Gender: Male
Status: Divorced
Age: 64
Sign: Gemini
City: Sunny Denver
State: Colorado
Country: US
Signup Date:
04/09/06
|
Blog Archive
[ Older
Newer ]
|
|
 |
|
Saturday, October 11, 2008
|
Sooooo OLDE! :-)
Current mood:  amused
Category: Life
Each year St. George, Utah, hosts seniors from around the country. Seniors, in this case, are defined as people at least 50 years old -- but not your typical aged and infirm victims of outliving their usefulness. 
In fact, the seniors gather to compete in 24 different types of events, ranging from archery and bridge to volleyball and walking.
I'm looking forward to experiencing the Huntsman Games this month for the first time. I'll be there for the volleyball and, perhaps, for some additional motivation and conviviality. Will any of you join me?
For more information, please visit the web site: http://www.seniorgames.net/
3:50 AM
-
2 Comments - 4 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
|
October 7, 1998
Current mood:  sad
Category: Life
It was 10 years ago.
Matthew Shepard was beaten and left to die. He was 21 years old, 5'2" tall and all of 105 pounds -- an easy target. And, oh yes, he was gay.
RIP Matthew Shepard.
Let us pause and remember, and let us each reflect on our own actions.
4:38 AM
-
12 Comments - 28 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Sunday, September 28, 2008
|
The Aspen are Golden
Category: Life
It was a terrific wedding present from friends: a weekend at the Redstone Inn, towering above the Crystal River between Marble and Carbondale, Colorado. What a delightful place -- absolutely beautiful, although the rooms aren't the finest or the most luxurious.
We made a standing reservation for the last weekend in September, each year, when the aspen trees would be at their golden best. This would have been our weekend, although we no longer are together, and we no longer go to Redstone.
Indeed, high in the mountains the aspen have turned. There is color everywhere. The Crystal River runs clear and cold. Days are warm and sunny; the nights are crisp and cool. The leaves shimmer as the breeze runs through them.
Along with the gold, and oranges, and yellows, and reds, there is a new mix of color this year. Brown. Dead pine trees resulting from the current epidemic of pine beetles.
I didn't get to Redstone this year, although I might get to drive into the mountains nearby in two weeks. I'm just saddened by the loss of trees and the wrong color.
If you have a chance next September, consider the Redstone Inn. Hike along the river, or fish. Ride horseback, or bike, or play tennis, or soak in the hot tub, but be sure to visit the marble pits. Enjoy the magnificent Sunday brunch, and marvel at the colors. With any luck, brown won't be one of the significant colors next year. Bring a camera.
You might also want to look into the history of this quaint town, built by John Osgood as a utopian community for his workers and their families. You will find more online or in the National Register of Historic Places.
I just thought you would like to know about one of my favorite places.
4:20 AM
-
8 Comments - 18 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Friday, September 26, 2008
|
Elections for Sale (Hint: not by Democrats)
Category: News and Politics
In the 2004 election, Teller County Colorado voters were coming in to vote, but the poll books said they had already voted. The hadn't, but the Republican crooks who run Teller County had cast "absentee ballots" for them, and so marked the registration rolls, not expecting the voter to actually show up at the polls and demand to vote. A call was placed to the clerk and recorder to complain, and lo and behold about 9:30 in the morning, a courier delivered a whole new set of registration rolls to the polls with the correct information.
In effect, the clerk was keeping two sets of books; the correct ones and the cooked ones. That is a felony in Colorado, but the Secretary of State refused to investigate. That Secretary of State, a Republican, now is running for Congress.
*****
John Gardner now is the techie responsible for programming the voting machines in El Paso County. He claims a degree from Montana State University, but Montana State denies ever awarding him a degree. In 2005, he had been hired by the Colorado Secretary of State's office and given responsibility for certifying the voting machines to be used in the election. Judge Manzanares, in ruling on the class action contesting that certification, ruled that Gardner's rules for certification provided no minimum standards and were legally insufficient.
Mike Coffman, Republican, now campaigning for Congress, was elected Colorado's Secretary of State in 2006, and Gardner continued running the voting-machine tests under his leadership. Four voting-machine companies had sold equipment in Colorado and were going through the certification process. In late 2007, Coffman announced that machines from three of those vendors had been decertified.
Only machines from Premier Election Solutions, formerly known as Diebold, passed the tests, puzzling critics who point out that Diebold machines are vulnerable to viruses and use software that the company admits can miscount votes. Gardner says Premier machines, which are used in El Paso County, came closest to meeting state requirements.
