Some People Really Shouldn't

Hubby's friend Mountain Man had himself an idea.

He said: "Hey, this small Acer Netbook is on sale. Why don't you buy one and I'll scan your receipts into it so that you don't have all those papers getting lost"

Me: Silently screaming "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"

Hubby: "Yeah, that sounds great, let's go."

And they did, and we now have this cute, little 10" Acer Netbook that Mountain Man is not using to scan receipts into. See? I know Mountain Man. He does things on HIS schedule or not at all. Hubby wanted it done on his schedule since he's the one that actually MUST be available when the customers call. So, we are now stuck with a Netbook set up to make PDF files out of customer receipts and not all customer receipts scanned in. And I still have mountains of paper receipts that he keeps making copies of.

There's a problem with creating the files the way he did because as a PDF file, there doesn't appear to be any way to add a new receipt to a file which means creating a new file for every single receipt. *sigh*

Plus, Hubby decided HE wants to learn to do this since I am such an unreliable sort of bookkeeper. Somehow he seems to think that I'm supposed to have the information on things like: jobs HE scheduled for himself without telling me, and then there's the clients that don't want a written receipt. Which I'm supposed to be able to find a copy of when he wants to know something.

He is, of course, bringing this same skill set to the desk when trying to learn how to do this. Which means he can't grasp even the basics without written instructions and then he still has trouble. He's nervous. Ever try to teach someone something when they're nervous? Don't try it, trust me.

We are on week 2 and the letter D. Hub still doesn't grasp that all he's doing is creating an image of the receipt, going to the proper alphabet section to open and name a folder to store the graphic in. He simply doesn't get it because computers are designed to drive us crazy and he has NO sense of humor about that.

In order for him to get it, the screen he looks at and is working with MUST remain EXACTLY the same in looks and behave the same every time. And that ain't going to happen. EVER! With that thing, all you have to do is breathe on the keyboard and stuff changes. Poor man just can't figure out what's happening and I spend a lot of time fixing the problem for him. When I can figure out what the computer decided to do to him, that is.

The Sequester, Where The Poor Become A Sacrifice To The Civilized Conservative's God

I believe it was Oliver Wendell Holmes who said he liked to pay taxes because with them you buy civilization. The problem seems to be in the definition of civilization by today's society. It appears that a bully segment of society have determined that civilization is allowed only for those who are capable of enjoying the material richness of civilization and don't want to pay for it. Somehow or other they, in the name of their God, take it upon themselves to judge those less equipped to enjoy material richness and find them unworthy of the fruits of their civilized existence. Well, the words God and Greed do start with G.

I suppose if I researched it long enough I could find some ancient people who refused to care for their old and infirm. When times were rough, they left their burdens alone to die and feed the prey animals that were needed to feed the rest of the tribe. There were, of course, human sacrifices to appease whatever gods they held dear. They seldom used the elderly in those, having the notion that only the best and brightest of their clans would be considered worthy of the gods. However, those civilizations died out and if mentioned at all today are usually thought of in terms of lacking civilization. They are termed barbarians, savages or to be somewhat kinder, primitives.

If you've been kind enough to read this far I'm assuming you are asking yourself what all this has to do with the Sequester? Allow me to list just a few of the cuts for you and maybe you'll see what I mean.

$175 million will be cut out of Low Income Home Energy Assistance funds (LIHEAP)

$65 million was cut from Impact Aid at the Department of Education


$60 million was cut in salaries and expenses at the Farm Service Agency at USDA

$57 million was cut from the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Account at HHS

$56 million was cut from State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Grants at the Justice Department

$53 million was cut from Salaries and Expenses at the Food Safety and Inspection Service

$50 million was cut from the Home Investment Partnership Program at HUD

46 million was cut from the Rental Assistance Program at the Rural Housing Service

$40 million was cut in Science and Technology at the Environmental Protection Agency

$33 million was cut in money for Native American Housing Block Grants

$28 million was cut from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration at the Dept of Labor

15 million was cut from FEMA's Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program Account

12 million was cut from the Wage and Hour Division at the Department of Labor

2 million from the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

Instead of closing loopholes in the tax code which continue to allow the civilized the joy of making a choice between the red Mercedes or the blue, we CUT the ability of our nation's poor not to have to make the choice between paying rent and having heat. For 2 of my 80+ year old clients, that Rental Assistance Program allows them to actually have a roof over their heads that isn't from a cardboard box or some rat infested slum, but in order for the civilized to remodel their mansions to include car elevators, my clients are being forced to face that risk.

