Friday Funnies and Deep Thoughts

On the one hand, I'm all in favor of innovation in the firearms industry. On the other hand, I didn't think it was possible for make a gun fuglier than say a Hi Point. It appears that someone said "Hold my beer..." and penned this bastard love child of a German MP40 and a Remington Falling Block. 

Be dangerous my friends. Be dangerous. 

Hello my Alphabet  Agency followers. Don't shoot the dogs. They didn't do nothing. What out for the rabbits though. Tater wields a mean shiv.

We need less "there ought to be a law" and more "mind your own business."

I like my coffee dark enough to recite the entire Iron Maiden catalog from memory.

 The sooner you realize anyone in government, politics or business is only interested in maintaining the status quo BECAUSE they benefit monetarily from the system in place, the sooner you will realize the futility of changing the system.

Student Loans

One of the hot topics in the news right now is President Biden's plan to forgive a portion of existing student loans. So far, hard facts appear to be in short supply. Opinions, on the other hand, are being flung about with wild abandon like a barrel of monkeys excreting through a ventilation duct fan on high. 

"It's unconstitutional."

"It's a transparent attempt at vote buying in advance of the midterms."

"Why should I pay off the loans of someone who got a useless gender studies degree."

Etc, etc, etc. Let's look at things logically for a moment and see if we can come up with something approximating a rational conclusion. 

"It's unconstitutional." Let's get something out of the way right upfront: politicians regardless of party have been finding ways around the constitution since five minutes after the ink was dry. It's human nature. Lawyers exist to find ways around laws. Is it any surprise that a large number of politicians started life as lawyers? You want an example? The Second Amendment of the Constitution clearly says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed. And, yet, the National Firearms Act of 1934 ("the NFAA") blatantly and unconstitutionally infringes upon that right and has not been overturned to date. 

So, the president making noise that he will sign an executive order to forgive all or a portion of Federal Student Loan debt is no more or less constitutional than the NFA. In terms of overall Social Contract violations, this ranks pretty low on the scale of nefarious and diabolical threats to the Republic. The Turd Theater that we've been put through the last two years over a virus has done far more damage than giving a $10,000 haircut to what a bunch of folks trying to get educated owe the federal government. 

"Vote buying" Be honest with me. If someone offered you $10,000 and a wink and a nod, would you vote for them? What about if you identify with a different party and hold political views diametrically opposed to the person offering you cash? For the majority of the population, I would expect them to gladly pocket the money and then do whatever they would normally do anyway. Is there a segment of the population that is easily influenced by cash? Yep. I know a few of those. I'd be willing to bet that the people who think this is a vote buying scheme also think that the Democrats rigged the 2020 presidential election. Why would the Democrats "give away money" to buy votes when they can simply rig the elections to get the outcome they want anyway? 

Another thing to think about, the election is in November. The website to apply for forgiveness will not  even open until October and will be open until December. No one is getting anything paid off before the election. I'm cynical and skeptical enough to grant that it is possible that the administration is banking on the average student loan debtor not having the critical thinking skills or the free time to put two and two together and get "SCAM". There have already been rumblings about challenges being filed in court. So, what are the odds that anyone sees a dime wiped off their debt ever? 

"Why should I payoff...?" YOU aren't paying off squat. Neither am I for that matter. Think about this for a moment. When a kid signs the paperwork for a Federally backed student loan, the school isn't paying the professors and text book publishers with empty promises. The .Gov sends cash to the school in the form of revenue collected through taxes, tariffs, and (apparently for a short time) running a brothel in Nevada. The kid, in turn, agrees to pay back the loan to the .Gov at some point in the future plus interest and maybe a first born child unless the student can guess the name of the creepy old guy that shows up to claim...oh wait, wrong story. So, the truth of the matter is that Biden is simply saying he is going to hit "delete" on a certain amount in the government's balance sheet and move forward. 

Now, an argument could be made that the government will have to collect a certain amount more in taxes over the next however many years to offset the shortfall in expected recovery in student loan payments. That is, in my humble opinion, a fairly specious argument considering student loan payments have been on deferral since the pandemic began and the government has been running a deficit budget for all but 16 of the last 100 years. When you are talking about a deficit that almost equals the amount of tax revenue collected each year, this student loan forgiveness plan is barely a drop in that ocean. Don't take that comment to mean that I am in favor of more government mismanagement of our hard earned tax dollars. All I am saying is that there are bigger fish to pick and low hanging fruit to fry in terms of balancing the budget and getting spending under control.

If there is something I am missing here, I'm all ears. I've spent a fair bit of time thinking on this one. So, knee jerk reactions need not apply. Give me something equally well thought out to consider. 

2020 Primary Season

I haven't been following politics as much as I once did. The reason is equal parts disgust with the mockery that has been made of "civil discourse" on both sides of the aisle and distrust of the press to truthfully report the news without bias or spin. I have a hard time listening to what passes for news anymore. When I do make the effort, I'm cynical and skeptical enough that I have to read several sources and average it out to get a sense of what might really be happening.

I have not yet been able to muster up enough flying flips to watch any of the Democrat Party primary debates so far. From what I have been able to gather from reading the morning after recaps, they have been a big waste of time and money thus far. The sad fact of the matter is that no one actually debates anymore. Not that you can really have a debate with 10 or 20 people on the stage. With that many "contestants", there is no time to really conduct a proper debate under those circumstances even if they had the desire and skills to do so. It would take over an hour to get through a proper statement, response and rebuttal type debate for just one question with that many participants. Not that any of  the candidates cares to do such a debate. They seem to be content to talk in circles and sound bites dodging whatever question or topic while claiming to be "perfectly clear" about the topic at hand.

