I didn't attend the Tea Bagging rally in Scranton, as my oldest daughter is in from Kutztown and I thought it would be more fun to spend time with her instead of listening to a bunch of angry white folks talk about how they are being oppressed. Well that and I figured that I could always turn on Fox News and get all the information I need from Tea-Bag central. I did, however, drive by the rally twice. The one thing that struck me? It seemed more like a Lou Barletta campaign rally than anything else. Tons of Barletta supporters and signs.
Fitting when you think about it: the worst rap against the Tea Baggers...one I am sure they are trying to shake...is that they are kloset klansmen. Who shows up in force at their rally? Why the guy running for office who has been warning about the "great brown horde" infesting our nation. To quote that great Canadian philosopher Alanis Morissette, "...isn't it ironic, don't you think?".
Friday, April 16, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
From the "It's Just Creepy" File...
...we have volunteer firemen who set fires so that they can put them out. The latest incarnation recently happened in Susquehanna County.
Employee admitted setting Bingham's Fire.
Now I know that this kind of behavior is by far and away the exception, but I always find it interestingly creepy that you hear about volunteer firemen setting fires just to put them out, but you almost never hear of professional firemen doing this sort of thing. We did have a fireman guilty of setting a fire in Scranton, but that was a scam to get insurance money (as less enlightened person would use the phrase "Jewish Lightening").
This does point to one of the reasons why I choose to live in a city: professional services. Nothing against volunteer firemen, but I feel better knowing that myself, my family and my property are protected by full-time, professional public safety employees. Those folks in Scranton, particularly the Scranton Police Department, are really, really terrific. I've never had a bad experience with a Scranton Police Officer, and in fact years ago I had to deal with an officer over a very sensitive issue and he could not have been any more professional.
Employee admitted setting Bingham's Fire.
Now I know that this kind of behavior is by far and away the exception, but I always find it interestingly creepy that you hear about volunteer firemen setting fires just to put them out, but you almost never hear of professional firemen doing this sort of thing. We did have a fireman guilty of setting a fire in Scranton, but that was a scam to get insurance money (as less enlightened person would use the phrase "Jewish Lightening").
This does point to one of the reasons why I choose to live in a city: professional services. Nothing against volunteer firemen, but I feel better knowing that myself, my family and my property are protected by full-time, professional public safety employees. Those folks in Scranton, particularly the Scranton Police Department, are really, really terrific. I've never had a bad experience with a Scranton Police Officer, and in fact years ago I had to deal with an officer over a very sensitive issue and he could not have been any more professional.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
If I Could Pick 5 Famous People...
...to have over for dinner, who would I choose? Actually this isn't an original idea, as our company magazine has had this feature for years. Idea theft aside, here are my choices & why (note that I've limited my list to people who are actually alive):
Howard Stern - There are few people out there in the world who I consider to be ground-breaking geniuses in their field, but Howard Stern definitely fits the definition. People don't realize that Stern practically invented talk-radio. He was spinning a small number of records per hour and spending the rest of the time talking before Limbaugh ever started his act. He was doing stuff in the early 1990's that still makes me fall off my chair laughing.
Sir Paul McCartney - Another genius. Two hundred years from now people will be listening to "Hey Jude" like people listen to Beethoven now. Consider that, barely into his twenties, the man helped to change popular music as we know it. By the time he was thirty he had conquered the musical world. Talent like this only comes along once or twice a century.
Maureen Dowd - I don't always agree with her, but I confess to devouring her New York Times columns. I love her writing style...it's simple, straight-forward but always bright. She never backs away from a controversial topic, and while I think she sometimes comes down too hard on the Catholic Church, she always backs her comments up with common sense and logic. Her recent comparison of women in the Catholic Church to women in Saudi Arabia was harsh, but she made more than a few good points.