*****
A local businessman failed to disclose his personal ties to a top employee at the Secretary of State's office when he obtained two state contracts this year worth nearly $184,000, documents obtained from that office reveal.
But agency officials decided to allow John Paulsen to keep his contracts because his services are needed for the November election, "and no other contractor can provide these services within the short time frame," agency spokesman Richard Coolidge said Monday.
Paulsen operates a software company - LEDS, LLC - from his home in
Castle Rock. His company has two state jobs. The first $84,900 contract, signed in April, is to provide counties with ballot information for this year's elections. The second $98,900 contract, signed Aug. 29, is to compile data
reports from the November election.
In early August, weeks before the second contract was signed, the secretary of state's office was notified by a county clerk that Paulsen had leased a downtown Denver apartment to Holly Lowder, according to an e-mail written Sept. 10 by chief administrative officer Jacque Ponder.
Lowder was the elections director at the secretary of state's office. That office took action on that tip but could not elaborate because of state personnel rules. Lowder resigned Sept. 4.
Lowder supposedly was not involved in Paulsen's contracts. Lowder said in an interview Sept. 5 that she has known Paulsen for 15 years but did not have any conflict of interest in his business dealings with her agency.
The ties between Lowder and Paulsen date back to 1993, when she was the clerk in Alamosa County and bought Paulsen's voter-registration software. The two recently worked together on the new statewide voter-registration database known as SCORE.
E-mails obtained by the /Rocky Mountain News/ show that agency officials were struggling with how to handle the Paulsen contracts.
4:38 AM
-
4 Comments - 10 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Monday, September 22, 2008
|
You owe $33,333.
Category: News and Politics
It's your money!
While Congress and the President debate the plan for a $700 billion bailout, we have a tough time grasping what that will mean. Let's try to simplify this whole matter to take a broad look at what it all means.
One portion of the bailout includes increasing the statutory MAXIMUM national debt above $11 TRILLION.
Our national debt currently is rapidly approaching the $10 trillion dollar amount. Let's play with that money for a second, and we'll just round it up to the even figure of the $10 trillion it is likely to pass shortly. [I am not presenting a precise study here, just approximate numbers to allow us to grasp what is happening.]
There are somewhat over 300 million Americans. That's over 300,000,000 men, women and children, but let's round it down to that number so that we can work with it.
The 300 million of us owe, in the national debt, $10 trillion.
Your share is about $33,333.
If you have a child, your child's share is about $33,333. Likewise the share of your spouse, your sibling, your parent, your neighbor. A household of 4 owes about $133,333.
The national debt resembles most other debts. It draws interest. Now that interest rate can vary, depending on whether it is short term or long term, and on other factors. It can be low, or it can be high. Let's pick a figure (not entirely at random) and assume that the average interest rate on YOUR debt is 3% per annum.
Your interest payment comes out to $1,000 per year. Each year. For each of us. For that household of 4, it's $4,000 each and every year.
While we might not actually pay back the national debt, we do pay the interest. It turns out that interest payment of yours is computed into your taxes.
Oh, wait. Not everybody pays taxes. So actually, if you do pay taxes, you have to pay your own share of the interest AND somebody else's interest. In fact, on a national level, we will pay about $300 billion dollars per year in interest on our national debt this year.
That's $300 billion before we wage a war in Iraq, or before we repair a bridge, or build a school, or help a veteran, or fight an epidemic. It's $300 billion that doesn't make life better for anyone (except perhaps those who own the debt).
Today we're talking about a financial bailout that is expected to cost $700 billion dollars. Your share of that amount is about $2,333. You can expect to add that to what you owe.
And don't forget to add a similar amount for everyone else.
Plus, don't forget that the interest each year will be another $30 billion, costing every American an extra $100 per year. The cost to a typical household of 4 is another $400 per year.
We talk about a national debt, and it might never get paid off. Much of it is owed to Americans who invest in US Treasury Bonds or Bills; and much of it is owed to foreign nations or individuals. We might have some in our IRA or other investment accounts, if we're fortunate, and when our bond matures the government will borrow from somebody else to pay us.
One of the problems, though, is that it might cost more to borrow that money in order to pay us. There could be inflation, or there might be other reasons why US Treasuries are less popular, and the cost of that national debt might rise to $500 billion per year, or $600 billion per year, or more.
Those costs are likely to go up as the national debt goes up.
Aside from the value of just thinking about all this, there's a kicker. Under President Clinton, this country was operating with a large surplus. We were paying down the national debt. Under the current administration, we have been operating with record deficits. We have been increasing the national debt.