I suppose that the Conservative notion that families or churches need to do more to care for their elderly and infirm is going to be trotted out as a justification for those cuts. The problem I see with that is some of those cuts affect the family's ability to earn enough money to manage to feed, house and clothe their children let alone take on the extra mouth to feed. With the cuts in OSHA, job safety will become a real concern. When workers have accidents due to the benevolence of their employers whose responsibility it will be to see to it that the work environment is "safe", where will the income to care for them come from?

Well, at least all this should resolve the illegal immigrant problem. Why would anyone want to sneak into the US where if the assault weapons don't kill you, the e coli in our food or an accident at our workplaces will?

Is Gun Control Going To Be Enough?

Yesterday in Twitter there was a discussion going on about background checks for those who wish to purchase guns. After observing both sides of the discussion I asked one of them what information did he think these background checks would contain? I did not receive the courtesy of an answer. This happens since I'm not a member of the Twitter Elite, people tend not to pay too much attention to me. That suits me fine since it gives me time to read BOTH sides of the issue and think about it to form my own opinion.

My opinion is, we need to reduce the incidents of gun violence. Whether or not gun control will be successful remains to be seen, because it doesn't address the underlying cause. The tendency on the part of those shooting other people to deal with their emotions at the point of a gun. Someone who thinks shooting others is the answer to their problems shouldn't have access to guns and yet they do. A situation that I do not believe will change with gun control and background checks because most of the shooters I've read about would most likely have passed a background check. Background checks are only going to show something if there is a history of criminal behavior or violence towards others. I believe there has to have been a conviction, not just an accusation but I may be wrong about that.

During that discussion I kept seeing a reference to keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. The persons advancing that point seem to feel that criminals buy guns at gun shows or Walmart. Uh, no. They buy black market items which are usually stolen or smuggled in from someplace else. Drugs aren't the only thing one can buy on many street corners in the United States, or any other country for that matter.Black market guns are virtually untraceable since their identifying numbers have usually been defaced. They cost more but when one is in the business of crime, price is not a problem. A background check isn't going to keep a gun out of the hands of a criminal since they know better than to buy a gun legally. Besides, how many of these people who snapped and killed other people were criminals before they fired those guns?

Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Jared Loughner, James Holmes and Adam Lanza all had something in common. They were angry, they had guns and they killed.  Let's  remember that Harris and Klebold weren't old enough to legally purchase guns, but they got them.  They were being medicated with psychotropic drugs which are known to cause rage, were these drugs a contributing factor?  Had they been old enough to buy those guns on their own, this medication might not turn up in a background check because the federal government has in place a law that protects our health information from being disclosed by any medical practitioner under any circumstances unless they have written consent from us to do so.

My other question regarding background checks is what types of crime would prevent someone from obtaining a permit for the gun? Would a misdemeanor drug possession be enough? What about a DUI? I had to be fingerprinted and have my background checked to go to work as a health aide. I could not be employed as I am if I had been convicted of a certain class of felony. I would assume that would hold true of background checks for gun ownership which brings us right back to where we are now since I haven't found any information that indicates any of the shooters I've mentioned were convicted of felony charges. However, there is a growing group of people who appear to believe that gun control and background checks are the answer. They're trying to push Congress into a vote on the issue.

I'd feel better about it if they'd think things through and be sure that any bill that passes actually has some effect on the problem. Otherwise this entire issue will become another exercise in futility. I don't think it's going to be enough to try to remove the purchase of guns, we need to address the underlying causes of violence. Otherwise people will continue to die.

Duct Tape Has A Dark Side

Sitting in my driveway directly next to my rust bucket is my daughter-in-law's vehicle. Both vehicles are gray, and very similar in shape if you don't look too closely. The biggest difference is the shape of her rear quarter panel, bumper and trunk hood. It's been smushed in by a mishap involving a guard rail. I know smushed isn't a word, but it describes the appearance of a damaged rear end being held together by duct tape as good as any real word. Better, actually.

Driving around here in the past two weeks has been interesting to say the least. I manage it by slowing myself down to 30 or so miles per hour. At that speed I can see the slushy mess that is lying in wait for me and take steps to correct the fishtailing the vehicle likes to do when driving through it. Slow speed skids are easier to correct than those that take place at 55 miles per hour. Snow tires rather than the more popular "All Season" tires help a lot too.

