Enough To Warm Your Heart

Sunday morning was a bit unusual for two reasons; First, it was unseasonably warm. The second part needs a little explaining. What I saw from my front porch, on this warm Sunday morning, I have not seen since I was a child. I saw the effects of true "Family Values."

At first glance, I saw a young teenager riding his bike with his little sister. The teenager was wearing the quintessential "Rapper-Wanna-Be" clothing, so I figured it was the typical "got stuck with my sister" situation. As they got closer, I could hear the little girl complaining, but could not make out the words. I saw the boy grab the front of the bike and pull her forward and let her glide. I thought he was frustrated with the girl, and it made me a little nervous.

When the girl came to a stop, I could hear what she was saying. She was cried to her brother because she could not move the bike on her own. "Pull me," she begged. "NO!" he replied. The little girl told him she couldn't move without him pulling, but the teenage boy told her she could do it, she just needed to try. Now my curiosity was peaked.

I started to pay close attention to what was being said by the siblings. He told her to push the pedal, but she found it too hard. He pushed her forward one more time, and told her to push the pedal as she was moving. After she stopped coasting, she begged for another push. The boy declined and said he was going ahead without her.

The girl begged then she sat on the sidewalk. The boy did not give in. He simply told her that she could do it, she just needed to try harder. The girl had dug her heels in, and was not going to budge. The teenager came back and told her to get on the bike. Once on the bike, he told the girl HOW to push the pedal. The girl tried and tried. Then after about a 30 seconds, the bike started to move. Not only did she move it, but the boy was able to coach her to keep it moving. He became her cheerleader, chanting "You can do it!" and "Good job!" The two continued down the street with the girl giggling and the teenager cheering all the way. I am not sure who was more excited, the "Wanna-be Rapper" or the cute little girl, but they both rode down the road with the broadest smiles I have seen in quite a long time.

Sometimes we judge people before they have a chance to show their true colors. I was guilty of such sins on this morning. I assumed the boy was a typical punk. Turns out he was a sweet, caring, brother. After seeing this display of kindness, I realized how cynical I have become. It never crossed my mind that this teenager could be a good kid. This was a great reality check for me, and I thought it might be for you as well.

Next time you see or meet someone, stop and think of what YOU might be thinking that will get in the way. What walls have you put up without having any facts? Did you give this person a fair shake, or did you act as I did and prejudge them? Everyone deserves a fair shake; extend a friendly hand with an open mind.

Barack-O-Nomics 101

Barack Obama has again been kind enough to show me my place. While addressing his "age appropriate sex education" ideas, (for kindergarten children?!?) he took a pop shot at conservatives. Though he wanted us to know that Americans are "... generally decent people..." he felt the need to tell us conservatives that we "...listen to the wrong talk radio..." (video Last 60 seconds contain the comments) Considering I do not agree with on.. ah.. hmm... ANYTHING that he stands for, I guess he was referring to me. If you are reading this post and listen to my show (1590 WSMN Sunday's 6-7), then he must be referring to you as well. But then again, Barack does think we are "basically decent people," sort of like Hillary is "likable enough." Well, I am proud to be generally decent even if I listen (or host) the wrong kind of talk radio. Thank you Barack Obama.

Thank you for condescending to those of us who do not want to pay more of our hard earned dollars. No I do not agree with you, and yes I would LOVE to see you FAIL. Nothing would please me more during this presidential election than seeing you lose. That doesn't make me wrong, but it does make me an opinionated individual who believes, rightfully so according to your VP candidate, you are going to cost me more money. No I do not make 250K annually; my family does not even make 100K. But if you're taxing the corporations, their revenue will be reduced. When a company's profit are decreased, the cost for their products typically go up. In other words, this cost is typically passed onto the consumer (you and I).

One more economic point, Barack wants to give tax breaks to 95% of Americans. Not tax payers, but Americans. Sounds good, but let’s look at some examples.

