I always wanted a warm, or a relatively warm December 15th to celebrate Pekoe's birthday. Here in DC that's not a stretch. Over the years there have been days here in which DC has been bitterly cold, or in the 70's. I wanted Pekoe's birthday to fall on a warm day because of some of the things I wanted to do for him. I wanted to take him for a long walk. I wanted wanted to take him somewhere he could splash in the water. I wanted to get him a good steak. Most of all, I wanted to put the top down and take him on a long drive.
Today was such a day. I think it hit 67. Today was a perfect day for Pekoe's birthday. It turned out to be anything but perfect.
Pekoe had been having leg problems. By Saturday night, it had become really tough for him to get up and down stairs. By Sunday evening he was only walking, if you wanted to call it that, on the front legs and rear right leg. On Sunday night, the Vet was obviously closed. I did some research on the net. Turns out dogs can take buffered aspirin. We gave Pekoe the buffered aspirin, along with a peanut butter sandwhich, thinking that he only had a hip dysplasia problem. We put a blanket on him to keep him warm. I slept on the couch next to his bed so he wouldn't try to go up the stairs.
He had slept well. By morning, the swelling seemed to go down a bit. He got up and managed to hobble outside to do his business. We had to help him back in the house because he couldn't make it up the kitchen deck stairs. He ate breakfast and climbed back in his bed.
The Vet called and said they could see him at 10:00am. We used his bed sheet to lift him on to a blanket, and then out of the house and into the car.
From there it was all down hill.
The took a series of x-rays. It wasn't hip dysplasia. Pekoe had a fractured hip. The bone had been weakened by cancer. Further, he wasn't feeling anything in the leg because between the hip fracture had led to break in his sciatic nerve. The doctor went on to say that there was no way to tell ho far or how fast the cancer had spread or was spreading. The only certainty was that Pekoe was dying of bone cancer.
I just hope you don't ever have to make a decision to put your pet down on his birthday.
I live in a quiet neighborhood. I think I have a quiet home. But when I got home it was the wrong kind of quiet. You could always hear Pekoe barking as soon as the car pulled up. It I came in from the garage, I could hear him pacing in the kitchen. I could hear him breathing. I could hear him snoring. And if he wanted to go outside, I could hear him barking.
I sit here now trying to write this blog. Ordinarily, Pekoe would be interrupting me right now to take him on his evening stroll. Now nothing. This is the wrong kind of quiet.
Pekoe the Wonder Dog, December 15, 1996 to December 15, 2008.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Monday, December 8, 2008
What are These Guys Doing Here?
I'm still trying to get my head around why Ford, Chrysler, and GM are coming here looking for "lines of credit" from the Federal Government...other than the fact that Wall Street won't back them.
Why is Detroit in trouble? I don't think it's necessarily the product. Dependning on who you talk to, the so-called "Big Three" make cars that pound for pound match anything made my Mercedes, or BMW, or Toyota, or Nissan, or any other manufacturer. Indeed American were honored as some of the best made cars and trucks in the world.
While a compelling argument can be made that some of the CEOs at American car makers are not as well educated as some of the CEOs at foreign (headquartered) car makers, the men at the helm of GM, and Chrysler, and Ford aren't ignorant. Academically, these are accomplished men, holding a wealth or corporate leadership and managment experience.
Is it the fact that people can't get financing for a car loan? No, I don't think so. I do think people were worried about the economy and they decided to forgo descretionary purchases like a new car. This and climbing oil prices of the last few months.
I also don't think unions, pension costs, and auto worker healthcare costs were the problem. Possibly one could argue, rather convincingly, that these elements, combined with the rapid rise in oil prices earlier this year, could be the "proximate cause" of the financial problems Detroit suffers. Another proximate cause would definitely be the demand, the the fufillment of demand, for SUVs.
But these challenges are what managers manage. If these challenges were not managed, was there a failure in the management of the automakers?
I haven't figured exactly what the problem is that led Detroit to this point. I do want to spend some time studying the Ford, GM, and Chrysler business models. In the meantime, while I'm not sure I'm 100% in favor of a bailout, If Congress does provide emergency short-term funding, they are 100% right to demand to see their plans as to how they will make their respective companies profitable, as well as how they plan to pay any moneis borrowed back.
Why is Detroit in trouble? I don't think it's necessarily the product. Dependning on who you talk to, the so-called "Big Three" make cars that pound for pound match anything made my Mercedes, or BMW, or Toyota, or Nissan, or any other manufacturer. Indeed American were honored as some of the best made cars and trucks in the world.
