Consequences! Shouldn’t we all Suffer?

When you break the law shouldn’t you go to jail or pay a fine?

When you lazily lay around all day and night week after week, month after month, doing no work shouldn’t you be deprived of any sort of compensation? Pay? Salary? Should you not suffer financially?

If you eat too much food, and food with too many calories shouldn’t you be fat?

If you run a business foolishly; spending more money than your business takes in shouldn’t your business fail?

And if you elect leaders who lie to you, and say they’ll take care of you knowing they really can’t, don’t you deserve what you get?

Nicolas Sarkozy - Meeting in Toulouse for the ...

Nicolas Sarkozy – Meeting in Toulouse for the 2007 French presidential election 0297 2007-04-12 (Photo credit: Guillaume Paumier)

When France (and the rest of Europe) spoils their children citizens with endless entitlements, and social programs (all while relying on the United States for their military defense) and they run-up a debt that becomes insurmountable they turn to a Conservative like Nicolas Sarkozy to bail them out. But when Sarkozy cuts back on the spending that got France into its financial mess that it’s in, the children…errr…the citizens whine and vote him out of office in favor of a man who promises to spend, spend, spend…Oh…and tax their rich up to 75%. In case the brilliance of Francois Hollande‘s scheme eludes you let me elaborate. He’s going to drive millionaires out of his country, all while establishing a nation of equally poor people supported by a diminishing wealthy class, until there is no more wealthy class and every child …err…citizen is equally miserable. Such is the failed policies of Socialism.

Shouldn’t Europeans got through a period of austerity to correct the over spending they’ve lavished themselves with in recent decades? When overspending for a period, something we all do, don’t you need to hold more tightly on to your money for a while in order to bring yourself back into balance?

Official portrait of Vice President of the Uni...

Vice President of the United States

Vice President Joe Biden appeared on Meet the Press this weekend. He says Gay and Lesbian committed couples should be entitled to each social and civil right, including marriage. For the record I think they should be afforded every social and civil right to. After all why should we discriminate based on a person’s behavior? (Oh…wait…we already do….never mind). And yet President Obama showing the leadership that he has demonstrated repeatedly in his 3+ years in office has said “His position is evolving”. The fact that his 2008 position was to stand against Gay Marriage is meaningless to where he stands now. The fact that his position is “evolving” is a head fake for Gay Rights advocates that he’s got their backs.

President Barack Obama and France's President ...

President Barack Obama and France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy stand together on Friday, April 3, 2009, during the review of an honor guard at the Palais Rohan in Strasbourg, France. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

President Obama’s lies and lack of truthfulness and openness is so tired. Democrats can help me understand him better if they can just explain to me when I can trust a word that’s coming out of his mouth. Rather than disingenuously saying “well…everybody does it” as your constant fall-back excuse for your party’s leader; shouldn’t the President suffer the consequence of his failures? Shouldn’t we vote him out of office for his lies alone?

Well, that’s what’s in the news this morning. It’s a recurring theme I hope we can visit again. It seems to me one never learns from one’s mistakes or failures unless there are consequences for having committed the sin or sins to begin with. But America is such a forgiving nation that we are repeatedly picking up and dusting off those who have fallen and sending them on their way to trip on the same curb. That’s fine and good. I’m glad we’re a forgiving and generous people. But isn’t the guy who keeps falling down less likely to do so if he picks himself up and observes the curb he keeps taking for granted? Once in a while we should trust that the guy is OK and he can do it.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Legalize Marijuana? Let’s take a Deep Breath

Fast Times at Ridgemont High

The momentum to legalize marijuana is undeniable and likely to happen nationwide in the next 5-10 years. The question is: how wise a decision is it?

Five years ago I probably would have come down pretty firmly on the side of legalization. After all, Weed is largely safe of detrimental health risks that are much more common with other illegal drugs like cocaine, and heroine. I don’t ever remember hearing of a reported death from overdosing on pot. On the other hand death from acute alcohol poisoning is not uncommon, and alcohol is a legal drug. Besides death alcohol abuse is well-known to cause innumerable problems.

