Protecting Choice

This last week's news of a federal judge overturning Proposition 8 in California, brought out both supporters of, and those against, same-sex marriage.  Most of these people are against same-sex marriage for pretty much three reasons: it's morally wrong, God says no and it's a choice.


While the first two are normally positions that are taken by ultra religious people, the last excuse is easily debatable.  Supported positions against gay marriage normally echo such statements like "it's their choice" and "they are welcome to marry a person of the opposite sex."


Yet, when thinking about other forms of choice that are protected under law, religion seems to come up as a large and glaring omission in their arguments.


While we can argue about being forced into religion by family, it's still our individual choice to belong to an organized religion.  It's also our choice to believe in Jesus, God, Satan, Allah, Buddha, a golden calf or nothing at all.


Yet, religion and belief is a protected status in the eyes of our government.


So here's my question to those against same-sex marriage because they feel being gay is a choice: why should your choice of what religion you belong to be protected?


Of course, for me personally, I do not believe that being gay is a choice. People are born gay and science and other studies have pretty much concluded that sexual orientation is not a choice.  But for the sake of argument here, I'll let others believe it's a choice, hoping for some thought-provoking honesty in their hypercritical view of the rights of others.

Resistence Is Futile

Over on my other blog, I wrote a post talking about the upcoming Superbowl ad that was paid for by Focus on the Family, on behalf of Heisman Trophy winner, Tim Tebow.

Part of his conservative allure is that he is a virgin, waiting to have sex until marriage. Now there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, I was a virgin when I married, so I can't be throwing stones around at others. But for me it was easy. I wasn't famous and well known. For Tim, this is bit harder. He's in the press, he's a sports jock, he attracts all sorts of people, including some very attractive females, as evidenced below:


Image from the following article on The Big Lead

I need to clarify myself here. I'm not implying that just because you have a pretty young female that you are spending time with that it's expected to bed her. But from a public persona, being seen with such an attractive woman, the implied notion that you are bed partners will run through most people's minds, mine included.

With that disclaimer out of the way, let me make my point here. He's a virile young man, attractive himself and he's talented. While saving himself for marriage is admirable [and most likely marketable for him as far as the press is concerned], the theory of it is completely out the window. At best, he's going home and rubbing one out after each date with someone like her. Again, if it were me in that position and holding onto this abstinence pledge of his, Some kind of sex is going to happen.

So my point is this: Mr. Heisman can say whatever will satisfy his belief system. He doesn't have to be Slutmaster Jack on the town. He can still be a gentleman and able to wake up with a smile on his face. But if these women he's with are not satisfied [or being satisfied, as the case may be], he's going to look like he's a player off the field. And having that image along with wearing the chastity belt, he's going to come off [and get off, privately] as looking like last year's model.

C'mon Tim. There's some of us that will support you if you decide to do more than dance.

Trust or Fear

Today was an odd day at work. Well, most days are filled some sort of oddness, but there was an odd thing that happened today. And it's happened before, but more about that later.

I work in a formal IT department. There are three of us that are considered system or network administrators. My official title is Network Admin.

My responsibilities include the management of our company-wide email system, main FTP server and helping with maintaining our server farm. I've been there almost seven years and have been working in IT almost 25 years.

Today, a call came in where one of my co-workers was asked to take care of a computer issue in one of our east coast offices. This co-worker then recruited the help of the other admin.

While trying various options, they asked for my help. I immediately offered and asked what the situation was. I was told that they needed to get some data off of a computer. I then asked what computer this was.

This is where the odd part comes in.

I was told by the first co-worker that they were told to keep it confidential and not tell anyone else.

Huh?

Puzzled, but recalling a similar situation happening several times before with the "keep it confidential", I tested a solution on another computer and offered it up to my other co-workers.

Confused

Now I understand certain topics and subjects that need to remain confidential. I've not spent the amount of time I have managing people's data and sensitive needs over the years without knowing how to be professional and ethical in all of my dealings at any company I've worked at.

But when you are in a close knit group of people - a team - you learn to trust each other when dealing with sensitive subjects.

