I'm trying to remain objective today, but.....
Gun control is not THE issue, but it is part of the issue.
Current gun laws are not THE issue, but they do apply and need to be enforced.
Mental Health awareness is not THE issue, but we need an adequate way to recognize and support those who are falling through the cracks.
So, who will ever be smart enough to recognize that a sane conversation is due? Who in the NRA will step up and do more than talk about tyranny and the mindset of our forefathers? Who will give the men and women who protect us legally the tools they need to support the current gun control laws? And who will recognize that every person in the USA will need and use health care at some point in their lives and step up?
I'm not holding my breath.....
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Monday, November 19, 2012
Venture VS Vulture, are our angel investors losing touch?
I am somewhat at a loss of words for the poor folks that worked at Hostess. 18K+ jobs lost. And who takes the blame? If you read the CEO headlines, it was the unions. But, as always, there is more to this story than meets the eye. Look behind the CEO's words to find the truth.
Word has gotten out that during the last few months of their latest (2nd I believe, sometimes referred to as Chapter 22) bankruptcy is the little presented fact that the C levels gave themselves a 3X salary increase. Here is another interesting tidbit, there are many stories that factories were set to close anyway as part of the bankruptcy proceedings, not because of the striking workers, but because the loans that were made to revive aging factories were used to provide the top 9 execs with up to 300% increases to their salaries - all while workers were taking wage cuts. Another thing to know that has not necessarily made it into the papers or major news organizations (and I can guarantee you'll never hear this on FAUX NEWS) is that the venture capitalist organization that was supposed to be helping guide the company through its bankruptcy pulled a "Bain" and took out enough capital and restructuring loans the first time through bankruptcy so as to place Hostess in a position to have more debt when they exited Chapter 11 (first time through) than when they entered.
From a Reuters article comes the following info (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/06/us-bankruptcy-repeats-idUSTRE8251N12012030)"Hostess faced some similar problems. The company filed for its first bankruptcy in 2004, citing declining sales, high food costs, excess capacity and worker benefit expenses. It tackled some issues - closing bakeries and simplifying some union contracts -- but it did not deal with its debt. It went into the first bankruptcy with $648.5 million in debt, and came out with more than $800 million, according to court documents. As a result, the company's second bankruptcy-- after less than three years under the control of private equity firm Ripplewood Holdings -- came as no surprise to some workers."
So, what happened the second time through? Well, management went after their union contracts for one, and the following happened (http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/13/4983174/hostess-continues-pattern-of-misinformation.html) "BCTGM members are well aware that as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One such executive received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one taking his salary from $375,000 to $656,256. Over the past 15 months, Hostess workers have seen the company unilaterally end contractually-obligated payments to their pension plan. Despite saving more than $160 million with this action, the company continues to fall deeper and deeper into debt. A mountain of debt and gross mismanagement by a string of failed CEO's with no true experience in the wholesale baking business have left this company unable to compete or survive."
You can also read here (http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Corporate-Greed/Trumka-Giving-Thanks-for-Hostess-Workers) about how the workers have actually stood up to Wall Street greed: "Wall Street investors first came onto the scene with Hostess about a decade ago, purchasing the company and then loading it with debt. All the while, its executives talked of investments in new equipment, new research and new delivery trucks, but those improvements never materialized. Instead, the executives planned to give themselves bonuses and demanded pay cuts and benefit cuts from the workers, who haven’t had a raise in eight years. In 2011, Hostess earned profits of more than $2.5 billion but ended the year with a loss of $341 million as it struggled to pay the interest on $1 billion in debt. This year, the company sought bankruptcy protection, the second time in eight years. Still, the CEO who brought on the latest bankruptcy got a raise while Hostess demanded that its workers accept a 30 percent pay and benefits cut."
So who wins in all of this? It appears as if all of those supposed "Job Creators" have won. And even more than that, the big business leader angel investor "Bain-like" companies once again show their true colors. And guess who really pays? All of those who want to borrow money to start a business, or reach out to be small business job creators. Because every big business that borrows money to make its way through bankruptcy and borrows to pay execs instead of reinvesting and fails causes an increase in interest rates for the 97% of small business that do support our country and wish to expand our employee base. That doesn't sound like the path forward to me.
One big question.....does this mean that the path forward and upward involves the upper 2% stealing from bankrupt companies and forcing the 98% to pay for that? Sounds like they get a "rebate" anyway, just not through their savior Mitt Romney, or through tax reform. Maybe it is time to look at how bankruptcies should be managed, and unfortunately for anyone that wants less government (Repubs, right?) having to bring in the government means another group providing oversight, another agency to be created. Sounds like (as has been proven in the past) Repubs increase government through their actions instead of decreasing government through responsible leadership. So who has lost touch? I'll let you figure that out.
Word has gotten out that during the last few months of their latest (2nd I believe, sometimes referred to as Chapter 22) bankruptcy is the little presented fact that the C levels gave themselves a 3X salary increase. Here is another interesting tidbit, there are many stories that factories were set to close anyway as part of the bankruptcy proceedings, not because of the striking workers, but because the loans that were made to revive aging factories were used to provide the top 9 execs with up to 300% increases to their salaries - all while workers were taking wage cuts. Another thing to know that has not necessarily made it into the papers or major news organizations (and I can guarantee you'll never hear this on FAUX NEWS) is that the venture capitalist organization that was supposed to be helping guide the company through its bankruptcy pulled a "Bain" and took out enough capital and restructuring loans the first time through bankruptcy so as to place Hostess in a position to have more debt when they exited Chapter 11 (first time through) than when they entered.
From a Reuters article comes the following info (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/06/us-bankruptcy-repeats-idUSTRE8251N12012030)"Hostess faced some similar problems. The company filed for its first bankruptcy in 2004, citing declining sales, high food costs, excess capacity and worker benefit expenses. It tackled some issues - closing bakeries and simplifying some union contracts -- but it did not deal with its debt. It went into the first bankruptcy with $648.5 million in debt, and came out with more than $800 million, according to court documents. As a result, the company's second bankruptcy-- after less than three years under the control of private equity firm Ripplewood Holdings -- came as no surprise to some workers."
So, what happened the second time through? Well, management went after their union contracts for one, and the following happened (http://www.sacbee.com/2012/11/13/4983174/hostess-continues-pattern-of-misinformation.html) "BCTGM members are well aware that as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One such executive received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one taking his salary from $375,000 to $656,256. Over the past 15 months, Hostess workers have seen the company unilaterally end contractually-obligated payments to their pension plan. Despite saving more than $160 million with this action, the company continues to fall deeper and deeper into debt. A mountain of debt and gross mismanagement by a string of failed CEO's with no true experience in the wholesale baking business have left this company unable to compete or survive."
