Source article
mschmitt's picture
By Mark Schmitt | bio
Bloomberg reports that six Republican-held congressional seats in New York State may be seriously in play in November, a pretty nice downpayment on the 15 seats Democrats would need to take back the House. This confirms something that one of the serious analysts of congressional campaigns told me a month ago: that with a national tide in favor of Democrats, and the strength of Senator Clinton's reelection bid and Eliot Spitzer's gubernatorial campaign, all the Republican seats in that state could be vulnerable.
section break
As a Democrat, I see this as is great news. (And incidentally, if you’re looking for just one campaign to support in this group, may I suggest Dan Maffei, who’s running against Rep. James Walsh in the Syracuse district, which hasn't appeared on a lot of "hot races" lists even though it's the only Republican-held New York district that Kerry carried in 2004. I’ve known Dan for almost ten years, and I’m enthusiastic about his candidacy not just because I think he can win, but because he would make a great member of Congress, with deep roots in Syracuse but also having worked for Senators Bradley and Moynihan and for the Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee.) [UPDATE: I corrected the error in this paragraph which said that NY-25 was the only district in the state Kerry carried.]
With that experiment in violating the FEC’s regulations on blogs completed, I’ll return to the main point: Six Republican seats in New York could switch. Three of Connecticut’s five seats are held by Republicans; at least two are in play and possibly the third. Several Philadelphia-suburb Republican seats are vulnerable, along with a few in Ohio. I notice that even Frank Wolf of Virginia is potentially vulnerable, having been outraised by a great opponent, health policy expert Judy Feder. These are seats that were once as reliably Republican as Mississippi’s were reliably Democratic, the wealthy green suburbs of the Eastern Seaboard and industrial Midwest, where the Bush family has its roots.
One consequence of this outcome, however, is that the partisanship we’ve been discussing in the Book Club will become all the more acute. Not all of the Republicans who hold these seats now advertise themselves as "moderates," but many are allies on environmental causes and/or try to maintain good relationships with organized labor.
This November, even if the Democrats fall short of capturing the House, we are likely to find a Congress made up of two parties that are more ideologically homogenous and more regionally based than ever in history. There will be no truly conservative Democrats (some opportunists, of course), but that’s been the case since 1994 and the party-switches that followed. But there will also be no significant number of Republicans who are pro-environment (simple measure: the 34 Republicans who voted against Rep. Pombo’s near-repeal of the Endangered Species Act includes all of the NY, CT, PA representatives mentioned above.)
This will be an enormous challenge for, for example, environmental activists, because they are accustomed to operating across party lines, and in general it means that those trying to move any good policy will find themselves, through no choice of their own, more deeply embedded within the Democratic Party and more consistently opposed to Republican policies. The alternative is to wait around for the Northeastern moderates to reappear, which is as futile as waiting for Waco, Texas, to suddenly start electing Democrats. [Another error caught in comments: Waco is represented by Democrat Chet Edwards, one of the few survivors of the DeLay redistricting. Let's substitute "Gwinnett County, GA," for Waco.]
This is an important point about partisanship that needs to be made: Even someone who doesn’t have an ounce of partisanship, who has no interest in or respect for the Democratic Party, but who cares about one or several issues, is going to find herself increasingly in the position of a partisan. Since resistance is futile, it’s best to embrace the role.
DJHJD
Saturday, April 22, 2006
A Short And Simple Democratic Agenda
Source Article
by georgia10
Sat Apr 22, 2006 at 04:44:53 PM PDT
At the DNC's spring meeting today in New Orleans, Howard Dean laid out a six-point Democratic agenda:
Dean said that Democrats will fight for a six-point plan that includes raising the minimum wage, tax ``fairness'' for the middle class, ``a complete ban on gifts and travel from lobbyists,'' the inspection of all cargo coming into U.S. ports, fixing the Medicare drug plan and ``transition'' in Iraq.
If you haven't noticed, Democrats have been making a concerted effort to explain in plan and simple terms what Democrats stand for. Yes, Democrats have finally trained themselves to drop the clause-laden, inaccessible rhetoric of the past, and are beginning to embrace a much more effective method of educating voters about the Democratic Party.
For example, last fall, Rahm Emanuel laid out a five-point plan on Meet The Press that included (1) making college education affordable for every American; (2) holding a summit to fix the budget; (3) achieving energy independence in part by switching to a hybrid economy; (4) creating an institute on science and technology to spur American innovation; and (5) universal health care.
Recall that earlier this month, Senator Kerry also described in plain terms the Democratic agenda:
Tell the truth. Fire the incompetents. Find Osama bin Laden and secure our ports and our homeland. Bring our troops home from Iraq. Obey the law and protect our civil rights," Mr. Kerry said in ticking off his list, which also included supporting health care, education, lobbying reform and alternatives to oil, as well as reducing the deficit.
Senator Kennedy's new book, America: Back on Track, is centered around seven main points of change, from reclaiming our constitutional democracy to making our economy work for all, not just the rich.
Six points, five points, seven points, ten points--the general idea is that Democrats are taking affirmative steps to shatter the myth that "Democrats don't have any ideas."
We don't need a "Contract with America." We don't need to think of new ideas. We are a party full of ideas, and we're finally able to express them in a concise and confident manner to the American people.
by georgia10
Sat Apr 22, 2006 at 04:44:53 PM PDT
At the DNC's spring meeting today in New Orleans, Howard Dean laid out a six-point Democratic agenda:
Dean said that Democrats will fight for a six-point plan that includes raising the minimum wage, tax ``fairness'' for the middle class, ``a complete ban on gifts and travel from lobbyists,'' the inspection of all cargo coming into U.S. ports, fixing the Medicare drug plan and ``transition'' in Iraq.
If you haven't noticed, Democrats have been making a concerted effort to explain in plan and simple terms what Democrats stand for. Yes, Democrats have finally trained themselves to drop the clause-laden, inaccessible rhetoric of the past, and are beginning to embrace a much more effective method of educating voters about the Democratic Party.
For example, last fall, Rahm Emanuel laid out a five-point plan on Meet The Press that included (1) making college education affordable for every American; (2) holding a summit to fix the budget; (3) achieving energy independence in part by switching to a hybrid economy; (4) creating an institute on science and technology to spur American innovation; and (5) universal health care.
Recall that earlier this month, Senator Kerry also described in plain terms the Democratic agenda:
Tell the truth. Fire the incompetents. Find Osama bin Laden and secure our ports and our homeland. Bring our troops home from Iraq. Obey the law and protect our civil rights," Mr. Kerry said in ticking off his list, which also included supporting health care, education, lobbying reform and alternatives to oil, as well as reducing the deficit.
Senator Kennedy's new book, America: Back on Track, is centered around seven main points of change, from reclaiming our constitutional democracy to making our economy work for all, not just the rich.
Six points, five points, seven points, ten points--the general idea is that Democrats are taking affirmative steps to shatter the myth that "Democrats don't have any ideas."
We don't need a "Contract with America." We don't need to think of new ideas. We are a party full of ideas, and we're finally able to express them in a concise and confident manner to the American people.
Fundy Values:
Source article
Not quite an oxymoron, just misguided (by defensiveness).
by shock
Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 09:33:02 PM PDT
As I've written about here before (for example, here and here), I was raised as a fundamentalist and a Republican and have undergone a radical shift in beliefs in my adult life. While reading the comments for the highly-recommended diary, Romans 13: the reason fundamentalists still support GWB (for example, this thread), my memory was jogged to something I'd written a few years ago to a group of my friends who'd been (playfully, but genuinely) asking me to try to help them make sense of the fundamentalist mindset with respect to politics. I think this may be somewhat useful to some people here.