While a compelling argument can be made that some of the CEOs at American car makers are not as well educated as some of the CEOs at foreign (headquartered) car makers, the men at the helm of GM, and Chrysler, and Ford aren't ignorant. Academically, these are accomplished men, holding a wealth or corporate leadership and managment experience.
Is it the fact that people can't get financing for a car loan? No, I don't think so. I do think people were worried about the economy and they decided to forgo descretionary purchases like a new car. This and climbing oil prices of the last few months.
I also don't think unions, pension costs, and auto worker healthcare costs were the problem. Possibly one could argue, rather convincingly, that these elements, combined with the rapid rise in oil prices earlier this year, could be the "proximate cause" of the financial problems Detroit suffers. Another proximate cause would definitely be the demand, the the fufillment of demand, for SUVs.
But these challenges are what managers manage. If these challenges were not managed, was there a failure in the management of the automakers?
I haven't figured exactly what the problem is that led Detroit to this point. I do want to spend some time studying the Ford, GM, and Chrysler business models. In the meantime, while I'm not sure I'm 100% in favor of a bailout, If Congress does provide emergency short-term funding, they are 100% right to demand to see their plans as to how they will make their respective companies profitable, as well as how they plan to pay any moneis borrowed back.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Sunday, December 7th, The Way it Was
On Sunday, December 7, 1941, Japanese armed forces attacked the U.S. Navy Base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Barack Obama, American Citizenship, the Supreme Court, and the Lunatic Fringe
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
United States Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), President-Elect of the United States of the United States of America ("POTUS"), was born in the State of Hawaii on August 4, 1961, almost 2 years after Hawaii entered the Union. Given his age, place of birth, i.e., the United States ("U.S."), and the number of years he has resided in the U.S., Senator Obama passes all the constitutional requirements to "...be eligible to the Office of President." Given the number of electoral votes secured by the Senator on November 4, 2008, Mr. Obama should be officially elected POTUS when the Electoral College meets on December 15, 2008.
************************************************************************************
I've seen posts over the last 6 months on YouTube and various and sundry blogs and websites claiming, amongst other things, that Barack Obama can not be president because he is not an American citizen. Given all the pre-election drama, common sense should tell anyone that if this were true, someone would have caught Obama's ineligibility during the primary. However, this is part of the charm, and problem, with the lunatic fringe. After all why should common sense get in the way of a good conspiracy?
Now there's nothing I love better than a good tale. But let's look at the facts, let's look and the law, and let's apply the the law to the facts. Perhaps then, we can arrive at reason.
Facts:
1. Hawaii entered the Union in August of 1959. In other words, Hawaii is one of the states of the United Sates of America.
2. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. So Obama was born in the United States. The State of Hawaii has a birth certificate attesting to this fact. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html.
3. At the time of the 2008 national election, Senator Barack Obama was 47 years of age. He will still be 47 when the Electoral College meets on December 15, 2008.
4. As a boy Barack Obama spent a portion of his life in Indonesia. However from 1971 on, he spent his life in the United States.
The Law:
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads as follows:
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The Law as Applied to the Facts:
1. Barack Obama was a natural born citizen in Hawaii, well after Hawaii became part of the Union.
2. According to the Constitution, a valid candidate for the presidency must be 35. Senator Obama was 47 at the time of the election.
3. The Constitution requires that a viable candidate for president must have lived in the U.S. for 14 years. From 1971 until today, a period of 37 years, Senator Obama has lived in the U.S.
According to ALL the requirements of the Constitution of the United States, Senator Obama is qualified to be sworn in as president on January 20, 2008.
There you are. The facts, the law, and the law applied to the facts. While this is not a legal brief, the facts and the law speak for themselves. Everything else, i.e., allegations of faked/forged birth certificates, Obama's Moslem father, or his father's Kenyan heritage, or his father's British citizenship, allegations of Soviet or Mo sad or AlQaeda brainwashing while Obama lived in Indonesia, etc. is just stuff and nonsense; the fodder for a bad novel. But the stuff of bad novels, i.e., alien abductions, covert brainwashing, international intrigue, a presidential sleeper agent in the White House, is just the ticket for the lunatic fringe!