With the New Hampshire Primaries just four short months away, I thought I would go out on a limb and get my predictions in early for the likely opponents in the big show next November.

For the Republicans, this is a no brainer. Incumbent President Trump has no serious contenders waiting in the wings to unseat him as the GOP standard bearer for 2020. Of the currently declared candidates, John Kasich probably has the best chance of any of them by which I mean none. The current impeachment inquiry drum beating trying to stick Joe Biden's dirty laundry on Trump is pretty pathetic even by the standards of the Democratic Party for the last couple of years. My prediction is that the Democrat controlled House of Representatives drags out the impeachment inquiry until November in hopes of keeping Trump on his heals. Trump, being Trump, will continue to do what he does best and use every opportunity to make his opponents look like bumbling incompetents.

For the Democrats, the three ring circus isn't nearly as up for grabs this time as one would expect without Hillary Clinton in the mix. From what I can tell, this is really a 3 maybe 4 person race with Joe Biden leading the polls followed by Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders polling better than 10% depending on who is doing the stats. None of the other currently announced candidates are polling well enough or have the fundraising ability to stay in the race for long even assuming they stay in until February.

Creepy Uncle Joe, for all his faults and dirty laundry, is, for want of a better option, the front runner here. To moderate Democrats, Biden is "safe" for certain values of safe. He is not an ultra liberal nutcase; and, having been in political office for the majority of his life, he knows who is who and how to make deals in the swamp (which, let's face it, can't be drained to the extent it needs to be). No one in flyover country will ever leave Joe alone in the same room as their daughters, but he can also be counted on not to go full retard. Yes, he will engage in pay for play antics and generally do whatever he can to advance the interests of his donors and the party over what is good for the country as a whole, but he's not likely to honeymoon in Moscow or Havana either.

That brings us to Bernie Sanders. If Joe Biden is the creepy uncle everyone tolerates, Bernie is the crazy uncle to whom no one admits being related. That is not to say that Bernie isn't a contender this go round. Quite the opposite. The Bern is most popular with a certain demographic which just happens to be reaching ascendancy as the majority of the working and voting population: Millenials. Boomers, Xers and Yers underestimate this demographic shift at their peril, and it is no coincidence that the Liberal wing of the Democratic Party has spent the last 40 years with a death grip on public and higher education for the sole purpose of shaping entire generations to achieve their agenda. To them, Bernie is their ideological hero who shook the pillars under Queen Hillary's throne before discovering that the game was rigged. Unfortunately, recent reports have him taking a break from campaigning because of health issues.

Elizabeth Warren is competing with Sanders for the liberal wing of the party and, based on current polls, has a credible chance of upsetting Biden at the convention. That said, she's no Hillary and does not have what it takes to be the first woman president.

That, in my opinion and absent an as yet unannounced dark horse candidate, brings it back to the "safe" choice for the donors and moderates. Unless the Ukraine deal rears its ugly head and bites Uncle Joe in the naughty bits,  I see a Trump vs. Biden match up in November.

What says the peanut gallery?

Election Results

Dear Outgoing Speaker of the House Paul Ryan,

Congratulations genius. You and your establishment buddies managed to screw up a conservative’s wet dream. You had full control of all three branches of government, and you still couldn’t unbugger the mess in Washington.

Why am I blaming you and not President Trump? Simple. Trump’s power is limited to enforcement of the laws you give him to work with and exercising the bully pulpit to champion his own agenda. Yeah, yeah…executive orders. I’ll see your excuse, and I’ll raise you an accusation that it’s Congress’ fault that “a pen and a phone” is all that’s necessary to get around the Constitution these days. You can thank your predecessors for that one (Gulf of Tonkin Resolution ringing any bells?), and you and your spineless buddies have done nothing to correct the problem since.

Go enjoy your fat, Congressional pension in retirement you useless bag of warm spit. Thanks for nothing.

Dear Incoming (again) Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi,

Congratulations on regaining the gavel you hollow eyed, former hippie, walking argument in favor of term limits. Now that you have your toy back, what are you going to do with it? I’d strongly recommend against wasting my hard earned money on investigations that are going to go exactly nowhere. Impeachment? Not happening. You don’t have the votes in the Senate. Besides, if you investigate Trump, you damn well better investigate Hillary unless you want your gavel taken away from you (again).  

Here’s another suggestion: ever hear the saying “a rising tide floats all boats”? How about working in the country’s best interests for a change instead of lining your own pockets and those of your billionaire donor class puppet masters?

How about an observation, which should be obvious to everyone, for you too. 2016 is over. Too bad, so sad that The Donald made a mess of Queen Hillary’s ascension to the throne. Deal with it and move on. You’re stuck with him just like we are stuck with you. To quote your messiah, Barry Obama the Organizer, “Elections have consequences.” You want to keep a firm grip on that gavel? How about starting with admitting that ACA should never have seen the light of day to begin with and push for its repeal. Do that and actually honor your oath of office for a change, and you might just get to die in office like McCain did.

While we are on the subject of the [un]Affordable Care Act, it was an unconstitutional disaster of a law intentionally designed to fail so that you and your wannabe socialist buddies could usher in socialized medicine. Haven’t you kept track of the news? Socialism DOES NOT ^%$##$%^&*!!! WORK. Socialism requires massive amounts of OTHER PEOPLES’ MONEY! The only reason Europe has a halfway functioning socialist democracy is because it receives MASSIVE amounts of foreign aid from the UNITED STATES. Without US money and military presence (allowing Europe to spend less on defense), Europe would be on its way to being Venezuela.

Last suggestion: how about you start acting like a leader and stop demonizing the half of the country that disagrees with you and your party? While you are at it, a leader holds their own people accountable for mistakes, transgressions and outright, flagrant violations of the law. Get your flashlight out and poke into the corners of Hillary Clinton’s email server and Diane Feinstein’s driver for starters.

