you should give. Don't give reluctantly or in response to pressure. For God loves the person who gives cheerfully." (2 Corinthians 9:7 - NLT)
Click here for a list of charities we help support
As my wife and I were discussing our finances before we married, we agreed that we would tithe to our local church. That means we give 10% of our incomes to help support our local church. One can argue this way or that to prove tithing isn't necessary under the new covenant, or that churches are "just out for the money." Certainly, there are Biblical arguments for not tithing and there are churches which are only interested in profit, both of which sour many on giving to the "church." Still, I believe there are good arguments in favor of tithing.
First, it's a practical thing: bills need to be paid. Personally, I like having lights, air conditioning, heat and coffee in the church's building. There's a mortgage to pay, water bill, salaries, etc. That money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is supposed to be from the donations of the people who call that church "home."
The next reasons are more spiritual. This is, perhaps, the most oft-quoted verse when it comes to tithing: "'Bring all the tithes into the storehouse so there will be enough food in my Temple. If you do,' says the LORD Almighty, 'I will open the windows of heaven for you. I will pour out a blessing so great you won't have enough room to take it in! Try it! Let me prove it to you!'" (Malachi 3:10 - New Living Translation)
The God of the Universe is offering a challenge: "Try it!" This isn't a command, this isn't a guilt trip, this isn't some kind of religious zealousness. God is simply telling us to give 10% and see if He doesn't return it and more to you. It's like an investment. I can honestly say from my own experience, I live a whole lot better on 90% of my income than I ever did on 100% of it.
There is another spiritual aspect to this I call "God Karma." In eastern religions, Karma is the process by which when you do good things, good things are returned to you. In Christian circles this is known as "sowing and reaping." St. Paul wrote to the Galatian church: "Don't be misled. Remember that you can't ignore God and get away with it. You will always reap what you sow." (Galatians 6:7 - New Living Translation)
By sowing generosity in your life - not only in tithing but in all you do, generosity will come back to you. I can't explain why and how - I just know it works. For the past four years, my wife and I have taught ourselves to be generous in all circumstances. We give to our church, we give to many charities, we over-tip (even when the service is bad), we give to those we find in need, we try to pick up dinners for our friends and family members when we go out, and the list goes on. This isn't a way to show off or to make people think we have more money than we really do. This is all done on a "cash basis" using very little, if any, credit or borrowing.
One thing we find is that we don't worry about money. We never have to because we always have more than enough to meet our needs and have plenty go give away. This takes a lot of the stress our of our lives and out of our marriage. It's wonderful that when we see a need, we always seem to have enough in our savings to make things happen. My friend's son passed on; I was able to buy plane tickets with little notice so I could attend the funeral. My sister's son passed; we were able to pay for a part of the headstone. Another friend needed gas money to take his son to a missionary event 12 hours away; we were able to help out.
We believe that out of this generosity comes things which benefit us personally. When we want to take a trip, we have money for it. On gift-giving occasions we're able to give wonderful gifts. When our cars need repair, we have the money to get them done. From where all this largess comes from we can't really calculate because it doesn't make sense. When we need or want it, the money's there.
Now, I will caution against taking this too far and falling into the "Prosperity Gospel." I've heard preaching which instructs people to give because God has to return to us 100 times what we give. I don't believe, though, that God "has" to do anything. As in many spiritual matters, I believe it's the attitude about the giving rather than the hard numbers. Give because you want to give, because it's the right thing to do. If you give out of greed you won't get the "God Karma" going. It's a delicate balance in your heart and in your head, but it can be done.
"You must each make up your own mind as to how much you should give. Don't give reluctantly or in response to pressure. For God loves the person who gives cheerfully." (2 Corinthians 9:7 - NLT)
Click here for a list of charities we help support
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Social Network Fundraising
I was going through my Twitter updates this morning, and saw a post from Danny Sullivan with a link to Beth Kanter's blog about social network fund raising. This is a novel idea which I've done in the past on a small scale, but it never "clicked" with me that it could be more successful.
The basic idea is to request donations from your friends and colleagues via your social network links. You put the idea out there and let people respond, or not, as they desire. No nagging, no phone calls, no guilty feelings - just doing something to help someone else.
I belong to an email list with a group of friends from the Army. Any time one of them is involved in a fund-raising activity, they throw out a short message asking for assistance.
Many of you may be thinking "DUH!" I have a difficult time asking people I know for donations in person, on the phone, or via direct email. But, though Twitter or MySpace, a simple posting is all that's needed any everyone has the option to help or ignore. That method appeals to me much more. It might also help me reach a larger audience of potential donors.
Later, I'm going to post a list of charities we regularly give to. Anyone is free to assist no not as they see fit.
The basic idea is to request donations from your friends and colleagues via your social network links. You put the idea out there and let people respond, or not, as they desire. No nagging, no phone calls, no guilty feelings - just doing something to help someone else.
I belong to an email list with a group of friends from the Army. Any time one of them is involved in a fund-raising activity, they throw out a short message asking for assistance.
Many of you may be thinking "DUH!" I have a difficult time asking people I know for donations in person, on the phone, or via direct email. But, though Twitter or MySpace, a simple posting is all that's needed any everyone has the option to help or ignore. That method appeals to me much more. It might also help me reach a larger audience of potential donors.
Later, I'm going to post a list of charities we regularly give to. Anyone is free to assist no not as they see fit.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Geek-Speak for Marketers, Marketing Speak for IT
An interesting session at Search Engine Strategies in San Jose this week was recapped on Search Engine Roundtable: How to Speak Geek: Working Collaboratively With Your IT Department to Get Stuff Done.
When I started as Webmaster for my company, my boss and I set down our "prime directive" that we don't "own" our web sites. Some may view this as an attempt to dodge responsibility for the content and look of our sites, but we look at it as empowering those who can best determine how the sites are used and what is communicated through them.
For example: Our corporate Intranet is used to communicate information to employees. The content, therefore, is logically best determined by the departments needing to communicate with employees. Our public web sites are used to communicate with customers. It seems best to let the Marketing Departments create their messages and how to present them. In this way, us IT folks can focus on what we do best: keeping the lines of communication open and making sure everything runs smoothly.
Because we work closely with our our departments, all participants are able to lend their strengths to the process of getting a site completed and launched. None of us in IT are very artistic, so we leave the creative part to those who are better at it (or we outsource it). The marketing folks don't always stay on top of search optimization or new technologies, so they leave that to us to provide advice and assistance. In the end, we get an excellent result which is much better than if only one group or the other had done the work.
I remember a couple years back in another session at SES San Jose where Danny Sullivan did one of his "on the spot" surveys and asked how many marketing folks had to fight with their IT to get optimization and search marketing incorporated into their web sites. I was quite amazed to see most hands go up. I would hope things have changed since then. I firmly believe the best work comes when marketing and IT come together as a team and work the process.
To all you IT folks, geeks, nerds, and what-have-you: It's not bad idea for you to learn some "Marketing Speak." The more you learn about the other's job, the better you can assist in putting together an excellent web site.
When I started as Webmaster for my company, my boss and I set down our "prime directive" that we don't "own" our web sites. Some may view this as an attempt to dodge responsibility for the content and look of our sites, but we look at it as empowering those who can best determine how the sites are used and what is communicated through them.
For example: Our corporate Intranet is used to communicate information to employees. The content, therefore, is logically best determined by the departments needing to communicate with employees. Our public web sites are used to communicate with customers. It seems best to let the Marketing Departments create their messages and how to present them. In this way, us IT folks can focus on what we do best: keeping the lines of communication open and making sure everything runs smoothly.
Because we work closely with our our departments, all participants are able to lend their strengths to the process of getting a site completed and launched. None of us in IT are very artistic, so we leave the creative part to those who are better at it (or we outsource it). The marketing folks don't always stay on top of search optimization or new technologies, so they leave that to us to provide advice and assistance. In the end, we get an excellent result which is much better than if only one group or the other had done the work.
I remember a couple years back in another session at SES San Jose where Danny Sullivan did one of his "on the spot" surveys and asked how many marketing folks had to fight with their IT to get optimization and search marketing incorporated into their web sites. I was quite amazed to see most hands go up. I would hope things have changed since then. I firmly believe the best work comes when marketing and IT come together as a team and work the process.
To all you IT folks, geeks, nerds, and what-have-you: It's not bad idea for you to learn some "Marketing Speak." The more you learn about the other's job, the better you can assist in putting together an excellent web site.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Ice Road Truckers
Jen and I have been watching "Ice Road Truckers" second season.
On a whim, I decided to look up Tuktoyaktuk on Google Maps. It was very interesting. If you start there and follow the road south (called "Tuktoyaktuk Winter Road") to Inuvik, you find that the road is actually on the water most of the way. The road is marked "Closed Apr-Nov" so you can't miss that it's an ice road.
Check it out yourself: Click here to check it out on Google Maps
On a whim, I decided to look up Tuktoyaktuk on Google Maps. It was very interesting. If you start there and follow the road south (called "Tuktoyaktuk Winter Road") to Inuvik, you find that the road is actually on the water most of the way. The road is marked "Closed Apr-Nov" so you can't miss that it's an ice road.
Check it out yourself: Click here to check it out on Google Maps
Sunday, August 10, 2008
I'm A Bad Blogger
I've been so wrapped up in family stuff and other projects I haven't taken time to blog here. It's not that I don't have anything to write - there are always things floating around in my head begging to be typed out and shared with the world. I just haven't made the time to do so.
But, here are some random thoughts:
But, here are some random thoughts:
- The US is heading headlong into socialism. It's not that some evil group is plotting a takeover, it's just that people would rather trade in some of their freedom so they don't have to worry about things and let the government take care of them, instead.
- Christians don't get involved enough in the political process. Most of the ones who do are coming from such a "religious" bent that they become objects of scorn - which in turn is reflected on all of us.
- Kids grow up way too fast.
- We're not going to solve our energy problems without a comprehensive plan. We're not going to get a comprehensive plan from either of the presidential candidates nor from the Congress. There are no leaders with enough backbone to forget politics and do what is right.
- Speaking of that: My opinion of the candidates is that neither of them is fully qualified enough to be mayor of the town I live in (population a little over 60,000), let alone run the country.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
The Passing of Dith Pran
While playing "Guitar Hero" with my kids, one of the songs we were to "play" was "Holiday In Cambodia" by the Dead Kennedys. Of course, the historical references were lost to my boys, their history education severely lacking in the genocide department. I tried in vain to explain to them who Pol Pot was and the terrible things he did to the Cambodian people.
Because those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, I rented "The Killing Fields" and watched with my kids. Afterwards, we had a great discussion about genocide and how we mustn't forget those horrible crimes against humanity because if we know how they look we can recognize them later.
That story of Dith Pran's historic and arduous trials in Cambodia hold a lesson humanity must never forget.
Because those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, I rented "The Killing Fields" and watched with my kids. Afterwards, we had a great discussion about genocide and how we mustn't forget those horrible crimes against humanity because if we know how they look we can recognize them later.
That story of Dith Pran's historic and arduous trials in Cambodia hold a lesson humanity must never forget.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
If This Isn't Just Ridiculous ...
Back in December I went to the local Texas AG office to "negotiate" my child support payments. This was after they accused me of being behind and the subsequent mess I went through to prove I wasn't. (If you're interested you can read the history here)
After the paperwork was all done, I was told I had to pay the court costs. This was supposed to cover the filing fee for the paperwork since we didn't actually go into court. The lady at the AG office who did the paperwork told me how much it was and that I had to pay it by the end of March.
So, being a procrastinator I waiting until March 1st to send in the payment. When I checked all the paperwork I got that day from the AG office, there was no mention of how much I was supposed to pay. Having slept numerous times between December and March, I couldn't remember how much it was.
Being the web-savvy guy that I am, I checked the local District Court's web site. It's hard to figure out and I couldn't find out for sure how much I was supposed to pay. To find out the amount, I emailed the District Court office.
After I week, I got a response to the effect of: "It's $20. We sent you a bill in December." I didn't remember getting anything from the District Court, and I mentioned that in my reply. At the end of the email I sent I mentioned something like "No matter if I didn't get the bill, I'll just send you a check." The email bounced.
The next day I mailed my check. And, I foolishly thought that was the end of it.
I got my check back today in the mail. Enclosed was a copy of the bill with the text highlighted at the bottom "No Personal Checks!"
I can't tell you how ticked off I am right now. Why didn't the person who responded to my email mention that little fact. Now, not only do I still owe the money, I wasted the postage, the cost of the check (a pittance, but waste nonetheless), and my time. Now I have to either invest enough time to go a buy a money order and mail it, or drive down to the office on my lunch hour and pay it in person in cash.
OK, I'm calmer now. Thank you for letting me vent.
After the paperwork was all done, I was told I had to pay the court costs. This was supposed to cover the filing fee for the paperwork since we didn't actually go into court. The lady at the AG office who did the paperwork told me how much it was and that I had to pay it by the end of March.
So, being a procrastinator I waiting until March 1st to send in the payment. When I checked all the paperwork I got that day from the AG office, there was no mention of how much I was supposed to pay. Having slept numerous times between December and March, I couldn't remember how much it was.
Being the web-savvy guy that I am, I checked the local District Court's web site. It's hard to figure out and I couldn't find out for sure how much I was supposed to pay. To find out the amount, I emailed the District Court office.
After I week, I got a response to the effect of: "It's $20. We sent you a bill in December." I didn't remember getting anything from the District Court, and I mentioned that in my reply. At the end of the email I sent I mentioned something like "No matter if I didn't get the bill, I'll just send you a check." The email bounced.
The next day I mailed my check. And, I foolishly thought that was the end of it.
I got my check back today in the mail. Enclosed was a copy of the bill with the text highlighted at the bottom "No Personal Checks!"
I can't tell you how ticked off I am right now. Why didn't the person who responded to my email mention that little fact. Now, not only do I still owe the money, I wasted the postage, the cost of the check (a pittance, but waste nonetheless), and my time. Now I have to either invest enough time to go a buy a money order and mail it, or drive down to the office on my lunch hour and pay it in person in cash.