But is the imminent possibility of death from over-use the only reason to make a drug illegal? The answer is obviously No. Regular marijuana use causes its users to lose motivation, drive, goals, aspirations and work ethic. It’s also well documented that pot is a gateway drug that leads far too many users to the more dangerous drugs.

Marijuana growing Islamabad 01

Marijuana growing Islamabad 01 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On the first point, a study is hardly needed. The loose, brain-dead pot smoker is so stereotypical its a cliche`. It’s a cliche` most frequently represented by the portrayal of the fictional Jeff Spicoli, by Sean Penn,

Sean Penn at the premier for Milk at the Castr...

Sean Penn 

in the 1982 movie Fast Times at Ridgemont High:

Do we want a nation of Spicoli’s?

The fact that a regular use of Mary-Jane can diminish drive and work ethic is not without documentation or plenty of examples. I’ve been witness myself to a straight “A” student catching the “pot” habit and slowly decreasing into such a state of lethargy that their high school grades diminished to a point where they failed to graduate; something 75% of all kids manage.

Were pot legalized another big question is whether the number of users would remain as-is or increase. Put simply, would you not smoke pot if it remained illegal, but choose to do so if it were legal? I think the obvious answer is many would. I’d be one of them. My history with pot is minimal. I’m not sure that I ever bought even a gram. But in my youth I wouldn’t turn it down if it were offered. That stopped for me at the age of 19. At that young age I determined I had too many vices and committed to eliminate some. It made sense to make one of them that which is illegal. In the nearly 30 years since I made that decision I’ve partaken in a little pot only a hand full of times, and only when sex was imminent. So sue me. Sex is GREAT when high on weed.

Leaf of Cannabis עברית: עלה של קנביס

Another reason to oppose marijuana legalization is the fact that it is addictive. Legalization advocates can argue all they want that it’s not. But common sense and repeated studies prove otherwise.

The debate extends far beyond the minimal points that can be made in this blog. But for my part the momentum to legalize is so omnipresent that I felt a moment of pause to recognize there really are detrimental effects to such a move and taking a deep breath is appropriate. A deep, clean breath.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Democrats Continually Make Excuses. Is that Leadership?

It just makes me sick how Democrats so willing excuse the inexcusable done by their elected leaders. Time and again you point at lies and failures, and uncontrolled spending and Democrats (at least the ones I talk with, read, listen to, see on tv, hear about, etc) wave off the offense as if its nothing, no big deal, everybody is doing it. I got news for you Democrats; if you keep ignoring the offenses of your chosen elected leaders merely out of an irrational hatred of Republicans you’re likely to get exactly what you want. You’ll have someone else taking responsibility for and running your lives.

This is an election year. As such there will be no Federal Budget passed by the Democrats in the U.S. Senate. This comes as nothing new. This will be the fourth consecutive year the Democrat controlled Senate has failed to comply with U.S. laws and perform their most basic of tasks. As of this writing its been 1100-days since it was accomplished.

The fact that it’s taken so long indicates this failure is not so much incompetence as it is cold, calculating politics. Democrat Harry Reid leads the Senate, and has throughout this whole period of failure. In the past two years he has allowed two budget votes for the budgets proposed by President Barrack Obama. The combined number of votes in favor of passing the Presidents proposed budget the past two years was – ONE! The Senate, which is led by the same incompetent party as the President gave him 1 vote of support last year. This year, bupkis.

The Federal budget cycle is governed mainly by the following six laws,

1 Budget and Accounting Act.
2 Congressional Budget Act.
3 Antideficiency Act.
4 Impoundment Control Act.
5 Government Performance and Results Act.
6 Federal Credit Reform Act.

The Budget and Accounting Act was passed in 1921 and says: “Each budget shall include a budget message and summary and supporting information. The President shall include in each budget the following….” The provision goes on to list about thirty items, such as expenditures and receipts for the past year through the fourth year following the budget year, information on debt, financial information, and information on employment levels.

