Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Platitudes

I read the best opinion blog post tonight...read below from the WSJ Opinion Journal found at this link. Remember when we talked about platitudes and saying one thing, but only being able to deliver less. This article sums it up...Phase 1: Promise the world (Cure cancer, world hunger, and dependence on fossil fuels in one breath). Phase 2: ?. Phase 3: All promises met in time for re-election in 2012. I like the Lockheed Martin commercial that hits phase 2...it is the HOW that makes all the difference. I am very disappointed in most of the HOW in the Obama Administration. Admitting the US is broke, but continuing to spend???? Saying consumers shouldn't spend with credit cards and then push a budget that spends on debt????? Saying he doesn't want to run car companies and then firing the CEO????? The HOW (Phase 2) makes all the difference!!!! Just get it over with and start proposing the Constitutional Amendments...that is my biggest problem, either do it the way the Framers wrote the document or change it. That is the HOW, it has been the HOW since the Bill of Rights was added in 1791. Give US a plan. The what is easy, now President Obama, please give us a HOW that works and matches the Constitution or change the HOW or Constitution. I think it is called integrity when all parts are matched.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124329131991652291.html

OPINION: GLOBAL VIEW
MAY 27, 2009
Obama and the 'South Park' Gnomes
Too many initiatives that require a leap of faith.
By BRET STEPHENS
Sometimes it takes "South Park" to explain life's deeper mysteries. Like the logic of the Obama administration's policy proposals.
AP
Consider the 1998 "Gnomes" episode -- possibly surpassing Milton Friedman's "Free to Choose" as the classic defense of capitalism -- in which the children of South Park, Colo., get a lesson in how not to run an enterprise from mysterious little men who go about stealing undergarments from the unsuspecting and collecting them in a huge underground storehouse.
What's the big idea? The gnomes explain:
"Phase One: Collect underpants.
"Phase Two: ?
"Phase Three: Profit."
Lest you think there's a step missing here, that's the whole point. ("What about Phase Two?" asks one of the kids. "Well," answers a gnome, "Phase Three is profits!") This more or less sums up Mr. Obama's speech last week on Guantanamo, in which the president explained how he intended to dispose of the remaining detainees after both houses of Congress voted overwhelmingly against bringing them to the U.S.
The president's plan can briefly be described as follows. Phase One: Order Guantanamo closed. Phase Two: ? Phase Three: Close Gitmo!
Granted, this is an abbreviated exegesis of his speech, which did explain how some two-thirds of the detainees will be tried by military commissions or civilian courts, or repatriated to other countries. But on the central question of the 100-odd detainees who can neither be tried in court nor released one searches in vain for an explanation of exactly what the president intends to do.
Now take the administration's approach to the Middle East. Phase One: Talk to Iran, Syria, whoever. Phase Two: ? Phase Three: Peace!
In this case, the administration seems to think that diplomacy, like aspirin, is something you take two of in the morning to take away the pain. But as Boston University's Angelo Codevilla notes in his book, "Advice to War Presidents," diplomacy "can neither create nor change basic intentions, interests, or convictions. . . . To say, 'We've got a problem. Let's try diplomacy, let's sit down and talk' abstracts from the important questions: What will you say? And why should anything you say lead anyone to accommodate you?"
Ditto for Mr. Obama's approach to nuclear weapons. In a speech last month in Prague, right after North Korea had illegally tested a ballistic missile, Mr. Obama promised a new nonproliferation regime, along with "a structure in place that ensures when any nation [breaks the rules], they will face consequences." Whereupon the U.N. Security Council promptly failed to muster the votes for a resolution condemning Pyongyang's launch.
Now Kim Jong Il has tested another nuke, and we're back at the familiar three-step. Phase One: Propose a "structure." . . .
It was also in his Prague speech that Mr. Obama repeated his pledge to "confront climate change by ending the world's dependence on fossil fuels, by tapping the power of new sources of energy like the wind and sun."
Never mind that neither the wind nor the sun are new sources of energy. It so happens that the U.S. gets about 2.3% of its energy resources from "renewable" resources of the kind the president advocates while fossil fuels account for about 70%. The reason for this, alas, has nothing to do with the greed of the oil majors. But it has much to do with something known as "energy density": Crude oil has almost three times as much of it as switchgrass, supposedly the Holy Grail of our green future. A related problem is that heat invariably dissipates, meaning that it will always be difficult to turn diffuse sources of energy, like wind, into concentrated ones.
In Gnome-speak, then, Mr. Obama's energy policy goes something like this: Phase One: Inaugurate the era of "green" energy. Phase Two: Overturn the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Phase Three: Carbon neutrality!
Take any number of Mr. Obama's other initiatives. Rescue Detroit? Phase One: Set a national mileage standard for passenger cars of 39 miles per gallon and force auto makers to make the kind of cars that drove them to bankruptcy in the first place.
Reduce the deficit? Phase One: Approve $3.5 trillion in government stimulus, and then await the mythical Keynesian multiplier.
Pay for a $1.2 trillion health-care reform? Phase One: scrounge around for about $60 billion in new "sin tax" revenue.
Actually, we can easily guess how Mr. Obama intends to make up the difference on this last item: To wit, by taxing health benefits. Taxes, subsidies funded by taxes, regulations and mandates will also fill in many (though not all) of the other blanks. Underpants gnomes: meet Phase Two. Say, what happened to profits?
Write to mailto:%20bstephens@wsj.com

Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A14
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
http://www.djreprints.com/

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Who Pays Taxes?

With all the rhetoric lately about taxing corporations, I thought I remind folks that it is individuals that pay taxes not corporations. Corporations simply pass on increased taxes to the customer, pay lower dividends, or go out of business. I know from owning my own business...we did all three. The one that everyone forgets is dividends and it may be the one that hurts individuals the most. What current leadership forgets is that SOCIAL SECURITY is not enough to retire on and nor should it be...so we depend on investing in corporations to fill that gap. Capitalism works because it uses the sinful parts of humans for the good of all. The individuals in corporations want to be as successful as possible for themselves which they can not do without the help of the stock holders who get rewarded, but guess what, if the individuals in the corporations do not reward the investors appropriately they will be less than successful. It is this symbiosis that keeps wealth growing. Taxes if too high can become so burdensome that it damages this relationship and individuals suffer not the body we call "Corporation" because it is easy to make a faceless entity the evil problem when the problem is not remembering lessons of the past.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Term Limits

It is about time to establish term limits for Congress. I think an amendment to the Constitution is well overdue. There are several reasons I think term limits would be beneficial.
1. Personalities. The politics inside politics is ridiculous. Congressmen that have served 50 years become more of mobsters working inside the family than representatives working for the good of all families.
2. Spending. With the ability to continually be re-elected there is always reason to bring home the bacon. I theorize that Congressmen tend to concentrate on bringing home the bacon prior to election campaigns...it definitely sets them apart from any challengers. "Bob only says he loves Pennsylvania's with their God and guns, I proved it by getting $1Million in funding for our 3 airplane a day airport." Hard for the little guy to compete.
3. Let's legislators focus on writing laws not winning re-election campaigns.
4. Gets back to citizen legislators. Career legislators are affected by living in the political war zone. The echo chamber fills their heads with thoughts that they are better than everyone else and deserve special treatment. Their behavior is perfect example...Ted Stevens, Diane Fienstein, and the list goes on...

There are good reasons for no term limits, but I'm a fan of 8 years in the House and 12 in the Senate.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Press Conference

What did I hear tonight...that if you don't pass my budget now we are in dire circumstances...sounds all too familiar...if you don't pass the stimulus quickly the economy will crumble. The Dodd amendment is a perfect example of how/why Congress is not supposed to function rapidly. When Congress is artificially forced to "cram," even more wasteful spending results.

Dear Congress, please take your time before you spend my tax money. (The only way I do not go insane is that I envision that all my money is going to battle cattle methane production...a real way to get rid of greenhouse gases, not car emissions). I take my time before I spend money...I research the best value etc...What has every personal financial consultant since the beginning of time said is the best way to avoid debt that leads to bankruptcy, DON'T SPEND WHAT YOU DON'T HAVE AND AVOID COMPULSIVE PURCHASES!