James Gandolfini - Tony Soprano was probably the most complex, most well-written, most expertly portrayed lead male character on TV series ever, bar none. The only one that even comes close in my mind was Daniel J. Travanti's portrayal of Frank Furillo on Hill Street Blues. Gandolfini's Tony Soprano managed to be both ruthless and sympathetic, cruel and kind all at the same time. Pulling that off requires genius-level talent. This was the last TV show that I actually had to watch every week.
Dr Sally K. Ride - Who better than to sit next to Tony Soprano than a Physicist? I always secretly wanted to be an astronaut, but since actually having depth-perception is something of a requirement, I've never been in the running. All the more reason to have one over for dinner, especially someone as passionate about space exploration as Dr Ride. I could sit and talk to her about astronomy for hours.
Howard Stern - There are few people out there in the world who I consider to be ground-breaking geniuses in their field, but Howard Stern definitely fits the definition. People don't realize that Stern practically invented talk-radio. He was spinning a small number of records per hour and spending the rest of the time talking before Limbaugh ever started his act. He was doing stuff in the early 1990's that still makes me fall off my chair laughing.
Sir Paul McCartney - Another genius. Two hundred years from now people will be listening to "Hey Jude" like people listen to Beethoven now. Consider that, barely into his twenties, the man helped to change popular music as we know it. By the time he was thirty he had conquered the musical world. Talent like this only comes along once or twice a century.
Maureen Dowd - I don't always agree with her, but I confess to devouring her New York Times columns. I love her writing style...it's simple, straight-forward but always bright. She never backs away from a controversial topic, and while I think she sometimes comes down too hard on the Catholic Church, she always backs her comments up with common sense and logic. Her recent comparison of women in the Catholic Church to women in Saudi Arabia was harsh, but she made more than a few good points.
James Gandolfini - Tony Soprano was probably the most complex, most well-written, most expertly portrayed lead male character on TV series ever, bar none. The only one that even comes close in my mind was Daniel J. Travanti's portrayal of Frank Furillo on Hill Street Blues. Gandolfini's Tony Soprano managed to be both ruthless and sympathetic, cruel and kind all at the same time. Pulling that off requires genius-level talent. This was the last TV show that I actually had to watch every week.
Dr Sally K. Ride - Who better than to sit next to Tony Soprano than a Physicist? I always secretly wanted to be an astronaut, but since actually having depth-perception is something of a requirement, I've never been in the running. All the more reason to have one over for dinner, especially someone as passionate about space exploration as Dr Ride. I could sit and talk to her about astronomy for hours.
It Ain't For Sale
Some things can never be bought, no matter how much you may believe otherwise. My favorite non-saleable? That would be happiness.
You see, I just don't think that there is anything you can buy that can truly make you happy. Can you buy things that can momentarily bring you some joy? Sure, but true happiness doesn't come from without, it comes from within.
Believing that having a "thing" brings about happiness is nothing more than another form of addiction. Conceptually, that parent who buys their children every toy imaginable because they think it will make their kids "happy" isn't all that far from the drug addict who believes that just one more "hit" and the pain will all go away. No, the pain will still be there when the drugs fade from the system or when the toy becomes an object of boredom.
It doesn't stop there. I'm currently embroiled in a struggle with others about making long-term decisions. Specifically...
On one side of the fence we have those who believe that all that matters is that we make decisions now that make folks immediately happy. Give them what they want, after all we want people to be "happy", right? Life is short.
On the other side of the fence (my side), I believe that you have to think about the long-term consequences of actions. If you do something now that makes you immediately happy but yet could cause real, tangible harm in the future, then maybe it's not such as wise decision. Actions have consequences, and simply choosing not to think about them is short-sighted and stupid.
Hey, in the end you chose your reality. I have this sneaking suspicion though that some realities may be a bit more "real" than others.
You see, I just don't think that there is anything you can buy that can truly make you happy. Can you buy things that can momentarily bring you some joy? Sure, but true happiness doesn't come from without, it comes from within.