Good luck, I’ll be praying for you, and feel free to check back for more suggestions. I’ve got plenty to go around.

Sincerely,

Daddy Hawk, A Humble (broke) Taxpayer

Source Material

The Queen has been out on her annual fall trek through the thrift stores hunting clothing and other apparel for our upcoming trip (hopefully Haweewee if it doesn't get blown off the map by the hurricane currently spinning up in the Pacific). So, she sends me a text at the office with the a photo of the following t-shirt:

She allowed as how it was the perfect shirt for me...since I typically refuse to accept much of anything without critically assessing the facts and source material.

I can't help it. I come by my flaw honestly as I was trained that way by a wise, old, Jesuit priest turned history professor in my history methodology class. The man had to be in his 70s at least at the time, and that was...more than a few years ago. Let's just say, if that man is still creeping around this old mud ball, I'm shooting him in the head on general principle. You can't be too careful to prevent a zombie outbreak.

God will sort it out.

Anyspeculation, there was a point to this post. I'm sure of it.

Oh yes...critical assessment of facts and source material.

That old Jesuit had all us wannabe history majors do a project (a research paper really) the main point of which was an annotated bibliography. He didn't really care what the subject of the paper was as long as the bibliography was annotated with a critical assessment of the source material including whether it was primary, secondary, tertiary, etc. He also wanted us to take it a step further and assess whether the source material exhibited any bias (this came back to bite me in the butt with my African history professor, but that's a story for another time).

Fast forward mumble, mumble years, and that is one the lessons that has stuck with me to this day. Unfortunately, I think this lesson has been lost on an entire generation (or more) of people.

Case on point. The other night, I come home from work to find two, brand new, freshly purchased boxes of Cheerios (M&M's preferred breakfast cereal) on a pile of stuff being gathered for donation. I queried The Queen as to the reason suspecting something was afoot.

The Queen informed me that my father-in-law, Opa, had told her that he had read an article somewhere that claimed Cheerios contained dangerous levels of a particular pesticide residue. Opa is one of those people for whom a little information is a dangerous thing (no, seriously, he's never met an internet scare of conspiracy theory that he hasn't latched onto). He really should not be let loose with an internet connection without a minder.

This revelation, as one would expect, caused my eyebrows to raise and set off my facial tics just a touch.

I set about investigating the claim du juor. Opa was questioned regarding the source of the Cheerios Challenge. After much fumbling about the dustier corners of his memory, we were able to tease out the source of the pesticide proposition. It was a news article from the Detroit Free Press linked to from the Natural News website referring to a study done by a group called Environmental Working Group.

Now we were getting somewhere. I start doing my due diligence on EWG. EWG claims to be a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to protecting human health and the environment. A laudable goal to be sure. Funding is primarily from grants and individuals. Notable names among the donor list is the Walton Family Foundation (think Sam Walton of Wal-Mart fame) and The Turner Foundation (Ted Turner - CNN Founder). They also have corporate partnerships with many of the bigger names in organic foods.

Nothing about this is particularly alarming. It's not like George Soros or the Koch Brothers are involved. Having said that, did I mention EWG has a lobbying arm? Silly me. That must have slipped my mind. And regarding what issues do they lobby? Environmental, agricultural, food, toxic chemicals, etc.

So, they are environmental advocates. Again, nothing particularly wrong with that, but it could color their findings on certain topics or influence their reporting of facts. We'll get back to that in a minute.

I tracked down the article EWG posted about glysophate levels in foods. Glysophate, for the uninitiated, is the evil active ingredient in RoundUp (created by the nefarious mega corporation Monsanto...yes, I'm being a tad tongue in cheek). It seems that EWG commissioned a laboratory study of glysophate levels in common breakfast cereals. The article published by EWG reporting the results of the lab study started with a link to a recent California jury verdict in which Monsanto was ordered to pay $289 million to a plaintiff dying of cancer allegedly caused by exposure to glysophate. They then get into a discussion of the levels of glysophate in food allowed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (1.1 milligrams per day for a 154 pound average person), the EPA (not specifically noted by referenced to be 60 times higher than the CA state allowable level) and the EWG's calculated "one in a million" cancer risk of 0.01 milligrams per day.

The original article I read did not "show their work" on the math, but it seems to have been corrected as they now report that a person would have to eat a 60 gram serving of food exceeding 160 parts per billion glysophate concentration to reach their calculated risk level of 0.01 millgrams per day (which, by the way, is 110 times lower than the  level the state of California says is too much which in turn is 60 times lower than what the EPA says is too much). So, just to put a bow on the math, EWG is saying that the safe level of glysophate in foods SHOULD be 6600 times lower than the level currently allowed by the EPA. They don't make a convincing case for why the level should be 6600 times lower than the EPA or 110 times lower than the state of California. Instead, they seem content to make the argument that it is a chemical linked to cancer and is therefore bad in any quantity.

For the record, I'm not volunteering to drink or otherwise consume 1.056 million parts per billion (that's 160 parts per billion times 6600) concentrations of glysophate in my daily Cheerios; and, truthfully, EWG may not be wrong in their conclusion. I just take issue with the manner in which they are presenting their information.

Back to the report on the study results. First off, the article currently on their website has been drastically revised from the version I read a few days ago, and I really wish I had a screen capture or PDF copy of the original to compare and contrast. The current version shows that EWG took samples of 45 conventional breakfast cereals and 16 organic breakfast cereals and tested them for glysophate concentration. They then report the test results in concentration parts per billion for each sample. All fine and dandy so far. Where things really went off the rails in the original article was that samples results were grouped according to which ones had unsafe levels (color coded in red...for contrast I'm sure). The thing that really bugged me in the original was that  they did not make it clear that the table of results categorized each product according to EWG's much lower concentration level.