First, I am not posting this to try to defend the fundamentalist belief set, but rather because way back then we found it useful for strategizing going into the 2004 election in our area. That is, I hope this generates ideas for people here and/or politicians as to how to approach fundamentalists in the future.
* shock's diary :: ::
*
Despite all of the discussion about this topic here (and in the liberal press, among which I highly recommend Jim Wallis' book), I still believe that this is very important and still necessary. The voting power of this subset of our population cannot be denied -- and they are growing more influential. For example, in an episode of Frontline called "The Jesus Factor" that looked at how Republicans (in particular Bush) appeal to Christians, the following two points were made:
1. It is possible to win the presidency by carrying only the Evangelical Christian vote. (With some turnout assumptions, of course.)
2. The single most predictive "variable" as to which way a person voted in the last presidential election was whether or not they attended church (a religious service) on a weekly basis. This beat out class, race, income, education, etc.
This has long been recognized by Republican strategists. We now recognize it too. How we are going to deal with it is still up in there air. One option is to write off the fundy vote (and instead try to recruit more progressive voters into the voting pool -- essential because of #1). I'm partial to this to an extent. But, as a former fundy who was "reformed" and am now very politically active on for the "good guys", I'd like to think that there are better ways than writing off everyone like I used to be. In what follows, I offer first a rather-shallow analysis/diagnosis and then some modest suggestions.
Core "Conservative" values
(Snarkiness aside: I understand that to many here the phrase seems like an oxymoron, but I assure you that many fundies really do believe that they are operating within a self-consistent framework of values, whether they are or not. Remember, I'm presenting this through their viewpoint, not ours, and so I make no comments on some of the hypocricy.)
For many (or most?) conservatives, the core of their political views come from their religious values. (Thus, when their politics are attacked, it is likely to trigger a deeper defensive response than you might expect. More on this below.)
What follows is what I consider to be a core set of conservative ideals that I have heard expressed to various extents by religious conservatives that I know (especially my parents). The list is by no means meant to be exhaustive and lots of these overlap. I divided them into two main categories. The first are the values that stem directly from "Western religion" (as exemplified here primarily by modern Christianity, which I understand the best). The second set are more secular, but typically accompany the first. (It is obviously possible to adopt subsets of these.)
* Religion-based
1. "Decisiveness" ("clarity")
Little or no moral ambiguity
--> "Categorical" politics of generalizations and labels
Good vs. Evil worldview ("We" are the "Good Guys". Period.)
--> Security (protection from and battle against "evil") is very important
--> Strong patriotism / loyalty.
2. "Morality"
Actions are either right or wrong.
--> Against adultery (any sex outside marriage), homosexuality, abortion.
Human Laws are (or should be) based upon God's absolute law
--> Religion in government, Prayer in schools
(Given "clarity", it is possible to decide what is "moral".)
3. "Discipline and Accountability" ("individual responsibility")
--> Against abortion.
Pro death penalty
Low spending on social programs (e.g. welfare)
"Authoritarian" government in terms of law enforcement
(Given the "morality" and "clarity", there are no qualms about punishing "guilty" people.)
4. (Nuclear) "Family values"
Traditional (paternalistic) Gender Roles
--> Against adultery and homosexuality and feminism.
Want "values" (morality) taught at home, not from school (or "liberal TV")
--> Against sex education, teaching about evolution, etc.
The "Home" is a sacred place: anything that threatens its sanctity is "evil"
--> Pro guns, Favor tough law enforcement, Even "neighborhood diversity" is bad
* Non-Religious
1. "Freedom"
Security is a requirement for this to work
Free Market Capitalism
--> Pro corporation
--> Consumerism (the less savvy or informed people are the better!)
--> Globalization and the active spread of the capitalistic system
Small Government (less laws and regulations)
For some, also partly due to view that it is amoral! (But interestingly, this one sometimes goes against the authoritarianism and morality of Social Conservatives.)
--> Pro guns
2. "Stability"
Don't rock the boat. Change is unpredictable and therefore destabilizing. (Predictability is good for the markets.)
--> Maintain traditional distinctions (based on class/race/gender/etc.)
Main Point: Religious conservatives feel they are under attack!
1. Moral attack
Commercial (entertainment) media is:
1) Socially liberal
Negative portrayal of religion (or minimization), sexual promiscuity, acceptance of non-traditional gender roles and homosexuality), depicting rebellious behavior, etc.
2) YET economically conservative
Pro-consumerism, pro-corporation, pro-war (good for business), etc.
(But most Republicans don't notice #2 because they never question "the system".)
#1 has created the perception among many socially conservative (religious) Republicans that they (their value systems) are under attack. Notice that mainstream entertainment media routinely violates every single one of the religion-based values above! This leads to an "embattled" feeling that everyone else in America disagrees with them and thinks they are prudes. There is a feeling of marginalization that leads to (self-righteous) anger.
"Evil is winning! Society is falling apart!"
--> Quest for media reform
--> A Victorian style culture that over-reacts to promiscuity (think Lewinsky)
2. Intellectual attack
Not only are their values attacked, but also their intelligence:
* Science is portrayed as a quest to supplant religion.
* Intellectuals / academics look down upon and even ridicule religious people.
Many religious conservatives are keenly aware of this. As a reaction, scientists are perceived as arrogant know-it-alls who are out of touch with reality.
--> Home schooling movement
--> Rejection of "nuance" in politics
--> Anti-intellectualism (rejection of "book smarts") leading to things like the discounting of scientific evidence for global warming.
3. Personal attack
Furthermore, conservatives are (rightly, but not in their eyes) portrayed as bigots for their stand against homosexuality and affirmative action.
--> Mistrust of all "diversity" programs
4. Political attack
Finally, they believe they are under political attack. They believe (wrongly) that the country was founded on religious principles and that these are slowly but surely being removed from the government. (Note that, as many here have written about, most do NOT believe that a separation between church and state is written into the constitution and many are willing to argue this tooth and nail. Believe it or not, many have undertaken to prove this point historically -- and these attempts are rightly refuted by the likes of Frederick Clarkson.)
They point to the removal of prayer from government and schools, the gradual removal of religious symbols, the "pledge controversy", Roe vs. Wade, etc. as evidence of this sustained attack.
--> Strong reaction to "political correctness"
Consequences
In addition to causing them to take more extreme political positions related to the above points, this perception that they are under moral, intellectual and political attack has more general consequences as well. Importantly, it causes them to become even more conservative because it:
1) Further reinforces their fundamental notion of a struggle between Good and Evil;
2) Causes to unite to "defend" themselves and their way of life, empowering right-wing organizations (e.g. the "Moral Majority", "Christian Coalition", and even Fox News). In doing so, this polarizes and homogenizes their world even further.
These, in turn, lead them to favor government policies and institutions that will help "defend" them against the onslaught AND (importantly) give more more power to their organizations (which they perceive as "defending" them as well). They also lead them to the urge to go on the "offensive" and "fight back". (A favorite quote of theirs is the one about the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.)
Possible Approaches
Obviously: take them off the defensive.
But how?
I don't know, and here I am just brainstorming. I have a couple of ideas though.
At a personal level:
Call attention to their defensiveness. Acknowledge that they have legitimate reasons to be defensive. (They really do!) And, of course, don't try to "proselytize" them to change their values (at first)... this would obviously just make them even more defensive!
