TexasTruBlu's Blog

Most businesses, especially sales, will say that in order to keep customers happy, you don't over-promise. You don't promise things sooner than you reasonably think they can get there or you run the risk of making the customer mad. I am betting there's not a single person out there who went to a one hour photo booth and didn't expect their photos in sixty minutes. One of the biggest gripes people have regarding businesses these days is the lack of customer service, and disappointment over delivery, specs and such play into that.

So....
Witness the Democratic National party line where they are promising virtually everything to virtually everyone. Because of the image of the DNC as the Big Umbrella party, their party platform must address every single demographic minority's view in order to maintain the perilous status quo. Be they gay or straight, atheist or fundamentalist,  regardless of religion, union, job or gender, every single person's needs MUST be addressed, even when they conflict (as in the current primary race between a woman and an ethnic minority) or when they fly in the face of common sense. Take just one example-energy. The environmentalists have been violently opposed to nuclear power for decades even when their European counterparts embraced this source.
So that leaves
solar-which doesn't have the battery or generating ability to date,
wind-which has the same problems,
hydraulic-which is also being fought by environmentalists who want to do things like get rid of Glen Lakes Dam,
coal-which they don't like even though it is our most abundant naturally occurring source of energy
natural gas-no ability exists for average folks to access this for cars at this time.
biodiesel-which is being scuttled by higher source material costs
or oil-which Cuba and China are taking from right under our noses off the coast of Florida because the Congress and DNC are so much in the back pockets of environmental groups.

And this is just one issue. Pick another-single payer healthcare, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, taxation, states rights, eminent domain, drugs, illegal immigration, voter ID-pick any issue and they have promised to any and all that their dreams will be fulfilled. Just as if the Magic Fairy showed up or a Genie in a bottle granted three wishes. But when you read such stories as those, there's always a catch or a moral attached. The moral to this story is that if you promise everything to everyone, somebody is going to be disappointed. And with the fervor and anger that has driven the last four years of media hype, if all that is on the winner's plate cannot be delivered in record time, there is going to be serious implications for the mid-terms. Lincoln said it best,
"You can fool some of the people all of the time,
and all of the people some of the time,
but you can't fool all of the people, all of the time"

Let's me add to that: "And payback is a *****"

For those of you with school age children who are now lingering in the strange limbo between TAKS testing and the end of the school year, you may want to consider why school districts do this type of testing and what they aim to achieve by doing so. You may also want to consider programs that are dropped because they don't address subjects that are tested. With the cost of everything going up, there could be a time in the not so distant future where things like music, art and PE are removed from curriculum. While I have no problem with teaching academics, I do think we should consider whether back forty years ago, when all of these subjects and programs were part of the school day, students were doing better on their core subjects than they are right now. Don't fool yourself, your kid may understand Facebook and how to text, but at the high school level I am seeing more and more kids who fail to understand the process of learning and can only parrot what teachers feed them. This is not a way to produce independent successful individuals, this is the way to create a population of weak minded citizens who are more willing to let someone else make their decisions than they are to read about anything related to economics, history, politics and such. You should be concerned and you should get involved because this is about more than taxes, this is about our future. And that's something everyone should pause to consider.
If you need further information here's a video link. It's not long and it's worth it. The information links are good too.

I've posted a great number of ominous stories regarding the reality of socialized medicine in Europe. Some Americans have the attitude that we can do it better, cheaper and more efficiently. Well if the recent stories about our VA hospitals haven't caused you to doubt, read this doctor's account of how TriCare- a service company for our military and a government run and paid for entity-has such poor service, such lack of network accessibility that patients are not being served as well as even Medicare and Medicaid patients. Americans by and large are used to a system where you either pay for insurance and pay out of pocket co-pays or one that is all encompassing as in the true HMO model. But when this is applied to offer unlimited services to everyone without any sort of accountability, the number of patients goes up  and the doctors are spread more thinly than they are now. So read this, see what an American doctor says and while you are at it, read about Canadian doctors that have chosen to leave practices and move elsewhere. This is a huge issue this election and people need to pay attention because somebody has to pay for such sweeping programs. And it is just as likely to be the little guy as the big corporations. Everyone would have to take a hit.
Story here.