1. About 50% of all tax revenue is paid by the top 5%. Maybe they can afford higher taxes, but what does their tax bracket look like? The people in the top 5% pay about 50% of their gross income. Could you afford to pay 50%? I can't, but then again, I am not making 300k. Most people, who actually pay taxes, pay 25-30% of their gross income in taxes. Quick math for you using arbitrary numbers (not actual figures):

Gross=250k 50%Taxes=125k Net=125k
Gross=150k 30%Taxes=45k Net=105k

So a person making 150k brings home 20k less than a person who makes 300k. So if I net 105k, and I want to net 20 k more per year, I need to make 100k more per year gross? That's 80% of my increase GONE in taxes.

Another way to look at this is for a person to make one third more, they have to spend 80% of their increase on taxes. I am not kidding, this is reality. Even if my example is based on incomes that could be the same tax brackets, it is a fair assessment of the way tax brackets percentages work around the tax bracket break.

2. What did I mean “actually pay taxes?” Out of the 95% that Barack wants to give tax breaks to, many are not paying taxes. No joke, they pay nothing in taxes. Either they are not working (maybe a welfare recipient), they make so little that they get a refund of 100% (or more), or after all deductions are figured in, they receive a refund that equals the taxes they pay. Want a couple of examples?

Family A - Single mom with 3 kids. Makes 20K annually, Pays 6k in taxes. Tax time comes, and she is head of household, 3 children on her taxes, Earned Income Credit, deductions for child care, Transportation write-offs, etc. Refund check = Taxes paid out. 100% refund.

Family B - Married couple who owns a business and has no kids. Tax write-offs for toilet paper, office supplies, computer supplies, automotive expenses, advertising, tax preparation costs, etc. Gross income 60k., taxes on income 18k. They receive a rebate 100% because they can write off ANYTHING so long as they can prove it is used for business purposes. They can even write off part of their rent or mortgage, if they have a designated area that they use for “business.” Yes, if a corner of one room is used for the business (accounting, storage, etc.) and nothing else, you can write off a percentage of your housing cost. (Ask an accountant if you do not believe me)

So how exactly is Barack going to lower taxes for these people? THEY ARE NOT PAYING TAXES!!!!! What are you going to lower? Do you give them free money? Where does that free money come from? Who gives you the money to pay them? Oh wait, you need to take more money from the tax payer so you can pay the tax payer more money? HUH?!?

Of course not! Don’t be silly! He is going to end tax cuts for the oil companies and businesses. A great idea!! Let's make it more expensive for the oil companies and businesses! Companies would never try to raise their prices to recoup the cost of tax increases... WRONG! Yes, the government will get more tax revenue from the companies. But when the increased cost comes down the line, WE pay for the increased cost to the companies!! Thank you Barack for costing us MORE MONEY! Please do not buy into the half-truth Barack is spreading. The part he left out you learn in economics 101; increased cost has to be recouped in product prices, or by cutting staff. (Higher unemployment sound good to anyone? How about lay-offs?)

But Vice Presidential candidate Joe Biden was kind enough to show me the flaw in my logic. (video) He told me that if I was concerned with higher taxes and didn't want taxes to go up, I was not being patriotic. I just need to be more patriotic and pay more money that I don't have, or I am just not patriotic enough.

Well, I guess I don’t want to be more patriotic, just ask my thinning wallet.

Gibson's Ass Kicked BY A GIRL!

Before anyone decides to jump on me for the post name, understand how I view Charles Gibson before you start you ranting. Mr. Gibson is one of those good liberals who (supposedly) believes that women are equal. So under this presumption, Chuck decided to viciously discredit Sarah Palin. Figuring that he is a good liberal who treated Sarah with proper respect by hitting her with tough questions, he did his best to nail Sarah to the wall. He made one big mistake; he assumed Sarah would not be able to handle the Great Media God, Charlie Gibson. Can you say, "oops?"

So why does this post point out that Sarah, a "girl," kicked Chuck's ass? Like I stated before, Chuck is supposedly a good liberal. Personally, I think he walks both sides of the line. I really believe Chuck didn't think a woman would be skilled enough to stand toe to toe with him. I knew Sarah could handle this joker, but what I did not know was how badly she would kick his teeth in. Forget John McCain, where was this woman back in the primaries?!?

Mr. Gibson (to be referred to as "Glib-son" and other variations on his name from here on) entered this interview with an agenda. This was supposed to be the one interview that shot the Palin effect to hell. Instead, Sarah shot Glib-son's credibility to hell. One of the best examples was when Glib-son decided to twist Sarah's words and stated,

"You said recently in your old church, our nation leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from god... are we fighting a holy war?"