Believing that having a "thing" brings about happiness is nothing more than another form of addiction. Conceptually, that parent who buys their children every toy imaginable because they think it will make their kids "happy" isn't all that far from the drug addict who believes that just one more "hit" and the pain will all go away. No, the pain will still be there when the drugs fade from the system or when the toy becomes an object of boredom.
It doesn't stop there. I'm currently embroiled in a struggle with others about making long-term decisions. Specifically...
On one side of the fence we have those who believe that all that matters is that we make decisions now that make folks immediately happy. Give them what they want, after all we want people to be "happy", right? Life is short.
On the other side of the fence (my side), I believe that you have to think about the long-term consequences of actions. If you do something now that makes you immediately happy but yet could cause real, tangible harm in the future, then maybe it's not such as wise decision. Actions have consequences, and simply choosing not to think about them is short-sighted and stupid.
Hey, in the end you chose your reality. I have this sneaking suspicion though that some realities may be a bit more "real" than others.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Just A Quick Note...
...as I am feeling especially foul this morning. Maybe it was the lights and my computer that were left on all night (I know, it's only electricity...that I pay for...), maybe it's the overcast glumness outside, maybe it's because my hair is thinning, maybe it's that I have a class today. Who knows.
Well actually I do know. The trick is to express this artfully.
There are times when I feel as if we've failed as a nation with our young people. We've raised a generation to believe that things like cellphones and mobile access are givens in life that just magically appear and just happen to work month after month. We've done out best to insulate them from the reality that in life sometimes you win and sometimes you don't win. We've taught them that the only people that matter are the slim and the glamorous, but yet we are nation full of obese young people. We have done an outstanding job of separating choice from consequences, reality from economics.
What have we done? We've taught them that the single most important thing in the world is to feel good. Yes, feeling good reins over all. The problem is that if you try and feel good all the time, you are less equipped to handle things when you don't feel good. Same thing goes for winning: when you are taught that everyone is a winner, in reality no one wins and when you do fail to win, that fall is especially hard.
We've become a nation of the soft dullard, where "sacrifice" is something that you see on television (even better viewed via mobile access on your cellphone), but never actually consider yourself. Why? Because it doesn't feel immediately good when you sacrifice. Since so many are now devoid of the ability to handle things like sacrifice, not feeling good all the time, and all believe that all have an inalienable right to technology. Ever see someone pay for groceries with an Access card while using their Blackberry cell phone?
In short...
We lead people to believe that they are entitled to things that in reality are optional.
We lead people to believe that you need to look like Jennifer Aniston to be happy, but yet we still love fast & junk food and we don't want to put any effort in at being healthy.
We lead people to believe that winning is a right.
We lead people to believe that sacrifice is something that others do.
Our collective attention span has now decreased to a maximum of 140 characters.
It's no wonder that the use of anti-depressant medication has increased approximately 75% since 1996.
Well actually I do know. The trick is to express this artfully.
There are times when I feel as if we've failed as a nation with our young people. We've raised a generation to believe that things like cellphones and mobile access are givens in life that just magically appear and just happen to work month after month. We've done out best to insulate them from the reality that in life sometimes you win and sometimes you don't win. We've taught them that the only people that matter are the slim and the glamorous, but yet we are nation full of obese young people. We have done an outstanding job of separating choice from consequences, reality from economics.
What have we done? We've taught them that the single most important thing in the world is to feel good. Yes, feeling good reins over all. The problem is that if you try and feel good all the time, you are less equipped to handle things when you don't feel good. Same thing goes for winning: when you are taught that everyone is a winner, in reality no one wins and when you do fail to win, that fall is especially hard.
We've become a nation of the soft dullard, where "sacrifice" is something that you see on television (even better viewed via mobile access on your cellphone), but never actually consider yourself. Why? Because it doesn't feel immediately good when you sacrifice. Since so many are now devoid of the ability to handle things like sacrifice, not feeling good all the time, and all believe that all have an inalienable right to technology. Ever see someone pay for groceries with an Access card while using their Blackberry cell phone?
In short...
