Hi Everyone:
I am sure everyone is very aware of the Health Care plan overhaul that was passed by the House this past week. Today's blog is not about whether the Health Care plan is good or bad, but rather the reaction to it.
In the not to distant past, it used to be that if people either agreed or disagreed with a law that Washington passed they took to the streets and either extolled its virtue or protested against it. Both of those things happened last week. But there were some very nasty things that extremists added to their protesting bag of tricks towards the congresspeople who voted for and against the law.
From my own count, 10 Democratic and 2 Republican congresspeople so far have had more than just verbal protests aimed in their direction. It now seems that it is OK to to use intimidation, threats and personal info against elected officials who voted either for or against the law. Congressman John Driehaus' name, home address and home phone number were posted on an anti-health care blog. As you can guess, his home was inundated with calls that were of a threatening and intimidating nature. Now his wife and children live in fear for their lives. Is it OK for his family to now live in fear for their lives? The obvious answer is no, it is not OK and never will be OK. But that didn't stop the fanatical, moronic people from leaving the messages anyway. There was also supposed to be a protest outside of his home this weekend. If you want to protest, the common sense answer would be to protest outside his DC office or his home state office, but leave his home alone!!!!!
Some Democratic congressman had the windows to their offices broken by rocks being thrown into them.
There were threatening phone calls made to Republican congressman who voted against the law. There were also threatening phone calls made to Democratic congressman who voted for the law. Some of the calls actually threatened their lives with physical harm and some even mentioned death.
I believe that the increase in threats and intimidation is being fueled by the political leaders. A prime example is when the hearings were being conducted, a bunch of Republican congressman, stood on the balcony of the Capital building and held the same signs as the protesters while cheering (egging) them on. What violence some of those people may take back home with them remains unknown at the present. But who knows what they may do? Will the violence, threats and intimidation increase all in the name of their beliefs? I hope that does not happen, because that means we are really sinking into a sad state of affairs for this country. In addition, Sarah Palin thought that it was OK to write on her Facebook page, "Don't retreat, instead reload." There were also the cross hairs of a rifle scope aimed at some blue states. I am sure that there are some morons out there that will take that statement as a call to arms, literally and some bad violence will happen because of her words, which she makes no apologies for. Which means that it is OK to talk in gun related terms and pictures when speaking about your opponents. It seems to me that there are more civilized ways of using the English language.
If you start a forest fire, you will be held liable for any and all destruction that the fire (that you started) caused, including any deaths. I think that political leaders should also be held liable in the same way because it seems that they are the ones who are fueling the increases in threats and intimidation with their own words. If they start the fire, hold them liable and accountable. That would stop them in their tracks. There are too many crazy people living in this country that just need a little nudge to push them over the edge for them to do some crazy and unthinkable acts. Then those same political leaders who said the words that started the violence, will denounce the acts. But those same people will not ever, ever admit that maybe, just maybe, their words were the catalyst that started the acts of violence. THE ENDS DO NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS no matter what spin you put on this!
So what appears to be happening in this country is that if you disagree you are threatened with with physical harm to you and maybe even your family, including death. Is this the type of country we want? I dare say that it is not! Using common sense mandates that there are other ways i.e.: legal ways to oppose something that happens in DC. Violence is never, ever the answer. I dare anyone to try to convince me that threats and intimidation are the avenue to take. It isn't and that person would be wasting their time.
With leadership comes responsibilities and you would think common sense. Politicians have no shame and it seems to be getting worse every year since 2000. How much more worse can it get? On 3/24/10 Republicans shut down all Senate hearings regarding any topic and they now have said that they will not work with any Democrats. Not for nothing, how childish is that? The elected officials are to do work for the American people and not stop the process just because they lost and now hold a grudge. Get over it and move on.
