Posts

Showing posts from August, 2016

Walt Disney: The Impossible Man

Image
By most accounts he was a difficult man. He lived in an age where adults smoked constantly, and was seldom without a cigarette. He died at 65, not surprisingly from complications surrounding lung cancer. He damaged his spine playing polo in the 1930s and suffered from it the rest of his life. And he changed the world. Something about a sharp-dressed man... Like it or not, Walt Disney rearranged the face of entertainment. The stories and characters he brought to life are known in every corner of the world, and his influence on animation, film in general, and popular entertainment as a whole are beyond calculation. I’ve read everything I could lay my hands on about Walt. The more I learn about him, the less I seem to know. A genius before his time who saw what animation could become? The quintessential common man who reflected a cleaned up, homogenized version of America back on itself? The tinkerer who loved gadgets and trains and multiplane cameras? Certainly Walt was

The Idiocy of Term Limits

Normally when I compose one of these little diatribes I start with as many facts as I can muster about the subject. This serves two purposes: hopefully inoculating me from making hugely stupid or false statements, and imposing some sort of order on the essay. In the case of term limits, however, facts are difficult to come by—but there is no shortage of opinion. Supporters of term limits usually hit three themes: corruption, or the amount of influence lobbyists have on legislators, the lack of diversity and the preponderance of career politicians in legislatures without term limits (such as Congress), and the savings from decreased spending that must surely follow when term limits are imposed. Writing in the Washington Post Niraj Choksi managed to cite several different abstracts from major sources: a 2006 National Conference of State Legislatures study, a 2010 Wayne State University study, and a 2005 Public Policy Institute of California study. NCSL is an advocacy group for state

The Convention of States Project

Let’s just be clear here on what The Convention of States Project is. They identify four “abuses” perpetrated by the Federal government that they feel need to be addressed. From their website: 1. The Spending and Debt Crisis The $17 trillion national debt is staggering, but it only tells a part of the story. Under standard accounting practices, the federal government owes around $100 trillion more in vested Social Security benefits and other programs. This is why the government cannot tax its way out of debt. Even if it confiscated everything, it would not cover the debt. 2. The Regulatory Crisis The federal bureaucracy has placed a regulatory burden upon businesses that is complex, conflicted, and crushing. Little accountability exists when agencies—rather than Congress—enact the real substance of the law. Research from the American Enterprise Institute shows that since 1949, federal regulations have lowered the real GDP growth by 2% and made America 72% poorer. 3. Congressional A

The NFL: 110 out of 111

Update 9/29/2017 Saw this today on FB: I am smart enough to recognize that I am not as smart as I would like to be. Many of you out there (especially liberals) are much smarter......so I am trying to figure something out. Maybe you can help me.   Here's my question: If kneeling during the national anthem rather than standing before the flag (which represents the nation and the sacrifices people have made on behalf of this nation) is not about the flag, then why are these "people" choosing that brief two minute time to kneel? Let me see if I can parse this out.  The contention seems to be that "about the flag" refers to some sort of recognized, laudable, mandatory civic duty.  It represents "the nation and the sacrifices people have made on behalf of this nation."  One assumes the  reference to sacrifice refers to the many thousands who fought, suffered, and died in the armed services of the country to purchase that freedom. The oath one tak

The Matterhorn

When I was 11 my parents dropped me off at Disneyland with a friend. Roll your eyes if you must when I say it was different back then, but, well—it was different back then. As kids of course we loved it: we weren’t “little kids” any more, whatever that means. By some obscure evaluation we had been found qualified to look after ourselves in an amusement park with thousands of other humans. We blasted past Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln (who wants to waste a precious 45 minutes waiting in line to watch a robot? Although the lighting and the Gettysburg sound effects were pretty cool.) and made immediately for the Matterhorn to get on when the line was at its shortest. One of the things you’re really good at when you’re 11 is running through crowds of adults and small children moving slowly in a limited area. You chose your path while constantly re-evaluating and making small adjustments. Faster to go around the fat couple from Des Moines using the path that goes toward the castle,

Was the ACA "shoved down our throats"?

This post appeared on my newsfeed written by someone I’ve never met in response to the story of Aetna pulling out of one of their less profitable healthcare markets. The story is being spun as an example that the Affordable Care Act was wrong all along and that the insurance companies know best. I see red whenever the words “shoved down our throats” are used to describe an act of Congress. Danita *** ***: I don't have any issue with healthcare for all. I DO think this plan wasn't done well and shoved down the throats of most Americans who now can't afford the premiums or are opting to risk the IRS penalty because it's too cost prohibitive. What Congress should do is look closely at Medicare and Medicaid fix the issues there THEN add what's needed to cover those who are not insured. Yes the insurance industry is as corrupt as Washington politicians but until those two entities work together the problem will not be resolved and the middle class will carry that burde

Second Amendment

Image
Here are some facts: The Bill of Rights was modeled largely on the Virginal Declaration of Rights (drafted May, 1776, by George Mason) that predated the Declaration of Independence by about a month. The Declaration of Independence was heavily influenced by the Virginia Declaration as well. Article XIII of the Virginia Declaration: That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and be governed by, the civil power. The Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, ratified in September of that year, borrowed Article XIII very closely but with some interesting variations: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be

What is Since You Asked?

My Facebook rule, for as long as I can remember, is to avoid posting anything with political or religious content. Not surprisingly I have fallen from this ideal several times. (It usually involves reading a post that agitates me in some way, but that’s not important—my commitment to keeping Facebook a positive place for people who have friended me is.) It’s not that I have anything against political or religious expression—far from it. If you know me, my politics and views on religion are no surprise. I have several Facebook friends who post largely political things with lots of humor thrown in, and whether I agree with them or not they have a certain grace in how they express things. But as for me, I think it best, at least as far as Facebook is concerned, to refrain from venturing into those waters. I do have opinions on these things. Who doesn’t? I think the best way to reconcile this is to gather what writing I have done on religion and politics in a place where one has to a