All of us are admins. We all have identical rights on the entire network to manage, disable, grant rights and take care of needs from our upper management when asked.
But for some reason, my co-worker seems to think that when there is a general user that they are told to keep confident about, that means not to share that information with your other co-workers, especially when you are asking that person for specific help.

Granted, this co-worker did share the information with the other co-worker, mostly due to the fact that this co-worker needed additional help. But when my additional help was needed, lips were sealed on any details.

Why does this bother me so much?

Mostly it's due to the fact that we are a team. We all work together in the same area. When a bit of company-related information of a sensitive nature (ie. layoffs, terminations) needs to be completed, I would hope that all of us could trust each other and be confident that we are all professionals and will keep this information to ourselves. I've shared such information before when told to keep it confidential. Why? Because I trust that my other co-workers are just as ethical and professional as I am.

And that's what bothers me the most. It's the lack of any logical or reciprocal thought when a situation comes up like this.

And when it happens again, I fear that I may be just as jilted and just as silent.
Trust and fear. Two bed fellows that often accompany work-related issues.

Monday's Question

With all of the discussion and debate over the proposed universal health care, a question came up that I would like to pose.

Question

How many of the people that are protesting at these town hall meetings are currently not covered by any health care plan?

And not just the ones lacking insurance coverage, but also how many of them that are needing some sort of care - covered or not - and are not able to get the care they need.

There are millions of people that live each day without any kind of health care coverage. There are millions of others that are covered but have lackluster care or get denied based on some insurance companies definition of what is considered a pre-existing condition. Young, healthy, elderly, sick, diseased... people of all stages in life need to maintain their health. Sometimes it can be as simple as eating right and exercising often. For others, it's a constant string of visits to the doctor. But regardless, just about every man, woman and child visits a doctor at least once in their lifetime - even if that single time is when they are born. The health care of our citizens shouldn't be taken for granted.

I found this video of a recent protest at a town hall meeting. The footage was great, but I was shocked at what I heard. View for yourself:



I watch a video like that and it makes me wonder how informed these people are. Are they getting their news from a limited few like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh? Or have they been so fear driven into thinking that Obama is channeling Hitler and going to send them all into the gas chambers?

Not a single one of them mentioned a valid option for caring for the uninsured or those denied needed care. Each and every one of them were more concerned about the fear of what this country would turn into if national health care were to become available.
And they talk about waiting for weeks for health care under a government run plan. We wait now. Look at the list of people that wait for weeks for a procedure while combating insurance companies to cover something that is so obviously needed. Having another option would be a benefit.

But yet I see two major "socialist" government programs that have been in place for many years and I haven't seen a socialist takeover from their implementation. They are Social Security and Medicare. Both are tax-payer funded. Both offer care to those that are retired or unable to work. Both have been able to extend the lives of millions of Americans for many years.

And I can't help but think how many of these vocal individuals are proclaiming this takeover have benefited from Social Security or Medicare. I'm willing to bet a good amount of them have. Yet, this most recent "universal health care" proposal is "socialism" and "will be the downfall of this country." Um, Ok.

My Position

So what's my position on this? I'll go out on a comfortable limb and say that most, if not all of the people at these protests are already covered by some form of health care plan. Or Medicare. Or they don't get sick and are one of the rare group of humans that don't need pills or regular doctor visits to remain healthy.

So let's hear how you feel about this question. How many people protesting are without proper or any health care coverage? If there are some there and they are just as vocal, why do you think they are protesting?

Losing Someone You've Never Met

Everyday people pass on. Hundreds, if not thousands in the world die on a regular basis. This isn't some sort of war or plague or flu. It's the process of life. It starts and it ends.

This last weekend, an online acquaintance passed away, which was a shock to many of us. I had never met this person, although I had many conversations with her on film and other aspects of life that were discussed on a regular basis on the film forum we both belonged to. It's a tightly knit community that has been going on for many years now. I've been a member for more than five years now.