A LOT of their values hinge upon the first one in the list -- the sense of moral absolutes and Good vs. Evil. This can be undermined using their own principles in several ways. For example, although the Bible does clearly reinforce notions of Good and Evil and an eternal struggle, there are also passages that challenge the traditional conservative notion of moral absolutes, man's judgment of other people, and how people should react to evil, including many famous ones, like Matthew 5:38-32, Matthew 5:43-45, Matthew 7:1-5, Matthew 12:1-14 (where Jesus actually breaks one of the 10 commandments! --> situational ethics), Romans 12:14-21, etc. (I can provide more examples for more contexts as well.)
Also, providing specific examples of where there are gray areas in their own lives might be helpful. (Of course this can be accomplished by asking questions about their views, not by just flat out telling them.)
Finally (although it wasn't out at the time I originally wrote this), I would highly recommend Jim Wallis' book to help expand the rhetoric about values to include things like poverty (as he so rightly says, budgets are statements of our morals/values).
At a political level:
Liberal/Progressive goals and policies shouldn't change but they can be couched in terms of the above values. For example, Lakoff's now-famous (and much discussed) example of reframing "taxes" as being like dues to imply that "everyone should want to do their fair share" makes an appeal to the value that I call above "personal responsibility" or "accountability".
When conservative political leaders fail to uphold these values, it is probably useful to (gently) point it out -- again couching it into their system. For example, one flaw of Bush that is more important to conservatives than you think is his lack of accountability. (That's why those questions at his [third!] press conference about whether he would admit any mistakes were very important. I personally couldn't believe he wasn't prepared for that!) His pattern is to blame others. Recall that he campaigned on the promise to restore "moral integrity" and "accountability" to the White House. It is very easy (especially now, a few years later!) to show that he failed to do this -- especially the accountability part. Indeed, his reaction to all of the scandals -- not just the scandals themselves -- is hurting him deeply in the accountability department. (And of course the scandals themselves are hurting him in the "clarity" department. Some people are starting to wonder if we are really on the side of Good. But I personally believe he is more vulnerable on his accountability failures because they are so blatant and so obviously his own fault, by definition.)
What else?
Not quite an oxymoron, just misguided (by defensiveness).
by shock
Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 09:33:02 PM PDT
As I've written about here before (for example, here and here), I was raised as a fundamentalist and a Republican and have undergone a radical shift in beliefs in my adult life. While reading the comments for the highly-recommended diary, Romans 13: the reason fundamentalists still support GWB (for example, this thread), my memory was jogged to something I'd written a few years ago to a group of my friends who'd been (playfully, but genuinely) asking me to try to help them make sense of the fundamentalist mindset with respect to politics. I think this may be somewhat useful to some people here.
First, I am not posting this to try to defend the fundamentalist belief set, but rather because way back then we found it useful for strategizing going into the 2004 election in our area. That is, I hope this generates ideas for people here and/or politicians as to how to approach fundamentalists in the future.
* shock's diary :: ::
*
Despite all of the discussion about this topic here (and in the liberal press, among which I highly recommend Jim Wallis' book), I still believe that this is very important and still necessary. The voting power of this subset of our population cannot be denied -- and they are growing more influential. For example, in an episode of Frontline called "The Jesus Factor" that looked at how Republicans (in particular Bush) appeal to Christians, the following two points were made:
1. It is possible to win the presidency by carrying only the Evangelical Christian vote. (With some turnout assumptions, of course.)
2. The single most predictive "variable" as to which way a person voted in the last presidential election was whether or not they attended church (a religious service) on a weekly basis. This beat out class, race, income, education, etc.
This has long been recognized by Republican strategists. We now recognize it too. How we are going to deal with it is still up in there air. One option is to write off the fundy vote (and instead try to recruit more progressive voters into the voting pool -- essential because of #1). I'm partial to this to an extent. But, as a former fundy who was "reformed" and am now very politically active on for the "good guys", I'd like to think that there are better ways than writing off everyone like I used to be. In what follows, I offer first a rather-shallow analysis/diagnosis and then some modest suggestions.
Core "Conservative" values
(Snarkiness aside: I understand that to many here the phrase seems like an oxymoron, but I assure you that many fundies really do believe that they are operating within a self-consistent framework of values, whether they are or not. Remember, I'm presenting this through their viewpoint, not ours, and so I make no comments on some of the hypocricy.)
For many (or most?) conservatives, the core of their political views come from their religious values. (Thus, when their politics are attacked, it is likely to trigger a deeper defensive response than you might expect. More on this below.)
What follows is what I consider to be a core set of conservative ideals that I have heard expressed to various extents by religious conservatives that I know (especially my parents). The list is by no means meant to be exhaustive and lots of these overlap. I divided them into two main categories. The first are the values that stem directly from "Western religion" (as exemplified here primarily by modern Christianity, which I understand the best). The second set are more secular, but typically accompany the first. (It is obviously possible to adopt subsets of these.)
* Religion-based
1. "Decisiveness" ("clarity")
Little or no moral ambiguity
--> "Categorical" politics of generalizations and labels
Good vs. Evil worldview ("We" are the "Good Guys". Period.)
--> Security (protection from and battle against "evil") is very important
--> Strong patriotism / loyalty.
2. "Morality"
Actions are either right or wrong.
--> Against adultery (any sex outside marriage), homosexuality, abortion.
Human Laws are (or should be) based upon God's absolute law
--> Religion in government, Prayer in schools
(Given "clarity", it is possible to decide what is "moral".)
3. "Discipline and Accountability" ("individual responsibility")
--> Against abortion.
Pro death penalty
Low spending on social programs (e.g. welfare)
"Authoritarian" government in terms of law enforcement
(Given the "morality" and "clarity", there are no qualms about punishing "guilty" people.)
4. (Nuclear) "Family values"
Traditional (paternalistic) Gender Roles
--> Against adultery and homosexuality and feminism.
Want "values" (morality) taught at home, not from school (or "liberal TV")
--> Against sex education, teaching about evolution, etc.
The "Home" is a sacred place: anything that threatens its sanctity is "evil"
--> Pro guns, Favor tough law enforcement, Even "neighborhood diversity" is bad
* Non-Religious
1. "Freedom"
Security is a requirement for this to work
Free Market Capitalism
--> Pro corporation
--> Consumerism (the less savvy or informed people are the better!)
--> Globalization and the active spread of the capitalistic system
Small Government (less laws and regulations)
For some, also partly due to view that it is amoral! (But interestingly, this one sometimes goes against the authoritarianism and morality of Social Conservatives.)
--> Pro guns
2. "Stability"
Don't rock the boat. Change is unpredictable and therefore destabilizing. (Predictability is good for the markets.)
--> Maintain traditional distinctions (based on class/race/gender/etc.)
Main Point: Religious conservatives feel they are under attack!
1. Moral attack
Commercial (entertainment) media is:
1) Socially liberal
Negative portrayal of religion (or minimization), sexual promiscuity, acceptance of non-traditional gender roles and homosexuality), depicting rebellious behavior, etc.
2) YET economically conservative
Pro-consumerism, pro-corporation, pro-war (good for business), etc.
(But most Republicans don't notice #2 because they never question "the system".)
#1 has created the perception among many socially conservative (religious) Republicans that they (their value systems) are under attack. Notice that mainstream entertainment media routinely violates every single one of the religion-based values above! This leads to an "embattled" feeling that everyone else in America disagrees with them and thinks they are prudes. There is a feeling of marginalization that leads to (self-righteous) anger.
"Evil is winning! Society is falling apart!"
--> Quest for media reform
--> A Victorian style culture that over-reacts to promiscuity (think Lewinsky)
2. Intellectual attack
Not only are their values attacked, but also their intelligence:
* Science is portrayed as a quest to supplant religion.
* Intellectuals / academics look down upon and even ridicule religious people.
Many religious conservatives are keenly aware of this. As a reaction, scientists are perceived as arrogant know-it-alls who are out of touch with reality.