To clarify further, the report starts out talking about concentration levels in milligrams per weight before  shifting to parts per billion in the lab results table. The revised article does now provide a brief conversion from milligrams per serving to parts per billions, but the original article did not.

Even in the revised article, if someone is not reading carefully, they might miss that critical distinction. The skeptic in me suspects that was EWG's intent in order to advocate for a new, lower standard for safe concentration levels.

Another, in my opinion, glaring omission from EWG's article is the results of other scientific testing on glysophate, a discussion of the MSDS sheet on the chemical, etc. For instance, it took me literally seconds to find out that the WHO and UN studies on glysophate determined that mammal animal models suggest that concentrations as high as 2000 milligrams per kilogram of  body weight was not associated with genotoxic effects. There's more detail out there than I'm willing to transcribe or cut and paste here. Bottom line is that you would probably have to ingest enough to drown yourself before you'd be at a legitimate risk of getting cancer, and you'd probably puke it up before you got close to those dosage levels.

After I pointed out these little details, the Cheerios mysteriously reappeared in the pantry.

Now, this is just one little drop of questionable information in a practical galactic ocean of information floating around the internet. Why should you care? Well, the president attacks CNN almost daily accusing them of being fake news. Fox News claims to be fair & balanced. Alex Jones gets banned from social media for making wild claims reported as news. For every EWG, there is a company or interest group lobbying for the opposite position. And let's not forget all those companies out there trying to make a buck selling snake oil and legitimate products.

Everyone, it seems, is publishing information at the speed of light. The incredible quantity of information being published everyday makes it impossible to fact check it all. That is why it is so incredibly important to learn to critically assess source material.

So, the next time you hear someone ranting about the latest scandal, conspiracy theory, social justice melt down...etc. Take a step back and dig into the source material with a critical eye. I'd bet that, more often than not, you'll find discrepancies in the reporting that will be most illuminating.

Dear Paul Ryan (an Obamacare Rant)

Dear Paul Ryan,

Just a few short months ago, Republicans were swept back into full control of the government on a huge groundswell of populist support. Full repeal of Obamacare was one of the cornerstone planks of the platform that led to that support.

Now, you want to foist off your own "lite" version of an abysmal, abomination of a law that was passed through deception and outright lies. Then you have the audacity to tell the press: "Obamacare is collapsing. If we just did nothing, washed our hands of the situation, we would see a further collapse of the health insurance markets. So we feel an obligation to step in front of that collapse and replace this law with one that works, that has more freedom."

I strongly urge you to rethink that plan. Stepping in front of that collapse will get you crushed like a bug by a pissed off electorate. I'm not saying do nothing. Quite the opposite. By all means necessary, REPEAL BUT DO NOT REPLACE. Please allow me too explain further.

Prior to Obamacare's inception, I had decent healthcare coverage paid for by payroll deduction through my employer. Not the Cadillac coverage congressmen and administration officials enjoy, but functional and usable. Deductibles were either $500 or $1000. Premiums for me and my family were manageable and within our budget. Since Obamacare, the lowest deductible my (now former) employer offers is $5000 at essentially triple the premium.

Let me be clear, this makes my healthcare plan functionally unusable to me and my family. I have no choice but to take it unless I want to be penalized for not having health insurance.

No where in the constitution is healthcare listed as an inalienable right. It is not the government's business to mandate healthcare or be involved in it in any way. Government involvement in healthcare (or any industry for that matter) is antithetical to the principles of freedom upon which this country was founded.

If you want to do something productive, figure out a way for health insurance carriers to sell coverage across state lines so that something approaching free competition is possible.

So,  again, I urge you and your fellow Republicans to REPEAL Obamacare and let the free market sort itself out. 

Sincerely,

Daddy Hawk

Bill of No Rights

Ed. - I found this in my creative writing folder gathering dust. I can't remember when I first read it or where I came across it. It's not my work, but I like it and it seems appropriate in the wake of the election results. Beyond correcting one glaring typo and some minor formatting for readability, I've done nothing to it. 

A Little History...

The Bill of No Rights was written by Lewis Napper, a computer programmer in Jackson, Mississippi, after listening to a radio report about then President Bill Clinton's abyssmal free health care plan in 1993 on his way home from work. As he wondered about why some people think that they deserve government provided health care, he decided to write a bill for these people, the "Bill of No Rights," and shortly after listening to the broadcast, typed it up and e-mailed it to a few of his friends where it is now found through the Internet and often mis-credited; the most notable case being Mitchell Kaye, a Georgia lawmaker who e-mailed it to a few of his friends. Napper takes it in stride, e-mailing people who got it wrong, and asking them to change. Most do, except the stubborn few who refuse to believe him. Despite mis-credits, the Bill of No Rights is certainly a part of Internet history.

---

The Bill of No Rights

We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden, delusional and other liberal bedwetters. We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people were confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights.

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - and not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful. Do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big-screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You don't have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.

ARTICLE IX: You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness - which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

Friday Funnies - Election Day Issue

Election 2016

Greetings friends, it's time for another episode of Daddy Hawk’s Wandering Windshield Dialogue. It's just before 6 AM, and I've had no caffeine yet. I’m not sure if that bodes well for this episode or not. My Sister…The Devil checked my blood pressure yesterday which came in at a relatively mellow 110 over 69. So, in today's episode, we will tackle the tragic comedy that is the 2016 presidential elections.

As long time readers know, politics is one of my favorite spectator sports right up there with NASCAR. There's a fraud, corruption, conspiracy theories, cluelessness, allegations of murder, adultery, and the dead shall rise and vote once again (at least in Chicago). It's a bad teen zombie horror movie masquerading as a governmental system.