You can also read here (http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Corporate-Greed/Trumka-Giving-Thanks-for-Hostess-Workers) about how the workers have actually stood up to Wall Street greed: "Wall Street investors first came onto the scene with Hostess about a decade ago, purchasing the company and then loading it with debt. All the while, its executives talked of investments in new equipment, new research and new delivery trucks, but those improvements never materialized. Instead, the executives planned to give themselves bonuses and demanded pay cuts and benefit cuts from the workers, who haven’t had a raise in eight years. In 2011, Hostess earned profits of more than $2.5 billion but ended the year with a loss of $341 million as it struggled to pay the interest on $1 billion in debt. This year, the company sought bankruptcy protection, the second time in eight years. Still, the CEO who brought on the latest bankruptcy got a raise while Hostess demanded that its workers accept a 30 percent pay and benefits cut."
So who wins in all of this? It appears as if all of those supposed "Job Creators" have won. And even more than that, the big business leader angel investor "Bain-like" companies once again show their true colors. And guess who really pays? All of those who want to borrow money to start a business, or reach out to be small business job creators. Because every big business that borrows money to make its way through bankruptcy and borrows to pay execs instead of reinvesting and fails causes an increase in interest rates for the 97% of small business that do support our country and wish to expand our employee base. That doesn't sound like the path forward to me.
One big question.....does this mean that the path forward and upward involves the upper 2% stealing from bankrupt companies and forcing the 98% to pay for that? Sounds like they get a "rebate" anyway, just not through their savior Mitt Romney, or through tax reform. Maybe it is time to look at how bankruptcies should be managed, and unfortunately for anyone that wants less government (Repubs, right?) having to bring in the government means another group providing oversight, another agency to be created. Sounds like (as has been proven in the past) Repubs increase government through their actions instead of decreasing government through responsible leadership. So who has lost touch? I'll let you figure that out.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Rush and the Repubs are Lost
11/7/2012
An open letter to Rush Limbaugh and the Republican Party.
Rush, I listened to your confusion and lack of understanding on the radio today, the day after the 2012 election, because I honestly wanted to hear what your reaction would be to the results. I guess I was a little surprised at the confusion you demonstrated during your broadcast (which followed the same confusion I've heard over subsequent days from many conservative media outlets). I think you are all substituting your theory that all Democrats want a free lunch for what most of us on the opposite side actually used the election for. If I might be so bold, I'll explain what I was fighting for as much as fighting against with my vote.
I was fighting against the well-known fact that the Republican Party decided not to play well with the Democrats. You might remember 4 years ago when you decided to rant and rave on the radio about the fact that you were going to push for no holds barred obstructionism. I recall you and others going on the air and to the press and stating how you were not going to work within the reasonable expectation of compromise that politics and all politicians should be ready to support (a mainstay that most politicians have forgotten today). Because of that obstructionism, I would not seriously consider any republican candidate this time around.
I was fighting against big money in this election. There is no way I wanted to see any United States election be bought by the big money that was being poured into the conservative fight. I did not want a decision like "Citizens United" to work, as a matter of fact after this election I hope the country sees how much money went into these campaigns for a Democratic gain. And I will continue to push against this. To think that a corporation is a person is as ridiculous as the conservatives believing (with no real evidence) that there is an in-person voter fraud problem in this country, and that the path to win is through fraud and voter disillusionment.
I was fighting for the freedom of women all over this land - making sure they have the ability to determine what they do or do not want to do with their bodies. I will always fight against the government that feels they have a right to put themselves between a woman and her right to determine her own path forward. I am a Catholic that is also an American. And any American that wants to take away any right to decide what I or any other American wants to do with their body is not a decision I should make. Instead, I should be teaching responsibility and consequence when and where it is most effective. Sorry, but if Republicans and conservatives want to partner with the NRA and allow guns that are meant only to kill as many as possible in a short amount of time as is possible for sale in the US, then don't be surprised when there are also people out there that don't want to bring a child into this world and will do what they feel is necessary to prevent it. Yes, I know I'm mixing 2 political positions here, I'm demonstrating to you the absurdity of the stance you are taking. I wish that there was no need for another abortion to ever occur in this country and on this planet, but the reality is that it is not my decision to make. If we guarantee life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have to let the people responsible for bringing that life into the world to make whatever decision they feel they must at the appropriate time, regardless of your own belief. PERIOD, end of story.
I was fighting for the freedom to marry for anyone. Again, being a Catholic, I do not have the right to condemn a person or impugn their lifestyle choice (only one person does, and he'll do that when he is damn well ready), because as an American I should be making sure that if I have a right to do something that I not stand in the way of anyone's ability to do the same within reason. And I ask that conservatives don't stick their faces into the bedroom where they don't belong, regardless of their beliefs. I seem to recall a day not too far in the past where there were certain individuals who thought that skin color denoted or dictated the mental acuity and the capabilities of that person. I also seem to recall that being abolished, not the least of which because it was ridiculous. I also was told by my parents (white parents) that even though I was all of 6 months old at the time, that our entire family marched in the civil rights marches of that day to show support, that same spirit of equality for all survives today. All they are asking for is the ability to have the same rights as anyone else that is loved, married, has a loved one in pain and in the hospital, provides for financially, on and on.
I know you won't do a thing about your viewpoint, but until and unless you recognize you're living in the past, you will be doomed to repeat it.
P.S. I am a very self sufficient person, and don't want a handout, hell I paint my own house when it needs painting because I want to save a little money and enjoy the fruits of my own labor (besides, no one is going to do it the same way nor to the same level of quality that I am because I'm doing it for myself), mow my own lawn, fix what I can because I can, but I do want those that are in dire straits, those who have worked their entire lives, and those who cannot fend for themselves to be able to depend on us as a nation to support them. I think it is something that the greatest generation would gladly support. I am not waiting for Santa Claus, I can be Santa Claus by backing a social safety net for our country through some redistribution. Unlike you I guess.....
P.P.S. Added on 11/19/2012 AND one additional postscript. The programs that provide support are redistribution only in the fact that they are "PAY-IN" programs. They are not free. Anyone who has ever worked pays into the system, and should be able to depend on getting something out of that system. My dollar value today is submitted against what a fair return for those services should be in the future. It is not a handout. So anyone who feels like they got a gift from Obama just doesn't know how this "redistribution" system works. Time to take a civics class again America.....