Obviously, Chuck did not do his homework. That is not what Sarah said. Let me quote Sarah:

"Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right also for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them our on a task that is from god."

Now sometimes the written words are not enough to explain, but if you listen to both Glib-son and Palin (Click here), you will hear clearly that Sarah is saying her church should pray that our leader is sending our troops on a task that is from God. In other words, pray that god is on our side, pray for God to protect our troops. As she said, "Let us pray that we are on God's side." Sarah's response was perfectly phrased to disarm Glib-son, but he didn't concede! He actually tried again to discredit her on this topic! Glib-son states:

"But you went on and said there is a plan, and it is God's plan."

Again, Sarah backs herself up by stating that she believes that there is a plan for this world and that it is a plan for good. In other words, she does believe God has a plan, and God's plan is good. She did not claim to know God's plan. Is this not obvious? What's the problem Chuck? You think God should have a plan for evil? This one was a T.K.O.! Chuck, stay down! NO! He is getting up.... He is punch drunk and swings wildly!!!

"But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?"

Oh my God! Are you serious Chuck? If you have not seen this interview, you need to go to ABC and see this pathetic interview... um rather attempted character assassination. I think this can be considered a body check, and Glib-son should stay down on the ice. But he doesn't. He gets up and comes back for more butt kicking....

This was not Glib-son's only screw up (are you surprised? I'm not), just my favorite. Where else did Glib-son throw the facts out the window? How about my second favorite self-inflicted wound, the Bush Doctrine? Chuck asked what Sarah thinks the Bush doctrine is. She knew she was being baited, and walked very carefully around the landmine that was laid for her. She quickly asked, "In what respect, Charlie?" Chuck said the Bush Doctrine "September 2002, before the Iraq war." She stated that she felt President Bush, "attempted to... rid the world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation..." and admitted mistakes were made, but new leadership allows us to try to do things better.

For some reason, Chuck acquired foot-in-mouth disease. He stated that he felt the Bush Doctrine is that, "We have the right of anticipatory self-defense and we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us." Though Sarah handled it perfectly and put Chuck in his place, I want to focus on the Glib-son factual inaccuracy.

Charles Gibson's futile attack on Sarah using his "NEW" take on the Bush Doctrine of 2001 was based on his ability to change facts that he stated! His exact words in 2001 were a perfect compliment to Sarah's! "...He also outlined what is being called the Bush Doctrine, a promise that all terrorists organizations with global reach will be found, stopped and defeated." (Charles Gibson, 09-21-2001). So the moron was wrong about his own words in 2001. Let me bang my head against the wall as you continue reading....

You know I love Wikipedia. Not a perfect source, but a great place to find the sources to back up the facts. Wikipedia is not the place to find facts, but the cited excerpts are. "The phrase initially described the policy that the United States had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves..." (-Wikipedia). This is prior to the invasion of the Iraq war. The Iraq war started in March of 2003.

Now this is not Chuck's first rodeo. There really is not any excuse for his inability to ask questions that are pertinent while being accurate. His lack of accuracy is what I found most humorous, and therefore I have shown you how slanted this interview really is. The only other ploy Glib-son tried to use was asking the same question over and over to try to get a different answer. This is nothing new, and I do not begrudge him for trying. It was pointless and wasted a lot of time, but it did give Sarah the chance to reaffirm her standpoint.

The Iran and Israel questioning was a perfect example of this monotonous questioning. I have paraphrased the conversation below. You will have to listen to the interview (ABC edited interview) for the exact words.

Chuckle Head: What if Israel felt threatened and needed to take out Iranian nuclear facilities?

Sarah: We are friends of Israel and we should not second guess the measures Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.

Chuckles: If we wouldn't second guess (Israel), and they decided they needed to [take out Iranian nuclear facilities] because Iran was an existential threat, would we be cooperative or agreeable?

Sarah: We cannot second guess what Israel has to to do to secure its nation.

Laughing boy: If Israel felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right?

Sarah: We cannot second guess the steps Israel takes to defend itself.

Strike three Chuck, you're OUT!