A few months ago, I saw a meme on Facebook about the elections. The caption was: "The problem with this election is that one of them will win." Being a native Texan, I think the second problem with this election is that, no matter who wins, our next president will be from New York.

It really makes me wish Richard Pryor's “Vote Nobody” campaign from Brewster's Millions was a real, viable option.

Let's start with the third-party candidates. I really have to chuckle at the unofficial campaign slogan someone came up with on Facebook for the Gary Johnson campaign. Nothing says vote for me like "Feel the Johnson " (with apparently no apologies to the Bernie Sanders campaign).  So, does that make Gary Johnson supporters jockstraps?

Libertarians have the best shot of any of the third parties. And, by best shot, I mean none whatsoever. They're currently pulling just under 15% in recent national polls which means they could probably spoil for one of the two main candidates not unlike what Ross Perot did in ’92 which helped the Clinton’s and the snatch the White House the first time. This time, though, the big Johnson ticket is sounding more Democrat than conservative, libertarian or Republican with their stance on guns and other subjects. So, Hillary may see a statistically significant number of former Bernie supports feeling the Johnson instead of the Bern. If that happens enough in the battleground states, say hello to First Lady Melania Trump instead of First Philanderer Bill Clinton.

As someone who considers himself to be a small “L” constitutionalist/libertarian, this gives me some small measure of hope.

Speaking of the Constitution party, according to one of those silly Facebook quizzes, that’s with whom I am most closely aligned on the issues. Color me surprised. I didn't even know they existed. Who knew? Unfortunately, they are polling about as well as Lynden LaRouche and he’s not even running this year.

As an aside, there's nothing to throw your train of thought off like being stuck in a traffic jam because some idiots who can't drive in the rain. I'm trying to bypass this mess so I won't even get the payoff of seeing the wrecked cars. Oops, I was wrong. I got to see the crunched cars after all. Major front in damage to a regular cab pickup of some description with a smoking radiator and all. No photos for you. I can only do so much at once.

But, I digress as usual.

Speaking of digressions, there's the Green party. That's really all I need to say about them. I have no idea what they think they can accomplish other than waste the money of some useful idiots. I did hear a segment on the Sean Hannity show with Dr. Jill Stein who is their presidential candidate this year. As near as I can tell, their platform is to take the worst parts of the New Deal, ignore history and all economic wisdom to the contrary, wave a magic and magically create jobs and a healthy economy. Good luck you ignorant twits. At least Bernie was honest about being a socialist.

That brings us to the Democrats. I have to say that I think it is a sad commentary on the party that the BEST candidates they could put forward for the primaries was an aging, self-avowed socialist and, arguably, the single most corrupt woman in American politics. She continues to be dogged by scandals that have brought down lesser people; and, yet, nothing sticks to her. The fact that Hillary had to conspire with the DNC to rig the primaries to beat Bernie is nothing short of hysterical and is further commentary on just how fed up America is with the establishment of both parties.

Discussing the establishment brings us to the Republicans. If Bernie was so unpalatable that the donkies rigged the game to pick Hillary, Trump is a poison pill with a chainsaw enema for the GOP elephants. Say what you will about Trump, but he beat a deep field of contenders including some serious talent from hard core conservatives to moderate establishment favorites. A lot of good candidates underestimated him and/or misread the direction the electoral winds were blowing. Either way, Trump is the horse the ‘Pubs are stuck with and has at least as good a chance as Hillary of winning the White House.

My final thoughts for now is that this election could really go either way. I’ve not seen voter discontent at this level in my lifetime or in my study of American history. I would submit the recent Brexit vote up for consideration as a case study in the triumph of the will of the people over the desires of their supposed betters in the establishment. I think we will see record setting voter turnout especially in the battleground swing states. Were I a betting man, I would give odds in favor of Trump. However, I could not begin to give an estimate on an over/under or point spread. I seriously doubt the winning candidate will have a clear majority and, thus, will have no clear mandate.

M&M 2.0 Brief Update

Fortunately, I did not have to discover whether I had a fool for a client by attempting to represent myself. At the 11TH hour, we were able to retain another attorney to step in and fill the shoes vacated by the previous attorney. The prior attorney had given me several recommendations; however, upon casual vetting, it was revealed that all of them suffered from one or more serious flaws which eliminated any interest I had in retaining them. I mean, really, who in their right mind retains an attorney who shows up at the court house drunk while carrying a handgun in a hollowed out book without a license to carry (not that he would have been allowed to carry the gun in with a license)?

Not me. I don't care how well politically connected he is (chairman [now former thanks to his arrest] of the local Democrat party in a predominately Democrat county), I don't want a drunk with a felony weapons charge pending against him representing me and mine.

So, short on time and options, I dug back into the memory banks for the names of two attorneys that we knew from M&M's case. The first was the attorney The Queen and I consulted regarding intervening in M&M's case. The other was the attorney that the court appointed as M&M's guardian ad litem.

The first attorney was not very encouraging. He said things like "that's impossible" referring to the short time frame (a day and a half) in which to draft and file the intervention. He was also not entirely sure he could make the hearing. So, I thanked him for his time and moved on to door number two.

M&M's former ad litem was much more enthusiastic. She had her staff jumping on drafting the intervention even before the retainer contract was signed. Her paralegal was also very resourceful. The attorney for the petitioners (the couple currently caretaking 2.0) was not willing to extend any professional courtesy and give up the address where the bio parents could be served with the intervention.