One of the other forum members lives close to this person and has regular communication with her. His grief was expected since he had actually known her in person. But to those of us that had never met her, the grief and shock was different. Much different. But yet, we all still feel a sense of loss.

My thoughts immediately went to a place of questioning. How well did we know this person? We saw her online persona come out and I'm sure a lot of her personality shone through those posts on movies, TV shows, politics and various life topics. But people are known for hiding their real self behind an avatar, a nickname or a quirky username. And with that veil, they can be a different person for their online communicating.

I seriously doubt someone like Nancy would be that much different. She was in her mid 50's and was very honest in her replies. Not that should be the end all to judge someone that you've never met before, but for those of us that's all we have to go on. We've never had the chance to read the other person's body language, their facial expressions and hear their actual voice. So we take that person at face value, however that translates to a post of words on a web site.

But after hearing the news she had died, I wondered how different I would feel if I had actually met her. I've met online people before and there is a different kind of rapport that gets communicated that you don't feel online. You know the person, but now that you've met in person, you can actually say you know this person.

Yet, there is always something there that not everyone sees, online or in person. Some say it's the soul. Others say it's just a case of common humanity that you see in someone else. I think most people have a general respect for one another and regardless if you've hung out for years or just have seen their name pop up online, you want to not only treat that person with the same respect you would want to be treated with, but part of their real self escapes outside their carbon footprint.

And that's the bond that you share. And the one that feels empty when someone expires. For some it may be stronger, others it may be a temporary sense of loss. But it is loss, none the less. And each time you see that person's name or avatar, you think back to the conversations you had and a small bit of reflecting takes hold and reminds you and that in person or online, humankind makes itself known to those that care to recognize it.

Drive-By Revelation

There are some things that you didn't expect that become the unexpected.

For me, it happened this week.

It wasn't some big event, but it was ego bruising.  And one that I wasn't ready for.

I'm a very social person.  I like to connect to people on different levels.  Even if that person I am trying to connect with doesn't have any instant connection, I try to find one.  Kind of like an accommodation, but mostly me trying to find a topic I can join in lively conversation with.

Well, it seems with some people, I have an annoying side.  Or at least that's what I was informed of.

Actually, I was informed there are TWO annoying things about me.  Here's the first one.

1. I don't know when to stop when discussing a topic of interest.  I like to continue the conversation past the point of the initial topical discussion.

It happened today, at least that's what I was made aware of by another party [my wife].

The conversation was talking about Simpsons episodes.  I wanted to participate, so I brought up part of the episode where Homer gets a helper monkey named Mojo.  It's a funny episode and I like to quote lines from it.  One of the people in the conversation had previously that same day showed me a clip of the episode where they do the Planet of the Apes theater recreation [another equally funny episode].

So I thought, "hey, I'm a big fan of the Simpsons" and threw my trivial intellect into the ring.

If only I would have stopped at "Pray for Mojo"

I continued with my ever-flowing dialogue of the episode.

There was the silence, which I completely missed, until my wife tapped me on the arm.

That was my cue to SHUT THE FUCK UP, which I did.

Tuck that one into the part of my brain that acts like a flash drive with reference points attached that will clue me in to future conversations with said persons.

And here's the other annoying revelation.

2. When I travel, I like to read signs.  If I'm by myself, I sometimes read them to myself.  If there are others in the car, I sometimes read them out loud.  It helps me take a mental reference to places and locations so that if I ever got lost in a city I've not been to before, I can find my way back to the hotel.  Plus, it's my social side wanting to share what I'm seeing.

I've recently been informed this is most annoying to some people.  And I can certainly see how this would come across as bothersome.  To some, it may say, "Hello... fuck tard, I know how to read a sign!"  To others, it may come out as just plain, "I really don't need to hear you narrate your every point of self-navigations."

Up until this point in time, none of the people this bothered had said a single word to me about this.  Maybe they are just being nice.  Maybe they are trying to not hurt my feelings.  Regardless, it was said to someone, who then informed another person [again, my wife], who then relayed this revelation to me.

Once again, I take this one to another spot in my physical flash drive and note another point of conversational reference.