--> Home schooling movement
--> Rejection of "nuance" in politics
--> Anti-intellectualism (rejection of "book smarts") leading to things like the discounting of scientific evidence for global warming.
3. Personal attack
Furthermore, conservatives are (rightly, but not in their eyes) portrayed as bigots for their stand against homosexuality and affirmative action.
--> Mistrust of all "diversity" programs
4. Political attack
Finally, they believe they are under political attack. They believe (wrongly) that the country was founded on religious principles and that these are slowly but surely being removed from the government. (Note that, as many here have written about, most do NOT believe that a separation between church and state is written into the constitution and many are willing to argue this tooth and nail. Believe it or not, many have undertaken to prove this point historically -- and these attempts are rightly refuted by the likes of Frederick Clarkson.)
They point to the removal of prayer from government and schools, the gradual removal of religious symbols, the "pledge controversy", Roe vs. Wade, etc. as evidence of this sustained attack.
--> Strong reaction to "political correctness"
Consequences
In addition to causing them to take more extreme political positions related to the above points, this perception that they are under moral, intellectual and political attack has more general consequences as well. Importantly, it causes them to become even more conservative because it:
1) Further reinforces their fundamental notion of a struggle between Good and Evil;
2) Causes to unite to "defend" themselves and their way of life, empowering right-wing organizations (e.g. the "Moral Majority", "Christian Coalition", and even Fox News). In doing so, this polarizes and homogenizes their world even further.
These, in turn, lead them to favor government policies and institutions that will help "defend" them against the onslaught AND (importantly) give more more power to their organizations (which they perceive as "defending" them as well). They also lead them to the urge to go on the "offensive" and "fight back". (A favorite quote of theirs is the one about the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.)
Possible Approaches
Obviously: take them off the defensive.
But how?
I don't know, and here I am just brainstorming. I have a couple of ideas though.
At a personal level:
Call attention to their defensiveness. Acknowledge that they have legitimate reasons to be defensive. (They really do!) And, of course, don't try to "proselytize" them to change their values (at first)... this would obviously just make them even more defensive!
A LOT of their values hinge upon the first one in the list -- the sense of moral absolutes and Good vs. Evil. This can be undermined using their own principles in several ways. For example, although the Bible does clearly reinforce notions of Good and Evil and an eternal struggle, there are also passages that challenge the traditional conservative notion of moral absolutes, man's judgment of other people, and how people should react to evil, including many famous ones, like Matthew 5:38-32, Matthew 5:43-45, Matthew 7:1-5, Matthew 12:1-14 (where Jesus actually breaks one of the 10 commandments! --> situational ethics), Romans 12:14-21, etc. (I can provide more examples for more contexts as well.)
Also, providing specific examples of where there are gray areas in their own lives might be helpful. (Of course this can be accomplished by asking questions about their views, not by just flat out telling them.)
Finally (although it wasn't out at the time I originally wrote this), I would highly recommend Jim Wallis' book to help expand the rhetoric about values to include things like poverty (as he so rightly says, budgets are statements of our morals/values).
At a political level:
Liberal/Progressive goals and policies shouldn't change but they can be couched in terms of the above values. For example, Lakoff's now-famous (and much discussed) example of reframing "taxes" as being like dues to imply that "everyone should want to do their fair share" makes an appeal to the value that I call above "personal responsibility" or "accountability".
When conservative political leaders fail to uphold these values, it is probably useful to (gently) point it out -- again couching it into their system. For example, one flaw of Bush that is more important to conservatives than you think is his lack of accountability. (That's why those questions at his [third!] press conference about whether he would admit any mistakes were very important. I personally couldn't believe he wasn't prepared for that!) His pattern is to blame others. Recall that he campaigned on the promise to restore "moral integrity" and "accountability" to the White House. It is very easy (especially now, a few years later!) to show that he failed to do this -- especially the accountability part. Indeed, his reaction to all of the scandals -- not just the scandals themselves -- is hurting him deeply in the accountability department. (And of course the scandals themselves are hurting him in the "clarity" department. Some people are starting to wonder if we are really on the side of Good. But I personally believe he is more vulnerable on his accountability failures because they are so blatant and so obviously his own fault, by definition.)
What else?
Friday, April 21, 2006
Friday night late
What an interesting afternoon. The Berryhill guy came by around 1:00 and spent four hours here, talking to me about his business decisions. Four hours. "Me being friendly." Well, it is his birthday this weekend.
So, I didn't get the work done that I planned to. Babs worked on my class reunion planning all afternoon, and created a list of everyone for whom we didn't have email contact information. She worked on the classmates.com website, and couldn't get them added into the "missing" classmates list, so tonight I gave it a shot. I spent an hour inputing the 220 names, clicked on "send," and .. poof .. it was all gone.
How annoying is that?
I spent a bunch of time talking to another consultant about a mutual client, and dug up some bylaws for him. So, I guess I worked until about 9:00 tonight.
Lately, I've been having deep and sharp chest pains. Strange. It's in my sternum, not underneath. I think. However, it's keeping me awake. At night. Yep. I'm giong to speak to the doctor about it on Friday.
The blood glucose medication causes heart attack after long term useage. Fun stuff.
I need to go see Lloyd. My body is very sore lately, which is from stress or .. from stress.
A busy morning tomorrow. Ruby's packed with stuff for the church garage sale, and riding on her butt. I don't know whether I should unload everything out of her before running around the County tomorrow morning, or whatever.
I'm invited to Philip's birthday party tomorrow night. (sigh)
I'm watching the Enron movie on DVD. It's very very interesting.
I'm wide awake (of course,) and have to pop out of bed in the morning and do a bunch of work before leaving for the north part of the county for a study group. Yurg.
So, I didn't get the work done that I planned to. Babs worked on my class reunion planning all afternoon, and created a list of everyone for whom we didn't have email contact information. She worked on the classmates.com website, and couldn't get them added into the "missing" classmates list, so tonight I gave it a shot. I spent an hour inputing the 220 names, clicked on "send," and .. poof .. it was all gone.
How annoying is that?
I spent a bunch of time talking to another consultant about a mutual client, and dug up some bylaws for him. So, I guess I worked until about 9:00 tonight.
Lately, I've been having deep and sharp chest pains. Strange. It's in my sternum, not underneath. I think. However, it's keeping me awake. At night. Yep. I'm giong to speak to the doctor about it on Friday.
The blood glucose medication causes heart attack after long term useage. Fun stuff.
I need to go see Lloyd. My body is very sore lately, which is from stress or .. from stress.
A busy morning tomorrow. Ruby's packed with stuff for the church garage sale, and riding on her butt. I don't know whether I should unload everything out of her before running around the County tomorrow morning, or whatever.
I'm invited to Philip's birthday party tomorrow night. (sigh)
I'm watching the Enron movie on DVD. It's very very interesting.
I'm wide awake (of course,) and have to pop out of bed in the morning and do a bunch of work before leaving for the north part of the county for a study group. Yurg.
Friday .. with my left shoulder hanging off my ear
We start our morning with so much amusement that I don't know quite where to turn.
Last night, as I was driving home from my class, I had a text message from Wolfram, asking me to join him at the Mining Company. My gut reaction was to just delete the message, but I foolishly replied with something to the effect of "what the .. ?"
After spending some time with Tom, I toddled over to meet .. Wolfram. And Babs. And CHUCK?! Wolfram was .. well, mugging on Chuck, who was excited to see me. I was NOT excited to see Wolfram, but was very happy to see Babs and Chuck. It was just weird. I left shortly after 11:30, and headed home.