On health care:
Before I can form an opinion I need more information on the source of the rising health care costs. If anyone knows please fill me in.
1. Are costs going up because the level of care is going up? Could I get the same "level" of care I did 10 years ago for the same price. E.g. 10 years ago when you daughter got stitches b/c of a cut on her face, she didn't also get an MRI to ensure there was no brain swelling. The technology and drugs available today are incredible...and guess what we expect everyone to get the latest care...it is not cheap to write the software, mine the titanium and pay upkeep on complex pieces of equipment.
2. Are costs going up b/c of increased litigation? Malpractice insurance costs increases are only a small piece of overall affect on costs...why do you think my daughter got the MRI, makes the doctors case stronger if there was litigation.
3. Are costs going up b/c we are offering care to more people? Anyone, Anyone can go to an emergency room and will not be turned down. Has anyone thought about that means non-taxpayers? So the costs of that expensive care for non-payers is spread to those who can pay. Guess what it is the way the free market economy "spreads the wealth." The market raises the price on those who can pay to pay for those who can't.
4. Are HMO and health care employees getting rich? Do they make more relative to what similar skill and position used to make?

I will be first to tell you that the system we have is bad. It is one where private individuals are forced to pay sticker price b/c they do not know the ins and outs and HMOs use their power to negotiate a fair market value. The health care system much like airlines works on a system of yield management. Health care is perishable in the sense that opportunity must meet with circumstance and health care management knows they must squeeze every drop they can to make ends meet. The system does need overhaul, BUT WE NEED TO STAY AWAY FROM ANYTHING THAT LOOKS LIKE CANADIAN SYSTEM AND/OR THE VETERANS/MILITARY SYSTEM! The rules focused approach concentrates on the system and not the patient...I know, I have gotten the t-shirt.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Is this what we've come to?

White House to China: No Safer Investment Than U.S. AP
Friday, March 13, 2009
powered by Baynote
The White House says there is no safer investment in the world than in the United States. Press secretary Robert Gibbs was responding to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's comments Friday that he is concerned about the safety of his country's investments in the U.S. China is Washington's biggest foreign creditor, with an estimated $1 trillion in U.S. government debt. And Washington is counting on the Chinese to help pay for President Obama's $787 billion stimulus package by buying U.S. bonds. Gibbs says the Chinese should rest assured because investments in the U.S. are the safest in the world. Gibbs also says Congress can help by passing Obama's budget for next year, which promises to halve the deficit by 2012.


Who thinks this is a good idea? Is it just me or is this sad? We are begging China to loan us money and having to convince them we are good for it. Bernie Maddoff also promised his investments were the safest in the world. If you have to say it maybe there is reason to question it?

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Things that matter

I continue to be impressed with our new President's ability to give a speech. It is awe inspiring to listen to his perfect cadence and impeccable vocabulary. What is not awe inspiring are his policies. If someone really cares about solving problems and improving life for everyone why in the world would they ever cut tax benefits for charitable giving...ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? Private charities time and time again are proven more effective than federal government at solving problems. NGOs have way more impact at a fraction of the cost...mostly b/c they have to fight and scrap for every dollar. They depend on volunteers. People are there b/c they want to be feeding the homeless or providing health care for children, not b/c they are government employees in Health and Human Services on assignment...don't get me wrong, most folks in Health and Human Services are there b/c they care, but not b/c it is their mission in life. The typical NGO is comprised of folks with a very specific passion for their focus. Bottom-line is that they get the job done better than big government.

Then why cut their funding? Why take good money from the local level and move it to a national level? It is about power. Whoever controls how the money is spent decides direction and priority. NGOs are about solving specific problems and government has problems with that b/c they do not get to control the money. What strikes me as odd about this control grab is the lack of rationale and justification behind it. Most of the time when government looks to take control it uses fear and sugar. Fear like wire tapping b/c the terrorist are coming or sign my bill before you're in a soup line. Sugar like vote for me and I'll get more projects for our district. It is amazing how much control we will turn over for fear and sugar...back to my original thought:

It should not surprise me that the new president does not believe in charity. The chart below is a perfect example...despite being in the top 5% of wage earners in his years prior to his 7 figure books deals the president gave half the national average. Does he really care? Why didn't he put his money where his mouth is? Or is it just easier to care with other people's money? I could let this go until he hurt what I think is a real solution to real problems. People helping people. The role of government is to encourage this b/c it is best for the nation as a whole. Allowing people to place money in the hands of NGOs and not government is a good thing.