OK, I'm calmer now. Thank you for letting me vent.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Take Time Out For the Important Things
A few days ago, an email group I participate in had a discussion about taking time for the important things. I sent a reply to the group to add some things which hit me reading their messages. Now that I think it over, it wouldn't make a bad blog posting, either. So here it is:
Two years ago this past December my fire fighter brother-in-law died on his way to a fire call. His death is somewhat of a mystery because he wasn't killed when the truck he was driving crashed, but rather, he died and then the truck went out of control and crashed.
His death was totally unexpected. We all know fire fighters assume a bit of risk each time they respond to a call. But to "just die" like this was way out there.
He and my wife's sister just had a baby (6 months old when this all happened) and planned to build a house together on the property they just bought. My wife's sister is rather a strong woman so she completed many of their plans in the past couple years since his passing. Still, we all miss him terribly.
The hard part was, he didn't have a will drawn up. You'd think an Army vet and a fire fighter would automatically think to have one done up. But, I guess being just a shade above 30 he still thought he had time. Because of the lack of will, his wife had to hire 2 attorneys to run his estate through probate: 1 for her and 1 for his daughter from his first marriage. In the end, everything worked out OK, but had he done up a will it would have gone much smoother and faster. Dragging through court with the potential of dealing with a greedy ex-spouse is not a good way to mourn someone's passing.
Lesson #1: Get a will done up. Even if you don't have anything it'll be better for those left behind.
This past Thursday my sister and her husband lost their 9-year-old son. The boy woke up that morning around 4:30 complaining his head and neck hurt. Sis stayed with him a bit and got him to go back to sleep. He woke up a couple more times, and she gave him a little Tylenol. When my brother-in-law got up for work, the boy was still feeling poorly. Sis took his temperature twice, and it was around 93 degrees.
So, Sis got her other son ready and off to school with one of the neighbors and she called in sick to work so she could take the boy to the doctor. The flu is going around pretty hard here, so she logically thought he had the flu. She went back in the living room and found him not breathing and foaming at the mouth.
She called 9-1-1 and started CPR. The paramedics arrived, took over care and transported him to the hospital. The doctors took over from there and tried to restart his heart, but they were unsuccessful and he passed. The preliminary results from the autopsy indicated he died from a hemorrhage in the brain, likely caused by an aneurysm.
You can imagine what nervous wrecks we've been for the past week. Planning a funeral for your child is something we just shouldn't have to do. It was especially hard because there was no life insurance for the boy. My brother-in-law left the Army just last year and is working as an apprentice electrician. Of course, this was completely unexpected for them. They have health insurance, but not life insurance. Thankfully, our family was able to kick in and get the arrangements paid up for them.
Lesson #2: Plan for the worst and be glad if it doesn't happen. Get life insurance on your kids. Find a plan that can be cashed in when they're ready for college and you'll have a great investment.
The boy's dad doesn't need to regret not spending time with him. He is totally devoted to both his sons and it would be harder to find a better dad. He's a big kid himself most of the time and his kids love being with him.
For the longest, I didn't have the luxury of time. During my first marriage I worked like a dog trying to keep us afloat financially. I worked all day and did freelance work in the evenings. I missed out on watching goofy cartoons with my boys, playing video games with them, going on vacations together.
Now that I'm not with them all the time, I try to make the time we spend together, well, together. I purposely leave my days with them open. I play Xbox games with them even though they usually destroy me (there are too many buttons on those controllers). We play board games, card games and watch crazy shows together. I also save up money so we can take trips together. My wife helps a lot, too, because she is good at stashing money away for things we want to do.
Lesson #3: My lesson learned from my brother-in-law's passing is to take time for people. People are more important than things. This was reinforced 100-fold with my nephew's untimely death. People are important and among them kids are the most important.
Two years ago this past December my fire fighter brother-in-law died on his way to a fire call. His death is somewhat of a mystery because he wasn't killed when the truck he was driving crashed, but rather, he died and then the truck went out of control and crashed.
His death was totally unexpected. We all know fire fighters assume a bit of risk each time they respond to a call. But to "just die" like this was way out there.
He and my wife's sister just had a baby (6 months old when this all happened) and planned to build a house together on the property they just bought. My wife's sister is rather a strong woman so she completed many of their plans in the past couple years since his passing. Still, we all miss him terribly.
The hard part was, he didn't have a will drawn up. You'd think an Army vet and a fire fighter would automatically think to have one done up. But, I guess being just a shade above 30 he still thought he had time. Because of the lack of will, his wife had to hire 2 attorneys to run his estate through probate: 1 for her and 1 for his daughter from his first marriage. In the end, everything worked out OK, but had he done up a will it would have gone much smoother and faster. Dragging through court with the potential of dealing with a greedy ex-spouse is not a good way to mourn someone's passing.
Lesson #1: Get a will done up. Even if you don't have anything it'll be better for those left behind.
This past Thursday my sister and her husband lost their 9-year-old son. The boy woke up that morning around 4:30 complaining his head and neck hurt. Sis stayed with him a bit and got him to go back to sleep. He woke up a couple more times, and she gave him a little Tylenol. When my brother-in-law got up for work, the boy was still feeling poorly. Sis took his temperature twice, and it was around 93 degrees.
So, Sis got her other son ready and off to school with one of the neighbors and she called in sick to work so she could take the boy to the doctor. The flu is going around pretty hard here, so she logically thought he had the flu. She went back in the living room and found him not breathing and foaming at the mouth.
She called 9-1-1 and started CPR. The paramedics arrived, took over care and transported him to the hospital. The doctors took over from there and tried to restart his heart, but they were unsuccessful and he passed. The preliminary results from the autopsy indicated he died from a hemorrhage in the brain, likely caused by an aneurysm.
You can imagine what nervous wrecks we've been for the past week. Planning a funeral for your child is something we just shouldn't have to do. It was especially hard because there was no life insurance for the boy. My brother-in-law left the Army just last year and is working as an apprentice electrician. Of course, this was completely unexpected for them. They have health insurance, but not life insurance. Thankfully, our family was able to kick in and get the arrangements paid up for them.
Lesson #2: Plan for the worst and be glad if it doesn't happen. Get life insurance on your kids. Find a plan that can be cashed in when they're ready for college and you'll have a great investment.
The boy's dad doesn't need to regret not spending time with him. He is totally devoted to both his sons and it would be harder to find a better dad. He's a big kid himself most of the time and his kids love being with him.
For the longest, I didn't have the luxury of time. During my first marriage I worked like a dog trying to keep us afloat financially. I worked all day and did freelance work in the evenings. I missed out on watching goofy cartoons with my boys, playing video games with them, going on vacations together.
Now that I'm not with them all the time, I try to make the time we spend together, well, together. I purposely leave my days with them open. I play Xbox games with them even though they usually destroy me (there are too many buttons on those controllers). We play board games, card games and watch crazy shows together. I also save up money so we can take trips together. My wife helps a lot, too, because she is good at stashing money away for things we want to do.
Lesson #3: My lesson learned from my brother-in-law's passing is to take time for people. People are more important than things. This was reinforced 100-fold with my nephew's untimely death. People are important and among them kids are the most important.
Two Perspectives on Human-Implanted RFID
I ran into two articles on Business Week's web site. They are two in a series of articles which discuss implantable RFID chips in humans. The first was written by Scott Silverman, CEO of VeriChip, maker of the only FDA-approved RFID implant for humans.
As one might expect, Silverman attempts to ease concerns over using RFID by describing certain "misconceptions" about the implants and explaining how those "myths" are unsubstantiated. He does a very good job, but as one who stands to benefit greatly from additional use of those chips, I think we should be leery of his attempt to explain away those misconceptions so casually.
Medical information is private: Yes, I agree with his stance pointing out that the implant alone cannot be used to access anyone's private health records because it only provides a coded number pointing to the person's records. Health records are only as safe as the security surrounding them and chip or no chip the safety of those records are the same.
I also agree with Mr. Silverman in that I don't believe implanted RFID implants are hazardous to health. The implants have been used for many years in animals and there is scarce evidence they cause any health problems.
I disagree with Silverman's claim the chips can't be used to track someone. He is correct in explaining the chips in the implant have no GPS and do not continuously transmit their data like a beacon. Although it is true the implants only transmit their data when activated by a special reader, he fails to mention the fact that someone with just a little bit of technical prowess can make a device to activate the chip and get the data from it.
Although tracking an individual's movements might be impractical, reading the unique ID number could be used in a crime against the person with the implant. Currently, the unique ID number in the implant's chip only links to a health record stored in VeriChip's database. But, what happens in future if that implant's technology is linked to bank accounts or other databases. Like credit and debit cards with RFID chips in them, we have a scenario where those chips can be exploited to the detriment of those who have them.
The second article, titled "Human ID Chips Get Under My Skin" by David Holzman, outlines some of objections to this technology, many of which I have already commented on elsewhere in this blog. I won't go into details, but suggest reading the article. It's short and to the point. I found his comments to be a thoughtful counterpoint to Mr. Silverman's utopian ideals of how these implants can be used.
As one might expect, Silverman attempts to ease concerns over using RFID by describing certain "misconceptions" about the implants and explaining how those "myths" are unsubstantiated. He does a very good job, but as one who stands to benefit greatly from additional use of those chips, I think we should be leery of his attempt to explain away those misconceptions so casually.
Medical information is private: Yes, I agree with his stance pointing out that the implant alone cannot be used to access anyone's private health records because it only provides a coded number pointing to the person's records. Health records are only as safe as the security surrounding them and chip or no chip the safety of those records are the same.
I also agree with Mr. Silverman in that I don't believe implanted RFID implants are hazardous to health. The implants have been used for many years in animals and there is scarce evidence they cause any health problems.
I disagree with Silverman's claim the chips can't be used to track someone. He is correct in explaining the chips in the implant have no GPS and do not continuously transmit their data like a beacon. Although it is true the implants only transmit their data when activated by a special reader, he fails to mention the fact that someone with just a little bit of technical prowess can make a device to activate the chip and get the data from it.
Although tracking an individual's movements might be impractical, reading the unique ID number could be used in a crime against the person with the implant. Currently, the unique ID number in the implant's chip only links to a health record stored in VeriChip's database. But, what happens in future if that implant's technology is linked to bank accounts or other databases. Like credit and debit cards with RFID chips in them, we have a scenario where those chips can be exploited to the detriment of those who have them.
The second article, titled "Human ID Chips Get Under My Skin" by David Holzman, outlines some of objections to this technology, many of which I have already commented on elsewhere in this blog. I won't go into details, but suggest reading the article. It's short and to the point. I found his comments to be a thoughtful counterpoint to Mr. Silverman's utopian ideals of how these implants can be used.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Congress and Baseball Hearings
With so many things going on, isn't there something more important our representatives in congress can do other than nit-pick about baseball players using performance-enhancing drugs? Certainly there must be something out there our representatives can deal with that will do the public much more good.
Is there some kind of constitutional precedent which makes these hearings necessary? I can't remember a clause in that historic document outlining the Federal Government's power to regulate professional sports leagues.
Oh, wait - this is another instance of Congress doing something other than wasting money, intruding into my life and raising my taxes ...
Is there some kind of constitutional precedent which makes these hearings necessary? I can't remember a clause in that historic document outlining the Federal Government's power to regulate professional sports leagues.
Oh, wait - this is another instance of Congress doing something other than wasting money, intruding into my life and raising my taxes ...
Friday, February 08, 2008
Tax Rebate Humbug
If the federal government can afford to give me a tax rebate, then it can afford not to take so much of my money in the first place.
Monday, January 28, 2008
More RFID Security News
Security Advocates Fight Passport RFID Proposal
The State Department issued a mandate requiring all US passports to be equipped with RFID chips in them. This is a bad thing, not only for reasons I've pointed out in earlier posts (here, here, here and here); but, also because the type of RFID chip they require will be one which can be "vicinity read" rather than the "proximity read." In other words, they want a chip which can be read from a further distance away.
The fact that the State Department will required whoever gets the contract to provide these chips will be required to supply a "protective sleeve." Although not spelled out in the article, I assume this sleeve is meant to protect the passport holder from having his or her information read off the chip.
This is another example of the government wanting to take advantage of a technology without fully thinking through the implications. Yes, I imagine having RFID passports which can be read from some distance away can be a great tool to ease traffic at customs stations and immigration checkpoints. But, the inherent lack of security in this type of scheme screams for it to not be used.
I mentioned in one of my previous posts on RFID that if this technology were mandated I'd wrap my wallet in aluminum foil. I'm not the only one with this idea. While on a recent trip, I spotted an RFID Blocking Passport Wallet in the "Sky Mall" catalog which is made to prevent "sniffing" information off one's RFID-equipped cards and identification. In addition to the one I noticed in the print catalog, the Sky Mall web site offers three other types of ID holders which are made to block RFID readers from getting the information off the chip.
The State Department issued a mandate requiring all US passports to be equipped with RFID chips in them. This is a bad thing, not only for reasons I've pointed out in earlier posts (here, here, here and here); but, also because the type of RFID chip they require will be one which can be "vicinity read" rather than the "proximity read." In other words, they want a chip which can be read from a further distance away.
The fact that the State Department will required whoever gets the contract to provide these chips will be required to supply a "protective sleeve." Although not spelled out in the article, I assume this sleeve is meant to protect the passport holder from having his or her information read off the chip.
This is another example of the government wanting to take advantage of a technology without fully thinking through the implications. Yes, I imagine having RFID passports which can be read from some distance away can be a great tool to ease traffic at customs stations and immigration checkpoints. But, the inherent lack of security in this type of scheme screams for it to not be used.
I mentioned in one of my previous posts on RFID that if this technology were mandated I'd wrap my wallet in aluminum foil. I'm not the only one with this idea. While on a recent trip, I spotted an RFID Blocking Passport Wallet in the "Sky Mall" catalog which is made to prevent "sniffing" information off one's RFID-equipped cards and identification. In addition to the one I noticed in the print catalog, the Sky Mall web site offers three other types of ID holders which are made to block RFID readers from getting the information off the chip.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
God Does Not Hate You, Either.
Nor anyone else for that matter.