Jennifer Horn Runs Away With the Nomination

Just a quick update on the 2nd Congressional race...

Congratulations Jennifer Horn.

This was the first time I was actually at a campaign headquarters while the votes came in. There was no up and down, nor where there any out bursts of cheering and clapping like you typically see on television, but there was plenty of positivity and and happy faces. Why, you ask? Not once was Jennifer behind Bob Clegg. To make up for the lack of drama on the floor, we talked about the other races, November elections, and other political items on our minds.

Starting at 8:30 pm. Jennifer Horn was up 46-28 with 5% reporting, and she held the lead all evening. The closest Bob Clegg came to taking the lead was when he was trailing by 3%. This was a good thing for us who support Jennifer, but it made for a quiet evening waiting for her to arrive. Most of us knew it was over at about 9pm, but no news networks called it until 10:30.

Around 10, people were getting antsy. Many of us started pacing, shifting in our seats, and walking in and out of the building. We were not bored, nervous, or even concerned. Simply put, we were anxious. We all knew it was over and Jennifer had won, but the news networks would not call it, and Bob Clegg seemed to miss what we all knew.

When Jennifer walked into the room, the crowd exploded. She spoke about November and beyond. She outlined the direction she expected to take once she hit Washington, and spoke in detail about her major goals (I know I am going to miss some points here) such as energy independence, term limits, lowering taxes, and much more.

Granted, politicians say a lot, but with Jennifer...
Word is bond.

"The Little Green Men Took My Daughter! I Swear!"

Casey Anthony claims to have dropped her daughter, Caylee, off with a babysitter on June 9, 2008. Funny thing is, when she went to pick up her precious little girl from Zenaide (Zani), the babysitter, Caylee and Zani were nowhere to be found. The initial reaction from a responsible parent would be to call the police. Oh no, not Casey! She decides to wait a little while to see if Zani might have taken a walk… a 5 week long walk….

I really do not want to report the news here, but I would like to give some background information. Four weeks after Caylee disappeared, her grandmother asked her mom where Caylee was. The Grandmother was getting suspicious as she had not seen her granddaughter in a number of weeks. Grandma told Casey that she would go to the police if Casey did not. A week later, Casey reports her daughter is missing. If you’re doing the math, it has been five weeks since the disappearance of Caylee.

So the police end up arresting Casey, and Casey has been sitting in jail. During her stint in the joint, she has refused to see various family members at different times, stuck to her ludicrous story about some phantom babysitter that no one has meet or can find, and generally acted in a manner that screams “Pay attention to me! I don’t want you asking about Caylee, pay attention to me.” The drama queen actually said she didn’t understand why everyone was so focused on her daughter, and followed it up by asking why people were not concerned with her. Well, we are concerned with you, that is why you’re in jail.

I don’t mean to be callous, but I want the police to find the body of your daughter so they can charge you with the murder you committed. Sorry folks, but my gut feeling is this psycho killed her own daughter. Blood and hair fiber were found in her car and trunk, the officer who is in charge claimed the car smelled of decomposition…. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to connect these dots. My only hope is that the District Attorney’s office charges her for First Degree Murder and puts her away for life.

Now there is an alternative. Caylee could have been kidnapped and held for ransom. I doubt it for a number of reasons. First, what can the family offer a kidnapper? They do not seem to have money. Second, with the amount of attention this case has drawn, a kidnapper would probably give up by now. Third, someone should have seen Caylee by now. She has been missing for over two months. With all the media coverage, if Caylee is alive, someone should have seen her.

This is what I am getting to; how can a parent do something like this to their child. I have a hard time understanding abusive parents, never mind killer parents. I can not understand how a parent could EVER cause pain (abuse) to their own flesh and blood. How people turn out this way is a mystery to me. People like this should be put to death. Yes, I do advocate for the death penalty, and this is a case where it should be used. I don’t want to hear about her “scared childhood” or how she “needs help.” The only help Casey Anthony needs is help into the electric chair.

Global Warming Update: so maybe we're not going to die?

For anyone who listened to our show last Sunday (July 13th), you know that I did a brief monologue on global warming and detailed the differences between the RSS MSU temperature system and data; and the GISS/NOAA system and its data. Until recently, the readings between the two (or three, depending on whether you actually consider the NOAA numbers separate) have been pretty similar.

The GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies) is a branch of NASA that is involved primarily with tracking climate data. The NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) has, among its other duties, to warn of weather hazards to boaters and news agencies. It should be no surprise that the NOAA also tracks global historical weather data. The sensors these two groups use to gather their temperature data have been a topic of concern lately because they've started to differ substantially from another trusted source - the RSS MSU system.

MSU stands for Microwave Sounding Units and it works by measuring microwaves emitted from the Earth and extrapoling very accurate readings from any part of the Earth (and at any altitude) that it can see at that moment. An ever-growing number of scientists are now proclaiming this to be the most accurate system of all.

Why? Because it's not subject to local influences which could alter the data, that's why. Reports (largely overlooked) have circulated for years that the GISS and NOAA sensor data was being altered by poor implementation. It seems that when the system was put into place in the 60's the original specs set up by the designers called for the sensors to be put into metal boxes coated with a special whitewash that would reflect heat from the sun. In 1978 though, the rules were changed (presumably to save money) to allow the boxes to be painted with white latex paint. Obviously, the paint doesn't reflect the sun's heat nearly as well.

Enter Anthony Watts, a young meteorologist who read about the change and wanted to find out if it mattered. He located where the nearest sensor was and drove out to see it for himself and to his shock, he discovered that the sensor box was at the top of a lightpole in the middle of a parking lot... something that would surely throw the data off. He then watched as the afternoon sun set and the light came on. Since the sensor was directly above it, he concluded (correctly) that the equipment could not possibly be relaying reliable numbers.

To make a long story short, he recruited dozens of people and set up a website at surfacestations.org which he uses to gather measurements on these sensors to determine whether they are being influenced by outside heat sources. As of now, he and his team have surveyed just under half of the stations in the US and a brief rundown of his results is as follows:
* 18% of the stations had a heat source within 30 meters (1 to 2 degrees C variation)
* 56% of the stations had a heat source within 10 meters (2 to 5 degrees C variation)
* 13% of the stations had a heat source within 2 meters (5 to 10 degrees C variation)
* In all, 87% of the stations had a heat source too close for reliability.

I myself would probably have never heard of Anthony Watts & co. if it were not for new information coming to light revealing that the MSU numbers for 2007 differed from those of the GISS/NOAA data set. While the latter ranked 2007 as being tied with 1998 as the 2nd warmest year in the past decade, the MSU numbers ranked it as only 9th. It was this disparity that caused climatologists around the world to take a second look.

Here's the yearly temperature average rankings:

	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007
RSS MSU:	1st	--	--	7th	3rd	4th	6th	2nd	5th	9th
GISS/NOAA:	2nd	--	--	7th	3rd	4th	6th	1st	5th	2nd(tied)

The real story here however should be that the Earth is actually cooling (or at least plateaued) when you look at the graph for the past 10 years. Skeptics will naturally declare that 10 years is an unreasonable sample size and that not too much should be read into that. Keep in mind though, that we're told the Earth is warming based on a sample size not much greater; 23 years by the scientific community's reckoning.

But is a little over decades of warming even a trend? The story of the 20th century tells us that this has happened before and it will happen again. From 1918 to 1940 we had a warming trend about like the one we've seen recently, and from 1940 to roughly 1965 it cooled. A plateau of cool stability then carried us through the mid-70's until we began the latest upward temperature trend.

Check back soon - I'll have a part 2 on global warming ready in a week or so.

- Scott

Is This Exxon Mobile's Fault Too?

Oil prices have come down over the past three days. Oil is still over $130 a barrel, but it is down about $14 since the close on Monday. That's a heck of a slide. The way I figure it, even if oil comes back about $5 over the next 3-5 business days, gasoline prices should be dropping in about 4 -8 days.

Ok, is that as confusing to read as it was to write? Let me bullet this for you:

Monday: 1 barrel of oil about $145
Thursday: 1 barrel of oil about $130
1 gallon of gasoline about $4

My guess is that if oil stays under $140 for the next week, on Friday of next week (or Monday of the week after), gas prices should come down a few pennies.