There are those out there who have taken the "Obama Conspiracy" past the point of the Net. They have filed petitions courts to hear their "Nobama" arguments. Because they seek an answer to a constitutional question, that of whether and individual is eligible to be POTUS, constitutional issue must be decided by the Supreme Court, that is of course, should the Supreme Court choose to hear this question. They won't. Trust me. Why? There is no basis in fact or in law for this argument. Won't matter to the lunatic fringe though. They don't care about facts. They are hard wired to believe what they believe and that's it. The flat out refuse to see facts.(http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/12/05/birth_certificate/) It's a shame.
I think that the next 25 years will be tough for our country. Can we pull through it? Sure. But it's going to take each and every one of living in reality, working, and thinking. This can't happen if we choose to follow flights of fancy.
On January 20, 2009 Barack Obama will be sworn in as president. Will this usher in a era of sweetness and light. Of course not! As a nation we will have economic issues to confront, a war in Aghanistan, the management of an Iraqi troop draw-down, securing our borders, the posibility of a new cold war, and so on. This will time time and work. There is a need for everyone to be part of the solution. We can only hope that time will correct the vision of those that, well, have a seeing problem.
United States Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), President-Elect of the United States of the United States of America ("POTUS"), was born in the State of Hawaii on August 4, 1961, almost 2 years after Hawaii entered the Union. Given his age, place of birth, i.e., the United States ("U.S."), and the number of years he has resided in the U.S., Senator Obama passes all the constitutional requirements to "...be eligible to the Office of President." Given the number of electoral votes secured by the Senator on November 4, 2008, Mr. Obama should be officially elected POTUS when the Electoral College meets on December 15, 2008.
************************************************************************************
I've seen posts over the last 6 months on YouTube and various and sundry blogs and websites claiming, amongst other things, that Barack Obama can not be president because he is not an American citizen. Given all the pre-election drama, common sense should tell anyone that if this were true, someone would have caught Obama's ineligibility during the primary. However, this is part of the charm, and problem, with the lunatic fringe. After all why should common sense get in the way of a good conspiracy?
Now there's nothing I love better than a good tale. But let's look at the facts, let's look and the law, and let's apply the the law to the facts. Perhaps then, we can arrive at reason.
Facts:
1. Hawaii entered the Union in August of 1959. In other words, Hawaii is one of the states of the United Sates of America.
2. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. So Obama was born in the United States. The State of Hawaii has a birth certificate attesting to this fact. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html.
3. At the time of the 2008 national election, Senator Barack Obama was 47 years of age. He will still be 47 when the Electoral College meets on December 15, 2008.
4. As a boy Barack Obama spent a portion of his life in Indonesia. However from 1971 on, he spent his life in the United States.
The Law:
Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution reads as follows:
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The Law as Applied to the Facts:
1. Barack Obama was a natural born citizen in Hawaii, well after Hawaii became part of the Union.
2. According to the Constitution, a valid candidate for the presidency must be 35. Senator Obama was 47 at the time of the election.
3. The Constitution requires that a viable candidate for president must have lived in the U.S. for 14 years. From 1971 until today, a period of 37 years, Senator Obama has lived in the U.S.
According to ALL the requirements of the Constitution of the United States, Senator Obama is qualified to be sworn in as president on January 20, 2008.
There you are. The facts, the law, and the law applied to the facts. While this is not a legal brief, the facts and the law speak for themselves. Everything else, i.e., allegations of faked/forged birth certificates, Obama's Moslem father, or his father's Kenyan heritage, or his father's British citizenship, allegations of Soviet or Mo sad or AlQaeda brainwashing while Obama lived in Indonesia, etc. is just stuff and nonsense; the fodder for a bad novel. But the stuff of bad novels, i.e., alien abductions, covert brainwashing, international intrigue, a presidential sleeper agent in the White House, is just the ticket for the lunatic fringe!
There are those out there who have taken the "Obama Conspiracy" past the point of the Net. They have filed petitions courts to hear their "Nobama" arguments. Because they seek an answer to a constitutional question, that of whether and individual is eligible to be POTUS, constitutional issue must be decided by the Supreme Court, that is of course, should the Supreme Court choose to hear this question. They won't. Trust me. Why? There is no basis in fact or in law for this argument. Won't matter to the lunatic fringe though. They don't care about facts. They are hard wired to believe what they believe and that's it. The flat out refuse to see facts.(http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/12/05/birth_certificate/) It's a shame.
I think that the next 25 years will be tough for our country. Can we pull through it? Sure. But it's going to take each and every one of living in reality, working, and thinking. This can't happen if we choose to follow flights of fancy.