Very often, those of us who are church-going people look down our noses at those whom we consider "sinners." There are two reasons, out of a list of many, why we should not do this:
Nothing, though, could be further from the truth. There are people we can read about in the Bible who were "sinners" and did some rather evil things, yet God loved them. First in my mind is David. Among his many "sins," this man had an affair with a woman he was not married to, she being married to someone else. The lady became pregnant from this affair, so David tries to cover the whole thing up by getting her soldier-husband home to sleep with her. When he doesn't, David has him killed and then marries the lady himself. (2 Samuel:11) And yet, this is a man described by God as "a man after my own heart" (1 Samuel 13:14).
The reason why God said that about David was because David, when confronted with his sin, immediately went to God in repentance and God forgave him. That doesn't mean David didn't have to pay for his sins - he often did. But, he was certainly a lot better off than if he hadn't repented.
So, where does that leave us? We need to always remember God loves everyone, irregardless of what they have done or failed to do. Everyone is in the same boat when it comes to needing the forgiveness - that includes the worst sinner on the Earth as well as the most "holy." When we start judging others on our scale, we become like the religious leader in Jesus' story who stood at the front of the temple and pronounced himself "better" than someone else in the room (Luke 18:9-14). We get ourselves into trouble when we consider ourselves "holier than thou."
What got me going on this rant is that church group from Kansas whose members have made themselves prophets by pronouncing that our country is at war and its military members are being killed because we, as a nation, don't condemn homosexuality. This is the group who protests at military funerals holding signs reading "God Hates Fags" and other equally ugly things. These were the same folks who were protesting outside the courthouse when the murderers of Matthew Shepard were on trial, seemingly protesting in favor of the killers because Shepard was gay. Even though that happened almost 10 years ago, I can still clearly see the image of those signs in my mind and it pains me each time I see them.
If you call yourself a Christian and profess to be a follower of Jesus, then you cannot and must not judge others. While he was here, Jesus show himself to be the epitome of love and grace. He didn't hang around with the religious leaders of the day. No, he hung around with "tax collectors" and "sinners." He demonstrated compassion and forgiveness to all who needed it. He did not condemn those people, and he saved his sharpest rebukes for those who thought themselves better than others. Because of their arrogance, they kept regular people away from God by making them feel they were unworthy of his love and forgiveness. We Christians need to follow Jesus' example and demonstrate love and forgiveness to those who need it most. That would be the "unlovable," the "dirty," the "heathens," the "shameful" among us.
The list I posted earlier was meant as a stark reminder of who's boss and who makes the decisions about whether one is "worthy" or not. It's not us, it's God. He's the one who loves everyone and demands we do the same.
We can get into a huge debate about whether homosexuality (or whatever your "pet" sin) is wrong or against the Word of God. The bottom line is: it doesn't matter. It is not up to us to judge those we come in contact with. It's up to us to show love and grace to everyone and to demonstrate God's love in practical ways. Once folks get to know him, they and God can work out their differences without our interference. Believe me, they and you will be a lot better off in God's hands than in yours.
Very often, those of us who are church-going people look down our noses at those whom we consider "sinners." There are two reasons, out of a list of many, why we should not do this:
- We are sinners, too. Though we might be "saved," we are still sinners and are in need of God's grace every day.
(Romans 3:8-20) - Jesus told us not to judge others. That's his job, not ours.
(Matthew 7)
Nothing, though, could be further from the truth. There are people we can read about in the Bible who were "sinners" and did some rather evil things, yet God loved them. First in my mind is David. Among his many "sins," this man had an affair with a woman he was not married to, she being married to someone else. The lady became pregnant from this affair, so David tries to cover the whole thing up by getting her soldier-husband home to sleep with her. When he doesn't, David has him killed and then marries the lady himself. (2 Samuel:11) And yet, this is a man described by God as "a man after my own heart" (1 Samuel 13:14).
The reason why God said that about David was because David, when confronted with his sin, immediately went to God in repentance and God forgave him. That doesn't mean David didn't have to pay for his sins - he often did. But, he was certainly a lot better off than if he hadn't repented.
So, where does that leave us? We need to always remember God loves everyone, irregardless of what they have done or failed to do. Everyone is in the same boat when it comes to needing the forgiveness - that includes the worst sinner on the Earth as well as the most "holy." When we start judging others on our scale, we become like the religious leader in Jesus' story who stood at the front of the temple and pronounced himself "better" than someone else in the room (Luke 18:9-14). We get ourselves into trouble when we consider ourselves "holier than thou."
What got me going on this rant is that church group from Kansas whose members have made themselves prophets by pronouncing that our country is at war and its military members are being killed because we, as a nation, don't condemn homosexuality. This is the group who protests at military funerals holding signs reading "God Hates Fags" and other equally ugly things. These were the same folks who were protesting outside the courthouse when the murderers of Matthew Shepard were on trial, seemingly protesting in favor of the killers because Shepard was gay. Even though that happened almost 10 years ago, I can still clearly see the image of those signs in my mind and it pains me each time I see them.
If you call yourself a Christian and profess to be a follower of Jesus, then you cannot and must not judge others. While he was here, Jesus show himself to be the epitome of love and grace. He didn't hang around with the religious leaders of the day. No, he hung around with "tax collectors" and "sinners." He demonstrated compassion and forgiveness to all who needed it. He did not condemn those people, and he saved his sharpest rebukes for those who thought themselves better than others. Because of their arrogance, they kept regular people away from God by making them feel they were unworthy of his love and forgiveness. We Christians need to follow Jesus' example and demonstrate love and forgiveness to those who need it most. That would be the "unlovable," the "dirty," the "heathens," the "shameful" among us.
The list I posted earlier was meant as a stark reminder of who's boss and who makes the decisions about whether one is "worthy" or not. It's not us, it's God. He's the one who loves everyone and demands we do the same.
We can get into a huge debate about whether homosexuality (or whatever your "pet" sin) is wrong or against the Word of God. The bottom line is: it doesn't matter. It is not up to us to judge those we come in contact with. It's up to us to show love and grace to everyone and to demonstrate God's love in practical ways. Once folks get to know him, they and God can work out their differences without our interference. Believe me, they and you will be a lot better off in God's hands than in yours.
Friday, January 11, 2008
God Does Not Hate Fags
I say again: God does not hate fags.
He also does not hate:
- Abusers (spouse, child, elderly or animal)
- Adulterers
- Artists (all mediums and styles)
- Authors
- AIDS patients
- Agnostics
- Atheists
- Bad Drivers
- Barkeepers
- Bigots
- Bisexuals
- Blasphemers
- Brewery workers
- Boys
- Celebrities
- Corrupt government officials
- Dancers (Exotic, erotic or folks who like to dance)
- Deviants
- Drug and/or alcohol abusers
- Drug dealers
- Drunk drivers
- Distillery workers
- Embezzlers
- Gamblers
- Gang members
- Geeks
- Girls
- Groupies
- Handicapped people
- Hippies
- Homeless people
- Homophobes
- Hypocrites
- Immigrants (legal or otherwise)
- Lesbians
- Men
- Muggers
- Murderers
- Musicians (of any type or style)
- Pedophiles
- People of color (any, and also those considered not “of color”)
- Perverts
- Pickpockets
- Polytheists
- Pirates (on sea or those dealing in music, movies or software)
- Prisoners
- Promiscuous people
- Prostitutes
- Racists
- Rapists
- Refugees
- Sinners
- Slanderers
- Spammers
- Terrorists
- Thieves
- Transsexuals
- Transvestites
- Womanizers
- Women
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Vibration Test
Yesterday, as I was riding home from a PGR ride, I was stopped at a light next to what I refer to as a "stereo car." This is a car which almost drives itself under the power of the bass in the music. This is a car which you don't so much hear the bass as feel it. Where you hear the bass is in the rattling of the various parts of the car.
I'm not a killjoy when it comes to loud music. I like to listen to my tunes loud, too.
But, I have to wonder if anyone has done a study to see how that extreme vibration affects the structure of the average car. I don't expect the frame or the drive train to be affected too much, but the body pieces seem to take a real beating. I wonder if any fasteners come loose after a time of being exposed to so much vibration.
I'm sure the auto manufacturers design around a certain amount of vibration, but that is from the road and the drive train pieces. The vibration of the bass is completely different.
I'm just curious.
I'm not a killjoy when it comes to loud music. I like to listen to my tunes loud, too.
But, I have to wonder if anyone has done a study to see how that extreme vibration affects the structure of the average car. I don't expect the frame or the drive train to be affected too much, but the body pieces seem to take a real beating. I wonder if any fasteners come loose after a time of being exposed to so much vibration.
I'm sure the auto manufacturers design around a certain amount of vibration, but that is from the road and the drive train pieces. The vibration of the bass is completely different.
I'm just curious.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
The Demise of Netscape
AOL pulls plug on Netscape Web browser
Like many people, AOL was the first ISP I used when I started surfing the web. It was an OK service, but on dial-up the constant updates were too much of a hassle. Thankfully, I soon learned there was more to the web than AOL and got on a local ISP.
Netscape was the browser of choice back then. In the early days of the browser wars, one had to pay for Internet Explorer as Microsoft hadn't yet integrated it in with their operating system (Windows 95 at the time). Netscape was great: it was easy to use, it supported all the web standards of the time, and it even came with a WYSIWYG HTML editor which came in very handy in my early web page-making days.
When Microsoft put out a free version of IE, Netscape had a real run for the money if it was going to make it. Soon, IE stood head and shoulders above Netscape in features and ease of use. It seemed like the Netscape folks just gave up. They put out some VERY bad versions in the early 2000s which really spelled out doom for the old standard.
When AOL bought Netscape, they were bundling IE into their package. I though for sure AOL would bring Netscape back to life and dump IE in favor of something they would have more control over. But, it was not meant to be. Soon IE took over as the dominant browser and has been there ever since.
So, it comes as no real surprise to me that AOL is finally going to let Netscape die. I think it was a long time in coming. A chapter of web history closes.
I think the spirit of Netscape is still alive in Firefox. I find Firefox to be much better than IE in many ways. I don't see them going away any time soon.
Like many people, AOL was the first ISP I used when I started surfing the web. It was an OK service, but on dial-up the constant updates were too much of a hassle. Thankfully, I soon learned there was more to the web than AOL and got on a local ISP.
Netscape was the browser of choice back then. In the early days of the browser wars, one had to pay for Internet Explorer as Microsoft hadn't yet integrated it in with their operating system (Windows 95 at the time). Netscape was great: it was easy to use, it supported all the web standards of the time, and it even came with a WYSIWYG HTML editor which came in very handy in my early web page-making days.
When Microsoft put out a free version of IE, Netscape had a real run for the money if it was going to make it. Soon, IE stood head and shoulders above Netscape in features and ease of use. It seemed like the Netscape folks just gave up. They put out some VERY bad versions in the early 2000s which really spelled out doom for the old standard.
When AOL bought Netscape, they were bundling IE into their package. I though for sure AOL would bring Netscape back to life and dump IE in favor of something they would have more control over. But, it was not meant to be. Soon IE took over as the dominant browser and has been there ever since.
So, it comes as no real surprise to me that AOL is finally going to let Netscape die. I think it was a long time in coming. A chapter of web history closes.
I think the spirit of Netscape is still alive in Firefox. I find Firefox to be much better than IE in many ways. I don't see them going away any time soon.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Tax Dodgers in the Great White North
Canadians Discarding Old Clothes in Mall Parking Lots on U.S. Shopping Trips
This is nothing new; it's been going on for years.
My mom worked at the catalog desk for a department store in suburban Detroit before her retirement a few years ago. She often said it was pretty routine for Canadian customers to order from the catalog (over the phone in those days) and have their purchases delivered to stores on the US side of the border.
They would drive across the border, out of their way, to come in to the store, pick and up their stuff. She said there were countless times she saw people put on the new clothes over their old or pack the new clothes into suitcases for the trip back across the border. This was, no doubt, an effort to avoid paying the 15% or so sales and value-added taxes they would have had to pay if they made their purchases at home in Ontario.
For a time, it wasn't unusual to see more Ontario plates than Michigan plates on cars in the parking lot.
It's a sad tale for those folks in Ontario who are forced to pay such high taxes that they must resort to going way out of their way to buy things without going broke doing it. For those in the US who want government-run health care, who want the "nanny state," take heed. That type of socialism comes at a high cost - not only out of our freedom but also out of our wallets.
This is nothing new; it's been going on for years.
My mom worked at the catalog desk for a department store in suburban Detroit before her retirement a few years ago. She often said it was pretty routine for Canadian customers to order from the catalog (over the phone in those days) and have their purchases delivered to stores on the US side of the border.
They would drive across the border, out of their way, to come in to the store, pick and up their stuff. She said there were countless times she saw people put on the new clothes over their old or pack the new clothes into suitcases for the trip back across the border. This was, no doubt, an effort to avoid paying the 15% or so sales and value-added taxes they would have had to pay if they made their purchases at home in Ontario.
For a time, it wasn't unusual to see more Ontario plates than Michigan plates on cars in the parking lot.
It's a sad tale for those folks in Ontario who are forced to pay such high taxes that they must resort to going way out of their way to buy things without going broke doing it. For those in the US who want government-run health care, who want the "nanny state," take heed. That type of socialism comes at a high cost - not only out of our freedom but also out of our wallets.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Guilty Until Proven Innocent - Part IV "A New Hope"
Please pardon the "Star Wars" reference. You'll see why I thought of that as you read on:
In my previous posts about my trials (or, more correctly, my lack of trials) with my child support issues I had quite the horror story to tell in Guilty Until Proven Innocent, Return of "Guilty Until Proven Innocent", and Return of the Son of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. I have a new chapter to add to this saga, and a surprisingly pleasant one, too.
After my previous experiences with the Texas Attorney General Child Support Division (AG), I was rather upset to receive a letter from them informing me that my child support agreement was to be "reviewed" to make sure everything was set up properly. It was a nicely written letter which described the benefits of going directly to the AG and negotiating since I wouldn't have to hire an attorney, pay court costs and would have any disagreements settled in a "friendly" atmosphere.
To say the least, I was somewhat dubious of the letter's claims and figured I was on my way to a kangaroo court. My fears were reinforced when I got another letter in ALL CAPS with a far more threatening tone which informed me if I didn't show up for the meeting a settlement would be made with no input from me. Of course, I was going to show up.