Without a budget we lose the summary and the supporting information and the close examination of what our leaders have decided to make their, or our, priorities. In essence, Democrats are saying “We will not give you a basis in which to judge our performance. We will talk a lot of rhetoric. But there will not be a measuring stick from which you can find flaws with my decision-making.” What kind of leadership is that?

The problem I see and hear repeatedly from run-of-the-mill Democrats not in elected office is “Well…that’s what all politicians do. You can’t blame Democrats for doing what Republicans do.” To which I respond…name the last time a Republican led body of Congress, House or Senate, went 4 years without passing a budget.

Wait! You don’t need to answer that. You don’t need to answer because we have a fair comparative example. In the past two years Republicans have put their political carcasses on the line and passed budgets. The GOP Paul Ryan budget would aim to cut $4-trillion dollars from government spending. It would also take a huge step toward entitlement reform which is mandatory for controlling this country’s deficit spending.

Passing these budgets have shown all Americans what plan the Republicans have going forward. It’s left them open to a lot of scrutiny and criticism; or haven’t you seen the Democrats commercial depicting Paul Ryan wheeling a wheel-chair bound old lady to the edge of a cliff and then pushing her off. And hard-core Democratic voters BELIEVE this crap! Are you idiots? I digress.

Until Democrats decide to grow a backbone and show the world their plans for the future, and how to pay for them, and how they prioritize them not one should get our votes. We can disagree with our political leaders. We can see them make promises they never keep. We can tolerate the mudslinging that makes every election cycle vomit inducing. But we should no longer abide by Senators hiding their goals for our country. They must pass a budget or be removed from leadership.

Take Responsibility! Your Kid is Fat. It’s YOUR Fault.

What scientists call "Overweight" ch...

Personal responsibility is a character trait increasingly hard to find in people of this country. The people of the United States have completely fallen for our “leader’s” efforts to “help” you every time an accident happens, or a negative trend is discovered, or a problem occurs. It’s always someone else’s fault.

A growing and popular topic of discussion in this country is childhood obesity; a problem so pervasive and threatening that we could be raising the first generation ever to have a shorter life expectancy. It’s a war that has drawn the attention of former President Bill Clinton, current First Lady Michelle Obama, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and many others. It’s a serious problem. But if you want to find who or what’s responsible for your child’s heft…go no further than the nearest mirror.

CBS News reported yesterday that a key drug used for adults with Type 2 diabetes, Metformin, was largely ineffective in treating children with Type 2 diabetes. The drug is supposed to help control sugar levels in blood. Obesity is a leading cause of Type 2 diabetes in kids and adults. Since 1980 obesity in children has almost tripled, to over 12.5-million. In the CBS report the studies Director says “If we can prevent them (children) from getting diabetes that would be far preferable than being in a position of treating it.” Doctor Robin Goland correctly points out that historically kids didn’t get Type 2 diabetes. When, and if a child got diabetes it was Type 1, which has little or nothing to do with obesity. Diabetes creates a host of medical problems including poor circulation, blindness, and kidney disease.

In related news a new study reported on by the New York Times discloses that the claims of urban residents around our country being nutritionally disadvantaged because of a lack of stores providing fresh fruits and vegetables is an urban myth, not urban desert. The urban food desert myth was given lots of credibility by…wait for it…First Lady Michelle Obama.

First Lady Michelle Obama

First Lady Michelle Obama (Photo credit: West Point Public Affairs)

I for one am glad Mrs. Obama cares for us all and emphasizes healthy eating and physical activity. It would just be more helpful if she knew what she was talking about. The article in the NY Times reports that two recent studies have been done about the supposed lack of nutritional foods in poor urban environments, “But two new studies have found something unexpected. Such neighborhoods not only have more fast food restaurants and convenience stores than more affluent ones, but more grocery stores, supermarkets and full-service restaurants, too.” So with availability no longer an issue who’s to blame for kids lack of proper diet and their subsequent obesity? Here’s a hint…they got their money for that McDonald’s Super Sized Bic Mac Meal from Mom or Dad, same as yesterday, and the day before and the day before that.