We have been increasing the national debt because we have taken in less money than we have spent.
We have not increased expenditures significantly in most areas, other than Iraq. Indeed, the President has tried to decrease expenditures in many human services areas. However, any attempted reductions in expenditures have been far outweighed by the costs of the war.
Moreover, we have taken in less money because we have given huge tax breaks to oil companies. We have taken in less money because we have given huge income tax reductions to very wealthy individuals. We have taken in less money because we have reduced or eliminated the estate and inheritance tax for wealthy families.
The rich have benefited, and your share of the national debt has risen. The rich have benefited, and your child's share of the national debt has risen.
This is a price we will be paying for many years to come. It is the price of electing a Republican President. We cannot afford to make that mistake again.
Can your children afford another Republican President?
5:10 PM
-
17 Comments - 24 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Saturday, September 20, 2008
|
Is Capitalism Dead?
Category: News and Politics
Ok, so it's probably the biggest story of our lifetimes -- of any lifetime -- and probably none of us has a clue.
7:04 PM
-
15 Comments - 15 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
|
Stealing an Election ... 2008
Category: News and Politics
Do you remember the hanging chads of 2000 in Florida, or the voter disenfranchisement of 2004 in Ohio? Do you remember the allegations of stolen elections? You haven't seen anything yet, but do keep your eyes open.
The Republican National Committee has sent out tens of thousands of letters to Democrats registered in Florida. These letters state that the recipient is a registered Republican who needs to send back to the RNC confirmation that he/she is indeed registered and living at the address. The envelopes, in which the letters are delivered, bear the message "Do Not Forward."
Why, you may ask, would the RNC send out these letters? Well, many of the Democrats might be snowbirds, spending the summer months outside of Florida. When the letters are returned, rather than forwarded, the RNC will challenge each of these Democratic voters. Ultimately, voting in Democratic precincts in Florida will take more time and be more problematic because of these challenges.
Also in Florida, lists of convicted felons are being compared with voter registration lists. Any potential voter having the same name, or even a similar name, to a convicted felon will face a challenge and possible loss of his/her voting rights.
In Michigan, Republicans are checking voter registration with lists of foreclosed homes in Democratic precincts. It isn't bad enough to lose one's home, now they want to make sure that the voter cannot vote against the party that led us into this economic morass.
In Colorado, the former Secretary of State has reported that 19.5% of the voters were removed from the voter registration lists in 2006. The current Secretary of State (also a Republican) has refused to provide any information.
Elsewhere, the McCain campaign has mailed out thousands of documents purporting to be requests for absentee ballots. These documents, sent to Democrats and Independents, have errors in the forms, the instructions, or the return address. A lot of non-Republican voters will find themselves unable to cast their absentee ballots because they never will receive them.
One such form, mailed to an Iowa Democrat, asked for his Ohio Driver's License number and had an Ohio return address. A Minneapolis woman received an unsolicited Colorado form with an Arlington, Virginia, return address. In North Carolina, the forms being sent out lack a space for the date of birth, a requirement in North Carolina. Similar tactics have been employed by McCain supporters in at least half a dozen key states.
The problem in Missouri is more complex, as that state has a strict set of guidelines for which voters can vote by absentee ballot. Ineligible voters might face a challenge or, worse yet, might face felony charges that would render them permanently ineligible for voting.
It would appear that Republicans have little faith in the process of fair elections. They're planning to steal this one.
5:02 AM
-
25 Comments - 24 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
LIes? Is McBush a liar? Doh!
Category: News and Politics
Following is a letter written by a friend of mine -- yes, I do have friends who are Republicans, and I think you'll see why as you read.
"As some of you to whom I am sending this email may know, I am an elected official of the Republican Party in Suffolk County.The following was printed in the New York Times editorial page today. Nevertheless I have become totally disgusted with the lies and negative attack ads being utilized by my Party in this current National Election Campaign. In that vein I am sending you all the following, which was the main part of an column on the Editorial Page of the New York Times today, and summarizes what has gone on.
'Sure politicians occasionally stretch the truth or exaggerate, but willful and conscious lying is something else, which makes the stream of fabrications from the McCain campaign over the last week that much more shocking.
'As Farhad Manjoo in Slate.com succinctly put it: "Since July, John McCain and his campaign have made 11 political claims that are barely true, eight that are categorically false, and three that you'd have to call pants-on-fire lies — a total of 22 clearly deceptive statements (many of them made repeatedly in ads and stump speeches)." The Obama campaign has also occasionally strayed from the truth. But the actions of the McCain campaign are venturing into territory rarely before seen on the campaign trail.