We lead people to believe that they are entitled to things that in reality are optional.
We lead people to believe that you need to look like Jennifer Aniston to be happy, but yet we still love fast & junk food and we don't want to put any effort in at being healthy.
We lead people to believe that winning is a right.
We lead people to believe that sacrifice is something that others do.
Our collective attention span has now decreased to a maximum of 140 characters.
It's no wonder that the use of anti-depressant medication has increased approximately 75% since 1996.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Extremists Suck
A posting by Mark Cour reminded me of how much extremists, of all stripes, suck.
His particular post was about PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals...oops, I mean People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) reminded me that good intentions, if taken to an extreme, almost always result in asinine behavior. Yes, I do believe that animals should be treated fairly at the circus, and no, I don't believe that poor chickens should have their beaks clipped off. However, advocating a completely vegetarian diet (we are not designed for that by the way...just open your mouth and look at your teeth...we are constructed as omnivores) and throwing red paint on people who wear fur is more comical than anything else. Do animals have "rights"? I don't believe that the term "right" is the same when you compare me and, say, a naked mole rat. For me, it's more like the reverse: I have an obligation to not torture animals and to not encourage others to do so.
Extremists don't just exist on the left-hand side of the lunatic fringe. For example, on the far right you have the various sundry "Militia Movement" groups who carry lots-o-guns, stock up on MRE's & preach against the ZOG. Not familiar with the ZOG? Well that would be the "Zionist Occupational Government" to those not familiar with the terminology of the far, far, far right. No, these folks don't protest at the circus, but instead the sit in their camps, horde ammunition, and listen to circa 1992 Billy West impersonations of former Mayor Dinkins, inserting "Obama" for NYC's last black chief executive. Personally I think many Tea Party members are simply in the larval stage of being militia members.
I could go on, as you have various groups who...
...spike trees for Jesus (anti-logging environmentalists)
...advocate the murder of doctors who perform abortions
...advocate for state succession (Texas, Alaska come to mind)
...advocate for the sabotage of nuclear facilities (No Nukes man!)
...follow the band Fish around (sorry, I just wanted to stick that one in there for comic relief)
...all in the name of supposedly good intentions. All of these groups have at their core one central philosophy: they know better than we do, the unwashed majority of citizens who go to work, pay our taxes and just try and do our best. Oh well, I'll just wallow in the mire of my ignorance as I eat a chicken sandwich, praise the victory of the Union over God-forsaken rebels, and enjoy the benefits of both logging and electricity.
His particular post was about PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals...oops, I mean People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) reminded me that good intentions, if taken to an extreme, almost always result in asinine behavior. Yes, I do believe that animals should be treated fairly at the circus, and no, I don't believe that poor chickens should have their beaks clipped off. However, advocating a completely vegetarian diet (we are not designed for that by the way...just open your mouth and look at your teeth...we are constructed as omnivores) and throwing red paint on people who wear fur is more comical than anything else. Do animals have "rights"? I don't believe that the term "right" is the same when you compare me and, say, a naked mole rat. For me, it's more like the reverse: I have an obligation to not torture animals and to not encourage others to do so.
Extremists don't just exist on the left-hand side of the lunatic fringe. For example, on the far right you have the various sundry "Militia Movement" groups who carry lots-o-guns, stock up on MRE's & preach against the ZOG. Not familiar with the ZOG? Well that would be the "Zionist Occupational Government" to those not familiar with the terminology of the far, far, far right. No, these folks don't protest at the circus, but instead the sit in their camps, horde ammunition, and listen to circa 1992 Billy West impersonations of former Mayor Dinkins, inserting "Obama" for NYC's last black chief executive. Personally I think many Tea Party members are simply in the larval stage of being militia members.
I could go on, as you have various groups who...
...spike trees for Jesus (anti-logging environmentalists)
...advocate the murder of doctors who perform abortions
...advocate for state succession (Texas, Alaska come to mind)
...advocate for the sabotage of nuclear facilities (No Nukes man!)