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Something Off My Chest

This has been eating at me for a while...
Remember when the Auto Execs went before Congress to tell them why they needed a big loan and they got lambasted for flying their Gulfstreams to DC. It would be my assumption that most members of Congress fly coach. I would be wrong! Congress members fly TAXPAYER FUNDED Gulfstreams and Boeing Business Jets. Of course these aircraft are "owned" by the Department of Defense for training pilots and Operational Support (e.g. time-sensitive travel). Most large corporations and/or governments reach a point when the executives' time becomes so valuable that the expense of corporate provided transportation is justified. Especially when the corporation can lease the aircraft and provide an alternate stream of income to the business.
I am not against Congress taking the DOD provided aircraft. It is better for the taxpayer to make good use of the Congress members time. It is also better for the economy to make good use of the auto execs time, not to mention all the jobs associated the Gulfstream lease and commercial aviation.
The hypocracy of Congress knows no bounds. I am sure their out rage will wane as they commute back and forth to their home districts in their TAXPAYER FUNDED (not just subsidized) Gulfstreams.

Friday, February 13, 2009

We Surround Them

This is a very interesting project that a good friend of mine pointed me to. I had heard Glenn Beck mention it quickly but really did not pay much attention until I read the website. Below is a cut from the website http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/21018/. I think most people will read them and not have a problem with most of them so I want to address a couple that on the surface may seem offensive or troublesome.
2. This is hard for people who have been indoctrinated into a worldview that has man at the center of the universe. We have become so self centered that we think we control the weather and what happens to us...we are so calculated and forget that so much is outside our control. This statement acknowledges that there is a power bigger than us. That there is a purpose for human life and it is bigger than anything humans can control. There is a God. Life is not happenstance that true superior human knowledge we are in control of. Without something bigger than human knowledge there is no truth. Without truth, right and wrong do not exist. George Washington in his farewell address warned what would happen if we abandoned belief in a higher power and failed to maintain our virtue in public life, government will fail. Belief in a higher power is where government should start. Maybe our best wouldn't be tax evaders and womanizers...but then again we are human and not God.
7. Some of my coworkers will quickly disagree with this statement. That is what government is for to take care of those who can not take care of themselves. That fundamental belief is where government has gone wrong. The framer's were very specific in the preamble to the Constitution. Every word was written intentionally and with purpose. To illustrate this compare to word...promote and provide. They are very different in there meaning. If the framers meant for the government to do the same thing in both areas they would have used the same word. They did not. The government is to promote the general welfare and provide the common defense. Last time I checked promote should mean less involvement than provide...however, when I look at federal entitlements and compare it to the military, I feel like we are treating them the same provide and provide. So what does this have to do with the government can not force me to be charitable. 2 things...1. Taking my money and giving it to some one else is not charity. That more closely resembles theft. Also we forget that those deciding who to give my money to are human. They are influenced by their own selffish desires. We have forgotten that. Today's thought is corporation evil, government saintly when in reality they are no different...the same humans work in government that work in corporations their humanness just shows in different areas. 2. Having the government be charitable robs people the benefit of giving. We are meant to give. I think that is a huge source of societal problems today, we don't give to one another. In one of my other post, I mentioned when FDR gave up on families taking care of one another. To paraphrase, he said it is time to devise a new system where government takes on that role, we have progressed to that point. I say that is regression. We are meant for so much more. Giving is one way to live large. It benefits both recipient and giver. Government robs us the opportunity and gives us an excuse. I walked by a homeless man begging with a group and the comment was, "The government needs to take care of this blight." We have turned over our caring to an entity that can never do as much as individuals who care and feel responsibility for their fellow human.

I could go on for days, but it is already way too long for a blog post. Go to WE surround them and decide for yourself.

In the days to come I plan on writing about me becoming a true social progressive. Progressive in the fact that I want to look at lessons from the past and actually use them for progress.

WE Surround Them
February 12, 2009 - 0:00 ET
What are we counting down to? Listen to today's radio and television program for more...