City Road McDonalds The famous golden arches b...

And lets stop blaming McDonald’s and other fast food establishments for our kids being fat. As Bill Wittle explained in a video blog we posted a couple of weeks ago called, Why It Sucks to Be Conservative, all McDonald’s does is open up for business. It’s something they have been doing with largely the same menu for sixty years. Remember when we were kids and Mom and Dad took us to McDonald’s? It was special and exciting? Why? Because it didn’t happen all that often. For me if I got McDonald’s food twice in a month I was fortunate. Now, it’s not unusual for many families to visit the drive-thru two-three-four times per week. We can’t do that to our kids and not have them suffer the ill effects. Let me remind you, they don’t have the money or the car to take them to McDonald’s. You do. You are also the one whose responsibility it is to say NO when the kids ask. Grow a backbone and do so.

Years ago I heard a news report on the radio in which the anchor told the listeners of a study, a multi-million dollar study that concluded obese people were obese because they ate more than the rest of us. Do we really need a study to come to this conclusion?

Used to be a common refrain from social critics was “how much time kids spent in front of the tv”. Well, I don’t hear that too often anymore, though I suspect its more of a concern. Between sitting in front of a tv show, video games and computers your kids are probably more inactive than they used to be. Combine that with the fear of letting them out of your sight and your kids are zombies compared to our youth. And we watched tons of TV, didn’t we? Telling your kids to “go outside and play” may seem like a punishment to them, sometimes. But you are doing them a big favor.

In this as in most all things your Mom or Dad were right when they told you “all things in moderation”. I personally don’t have a problem with buying my kids “junk” food, any kind of junk food. But eaten in moderation it’s not going to kill your kids. Too much of a “good” thing definitely will. And I certainly don’t mind being the bad guy (when my kids were younger) and telling them to go outside and play. The life you create for them through a little more attention being paid to the things you limit will be so much more healthy and full filling and they’ll be thankful too.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Radio’s Failures

Samsung Galaxy Tab showing its Wikipedia article.

Samsung Galaxy Tab

 

This morning as I sat in my canoe while fishing a nearby lake I placed headphones in my ears and listened to radio stations in Los Angeles, Tampa, Detroit, and Chicago on my Samsung Galaxy Tab with Android operating system. It caused me to think of the industry in which I’ve worked continuously since 1985. It caused me to think of radio’s failures.

For more than sixty years pundits have been predicting the death of radio as an information and entertainment medium. They began with the popularity of television. Predictions that radio was on its way out continued with every new audio technology that was introduced since that time. Time and again the pundits have been wrong. Radio has not only survived but thrived through all technology updates, twists and turns. Radio has also pressed on in spite of a constantly changing and finicky population that in the past sixty years grew increasingly young and now grows increasingly old.

Prior to televisions dominance radio was the medium for entertainment, news, and sports for Americans for more than 30 years.  Westinghouse’s KDKA radio in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania began successful commercial radio broadcasting in November 1920. And while television had many fathers, and many starts dating back to a time around 1908 the start of coast-to-coast network television in the United States didn’t begin until 1951. As late as 1947 there were 40 million radios in the U.S. and only 44,000 televisions (30k in the greater New York area). While only 0.5% of U.S. households had a television set in 1946, 55.7% had one in 1954, and 90% by 1962. And the death of radio was first predicted.

Try as it might though, television couldn’t compete with radio in two critical areas; immediacy and local community service and/or interest. A radio station could adequately serve the needs of small towns with as few as 2-3000 people. Many still do today. And radio could report the news immediately from almost any location in the world, or right down the street. As early as the 1940s all you needed was a telephone line ultimately connecting you to the radio station or radio network in order to transmit your story. The reports from England by

Edward R. Murrow, pioneer in broadcast journalism

Edward R. Murrow, pioneer in broadcast journalism

Edward R. Murrow back to the United States via radio broadcasts during the World War II Battle of Britain were so dramatic Murrow became a star and a hero. Television couldn’t duplicate such transmission capabilities until almost 10 years later when the same Edward R. Murrow in his show See it Now became the first to show a simultaneous broadcast from Atlantic and Pacific Coasts.