Anyways, her car is damaged, she's refusing to drive it, needs to drive to work so Hub has switched vehicles with her and she's taken his pick up truck while he uses her wreck. Once Spring rolls in he's going to repair her vehicle and keep it. Youngest is on the hunt for a new vehicle for his wife. I'm resisting the inclination to suggest he find an armored car or tank for her, this is the third vehicle she's damaged in 9 years. It's, of course, always the fault of something else, road conditions, deer and the lady that wouldn't get out of her way at the stop light. That accident went unreported since the lady that got rear ended actually left the scene. Possibly driving without a license? Maybe had a few too many brews? Who knows?

Back in the 1960s when I learned to drive, it was impressed upon us that WE, the drivers, were responsible for maintaining control of our vehicles at all times. Charges like "speed not reasonable or prudent" or "driving too fast for road conditions" were actual reasons for receiving speeding tickets which were adjudicated in court. Charges were seldom dismissed since the damage was considered proof of the charge. One paid a fine and a mark or marks were entered onto one's license. Too many of those marks resulted in revocation of one's license. Now it's "black ice" or "slushy road conditions" and nobody goes to court let alone receives a ticket. Now it's the fault of everything else rather than a failure on the part of the driver to maintain control of the vehicle.

The habit of blaming has become so bad that a local school superintendent is being blamed by some of the teachers for the death of a youngster on his way to school. She chose not to delay school opening for a couple of hours until road conditions improved. This accident happened the day after 16 adults lost control of their vehicles and closed a major state highway for hours. Mind you, I drove to work both of those days on those same roads without mishap. On both days I drove those roads shortly before the accidents happened. The speed limit on those roads is 55 miles per hour. I left for work earlier to allow me the extra time the trip needed to accommodate the road conditions I knew would exist. Road conditions which would not allow me to drive at speeds much higher than 30 miles per hour and sometimes not even that fast.

You can tell me how lucky I am, or decide I lead a charmed life. I don't see it that way. I see it more as a decision to accept that actions have consequences and that there are times when those consequences can be fatal. Life doesn't have built in guarantees that accidents won't happen to me, I just want to assure myself that I have done the best I can do to avoid causing damage. Driving safely is a choice that we can make and sometimes making the choice is as simple as slowing down. We all live longer that way.

On Drones, Due Process, and Dead People

I'm continually amazed, and not in a good way, at the cookie cutter, black and white attitudes of my fellow citizens. On any issue there seems to be a black side, a white side and lines drawn that are delineated by whatever pundit one tends to idolize. Sides are stamped out, perimeters are fortified so that nothing can leak through from the outside. There will be no melding of black and white to create gray. That's just not going to happen.

There is a window of opportunity which happens before a person's mind is made up. Once that window closes, any further examination of an issue is nothing more than allowing entrance of that which confirms the decision already made. If you don't believe me, take a good long look at the GOP representatives sitting in Congress. Despite evidence to the contrary they believe they have their feet on the right path. They have their very vocal supporters who affirm that belief through their activism online at Facebook, Twitter or whatever social media they choose to use. I am told they are the minority, however, they seem to be loud and committed to their purpose. The fact that voters reelected President Obama by overwhelming numbers is apparently just a fluke in their minds. That too should prove my point about the window of opportunity and what happens once it's closed. Despite the wide difference in ideology between Conservatives and Progressives, that closed window is also a problem within the Progressive community.

While Conservatives appear to focus on National Defense and keeping Wall Street grifting, Progressives focus on social issues and the subject of injustice. Neither side is overly concerned about Jobs and the economy in any real way, but that seems to be a downside of the closing of that window. Neither side is overly concerned about the 22 veterans a day who are committing suicide. I don't expect Conservatives to care much, I am surprised by the lack of concern on the part of Progressives. Especially the blogging Progressives with their large number of followers and their reach.

Their issue seems to be the due process that was denied (they think) to al-Awlaki and his son when President Obama put him on a "dead or alive" list which resulted in the use of drones which found their target. The issue has again come to the fore over the leak of a white paper which defines in essence how to use drones to kill our enemies. The fact that the man had joined and was actively recruiting for a terrorist organisation would lead me to believe he was an enemy, but without due process according to the intelligentsia, how are we to know for sure?

Sadly, his son also died. I'm inclined to place the responsibility for that on his father, the Progressives aren't. They want it squarely on President Obama for his decision to take out an AMERICAN CITIZEN WITHOUT ACCORDING HIM DUE PROCESS UNDER THE LAW. OMG it could happen to any of us at any time or in any place including our own homes. Call me an Obot, but it seems to me that among the rights and RESPONSIBILITIES of the President is that of keeping the NATION safe from terrorists? When there is evidence that someone hates and is actively working against Americans, does the President gamble that it's not true? See? al-Awlaki had already been arrested and tried in absentia in 2007 for fomenting against the United States and other foreigners. The Yemeni government did that. He spent 18 months in jail and once released apparently didn't show up for his court date which necessitated the in absentia part. Despite the fact that it didn't happen on American soil, would you not call that a part of the due process to which he was entitled? Imagine the screams from the US if al-Awlaki had caused something akin to the 9/11 attacks on our soil?