On January 20, 2009 Barack Obama will be sworn in as president. Will this usher in a era of sweetness and light. Of course not! As a nation we will have economic issues to confront, a war in Aghanistan, the management of an Iraqi troop draw-down, securing our borders, the posibility of a new cold war, and so on. This will time time and work. There is a need for everyone to be part of the solution. We can only hope that time will correct the vision of those that, well, have a seeing problem.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Just You Wait!
The whole purpose of this blog is to talk about living and being in Washington, DC. However, I am itching to write about President Elect-Barack Obama. I have held off because he hasn't been sworn in as POTUS. It has come to my attention that someone plans to file an action to keep Obama from being sworn in because, as they claim, "He is not an American citizen." This claim has stupid written all over it. I won't go in to details now because, frankly, my hands are filled taking care of my dog and I promised to finish a church project.
Just wait until tomorrow. I'll say plenty!
Just wait until tomorrow. I'll say plenty!
Thursday, December 4, 2008
How Things Work...and Why
I firmly believe in reading newspapers. Real newspapers. Not USA Today, but real, honest to goodness newspapers. Why? It's been said, rather accurately, that information is power. Well, how do you get information if you don't read newspapers? Newspapers, good ones, cover it all; art, entertainment, sports, politics, business, and everything else. This is important because if you read closely, carefully, and most importantly, thoughtfully, you can profit by what you read.
Take today. There an article in the Washington Post about Earl Stafford, president of a company called Unitech, a government contractor. It's been a while since I've paid any attention to Unitech. They used to hold a number of Federal Aviation Administration contracts in Washington, D.C. Here's the link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/03/AR2008120304095.html
It's a nice piece, but also very informative. What Stafford proposes to do is a good thing. As far as I can recall, Stafford is the first to volunteer to raise the funds to provide lodgings and food for physically and mentally challenged Americans; providing them with a "front row seat" for the Inauguration at the Washington Marriott, no less.
I honestly believe Earl Stafford is doing this for the reasons stated in the article; that he is a man driven by a desire to "give back," growing out of his Christian principles. However the Bible talks about doing your good deeds in secret. So why is this story on the front page of the Washington Post? Now, this is why we should read the newspaper, to learn how things work.
As the Post points out, Earl Stafford, smart, savvy, hard working businessman that he is, is still a businessman. A new administration is coming into Washington. No doubt there will be contract opportunities. What better way to garner attention of the incoming Chief Executive and his cabinet heads? There's noting wrong with this. It's public relations.
I wonder if the funds spent to lodge these people, given their handicaps and/or infirmities could qualify as a tax deduction?
If indeed the secondary, or even tertiary goal of Stafford's beneficence is to garner good will with perspective clients, there is another lesson to be learned here. One has to figure a way to get one's name out into the public eye. Stafford's company is billing at $150M. This is chump change for contractors like Lockheed Martin, KBR, and Halliburton. Stafford almost has to do something like this in order to get attention for him, his company, and his foundation.
This is a gamble that took guts. Trying to raise the million to make this happen, and the money spent to generate this PR piece with the Post, is a gamble. Sure if this works, Stafford will get some face time with the new president and he'll get contacts with incoming administration power players. However, this gesture may not necessarily turn into new business. Time will tell. But either way there is a lot to be learned here.
Yes, there is a lot to be said for reading the morning paper.
Take today. There an article in the Washington Post about Earl Stafford, president of a company called Unitech, a government contractor. It's been a while since I've paid any attention to Unitech. They used to hold a number of Federal Aviation Administration contracts in Washington, D.C. Here's the link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/03/AR2008120304095.html
It's a nice piece, but also very informative. What Stafford proposes to do is a good thing. As far as I can recall, Stafford is the first to volunteer to raise the funds to provide lodgings and food for physically and mentally challenged Americans; providing them with a "front row seat" for the Inauguration at the Washington Marriott, no less.
I honestly believe Earl Stafford is doing this for the reasons stated in the article; that he is a man driven by a desire to "give back," growing out of his Christian principles. However the Bible talks about doing your good deeds in secret. So why is this story on the front page of the Washington Post? Now, this is why we should read the newspaper, to learn how things work.
As the Post points out, Earl Stafford, smart, savvy, hard working businessman that he is, is still a businessman. A new administration is coming into Washington. No doubt there will be contract opportunities. What better way to garner attention of the incoming Chief Executive and his cabinet heads? There's noting wrong with this. It's public relations.