Til next week.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Out of Control Acceleration or Hyperbole
Hi Everyone:
Well it seems that Toyota's out of control acceleration problem with certain vehicles has gotten worse. Or has it? Last year there were approximately less then 100 reported problems with the acceleration. This year, remember that it is only March, there are thousands of reported problems. How is that possible? I believe that when people started to hear about the problem from the media, they jumped on the bandwagon for whatever reason.
Toyota's first solution to the problem was to stabilize the driver's floor mat. That would then prevent the mat from pressing on the accelerator. I guess that was a possibility. I also believe that they did some kind of work on the actual gas pedal itself. Again I think that is a possibility.
A College Professor, out west, with a PhD in Automotive engineering was able to mimic the out of control acceleration problem by actually opening up the supposed involved computer system and crossing some wires. He said that proved that the acceleration problem was definitely possible. So in order to mimic the problem he had to cross some wires? Of all the reported problems, who in their right mind would have done that? I don't think anyone did that. Sorry Professor but your theory doesn't make any sense.
A Consumer Reports automotive engineer dissected the computers in question in 1 of each of the recalled models and found absolutely nothing wrong with them. Consumer Reports has not been able to copy the problem and has not experienced the problem with any of the "suspected" vehicle models during all of the testing that they do.
Does this out of control acceleration problem sound familiar? If you remember, back in the 1980's, the Audi 5000 also supposedly had a similar problem with out of control acceleration. Tests were done and they never, ever found a problem. But that didn't stop a whole lot of people from jumping on the bandwagon and saying they had a problem. Audi then stopped making the 5000's.
From all the news reports that I have read or seen, it appears that the majority of the drivers who supposedly experienced the problem were drivers 55 years old and older. Could they have mistakenly stepped on the gas pedal instead of the brakes? I suspect that is entirely possible. One of the more TV news worthy reports was about the man who was speeding down the highway at 94 mph and couldn't stop his car. He called 911. The 911 operator asked him if he tried to put the car in neutral. If you listen to the 911 tape, he answers no to that question. What? Your car is supposedly speeding down the highway and all you do is to step on the brakes? When the police caught up to him all of a sudden he was able to reduce his speed to 55 and he then turned the car off and coasted to a stop. A news report that I just heard today now questions the legitimacy of his claim. Nothing was found wrong with his Toyota and the authorities believe that he was just in a hurry and didn't want to get a speeding ticket. That sounds very believable to me.
Last week a 72 year old man was driving his Mercedes-Benz SUV when he mowed down 6 parishioners in a Brooklyn, New York church parking lot, killing a mother of 2 and injuring 5 others. The driver put the vehicle in reverse and then sped up when the accident occurred. Does this mean that there is a problem with MB SUV's. I think not. A few years ago right here where I live, an elderly driver drove his car into the brick wall of our local Rite-Aid store. The car did considerable damage to the wall including knocking it down and the nose of the car ended up inside the store. The driver said that he had his foot on the brakes and the car wouldn't stop. It was determined that he mistakenly stepped on the gas pedal instead of the brakes. Additionally, last week a 56 year old driver of a 2005 Toyota Prius crashed into a stone wall in Harrison, New York. She said that she couldn't stop the car after it accelerated. The 2005 Prius isn't even part of the recall. But she swears it happened. A Toyota engineer is scheduled to check out the car this week including reading the black box. Maybe that would give enough info to help determine what happened. Who knew that cars had black boxes? Not me.
In my opinion, I think a lot of the out of control acceleration incidents is the drivers fault. People do not like to admit that they made a mistake and desperately want and need a scapegoat. They need to blame something or someone else other then their own stupidity or mistake.
If all of the drivers involved in these supposedly out of control acceleration incidents just did these 2 simple, but definitely common sense procedures that take milliseconds. Then there wouldn't be a crash with the possibility of injuries and or death, and one could bring the car to a stop. If you have a car that is accelerating uncontrollably, immediately put the car in neutral and step on the brakes. How damn simple is that? Enough said!
Til next week.