Also, I had a conversation last night with someone who doesn't understand the way that taxes are collected - the assertion was made that the high property taxes in Texas were the cause of the $8.2Billion surplus currently enjoyed by the State.
So, everyone - please pay close attention - here we go (this is only valid for residents of the State of Texas - if you live somewhere else, you should skip this part)
In Texas, we pay the following taxes:
Property taxes
Sales taxes
Gasoline tax
User fees
Business Franchise Tax
Occupation Tax
Oil & Gas Severance tax
We'll start with the easy ones:
Oil & Gas Severance taxes are charged to oil/gas producers for raw product that they extract from the ground that's in Texas, including the offshore area. It's based on the market price, this tax. For nearly eighty years, this tax alone carried the weight of government services in this state, and provided cheap college education and low personal tax burdens. Once the oil in Texas wells began to run low and production shifted elsewhere (approximately 1978) this tax had to be replaced by other taxes. This tax is assessed and collected by the State of Texas, and goes into general revenue, although a significant portion goes to the permanent education fund, which is shared by the University of Texas (Austin only, Texas A&M (College Station only,) and to a lesser degree, Texas Tech and University of Houston.
Occupation tax - this is a tax that was created in about 1989 to increase cash flow to the State of Texas. A number of occupations are "taxed," with an annual renewal fee, including lawyers. The attorney occupation tax is $200/year. This tax is assessed and collected by the State of Texas, and goes into general revenue.
Business Franchise Tax - a tax that has been with us for a very long time, this is a tax on business "capital" - retained earnings over expenses. This tax is quite low, and only applies to companies that have more than $150,000 in taxable income or capital annually. This tax is collected by the State of Texas, and goes into general revenue.
User fees - these are not direct taxes, but are collected by local and state governments to support delivery of services, most of which used to be free. When you change your address with the DPS, a $10 fee is collected. If you order a certified copy of a document, you pay a fee to the county clerk. These user fees are CAPPED by the State of Texas, not set nor collected by the State of Texas, unless it's a Texas state agency charging the fee. In either event, some portion of the user fee goes to support the agency collecting the fee, and some part goes to general revenue for the agency/county/state. Lately, the State of Texas has whalloped its citizens with "add on" user fees, if you're arrested for DWI - the DPS now assesses you a $1000/year fee to keep your driver license for three years. If you get a speeding ticket, you pay your fine to the local government that issued the ticket, AND you pay the State a fee for unsafe driving.
Gasoline tax - when you drive your Expedition up to the pump and drain $75 worth of unleaded into your tank, a portion of the $3.00 that you pay per gallon is STATE gasoline tax. Texas has one of the lowest fuel taxes in the nation, but this is a State tax, and goes into the general revenue fund.
Sales tax - for years, Texas had no sales tax (our meager services were paid for by the oil & gas severance tax) but, starting in the 1960s a sales tax was gradually added into the mix. Currently, the State of Texas charges 6.25% of everything you purchase (except automobiles, which are taxed at 6.25% of the first $1500 and then at $6.00 of the balance) except for food and some services. Watch out, though, as they're looking to start collecting sales tax on everything from legal services to medical services. Your city, county and transit authority can, by local vote, add to this sales tax. In Houston, we pay 1% to the city and 1% to Metro. In Pasadena (Texas,) they pay the same net sales tax, 8.25%, but it is broken down differently. The sales taxes are collected by the State of Texas, and those parts collected on behalf of the city, county or transit authority are distributed by the state to those local jurisdictions. The money is deposited into general revenue. This is a partially state and partially local tax.
Property tax - if you own property, you are taxed by the city, county, school district and whatever other local taxing authority smacks down a levy on property values. These taxes are set LOCALLY, and are capped by the State of Texas. Capped means that the State tells the local governments that one cannot be charged more than a certain percentage of one's property values.
In the City of Houston, the average taxpayer pays property tax to:
Harris County
City of Houston
[Houston] Independent School District
Harris County Hospital District
Houston Port Authority
Houston Community College District
If you're lucky enough to live outside of City water and sewer services, you pay a Municipal Utility District (MUD) tax.
These tax rates are SET and ASSESSED by the local government that collects them. The property values are set county wide by an independent agency called the appraisal district.
The appraisal districts track market values in the county, and then issue an annual statement of what one's property is worth. This sets the taxable valuation, on which the local tax rate is applied.
The only control a local homeowner has over their tax assessment is to contest the property tax valuation issued by the appraisal district. Otherwise, everyone pays the SAME rate, unless they're disabled, over 65 or meet other exemption criterion. Agricultural land, if in use, is generally exempt from tax. In the City of Houston (and Houston ISD) the approximate tax rate is 3.10% of one's assessed valuation. Therefore, if one owns a property that's assesed at $100,000 in value, one will be paying approximately $3100 in property tax, spread out over all of the taxing authorities.
NONE OF THIS MONEY IS COLLECTED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS. This money is assessed locally, collected locally, and goes to support the operations and services provided by local government.
In fact, the State of Texas cannot interfere with local property tax collections.
All of the statewide discussion about reducing property taxes revolves around the State's oversight of EDUCATION; they can dictate how much property tax the school districts assess.
None of it has a whit to do with how much you're paying your school district locally; it all has to do with spin and state politics. The State Supreme court has held that the State's system of financing education was unconstitutional because a child in a school district with high property values is funded at a much higher level than is a child in a rural school district with low property values.
So, the State of Texas, which has been aware that it had to revamp its system of public school financing, has been passing the buck for years and is now up against the wall. They have to create a new and approvable structure by the summer, or the Supremes (of Texas) have indicated a willingness to shut down public schools entirely.
Those elected officials in Texas, looking to create a statewide system of collecting and distributing money to support public education (required under the Supreme Court's order) are trying to sell this "new" tax by calling for a reduction in the tax RATE assessed by local districts. They can't change the rate that the districts charge, so they're talking about capping valuation.
And, I can promise you, they'll institute a new tax and nothing will substantially change about local property taxes.
If you're upset about your property tax rates, blame the general increase in property valuation - the RATE hasn't changed in years and years, except by the barest of fractions.
And, get very clear, the taxes collected to support local schools are NOT held by, managed by, collected by or ever touched by the State of Texas. Anything you've heard to the contrary is ignorant, inflammatory and uninformed.
What else were we going to talk about today?
Another busy weekend, revolving around church business and activities. The pool is yet green, and Mitch's ongoing promises to get it (and anything else) handled are just so much excelsior.
Ruby's loaded down with stuff for the church garage sale. She rides dreadfully. I'm glad that she'll be unloaded in a few hours.
Last night, as I was driving home from my class, I had a text message from Wolfram, asking me to join him at the Mining Company. My gut reaction was to just delete the message, but I foolishly replied with something to the effect of "what the .. ?"
After spending some time with Tom, I toddled over to meet .. Wolfram. And Babs. And CHUCK?! Wolfram was .. well, mugging on Chuck, who was excited to see me. I was NOT excited to see Wolfram, but was very happy to see Babs and Chuck. It was just weird. I left shortly after 11:30, and headed home.
Also, I had a conversation last night with someone who doesn't understand the way that taxes are collected - the assertion was made that the high property taxes in Texas were the cause of the $8.2Billion surplus currently enjoyed by the State.