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Losing touch because of missing context
10/23/2012
Michael Brown, now on 630 KHOW because his antics weren't good enough for 850 KOA played a bunch of 5 second sound bites that repubs have used to state that Barack Obama used his first trip as President to engage in an apology tour. I call bulls#*t. Here is an example of what Obama actually said, in context (you can find the entire speech here http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-President-Obama-at-Strasbourg-Town-Hall/). The tiny part that Brownie played is in bold.....
"Such an effort is never easy. It's always harder to forge true partnerships and sturdy alliances than to act alone, or to wait for the action of somebody else. It's more difficult to break down walls of division than to simply allow our differences to build and our resentments to fester. So we must be honest with ourselves. In recent years we've allowed our Alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there's something more that has crept into our relationship. In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.
But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what's bad."
If you don't read the statement preceding and paragraph following my bolded section, you lose all context. And I know that most of the people in Colorado are not shortsighted enough to take a 5 second sound bite literally, and this goes for all sides. Context Brownie, Please!
Saturday, September 1, 2012
The Repubs proved they are completely out of touch during convention
09/01/2012
"There is a President Obama that only republicans can see" was a line from John Stewart's "The Daily Show" last night. Very funny based on the context from his show, but as I thought about it more and more, I'm starting to think it might actually be true.
Clint Eastwood made the point for me when he spoke off the cuff for 12 minutes on the closing night of the convention by saying "I know you were against the war in Iraq, and that’s okay. But you thought the war in Afghanistan was OK. You know, I mean -- you thought that was something worth doing. We didn’t check with the Russians to see how did it -- they did there for 10 years." There is one problem with this statement - Barack Obama was not responsible for getting us into Afghanistan. Whoops, fact check fail!
Paul Ryan made my point for me when he said "You see, even with all the hidden taxes to pay for the health care takeover, even with new taxes on nearly a million small businesses, the planners in Washington still didn't have enough money. They needed more. They needed hundreds of billions more. So, they just took it all away from Medicare. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars, funneled out of Medicare by President Obama. An obligation we have to our parents and grandparents is being sacrificed, all to pay for a new entitlement we didn't even ask for. The greatest threat to Medicare is Obamacare, and we're going to stop it." You ask me what the issue is with this? Hmmm, I'm sort of stumped you see, because repubs are supposed to be against waste in government, but when our standing president takes steps to reduce waste in Medicare spending, but they must have decided that it is better to turn their backs on their past than to admit that a reduction in waste might be a good thing. And I'm sure you all know that Paul Ryan carries the same cuts over into his budget. Ohhhhh, but that would sort of be like calling the kettle black, right? Is that counted as a party platform fail?
Governor Romney made my point by saying (and yes, Mr. Eastwood, I did call him governor, even though I may not like the repub nominee, I still give him the respect in title he deserves) the following in his speech, "In America, we celebrate success, we don't apologize for it. We weren't always successful at Bain. But no one ever is in the real world of business. That's what this President doesn't seem to understand. Business and growing jobs is about taking risk, sometimes failing, sometimes succeeding, but always striving." Here is what I don't get out of his statement - that they weren't always successful.....but they got their consultant fees before they declared bankruptcy on behalf of the companies that became failures, and handed the leftovers to the country and the government, and to us, the taxpayers to cover, like a bad Las Vegas poker hand. I guess that failure is really only failure when you are the one that loses your business, your job, your healthcare, and your self respect. But if you can walk away from a deeply leveraged company with more money than you put in, then you must be "WINNING!"
So, as John Stewart so rightly commented on his show, it really does appear that the republican party sees a President Obama that doesn't really exist, and a delusional picture of what America was 4 years ago after the failed policies of 8 years of republican control brought to this nation - as compared to the socialist nation they believe us to be. So the election really does come down to a choice - do you believe the picture that the republican party is holding up, or do you not? I don't, and that is why I will not be voting for a fantasy.
"There is a President Obama that only republicans can see" was a line from John Stewart's "The Daily Show" last night. Very funny based on the context from his show, but as I thought about it more and more, I'm starting to think it might actually be true.
Clint Eastwood made the point for me when he spoke off the cuff for 12 minutes on the closing night of the convention by saying "I know you were against the war in Iraq, and that’s okay. But you thought the war in Afghanistan was OK. You know, I mean -- you thought that was something worth doing. We didn’t check with the Russians to see how did it -- they did there for 10 years." There is one problem with this statement - Barack Obama was not responsible for getting us into Afghanistan. Whoops, fact check fail!
Paul Ryan made my point for me when he said "You see, even with all the hidden taxes to pay for the health care takeover, even with new taxes on nearly a million small businesses, the planners in Washington still didn't have enough money. They needed more. They needed hundreds of billions more. So, they just took it all away from Medicare. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars, funneled out of Medicare by President Obama. An obligation we have to our parents and grandparents is being sacrificed, all to pay for a new entitlement we didn't even ask for. The greatest threat to Medicare is Obamacare, and we're going to stop it." You ask me what the issue is with this? Hmmm, I'm sort of stumped you see, because repubs are supposed to be against waste in government, but when our standing president takes steps to reduce waste in Medicare spending, but they must have decided that it is better to turn their backs on their past than to admit that a reduction in waste might be a good thing. And I'm sure you all know that Paul Ryan carries the same cuts over into his budget. Ohhhhh, but that would sort of be like calling the kettle black, right? Is that counted as a party platform fail?
Governor Romney made my point by saying (and yes, Mr. Eastwood, I did call him governor, even though I may not like the repub nominee, I still give him the respect in title he deserves) the following in his speech, "In America, we celebrate success, we don't apologize for it. We weren't always successful at Bain. But no one ever is in the real world of business. That's what this President doesn't seem to understand. Business and growing jobs is about taking risk, sometimes failing, sometimes succeeding, but always striving." Here is what I don't get out of his statement - that they weren't always successful.....but they got their consultant fees before they declared bankruptcy on behalf of the companies that became failures, and handed the leftovers to the country and the government, and to us, the taxpayers to cover, like a bad Las Vegas poker hand. I guess that failure is really only failure when you are the one that loses your business, your job, your healthcare, and your self respect. But if you can walk away from a deeply leveraged company with more money than you put in, then you must be "WINNING!"
So, as John Stewart so rightly commented on his show, it really does appear that the republican party sees a President Obama that doesn't really exist, and a delusional picture of what America was 4 years ago after the failed policies of 8 years of republican control brought to this nation - as compared to the socialist nation they believe us to be. So the election really does come down to a choice - do you believe the picture that the republican party is holding up, or do you not? I don't, and that is why I will not be voting for a fantasy.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Have we all lost touch with our electoral process?