I wonder if the funds spent to lodge these people, given their handicaps and/or infirmities could qualify as a tax deduction?
If indeed the secondary, or even tertiary goal of Stafford's beneficence is to garner good will with perspective clients, there is another lesson to be learned here. One has to figure a way to get one's name out into the public eye. Stafford's company is billing at $150M. This is chump change for contractors like Lockheed Martin, KBR, and Halliburton. Stafford almost has to do something like this in order to get attention for him, his company, and his foundation.
This is a gamble that took guts. Trying to raise the million to make this happen, and the money spent to generate this PR piece with the Post, is a gamble. Sure if this works, Stafford will get some face time with the new president and he'll get contacts with incoming administration power players. However, this gesture may not necessarily turn into new business. Time will tell. But either way there is a lot to be learned here.
Yes, there is a lot to be said for reading the morning paper.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Growth as Opposed to Change
I don't know, maybe it's me. Maybe it's just me. I'm tired of the use, or rather the misuse of the word "change." I was tired of the way the word was used to bash Obama an his supporters as being "pie in the sky" dreamers; as if it was somehow childish or immature to expect the formal and informal operations of our government would change under an Obama administration. I was equally tired of the way some Obama supporters used the word. To often, some Democrats looked at the prospect of "change' as something that would happen over night and would be all encompassing.
But "change" can be multi-faceted word. It is a rare word in that it can both convey something simple as in, "Change in weather," or something complex as in, "Change of religious culture."
I voted for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. I'm glad they won. The use of the word "change" is correct in that it indicates a change in presidential administration. However it is totally inadequate in describing what happened on November 4, 2008.
When I was in college I had a part-time job at the National Institutes of Health. I did statistics for the the Nursing Department in the NIH Hospital. The Nursing Department, as I recall, was hosting a conference and they had information packets to put together. To get the job done, they called on hospital volunteers. One of the volunteers was an elderly woman would had grown up in DC. She was easily in her 80s. Talking with her was interesting to say the least. She told stories of a time when the infamous "Tick-Tock Liquors" was a speakeasy, and when University Boulevard and Riggs Road were both dirt roads. She also talked about selling lemonade to marchers in the 1926 Ku Klux Klan Parade in Washington.
Yeah, that's right.
If you research this "parade," you'll learn that there were thousands of Klansmen from all over the U.S. marching in D.C. for this event. In the 1920s, after their rebirth in Indiana, the Klan was a political force to be reckoned with. So much so, that in many parts of the nation, if you sought elected, and you were white, you joined the Klan. Two examples of this are Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia and President Harry S. Truman. Fast forward to 2008. In 80 years time, basically the span of a life, America didn't just moved from a country that would support a Klan march in the Nation's Capitol, to a mature nation that would elect a man of wit, intelligence, and accomplishement to the White House. regardless of his race. Is this change? To be be sure. But more to the point, this represents growth.
But "change" can be multi-faceted word. It is a rare word in that it can both convey something simple as in, "Change in weather," or something complex as in, "Change of religious culture."
I voted for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. I'm glad they won. The use of the word "change" is correct in that it indicates a change in presidential administration. However it is totally inadequate in describing what happened on November 4, 2008.
When I was in college I had a part-time job at the National Institutes of Health. I did statistics for the the Nursing Department in the NIH Hospital. The Nursing Department, as I recall, was hosting a conference and they had information packets to put together. To get the job done, they called on hospital volunteers. One of the volunteers was an elderly woman would had grown up in DC. She was easily in her 80s. Talking with her was interesting to say the least. She told stories of a time when the infamous "Tick-Tock Liquors" was a speakeasy, and when University Boulevard and Riggs Road were both dirt roads. She also talked about selling lemonade to marchers in the 1926 Ku Klux Klan Parade in Washington.
Yeah, that's right.
If you research this "parade," you'll learn that there were thousands of Klansmen from all over the U.S. marching in D.C. for this event. In the 1920s, after their rebirth in Indiana, the Klan was a political force to be reckoned with. So much so, that in many parts of the nation, if you sought elected, and you were white, you joined the Klan. Two examples of this are Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia and President Harry S. Truman. Fast forward to 2008. In 80 years time, basically the span of a life, America didn't just moved from a country that would support a Klan march in the Nation's Capitol, to a mature nation that would elect a man of wit, intelligence, and accomplishement to the White House. regardless of his race. Is this change? To be be sure. But more to the point, this represents growth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