Well it seems that Toyota's out of control acceleration problem with certain vehicles has gotten worse. Or has it? Last year there were approximately less then 100 reported problems with the acceleration. This year, remember that it is only March, there are thousands of reported problems. How is that possible? I believe that when people started to hear about the problem from the media, they jumped on the bandwagon for whatever reason.
Toyota's first solution to the problem was to stabilize the driver's floor mat. That would then prevent the mat from pressing on the accelerator. I guess that was a possibility. I also believe that they did some kind of work on the actual gas pedal itself. Again I think that is a possibility.
A College Professor, out west, with a PhD in Automotive engineering was able to mimic the out of control acceleration problem by actually opening up the supposed involved computer system and crossing some wires. He said that proved that the acceleration problem was definitely possible. So in order to mimic the problem he had to cross some wires? Of all the reported problems, who in their right mind would have done that? I don't think anyone did that. Sorry Professor but your theory doesn't make any sense.
A Consumer Reports automotive engineer dissected the computers in question in 1 of each of the recalled models and found absolutely nothing wrong with them. Consumer Reports has not been able to copy the problem and has not experienced the problem with any of the "suspected" vehicle models during all of the testing that they do.
Does this out of control acceleration problem sound familiar? If you remember, back in the 1980's, the Audi 5000 also supposedly had a similar problem with out of control acceleration. Tests were done and they never, ever found a problem. But that didn't stop a whole lot of people from jumping on the bandwagon and saying they had a problem. Audi then stopped making the 5000's.
From all the news reports that I have read or seen, it appears that the majority of the drivers who supposedly experienced the problem were drivers 55 years old and older. Could they have mistakenly stepped on the gas pedal instead of the brakes? I suspect that is entirely possible. One of the more TV news worthy reports was about the man who was speeding down the highway at 94 mph and couldn't stop his car. He called 911. The 911 operator asked him if he tried to put the car in neutral. If you listen to the 911 tape, he answers no to that question. What? Your car is supposedly speeding down the highway and all you do is to step on the brakes? When the police caught up to him all of a sudden he was able to reduce his speed to 55 and he then turned the car off and coasted to a stop. A news report that I just heard today now questions the legitimacy of his claim. Nothing was found wrong with his Toyota and the authorities believe that he was just in a hurry and didn't want to get a speeding ticket. That sounds very believable to me.
Last week a 72 year old man was driving his Mercedes-Benz SUV when he mowed down 6 parishioners in a Brooklyn, New York church parking lot, killing a mother of 2 and injuring 5 others. The driver put the vehicle in reverse and then sped up when the accident occurred. Does this mean that there is a problem with MB SUV's. I think not. A few years ago right here where I live, an elderly driver drove his car into the brick wall of our local Rite-Aid store. The car did considerable damage to the wall including knocking it down and the nose of the car ended up inside the store. The driver said that he had his foot on the brakes and the car wouldn't stop. It was determined that he mistakenly stepped on the gas pedal instead of the brakes. Additionally, last week a 56 year old driver of a 2005 Toyota Prius crashed into a stone wall in Harrison, New York. She said that she couldn't stop the car after it accelerated. The 2005 Prius isn't even part of the recall. But she swears it happened. A Toyota engineer is scheduled to check out the car this week including reading the black box. Maybe that would give enough info to help determine what happened. Who knew that cars had black boxes? Not me.
In my opinion, I think a lot of the out of control acceleration incidents is the drivers fault. People do not like to admit that they made a mistake and desperately want and need a scapegoat. They need to blame something or someone else other then their own stupidity or mistake.
If all of the drivers involved in these supposedly out of control acceleration incidents just did these 2 simple, but definitely common sense procedures that take milliseconds. Then there wouldn't be a crash with the possibility of injuries and or death, and one could bring the car to a stop. If you have a car that is accelerating uncontrollably, immediately put the car in neutral and step on the brakes. How damn simple is that? Enough said!