I took the day off and headed to the local AG office at the appointed time. What a place. It seemed that most of the people there were angry to one degree or another. Many of the employees looked shell-shocked as they went about their tasks. And no wonder, most of the angry people were giving them such a hard time about things. I have a healthy respect for those folks who work in that office, I doubt I could deal with angry people all day long and not go crazy.
The meeting went very well. My ex-wife and I agree on many things, and we weren't there to fight. I presented my recent pay stubs and the lady recalculated how much I was supposed to pay according to the AG's formula. In Texas, child support is pretty much set according to the law, so there really isn't much to argue about. My obligation went up a little because of a raise I got a while back, but it was still fair and according to the law.
All in all, it was a somewhat pleasant experience.
I do have to point out again how harried the folks working in that office looked. The lady who working in our meeting thanked us over and over for not fighting and getting ugly with her. I imagine we were probably the very rare exception to the rule that most folks go in there and give the employees a hard time. Again, I couldn't work there. The stress would have me in a nice white jacket, the kind with the long sleeves that tie in the back. My hat's off to the folks who work in our local AG office.
This good experience, however, does not erase my concerns about the lack of due process of the AG when it appears someone is in arrears in their child support. Though I appreciated their professionalism in this case, I still disagree with their methods in situations such that I experienced this past summer. After this latest experience, though, I am cautiously optimistic that us noncustodial parents aren't automatically vilified in all circumstances.
In my previous posts about my trials (or, more correctly, my lack of trials) with my child support issues I had quite the horror story to tell in Guilty Until Proven Innocent, Return of "Guilty Until Proven Innocent", and Return of the Son of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. I have a new chapter to add to this saga, and a surprisingly pleasant one, too.
After my previous experiences with the Texas Attorney General Child Support Division (AG), I was rather upset to receive a letter from them informing me that my child support agreement was to be "reviewed" to make sure everything was set up properly. It was a nicely written letter which described the benefits of going directly to the AG and negotiating since I wouldn't have to hire an attorney, pay court costs and would have any disagreements settled in a "friendly" atmosphere.
To say the least, I was somewhat dubious of the letter's claims and figured I was on my way to a kangaroo court. My fears were reinforced when I got another letter in ALL CAPS with a far more threatening tone which informed me if I didn't show up for the meeting a settlement would be made with no input from me. Of course, I was going to show up.
I took the day off and headed to the local AG office at the appointed time. What a place. It seemed that most of the people there were angry to one degree or another. Many of the employees looked shell-shocked as they went about their tasks. And no wonder, most of the angry people were giving them such a hard time about things. I have a healthy respect for those folks who work in that office, I doubt I could deal with angry people all day long and not go crazy.
The meeting went very well. My ex-wife and I agree on many things, and we weren't there to fight. I presented my recent pay stubs and the lady recalculated how much I was supposed to pay according to the AG's formula. In Texas, child support is pretty much set according to the law, so there really isn't much to argue about. My obligation went up a little because of a raise I got a while back, but it was still fair and according to the law.
All in all, it was a somewhat pleasant experience.
I do have to point out again how harried the folks working in that office looked. The lady who working in our meeting thanked us over and over for not fighting and getting ugly with her. I imagine we were probably the very rare exception to the rule that most folks go in there and give the employees a hard time. Again, I couldn't work there. The stress would have me in a nice white jacket, the kind with the long sleeves that tie in the back. My hat's off to the folks who work in our local AG office.
This good experience, however, does not erase my concerns about the lack of due process of the AG when it appears someone is in arrears in their child support. Though I appreciated their professionalism in this case, I still disagree with their methods in situations such that I experienced this past summer. After this latest experience, though, I am cautiously optimistic that us noncustodial parents aren't automatically vilified in all circumstances.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Evel Knievel 1938-2007
Motorcycle daredevil Knievel dies at 69
For those of us who are 40-ish and can remember the 70s, the image of Evel Knievel on his motorcycle flying through the air is indelibly imprinted in our minds. From the near-tragedy of the attempted leap over the fountains at Caesar's Palace to the triumph of flying over 13 buses, I can remember the exploits of this larger-than-life man very well.
Other than watching him on TV, I remember how so many of us kids tried our own daredevil stunts, though on a smaller scale. That was in the days before the "experts" told us that kids imitate things they see on TV - though it is perfectly true.
I remember visiting my cousin Frank one Saturday afternoon. He and his friends were trying to see how many garbage cans they could jump over on their bicycles. They started with two and eventually worked their way up to five. On more than one occasion my uncle, Frank Sr., yelled out of the screen door at Cousin Frank telling him to stop that foolishness before he was seriously injured.
You see, the three or four kids who were jumping the garbage cans with my cousin had well-maintained bikes; but, Frank's bike was missing a very important part - the seat. On his last attempt, Frank peddled as fast as he could. He was at top speed and hit the ramp perfectly. He made a perfect landing on his wheels. Then, the force of the landing forced his butt down right on top of the metal pole to which his seat would have been attached. That pole went right up his behind an inch or so causing him great pain and injury.
In my mind I can still clearly see and hear my Uncle Frank hollering at his son, "If you weren't already hurting down there I'd pound on your a$$!" Cousin Frank was OK in the end, but his recovery was quite painful.
The Evel Knievel toys were great. I had the set with the toy motorcycle which came with ramps and a launcher which one cranked and then stopped to send the motorcycle with the plastic action figure riding along off to daredevil glory.
My friend, Barry, next door had the same setup, but he also had the toy version of the rocket cycle which Knievel used in his attempt to jump the Snake River Canyon. The toy version, though, was rather slow and klunky, being a bit too heavy to jump things if it was only set off from the cranked launcher.
Barry had a better idea: take one of the ramps and anchor it on the edge of the roof and then launch the toy rocket from the peak of the roof and see how far it would fly. Ah, yes. A bit of foolishness for the preteen. I think he merely slipped the ramp under a shingle at the edge of the roof. He then climbed to the peak and got ready for the launch. Now, where we lived in Michgan the roofs are pitched at a little more than 90 degrees so they can withstand the weight of snow, so Barry had quite a good run-up to the ramp.
At the peak of the roof, he set up the rocket in the launcher and started cranking. I watched from the safety of my front yard as he let the rocket go. It flew down the roof at an unimaginable speed (at least from my young perspective), hit the ramp and took to the air. I don't think I'm exaggerating that it flew at least 25 feet across his front yard and landed on its bottom. When it hit the paved walkway which lead from the sidewalk to the porch, it exploded in a shower of plastic and metal. It was a glorious sight! We found the twisted action figure, not too far away in a position of certain death had it been a real person. Our only regret was: we could only do it once.
Eventually Evel Knievel retired. These days, I watch his son Robbie with my kids and reminice about those days when the name "Knievel" was a household name which meant "daredevil."
For those of us who are 40-ish and can remember the 70s, the image of Evel Knievel on his motorcycle flying through the air is indelibly imprinted in our minds. From the near-tragedy of the attempted leap over the fountains at Caesar's Palace to the triumph of flying over 13 buses, I can remember the exploits of this larger-than-life man very well.
Other than watching him on TV, I remember how so many of us kids tried our own daredevil stunts, though on a smaller scale. That was in the days before the "experts" told us that kids imitate things they see on TV - though it is perfectly true.
I remember visiting my cousin Frank one Saturday afternoon. He and his friends were trying to see how many garbage cans they could jump over on their bicycles. They started with two and eventually worked their way up to five. On more than one occasion my uncle, Frank Sr., yelled out of the screen door at Cousin Frank telling him to stop that foolishness before he was seriously injured.
You see, the three or four kids who were jumping the garbage cans with my cousin had well-maintained bikes; but, Frank's bike was missing a very important part - the seat. On his last attempt, Frank peddled as fast as he could. He was at top speed and hit the ramp perfectly. He made a perfect landing on his wheels. Then, the force of the landing forced his butt down right on top of the metal pole to which his seat would have been attached. That pole went right up his behind an inch or so causing him great pain and injury.
In my mind I can still clearly see and hear my Uncle Frank hollering at his son, "If you weren't already hurting down there I'd pound on your a$$!" Cousin Frank was OK in the end, but his recovery was quite painful.
The Evel Knievel toys were great. I had the set with the toy motorcycle which came with ramps and a launcher which one cranked and then stopped to send the motorcycle with the plastic action figure riding along off to daredevil glory.
My friend, Barry, next door had the same setup, but he also had the toy version of the rocket cycle which Knievel used in his attempt to jump the Snake River Canyon. The toy version, though, was rather slow and klunky, being a bit too heavy to jump things if it was only set off from the cranked launcher.
Barry had a better idea: take one of the ramps and anchor it on the edge of the roof and then launch the toy rocket from the peak of the roof and see how far it would fly. Ah, yes. A bit of foolishness for the preteen. I think he merely slipped the ramp under a shingle at the edge of the roof. He then climbed to the peak and got ready for the launch. Now, where we lived in Michgan the roofs are pitched at a little more than 90 degrees so they can withstand the weight of snow, so Barry had quite a good run-up to the ramp.
At the peak of the roof, he set up the rocket in the launcher and started cranking. I watched from the safety of my front yard as he let the rocket go. It flew down the roof at an unimaginable speed (at least from my young perspective), hit the ramp and took to the air. I don't think I'm exaggerating that it flew at least 25 feet across his front yard and landed on its bottom. When it hit the paved walkway which lead from the sidewalk to the porch, it exploded in a shower of plastic and metal. It was a glorious sight! We found the twisted action figure, not too far away in a position of certain death had it been a real person. Our only regret was: we could only do it once.
Eventually Evel Knievel retired. These days, I watch his son Robbie with my kids and reminice about those days when the name "Knievel" was a household name which meant "daredevil."
Monday, November 26, 2007
Progressive Insurance Claims Service - Excellent
Two years ago, my wife and I switched our auto insurance from State Farm to Progressive. We had just purchased a new motorcycle and the insurer my wife had her coverage with on the old bike wanted over $100 per month to cover the new one. I checked with Progressive and they gave the same coverage for $25 per month. I wanted to keep our auto insurance with State Farm, but they wanted over $300 per month for the bike alone and already informed me they were going to raise my auto premium. I wanted to keep our vehicle insurance with one company and Progressive offered us the same coverage on our autos we had with State Farm - and - even adding in the bike's insurance cost we came out at less per month.
Up until now, I've only had to make 2 claims against my auto insurance in the 30 years I've been driving. One was when I was stopped and someone backed into me. I was 17 and it was my mom's car - not a good thing. The next was in 1986 when I hit a deer driving from El Paso to San Angelo, Texas. Thankfully I had my car registered and insured in Michigan where such happenings are covered as an "act of God." Both times State Farm came through for me with flying colors. I kept my auto insurance with them for over 25 years.
Today I was in a fender-bender. Not a good way to start a Monday morning. A young lady backed into my path as I drove through the driveway of the apartments where I live and I hit the rear corner of her car. Although we were both going slow, the damage is nevertheless somewhat extensive because of the way cars are made these days. Plastic breaks a lot easier than metal.
After the police officer assisted us in exchanging information and setting up an incident report, I went into work. Later that morning, I logged into my Progressive account via their web site and filled out a claim form. The whole process took me about 5 minutes.
Within 15 minutes of my submitting the form, I got a call from the local Progressive adjuster. He had already called the young lady who was driving the car and the young man who owns it and wanted to get my side of the story. I've contact Progressive a few times in the time we've been a customer of theirs and they have always been prompt to respond. Even so, I was really (and quite pleasantly) surprised at the speed in which I got a response.
I'm not entirely sure how the rest of the story will pan out. More on this later.
Up until now, I've only had to make 2 claims against my auto insurance in the 30 years I've been driving. One was when I was stopped and someone backed into me. I was 17 and it was my mom's car - not a good thing. The next was in 1986 when I hit a deer driving from El Paso to San Angelo, Texas. Thankfully I had my car registered and insured in Michigan where such happenings are covered as an "act of God." Both times State Farm came through for me with flying colors. I kept my auto insurance with them for over 25 years.
Today I was in a fender-bender. Not a good way to start a Monday morning. A young lady backed into my path as I drove through the driveway of the apartments where I live and I hit the rear corner of her car. Although we were both going slow, the damage is nevertheless somewhat extensive because of the way cars are made these days. Plastic breaks a lot easier than metal.
After the police officer assisted us in exchanging information and setting up an incident report, I went into work. Later that morning, I logged into my Progressive account via their web site and filled out a claim form. The whole process took me about 5 minutes.
Within 15 minutes of my submitting the form, I got a call from the local Progressive adjuster. He had already called the young lady who was driving the car and the young man who owns it and wanted to get my side of the story. I've contact Progressive a few times in the time we've been a customer of theirs and they have always been prompt to respond. Even so, I was really (and quite pleasantly) surprised at the speed in which I got a response.
I'm not entirely sure how the rest of the story will pan out. More on this later.
"Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima"
I rented these movies to watch with my kids over the Thanksgiving break. I like to watch films like these with them in an attempt to give them a sense of how much it costs to keep the freedom we have in the US and to show them examples of people who live and/or die for a cause bigger than themselves. These two movies, telling two sides of the Battle of Iwo Jima, portrayed those things in very distinct yet united ways.
"Flags of Our Fathers" portrayed the story of a group of Marines and a Navy Corpsman who landed on Iwo Jima and fought their way to the top of Mount Suribachi and planted the US Flag. Three of the men who raised the flag as shown in the historic photo and survived the weeks-long battle, were taken back to the US to help sell war bonds to a war-weary public. One man, in particular, was a very reluctant hero. He preferred to remember the men who died as the real heroes rather than be celebrated as one of the heroes of the battle. The story was well done and excellently portrayed.
"Letters From Iwo Jima" portrayed the battle from the Japanese point of view. It followed one very reluctant soldier who managed to survive bombings, artillery attacks, suicide missions and moving from Mount Surabichi to the northern part of the island. As he moves from place to place, meeting generals and colonels along the way, we see how some of the leaders knew the battle was futile and that they would certainly lose. However, they kept this knowledge from the lower-ranking officers and soldiers and encouraged them to fight to the end because they knew the longer they fought on Iwo Jima, the longer it would delay the inevitable attack on the Japanese home island by US Forces.
I hesitate to describe any more of the movie in deference to those who haven't seen them. Although panned by some critics, I highly recommend them and also recommend watching them together. They are excellent companions to each other.