So, the paralegal looked up which process server the petitioner's attorney had used, made a quick call and confirmed that, yes indeedy, the process server remembered the case and the shack where the bios were currently staying. He was more than happy to make a second service fee with little effort. I gave her a high five for that one. That's the kind of out of the box thinking that wins wars right there.

Anywho, we showed up for the hearing earlier this week as scheduled in hopes of getting a favorable ruling. No such luck. Our attorneys did not have the required amount of time to do anything other than file the intervention. Setting a competing hearing on any affirmative action of our own would have required at least three business days which we did not have due to the New Year's holiday.

We were successful in blocking the petitioners' efforts to make the Temporary Restraining Order permanent. Their attorney attempted to have their TRO hearing heard in addition to requesting the court to strike our intervention. The court declined and required their attorney to choose either A) to move forward on her hearing with us involved, or B) continue the hearing to a later date to give her adequate time to file a formal motion to strike and prepare for a full hearing as the scheduled hearing was only set for a half hour. The opposing attorney did the only thing she could do and took the continuance. She will find out quickly that she has not basis for a motion to strike as our standing to intervene is black letter statutory law. So, she's stuck with us now.

Of note, the bio parents actually showed up for the hearing. They are unrepresented this go around because this is a private lawsuit since Texas DFPS declined to pursue any action on behalf of the state thus denying the bios access to court appointed attorneys. We heard through sources that they have set up a Gofundme account which has netted a grand total of $0 in contributions. There was a host excuses offered up by the male bio as to why they didn't have counsel, why they hadn't completed their drug testing yet, why they haven't completed their anger management classes yet, etc.

In another interesting twist, while waiting for the hearing to begin, we heard the bios talking with the petitioners' attorney and male bio's reporting of the events leading up to the termination of their parental rights in M&M's case was quite amusing. No concept of personal responsibility. No acceptance of any blame. No nada. We are evil because we stole M&M, etc. Our attorney says she can't wait to get him on the stand.

Next step is a full blown, it's on like Donkey Kong, hearing in about 2 months from now with testimony by the involved parties, DFPS and probably a few others. The hearing is slated for 4 hours, and I bet it runs long. We have filed a motion to strike the petitioners claims due to lack of standing to file. There will be a brief exchange of written discovery between the parties (which I fully expect the bios to ignore).

Then...who knows. I still feel pretty good about our chances given the law; however, the judge has pretty wide discretion in these cases to do what he feels is in the best interests of the child. The longer this drags out, the more likely it is that he will just rule that the status quo is best.

That will suck.

More to follow when I can.

Law of Unintended Consequences

Once again, I apologize for the conspicuous lack of content here of late. This year has been singularly stressful on all fronts, and my time and desire to sit at the keyboard and write anything has been greatly diminished. Even now, I sit in a seminar on bad faith listening to an attorney drone on about how big bad insurance companies get bent over a barrel in the heart of redneck country.

So, I figured I would use the time to do something productive like update my loyal readers (all 4 of you who are left) on the status of M&M's sister.

The short version is that the last 24 hours have been very stressful, and the prognosis is not encouraging.

So, what does that mean? Well, sit back and I will try to click out the long version. Bear with me.

Back before all this started, Texas' long sitting governor (gooberner) Rick Perry had delusions of grandeur and decided he should not seek reelection for yet another term leading the great state of Texas so that he could focus on running to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States (along with 30 something other hopefuls). Cheerleader Rick (he was an Aggie Yell Leader which is the Aggie version of a cheerleader) anointed then Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott as his chosen successor. Greg Abbott (who I have nothing against for the record) was duly elected in predictable red state fashion over the democrat nominee, Wendy Davis (who never had a snow balls chance in Hell's outhouse of winning), and took over the keys to the governor's mansion in January of this year.

One of the first things Governor Abbott did upon taking the reigns was to request a review of Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (Texas' version of child protective services) procedures and policies regarding removal of children from their homes. The idea was that DFPS was removing children from their homes too frequently for minor, easily correctable issues that didn't warrant removal and placement of children in foster care when a suitable "safety placement" was available.

So, the Parental Child Safety Placement process was hatched. The theory is that DFPS would recognize a danger to the child in the home that was serious enough that it was in the best interest of the child to be elsewhere to give the parent time to correct the dangerous condition (e.g. cleaning up the filth, throwing out the dead beat/drug dealing boyfriend, etc.) but which condition was not serious enough to pursue a formal removal into DFPS conservatorship and resulting foster care. The PCSP is intended to be a short term, temporary alternative (ideally less than 60 days) where the odds of the child returning home following correction of the dangerous condition are good and there is a suitable safety placement willing to be a voluntary caregiver under a formal, written agreement.

If you read the guidelines for the PCSP, it's quickly apparent that whoever wrote it didn't quite think through all the consequences and implications of the new policy and how it would gel with the existing policy framework or how it would be applied in practice. There is a huge, unstated, assumption that the voluntary caregiver will be a family member or someone with close, significant contacts with the family.

In practice, reality and the law of unintended consequences beats good intentions into submission every time.

So, what does this have to do with M&M 2.0's situation? She was born just in time for the new procedures to be put in place. Come to find out, DFPS quickly figured out that they could use the new process to intimidate parents in borderline cases into putting their children into safety placements which have NO COURT OVERSIGHT.

In a normal removal case, the DFPS files an emergency removal petition with the court to be granted conservatorship over the child so that the child can be placed in a licensed foster care home or the home of a responsible family member who can be granted temporary custody. In the case of a PCSP, the birth parent retains legal custody of the child but signs an agreement giving temporary care of the child to pretty much anyone they choose.