So, everyone - please pay close attention - here we go (this is only valid for residents of the State of Texas - if you live somewhere else, you should skip this part)
In Texas, we pay the following taxes:
Property taxes
Sales taxes
Gasoline tax
User fees
Business Franchise Tax
Occupation Tax
Oil & Gas Severance tax
We'll start with the easy ones:
Oil & Gas Severance taxes are charged to oil/gas producers for raw product that they extract from the ground that's in Texas, including the offshore area. It's based on the market price, this tax. For nearly eighty years, this tax alone carried the weight of government services in this state, and provided cheap college education and low personal tax burdens. Once the oil in Texas wells began to run low and production shifted elsewhere (approximately 1978) this tax had to be replaced by other taxes. This tax is assessed and collected by the State of Texas, and goes into general revenue, although a significant portion goes to the permanent education fund, which is shared by the University of Texas (Austin only, Texas A&M (College Station only,) and to a lesser degree, Texas Tech and University of Houston.
Occupation tax - this is a tax that was created in about 1989 to increase cash flow to the State of Texas. A number of occupations are "taxed," with an annual renewal fee, including lawyers. The attorney occupation tax is $200/year. This tax is assessed and collected by the State of Texas, and goes into general revenue.
Business Franchise Tax - a tax that has been with us for a very long time, this is a tax on business "capital" - retained earnings over expenses. This tax is quite low, and only applies to companies that have more than $150,000 in taxable income or capital annually. This tax is collected by the State of Texas, and goes into general revenue.
User fees - these are not direct taxes, but are collected by local and state governments to support delivery of services, most of which used to be free. When you change your address with the DPS, a $10 fee is collected. If you order a certified copy of a document, you pay a fee to the county clerk. These user fees are CAPPED by the State of Texas, not set nor collected by the State of Texas, unless it's a Texas state agency charging the fee. In either event, some portion of the user fee goes to support the agency collecting the fee, and some part goes to general revenue for the agency/county/state. Lately, the State of Texas has whalloped its citizens with "add on" user fees, if you're arrested for DWI - the DPS now assesses you a $1000/year fee to keep your driver license for three years. If you get a speeding ticket, you pay your fine to the local government that issued the ticket, AND you pay the State a fee for unsafe driving.
Gasoline tax - when you drive your Expedition up to the pump and drain $75 worth of unleaded into your tank, a portion of the $3.00 that you pay per gallon is STATE gasoline tax. Texas has one of the lowest fuel taxes in the nation, but this is a State tax, and goes into the general revenue fund.
Sales tax - for years, Texas had no sales tax (our meager services were paid for by the oil & gas severance tax) but, starting in the 1960s a sales tax was gradually added into the mix. Currently, the State of Texas charges 6.25% of everything you purchase (except automobiles, which are taxed at 6.25% of the first $1500 and then at $6.00 of the balance) except for food and some services. Watch out, though, as they're looking to start collecting sales tax on everything from legal services to medical services. Your city, county and transit authority can, by local vote, add to this sales tax. In Houston, we pay 1% to the city and 1% to Metro. In Pasadena (Texas,) they pay the same net sales tax, 8.25%, but it is broken down differently. The sales taxes are collected by the State of Texas, and those parts collected on behalf of the city, county or transit authority are distributed by the state to those local jurisdictions. The money is deposited into general revenue. This is a partially state and partially local tax.
Property tax - if you own property, you are taxed by the city, county, school district and whatever other local taxing authority smacks down a levy on property values. These taxes are set LOCALLY, and are capped by the State of Texas. Capped means that the State tells the local governments that one cannot be charged more than a certain percentage of one's property values.
In the City of Houston, the average taxpayer pays property tax to:
Harris County
City of Houston
[Houston] Independent School District
Harris County Hospital District
Houston Port Authority
Houston Community College District
If you're lucky enough to live outside of City water and sewer services, you pay a Municipal Utility District (MUD) tax.
These tax rates are SET and ASSESSED by the local government that collects them. The property values are set county wide by an independent agency called the appraisal district.
The appraisal districts track market values in the county, and then issue an annual statement of what one's property is worth. This sets the taxable valuation, on which the local tax rate is applied.
The only control a local homeowner has over their tax assessment is to contest the property tax valuation issued by the appraisal district. Otherwise, everyone pays the SAME rate, unless they're disabled, over 65 or meet other exemption criterion. Agricultural land, if in use, is generally exempt from tax. In the City of Houston (and Houston ISD) the approximate tax rate is 3.10% of one's assessed valuation. Therefore, if one owns a property that's assesed at $100,000 in value, one will be paying approximately $3100 in property tax, spread out over all of the taxing authorities.
NONE OF THIS MONEY IS COLLECTED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS. This money is assessed locally, collected locally, and goes to support the operations and services provided by local government.
In fact, the State of Texas cannot interfere with local property tax collections.
All of the statewide discussion about reducing property taxes revolves around the State's oversight of EDUCATION; they can dictate how much property tax the school districts assess.
None of it has a whit to do with how much you're paying your school district locally; it all has to do with spin and state politics. The State Supreme court has held that the State's system of financing education was unconstitutional because a child in a school district with high property values is funded at a much higher level than is a child in a rural school district with low property values.
So, the State of Texas, which has been aware that it had to revamp its system of public school financing, has been passing the buck for years and is now up against the wall. They have to create a new and approvable structure by the summer, or the Supremes (of Texas) have indicated a willingness to shut down public schools entirely.
Those elected officials in Texas, looking to create a statewide system of collecting and distributing money to support public education (required under the Supreme Court's order) are trying to sell this "new" tax by calling for a reduction in the tax RATE assessed by local districts. They can't change the rate that the districts charge, so they're talking about capping valuation.
And, I can promise you, they'll institute a new tax and nothing will substantially change about local property taxes.
If you're upset about your property tax rates, blame the general increase in property valuation - the RATE hasn't changed in years and years, except by the barest of fractions.
And, get very clear, the taxes collected to support local schools are NOT held by, managed by, collected by or ever touched by the State of Texas. Anything you've heard to the contrary is ignorant, inflammatory and uninformed.
What else were we going to talk about today?
Another busy weekend, revolving around church business and activities. The pool is yet green, and Mitch's ongoing promises to get it (and anything else) handled are just so much excelsior.
Ruby's loaded down with stuff for the church garage sale. She rides dreadfully. I'm glad that she'll be unloaded in a few hours.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Thursday ... has the heat broken yet?
So, Dennis (The Minx) has taken to blogging, and he's damned good at it! Fun to read. Daily, I head over to his little piece to see what he's had to say, and when he's posted it always puts a grin on my face.
I also have a big old smile on my face because Daniel came last night and cleaned the garage. When Barbara looked in there this morning, she was verbally impressed. She's now helping me load up with car with the garage sale stuff for next weekend, which will empty out the unstair closet and allow me to push MORE stuff in there.
Mitch claims that he's having someone come to pick up his giant TV this weekend. Of course, he's made that claim before. However ..
And, hanging up all of the pictures in my room makes me much happier - many of the pictures are old magazine ads for the Lockheed Constellation that I've had in a drawer for years, because there was no place to put them. That's very cool. Unfortunately, I now have to deal with the concept of ALL of the unframed posters that are occupying the "extra" room. Perhaps it's time to throw in the towel and push them out onto eBay. Some of them are EXTREMELY rare.
I met with Tom (there's almost no one sweeter than Tom is) last night for nearly three and a half hours about my various web projects. He's already built a template (that's very very cool) for them, and is going to work already on getting a timeline/project order done, and starting the work on them. How wonderful! I've been waiting for so long to make some strides in this area.
Okay, it's time to be productive..
I also have a big old smile on my face because Daniel came last night and cleaned the garage. When Barbara looked in there this morning, she was verbally impressed. She's now helping me load up with car with the garage sale stuff for next weekend, which will empty out the unstair closet and allow me to push MORE stuff in there.
Mitch claims that he's having someone come to pick up his giant TV this weekend. Of course, he's made that claim before. However ..