"Flags of Our Fathers" portrayed the story of a group of Marines and a Navy Corpsman who landed on Iwo Jima and fought their way to the top of Mount Suribachi and planted the US Flag. Three of the men who raised the flag as shown in the historic photo and survived the weeks-long battle, were taken back to the US to help sell war bonds to a war-weary public. One man, in particular, was a very reluctant hero. He preferred to remember the men who died as the real heroes rather than be celebrated as one of the heroes of the battle. The story was well done and excellently portrayed.
"Letters From Iwo Jima" portrayed the battle from the Japanese point of view. It followed one very reluctant soldier who managed to survive bombings, artillery attacks, suicide missions and moving from Mount Surabichi to the northern part of the island. As he moves from place to place, meeting generals and colonels along the way, we see how some of the leaders knew the battle was futile and that they would certainly lose. However, they kept this knowledge from the lower-ranking officers and soldiers and encouraged them to fight to the end because they knew the longer they fought on Iwo Jima, the longer it would delay the inevitable attack on the Japanese home island by US Forces.
I hesitate to describe any more of the movie in deference to those who haven't seen them. Although panned by some critics, I highly recommend them and also recommend watching them together. They are excellent companions to each other.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Thank You Golden Corral!
On the first Monday after Veterans Day, Golden Corral restaurants across the nation offer free dinners to military members and veterans. Yesterday, November 12, 2007, was the 6th time Golden Corral offered this gift to our current and former defenders.
I was going to take advantage of this generous offer yesterday evening, but when I got to our local Golden Corral at around 7:00 PM the line was out the door about 70 deep. I like a free meal, but not enough to stand in line for an hour or so to get it.
Still, I want to extend my thanks to Golden Corral. You can be assured I will dine with you more often in thanks for this wonderful gesture.
I was going to take advantage of this generous offer yesterday evening, but when I got to our local Golden Corral at around 7:00 PM the line was out the door about 70 deep. I like a free meal, but not enough to stand in line for an hour or so to get it.
Still, I want to extend my thanks to Golden Corral. You can be assured I will dine with you more often in thanks for this wonderful gesture.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Water Shortage - Solved!
I don't want to get into a debate about global warming - how it's caused, who's responsible and how to stop it. Global warming is most likely caused by natural events we humans can do nothing to resolve making it out of our hands to stop it.
There is no doubt the fresh water supplies in many areas of the US are down. It's easy to see and measure. So, what are we going to do about it? Sit around and wring our hands? Wish for the problem to go away? Pray for a fix? (That would be the best way to go, but we must face reality and know that people don't believe in miracles anymore).
No, we need a real and concrete solution.
Here it is: Ocean water desalination.
Atlanta, Georgia is in crisis because of the shortage of fresh water. Yet, it has a large coast on the Atlantic ocean. Why are they not pulling water out of there and using it? It seems a no-brainer to me.
California has perennially been short of fresh water. The folks there come up with all sorts of unique ideas to tap into fresh water sources; even going so far as to propose digging a canal from Lake Michigan to Los Angeles. But what about the water in the Pacific Ocean? Take out the salt and you have the biggest reservoir of water on Earth.
Desalination is more expensive than treating fresh water. But, if you need it, isn't it worth the cost? Instead of spending billions of dollars trying to fight global warming, a fight we most likely can't win, why not put that money to better use and resolve problems which are in our power to resolve? The countries in the Middle East have been using ocean water for years with great success - why don't we do it, too?
There is no doubt the fresh water supplies in many areas of the US are down. It's easy to see and measure. So, what are we going to do about it? Sit around and wring our hands? Wish for the problem to go away? Pray for a fix? (That would be the best way to go, but we must face reality and know that people don't believe in miracles anymore).
No, we need a real and concrete solution.
Here it is: Ocean water desalination.
Atlanta, Georgia is in crisis because of the shortage of fresh water. Yet, it has a large coast on the Atlantic ocean. Why are they not pulling water out of there and using it? It seems a no-brainer to me.
California has perennially been short of fresh water. The folks there come up with all sorts of unique ideas to tap into fresh water sources; even going so far as to propose digging a canal from Lake Michigan to Los Angeles. But what about the water in the Pacific Ocean? Take out the salt and you have the biggest reservoir of water on Earth.
Desalination is more expensive than treating fresh water. But, if you need it, isn't it worth the cost? Instead of spending billions of dollars trying to fight global warming, a fight we most likely can't win, why not put that money to better use and resolve problems which are in our power to resolve? The countries in the Middle East have been using ocean water for years with great success - why don't we do it, too?
Sunday, October 07, 2007
The Great Raid
I watched "The Great Raid" yesterday evening. It told the story of a group of US Army Rangers who raided a Japanese Prisoner of War Camp in the Philippines towards the end of WWII. It was not only the story of the brave men who raided the camp and liberated those POWs, it also told some of the story of the brave men and women who were left behind when McArthur was ordered to Australia and participated in the resistance movement against the Japanese. All told it was a great story of people who demonstrated single-mindedness of working against the evil they found themselves in.
At the end of the movie, I found myself asking: "Why haven't I heard this story before?" I am, by no means, an expert on WWII. I have read enough about that era that I know quite a bit of the history and happenings. and I cannot recall ever having heard of this incident. In my opinion, it ranks up there with the other important histories of the War in the Pacific.
This story isn't important because it was about the taking of some strategic piece of ground which help turn the tide of a battle. Like the raid on Japan led by Doolittle, it was a huge symbolic victory showing the tenacity of the American soldier and the willingness to fight for those who couldn't fight for themselves.
I hope many people will view this movie and learn about the daring raid, the courage of the US and Philippine soldiers and the brave men and women who resisted the Japanese until the liberation came.
At the end of the movie, I found myself asking: "Why haven't I heard this story before?" I am, by no means, an expert on WWII. I have read enough about that era that I know quite a bit of the history and happenings. and I cannot recall ever having heard of this incident. In my opinion, it ranks up there with the other important histories of the War in the Pacific.
This story isn't important because it was about the taking of some strategic piece of ground which help turn the tide of a battle. Like the raid on Japan led by Doolittle, it was a huge symbolic victory showing the tenacity of the American soldier and the willingness to fight for those who couldn't fight for themselves.
I hope many people will view this movie and learn about the daring raid, the courage of the US and Philippine soldiers and the brave men and women who resisted the Japanese until the liberation came.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
A Comedic Gem in Tyler Perry's "House of Payne"
My wife and I have been watching Tyler Perry's "House of Payne" since it started on TBS a few weeks ago. Like Perry's other works, this show is an hilarious work with a lot of seriousness hidden inside. If you haven't caught the show yet, I highly recommend you check it out. You can watch entire episodes on TBS' web site (be prepared to watch some Pine Sol commercials if you do).
Curtis Payne, one of the main characters in the show, is played by LaVan Davis. That this man hasn't been more well-known is beyond me. In the show, I can only describe the character he plays as a cross between Archie Bunker and Curly Howard. Those are comparisons I don't make lightly.
He is like Archie Bunker, not because of bigotry; there's none of that. But Curtis' world-view and being set in his ways make for some very funny scenes (with a lot of seriousness just under the current). Like Archie, he even has his own chair (throne) which no one is supposed to occupy but him. Unlike Archie, when someone is in his chair he's more likely to grab the person and throw him or her off than to just wave his arms and demand his rightful spot.
That Davis is like Curly Howard is something which elevates him, and the entire show, onto a whole new level of comedy reached by a very few. His body movement, timing, song-like vocalizations and one-liners tossed into the mix so remind me of Curly in his heyday. Davis does little of the slapstick-funny stuff which made Curly a legend, it's the subtle things he does with such aplomb that show his genius.
Davis may also be somewhat of a renaissance man. According to his bio on the TBS web site he is studying opera. I have a feeling whatever this man puts his mind to he will accomplish.
Curtis Payne, one of the main characters in the show, is played by LaVan Davis. That this man hasn't been more well-known is beyond me. In the show, I can only describe the character he plays as a cross between Archie Bunker and Curly Howard. Those are comparisons I don't make lightly.
He is like Archie Bunker, not because of bigotry; there's none of that. But Curtis' world-view and being set in his ways make for some very funny scenes (with a lot of seriousness just under the current). Like Archie, he even has his own chair (throne) which no one is supposed to occupy but him. Unlike Archie, when someone is in his chair he's more likely to grab the person and throw him or her off than to just wave his arms and demand his rightful spot.
That Davis is like Curly Howard is something which elevates him, and the entire show, onto a whole new level of comedy reached by a very few. His body movement, timing, song-like vocalizations and one-liners tossed into the mix so remind me of Curly in his heyday. Davis does little of the slapstick-funny stuff which made Curly a legend, it's the subtle things he does with such aplomb that show his genius.
Davis may also be somewhat of a renaissance man. According to his bio on the TBS web site he is studying opera. I have a feeling whatever this man puts his mind to he will accomplish.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Tribute to CSM Lonnie Bagwell
In just a few lines his life is summarized:
CSM
Jun.16, 2006
Loving Husband
Beloved Father
Dear Grandpa
Proud Veteran
Until We Meet Again
But, what those few lines don’t tell is the story of how he positively affected a group of soldiers, some young and impressionable and some older and in need of focus.
I was a young man in the Army in 1986 stationed at Ft. Bliss serving with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. I was certainly in need of guidance at a time when, as happens in the military, a large group of our leaders left and some new ones came in. Included in that group was the new First Sergeant, Lonnie Bagwell.
A few of us were a bit concerned about this particular change. Bagwell had a reputation of being tough, mean and ugly. For a group Military Intelligence “weenies” this was hardly the type of leader we thought we needed. For my part, I was completely wrong about what kind of leader we needed – First Sergeant Bagwell was exactly the kind of leader our company (and I in particular) needed.
He came in and cleaned house. He was tough, expecting a lot from those in his charge. But, he was also fair, publicly praising those who deserved praise and privately correcting those who needed correcting. He pushed us to achieve more than we thought we could.
As I watched his example, I learned many important things helped me along as I progressed through my own Army career. Among these were taking care of soldiers, accomplishing the mission, doing the right thing even when no one is looking, working on and with a team to get things done. To be sure, I already knew these things in my head, but his example was a huge encouragement to follow through and start doing them.
Even now, over 20 years after my experience serving with him, I still remember those lessons. Many of those who served with me at the time also hold this man in high esteem. That also shows the tremendous positive impact he had on so many of us even though our time of working together was relatively short. I have no doubt he affected many more soldiers the way he did us through the rest of his career; eventually retiring as a Command Sergeant Major.
Recently, while on a trip to the Midwest, I was able to take a short detour and stop at the cemetery where this man's body now rests. It was an honor to place a small flag on his grave as a small gesture of my respect for the man.
Yes, being a loving husband, father and grandfather make a man great. Achieving the rank of Command Sergeant Major can also show greatness. In this man's case, the inscription on the stone only tells a very small part of the story. I'm sure are hundreds of people this man touched in a positive way which will make this world just that much a better place.
Monday, August 20, 2007
NHL - NASCAR Hockey League?
On Saturday I was shopping for school clothes with my boys at the local Wal-Mart. As we were perusing the merchandise I happened to notice a rack with hockey jerseys on it. In Texas, it's a little unusual to find hockey jerseys at the Wal-Mart, and I expected to see Dallas Star jerseys as they are the closest NHL team to us here in the Heart of Texas.
Imagine my surprise when I pulled one out and saw that it wasn't the Dallas Stars, but Dale Earnhardt Jr. on the thing.
Just in case someone doesn't believe me, I couldn't find the jerseys on Wal-Mart's web site, but I did find them on the NASCAR Things web site.
I know NASCAR is very popular and there are items ranging from toilet paper to underwear and everything in between with images of cars and drivers on them. But, hockey jerseys? Next thing you know, NHL teams will sponsor cars in some kind cross-promotion deal.
Imagine my surprise when I pulled one out and saw that it wasn't the Dallas Stars, but Dale Earnhardt Jr. on the thing.
Just in case someone doesn't believe me, I couldn't find the jerseys on Wal-Mart's web site, but I did find them on the NASCAR Things web site.
I know NASCAR is very popular and there are items ranging from toilet paper to underwear and everything in between with images of cars and drivers on them. But, hockey jerseys? Next thing you know, NHL teams will sponsor cars in some kind cross-promotion deal.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Return of the Son of Innocent Until Proven Guilty
When you think you have problems, often you hear about someone who has much bigger problems than you. I read an example of this in today's column by Ted Nugent in the Waco Trib entitled "Punks in black robes, courts of corruption." I feel a little ashamed for feeling sorry for myself dealing with my child support problem (See "Guilty Until Proven Innocent" and "Return of 'Guilty Until Proven Innocent'")
Ted tells the story of a man who was forced to pay child support despite the fact that the DNA evidence proved he wasn't the father of the child. Even the child's mother asserted she had never met the man who was paying support for her child. The DA and the judge both admit there were serious holes in their case, but that someone had to pay.
This man's story is amazing. In our country, with all the technological tools available to the police, prosecutors and courts - that someone can be forced to pay support for the child of a person he never even met is absolutely incredible. Instead of spending their time and resources trying to find the real father of this child they waste it putting the screws to an innocent man.
Yesterday, a friend told me of a man in Michigan who was forced to pay child support based not on actual salary, but based on what his salary should be when the average salary for his occupation was factored in. I'm would certainly be glad to hear that judge will force this man's employer to give him a raise. Oh, wait, that would be unfair to the employer. We certainly can't have any unfairness, now can we?
I wrote in an earlier blog I believe real deadbeat parents need to be prosecuted and forced to pay to support the children they helped bring into this world. But - some common sense and real justice needs to prevail as well.
Ted tells the story of a man who was forced to pay child support despite the fact that the DNA evidence proved he wasn't the father of the child. Even the child's mother asserted she had never met the man who was paying support for her child. The DA and the judge both admit there were serious holes in their case, but that someone had to pay.
This man's story is amazing. In our country, with all the technological tools available to the police, prosecutors and courts - that someone can be forced to pay support for the child of a person he never even met is absolutely incredible. Instead of spending their time and resources trying to find the real father of this child they waste it putting the screws to an innocent man.