'Politicians generally go to great lengths to avoid being seen as acting dishonestly, because the consequences are usually so great. In 1988, when Joseph Biden was caught lifting key phrases from the political speeches of British Labor Leader Neil Kinnock his campaign quickly fell apart.
'In 2000, Al Gore never truly recovered from the repeated assertions by his political opponents that he was a serial exaggerator, including claims that he invented the Internet. (And those weren't even lies!)
'During this year's Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton saw the momentum of her presidential campaign fatally slowed when it was discovered she lied about having come under sniper fire in Bosnia.
'When mistruths are spread by others on the campaign trail, candidates try to stay as far away as possible. For example, when the Swift Boat attacks of 2004 were made against Democratic nominee John Kerry, the Bush campaign distanced itself from those responsible even as it reaped the political rewards.
'And when campaign's make stinging political attacks, whether it was the Daisy ad of 1964 or the Willie Horton ad of 1988, they have almost always been grounded in some factual basis.
'For better or for worse, being seen as dishonest or lying is the one line that no politician ever wants to cross. Until now, it seems.
'During the last week, the McCain campaign has unabashedly engaged in the active spreading of mistruths and falsehoods. It said that Barack Obama supported "comprehensive sex education" for children in kindergarten ("dishonest" and "deceptive" said The Washington Post); that Mr. Obama used the colloquial expression "lipstick on a pig" to describe Sarah Palin (G.O.P. Senator Orrin Hatch labeled the charge "ridiculous"); that Ms. Palin never accepted earmarks as governor of Alaska; (this is patently false, she actually requested $450 million in earmarks as governor); that Mr. Obama will raise taxes on middle-class families (his plan would actually give a tax cut to 80 percent of Americans); that his health care plan will force families into a government-run health care plan; (a public health expert quoted in this paper called that "inaccurate and false"); that Ms. Palin told Congress "thanks, but no thanks" on the Bridge to Nowhere (she initially supported the bridge and kept the Congressional funds earmarked for the project); that Ms. Palin visited Ireland and Iraq (her airplane refueled in the former and never crossed the border into the latter). Now there are even reports that the McCain campaign fabricated crowd estimates for a recent rally in Virginia.
'Even after the press debunked each of these lies, the McCain campaign has refused to concede the truth. Though news outlets have consistently shown that Ms. Palin's claim about the Bridge to Nowhere is not true, she continues to repeat it to the point where MSNBC's Hardball began to keep a running tally of how often Ms. Palin made the same false assertion on the campaign trail.
'According to Brian Rogers, a McCain spokesman, "we're running a campaign to win. And we're not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say about it." Indeed, Mr. Rogers claimed the campaign had "detailed backup" for "everything" it has said. "If you and the Obama campaign want to disagree," he told reporters, "that's your call." Of course, detailed backup is not necessarily truth. The McCain campaign seems to be operating under the notion that if their distortions about Barack Obama become part of the campaign discourse, voters will pay less attention to the fact-checking response or dismiss it as the usual he-said-she-said of American politics.
'On the campaign trail facts can be flexible things and both parties have long trafficked in occasionally unfair stereotyping or exaggerations about their rivals. But the experience of the 2008 campaign is disturbingly unique. For the first time in modern political history, a presidential campaign, its candidate and running mate have engaged in a repeated pattern of lies and misstatements — and seemingly done so without pause.
'The greatest surprise in all of this is that Mr. McCain is the one responsible. This the same John McCain who had untruths about his mental stability and his supposedly illegitimate black daughter (she's Bangladeshi and adopted) hurled against him by allies of George Bush during the 2000 South Carolina Republican primary. This is the same John McCain who has long emphasized his embrace of personal honor and integrity that he learned as an officer in the Navy.
'And consider Mr. McCain's 1999 biography "Faith of my Fathers" in which he writes of his father and grandfather and his life-long aspirations "to live my life according to the terms of their approval." In speaking of the bedrock role that personal honor and virtue played in his father's life, he recounts his brother's words about John S. McCain Jr.: "I have never met a more honest man than my father. I literally cannot think of a single time he did not tell the truth about something, as he best knew it."
'One can only wonder what John McCain's father would think of the campaign his son is running today.'"