Do you watch the direction that America is being taken in and feel powerless to stop it? Do you believe that your voice isn’t loud enough to be heard above the noise anymore? Do you read the headlines everyday and feel an empty pit in your stomach&hellipas if you’re completely alone?If so, then you’ve fallen for the Wizard of Oz lie. While the voices you hear in the distance may sound intimidating, as if they surround us from all sides—the reality is very different. Once you pull the curtain away you realize that there are only a few people pressing the buttons, and their voices are weak. The truth is that they don’t surround us at all.We surround them.So, how do we show America what’s really behind the curtain? Below are nine simple principles. If you believe in at least seven of them, then we have something in common. I urge you to read the instructions at the end for how to help make your voice heard.

The Nine Principles
1. America is good.
2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.

You Are Not Alone: If you agree with at least seven of those principles, then you are not alone. Please send a digital version of your picture to: wesurroundthem@foxnews.com and then stay tuned to the radio and television shows over the coming weeks to see how we intend to pull back the curtain.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

President Obama is Exactly Right!

"It's a little hard for me to take criticism from folks about this recovery package after they've presided over a doubling of the national debt," he said at a news conference on Monday. "I'm not sure they have a lot of credibility when it comes to fiscal responsibility."

What was cited as the reason for the huge deficit, growth in national debt, and bad economy...tax cuts and government spending. What is the new "stimulus" package comprised mostly of...SPENDING and TAX CUTS! Are you kidding me? Does anyone else see the irony? When will we learn? Fear makes us do silly things. We have to make a rash decision to stop catastrophe? $1,000,000,000,000 will put the government spending at almost 35% of GNP...Huge amounts of borrowing will do nothing but weaken the dollar...I can't wait until we go for a loan from China and they say credit denied. Fear that drives us to short-term solutions only hurts the long-term health of the Republic.

The other part where Obama was exactly right is on A-Rod's drug us. In his words:
“It's depressing news on top of what has been a flurry of depressing items when it comes to Major League Baseball,” Obama said at a news conference, adding the new admission “tarnishes an entire era to some degree.”

In his words from 1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance:
"Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it," wrote Obama about what he would later say were "bad decisions." "Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man."

So does his pot, booze and blow use tarnish an entire era of Presidents? Casting stones in a glass house is a dangerous business.

I am continually impressed by President Obama charismatic stage presence and intellect. It is refreshing to watch him as President...HOWEVER, his continuation of BUSH policies of TAX CUTS and UNCONTROLLED GOVERNMENT SPENDING! The US needs a large infusion of infrastructure recapitalization, but that doesn't have to be decided by Presidents' Day.

Sunday, February 8, 2009

Ponzi Scheme

Bernard Madoff has put Ponzi schemes in news. I thought I'd do a little investigation into what a Ponzi scheme was, so I turned to Google who directed me to Wiki. Wiki explaned the Ponzi scheme as "The idea behind a Ponzi scheme is an operation that pays returns to investors from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors rather than from profit. The system is destined to collapse because the earnings, if any, are less than the payments."

Then it occured to me that I had read of a very similar system the other night when I was educating myself about FDR...Someone please explain to me the difference in a Ponzi scheme and Social Security as it currently exists. All I can come up with is that the government runs it and can prevent investors from making a run and go into debt when there are more taking benefits than paying in...

From my SS research:

Since the inception of Social Security, the government had administrated it as a pay-as-you-go program, paying benefits out of current receipts rather than building up a capital fund for each contributor. However, in the mid-1970s, expenditures for Social Security benefits began to exceed tax payments coming into the trust funds. This occurred because a serious recession reduced employment and trust-fund revenues while inflation simultaneously created a need to increase benefits. Public concern developed over the possibility that the Social Security system might become bankrupt over time. Since the funds had been accumulating for more than 35 years, they had a reserve of more than $40 billion in 1976, so the system was in no immediate danger. Nevertheless, experts warned that in the long term the reserve would eventually become depleted.