Yesterday, a friend told me of a man in Michigan who was forced to pay child support based not on actual salary, but based on what his salary should be when the average salary for his occupation was factored in. I'm would certainly be glad to hear that judge will force this man's employer to give him a raise. Oh, wait, that would be unfair to the employer. We certainly can't have any unfairness, now can we?
I wrote in an earlier blog I believe real deadbeat parents need to be prosecuted and forced to pay to support the children they helped bring into this world. But - some common sense and real justice needs to prevail as well.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Return of "Guilty Until Proven Innocent"
"Last time on 'Guilty Until Proven Innocent:'"
The State AG Office did a check of my child support payments and did not have a record of over $7000 in payments I made directly to my kids' mom. They immediately got a court order to garnish my wages for $100 per month to make up those payments without any type of communication with me to find out why those payments might be missing. I spoke with someone at the AG office and found out how to show I made the payments. Our story continues ...
I got the form from the AG Office, got the information about the payments I made directly to my kids' mom, and filled the form out. She was nice enough to meet me at the notary's office and we finished up the form.
Here's where the trouble starts over again:
My wife picked me up for our regular Friday lunch date. I planned to drop the form off at the AG's Child Support Office in my town. After we had a nice lunch, we headed towards the office. Right then, my phone started beeping - that's never a good sign. It was beeping to let me know I got some text messages that there was a problem at my office. My wife, being the great sport she is, agreed to drop the form off for me.
Fast-forward to that afternoon after work when I go to pick up my kids. Their mom comes out and tells me that the AG office called to ask whether the form was actually signed by her.
I was incensed at that.
Not only did they now question my integrity, they also questioned the integrity of my wife and the notary who innocently witnessed my kids' mom sign it. Amazing.
Thankfully, my ex-wife was kind enough to go to the AG Office and verify she signed it. The people there told her that those forms are never dropped off by the "current wife" with the ex-wife's permission. If that's the case, perhaps they should include instructions on the form as to how it should be delivered. If a notarized signature isn't good enough to prove the form's validity, the form should be changed.
Still in all, I am amazed at the mess this caused. Hopefully we have it all cleared up and I have been proven innocent.
The State AG Office did a check of my child support payments and did not have a record of over $7000 in payments I made directly to my kids' mom. They immediately got a court order to garnish my wages for $100 per month to make up those payments without any type of communication with me to find out why those payments might be missing. I spoke with someone at the AG office and found out how to show I made the payments. Our story continues ...
I got the form from the AG Office, got the information about the payments I made directly to my kids' mom, and filled the form out. She was nice enough to meet me at the notary's office and we finished up the form.
Here's where the trouble starts over again:
My wife picked me up for our regular Friday lunch date. I planned to drop the form off at the AG's Child Support Office in my town. After we had a nice lunch, we headed towards the office. Right then, my phone started beeping - that's never a good sign. It was beeping to let me know I got some text messages that there was a problem at my office. My wife, being the great sport she is, agreed to drop the form off for me.
Fast-forward to that afternoon after work when I go to pick up my kids. Their mom comes out and tells me that the AG office called to ask whether the form was actually signed by her.
I was incensed at that.
Not only did they now question my integrity, they also questioned the integrity of my wife and the notary who innocently witnessed my kids' mom sign it. Amazing.
Thankfully, my ex-wife was kind enough to go to the AG Office and verify she signed it. The people there told her that those forms are never dropped off by the "current wife" with the ex-wife's permission. If that's the case, perhaps they should include instructions on the form as to how it should be delivered. If a notarized signature isn't good enough to prove the form's validity, the form should be changed.
Still in all, I am amazed at the mess this caused. Hopefully we have it all cleared up and I have been proven innocent.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Guilty Until Proven Innocent
I never thought it would happen to me. The feeling it gives you is terrible. The shame is almost overwhelming. The thought of it makes my skin crawl.
What am I referring to? Being behind in child support payments.
Well, I'm not really behind. But, according to the Texas Attorney General Office I am; and I have the garnishment order to prove it.
My former spouse and I agreed on our divorce settlement a few years ago, it was during the last week of February. It was from that day until October before the final divorce decree was done and signed by the judge. Because I didn't have the proper court order, my employer would not take the support payments out of my salary and forward them on to the AG office as specified in the decree. Once I had the final paperwork in hand, I gave a copy to the payroll folks and the payments started coming out of my salary as agreed to.
In the meantime, I paid my support payments to my kids' mom directly. Every payday I wrote a check out and delivered it to her personally. No problem there, everyone was happy.
Fast forward to now. My support payments come up on the every-three-year review. They look in the records and see there is no record of payments made during the 8-month period before the final decree was finished. So they got a court order instructing my employer to take an additional $100 per month out of my salary to start paying back the support they think I didn't pay and they reported this matter to the credit bureaus. Without so much as a letter, a phone call, a "hey we're showing this discrepancy, can you explain it?" Wham! The gavel falls and I'm accused of and found guilty of a crime I did not commit in one fell swoop.
I called the AG Office to find out what the problem was. The garnishment order did not explain anything, it just mentioned the amount I am supposedly behind and ordered the amount to be deducted from my salary. Once the person at the office checked my records, I could immediately see it was a misunderstanding. I can understand where they might get the impression I skipped all those payments; but, given the fact that I have paid on time, every time since then you'd think they'd give me the benefit of a phone call or letter asking what happened to those payments. Nope - guilty!
I can have this backlog erased by merely filling out paperwork outlining the payments I made directly to my former spouse and having her sign it to verify I made the payments. Thankfully, we get along pretty well; I'd hate to think what it would be like if she were inclined to do "stupid ex-spouse" tricks like some I know of.
It's not the money I'm worried about. The worrisome part to me is that someone can be accused and found guilty with no due process, no recourse until after the fact. It's really a shame that our rights, guaranteed by the Constitution, are completely ignored in this type case. That is the real crime.
I believe any man (or woman for that matter) who does not pay their share of support for their children should be considered criminals. Their wages should be garnished and given to the custodial parent to make sure the kids don't go without. However - our Nation is founded on laws and one of the highest of those laws decrees that a person is considered innocent until proven guilty and that everyone is entitled to due process under the law.
If I had been given my due process in this matter, everything could have been settled with far less fanfare without labeling me a "deadbeat dad."
What am I referring to? Being behind in child support payments.
Well, I'm not really behind. But, according to the Texas Attorney General Office I am; and I have the garnishment order to prove it.
My former spouse and I agreed on our divorce settlement a few years ago, it was during the last week of February. It was from that day until October before the final divorce decree was done and signed by the judge. Because I didn't have the proper court order, my employer would not take the support payments out of my salary and forward them on to the AG office as specified in the decree. Once I had the final paperwork in hand, I gave a copy to the payroll folks and the payments started coming out of my salary as agreed to.
In the meantime, I paid my support payments to my kids' mom directly. Every payday I wrote a check out and delivered it to her personally. No problem there, everyone was happy.
Fast forward to now. My support payments come up on the every-three-year review. They look in the records and see there is no record of payments made during the 8-month period before the final decree was finished. So they got a court order instructing my employer to take an additional $100 per month out of my salary to start paying back the support they think I didn't pay and they reported this matter to the credit bureaus. Without so much as a letter, a phone call, a "hey we're showing this discrepancy, can you explain it?" Wham! The gavel falls and I'm accused of and found guilty of a crime I did not commit in one fell swoop.
I called the AG Office to find out what the problem was. The garnishment order did not explain anything, it just mentioned the amount I am supposedly behind and ordered the amount to be deducted from my salary. Once the person at the office checked my records, I could immediately see it was a misunderstanding. I can understand where they might get the impression I skipped all those payments; but, given the fact that I have paid on time, every time since then you'd think they'd give me the benefit of a phone call or letter asking what happened to those payments. Nope - guilty!
I can have this backlog erased by merely filling out paperwork outlining the payments I made directly to my former spouse and having her sign it to verify I made the payments. Thankfully, we get along pretty well; I'd hate to think what it would be like if she were inclined to do "stupid ex-spouse" tricks like some I know of.
It's not the money I'm worried about. The worrisome part to me is that someone can be accused and found guilty with no due process, no recourse until after the fact. It's really a shame that our rights, guaranteed by the Constitution, are completely ignored in this type case. That is the real crime.
I believe any man (or woman for that matter) who does not pay their share of support for their children should be considered criminals. Their wages should be garnished and given to the custodial parent to make sure the kids don't go without. However - our Nation is founded on laws and one of the highest of those laws decrees that a person is considered innocent until proven guilty and that everyone is entitled to due process under the law.
If I had been given my due process in this matter, everything could have been settled with far less fanfare without labeling me a "deadbeat dad."
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Visiting Detroit
It's always nice to visit mom and hand around the home of my youth. This trip was inspired by my brother's mention he was having all of his kids visiting, two of whom live with their mom in Georgia. I thought it the perfect opportunity to take my boys and see everyone.
The trip up was uneventful - which is the way I prefer it. We drove up to Dallas (that's where William Shatner could get me the best deal); got through the maze of parking, checking baggage and security with no problem. The only bad part was that we were seated in the very last row of a DC-8, which meant no windows and the seats wouldn't recline. Small things, indeed.
The food is always what gets me when I visit. There are some things you can't normally find outside Michigan and my favorites are: Mock Chicken Legs, Fried Bread (the way mom makes it), and Faygo pop (soda for you folks down in Texas). I always eat way too much when I come here, but it's wonderful.
We visited the Henry Ford Museum. There was a special show called "Rock Stars Cars and Guitars." It wasn't a very big display, but it was interesting. There were quite a few special guitars, mostly from the collection of Rick Nielsen (of Cheap Trick fame). There was one of the original Gibson "Flying 'V'" models, guitars played by Nielsen, Ted Nugent, Billy Gibbons, Jimi Hendrix and many more. There were some very nice cars there which I wish I could have driven instead of just looked at. Two cars were featured in Van Halen videos ("Hot for Teacher" was one) and driven by folks from Elvis (a yellow Pantera) to ZZ Top. There was even the "Yellow Submarine" Rolls to pay tribute to the Beatles (though they only had pictures of John Lennon in the room).
I've probably been to The Henry Ford and Greenfield Village at least a dozen times over the years. Every time I go there's the old cars, planes and trains which have always made up the bulk of the collection, but there are always some new surprises. For anyone who is into history at all, I highly recommend a visit to The Henry Ford. It's worth coming to the Detroit area to visit for a day or two on its own.
My mother knows I don't do anything "Christmasy" until after Thanksgiving because of my protest against commercialism of the holiday. Still, she had to tease me a little. One of the local radio stations (WNIC) was having a "Christmas in July" show playing Christmas music. After shouting that the management of the station should be jailed, and hurriedly switched the radio off. Humph - the effrontery of it all. We did all have a good laugh over it, though.
Lastly, speaking of the Gibson "Flying 'V'" - my 13-year-old son wants a guitar for his birthday. Not just any guitar, but a Fender Stratocaster with a light finish. Not a bad choice. While he was telling me his reason for wanting the "Strat" he mentioned that the Flying "V" wasn't popular until Jimi Hendrix played one. I though that model of guitar was only around since the '70s. We googled it and found that the Flying "V" was first made in the late '50s. And, sure enough, at the exhibit at The Henry Ford there was one of the first Flying "V" guitars which was made in 1958. It's sometimes wild what you learn from your kids.
The trip up was uneventful - which is the way I prefer it. We drove up to Dallas (that's where William Shatner could get me the best deal); got through the maze of parking, checking baggage and security with no problem. The only bad part was that we were seated in the very last row of a DC-8, which meant no windows and the seats wouldn't recline. Small things, indeed.
The food is always what gets me when I visit. There are some things you can't normally find outside Michigan and my favorites are: Mock Chicken Legs, Fried Bread (the way mom makes it), and Faygo pop (soda for you folks down in Texas). I always eat way too much when I come here, but it's wonderful.
We visited the Henry Ford Museum. There was a special show called "Rock Stars Cars and Guitars." It wasn't a very big display, but it was interesting. There were quite a few special guitars, mostly from the collection of Rick Nielsen (of Cheap Trick fame). There was one of the original Gibson "Flying 'V'" models, guitars played by Nielsen, Ted Nugent, Billy Gibbons, Jimi Hendrix and many more. There were some very nice cars there which I wish I could have driven instead of just looked at. Two cars were featured in Van Halen videos ("Hot for Teacher" was one) and driven by folks from Elvis (a yellow Pantera) to ZZ Top. There was even the "Yellow Submarine" Rolls to pay tribute to the Beatles (though they only had pictures of John Lennon in the room).
I've probably been to The Henry Ford and Greenfield Village at least a dozen times over the years. Every time I go there's the old cars, planes and trains which have always made up the bulk of the collection, but there are always some new surprises. For anyone who is into history at all, I highly recommend a visit to The Henry Ford. It's worth coming to the Detroit area to visit for a day or two on its own.
My mother knows I don't do anything "Christmasy" until after Thanksgiving because of my protest against commercialism of the holiday. Still, she had to tease me a little. One of the local radio stations (WNIC) was having a "Christmas in July" show playing Christmas music. After shouting that the management of the station should be jailed, and hurriedly switched the radio off. Humph - the effrontery of it all. We did all have a good laugh over it, though.
Lastly, speaking of the Gibson "Flying 'V'" - my 13-year-old son wants a guitar for his birthday. Not just any guitar, but a Fender Stratocaster with a light finish. Not a bad choice. While he was telling me his reason for wanting the "Strat" he mentioned that the Flying "V" wasn't popular until Jimi Hendrix played one. I though that model of guitar was only around since the '70s. We googled it and found that the Flying "V" was first made in the late '50s. And, sure enough, at the exhibit at The Henry Ford there was one of the first Flying "V" guitars which was made in 1958. It's sometimes wild what you learn from your kids.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Northwest Airlines Phone System Lunacy
First: let me preface these comments by telling I really like Northwest Airlines. I've flown with them many times in the past and I've always gotten good service at a pretty good price. But - their automated phone system leaves a lot to be desired. Here's my story.
I purchased tickets for me and my three sons to fly to Michigan. I normally like to do my travel deals on line, and this was no exception. I got a great deal on Priceline (I've been saying William Shatner negotiated a great deal for me). This was over a month ago.