And, hanging up all of the pictures in my room makes me much happier - many of the pictures are old magazine ads for the Lockheed Constellation that I've had in a drawer for years, because there was no place to put them. That's very cool. Unfortunately, I now have to deal with the concept of ALL of the unframed posters that are occupying the "extra" room. Perhaps it's time to throw in the towel and push them out onto eBay. Some of them are EXTREMELY rare.
I met with Tom (there's almost no one sweeter than Tom is) last night for nearly three and a half hours about my various web projects. He's already built a template (that's very very cool) for them, and is going to work already on getting a timeline/project order done, and starting the work on them. How wonderful! I've been waiting for so long to make some strides in this area.
Okay, it's time to be productive..
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
This is interesting - based on this, Rummy WON'T be leaving
Source from TPM
In all seriousness, I think the real story here continues to be that things are so bad at the White House, the level of denial and secrets to be kept, the self-bamboozlement and bad-faith so profound, that they just can't manage to bring in any new blood.
With Rumsfeld, or any other cabinet secretary, there's a related problem -- the importance of which has, I think, not been fully appreciated or aired. If Rumsfeld goes, you need to nominate someone else and get them through a senate confirmation. That means an open airing of the disaster of this administration's national security policy. Every particular; all about Iraq. Think how much they don't want that ...
Finally, can they find anyone on the outside who wants in? This, remember, seems to be the problem with Treasury Secretary Snow. He has already, in essence, been fired. But they can't come up with anyone crazy enough to take the job.
-- Josh Marshall
More republican "conservative fiscal policy"
Source article
Tax Gimmickry
The Washington Post | Editorial
Monday 17 April 2006
Paying for tax cuts for the wealthy with ... more tax cuts for the wealthy!
Much to the chagrin of the White House and the GOP leadership, lawmakers didn't get a new round of tax cuts done in time for tax day today. But when Congress comes back from its recess, it's expected to take up a deal to extend President Bush's capital gains and dividend tax cuts. To make their budget-busting tax policy appear less costly than it is, the lawmakers are resorting to a gimmick that is even more egregious than their usual tactics.
This one would, as usual, hide the cost of tax cuts that primarily benefit upper-income Americans. But it would accomplish that budgetary smoke and mirrors with a new tax provision, involving retirement savings accounts, that also benefits the well-to-do. And, to top things off, this new tax provision, while masking the cost of the tax cuts by bringing in more revenue in the short term, would in the long run worsen the fiscal situation by piling on more debt. No one who's serious about controlling the deficit - whatever one's position on extending the tax cuts - could support this dishonest approach.
The gimmick is intended to get around a Senate rule that requires 60 votes to approve a tax bill if it's going to deepen the deficit more than five years down the road; if it won't have that long-term impact, a simple majority could suffice for passage. Unfortunately for Senate leaders, a two-year extension of the capital gains and dividend tax cuts, now set to expire in 2008, would cost $20 billion over the next five years - but $30 billion more in the five years after that. Taxpayers will scramble to take advantage of the lower rates now, thereby lessening tax revenue later. So to pass the cuts with only 51 votes, legislators have to find some way to offset that second five-year revenue loss.
Enter the retirement savings gimmick. As it's being discussed behind the scenes, this would let wealthier Americans use savings plans known as Roth IRAs. With traditional IRAs, taxpayers get to deduct the contributions they make from their income for that year; they pay taxes on the savings once they are withdrawn. Roth IRAs flip that arrangement around: Contributors pay taxes on the income they put into the accounts, but their savings then grow tax-free. So letting more people put money into Roth IRAs would increase tax revenue for a while - offsetting, at least in theory, the cost of the capital gains cuts. But the Roth change would cost money down the road, as revenue once subject to taxation would grow tax-free.
Bottom line: A Senate rule designed to make it harder to increase the deficit would be circumvented with a maneuver that would end up increasing the deficit. And a tax cut for wealthier Americans that would cost $50 billion over 10 years would be "paid for" in part by another tax cut for the well-off, which would end up costing billions more. That's amazing - even from this Congress.
Hump Day dynamo
Interesting morning, from a blog perspective. Lots of thoughtful .. thoughts that are worth sharing, which I'll do in a few later posts today.
I've been nesting some more. This is troublesome, as it makes me love this place EVEN MORE. I'm fixing to go hang the pictures in the bedroom, and then later tonight, I'm going to move the stereo equipment (which I said I was going to do on Sunday and on Monday, but I was tired, so give me a break.)
Mitchell called this morning, said he was going to work out the mortgage issue here, and that he would have someone come and clean the pool this weekend so don't hire the pool cleaner people. Now, if I can get him to bring the lawn mower back..
I just haven't felt like doing anything at all. I've been nesting all day. I've hung about 20 pictures, put some more things away, etc. Very exciting stuff. I'm having dinner with Tom to talk about him working on my websites - that in about an hour, so I'm just about to get cleaned up.
I've been nesting some more. This is troublesome, as it makes me love this place EVEN MORE. I'm fixing to go hang the pictures in the bedroom, and then later tonight, I'm going to move the stereo equipment (which I said I was going to do on Sunday and on Monday, but I was tired, so give me a break.)
Mitchell called this morning, said he was going to work out the mortgage issue here, and that he would have someone come and clean the pool this weekend so don't hire the pool cleaner people. Now, if I can get him to bring the lawn mower back..
I just haven't felt like doing anything at all. I've been nesting all day. I've hung about 20 pictures, put some more things away, etc. Very exciting stuff. I'm having dinner with Tom to talk about him working on my websites - that in about an hour, so I'm just about to get cleaned up.
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Tuesday trials
Yeah, well - I wrote in this WHOLE long entry for today, and then .. firefox just .. shuts down. Third time today.
That's my life this week so far.
Ruby's butt cost $95 to fix - the repair shop, however, wanted to do $500 in additional work, telling me I had an oil pan gasket leak (but there's no oil on the garage floor) that the brake lines and power steering pump needed to be flushed and filled, and that the coolant needed to be flushed and filled. Since I just went through the most Royal of all screwings on the flushing and filling just back in September and then had the water pump replaced (and the engine torn down, with the coolant replaced) in October, I didn't feel like their advice was sound. In fact, I pretty much think they're a rip-off operation. And, they didn't give me the $25 coupon that I had received in the mail as an inducement to come do business with them in the first place.
On the phone, I got to listen to them shuck and jive about how they didn't try to screw me on the shocks, after all - they could have tried to drill me for $400 there.
Funny, but ..
Anyway.
This morning, I awoke to six huge dog turds in the middle of Lake Urine - and, of course, several people are TAKING THE DOG'S SIDE. Uh, thanks. Fourteen years of waste terrorism by that little bastard, but it's because I treat them badly and should pamper them more.
Screw that.
And, two clients' checks are coming BACK to me in my account tonight. Lovely. That should only cost about $160 in charge back fees.
So, I am actively trying to get in touch with EITHER of the recruiters that have an interest in me, but the first one left a message with his mouth full, and I couldn't get his phone number down - the second one is apparently in the custody of the Shi'ite terrorists in Baghdad, and won't be available for several more days.
Either way, I need to get away from "betting on the come," and into "you'll have $X.XX deposited into your account on the 1st and 15th."
Going to Jeffrey and Steven's for dinner here in a few minutes. Cleaned up the dining room today. It looks a ton better, even with no table, the bed and dresser up against the wall, and the huge sheet rock hole in the ceiling.
That's my life this week so far.