I continue to see a theme being played out over and over again in discussions about politics and the political process, each side is convinced that the other side is the one unwilling to compromise. Well guess what folks, it is both sides being driven farther and farther to their extremes by the complete loonies in each party that are making this occur (and I have talked about this before, http://losttouchwith.blogspot.com/2011/09/losing-touch-art-of-compromise.html). So what can we all do to bring some sense and compromise back into politics?
Who is on board? My guess is everyone but the politicians, and especially lifelong politicians like Paul Ryan, who met his wife while she was lobbying (read Corporate Bribery assistant) for multiple organizations and consulting firms in Washington. And he is not the only one, there are enough of these types of politicians on both sides. Instead of signing a stupid document that states you won't ever raise taxes (which is fiscally irresponsible, but I'll leave that for another day), why not sign a document that states an elected official will not take any corporate donations, bribes, pocket lining, and will represent their state to the best of their ability. After all, we are the United States of America, aren't we? Maybe we should start acting that way.
- Get corporate money out of politics. A business is not a person, and should not be allowed to give any tax free untraceable donations to a political party or person. Period, end of story. Abolish Citizens United. Does this mean looking at ways to possibly socialize the dollars that are used for elections? Heck yes, it might be one way to go! Do things like require a certain amount of donated political ad time for your FCC license, and the more states you have or provide FCC channels, radio time, any communications space, the more free time you have to donate. And make certain that it is being regulated, not for content, but for equal time slots.
- If you get the corporate dollars out of elections, you can't stop there. You also need to get it out of the senators, congressmen, courts, etc. Pass laws that force politicians to relinquish health care and pensions if they accept any form of corporate bribery (yes, that is what lobbyists participate in if they are giving any money to an elected official, they are participating in corporate bribery). Make the job of politics only a job of politics, not a paycheck outside of the job. Funny thing is, if most people were caught moonlighting by their current employer, they'd be out on the streets right away looking for another job. Why should politicians be allowed to take any money (regardless if how it will be spent IE campaign contributions) during their normal working hour, which is 24x7 if you are a politician).
- Do not ever allow any politician to become a paid lobbyist. This one is worth a mention, but I don't know if I actually want to deny anyone the ability to make a living in America. Even politicians should be allowed to make a living after politics (I'm not that heartless). As soon as we start denying equal employment opportunities.....well that would be like requiring identification of people like the young, the poor, the elderly and minorities that can't afford said identification to vote based on the fact that voter fraud is so rampant in the USA. That would never happen in America, would it?
- Remind our representation that their job in Washington is to find compromise. And remind them that no one elected official in any state or national election has been elected by 100% of the voting public. There are always multiple views, and while it is the job of any one politician to represent their elected constituencies viewpoint, they also do need to keep in mind that tipping the balance too much the other way could lead to their being unelected. So to solve the problem of non-compromise.....
- Go back to appointments for the Senate and remove the requirement that they be elected. It might not be a bad move to do the same with Congress. That way there is a little more of a responsibility for representation of the entire state instead of to a specific party. You then become beholden to the elected state body, and also don't have to spend your time raising money for your next election. You can actually do your job, representing the entire body of people that appointed you (and were elected themselves). If you don't like that, well that is what the Electoral College is all about at the national/presidential election level, so you're already participating in a representative electoral process. It would also take the dollars out of the hands that tend to bend elections (or at least funnel it down to the state level, and if republicans really do want to see states gain more power, then they would be the first ones in line looking to approve this step). And as a reminder to those who don't get why this might be a good idea, we are a country with a government that is founded on representation, so we make certain that we have more state level control of the electoral process by bringing back appointments rather than watching the cash being bet on big election outcomes.
- Get the big PAC and SuperPAC money out of elections, yes on both sides of the aisle. To say that these organizations are not collaborating with their side is ridiculous, boldface lying, contemptible, and anyone that believes otherwise has their head in the sand and their brain is dying from lack of oxygen.
Who is on board? My guess is everyone but the politicians, and especially lifelong politicians like Paul Ryan, who met his wife while she was lobbying (read Corporate Bribery assistant) for multiple organizations and consulting firms in Washington. And he is not the only one, there are enough of these types of politicians on both sides. Instead of signing a stupid document that states you won't ever raise taxes (which is fiscally irresponsible, but I'll leave that for another day), why not sign a document that states an elected official will not take any corporate donations, bribes, pocket lining, and will represent their state to the best of their ability. After all, we are the United States of America, aren't we? Maybe we should start acting that way.
Monday, August 13, 2012
If you like seeing Paul Ryan on the republican ticket, you've lost touch
Paul Ryan believes that one of the keys to reducing unemployment is to reduce the size of government. For those of you that don't know what that means, it means they would let go of government workers. Guess where these unemployed workers would get jobs.....? Well, as far as I know they would join the unemployment line along with all of the other workers. On top of that, they want to de-regulate, which will also remove more of the employed, specifically the government officials that are supposed to be in charge of watching over private industry, the same private industry (financial as one example) that put is in the predicament we are in now.
I sit here almost one year later from this blog (http://losttouchwith.blogspot.com/2011/08/losing-touch-with-middle-class.html) talking about the same concern I had at that time. It is scary to think that the VP candidate really believes that this is the path to prosperity. We've all been down this road before with both of the previous Bush presidents, looking at removing regulation, adding more tax cuts, and by the way paving the way for a war without having a way to pay for it.
So is this really the person you want as your vice president, one who really believes that less government (except for defense of course, they can keep or increase their spending) is the way to move the country forward.
I think that we all need to be the voice of concern now and moving forward. The Romney-Ryan plan is a failed plan, we've tried it before, it just won't work for this country. Make your voice heard!
I sit here almost one year later from this blog (http://losttouchwith.blogspot.com/2011/08/losing-touch-with-middle-class.html) talking about the same concern I had at that time. It is scary to think that the VP candidate really believes that this is the path to prosperity. We've all been down this road before with both of the previous Bush presidents, looking at removing regulation, adding more tax cuts, and by the way paving the way for a war without having a way to pay for it.
So is this really the person you want as your vice president, one who really believes that less government (except for defense of course, they can keep or increase their spending) is the way to move the country forward.
I think that we all need to be the voice of concern now and moving forward. The Romney-Ryan plan is a failed plan, we've tried it before, it just won't work for this country. Make your voice heard!
Sunday, August 12, 2012
The Republican Party has lost touch, Ayn Rand is unfortunately alive and well.
08/12/2012
I must admit that I tuned in to see the announcement of Mitt Romney's running mate in order to hear his first real statement to the people of the United States, and Paul Ryan did not disappoint. For myself, as a democrat, here is the thing that I heard that stuck in my mind, "we promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes."