The other day, I went to Northwest's web site to confirm my reservations and select seats. All I had to do was enter my confirmation number and my reservation for all four tickets was right there on the screen. When I went to pick my seats, however, I noted they were all taken except for the "premium" seats which cost something like $15 extra.
Thinking there was a problem and that the flight was horribly overbooked, I used the handy email form and sent a message. According to the web site I was to get an answer within 2 hours because Northwest has live agents on duty 24/7. I thought that was great service.
When I didn't get an answer by the next morning, some 14 hours later, I was slightly concerned. I knew from watching the news Northwest had been experiencing flight delays and cancellations because of a pilot shortage and bad weather. I thought it prudent to call. That's where my frustration started.
I'm used to automated phone systems, but I still don't like them at all. I especially hate the ones which want you to speak your selection. That just really gets me. It's a machine, for cryin' out loud. Some of them will skip you right to a real person if you hit the zero button enough times. Not this one, though.
So I went through the menu from flight information to reservation confirmations. Here's where the real fun started.
I was given a reservation similar to "3LBB9P." Every time I tried to say the letters and numbers, the machine at the other end got it wrong. "Did you say "3LDDB ... 3LPP9B ... 3LBD9Z?" Finally, after 3 or 4 tries the machine tells me it will connect me to a real person. To which, I got another recording telling me about extra-heavy call volume and my call could not be completed. Hang up.
At this point, I'm a little irritated. But, foolish me, I decide to try it again. I go through the whole mess again, even trying to say my reservation code in the international phonetic alphabet, "Three, Lima, Bravo, Bravo, Niner, Papa" to no avail. And again, I got the "extra-heavy call volume" message and the disconnect.
I'm really ticked off by now, but I had enough sense to quit trying for the time being. Thankfully, I got a reply in my email a little bit after the last call which let me know the reason I couldn't choose seats is because I bought them from another vendor and had to wait until check-in to choose seats. That was not a problem to me because I wasn't too concerned so much about picking seats as I was that the flight would be messed up and I might end up wasting my vacation waiting around in airports. In the end, I checked in on line and was able to choose seats.
Northwest IT/Telecom Folks: Either get a different way to enter reservation numbers or change the codes so we don't have to rely on a computer to differentiate between very like-sounding letters. Even live, human people have trouble hearing the difference between "B," "D," or "P" over the phone. I know I'm not the only one to experience this mess, so do something about it.
One thing I could have tried, but didn't, was to say "Agent" over and over. That works for the electric company's phone system. If I have to call Northwest again, I'll try to remember that trick.
I purchased tickets for me and my three sons to fly to Michigan. I normally like to do my travel deals on line, and this was no exception. I got a great deal on Priceline (I've been saying William Shatner negotiated a great deal for me). This was over a month ago.
The other day, I went to Northwest's web site to confirm my reservations and select seats. All I had to do was enter my confirmation number and my reservation for all four tickets was right there on the screen. When I went to pick my seats, however, I noted they were all taken except for the "premium" seats which cost something like $15 extra.
Thinking there was a problem and that the flight was horribly overbooked, I used the handy email form and sent a message. According to the web site I was to get an answer within 2 hours because Northwest has live agents on duty 24/7. I thought that was great service.
When I didn't get an answer by the next morning, some 14 hours later, I was slightly concerned. I knew from watching the news Northwest had been experiencing flight delays and cancellations because of a pilot shortage and bad weather. I thought it prudent to call. That's where my frustration started.
I'm used to automated phone systems, but I still don't like them at all. I especially hate the ones which want you to speak your selection. That just really gets me. It's a machine, for cryin' out loud. Some of them will skip you right to a real person if you hit the zero button enough times. Not this one, though.
So I went through the menu from flight information to reservation confirmations. Here's where the real fun started.
I was given a reservation similar to "3LBB9P." Every time I tried to say the letters and numbers, the machine at the other end got it wrong. "Did you say "3LDDB ... 3LPP9B ... 3LBD9Z?" Finally, after 3 or 4 tries the machine tells me it will connect me to a real person. To which, I got another recording telling me about extra-heavy call volume and my call could not be completed. Hang up.
At this point, I'm a little irritated. But, foolish me, I decide to try it again. I go through the whole mess again, even trying to say my reservation code in the international phonetic alphabet, "Three, Lima, Bravo, Bravo, Niner, Papa" to no avail. And again, I got the "extra-heavy call volume" message and the disconnect.
I'm really ticked off by now, but I had enough sense to quit trying for the time being. Thankfully, I got a reply in my email a little bit after the last call which let me know the reason I couldn't choose seats is because I bought them from another vendor and had to wait until check-in to choose seats. That was not a problem to me because I wasn't too concerned so much about picking seats as I was that the flight would be messed up and I might end up wasting my vacation waiting around in airports. In the end, I checked in on line and was able to choose seats.
Northwest IT/Telecom Folks: Either get a different way to enter reservation numbers or change the codes so we don't have to rely on a computer to differentiate between very like-sounding letters. Even live, human people have trouble hearing the difference between "B," "D," or "P" over the phone. I know I'm not the only one to experience this mess, so do something about it.
One thing I could have tried, but didn't, was to say "Agent" over and over. That works for the electric company's phone system. If I have to call Northwest again, I'll try to remember that trick.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
History Repeats Itself: Ford to Use Soy Plastic
Ford To Use Soybean-Based Foam In Mustang Seats
Although it may sound like a new idea in this era of searching for alternatives to fossil fuels, Ford actually experimented with soy-based plastics early in its history. Some of the first plastics used in automobiles were made from soybeans, and Ford led the way.
Henry Ford did have his quirks and idiosyncrasies and was downright foolish in his beliefs at times. Say what you will about him, but he and his sons were pioneers in many areas.
I highly recommend "Ford, the Men and the Machine" by Robert Lacey. It is a well-written and well-researched book about the Ford family and the Ford Motor Company from it's beginnings to the modern era (well, at least to the late-80s when the book was published).
Although it may sound like a new idea in this era of searching for alternatives to fossil fuels, Ford actually experimented with soy-based plastics early in its history. Some of the first plastics used in automobiles were made from soybeans, and Ford led the way.
Henry Ford did have his quirks and idiosyncrasies and was downright foolish in his beliefs at times. Say what you will about him, but he and his sons were pioneers in many areas.
I highly recommend "Ford, the Men and the Machine" by Robert Lacey. It is a well-written and well-researched book about the Ford family and the Ford Motor Company from it's beginnings to the modern era (well, at least to the late-80s when the book was published).
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Another Microsoft Conundrum Solved
Here's the scenario:
1. Windows MMIII Server running IIS, multi-homed with 2 NICs, some web sites running on IP Addresses on one NIC, others running on IP Addresses on the other. This was originally set up so that password-protected web sites could be authenticated through a WebSense LDAP call. This server hosts our Intranet web sites.
2. No longer using WebSense and the Networking group wants to replace and get rid of old routers and switches.
3. The server will now run all web sites through one NIC.
Here's what I did:
1. Deleted the IP Address of the NIC which was routed through WebSense. After doing that, I deactivated the NIC.
2. Entered the IP Addresses from the now-deactivated NIC onto the other.
3. Changed the subnet mask and the default router on the one working NIC. Turned off Routing and Remote Access because the static routes that service handled were no longer needed.
4. Restarted the Server.
At this point, I expected everything to route where it was supposed to and we could call it a night after 15 minutes work. Ah, but that was not to be. Computers in the same subnet as the server could access the web sites correctly. But, those which were in other subnets (across the router) could not get the web sites.
I went through and double-checked the IP Addresses, subnet mask, and default gateway on the server. All was correct. I also ran route print to make sure there wasn't anything hanging on from the old routing. There wasn't. I also restarted the server numerous times. (Microsoft Troubleshooting Lesson 1: Always reboot first before doing anything else.)
The networking guys checked, rechecked and checked again all the routing info in the routers and switches which the server's traffic would have to cross.
The interesting twist on this, by the way, was that the server's non HTTP traffic going across the router worked just fine. It could get its dynamic content from the 2 database servers which are each in a different subnet, and it could make the AD LDAP calls for authentication.
Total mystery.
We spend the better part of 2 1/2 hours checking, rechecking, adjusting and changing settings trying to get this server to give it's web pages to everyone needing access to them. No luck.
Finally, one of the networking guys, who was very frustrated, suggest we remove all the IP Addresses off the working NIC and reenter them.
I did that and everything started working. I didn't even have to restart the server again.
So, if anyone out there needs to "un-multi-home" a Windows server, don't just enter the old IP Addresses on the other NIC, remove all the IP Addresses and start over.
One more piece of advice: Remember which was the first IP address you entered on the working NIC and don't take that one off. In our scenario, that was the only IP address which seemed able to communicate across routers. There is something about the first NIC and the first IP Address entered on that NIC that's magical. I'm thinking about my other experience with that IP/NIC problem.
1. Windows MMIII Server running IIS, multi-homed with 2 NICs, some web sites running on IP Addresses on one NIC, others running on IP Addresses on the other. This was originally set up so that password-protected web sites could be authenticated through a WebSense LDAP call. This server hosts our Intranet web sites.
2. No longer using WebSense and the Networking group wants to replace and get rid of old routers and switches.
3. The server will now run all web sites through one NIC.
Here's what I did:
1. Deleted the IP Address of the NIC which was routed through WebSense. After doing that, I deactivated the NIC.
2. Entered the IP Addresses from the now-deactivated NIC onto the other.
3. Changed the subnet mask and the default router on the one working NIC. Turned off Routing and Remote Access because the static routes that service handled were no longer needed.
4. Restarted the Server.
At this point, I expected everything to route where it was supposed to and we could call it a night after 15 minutes work. Ah, but that was not to be. Computers in the same subnet as the server could access the web sites correctly. But, those which were in other subnets (across the router) could not get the web sites.
I went through and double-checked the IP Addresses, subnet mask, and default gateway on the server. All was correct. I also ran route print to make sure there wasn't anything hanging on from the old routing. There wasn't. I also restarted the server numerous times. (Microsoft Troubleshooting Lesson 1: Always reboot first before doing anything else.)
The networking guys checked, rechecked and checked again all the routing info in the routers and switches which the server's traffic would have to cross.
The interesting twist on this, by the way, was that the server's non HTTP traffic going across the router worked just fine. It could get its dynamic content from the 2 database servers which are each in a different subnet, and it could make the AD LDAP calls for authentication.
Total mystery.
We spend the better part of 2 1/2 hours checking, rechecking, adjusting and changing settings trying to get this server to give it's web pages to everyone needing access to them. No luck.
Finally, one of the networking guys, who was very frustrated, suggest we remove all the IP Addresses off the working NIC and reenter them.
I did that and everything started working. I didn't even have to restart the server again.
So, if anyone out there needs to "un-multi-home" a Windows server, don't just enter the old IP Addresses on the other NIC, remove all the IP Addresses and start over.
One more piece of advice: Remember which was the first IP address you entered on the working NIC and don't take that one off. In our scenario, that was the only IP address which seemed able to communicate across routers. There is something about the first NIC and the first IP Address entered on that NIC that's magical. I'm thinking about my other experience with that IP/NIC problem.
Monday, July 09, 2007
Scandal? What Scandal?
I am tired of the endless barrage of criticism and congressional inquiries into the firing of federal prosecutors. It's been months since it happened, and Congress and the media are still wasting time, energy and a lot of hot air over this.
Presidential appointees serve at the behest and pleasure of the president. Those folks were appointed by Bill Clinton when he was president. George Bush is president now and he gets to pick and choose who works for him and who doesn't. It doesn't matter why he fired them, he did. He doesn't have to have a good reason - or any reason. They served at the pleasure of the president and he decided some other folks would work out better.
When Bill Clinton fired federal prosecutors when he was in office, there was no hoopla, no talk of scandal, no congressional inquiries. He fired more people that Bush did and there was hardly a mention of it. Why all the fanfare now?
With all the important things Congress could be working on right now, why are they wasting time on these "small potatoes?" With the real crises our nation faces these days, the firing of a dozen folks hardly rates even a scant mention. They're all smart people and good attorneys. They will land on their feet. The experience they garnered working in their office will help them land some great jobs in the private sector. And, their employment as federal prosecutors was not a contract job. They could be fired at any time, and they knew that going into the job.
Wait a minute, what am I thinking? If the congress is busy making a big fuss over this, maybe they'll be too busy to raise my taxes. Maybe they'll be too busy to pass some stupid law which will end up costing me more of my hard-earned money ...
Hey, what is all this? These people should have never been fired. Congress needs to bear their full attention on this crisis and get Bush! Yeah! I want to see 24/7 congressional inquiries into this matter right now!
Presidential appointees serve at the behest and pleasure of the president. Those folks were appointed by Bill Clinton when he was president. George Bush is president now and he gets to pick and choose who works for him and who doesn't. It doesn't matter why he fired them, he did. He doesn't have to have a good reason - or any reason. They served at the pleasure of the president and he decided some other folks would work out better.
When Bill Clinton fired federal prosecutors when he was in office, there was no hoopla, no talk of scandal, no congressional inquiries. He fired more people that Bush did and there was hardly a mention of it. Why all the fanfare now?
With all the important things Congress could be working on right now, why are they wasting time on these "small potatoes?" With the real crises our nation faces these days, the firing of a dozen folks hardly rates even a scant mention. They're all smart people and good attorneys. They will land on their feet. The experience they garnered working in their office will help them land some great jobs in the private sector. And, their employment as federal prosecutors was not a contract job. They could be fired at any time, and they knew that going into the job.
Wait a minute, what am I thinking? If the congress is busy making a big fuss over this, maybe they'll be too busy to raise my taxes. Maybe they'll be too busy to pass some stupid law which will end up costing me more of my hard-earned money ...
Hey, what is all this? These people should have never been fired. Congress needs to bear their full attention on this crisis and get Bush! Yeah! I want to see 24/7 congressional inquiries into this matter right now!
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Yeah, What He Said - Again
It's funny how things work out sometimes.
Little did I realize while sitting in Detroit's air-conditioned Cobo Arena, my ears assaulted by the screaming feedback and wild guitar playing of the "Motor City Madman" that one day we would live in the same area of Texas and I'd be reading his opinion column in the local paper.