So is this really what going through life is all about?  Remembering dumb shit that bothers other people, so when you are around these people that are bothered by what you do, you take extra efforts to reduce or go silent on the things they are bothered by?

I certainly hope not.  That's a lot to keep track of.  I have too many other important things in life to keep track of already.

But at the same time, I really don't want to blanket cover every social liberty to everyone I meet.  It's personalizing that social relationship with each person you know that helps create a bond.

Which brings up the bigger question: If there are things that someone else does that annoy me, how do I react?  Am I just as bothered as some are with me when another person does something that is bothersome?  How blunt and honest should one be?

All of these questions I ask myself in a self-evaluative sort of way when I find myself in said annoyed circumstances.

I believe I'm pretty tolerant with others.  And of course, I would like others to have the same self-tolerance with me.  If that means being honest and verbally discussing something direct to the other party, then that's the best "get it all out in the open" resolve to correcting one's self, even if it's not the most friendly mode of relay.

So am I off base here?  Am I reading more into this on the method of social corrections amongst responsible adults?  Or am I justified in how I feel, dejected feelings and all? 

And what about the other party?  What actions are they required to meet?  Do they "pass the buck," breaking the ego-deflating news to another member of the affected party?

These are all just answers in the game of trying to figure out another member of the human race.

Because I'd like know an easier solution if one exists.

Tightening The Screws

Or I could call this post "Getting Screwed Tighter"

No, this is not a sexually-themed post.  That would be too enjoyable.

I'm talking about how the many companies out there are doing their best to screw their customers.

Airlines, credit card companies, banks - you name a place, they are doing their best to find any way to get that extra dime out of you.

Take the airlines.  Just less than two years ago, there was no extra cost to check a single bag on your flight.  Now almost every single US-based airline charges at least $15 for the first bag (some as much as $50 for the first bag).  I could almost understand a charge for a second bag, but for the first?  No wonder why people are trying to travel lighter or using the carry-on method.  I'm heading to Hawaii in a few weeks and I don't plan on taking more than one checked bag (I've got my laptop bag and a small carry-on that I'm taking).

I understand the gas costs went up and that more weight on a plane means the plane gets less mileage.  But it just seems like they really didn't care when they jacked up the price.

How about banks.  Beside the fact that a lot of them have failed, interest paid on regular savings accounts went from about 4% to well under 1%.  Not only are they using your money to get more interest, they are now paying you much less.  And overdraft fees are almost $35 per incident.  Check caching fees.  Monthly online bill pay charges.  A extra fee for going over the number of transactions you have on your accounts.  It's just insane.  Again, the double whammy with a lot of the banks was that they lost their shirts on the mortgage side of things, and now are taking it out on the regular customers.  Hey, I never had a mortgage with your bank, why come after my money to pay for your short-sighted mistakes.

Credit card companies, like the banks, are looking for every penny they can get.  The APR percentages are rising and not only quickly, but at almost double-digit rates.  Take Capital One.  I've enjoyed a nice 9% APR on my purchases.  Not too bad.  But starting in April, that goes up to 17.4% - more than an 8% jump.  So what did I do to deserve that - miss a payment?  Nope.  Not a single payment missed in the 6 years I've had this card.  Is that anyway to treat a person who's been ever so loyal to you, paid your bill on time and has already given you more interest than I wanted to pay?  I don't think so.  And my other cards are doing the same thing.  Taking on an extra 4% and 5% to my previously-enjoyable low APR rates.  Guess I need to rethink carrying any balances.

So where does all this stop?  Who knows.  I just listed three common industries that seem to not care about their customers.  There are multitudes of companies out there that have adopted this raping of the masses.  They are only interested in gouging each every nickel they can.

And the sad thing is that it may not even help their bottom line.  Layoffs and cutbacks are still going to happen.  These guys are bleeding billions.

All I can say is that they need to watch what they do and who they are "doing".  The day may soon arrive when their customers are doing better and don't need the services of their high interest rates and carrying balances from month-to-month.  And when that day hits, the pillage practices and the extra buck or two they net from that will come back to haunt them.