To those of my friends that are conservative, and I'm glad to say I have more than a few and we all have a healthy opportunity to voice our opinion, (and we don't "unfriend" each other just because our philosophies are different) what I want to point out about this is that this single statement shows how naive and extreme the republican party has become. It concerns me that they actually believe this to be the case. I would ask how many of them have actually been to an inner city school, have seen children come to school with shoes so worn out that they are held together with tape (and I heard this description at my catholic church today for those of you that think all democrats must be atheists). Luckily for our neighborhood, the community came together to donate school supplies that would otherwise not be available to this inner city school. I wish that there was more of this help available to those that have an "equal opportunity" to succeed.
It also reminds me of a blog I posted a while ago, where I ranted about a local radio host here in Denver that was convinced that government school food programs were a waste of tax dollars (http://losttouchwith.blogspot.com/2011/08/free-school-lunches-make-talk-show-host.html if you'd like to read it). To believe that we don't have a responsibility to take care of our fellow man and help them up when they need it is at the heart of this election. And it is truly telling that Paul Ryan is also an Ayn Rand follower (although he has lately seemed to change his tune slightly). How many of you out there know that Ayn Rand was very much a believer in "I have mine, and so that makes me superior to you" belief in big business.
Here is what your choice comes down to this November. Do you believe that there is actually an equal opportunity in this country to get ahead, or do we have a responsibility to have social programs in place that do truly allow for those that are less advantaged to be provided the tools that can get them ahead.
And for those of you that say there should be no socialized programs, that we are not a democracy that also has social programs, think about programs like Defense, Transportation (which is much more than highways for those of you that forget we've all contributed to the ability to transport goods around this great country of ours), NASA (which I personally love and wish we could support more, and how many of those developments led to great advancements for all, think computers), and now Healthcare (and again, I'm probably risking comments from my conservative friends, but) because I truly believe that when there is something that will be used for the benefit of all in this country, it should be looked at as a social program for the benefit of all (and there are studies now coming out that point to the fact that countries that have vastly disparate classes also have vastly awful and expensive healthcare). I don't know that this is the kind of government I want to see elected to represent us. I truly think the republican party has lost touch.
I must admit that I tuned in to see the announcement of Mitt Romney's running mate in order to hear his first real statement to the people of the United States, and Paul Ryan did not disappoint. For myself, as a democrat, here is the thing that I heard that stuck in my mind, "we promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes."
To those of my friends that are conservative, and I'm glad to say I have more than a few and we all have a healthy opportunity to voice our opinion, (and we don't "unfriend" each other just because our philosophies are different) what I want to point out about this is that this single statement shows how naive and extreme the republican party has become. It concerns me that they actually believe this to be the case. I would ask how many of them have actually been to an inner city school, have seen children come to school with shoes so worn out that they are held together with tape (and I heard this description at my catholic church today for those of you that think all democrats must be atheists). Luckily for our neighborhood, the community came together to donate school supplies that would otherwise not be available to this inner city school. I wish that there was more of this help available to those that have an "equal opportunity" to succeed.
It also reminds me of a blog I posted a while ago, where I ranted about a local radio host here in Denver that was convinced that government school food programs were a waste of tax dollars (http://losttouchwith.blogspot.com/2011/08/free-school-lunches-make-talk-show-host.html if you'd like to read it). To believe that we don't have a responsibility to take care of our fellow man and help them up when they need it is at the heart of this election. And it is truly telling that Paul Ryan is also an Ayn Rand follower (although he has lately seemed to change his tune slightly). How many of you out there know that Ayn Rand was very much a believer in "I have mine, and so that makes me superior to you" belief in big business.
Here is what your choice comes down to this November. Do you believe that there is actually an equal opportunity in this country to get ahead, or do we have a responsibility to have social programs in place that do truly allow for those that are less advantaged to be provided the tools that can get them ahead.
And for those of you that say there should be no socialized programs, that we are not a democracy that also has social programs, think about programs like Defense, Transportation (which is much more than highways for those of you that forget we've all contributed to the ability to transport goods around this great country of ours), NASA (which I personally love and wish we could support more, and how many of those developments led to great advancements for all, think computers), and now Healthcare (and again, I'm probably risking comments from my conservative friends, but) because I truly believe that when there is something that will be used for the benefit of all in this country, it should be looked at as a social program for the benefit of all (and there are studies now coming out that point to the fact that countries that have vastly disparate classes also have vastly awful and expensive healthcare). I don't know that this is the kind of government I want to see elected to represent us. I truly think the republican party has lost touch.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Speaking with your wallet, Rush loses touch yet again!
07/28/2012
It is interesting that one of the people I most often refer to in this blog is Rush Limbaugh. Could that be a clue as to how out of touch I believe him to be? For example, I happen to tune in to his show for only about 5-10 minutes yesterday, and here is what I heard. I won't be quoting him directly, instead I'll be presenting the context of the points he raised.
It was very revealing to hear Rush this week. I haven't turned his show on in a long time. It is now just one big 3 hour ad for his sponsors (and in case any of those sponsors is reading this, I listened closely to all of you that are on his show, I won't be purchasing any of your products any time soon). He really has gone downhill. That does show you how public opinion can affect your business. So let's explore what he had to say this time.
Rush was talking about the right of free speech and the recent national discussion on the political views of the CEO of Chick-fil-A and how a number of city and state politicians with a large right to marriage constituency have taken a stand against new store openings within their city or state. And here is the part I love - with one point, he managed to support and condemn the use of the that same first amendment, the right to free speech. And here is why I think, once again, that Rush is out of touch. He backs the ability of the CEO to make a statement that he wants to without repercussion in the arena of ideas and marketplace, but then pushes against that same right when members of duly elected governments use their voices to stand against the statements made by the CEO. How you can allow one but not the other, well that to me is a little disingenuous, Rush should be ashamed of himself (fat chance that will ever happen).
Rush forgets a couple of things, some of those that I mentioned in my last blog, the right for consumers to voice their opinion with their wallets (another thing that even the Supreme Court forgot when they voted in the "Citizens United" decision, another out of touch Susie I need to write about at some point), and that is that consumers do not want to support companies that use their revenue for causes the consumer does not believe in. This is free speech in action, and maybe the most productive way that citizens have to bring their voices quickly into focus (which unfortunately speaks volumes about the obstructionist policies of both parties, and their inability to move forward on even the most sensible decisions put in front of them).
If the common citizen is not able to rely on public discourse, the right for the elected and non elected to voice opinions, whether in the public square or with the wallet, then we truly have lost touch with our Bill of Rights. You can't give one right and take it away in the same breath, Rush, so shame on you. Especially coming from someone to whom the BULLY PULPIT is so important.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Losing touch with the right to protest.....