Radio became a staple in the assembly of automobiles beginning in 1922. According to the book “Chronicle of the American Automobile over 100 Years of Auto History,” it was possible to buy a 1922 Chevrolet with a Westinghouse radio installed. But by the 60s 8-tracks and then by the 70s cassette tape players were introduced and radio’s death knell was sounded again. The tape players were small and convenient enough to fit into cars. So, of course, why would people listen to radio when they could listen to their own selection of audio tapes. Only…they did.

Portable listening devices, like the

Members of the Sony Walkman line of products; ...

Members of the Sony Walkman line of products; photo by Marc Zimmermann

Sony Walkman in the 1980s and the Apple iPod in 2001 were also supposed to provide enough listening choices to the average person that radio would not possibly survive. Only…it did. In fact, in a study published on our company website, Total Broadcasting Service, an October 2011 Arbitron survey indicates that radio is still the dominant device listened to in cars over CD players or any other device.

Sadly though, radio and the Federal Government began the slow burial of my beloved industry in the mid-1980s. Automated equipment made it easy and cheap to run a radio station. So station owners began sacrificing the live real human being radio personalities in favor of pre-recorded, pre-planned formated music stations. I worked for one myself in 1986-1988. I was News Director at KBSN AM/KDRM FM Moses Lake. KBSN was a live, local, full-service radio station with personalities, music, news and sports and it was very successful. KDRM played soft-rock, adult-contemporary music off of huge reel-to-reel tape machines all day and night. The only time the music was interrupted was when pre-recorded commercials played 4 times per hour for 3 minute breaks. Or when my own voice was inserted into one of the commercial breaks with a prerecorded newscast. KDRM was boring to the listener. But because it was so cheap to operate more and more radio station owners put-out a boring product.

By the 90s satellite technology had grown to such a level that radio networks began airing national radio programs at all hours of the day and night all over the country further eroding radio’s other advantage over all other mediums, local-community service and/or representation. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 opened the door for corporate raiders to sweep up radio stations in small towns and large cities. Since 1934 no single entity could own more than one AM radio station, FM station, television station and newspaper in a single media market. After ’96 they could own as many as their bankrolls could allow. While such deregulation was a boon to capitalism and in line with the principle of free-markets, it was a horrible blow to democracy. It eliminated the voice of thousands of small business owners in communities all over our great country and left us with a few selection of flavors for radio listening, and news chosen for us by corporate big wigs thousands of miles away from the listeners they were supposed to be serving.

Not surprisingly the continuing elimination of people from broadcasting erodes the talent pool from which real live honest to goodness radio personalities are selected and groomed. Remember when all radio voices had a vocal quality that was special? Remember the classic full sounding, warm radio voice? Today I hear narrow high treble, low bass voices with little poetic quality. I am horrified to hear a reporter on Seattle’s KOMO AM 1000 with a lisp, a clearly audible lisp. Before the days of political correctness we called it a speak impediment.

Radio Tower Graphic

Radio Tower Graphic (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Even with the advent of mobile internet technology terrestrial radio (that’s a modern term referring to old-fashioned radio) still possesses the same advantages over television and even the internet that kept it alive through the past sixty years of frontal assault from technology and government. It can still be more immediate and local than any other medium. These are valuable and marketable attributes, but they’re attributes corporate owners no longer recognize and government officials no longer seem to value. Until they do I’m doomed to spend my life growing old listening to audio over the mobile internet from cities far far away on devices that cost me hundreds of dollars, rather than good quality local radio announcers bringing news and sports from my own town on radios, small convenient, quality, inexpensive radios. Radio is free and can be listened to free on comparatively inexpensive devices. Let’s hope as Americans we won’t learn to take it for granted be you a radio station owner or a radio listener.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.