In M&M 2.0's case, the bios chose to give voluntary custody to someone they allegedly knew from church. Why I say allegedly will become apparent soon enough; however, there is no possibility that these people from church could have had close, significant contact with the family as the bios had only been back in Texas for less than a year at the time of 2.0's birth and the bios had continued their history and practice of couch surfing nomadic living arrangements with whichever friend or drug buddy was willing to put up with them for a while which included locations from all over the north Texas area.

Now, fast forward to yesterday. In November, we had been told that the bios had agreed to extend the safety placement for another 60 or 90 days to give them time to work their services plan (which, in typical bio fashion, they had not been working). We were prepared to wait around until January or February to find out what would happen next.

Then, the DFPS case worker called The Queen yesterday morning to inform us that the voluntary safety placement family was filing suit against the bios for child support (good luck finding blood in that turnip), legal custody (for which they are on shaky legal grounds at best to seek but apparently found someone to actually file the pleading) and a restraining order (me thinks the welcome mat has been withdrawn). The case worker wanted to know if we would be willing to allow visitation between the siblings apparently assuming that this development would go unchallenged by us.

Tee hee...that's so cute. Fertilizer...meet fan.

Come to find out, the safety placement family is not unlike us in that they are childless and incapable of having children of their own. Naturally, they have bonded with 2.0 and want to keep her. Unlike us, they are pursuing questionable legal tactics instead of having patience and faith. Interestingly, they are also claiming they do not know the bios which directly calls into question DFPS' handling of the PCSP which requires that the safety placement have close, significant contacts with the family.

Needless to say, we are not amused.

Cousin L has been informed of these developments, and she has been in contact with the bios. Female bio was reportedly clueless about these developments and does not want to lose her latest offspring but was open to the idea of pulling the voluntary placement from church family and moving 2.0 to our home. Male bio adamantly refuses to consider moving 2.0 to our house and is now threatening Cousin L with termination of all future contact unless Cousin L drops everything and comes to Texas to get 2.0 (you may recall that Cousin L lives in a western state some 1200 miles away).

Meanwhile, The Queen and I await a call back from an attorney recommended to us by our foster care/adoption agency to see what, if any legal recourse we have in this situation.

That's the news fit to print at the moment. Further updates as events warrant.

Still Kickin'

I realize that I have neglected my little corner of the intertubes for much longer than I would like. I would like to plead something exciting...like winning the lottery or traveling to Mars.

Yeah. No such luck there.

Equal parts too busy, too tired and too couldn't get my give a care jump started with a flux capacitor attached to a lightning rod.

Sorry about that. We all go honey badger on the world every once in a while.

It's not like you've missed out on anything important.

In no particular order, here is the quick and dirty rundown on life since last we spoke.

I've made it through the first three months of the new job. It seems like it has been much longer than that. By all accounts, they like me and think I know what I am doing. That's positive since the CEO just hired a new executive for the claims operations which has everyone on pins and needles waiting for the ax(es) to fall. I am reasonable sure that my position is safe, and the general consensus among those up the food chain is that most everyone director level and below will not be directly affected. The AVP and VP level, however, is enjoying a wonderful case of heart burn right now.

My bet is that our current VP has about 3 to 6 months left with the company. There are a few others who will experience the job description discussion from "Office Space", and I foresee at least one "Don't you understand? I'm a people person." meltdown.

Whatever. As long as the paycheck clears and the fertilizer to work ratio stays reasonably bearable, I'm good for now.

No news on M&M's sister. Last we heard, it was the same song, third verse. Knowing and loathing the system as we do, we're doing our best to tune out the anxiety and live life instead of waiting by the phone for a call that may never come.

M&M continues to grow like a weed. She turns four very soon, and she is above average in height and development. She speaks clearer with a greater vocabulary than several kids months older than her that we know. The Queen has been teaching her the ABCs, writing, etc. She's even starting to read a little bit. She's super strong and healthy. She had her first round of swimming lessons over the summer and took to it like a duck. We also enrolled her in gymnastics (or "gymnasties" as she calls it) which she REALLY enjoys. She loves horses and gets her first riding lesson on Friday.

So, basically, she's growing up, and The Queen and I are both proud and sad at the same time.

Now that things have calmed down somewhat on the job and home fronts, I'm trying to noodle up a side gig to earn a little extra money. I'd love to make custom knives or guns, but those take money, equipment and skills that I lack at the moment. Custom leather work or wood working may be an option. The Queen wants me to start a small business risk management consulting firm of some sort. I think there is an opportunity there, but it doesn't speak to me the way the other ideas do.

The 2016 presidential race is shaking out about like I expected. Hillary, despite everyone admitting that she violated Federal law which should land her in jail, looks to be teflon coated and the only game in town for the Democrats. The Republicans are doing their best to run a campaign based on "The Biggest Loser". Rick Perry dropped out early which, frankly, doesn't come as a surprise. He was a decent governor. Not great, but not dismal either. Scott Walker dropped out too which disappoints me a little. I get the Trump thing, but I really hope he decides he has better things to do and throws his support behind a more "legitimate" candidate. Ben Carson is polling well right now, but I'm not sure if he has the backing to be there at the end. I'd really like to see Ted Cruz doing better in the polls, but don't count him out yet.

Then there's Jeb. The media seems to have already decided he's "the guy". He's the safe candidate for the Republican establishment which means he's too moderate for my tastes. Putting him up against Hillary is going to see the Repub's chances of winning the election go down faster than torpedoes at Pearl Harbor.

Needless to say, my outlook for the future is not rosy right now.

So, in order to leave you on a positive note, here are some recent pictures of the Cutest Little Girl in the World.

This is the wallpaper on my office computer desk top right now. I had been waiting a long time to get a photo like this one, and it finally happened a few months ago.

She's so cute when she is being a "proper lady".

A few M&M and Daddy Hawk pics. I love my time with her.