I like to read articles from The Atlantic magazine. And that is probably a little clue to my political leaning. But an article written by Jonathan Merritt definitely deserves a mention in the losttouchwith blog. Why? Because he talks about the ineffective (as he describes them) boycott measures that this country seems to be using more than a little these days.
For those of you who would like to read his article online, you can find it here (sorry, you'll have to copy and paste, links don't seem to be working right on blogger today):
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/in-defense-of-eating-at-chick-fil-a/260139
What he fails to account for is the emotional benefit of the ability to boycott. I am one of those that will boycott Chick-fil-A even though I do like their food. I will boycott them because I do not want my hard earned money to be able to be contributed to any cause I don't believe in. That is, in my opinion, a little naive of a view, because I also purchase fuel, shop for clothes, eat at various restaurants, and generally consume goods at many places where my earnings are being passed on and used for causes I don't believe in. But emotionally it feels better when I take a stand of some sort.
In the long run, does it do any good? Maybe not in the larger world view. But it allows me to make a statement about what I believe in my own small way. And that allows me to stay in touch with my own sense of self, something that many people in the world and our own United States have lost touch with in this day and age.
For those of you who would like to read his article online, you can find it here (sorry, you'll have to copy and paste, links don't seem to be working right on blogger today):
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/in-defense-of-eating-at-chick-fil-a/260139
What he fails to account for is the emotional benefit of the ability to boycott. I am one of those that will boycott Chick-fil-A even though I do like their food. I will boycott them because I do not want my hard earned money to be able to be contributed to any cause I don't believe in. That is, in my opinion, a little naive of a view, because I also purchase fuel, shop for clothes, eat at various restaurants, and generally consume goods at many places where my earnings are being passed on and used for causes I don't believe in. But emotionally it feels better when I take a stand of some sort.
In the long run, does it do any good? Maybe not in the larger world view. But it allows me to make a statement about what I believe in my own small way. And that allows me to stay in touch with my own sense of self, something that many people in the world and our own United States have lost touch with in this day and age.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Losing touch with.....right to vote?
So Texas and other states want to require IDs for voting, right? OK Texas, if you want to play hard ball and require IDs, that is fine.
Let's see, the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the right to vote, but does state that the People of this country cannot be denied the right to vote. So I think that once again I've found an out of touch issue for the tea party right to vote crowd. I also think that if the states want to set rules requiring the presentation of IDs that that state should also be required by the Federal Government to provide said IDs to those who cannot afford them for free. Of course, the repubs would not want to go down that path, would they? Especially if they had to raise taxes to provide such an item.
Of course, if Texas hadn't just paid $25 mil for the remodeling effort of the Gov's mansion, they might not have to raise taxes to pay for IDs for everyone! Guess the guvnr of the greatstateofTexass deserves something for all that great campaigning he did, hmmm?
Long live the right of every American to vote! Feds, wake up and take a stand that really counts! Don't lose touch with one of our most important rights here in America! Rant, Rant, Rant!
Let's see, the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the right to vote, but does state that the People of this country cannot be denied the right to vote. So I think that once again I've found an out of touch issue for the tea party right to vote crowd. I also think that if the states want to set rules requiring the presentation of IDs that that state should also be required by the Federal Government to provide said IDs to those who cannot afford them for free. Of course, the repubs would not want to go down that path, would they? Especially if they had to raise taxes to provide such an item.
Of course, if Texas hadn't just paid $25 mil for the remodeling effort of the Gov's mansion, they might not have to raise taxes to pay for IDs for everyone! Guess the guvnr of the greatstateofTexass deserves something for all that great campaigning he did, hmmm?
Long live the right of every American to vote! Feds, wake up and take a stand that really counts! Don't lose touch with one of our most important rights here in America! Rant, Rant, Rant!
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Have we lost touch with......words?
05/10/2012
In the movie "The Matrix Revolutions", one of those wonderfully simple but incredibly complex lines that is delivered hit me this week when I heard all of the back and forth about MARRIAGE vs. CIVIL UNIONS. The lines, delivered by Rama-Kandra (a program in the world of the Matrix) when responding to Neo, golike this:
NEO: I just have never.....
Rama-Kandra: .....heard a program speak of love?
NEO: It's a...human emotion.
Rama-Kandra: No, it is a word. What matters is the connection the word implies. I see that you are in love. Can you tell me what you would give to hold on to that connection?
NEO: Anything.
Rama-Kandra: then perhaps the reason you're here is not so different from the reason I'm here.
Connection.
Love.
Emotion.
What it implies.
So, why did this scene hit me between the eyes this week? Well.....let's hear some other words.
"When these issues were raised in my state of Massachusetts I indicated my view, which is I do not favor marriage between people of the same gender....."
"when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same sex relationships, who are raising kids together....."
"gay marriage is a matter of conscience. It is the responsibility of states to regulate marriage as they see fit".
Swap the words marriage, relationship, union, in any combination you might imagine, does the meaning really change?
So, what is the difference between a marriage and a civil union. If you look at meaning, civil can mean refined. It also can reference politeness. Marriage comes from maritus, which means joined or "yoked" together. Slightly joking, I'd rather be in a civil union than bound in a relationship by the throat with no way out. Not that my marriage is like that at all, I'm just illustrating the absurdity of the perceived difference.
Most of the conflict comes from the word, or meaning. It really is just a word. If our representatives across the country were more focused on the issue instead of playing with the meaning or what they think is the meaning, we'd get much farther along in our discourse.
Is this anything close to the Emancipation Proclamation? Slavery? No, let's be very clear about that. But it is something that should be dealt with in as compassionate a way as possible. We are supposed to be a civilized society, we want all people to be treated equally, we were all created equally according to our own country's founding documents, we look for all to have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, am I to be the judge of what makes others happy? I hope when I reach my own judgement day that I am able to stand there with my head high and be able to truly know that I have treated my fellow man as I wished to be treated, without bias to time, talent, or treasure.
I hope we can all do the same.....
In the movie "The Matrix Revolutions", one of those wonderfully simple but incredibly complex lines that is delivered hit me this week when I heard all of the back and forth about MARRIAGE vs. CIVIL UNIONS. The lines, delivered by Rama-Kandra (a program in the world of the Matrix) when responding to Neo, golike this:
NEO: I just have never.....
Rama-Kandra: .....heard a program speak of love?
NEO: It's a...human emotion.
Rama-Kandra: No, it is a word. What matters is the connection the word implies. I see that you are in love. Can you tell me what you would give to hold on to that connection?
NEO: Anything.
Rama-Kandra: then perhaps the reason you're here is not so different from the reason I'm here.