...follow the band Fish around (sorry, I just wanted to stick that one in there for comic relief)
...all in the name of supposedly good intentions. All of these groups have at their core one central philosophy: they know better than we do, the unwashed majority of citizens who go to work, pay our taxes and just try and do our best. Oh well, I'll just wallow in the mire of my ignorance as I eat a chicken sandwich, praise the victory of the Union over God-forsaken rebels, and enjoy the benefits of both logging and electricity.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Quotes On Learning
"Learning is like rowing upstream: not to advance is to drop back. "
~Chinese Proverb
I read that and it instantly clicked with me, mainly because it's true. Personally I am at my best when I am learning new things. At my worst I am sitting here (literally and/or figuratively) on my butt doing nothing. If I have one wish for myself as I get older, it's that I never be afraid to learn new things. The alternative, it seems, is a kind of death.
~Chinese Proverb
I read that and it instantly clicked with me, mainly because it's true. Personally I am at my best when I am learning new things. At my worst I am sitting here (literally and/or figuratively) on my butt doing nothing. If I have one wish for myself as I get older, it's that I never be afraid to learn new things. The alternative, it seems, is a kind of death.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
What's The Most Offensive Thing You've Ever Seen On TV?
Here's my vote...from Family Guy, the "Prom Nite Dumpster Baby" musical.
The most ironic part? The show is on Fox, which also happens to host the favorite news channel of many who profess to fight for "family values". I wonder if Lynne Cheney wrote a letter to Rupert when this was aired?
The most ironic part? The show is on Fox, which also happens to host the favorite news channel of many who profess to fight for "family values". I wonder if Lynne Cheney wrote a letter to Rupert when this was aired?
Scranton Council President Evans & the FBI
There is a very interesting Random Notes column in today's Scranton Times (link HERE). Interestingly enough, the column infers something that I received some information on earlier this morning, namely that the President of Scranton's City Council, Mrs Janet Evans, may not have been summoned to the FBI but rather asked to meet with the FBI. Now that difference might sounds trivial, but it's not, chiefly for one reason: you never play games with Federal authorities. They have more money than you do, they have more resources than you do, they are more patient that you are (by the way that phrase is something that a lawyer at work once told me). In short, you don't mess with them or waste their time.
If Mrs Evans did in fact ask to meet with the FBI, then there are only three possible outcomes:
Outcome 1 - She provided credible, concrete proof of illegal activity on the part of Mayor Chris Doherty.
If this is true, then we should see much more investigative activity around the Mayor and his family. A raid on his house perhaps. A raid on the OCED office. The Mayor himself being questioned at length by the FBI. Here's the kicker: if you don't see these things happening, then there is no Federal investigation of the Mayor.
Outcome 3 - She is simply naive & believed the Federal authorities are as interested in rumor and innuendo as she is.
If this one is true, then she has succeeded in making herself look like an ass. As noted in the paper, a council speaker can scream "Pay to Play! Pay to Play!" at the top of their bitter little lungs, but awarding a contract that doesn't require bidding to someone that contributes to a political campaign is not illegal. It may not be the best policy, but...
a) Some contracts can be awarded without bidding
b) People are free to financially support candidates of their choice
In the "this does not necessarily mean that department" consider the following: Senator Mellow's committee has contributed in the past to the campaigns of Mrs Evans. Does that automatically imply a connection between Mrs Evans and the Senator? No. It's true...search through her campaign finance reports from, I think, the early 2000's...and you will see at least one contribution. That doesn't mean that there is any kind of "quid-pro-quo" between the two. Look, the business of campaign contributions is a dirty one, but dirty doesn't always mean "illegal".
Option 3 - This is a political ploy on the part of Mrs Evans to "harm" Mr Doherty's Senate campaign.