I'm not a huge fan of Hillary Clinton BUT, this is EXACTLY what is driving me mad about our current self-proclaimed media controllers. Who elected THEM to decide for US? And that has been going on this entire election season. There's no question that big time manipulations are being played out behind the scenes. I wise man once said "follow the money" so here's my question to all voters regardless of their views, who do you think is pulling the strings on this puppet? From Fox News.....
Clinton Out -- No Questions Asked
Last Edited: Friday, 09 May 2008, 1:49 PM CDT Created: Friday, 09 May 2008, 1:27 PM CDT

Sen. Hillary Clinton speaks at a rally in Dallas on Feb. 22. (function() { try { var td, img, p; if (document && document.getElementById) { td = document.getElementById('story_image'); if (td && td.getElementsByTagName) { img = td.getElementsByTagName('img')[0]; } if (img) { p = img.style.paddingLeft; img.onload = function() { img.style.paddingLeft = '1px'; setTimeout(function() { img.style.paddingLeft = p; img.onload = null; }, 0) } } } } catch (e) { } })(); or just enabling jstl so that we can just write ${bean.property} and jsp takes care of the new lines. -->
National polling firm Rasmussen Reports announced on Friday that it will stop polling people about the presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton because her opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, will win the Democratic nomination.

I am posting a link to Orange Punch about the relative academic acclaim of the Global Warming apologists and the Global Warming deniers (that is what they call themselves). Personally, despite the claim of some folks who don't bother to read all the words I write, I do think that everyone should take steps to avoid waste. That includes water, air, energy, food, clothing and such. Yet I can walk outside on trash day and see perfectly good things that could be donated for others to use, sitting on the curb in front of other folks' houses. I see water from backwashing swimming pools running down the street for hours along with water from sprinkler systems that run every day-even when it rains. I see folks sitting with engines running waiting for kids at school. So I am not against true conservation, what I am against is this phony self-righteous type of environmentalism that gives a free pass to some of the most toxic industries in some of the most polluted nations in the world at the expense of American and European taxpayers. Why should we subsidize bad science? And why are the folks who push this as the reason for carbon offsets, economically debilitating accords and just plain silly actions such as corn based ethanol (which incidentally, Congress is beginning to doubt...)are so darned defensive when someone bothers to question scientific findings. In science, it isn't normal for 100% of any outcome to be predicted, yet that is what some of the politicians and pundits would prefer. Having 100% of scientists agree to any measure is dubious and probably rigged. So after having introduced you to the earlier story about how many studies were aimed at creating false support for existing norms as accepted by "conventional wisdom", here's a story about the relative importance of the acceptors vs. deniers.
Link here

I would like to know what happened to my last two blogs. Something or someone is not posting them or unposting them. I am just curious as to why this is happening.

It would seem that Hillary Clinton let the cat out of the bag by trying to get Congress to pass a fuel tax holiday. While the margin of profit that oil companies make has been pretty consistent at around 8%. Granted that's better than some companies, but much less than say, Google, which had a 25% profit. To quote from CNN-which is not usually an apologist for big oil companies-

"...Even though many oil companies are reporting record profits, many people forget just how expensive it is for energy companies to engage in the oil business.

The average net profit margin for the S&P Energy sector, according to figures from Thomson Baseline, is 9.7%. The average for the S&P 500 is 8.5%. So yes, energy companies are more profitable than many others...but not by an inordinate amount.

Google, for example, reported a net profit margin of 25% in its most recent quarter. Should we have an online advertising windfall profit tax?..."

CNN Money April 29, 2008

So exactly which entities have the most to lose if gas taxes are cut? Not the oil companies, their taxes are paid before it hits the pump. But local taxing umbrellas such as counties, states and even the federal government have a great deal to lose if such a tax holiday were passed. The Obama camp is trying to rally union opposition by citing the possibility of losing construction jobs. But then again, is this real shrinkage of the domestic job market, or will it give construction companies the incentive to stop hiring people who are not here legally? And when it comes to tax dollars going into Washington D.C. , Texans are only getting about seventy five cents or so for every dollar we send. So where's the rest of the money? We could go into the scenario from "It's a Wonderful Life" where the function of the savings and loan is explained, but the simply matter is that the money Texans don't get back in the form of projects is political payola for things like ethanol support subsidies, pet projects and celebrity endorsed programs which due to their cost only help the already wealthy. In short, while there's a noticeable reluctance to address the issue, the federal government, state governments and local towns and cities are reaping a bountiful harvest of sales taxes that become exponentially higher when they are based on per dollar sales. Everyone wins, except the consumer. Maybe someone should read them the story about the Goose that Laid the Golden Egg before all of our gooses are cooked