Now here is my question. Is the DROP in gas prices going to be blamed on Exxon Mobil also, or is Exxon only at fault when the price goes UP? Actually, I am going to put up a poll right above the pod casts. Let's see what you think.

Oh, and let me throw up a prediction... I haven't had a prediction in a while, and I haven't been correct on a prediction since the Republican Primary. But this has been on my mind for a while and I just want to share my feeling with you.

Something (oil related) is going to be attacked by terrorists (surprise surprise) in the Middle East and magically oil prices are going to $175 a barrel. This should happen before Israel attacks Iran at the end of this year. If I am wrong and Israel attacks first, we will see $175 a barrel by March of next year. Be prepared for $5-6 a gallon by summer next year.

Blast from the past

Considering this is an election year, I thought you might like to remember why we typically vote for Republicans:

Ronald Reagan 1984 election

A friend of mine in Conway, NH. reminded me of this site. I forgot about all the good (and old) stuff on retrojunk.com this is where I found the Reagan commercial.

If you comment there, just let them know I sent you!!

Enjoy,
Myke

Primary Language

Why is it so important to most of us to have a primary language? I thought long and hard about how I was going to write this post. I was going to raise hypothetical’s, approach the topic from the points made on the air, and also tried starting fresh with this topic. None of this worked for me. The reason I ended up writing this post about a “private” conversation is because during our last radio show, I was asked about this topic off the air. There was a “fly on the wall” who thought it would be a good idea to jump in while my co-host and I were discussing the next topic on “Live.”

Her argument was simply that the government should not change the constitution to make the people do anything. Specifically, she referenced having a primary language. She phrased her argument to say that the founding fathers intended the constitution to be a bit more open for the people, not to dictate to the citizens. For this reason, we should not amend the constitution to make English the primary language. She further stated that we, as American, are superior to other governments, and because we are better, we don’t need to have legislation to state our primary language. Her next key point was that if I get my ballot in English, then why am I complaining.

No, I did not unload on her with both barrels. I was actually quite polite about this, allowed her to state her case, and plainly answered her retorts with as few words as I could. To be honest, she didn’t really interest me, just annoyed me. I think she was more interested in finding an argument than a discussion.

As to her three main points, I agree with her first and second point. There is no reason for a constitutional amendment that states we must speak English here in the United States. Personally, I think that would be wrong. Etiquette should be the guiding light as to the language you speak while you are here in the United States. If you are in a room of people who speak only German and you turn to a friend and start talking in English, your being rude. Thus, socially acceptable behaviors should be the guiding factor here. Either you’re a rude jerk, or you’re a polite “socialite” who has chosen to speak with respect. No law should dictate manners. She and I seem to agree here, though she seemed to think she was arguing this point with me.

In my opinion, the founding fathers were not looking to dictate to the people of the United States. Honestly I think the founding fathers wanted a document to use as the skeleton for laws and guidelines to be build on. The idea that English is the primary language is not skeletal in nature; it is more of a supporting clause to our culture. By having everything done at the federal, state and local levels in one common language, you remove the cumbersome task of translation, and the mistakes of interpretation. For example, if a Senator from Washington State sets forth a bill in Mandarin, and a Senate office in Maine translates it to Spanish, then it is voted on in English, there is much room for error. Just ask a person in Iran about the English version of the Qur’an. See if they think the translation to English is pure enough to be used in their Mosque.

Now here is where she and I separate. I think the United States is a great country. I enjoy the fact that my ancestors came here to root their families. I am also pleased that the FIRST GENERATION of my family learned English and assimilated. Then again, immigrants of the early 1900’s came to America to be American, not to make America the country they left (as some people from specific cultures are trying to do). But I digress. We are not superior to anyone. There are things that we may be better at, and there are things that we enjoy about our country. But this doesn’t make us superior to anyone. Who makes the best electronics? Who makes the best car? Each of us has our own opinion in these matters, and one line of thinking is not superior to the other. So how can we, Americans, be superior to another culture?

To be honest, there are parts of other cultures that i feel are BETTER than ours! Go to Germany, speak English and you will be treated like a tourist. Now LIVE in Germany, speak English and try to survive… Not so easy. Fair enough, German is the language, and you must know German to BECOME a German. I also like Mexico’s immigration laws. If you steal into their country, they kill you. I think this is fair, don’t you? (Yes I am being facetious) But seriously, if you going to wage your argument on the premise that we are superior, maybe you should start thinking about Nazi Germany, or Stalin.