It's not too late to turn back.  Rescind your rate hikes.  Drop the first checked baggage fee.  Give your customers an extra percentage of interest on the money they keep in your bank.  In due time, you will see more than just increased earnings.  You will retain loyal customers.  And that's worth more than any extra buck or two you will get today.

Privacy For All

I started following Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore on Twitter.  They are just a handful of famous people that have recently graced the micro-blogging site.

So today, Mr. A-Plus-K gets his camera out and starts complaining about his neighbor's house being worked on at 7:30am.  If you know Ashton and his sense of humor, he's mostly joking, but there's something real or serious in most of his responses.  Obviously, the paparazzi doesn't get the humor in it all.  Even The Huff Post seems to be running with the den of press wolves here.

Plain and simple, if the guy is upset about something, let him be upset.  If he's half joking, let him joke.  Even if it's a mix of serious and PUNKing around, it's just a homeowner that's letting off some steam.

Sure, in the real world, construction workers start early... way early.  Which is one reason why I'm not in construction.  And we can't all have the luxury of dictating the time schedule of construction workers.  So the part that Ashton is half serious about, he needs to get this.  I'm sure he does.  I'm just saying.

And while this particular homeowner is an actor who married a famous actress, and any of their actions or moves brings out every photographer out of the wood work, trying to capture every lucrative image they can get to keep them employed in their stalkarazzi position as long as they can, there still should be some sort of time and space respect.

Still, the questions begs: Why the media circus?  Why camp outside this guys home?

You want photos of him?  Hang out at the awards shows.

You want to see him in his jeans and t-shirt?  Camp out at the airport and nicely take a photo without trying to ride up his ass crack while he's pulling his luggage.

Every other time - Stay away.  Your hunt for the money shot isn't going to help you do anything except put cash into your wallet.

It's about privacy.  Not about how much money one gets for taking the photo.

Now if this is Ashton filming new episodes of PUNK'D, that's cool.  And maybe part of this is based on press that Ashton will get.  That's fine.  But you still have to learn when to back the fuck off.

Why am I writing this, you ask?  I don't like all of Ashton's movies.  I've not seen all of Demi's movies, either.  But this is personal.  If someday, I'm popular enough to where people will be hounding me for a photo, I'd want to have some time and space request.  Take my photo when I'm on the red carpet, but don't clog the road I live on for some dumb shot of me with a t-shirt and hat on.

Enough is enough.  As Ashton said today....  "you all know the truth... shhhhhhhhh"

Ashton's original rant via Qik.com

Ashton's calming rebutal via Qik.com

Red Herring

red herring

- noun

2. something intended to divert attention from the real problem or matter at hand; a misleading clue

------------------------------------------------------------------------

This term gets used a lot in both politics and financial discussions.  Creating something that is simply not true just to divert one's attention from what's important seems to be a good way of simply saying, "I really don't want this to happen"

Case in point.  Barack Obama.  While 52% of the registered voters that actually voted picked him to be our next president, there was a good amount of people that didn't.  At least 40%.  And while the Maverick and his Alaskan running mate went back to their respective states, Mr. Obama went to Washington.

Ok.  Said and done, he's now our Commander-in-Chief, put aside your differences and let's start moving forward together.

Nope.

These arbitrators of herrings that are red in color decide that there's got to be a way to kick this guy out of office.  They tried to keep him out during the election, calling into question the validity of his US citizenship.  More on that in a bit.

So during Tuesday's inauguration proceedings, there's a part that takes place at exactly 12 noon.  It's the Oath of Office.  And it's pretty specific.  Certain words have to be said and in a certain order.  This is the leader of the free world we are talking about here.

So President-Elect Obama is standing at the podium with Chief Justice Roberts, who is there to conduct the big important business of swearing in a new president.  It's a couple of minutes past 12 noon.  It's cold out.  And I'm sure there's a lot of nerves in jumbles.  This is a big moment and a big deal.

Roberts starts out, Obama starts to repeat after him and jumps ahead.  Roberts gets distracted and there's a few words that are not repeated in the proper order.