And agreeing with most of what he writes.
His latest column in the Waco Tribune: Terrorists who drink and drive is another example of "Yeah, what he said."
Just over a year ago, some good friends of mine lost a son and grandson because of a drunk driver. This young man was riding in his best friend's Jeep, not wearing a seatbelt. His friend was driving way too fast on a country rode after having a few too many beers. The Jeep went out of control and this young son/grandson/husband/father was ejected from the vehicle and slammed into a tree. He died a few days later because of massive trauma which caused his brain to swell.
Driving while drunk or high on drugs is a leading killer of people in the US. It's not funny and it's not a game. It's a real problem which affects real people in unimaginably horrible ways. Ted describes a great example of a real person whose life was changed in an instant because of someone else's selfishness and stupidity.
"Friends don't let friends drive drunk" should be a way of life, not just a catchy phrase. All the punishment in the world doled out after someone is killed or injured comes too late. Drunk driving needs to be stopped before it happens. Responsible drinking includes someone who doesn't drink who can help those who are drinking by making sensible decisions for them and not letting them get behind the wheel. It's more than just a designated driver, it's a designated thinker
Joining MADD, DADD or SADD is a great idea, but take it a step further and make a promise to yourself that in your circle of friends you will not let them drive while impaired. And let them do the same for you. The rewards are well worth the effort.
Little did I realize while sitting in Detroit's air-conditioned Cobo Arena, my ears assaulted by the screaming feedback and wild guitar playing of the "Motor City Madman" that one day we would live in the same area of Texas and I'd be reading his opinion column in the local paper.
And agreeing with most of what he writes.
His latest column in the Waco Tribune: Terrorists who drink and drive is another example of "Yeah, what he said."
Just over a year ago, some good friends of mine lost a son and grandson because of a drunk driver. This young man was riding in his best friend's Jeep, not wearing a seatbelt. His friend was driving way too fast on a country rode after having a few too many beers. The Jeep went out of control and this young son/grandson/husband/father was ejected from the vehicle and slammed into a tree. He died a few days later because of massive trauma which caused his brain to swell.
Driving while drunk or high on drugs is a leading killer of people in the US. It's not funny and it's not a game. It's a real problem which affects real people in unimaginably horrible ways. Ted describes a great example of a real person whose life was changed in an instant because of someone else's selfishness and stupidity.
"Friends don't let friends drive drunk" should be a way of life, not just a catchy phrase. All the punishment in the world doled out after someone is killed or injured comes too late. Drunk driving needs to be stopped before it happens. Responsible drinking includes someone who doesn't drink who can help those who are drinking by making sensible decisions for them and not letting them get behind the wheel. It's more than just a designated driver, it's a designated thinker
Joining MADD, DADD or SADD is a great idea, but take it a step further and make a promise to yourself that in your circle of friends you will not let them drive while impaired. And let them do the same for you. The rewards are well worth the effort.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Hugo Chavez - Marching to that Totalitarian Beat
Venezuelan Opposition Leader Demands Hugo Chavez Free Jailed Protesters
I just wonder how people can be so fooled. Hugo Chavez is elected to head Venezuela, the parliament gives him dictatorial powers (only for a limited time, though, wink-wink). Now the people are surprised when he puts people who publicly challenge his actions in jail and that he shut down a television station because it aired opinions contrary to what he dictates.
The people who disagree with jailing dissidents and shutting down free media demonstrate and many of them are themselves jailed. It should really come as no surprise the Venezuelan Government is making such moves as these. Not fair? We can still protest peaceably and freely in the United States, but the same is not true of Venezuela.
One person who lives in the United States and enjoys the freedoms of speech, press and assembly is the actor Danny Glover. I have watched many movies in which Mr. Glover appeared. I found his acting to be quite good and the movies he worked on very entertaining.
However, I will no longer watch, rent, buy or otherwise participate in anything Mr. Glover has a hand in. Why? Because Mr. Glover is a huge fan of Hugo Chavez, even going to far as to praise him on Chavez' talk show "Hello, President." (See Hugo Chavez to Finance Danny Glover Movies) He is among a group of celebrities who support Chavez and seem to have no problem with the increasingly totalitarian and communistic government headed by their friend.
Mr. Glover basks in the blessings of freedom he gets by living in the United States. He has every right to go to Venezuela, or anywhere else for that matter, and get financing for his projects from whomever he can.
As someone who defended those rights by spending most of my adult life in the military, I will exercise my right to ignore him completely from now on. To paraphrase something Rush Limbaugh once said: "He has the right to say whatever he wants, but he doesn't have the right to be listened to."
I just wonder how people can be so fooled. Hugo Chavez is elected to head Venezuela, the parliament gives him dictatorial powers (only for a limited time, though, wink-wink). Now the people are surprised when he puts people who publicly challenge his actions in jail and that he shut down a television station because it aired opinions contrary to what he dictates.
The people who disagree with jailing dissidents and shutting down free media demonstrate and many of them are themselves jailed. It should really come as no surprise the Venezuelan Government is making such moves as these. Not fair? We can still protest peaceably and freely in the United States, but the same is not true of Venezuela.
One person who lives in the United States and enjoys the freedoms of speech, press and assembly is the actor Danny Glover. I have watched many movies in which Mr. Glover appeared. I found his acting to be quite good and the movies he worked on very entertaining.
However, I will no longer watch, rent, buy or otherwise participate in anything Mr. Glover has a hand in. Why? Because Mr. Glover is a huge fan of Hugo Chavez, even going to far as to praise him on Chavez' talk show "Hello, President." (See Hugo Chavez to Finance Danny Glover Movies) He is among a group of celebrities who support Chavez and seem to have no problem with the increasingly totalitarian and communistic government headed by their friend.
Mr. Glover basks in the blessings of freedom he gets by living in the United States. He has every right to go to Venezuela, or anywhere else for that matter, and get financing for his projects from whomever he can.
As someone who defended those rights by spending most of my adult life in the military, I will exercise my right to ignore him completely from now on. To paraphrase something Rush Limbaugh once said: "He has the right to say whatever he wants, but he doesn't have the right to be listened to."
Useless Warning Label?
I remember reading once about a web site which displays useless warning labels. I might have found one yesterday while on a business trip to the Gaylord Texan resort in Grapevine, Texas.
In the Gaylord's hotel rooms there is a safe, much like in other hotel rooms. It's not very big, but you can put a notebook computer in it along with other, smaller, items. The nicest feature of this safe is the electrical outlet you can use to charge your computer (or whatever) while it's safely locked up.
While I was packing my stuff to leave, I noticed the warning label on the inside of the safe's door:
It's a little hard to read, but among the other warnings printed on it was, "SUFFOCATION DANGER EXISTS." Here's why I think this might be a useless warning:
You can see from this picture, the safe is not all that big. It's about 24 inches wide by about 6 inches high and about 12 inches deep. There's no way to fit a person in this thing, no matter how small they are.
I suppose, though, there are some folks out there foolish enough to try to stuff a very small cat or a dog in the thing, perhaps allowing the pet to suffocate while their owner was out of the room.
I can imagine a little old lady, sneaking her cat into the hotel in her over sized purse. She is sneaky, alright, but what happens when she has to leave the room for a time? "I can't just put the 'Do Not Disturb' sign up, someone might come in anyway," she thinks to herself. "Aha!" she says to herself, "I'll put Muffy in the safe. That way if someone comes in they won't find her, and the walls are thick enough to muffle any noise she might make. I'll just let her out when I get back."
Tragedy strikes, though, when she returns and finds Muffy dead from lack of oxygen in the safe. Because there was no warning label on the door, the lady sues the hotel and the safe company. Despite the fact she wasn't supposed to have pets in the room and it should be obvious not to put a creature which requires oxygen to stay alive in a box with no air holes, the court awards her $1 million in damages for her pain and suffering.
Maybe it's not such a useless warning after all.
I didn't see a warning, though, to alert the user of an electric shock hazard from the outlet inside the safe. Using the scenario above, instead of suffocating perhaps the poor cat might electrocute itself trying to claw it's way out of the safe. The electrical short could trip the breakers in the hotel and set off alarms all over the place. Then who would get damages: The lady who shouldn't have had her cat in the room in the first place or the Hotel and all the other guests staying there that day?
Sometimes it's just hilarious to see what hoops companies must jump though in order to avoid being successfully sued by people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions.
In the Gaylord's hotel rooms there is a safe, much like in other hotel rooms. It's not very big, but you can put a notebook computer in it along with other, smaller, items. The nicest feature of this safe is the electrical outlet you can use to charge your computer (or whatever) while it's safely locked up.
While I was packing my stuff to leave, I noticed the warning label on the inside of the safe's door:
It's a little hard to read, but among the other warnings printed on it was, "SUFFOCATION DANGER EXISTS." Here's why I think this might be a useless warning:
You can see from this picture, the safe is not all that big. It's about 24 inches wide by about 6 inches high and about 12 inches deep. There's no way to fit a person in this thing, no matter how small they are.I suppose, though, there are some folks out there foolish enough to try to stuff a very small cat or a dog in the thing, perhaps allowing the pet to suffocate while their owner was out of the room.
I can imagine a little old lady, sneaking her cat into the hotel in her over sized purse. She is sneaky, alright, but what happens when she has to leave the room for a time? "I can't just put the 'Do Not Disturb' sign up, someone might come in anyway," she thinks to herself. "Aha!" she says to herself, "I'll put Muffy in the safe. That way if someone comes in they won't find her, and the walls are thick enough to muffle any noise she might make. I'll just let her out when I get back."
Tragedy strikes, though, when she returns and finds Muffy dead from lack of oxygen in the safe. Because there was no warning label on the door, the lady sues the hotel and the safe company. Despite the fact she wasn't supposed to have pets in the room and it should be obvious not to put a creature which requires oxygen to stay alive in a box with no air holes, the court awards her $1 million in damages for her pain and suffering.
Maybe it's not such a useless warning after all.
I didn't see a warning, though, to alert the user of an electric shock hazard from the outlet inside the safe. Using the scenario above, instead of suffocating perhaps the poor cat might electrocute itself trying to claw it's way out of the safe. The electrical short could trip the breakers in the hotel and set off alarms all over the place. Then who would get damages: The lady who shouldn't have had her cat in the room in the first place or the Hotel and all the other guests staying there that day?
Sometimes it's just hilarious to see what hoops companies must jump though in order to avoid being successfully sued by people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions.
Monday, June 04, 2007
Modern Day Indulgences
In the 1500s, it was common practice in the Roman Catholic Church to sell indulgences. According to Catholic doctrine, indulgences are those acts performed by a penitent person to remit for any sins he/she committed. In modern times, this is done through the Sacrament of Reconciliation (Confession). In Luther's time, however, indulgences could be bought and sold for cash. In this way, the rich could, supposedly, purchase away their sins through monetary donations to the Church.
This led Martin Luther to write his "95 Theses" protesting the sale of indulgences. Forgiveness of sins was the purview of God alone and not something priests, bishops, nor even the Pope (Leo X at that time) could sell for a price. As Luther saw things, it was the responsibility of the individual to seek Christ and gain salvation by the Grace of God alone, which, as St. Paul wrote, "Is a gift from God so that no man could boast."
Sin Credits
In those days, one could purchase "sin credits" to keep themselves out of Hell or cut their time in Purgatory. Today, we have a similar system - the buying and selling of "Pollution Credits" or "Carbon Credits" or "Carbon Offsets."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit
Now, anyone who buys into the notion that global warming is human-caused and mostly the fault of those who live in the United States can buy their guilt away by paying someone else to plant a tree, go solar- or wind-power for electricity, or do some other task which will supposedly offset the amount of carbon dioxide their activities might put into the atmosphere.
Like the indulgences of 500 years ago, purchasing carbon offsets merely gives the illusion that a person is really doing something about how much carbon they might put into the atmosphere. Instead of actually doing something about climate change, they purchase their guilt away and do nothing of real substance. Folks like Al Gore don't have to actually do something about their houses, cars and plane trips. They can point to how much they offset their lifestyle ("sins against the environment) through the purchase of these modern indulgences.
If you believe that global climate change is human-caused then go out and do something real about it. Don't let your opinion be overshadowed by the hypocrisy of driving in limos or large SUVs , taking trips on private jets which put more carbon per passenger into the air than regular passenger jets, or using many times the amount of electricity of the average family in a home where only a few people live. Get a smaller car (or a motorcycle or hybrid car), fly with the scheduled airlines, insulate and modernize your home. Don't just put your money where your mouth is - do something real about it and lead by example.
This led Martin Luther to write his "95 Theses" protesting the sale of indulgences. Forgiveness of sins was the purview of God alone and not something priests, bishops, nor even the Pope (Leo X at that time) could sell for a price. As Luther saw things, it was the responsibility of the individual to seek Christ and gain salvation by the Grace of God alone, which, as St. Paul wrote, "Is a gift from God so that no man could boast."
Sin Credits
In those days, one could purchase "sin credits" to keep themselves out of Hell or cut their time in Purgatory. Today, we have a similar system - the buying and selling of "Pollution Credits" or "Carbon Credits" or "Carbon Offsets."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_credit
Now, anyone who buys into the notion that global warming is human-caused and mostly the fault of those who live in the United States can buy their guilt away by paying someone else to plant a tree, go solar- or wind-power for electricity, or do some other task which will supposedly offset the amount of carbon dioxide their activities might put into the atmosphere.
Like the indulgences of 500 years ago, purchasing carbon offsets merely gives the illusion that a person is really doing something about how much carbon they might put into the atmosphere. Instead of actually doing something about climate change, they purchase their guilt away and do nothing of real substance. Folks like Al Gore don't have to actually do something about their houses, cars and plane trips. They can point to how much they offset their lifestyle ("sins against the environment) through the purchase of these modern indulgences.
If you believe that global climate change is human-caused then go out and do something real about it. Don't let your opinion be overshadowed by the hypocrisy of driving in limos or large SUVs , taking trips on private jets which put more carbon per passenger into the air than regular passenger jets, or using many times the amount of electricity of the average family in a home where only a few people live. Get a smaller car (or a motorcycle or hybrid car), fly with the scheduled airlines, insulate and modernize your home. Don't just put your money where your mouth is - do something real about it and lead by example.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