Ruby's butt cost $95 to fix - the repair shop, however, wanted to do $500 in additional work, telling me I had an oil pan gasket leak (but there's no oil on the garage floor) that the brake lines and power steering pump needed to be flushed and filled, and that the coolant needed to be flushed and filled. Since I just went through the most Royal of all screwings on the flushing and filling just back in September and then had the water pump replaced (and the engine torn down, with the coolant replaced) in October, I didn't feel like their advice was sound. In fact, I pretty much think they're a rip-off operation. And, they didn't give me the $25 coupon that I had received in the mail as an inducement to come do business with them in the first place.
On the phone, I got to listen to them shuck and jive about how they didn't try to screw me on the shocks, after all - they could have tried to drill me for $400 there.
Funny, but ..
Anyway.
This morning, I awoke to six huge dog turds in the middle of Lake Urine - and, of course, several people are TAKING THE DOG'S SIDE. Uh, thanks. Fourteen years of waste terrorism by that little bastard, but it's because I treat them badly and should pamper them more.
Screw that.
And, two clients' checks are coming BACK to me in my account tonight. Lovely. That should only cost about $160 in charge back fees.
So, I am actively trying to get in touch with EITHER of the recruiters that have an interest in me, but the first one left a message with his mouth full, and I couldn't get his phone number down - the second one is apparently in the custody of the Shi'ite terrorists in Baghdad, and won't be available for several more days.
Either way, I need to get away from "betting on the come," and into "you'll have $X.XX deposited into your account on the 1st and 15th."
Going to Jeffrey and Steven's for dinner here in a few minutes. Cleaned up the dining room today. It looks a ton better, even with no table, the bed and dresser up against the wall, and the huge sheet rock hole in the ceiling.
Monday, April 17, 2006
two quick things
Two things that I cooked up on my own ..
First - bushenanigans
Second - Aberzombie and Bitch
Either describe cultural and behavioral traits that are less than flattering to our little collective.
First - bushenanigans
Second - Aberzombie and Bitch
Either describe cultural and behavioral traits that are less than flattering to our little collective.
It's a small world - after all -
So, what if something happened to you that was SO .. bizarre? Funny? Hilarious? Unbelieveable? That youjust HAD to tell someone, but you can't tell a soul?
Well, it happened to me tonight. And, I think we're going to go out again!
T shot me an IM tonight asking me if I was ready for him to move back in. I told him no. I did tell him that, unless and until he's actually ended it with the boyfriend (who's a lying, cheating ho-bag) that I was not willing to be used as leverage.
He's been very quiet ever since.
Found a GORGEOUS house in League City. HOO baby. I've decided if I'm going to move, and I want (as I do) a big house with a pool, I should look at moving down near Clear Lake (it seeming to make more sense than anything else.) It's only three hundred thou. But, it's GORGEMOUS. I'm sure that there are others.
Anyway, that's the view from here in the western suburbs. Buenos Noches!
Well, it happened to me tonight. And, I think we're going to go out again!
T shot me an IM tonight asking me if I was ready for him to move back in. I told him no. I did tell him that, unless and until he's actually ended it with the boyfriend (who's a lying, cheating ho-bag) that I was not willing to be used as leverage.
He's been very quiet ever since.
Found a GORGEOUS house in League City. HOO baby. I've decided if I'm going to move, and I want (as I do) a big house with a pool, I should look at moving down near Clear Lake (it seeming to make more sense than anything else.) It's only three hundred thou. But, it's GORGEMOUS. I'm sure that there are others.
Anyway, that's the view from here in the western suburbs. Buenos Noches!
Monday, Monday ver. 774.01
Well an interesting day all around.
Ruby's butt is going to cost $250 to fix tomorrow (since I can't drive her in this condition, I have little choice.) I have a bunch of tax returns to do up tomorrow. That's a good thing, because I can get paid for them. I need to cook up some more cabbage this week, as the pool is going to cost $360 to clean up and then there are the REST of the obligations due .. yowie. And the fact that the yard is a disaster.
I have three loans going on suddenly. That's good; they'll all close as the next thirty days go by. Tomorrow was supposed to be the meeting with the Dutch investors who need book keeping. I wonder what happened to them. No word from my friend who was making the introduction.
Been talking today to a very nice guy - he lives just up the street. He just got laid off today. Divorced, my age, red hair, very handsome. He hosted singles cruises. Can you spell "FABULAIR?"
Where and when is there enough time in the day to get everything done? I spent some time today moving books upstairs into book cases. I have all the 110 year old books from my grandfather's house that are going to Half Price books in the morning.
Then, there is the big load of metaphysical books that are in a suitcase in the closet, but they have no home for the moment.
Running into resistance with the new car financing. Blarg. I don't know yet what the magic formula is going to be.
Anyway. More to be done. Until later!
Ruby's butt is going to cost $250 to fix tomorrow (since I can't drive her in this condition, I have little choice.) I have a bunch of tax returns to do up tomorrow. That's a good thing, because I can get paid for them. I need to cook up some more cabbage this week, as the pool is going to cost $360 to clean up and then there are the REST of the obligations due .. yowie. And the fact that the yard is a disaster.
I have three loans going on suddenly. That's good; they'll all close as the next thirty days go by. Tomorrow was supposed to be the meeting with the Dutch investors who need book keeping. I wonder what happened to them. No word from my friend who was making the introduction.
Been talking today to a very nice guy - he lives just up the street. He just got laid off today. Divorced, my age, red hair, very handsome. He hosted singles cruises. Can you spell "FABULAIR?"
Where and when is there enough time in the day to get everything done? I spent some time today moving books upstairs into book cases. I have all the 110 year old books from my grandfather's house that are going to Half Price books in the morning.
Then, there is the big load of metaphysical books that are in a suitcase in the closet, but they have no home for the moment.
Running into resistance with the new car financing. Blarg. I don't know yet what the magic formula is going to be.
Anyway. More to be done. Until later!
Sunday, April 16, 2006
Sunday evening commentary
Okay, so I've decided to do some more nesting. I'm going to set up the home theater equipment, probably tomorrow. I'm going to hang up the pictures in my bedroom, and I'm going to put up shelves in the built ins in the "great" room to put up the books.
Ruby busted yet another rear shock today. I think this time, I'm going to NOT get replacement shocks from Auto Zone and I'm going to take her to a different mechanic to have them replaced. Well, at least take it to a different mechanic. If they tell me that the problem isn't the shocks, then I'll see about saving the $150 for the replacement shocks.
Lots of catch up for tomorrow, including tax work. Blarg. LOTS. People with a ton of questions, all of which need to be answered.
All answers will be dispensed.
Started thinking about how to organize the web presentation/magazine articles/DVD on the Seven Deadly Sins and the Science of Mind. It's going to take a ton of work, but I think it will be valuable for both me and for NV.
Watching this DVD that I've been putting off a while. I'll be mailing back three or four tomorrow morning. Along with a few envelopes addressed to the IRS.
We'll see what tomorrow brings. I think that we'll have some good progress.
Ruby busted yet another rear shock today. I think this time, I'm going to NOT get replacement shocks from Auto Zone and I'm going to take her to a different mechanic to have them replaced. Well, at least take it to a different mechanic. If they tell me that the problem isn't the shocks, then I'll see about saving the $150 for the replacement shocks.
Lots of catch up for tomorrow, including tax work. Blarg. LOTS. People with a ton of questions, all of which need to be answered.
All answers will be dispensed.
Started thinking about how to organize the web presentation/magazine articles/DVD on the Seven Deadly Sins and the Science of Mind. It's going to take a ton of work, but I think it will be valuable for both me and for NV.
Watching this DVD that I've been putting off a while. I'll be mailing back three or four tomorrow morning. Along with a few envelopes addressed to the IRS.
We'll see what tomorrow brings. I think that we'll have some good progress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)