Update: If you think that this is merely a political gambit, you may be right. But if you think that neither the Republicans nor Democrats have come out for higher taxes as a means of forcing citizens into a more fuel concious mode, then think again. Read this blog, but then be sure to scroll down to the comments where some die hard Democrats urge the RAISING of federal fuel taxes in order to fund alternative fuels. I have already outlined the political boondoggle that is corn based ethanol. Imagine what will happen to those funds once the other fringe groups get their hooks into a candidate. I have no problem with subsidies for solar, thermal or even biofuel, but there are groups out there with tangential programs that are not economically feasible. But without someone demanding accountability, there will be  good money thrown after bad.

Read this blog and comments

"NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - A man charged with shooting three people outside a Las Vegas strip club has denied he was involved and accused Adam "Pacman" Jones of ordering the shooting and framing him to avoid identifying the real shooter.

Arvin Kenti Edwards of Renton, Wash., is being held in a Washington state jail on $1 million bail pending extradition to Nevada. He talked with WTVF-TV in Nashville by phone for a report that aired Wednesday.

Edwards told the TV station in a telephone interview that Jones lied to police about the Feb. 19, 2007, shooting at the Minxx club that left an employee paralyzed and two other people wounded. Edwards said Jones paid someone for the shooting, but that it wasn't him.

"I want to let them know I'm not the person who done this. I've been shot before. I know how it feels," Edwards said.

He accused Jones of lying to help his plea deal as the suspended cornerback tries to return to the NFL. Jones was traded by the Tennessee Titans to the Dallas Cowboys last weekend, with Jones receiving a new contract.

Jones' agent and attorney, Worrick Robinson, said Edwards has reason to lie as the man facing three counts of attempted murder.

Robert Langford, Adam "Pacman" Jones' lawyer in Las Vegas, was out of the state Thursday and unavailable for comment, an aide at his office said.

Police say Edwards opened fire outside the strip club after Jones was involved in a brawl inside, and later demanded $15,000 from Jones for "services rendered."

Jones told authorities he didn't order the shooting and declined to pay. But he said he reimbursed a friend after the friend paid the money on Jones' behalf. Jones also told police he saw the person who fired the shots at the club and identified Edwards, who has an amputated arm, in a police lineup April 18.

A warrant filed in the case said Edwards' phone records were checked and that he had contacted Jones in Atlanta and Tennessee.

Jones pleaded no contest Dec. 6 in Las Vegas to conspiracy to commit disorderly conduct in a plea deal that reduced two felony charges of coercion, each carrying a possible sentence of one to six years in prison.

In return, he agreed to tell police what he knew about the gunman. Jones has never acknowledged any role in the shooting."

...Yeah, Jerry Jones, real classy personnel decision......

I am not a big NBA fan. I think the players are overpaid and the off-court antics have more in common with music videos than life. But I did sometimes watch the Mavericks and I have always considered Avery Johnson and OUTSTANDING individual. He never passed the buck. He always shouldered the blame. In a way, that's what he's doing this time, too. There were circumstances not entirely under his control. Mark Cuban, for all his acclaim, made some pitiful trades and saddled Mr. Johnson with a team with tired legs. Perhaps he will find more success in his next team. I feel sorry for those who tried and lost, but it's pretty sad when a decent man gets fired over the inaction of others.

So all the political hopefuls are oh so GREEN this year. Even NBC has changed its logo green. Isn't it just a little too much? It's not just me that thinks so...

Try here....
For a description of how the exemptions for India and China have led to increases in greenhouse gases from  (drumroll.......) THE KYOTO ACCORD NATIONS!!! Yes the same folks that want to condemn the "evil West" especially the "evil U.S." Strangely enough, the United States has a relatively GOOD record on reduction of these gases. So what gives? Has any major mainstream media even BOTHERED TO REPORT THIS? Of course not, because that would anger the Church of Global Warming and their powerful head honchos.