This is, I think, the point made in the column this morning. I sincerely hope this IS NOT true. I shutter to think that Janet Evans is so incredibly stupid as to think that she can "use" the Federal Bureau of Investigation to score cheap political points against a small town Mayor. "Incredibly stupid" I say? Perhaps that's not strong enough of term; how about "moronic" instead? Wasting the time of Federal agents is about as smart as telling Guido jokes at Satriales in Kearny, NJ.
Here's my bet:
Option 1 - Unlikely.
If the Feds had something on Chris Doherty, they wouldn't need the help of Janet Evans and we would be seeing other activity.
Option 2 - Likely.
Mrs Evans is used to being told by her followers that every word she puts forth is gold, so it's entirely possible that she might think Federal authorities would be similarly wowed. The problem is that there is a big difference between a professional FBI agent and, say, Ray Lyman.
Option 3 - Somewhat likely.
Mrs Evans is shrewd, and some of her supporters are even shrewder. These kinds of folks never miss an opportunity to kick an opponent. The problem is that Federal Authorities don't like being used as media cannonballs. Bad move.
Mark my words here: This will not help Mrs Evans AND this will not harm Mr Doherty. What does it do? It simply adds fuel to the notion that Janet Evans' is a one-trick pony, who does nothing other than try and harm Chris Doherty at every turn. Sadly, we actually need her to do more, like help to govern the city for example.
If Mrs Evans did in fact ask to meet with the FBI, then there are only three possible outcomes:
Outcome 1 - She provided credible, concrete proof of illegal activity on the part of Mayor Chris Doherty.
If this is true, then we should see much more investigative activity around the Mayor and his family. A raid on his house perhaps. A raid on the OCED office. The Mayor himself being questioned at length by the FBI. Here's the kicker: if you don't see these things happening, then there is no Federal investigation of the Mayor.
Outcome 3 - She is simply naive & believed the Federal authorities are as interested in rumor and innuendo as she is.
If this one is true, then she has succeeded in making herself look like an ass. As noted in the paper, a council speaker can scream "Pay to Play! Pay to Play!" at the top of their bitter little lungs, but awarding a contract that doesn't require bidding to someone that contributes to a political campaign is not illegal. It may not be the best policy, but...
a) Some contracts can be awarded without bidding
b) People are free to financially support candidates of their choice
In the "this does not necessarily mean that department" consider the following: Senator Mellow's committee has contributed in the past to the campaigns of Mrs Evans. Does that automatically imply a connection between Mrs Evans and the Senator? No. It's true...search through her campaign finance reports from, I think, the early 2000's...and you will see at least one contribution. That doesn't mean that there is any kind of "quid-pro-quo" between the two. Look, the business of campaign contributions is a dirty one, but dirty doesn't always mean "illegal".
Option 3 - This is a political ploy on the part of Mrs Evans to "harm" Mr Doherty's Senate campaign.
This is, I think, the point made in the column this morning. I sincerely hope this IS NOT true. I shutter to think that Janet Evans is so incredibly stupid as to think that she can "use" the Federal Bureau of Investigation to score cheap political points against a small town Mayor. "Incredibly stupid" I say? Perhaps that's not strong enough of term; how about "moronic" instead? Wasting the time of Federal agents is about as smart as telling Guido jokes at Satriales in Kearny, NJ.
Here's my bet:
Option 1 - Unlikely.
If the Feds had something on Chris Doherty, they wouldn't need the help of Janet Evans and we would be seeing other activity.
Option 2 - Likely.
Mrs Evans is used to being told by her followers that every word she puts forth is gold, so it's entirely possible that she might think Federal authorities would be similarly wowed. The problem is that there is a big difference between a professional FBI agent and, say, Ray Lyman.
Option 3 - Somewhat likely.
Mrs Evans is shrewd, and some of her supporters are even shrewder. These kinds of folks never miss an opportunity to kick an opponent. The problem is that Federal Authorities don't like being used as media cannonballs. Bad move.