Connection.
Love.
Emotion.
What it implies.
So, why did this scene hit me between the eyes this week? Well.....let's hear some other words.
"When these issues were raised in my state of Massachusetts I indicated my view, which is I do not favor marriage between people of the same gender....."
"when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same sex relationships, who are raising kids together....."
"gay marriage is a matter of conscience. It is the responsibility of states to regulate marriage as they see fit".
Swap the words marriage, relationship, union, in any combination you might imagine, does the meaning really change?
So, what is the difference between a marriage and a civil union. If you look at meaning, civil can mean refined. It also can reference politeness. Marriage comes from maritus, which means joined or "yoked" together. Slightly joking, I'd rather be in a civil union than bound in a relationship by the throat with no way out. Not that my marriage is like that at all, I'm just illustrating the absurdity of the perceived difference.
Most of the conflict comes from the word, or meaning. It really is just a word. If our representatives across the country were more focused on the issue instead of playing with the meaning or what they think is the meaning, we'd get much farther along in our discourse.
Is this anything close to the Emancipation Proclamation? Slavery? No, let's be very clear about that. But it is something that should be dealt with in as compassionate a way as possible. We are supposed to be a civilized society, we want all people to be treated equally, we were all created equally according to our own country's founding documents, we look for all to have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, am I to be the judge of what makes others happy? I hope when I reach my own judgement day that I am able to stand there with my head high and be able to truly know that I have treated my fellow man as I wished to be treated, without bias to time, talent, or treasure.
I hope we can all do the same.....
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Marriage.....have we lost touch?
05/08/2012
I sit here very late at night, should be working, but really am disturbed to see the vote in North Carolina for same sex marriage and the even more closely watched bill in Colorado (since I live here), and I really can't understand the desire in this day and time to subject any group to a bias of inequality. I guess I'm most disturbed by the fact that I am a religious person that also believes that the tenet to treat each person as you'd like to be treated is one of the most overwhelmingly important yet under appreciated thoughts that any person could come up with. We all inherently realize it (at least I hope so) but to see the extreme amount of bias presented on both sides of the political aisle really deflates me. I want to believe in our system politic, but so often it gets in the way.
I guess the other reason it disappoints me so much when I see this kind of hatred,and yes, I'll say it again, hatred, for another human being is that the side that usually is the more vehemently against this approach is the side that says they are the moral representation of god in our democratic society. Hogwash. They have forgotten to read the new testament, and are living and dealing with a god that is not compassionate, does not forgive, and certainly doesn't reflect the view of not throwing the first stone.
I hope those of you that read any news, have any ability to voice your opinion, or stand for what is not only right but compassionate, reach out to those in your state legislatures and let them know that enough is enough,and that it is time for them to change their tune.
For those of you in Colorado who want to reach out, here is a link to the entire list of your state representatives. Please let them know how you feel!
http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2011A/csl.nsf/DirectoryHou?openframeset
I sit here very late at night, should be working, but really am disturbed to see the vote in North Carolina for same sex marriage and the even more closely watched bill in Colorado (since I live here), and I really can't understand the desire in this day and time to subject any group to a bias of inequality. I guess I'm most disturbed by the fact that I am a religious person that also believes that the tenet to treat each person as you'd like to be treated is one of the most overwhelmingly important yet under appreciated thoughts that any person could come up with. We all inherently realize it (at least I hope so) but to see the extreme amount of bias presented on both sides of the political aisle really deflates me. I want to believe in our system politic, but so often it gets in the way.
I guess the other reason it disappoints me so much when I see this kind of hatred,and yes, I'll say it again, hatred, for another human being is that the side that usually is the more vehemently against this approach is the side that says they are the moral representation of god in our democratic society. Hogwash. They have forgotten to read the new testament, and are living and dealing with a god that is not compassionate, does not forgive, and certainly doesn't reflect the view of not throwing the first stone.
I hope those of you that read any news, have any ability to voice your opinion, or stand for what is not only right but compassionate, reach out to those in your state legislatures and let them know that enough is enough,and that it is time for them to change their tune.
For those of you in Colorado who want to reach out, here is a link to the entire list of your state representatives. Please let them know how you feel!
http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2011A/csl.nsf/DirectoryHou?openframeset
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Costco - A Rant
Big thanks to Brian for letting me guest blog this week. I tend to stay out of politics, so instead of going off on an issue and high-fiving half my friends and alienating the other half, I've decided to expose a common enemy of everyone, the bulk store shopping experience.
I go to Costco on average for 4 or 5 things, and I usually go on the weekends. Here is a quick re-creation of my weekly visit:
Costco on the weekends is more aggravating than trying to play hide and seek with Helen Keller. The anger level begins to rise as soon as I get into the parking lot. There's a line of mini-vans waiting for a space and blocking the entire lane, while Mr. small business owner loads his vehicle with so many supplies that he looks like he's going on a UN mission to Nigeria. Finally, I park so far away that I need binoculars to see a store that is the size of Wembley stadium. What time does the shuttle come by again? I'm not really up for doing a 5K this morning.
When I get to the entrance it's complete mayhem. People are coming out in droves and I am digging through my wallet for the damn membership card that says "Yes I pay $55 a year to come in and buy stuff from you." and the cart guy is pushing 9 million carts in from the parking lot in one long row that also jacks up the entire flow. Then, as soon as I get past the membership ID checker the jagoff in front of me stops and looks around like a tourist at Macchu Picchu. The lady to his left stops right beside him to load her five kids into the cart and the old guy on the right stops and stares at the plasma TV's like he's in the cockpit of the Starship Enterprise. And there I am knowing exactly where I want to go and what I want to buy and I'm facing the defensive line of the 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers.
Twenty minutes into the Costco trip and I'm finally into the store. I get about ten steps in and everything comes to a grinding halt, because there is a free sample lady handing out tunafish on a cracker. People start losing their shit. OOOH I gotta have me some of that. I gotta have it so much that I'll abandon my cart in the middle of the aisle and stand there and eat this cracker. Like they've never had tunafish on a cracker before. Then they make the face, like wow that is good, what's on that again? Tunafish? Amazing! What aisle has the case of tunafish? And where can I find the crackers? Excuse me dude can you get your cart out of the aisle so that I can grab my four items and get out of this place.
I finally get back into the bakery area and what do I see? Chocolate versions of the US Capitol building that are almost life size. Even Augustus from Willie Wonka couldn't finish one of these. And who buys these things? Is that really what you get your kids for Easter? Hey kids, yeah no bunny this year, no colored eggs, no Jesus rising from the dead, just a chocolate, life-size version of the place where bills become laws. "Oh I'm just a bill, yes only a bill and I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill..."