Superiority doesn’t even come into question here. This is all about consistency and efficiency. Do I care if you speak another language? Yes and no. Yes, because it shows me that you have a useful skill. No, because it doesn’t really matter to me unless I need a translator or tutor. Things should be consistent within the government. My president should not be addressing the country in any language other than English. If you want to hear the Presidents words in another language, then you should have it translated like they do on the Spanish channels. Congress should never address any proposal that is in any language other than English. You will NOT try to pass a law in MY NAME that I can not understand. Further, no ruling should be made in the name of the people in a language that can not be understood by its citizens.

One last thing; I want to reiterate something I said to the “fly on the wall” that started this baseless argument:

It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL to pass a law, ruling, policy, or raise an issue in a language that the citizens can not understand. You must be proficient with English to be a citizen. THAT is why English should be the primary language.

Barack’s insane, oh my God!

Let’s start with an intelligent quote:

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American … There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language … and we have room for but one sole loyalty and the is a loyalty to the American people.”

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Now we delve into the stupidity spoken 101 years after:

“…you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish.
You should be thinking about how can your child become bilingual.”

 Barack Obama 2008 (video to follow)

Did Barack have an ice cream headache when he gave that speech in Powder Springs, GA.? I should be thinking about how my children can “become” bilingual? First off, don’t tell ME how to raise my kids. I have a sixteen year old honors student, a very bright eleven year old, and a precocious seven years old. Excuse me, Mr. Obama, but last I checked, we speak English here in the United States. If my child would like to take Spanish, that’s their choice.

Barack has slid, yet again, back into his comfort zone… The far left (even MSNBC admits Obama is SOLIDLY in the top 20 three years in a row). On July 8^th, he stated that he does not understand why people are calling for “English only” in the United States. Well Mr. Obama, we have something in common. IF people were calling for “English only,” I would not understand the sentiment either. Yet I believe you were talking about people like me. People who want the United States Government to operate in English. People who want to continue the requirement for citizenship that states you must learn English.

Well Barack, don’t forget where you are. This is the UNITED States of America, and, as much as you might hate to hear it, "applicants for naturalization must be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language." (Quoted from US Citizenship and Immigration Services website) Deal with it. We like it this way, and we want it to stay this way. Keep in mind, the key word was UNITED. People like me want legislation to define the official language as English simply to ensure that things remain united and uniform. I don’t care what language you speak in your own home. If “Xhosa” is your cup of tea, please, by all means.

Voting has become cumbersome with the various “language” ballots (Thank you for the example California), and it would be perfectly legal and justified to offer ballots in ONLY English. Remember the requirements for citizenship; must speak, read, and write English! Only citizens of the United States may vote in national elections and primaries. Now, Mr. Obama and friends, please tell me why I should allow ballots to be passed out in other languages? Do you NOT understand the difference between assisting and enabling?

Fact: ONLY US citizens may vote in the Presidential election.(thank you PA and TX)

Fact: To become a citizen you must speak English.

My last words on this:
As a private citizen, the Government should NEVER mandate that I must write or speak in ANY other language.

And one last opinion:
It is rude to speak another language in front of others if it is not the common language of the land. This is to those French people who sit on the stoop and talk “nineteen to the dozen” in French. (Yes I am French.)

I am going to ensure that you all can read and hear what raised my temperature. I don’t want anyone to second guess the words coming out of Barack’s mouth here, so not only did I put up a video, but the words have been written under the video. Please read along as you listen to this 1 minute clip from his speech.

"I ah I I don’t understand when, people are going around worrying about, we need to have English only.
They they wanna pass a law, we want just, ah, we want English only.
Now I agree that, immigrants should learn English.
I agree with that. But, but understand this.
Instead of worrying about whether, ah immigrants can learn English they’ll learn English you need to make sure, your child can speak Spanish.
You should be, thinking about how can, your child become bilingual.
We should have every child, speaking more than one language.
Yo its embarrassing, its embarrassing when when ah, eu when Europeans come over here.
They all speak English they speak French they speak German, and then we go over to Europe, an an ah wah ah all we’s can say is, merci beaucoup ... Right?"