Mark my words here: This will not help Mrs Evans AND this will not harm Mr Doherty. What does it do? It simply adds fuel to the notion that Janet Evans' is a one-trick pony, who does nothing other than try and harm Chris Doherty at every turn. Sadly, we actually need her to do more, like help to govern the city for example.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Road Apples, #62
Judge Joan Orie Melvin...should resign from the State Supreme Court if allegations that her family strong-armed legislative staffers to help in her campaign are true. The full story is HERE, but I'm thinking that more is coming out on this case. Note that this isn't a Democrat "gotcha", as there are plenty of instances where Democrats have done precisely the same thing (and God only knows just what Senator Mellow has done over the years). Once again it appears that politicians used OUR MONEY as if it were their own.
Cars...Well I'm moving forward with getting another car. With a second daughter in college, I'm going to need one, so while I don't like spending money this time it can't be avoided. I find this kind of thing to be very stressful, the part being spending money. I actually like the notion of researching vehicles, etc, and I've already been doing some of that.
Cars, Part II...I'm still not sure what I ultimately want to get. I have a certain amount of money that would allow me to get a decent used car, or I could go and use that money towards a new car. I don't want to have another payment to deal with, but the single most important thing for me at this stage is to have something that will be reliable and not cause me constant mechanical stress. I need less of that sort of thing, not more. As a result, I've pretty much given up on American made cars for this go-around. I love my 2005 PT Cruiser, but it's just had too many different things break before they should, so I've pretty much learned my lesson about American car quality. The quality of the Korean made cars (Hyundai and Kia) is better than the American made stuff, and they have incredible warranties, so I may go that route. I actually did own a Hyundai years ago, and it was a pretty decent car. Maybe I'll go that route or maybe I'll visit the Kia dealership that isn't all that far from my house. Regardless, I'll probably have this whole mess figured out by the end of the month.
Ray Musto Gets Raided...This story is all over the news (including HERE). In a way this is kind of sad: the Feds are now doing what voters in this areas should have done years ago, namely weeding out the self-serving politicians that believe they had an entitlement to public money. I don't know Ray Musto, but I do know this: when the FBI comes to your house with a search warrant, then they at least think that maybe you're implicated in something.
This Past Week...has been long. I was in Hartford yesterday, so that made for a 13 your day. I also have tons of things to try and accomplish today, none of which are getting done while I sit here any type this. On that note it's away I go to earn a living.
Cars...Well I'm moving forward with getting another car. With a second daughter in college, I'm going to need one, so while I don't like spending money this time it can't be avoided. I find this kind of thing to be very stressful, the part being spending money. I actually like the notion of researching vehicles, etc, and I've already been doing some of that.
Cars, Part II...I'm still not sure what I ultimately want to get. I have a certain amount of money that would allow me to get a decent used car, or I could go and use that money towards a new car. I don't want to have another payment to deal with, but the single most important thing for me at this stage is to have something that will be reliable and not cause me constant mechanical stress. I need less of that sort of thing, not more. As a result, I've pretty much given up on American made cars for this go-around. I love my 2005 PT Cruiser, but it's just had too many different things break before they should, so I've pretty much learned my lesson about American car quality. The quality of the Korean made cars (Hyundai and Kia) is better than the American made stuff, and they have incredible warranties, so I may go that route. I actually did own a Hyundai years ago, and it was a pretty decent car. Maybe I'll go that route or maybe I'll visit the Kia dealership that isn't all that far from my house. Regardless, I'll probably have this whole mess figured out by the end of the month.
Ray Musto Gets Raided...This story is all over the news (including HERE). In a way this is kind of sad: the Feds are now doing what voters in this areas should have done years ago, namely weeding out the self-serving politicians that believe they had an entitlement to public money. I don't know Ray Musto, but I do know this: when the FBI comes to your house with a search warrant, then they at least think that maybe you're implicated in something.
This Past Week...has been long. I was in Hartford yesterday, so that made for a 13 your day. I also have tons of things to try and accomplish today, none of which are getting done while I sit here any type this. On that note it's away I go to earn a living.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)