Friday, February 6, 2009

"Nothing to fear, but fear itself"

Fear: an unpleasant feeling of anxiety or apprehension caused by the presence or anticipation of danger. We like to think of ourselves as rationale beings that make smart decisions based on fact. We like to think we can remove our emotions and weigh cost versus benefits. I have news...that is not where we, the American people, are today. Unfortunately, fear is setting public policy. This is nothing new...fear has ruled people since we lived in caves. Fear paralyzes sometimes and causes over reaction at other. The one thing in common is that it usually leads to less than optimum decisions. I believe that fear led President Bush to enact laws and wage wars that he thought were the only solution to keep America safe. Just like normal Americans, he points to exceptional circumstances that lead him to make decisions that he felt justified because of the anticipation of danger. Perceived or real danger has the same effect. See post below, but the perceived threat was great, not just to President Bush. President Bush let fear influence his decisions...the fear of another attack on American soil and the fear that people would question his inaction if he did not take radical action. Most of the laws over the past 100 years are based in fear. Elected officials make decisions based on being re-elected. Decisions focus on the next election and not what is best for the country in the long term. This has led to a financial crisis which has just begun. The GAO did an outstanding job factually documenting the dire straits our posterity will face. http://www.gao.gov/cghome/d08446cg.pdf


So today we have a choice to succumb to the fear and repeat history. As Roosevelt put it in his first inaugural address, "We have nothing to fear, but fear itself." He was exactly correct. The sad part is that his action spoke louder than his words. I highly recommend that you read his entire address. History is eerily repeating itself. http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5057/

Let's learn from history. Let's use history to confront the fear which leads us to bad decisions. Fear that says spending is the only way out of this crisis. Exuberant spending is why we are here. A government that over spends sets the example. Live greater than your means...let me think, what was the spark that started this fire...oh yeah it was spending on credit and trading credit. What is the current stimulus bill: SPENDING ON CREDIT! When will we learn?

I firmly believe that the following statement by Roosevelt has roots in our problems today:

"Security was attained in the earlier days through the interdependence of members of families upon each other and of the families within a small community upon each other. The complexities of great communities and of organized industry make less real these simple means of security. Therefore, we are compelled to employ the active interest of the Nation as a whole through government in order to encourage a greater security for each individual who composes it . . . This seeking for a greater measure of welfare and happiness does not indicate a change in values. It is rather a return to values lost in the course of our economic development and expansion . . ."Franklin D. Roosevelt: Message of the President to Congress, June 8, 1934.

Roosevelt gave up on what made America great...interdependence of members of families upon each other and of the families within a small community upon each other. Government replaced people. It took years but the unintended consequences of the decisions made in the 30s and 40s are catching up to us today. Those are posts for another day.

America is great! YES WE CAN overcome the despair of the day, but we must not let our fears control us. We, as a people, value our freedom. DO NOT LET OUR FEARS AND DEPENDENCE ON GOVERNMENT DRIVE US TO GIVE THOSE FREEDOMS UP. We would be better off monetarily poor than prisoners to our fears and government.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Object in Motion

I haven't blogged in quite some time, but I plan on catching up. I need a place to vent...I am boiling over due to the current state of affairs. The problem has been I have trouble writing unless it is War and Peace, thoroughly researched and thought out. During several home improvement projects, I have had plenty of time alone with my thoughts. Good, bad, indifferent I need a place to share them and I'm choosing this blog. I am pledging to keep my post short and posted before they are perfect. To spend 30 minutes every other day as opposed to hours once a quarter...only not to post the entry because I don't think it is perfect.

So how did I arrive at the blog address, objectinmotion? No, I'm not a physics expert, but I do enjoy studying it. NASA eloquently explains it at http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/objmotion.html. You'll often heard it put as an object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion unless acted upon by an external force. I think that Newton's laws of motion apply to life, not just mass. What do I mean by that?

In my own life, I see these laws so applicable. When I am at rest, I tend to stay at rest...whether it is home projects, blogging, spiritually, at work, and/or as a father. When I am in motion, I tend to stay in motion. I want to be an object in motion. I want to make a difference...I believe I have been given life to do just that stay in motion and make a difference. This blog is now in motion. I hope it encourages thought and makes others better off for reading it, but if not I am using to make me better...in motion to think through issues, in motion to look at the world through different eyes, in motion to let things go that I can't change, in motion to become who God wants me to be...This object is in motion.