Ok, if you haven’t found humor in Barack’s words say the title of this post with the same accent and "swing" that you say Barack’s full name with.

Temperature Gauge Live is on the air!

You and I have been waiting for this day to come. Looks like it is just around the corner. Yes, Temperature Gauge is going live. I have been putting together advertising spots, and "learning my lines," (who knew there would be acting involved?!?) and it looks like we go live on the 6th of July. My show is going on every Sunday, and I look forward to talking with you all.

Just to clue you in as to why this is taking so long, I have to "sell" my show. Basically I have to convince local businesses to buy advertising on 1590am WSMN. The advertising pays for my air time. If I have had the pleasure to meet you before, you might know I am not a sales person. My own failings have been holding me back. But somehow I managed to do it thanks to you. You gave me the backbone I needed to get this done.

Either way, The important thing is that we are going live! I will update with air time later this week, (if I can get on the internet from my hotel) but it should be 7pm every Sunday. This is a basic trial for me. I am in it for 10 weeks, and longer if the live show takes off! I will be waiting on your phone calls at 883-9900.

Temperature Gauge Live on 1590am WSMN
Sunday evenings from 7-8
(603) 883-9900
Streaming at wsmnradio.com

Call or email me... What's your temperature?

The missing post... I weep for our country.

(This post was actually written on the 11th, but I lost it. I am also searching for one more)

In social circles, I try to never bring up politics or religion. Sooner or later, someone has an opinion about something political, and then they turn to me. “So what do you think, Myke?” Of course I can’t just ignore the question, and they want to know my feelings on the matter. So I sit back, take a breath and launch into a dissertation regarding the subject at hand. Unfortunately, the recent subject at hand was the attacks on 9-11, or should I say the “conspiracies of 9-11.” (put on you waders, this gets deep)

Let’s get this squared away from the beginning; you and I both know the attacks on 9-11 were terrorist attacks. If you think the U.S.A. attacked itself on that day, please stop reading and do not EVER reproduce (We can not afford anymore idiots in the world, we are over our quota). Science and common sense has proved that I am right about 9-11.

Why would an American ever claim that we attacked ourselves? Who in their right (or left as the case may be) mind could ever believe we could do something so horrific to anyone, never mind ourselves? What kind of sick and twisted person would ever want to crash a plane of civilians into a building of civilians? But then again, I did have this argument with a kid in his 20’s just a few weeks back. He swore up and down that we blew up our own buildings and murdered the people on the planes.

His take on it was that we “…used explosives in the World Trade Center buildings, and hijacked our own plane.” The proof was that “…the buildings fell straight down.” Of course my first question was “Are you a %&$*-ing moron?!?!” I followed such eloquence with the hard facts of the case. The buildings did NOT fall straight down, they toppled slightly. Second, we know that as the floors collapsed, they displaced what was ON those floors and sent it to the easiest exit; the window. The “plumes of smoke,” as he called them, were nothing more than dust particle, papers, and parts of building and furniture being forced out the windows.

The reason I bring this up is simple. This kids in his twenties, and he will be helping steer this country over the next few decades. His vote is going to affect how we live our lives. This ignorant fool, who doesn’t know the facts, and has no desire to be educated, is going to decide my future? If this doesn’t scary the hell out of you, let me try this; President Barack H. Obama. You see, this idiot… who plagues my nightmares… “will vote for Barack, because Barack stands for change.” (Yes, the moron even told me so.) He doesn’t know what Barack is going to do in Iraq, with healthcare, taxes, or any other political issue. But he knows Barack stands for change. Ahh, come again?

When did we lose track of our sanity? Was it just bad parenting that lead to this worldly ignorance? Was it too many drugs in the 60’s and 70’s (and apparently 80’s)? Could this be the product of single parent households? Or is it that we just don’t care about ourselves enough to educate ourselves on the world around us. Very few of my Democrat friends can explain to me what their party is going to do for our country if Barack wins the election this year. Even less can explain how the Democrats can be beneficial to the United States this election cycle. They all have learned the mantra, though. Change for ’08. I weep for our country.

Bartender… another shot please….