Not a problem.  They correct themselves, get back on track and finish the Oath proceedings.  It's now official, we have a new president.

But wait.

That's right.  The lovers of all herrings red speak out.

"He's not really president...  they didn't stay it right."

"It was said a few minutes past 12 noon.  It's not official."

"The words were not spoken in the correct order....  Obama needs to step down"

Wha?  Huh?  Are you serious?

Last year, around mid-August, the red herring detractors came out of the woodwork.  They were questioning Obama's citizenship credentials.  In summary, they were doing their best to invalidate his qualifications for being president due to his birth certificate being a fake.

They spent endless amounts of time, energy, blog posts, Google searches and Photoshop editing making sure that they were right.  It was their goal to make sure Barack Obama was not going to "go against the Constitution" and to never take office, let alone even get a chance to be on the ballot on November 4th.

"It's a fake, the lettering is not right."

"He never lived in Hawaii"

"His father wasn't a naturalized citizen"

"His mother left the country after he was born"

And there were many other detailed and outlandish reasons why Obama shouldn't be eligible to be president.  Some even went as far as to suggest that this was one of the greatest conspiracies to happen to the United States.

Yep, 46 years in the making, before Barack Hussein Obama was born, there were some that plotted this out, carefully making alterations to his birth certificate.  Secretly throwing out valid documents.  Changing the laws so that every person with a red herring mission couldn't order a copy of the birth certificate.  Making sure that one day, in 2008, Barack could become a candidate for president, and making history.

Give me a fucking break.

Let's get this straight, people.

There was no conspiracy.

There are no faked birth certificates, except for the hundreds stored on the blogs and hard drives of red herring mongers.

Regardless of the location of his parents after his birth, Barack Obama's eligibility for the office of president met each and every requirement.

Enough, people.

Read this link if you are still clinging onto this utter and complete bullshit:

Obama's birth certificate: Final chapter

Just Stop

And so it continues today with "Flubbergate".  Which, by the way, was properly repeated on the first day in office.  Crisis avoided.

But don't worry.  There will be further red herrings drummed up in order to find a way to remove President Obama from office.  Which is simply another way of distracting from the real goal, and that is unity.  Removing divides and walls and coming together for the common good of everyone.  Putting aside partisan politics and trying to solve current problems instead of creating new ones.

So please, I beg of you.  Stop with these red herrings.  Get over your selfish nature and put aside whatever it is that bothers you that there's no Ultra Conservative Right-Wing President in office.  We have someone who has the chance - and wants the chance - to make this country a better place to live.  Let him at least try to make good on his campaign promises for the next 48 months before you start finding ways to run him out of town.

Thank you.  The world is watching.

Criticism

Since when did a criticism affect me so much?

Later this afternoon, I posted a response to an article I read on the web.  I'm not sure what my point was, but what came out wasn't exactly countering any point in the article.  Someone I respect read my response and called me out on the point I made, which was a correction.

For some reason, I became more defensive than I should have.  After all, I really should have read more of my response before posting it.  In hindsight (what a common phrase that gets used a lot today), I see where I missed the point and now know what I should have wrote.  A bit too late for that, buddy.

Regardless, what came out of this is the fact that person that was nicely trying to point out something to me came across as a heavy dose of criticism.

Back in the day, I used to be able to take a lot.  I mean, hell...  I went through a divorce where regular trashing of me and what I stood for was a regular expectation.  I've worked at companies where dealing with the shit that came down on a daily basis was something I could easily handle.  I've been through a lot and have handled it.  This part of me now... who is this person?  Have I just been dealt with so much lately that this was the final bit of criticism that I could handle before losing it?  I certainly hope not.

I think most of this comes from the fact that I let way too much get in the way of doing what I want to do.  I don't have that control of life like I feel I should.  It's that point of wanting something that I feel I should have.

It's all a process of living life and as I normally do, I tackle the self-analysis side of a situation like this and make improvements where needed.  It's the one part that does take that criticism and turn it into a positive.