Til next week.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Free Range
Hi Everyone:
Before I begin with today's topic, I would like to pass something on to you all. After last weeks blog, I received an email from one of my more avid readers. The reader added 3 more rules to my list of rules for all of the politicians in Washington. So here are the 3 additional rules:
19) All of congress will go back to their States or districts 6 months out of the year, unless there is an emergency session.
20) No elected Senator or Representative will meet with a lobbyist outside of their office and all meetings will be recorded.
21) No elected Senator or Representative will serve more then 2 terms.
Now you might be wondering about what the title of today's topic means. When you hear the term free range, it is almost always about chickens. I have heard so many people talk about how they prefer free range chickens over caged chickens. Right off the bat, let me state that I am not a fan of overcrowding of chickens in a caged environment. So let's look at the difference between free range vs. caged.
What most people do not know or realize is that chickens can and will be carnivores if ever given the opportunity. So if you raise chickens free range, they will eat any small animal, live or dead, that they will inevitably find. What does that mean? You can not control what the chickens eat and that worries me. Dead animals can have any number of diseases. Puddles of stagnant water can also be a problem.
On the other hand, chickens raised in cramped quarters, in a caged environment are often given antibiotics to stem the spread of disease due to the cramped conditions. This also worries me. But you can raise chickens in a caged environment as long as they are not cramped. That means that you don't need to give them antibiotics. But, you can raise them organically if you so chose. I raised my chickens without the use of antibiotics and I used organic feed and never had a problem. I also raised my chickens on a raised platform with chicken wire as the floor, yes it really is called chicken wire. Chicken wire is used so that their droppings drop through the wire and doesn't stay in their living area meaning a cleaner environment. Additionally, fresh clean water is not a problem.
So let's review:
Free range: Caged:
Can't control what they eat or drink. Can control what they eat and drink.
If given the choice which would you choose? To me, the common sense answer is organically fed caged chickens.
So now you have the info to make an informed decision and common sense dictates which is the better choice. Bon appetite.
Til next week.
Before I begin with today's topic, I would like to pass something on to you all. After last weeks blog, I received an email from one of my more avid readers. The reader added 3 more rules to my list of rules for all of the politicians in Washington. So here are the 3 additional rules:
19) All of congress will go back to their States or districts 6 months out of the year, unless there is an emergency session.
20) No elected Senator or Representative will meet with a lobbyist outside of their office and all meetings will be recorded.
21) No elected Senator or Representative will serve more then 2 terms.
Now you might be wondering about what the title of today's topic means. When you hear the term free range, it is almost always about chickens. I have heard so many people talk about how they prefer free range chickens over caged chickens. Right off the bat, let me state that I am not a fan of overcrowding of chickens in a caged environment. So let's look at the difference between free range vs. caged.
What most people do not know or realize is that chickens can and will be carnivores if ever given the opportunity. So if you raise chickens free range, they will eat any small animal, live or dead, that they will inevitably find. What does that mean? You can not control what the chickens eat and that worries me. Dead animals can have any number of diseases. Puddles of stagnant water can also be a problem.
On the other hand, chickens raised in cramped quarters, in a caged environment are often given antibiotics to stem the spread of disease due to the cramped conditions. This also worries me. But you can raise chickens in a caged environment as long as they are not cramped. That means that you don't need to give them antibiotics. But, you can raise them organically if you so chose. I raised my chickens without the use of antibiotics and I used organic feed and never had a problem. I also raised my chickens on a raised platform with chicken wire as the floor, yes it really is called chicken wire. Chicken wire is used so that their droppings drop through the wire and doesn't stay in their living area meaning a cleaner environment. Additionally, fresh clean water is not a problem.
So let's review:
Free range: Caged:
Can't control what they eat or drink. Can control what they eat and drink.
If given the choice which would you choose? To me, the common sense answer is organically fed caged chickens.
So now you have the info to make an informed decision and common sense dictates which is the better choice. Bon appetite.
Til next week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)