Did I mention she LOVES horses. This horse's name is "Death Wish" (no, really, but he also goes by Killer). She sat up on him and rode him bareback like a boss (with Killer's owner and trainer close by).

I think the respective looks says it all. The kitten wants down NOW, and M&M is giving me the innocent "can I keep him" look.

That's all for now. I've got work to do.

My Thoughts on The State of The Union Address

Didn't watch it. Didn't read it.

Wouldn't have believed the words that emanated from the horse thief in chief's pie hole if I did.

From what little I've gathered from reading the news and other opinion sources, it was a mixed bag of delusion, half truths, questionable science, posturing, threats and childish taunting.

The only state of the union that matters to me anymore is the state of my union to The Queen.

Liberal...conservative...makes no difference anymore. If I'm doing good in the eyes of God and The Queen, I'm happy.

Stop Hitting Yourself

Dear Texas Republican Party Members (and you folks at the National Party HQ need to listen up too),

I'll make this simple: STOP HITTING YOURSELF! Seriously. Put down the shovel, go take a bottle of Tylenol and reread the Bible and the Constitution when you wake up.

Sincerely,

Daddy Hawk

I'll be the first to state that, as a conservative Christian, I believe the Bible is very clear on the subject of homosexuality. The Bible is also very clear about not judging others, accepting people as they are (while loving them and encouraging them to sin no more) and looking after your own problems before you try to solve everyone else's. I'll also be the first to admit that I do not understand the "cause" of homosexuality anymore than I do particle physics, and I'm pretty sure no one living has a decent grasp on that subject either. We can debate genetics and nature versus nurture until the end of time; but, if you listen closely, you can just make out the sound of God laughing at us for thinking we have a clue.

So, it strikes me that these well intentioned folks are suffering from a special form of stupid to think that 1)homosexuality can be "fixed" through therapy, 2) that it's any of the government's business in the first place, and 3) there ought to be a law to do something about it.

Do you want to take a stand on moral issues? Fine be me. Live your life according to those morals. Be the example you want others to follow. Talk to people about why you do what you do when offered the opportunity. Talk to them out of love and be respectful of that teachable moment.

Do you want to make a difference in state and national level politics? Fine by me. Stick to things that are defined by the Constitution as being the government's business. Let's talk fiscal policy. Let's talk foreign policy. Let's talk about securing the borders. Let's talk about taxes. Let's talk about how entitlements are bankrupting the county. Let's talk about the ideas you have to make Texas and America stronger (or strong again depending on your point of view).

Let's stay out of people's bedrooms. Let's stay out of people's minds. This isn't Orwell's 1984. There should be no political correctness. There should be no hate crimes or thought police. You don't fix racism by inciting riots and perpetuating the "us vs. them" mentality. You change people's hearts and minds by being the best example you can be.

[dropping mike and stepping off soap box]

Tilting at Liberals

The Queen has a habit of chatting up ministers at church and then dropping a seemingly innocuous but very serious spiritual question on them putting them on the spot and generally making them VERY uncomfortable. Especially when they know the Biblical answer to the question is contrary to what they've been teaching and allowing in their congregation...and they don't want to admit it. I call it "tilting at ministers" (it's a Don Quixote-esque game of mental torture if you've never witnessed a rabid Ginger sink her teeth into someone who should know better than to poke the red head). 

Anyway, I told you that to sort of explain the title for today's post. 

I was perusing Facebook during lunch yesterday and came across a status from a church aquaintance. The status was a comment on a shared image. The image was from the National Low Income Housing Association or some such and stated that "Nowhere in the US can you rent a two bedroom apartment on 40 hours a week earning minimum wage." The aquaintance's comment was something along the lines that business owners are big, greedy, godless creatures who need to care about people and pay their employees more. 

Well, since I tend to sit on the far right side of the spectrum on most issues...especially economic/financial ones...I just had to go tilting at the liberal. My comment in response is as follows:

"First off, minimum wage is not supposed to be a "living" wage. It is an government required, artificial wage rate for unskilled labor most typically earned by teenagers still living at home. 

Second, this idea that business owners are somehow evil just because they pay a politically mandated minimum wage for unskilled labor ignores the fact that the employer is taking a RISK in providing a job and training the person to perform a task (and giving that person job skills in the process) all while trying to make a profit so that the business owner can continue to stay in business and provide the jobs that everyone seems to believe don't pay enough. 

Thirdly, name me ONE job that requires trade skills or a college degree that pays minimum wage. Higher wages are earned by putting in the time and effort to better yourself to make yourself move valuable (and hence more productive) to an employer. 

My first job was as a warehouse/stocker/janitor earning the then minimum wage of $4.25 an hour. I lived at home and then in the dorm at college. The first time I had an apartment where I paid rent, I was single and sharing it with a friend. I kept busting my rear at work to gain skills and raises until I could afford a place of my own. 

I didn't buy a car until I could afford it. I didn't get a cell phone until I could afford it. I didn't go out and start a family when I couldn't afford it. I didn't buy a house until I could afford it. 

People seem to have developed this idea that they are entitled to money, benefits, cars, toys, a big house and a lot more without the putting in the effort to earn it. God sees it differently. 2 Thessalonians 3:10 says "...any man who will not work, neither let him eat."

My comment will likely offend several people. If that causes you grief, I apologize for that. But, I stand by what I say and won't apologize for speaking the truth as I see it."

I then proceeded to post my little shot across the bow on my own Facebook page just in case my words of wisdom were not well received and subsequently deleted by said acquaintance. Such would be intolerable. It's gotten fairly favorable responses so far, and a couple of people of like mind have seen fit to share it on their walls as well. 

I figured, heck, if it's getting good feedback on Facebook, why not use it as blog material? Hence, here we are.

You're welcome.