3:22 AM
-
12 Comments - 14 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
|
Books, Palin, and the Librarian - Updated
Category: News and Politics
My daily newspaper this morning had a column by Ben Boychuk bearing the headline "Book-ban Smear." I read it. My mistake.
Essentially, it defends Sarah Palin and attacks those who have "questioned" her commitment to the First Amendment.
Boychuk states: "Paliln's contempt for the First Amendment exists only in the fevered imagination of paritsans."
Following is the email I sent to him this morning:
Mr. Boychuk:
Apparently you believe that Sarah Palin's inquiry of the librarian was an exercise that somehow had nothing to do with a desire to remove books from the library. If that is what you believe, then I would be anxious to learn what motive you possibly could attribute to the Mayor for such an inquiry.
Perhaps she was testing Ms. Emmons to be certain that the town's librarian would uphold the Constitution, with the thought of removing any librarian who did not respect the rights of the First Amendment. In that case, Ms. Emmons passed the test with flying colors, only to face subsequent attempts at removal which were mere coincidence.
I am anxious to learn of your facts or theories supporting your notion that Mayor Palin had no intent to remove books from the library. Without such support, your column of this morning is worthless and -- worse yet -- misleading.
Lou
*****
Today's edition of the Rocky Mountain News printed my letter to the editor (essentially my email to Boychuk but directed to the Editor), with some modifications. As the Editor pointed out, altering slightly some language I had used in referring to Boychuk's column: "This is journalism at its worst."
Interesting that the Editor chose to print that sentence, also, since it seems to reflect on the editors of the newspaper as well as on the author of the column.
My letter is printed under a caption "At Issue", with the headline "So why did Palin ask about certain books?"
Readers are invited to go to RockyMountainNews.com/opinion to join the conversation. I think I'll check it out.
4:55 PM
-
31 Comments - 45 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
|
Reply from US Attorney Eid, and my Response
Category: News and Politics
I sent the open letter, and I already received a reply from the US Attorney, Troy Eid. His reply to me, and my response back to him, are below.
--- On Mon, 9/1/08, Eid, Troy (USACO) <Troy.Eid@usdoj.gov> wrote:
From: Eid, Troy (USACO)
Subject:
Date: Monday, September 1, 2008, 6:47 PM
Mr. ___,
Thanks for your note. Certainly you're passionate, and I commend you for
that and for expressing yourself.
I don't agree with your interpretation of the Constitution, which would
transform the First Amendment into license to shout "Fire!" in a
crowded theater (or in your case, to create a privilege to shatter glass and put
innocent people at risk).
To me, yours is an extremist vision that Justice Holmes rightly dispensed with,
a legal matter, nearly a century ago.
Truth is, there was no shortage of protesting in Denver last week. I
personally witnessed it and saw it repeatedly on TV and the Internet.
"The system" isn't calibrated as you'd like. But I believe it
worked: People expressed themselves, the convention did its business, and the
people of Colorado and our guests were safe.
So I did my duty as I saw it, along with a great many others. You disagree,
which is your right, so good for you!
Your letter doesn't persuade me, but I accept and admire your obvious
respect for our democracy and system of government.
So here's to no more apathy, even when we disagree. What's
"pathetic" are people not taking seriously the issues your want to
debate.
Best,
Troy A. Eid, USA
U.S. Attorney's Office
1225 17th Street 700
Denver, CO 80202
303.454.0100, fax 0400
www.usdoj.gov/usao/co Mr. Eid, Thank you for your prompt and courteous reply. I really do appreciate you taking the time to respond. I would point out that Justice Holmes' dictum does nothing to eliminate the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. The right does, in fact, exist. There is no requirement that there be a fire, although I'm sure even you would agree that the right exists in those circumstances. One might ask you if freedom of speech depends on the "mens rea" of the speaker. I don't believe that the people framing the Constitution felt that way. Furthermore, please understand that I neither advocate nor suggest that freedom of speech includes a right to shatter glass or injure people. Speech is protected; illegal activities are not. However, the proper way to deal with illegal activities is to punish the perpetrators for their violations. It is not to broadly punish any group of people who might, or might NOT, commit some violation. While protests may have taken place in Denver, your actions without doubt inhibited those protests and rendered them ineffective. I am not apathetic. I took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and I am writing to honor that oath. Perhaps you took a similar oath? Perhaps you forgot and thought that somehow protecting plate glass was part of your oath? In any event, I thank you for taking the time to respond, and I appreciate your thoughtfulness. Sincerely, Lou
2:53 AM
-
16 Comments - 34 Kudos
- Add Comment
|
|
|