Thirty-five minutes into the trip and I have steaks, wine and I'm making the turn to come down the home stretch to get cereal and diapers, when I see the lady serving crabcakes at the end of the frozen food aisle. Yes! Score! I am so getting hooked up. I see the tray with four left and only one guy in front of me. He stands there and eats one, then he eats two and I'm getting a little impatient, then he grabs the last two and takes them over to his wife. Dude? WTF? The jerk store called and said they're out of you. No way am I waiting for 80 year-old Grandma Moses to open a new package and bake a new batch. Looks like I am-a-no-getting-a-no crabcakes today.
Steaks, wine, cereal and diapers, check-check-check-check. Time to get in line, if only they had an express lane, but of course they don't. Now getting in line on a busy Saturday is like making a pit stop at the Indy 500. You dodge, you weave and finally land in a line behind someone who looks quick, but ends up being a nightmare. Her transaction goes something like this: "Honey have you seen my card? I had it when we came in? Did I leave it in the dog food aisle? Oh nevermind it was in my pocket. HAHAHA it was in my pocket. Ma'am your total is $169.73. Ok, let me write a check. Harold, what's the date? Ooops I wrote 2011 on this one. I guess I'd better write you a new one. I can't believe it's 2012 already, time sure does fly. Those crackers and tunafish were delicious, weren't they?" Hey lady, being behind you, I can attest that time certainly does not fly, in fact it almost stands still. In the time it's taken you to get through the checkout process, I could have played a game of Monopoly from start to finish.
Yes! I am on my way out after somehow spending $95 on four items. Only one more obstacle, the check your receipt against your cart guy. Will I get the I don't give a shit guy who looks for two seconds and marks the receipt or will I get the must check every item guy. Of course I get the latter and because I have my daughter with me he has to mark the receipt with a smiley face. Yo dude, I know you don't have anywhere to go, but my kid hasn't eaten in three hours and is about to lose it, so you can skip the art school drop-out caricature.
Costco on the weekends is more aggravating than trying to play hide and seek with Helen Keller. The anger level begins to rise as soon as I get into the parking lot. There's a line of mini-vans waiting for a space and blocking the entire lane, while Mr. small business owner loads his vehicle with so many supplies that he looks like he's going on a UN mission to Nigeria. Finally, I park so far away that I need binoculars to see a store that is the size of Wembley stadium. What time does the shuttle come by again? I'm not really up for doing a 5K this morning.
When I get to the entrance it's complete mayhem. People are coming out in droves and I am digging through my wallet for the damn membership card that says "Yes I pay $55 a year to come in and buy stuff from you." and the cart guy is pushing 9 million carts in from the parking lot in one long row that also jacks up the entire flow. Then, as soon as I get past the membership ID checker the jagoff in front of me stops and looks around like a tourist at Macchu Picchu. The lady to his left stops right beside him to load her five kids into the cart and the old guy on the right stops and stares at the plasma TV's like he's in the cockpit of the Starship Enterprise. And there I am knowing exactly where I want to go and what I want to buy and I'm facing the defensive line of the 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers.
Twenty minutes into the Costco trip and I'm finally into the store. I get about ten steps in and everything comes to a grinding halt, because there is a free sample lady handing out tunafish on a cracker. People start losing their shit. OOOH I gotta have me some of that. I gotta have it so much that I'll abandon my cart in the middle of the aisle and stand there and eat this cracker. Like they've never had tunafish on a cracker before. Then they make the face, like wow that is good, what's on that again? Tunafish? Amazing! What aisle has the case of tunafish? And where can I find the crackers? Excuse me dude can you get your cart out of the aisle so that I can grab my four items and get out of this place.
I finally get back into the bakery area and what do I see? Chocolate versions of the US Capitol building that are almost life size. Even Augustus from Willie Wonka couldn't finish one of these. And who buys these things? Is that really what you get your kids for Easter? Hey kids, yeah no bunny this year, no colored eggs, no Jesus rising from the dead, just a chocolate, life-size version of the place where bills become laws. "Oh I'm just a bill, yes only a bill and I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill..."
Thirty-five minutes into the trip and I have steaks, wine and I'm making the turn to come down the home stretch to get cereal and diapers, when I see the lady serving crabcakes at the end of the frozen food aisle. Yes! Score! I am so getting hooked up. I see the tray with four left and only one guy in front of me. He stands there and eats one, then he eats two and I'm getting a little impatient, then he grabs the last two and takes them over to his wife. Dude? WTF? The jerk store called and said they're out of you. No way am I waiting for 80 year-old Grandma Moses to open a new package and bake a new batch. Looks like I am-a-no-getting-a-no crabcakes today.
Steaks, wine, cereal and diapers, check-check-check-check. Time to get in line, if only they had an express lane, but of course they don't. Now getting in line on a busy Saturday is like making a pit stop at the Indy 500. You dodge, you weave and finally land in a line behind someone who looks quick, but ends up being a nightmare. Her transaction goes something like this: "Honey have you seen my card? I had it when we came in? Did I leave it in the dog food aisle? Oh nevermind it was in my pocket. HAHAHA it was in my pocket. Ma'am your total is $169.73. Ok, let me write a check. Harold, what's the date? Ooops I wrote 2011 on this one. I guess I'd better write you a new one. I can't believe it's 2012 already, time sure does fly. Those crackers and tunafish were delicious, weren't they?" Hey lady, being behind you, I can attest that time certainly does not fly, in fact it almost stands still. In the time it's taken you to get through the checkout process, I could have played a game of Monopoly from start to finish.
Yes! I am on my way out after somehow spending $95 on four items. Only one more obstacle, the check your receipt against your cart guy. Will I get the I don't give a shit guy who looks for two seconds and marks the receipt or will I get the must check every item guy. Of course I get the latter and because I have my daughter with me he has to mark the receipt with a smiley face. Yo dude, I know you don't have anywhere to go, but my kid hasn't eaten in three hours and is about to lose it, so you can skip the art school drop-out caricature.
Ok, where did I park again? Oh yeah, right beside the Griswalds in Wally World lot 3 row S. After doing my second 5K of the day I reach my car, throw the box of loose items, that always seems to weigh more than it should, into the trunk and after dodging more carts I have a flashback to 1979 as I drive past the long line of cars at the gas pumps. I notice that the car that just pulled up to the front of the line was the guy that was in front of me on the way into the parking lot. Was it really worth the $3 you saved to wait in line for an hour to get gas? Finally, I manage to make it home.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to take a Valium, drink a beer and try to bring my internal anger alert system back down to yellow.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)