As for the Green Faithful, they are trying to create their first media martyr......

The short version is that Colorado State University took exception to famed hurricane forecaster William Gray's doubts about Global Warming. So they tried to silence him by denying his access to produce his annual forecasts.
"By pioneering the science of seasonal hurricane forecasting, William Gray turned a university far from the stormy seas into a hurricane research mecca.

But last year, the long-term relationship between Gray and Colorado State University, where he has worked for nearly half a century, nearly unraveled in an episode that highlights the politically charged atmosphere that surrounds the global warming debate.

University officials told Gray that handling media inquiries related to his forecasting required too much time and detracted from efforts to promote other professors' work.

Gray, who has emerged as a leading voice of skepticism about global warming, reacted hotly, firing off a memo to Dick Johnson, head of CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, and others. He didn't buy the too-much-media reasoning.

"This is obviously a flimsy excuse and seems to me to be a cover for the Department's capitulation to the desires of some (in their own interest) who want to reign (sic) in my global warming and global warming-hurricane criticisms," Gray wrote in the memo obtained by the Chronicle.

Gray initially declined to speak about the issue. But on Tuesday, Gray acknowledged the dispute.

"You see, so many people in our department make a living off the global warming threat," he said. "So I think that's part of why they came to me."

Just Sad. It sounded like the plot for a horror film-a reclusive neighbor, unseen for months, is found to have been dead for perhaps a year or more. Weirder still, someone has been mowing the lawn, collecting the mail and I suspect, collecting whatever pension or social security payments were coming. Cars were seen coming and going, and all the while a frail and failing little old lady passes without even the dignity of a proper memorial. I wish it were just a movie plot, but it happened here. And it's not the first. I have commented before that part of what makes us human is our connection to others. In the past, that was basically family, but now my fellow 'Boomers like to think that their friends will care for them. Many people of my age pat themselves on the back for not having kids, for eschewing the bonds of marriage and for indulging their whims. It's their choice, that's for sure, but I am concerned that as our population ages, and as the young population dwindles in proportion, who is going to care about an old lady and her dog? Today the UN issued a concern about the possible reduction of the population of the former USSR by nearly 40% in the next forty years. Their views on what is laughingly called family planning-as in multiple abortions-paired with poor nutrition, increased alcoholism and risky personal behavior is fueling this fear. They aren't alone-France and Germany are not far behind. There's something to be said for having family.

Back when Al Gore was inventing the Internet, the same End of the World-isms were being spouted by the Liberal Left. So we have all this hoopla and fake "greenness" being pushed on us more heavily than a Presidents' Day furniture sale. Is is just me, or is this just getting a little too heavy handed? I have no problem with conserving, with being frugal with resources and with not simply buying "things", but really folks, isn't this just getting a bit much? Anyway, I came across these predictions from the loonies of the past. See how often they were wrong and ask yourselves if the current crop of loonies is any better. Frankly, I think the overkill is turning people away. They make such situations seem inevitable and the fixes are draconian in nature-so why bother? If I hear ONE MORE ADMONITION TO GREEN UP MY LIFE I WILL PUKE......at least it's organic.

Earth Day 2008: Predictions of Environmental Disaster Were Wrong

"Courtesy of the Washington Policy Center, 4/22/08

“By 1985...air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the earth by one half” ­ Life magazine, January 1970

Seattle ­ Another Earth Day is upon us. This is a good time to look back at predictions made on the original Earth Day about environmental disasters that were about to hit the planet.

Most Earth Day predictions turned out to be stunningly wrong. In 1970, environmentalists said there would soon be a new ice age and massive deaths from air pollution. The New York Times foresaw the extinction of the human race. Widely-quoted biologist Paul Ehrlich predicted worldwide starvation by 1975. Documented examples are below.

On this Earth Day 2008, new predictions will again be made about looming environmental disasters about to strike our planet. If past experience is any guide, most of these predictions are wrong. People concerned about our planet’s future should be wary of statements from activists and other interested groups, so we stay focused on real environmental concerns, and don’t waste time on fearsome predictions that will never happen.

• “...civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind,” biologist George Wald, Harvard University, April 19, 1970.

• By 1995, “...somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.

• Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “...the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born,” Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.

• The world will be “...eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age,” Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

• “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” biologist Barry Commoner, University of Washington, writing in the journal Environment, April 1970.

• “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from the intolerable deteriorations and possible extinction,” The New York Times editorial, April 20, 1970.

• “By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half...” Life magazine, January 1970.

• “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

• “...air pollution...is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone,” Paul Ehrlich, interview in Mademoiselle magazine, April 1970.

• Ehrlich also predicted that in 1973, 200,000 Americans would die from air pollution, and that by 1980 the life expectancy of Americans would be 42 years.

• “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” Earth Day organizer Denis Hayes, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

• “By the year 2000...the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America and Australia, will be in famine,” Peter Gunter, North Texas State University, The Living Wilderness, Spring 1970.

Our purpose on Earth Day 2008 is not simply to point out how often environmental activists have been wrong, but to learn from the mistakes made during past Earth Days. Learning from the past will give us a better understanding of our world and the threats that face it.

By being skeptical about routine portents of doom, we can stay focused on the real threats that face our planet, and on the reasonable and achievable actions we as a society can take to meet them."

In today's headlines we see the United Methodist Church has decided that it is God's will that they harbor illegal immigrants. Fine, I suppose this means that those of the poor who were born in places like Appalachia, southern Mississippi or inner city Los Angeles are now sufficiently cared for and supplied with everything they need. Do we not have enough of our own citizens who are struggling? Do we really need to create a false "humanitarian crisis" for the media? It is one thing to support ministries in other lands who need assistance, it is quite another to claim some sort of moral superiority for creating a support system for the poor of other nations who come here and CREATE THE CRISIS. How about Mexico, Costa Rico, Guatemala and other nations begin taking care of their own poor and we allow our churches here to take care of ours? Until men, women and children born and raised here legally are served churches such as this are doing nothing more that creating what is legally known as an attractive nuisance by offering services. This is why although I believe in everything to do with the Christian faith, I am increasingly appalled at the militant leftist arm of most mainstream religions these days.

Story here.

Who is fooling who now? For years some of the same political know it alls backed the Clintons. Now those same folks say they are tearing apart the party. So why the sudden epiphany? Also, why is it that Hillary, a woman, has to back down for Obama because of his ethnicity? Have women been so easily elected to high offices that it's no longer an issue? Or is this, as I think, just another example of the wishywashy nature of political opportunism?
Article here.

There
Ain't
No
Such
Thing
As
A
Free
Lunch.

I hear a great deal of discussion about how the Democrats are going to "give" everyone "free" healthcare. First of all, there's no giving or not giving, it's all a matter of allocating funds. And those funds have to come from somewhere. Unless we simply print money, causing the dollar to sink further, then that means the money either has to come from cutting other programs OR from levying heavier taxation. There is NO SUCH THING AS A FREE GOVERNMENT PROGRAM. You and I pay for it. I wonder how happy the many supporters of these programs will be when they get the sticker shock from the smaller take home pay on their paychecks.

In another attempt to extort more money from the American public, there's currently legislation on The Hill to bail out folks that defaulted on their home loans. I have a question. If your neighbor takes lush vacations, buys a new car every year and sends their kids to expensive private schools, but defaults on their home loan, should his neighbors have to pay more in taxes to bail him out? Life is about choices. If you have never played the game "Life" I recommend you do. There are financial, educational and lifestyle decisions involved in every aspect of life. And for people that make bad decisions, there should be consequences. It's hard for me to feel much sympathy for people that insist on buying to the last penny limit of their credit worthiness. And it is equally hard for me to feel sorry for grown up people who sign mortgage contracts and then get upset when the balloon goes up. If you don't want to have to have such mortgages, then hold off buying a home, save some money, pay off some bills and improve your personal credit score. I know that bad things happen in life, but I am getting really tired of having to pay more for insurance because other people don't want to be bothered, having to pay more for healthcare to subsidize folks that would rather vacation than pay insurance and having to bail out home loans that should probably never have been written. Last I heard it's less that 5% of the loans that are defaulting. Sure that's a big number, but it also means that 95% are doing what we have to do, making the adult decisions and sacrifices, to keep our bills paid. Why do we have to pay more for other people's bad choices?