When it comes to acts of war or terrorism, you pay your money and you take your choices. That's the harsh reality of war. However, when you send men and women off to kill or be killed instead of using drones for the job, you are creating a group of loyal American men and women with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Something our government, until President Obama ordered the VA to address, was unconcerned with.

While Progressives are screaming about the injustice of the lack of due process, and the use of drones, 22 veterans are committing suicide every day. That's almost 1 every hour. Despite the long standing evidence that PTSD exists, the VA and the government that funds the VA did nothing to assure these soldiers that they had access to mental health professionals. Even with the presidential order to increase the number of mental health professionals available to these people, the VA hasn't been able to keep up. With so few professionals available the waiting lists are still, 2 years later, far too long. And the Progressive outcry over the injustice of this is....crickets. And the death toll from it far surpasses the number of deaths caused by drones.

Perpetuating A Sense Of Entitlement

The massive amount of misinformation that one finds online is appalling. That misinformation can lead to a lot of arguments and outright hostility simply because certain people believe it. As I read blogs and Twitter feeds, I am finding that it is largely the Conservatives that accept this misinformation and fail to listen to anything resembling facts. I don't care how you spin it, half truths presented as facts are still nothing more than lies.

I do find it amusing as all get out when I read about Conservatives in their 40's and 50's that want to go "back to the 60's" without a single clue about what life was really like back then. From a safe distance of 4 or 5 decades, lower taxes and fewer people living high on government safety nets looks real good. The truth is another thing, but they don't know that, they stay connected to the internet to get their information.

In the 60's one car garages were the norm. Families had no need for anything larger because one car was all that was needed to get Dad back and forth to work. I don't know how many women had driver's licenses because all my friends parents did their errands the same way my parents did. On Saturday, when Dad didn't have to work and was available to chauffeur Mom and kids around. Kids were dropped off at dance or music lessons while Mom did the weeks grocery shopping. Everyone was usually home by noon because there were weekly chores. Lawns needed mowing, bedrooms needed cleaning, etc. And elderly neighbors would pay to have their lawns mowed, leaves raked or their sidewalks shoveled in winter.

Parents provided a small allowance for entertainment and things we might decide we wanted. If something cost more than we had, it was up to us to EARN it by mowing lawns, shoveling snow or babysitting. We weren't raised to believe we were entitled to something simply because we wanted it.

Life wasn't convenient. It required hard work and skills. In the 60's people were judged not on how many technology toys they owned, or how many sports programs their kids were in after school,  but on how well they kept their homes or how industrious or helpful to others their children were.

Conservatives scream about this sense of entitlement people have today. Just what do you think created that? When you give someone something simply because they ask for it, what lesson are you teaching?

In the 60's if an adult said your child did something, they were believed and the boom was lowered so that behavior didn't continue. In the 60's parents read diaries and snooped in their child's bedrooms so that they could keep abreast of what the child might be up to behind their backs. If something was found that hadn't ought to have been there, the excuse that it wasn't the child's wasn't accepted.  "That's not my pack of cigarettes, that's so and so's." Answered by: "It was found in YOUR room, YOU are responsible." It wasn't a lack of trust, it was the understanding that behavior was influenced by situations and people other than themselves.

In the 60's families weren't democracies, they were benevolent dictatorships. He who paid the bills made the rules and woe betide anyone who didn't follow those rules.

In the 60's people volunteered their labors to help others. Back then kids wanting to help others didn't make the news because they were the norm, not the exception.

I was raised that way and guided my step-children in that direction when they were residing in my home. They are raising their children that way as well. None of us feel entitled to anything that our labors can't provide and are grateful for anything we receive over and above that. None of us use food stamps or apply for Heap. Hub and I did apply for assistance in paying his hospital bill because we no longer make enough to have paid it on our own. I am eternally grateful that we received as much as we did, and we are paying the balance in monthly installments. Without complaints and without the feeling that we were entitled to more than we received.

The more you give some people, the more they feel they're entitled to. That is part of our problem even with those who make more than enough money to meet their needs. They feel entitled to more. We saw that attitude during the last election cycle. Simply cutting social programs isn't going to change anything. The problem isn't the program, it's the sense of entitlement that we built in to our society and until we change that, we will not ever get back to what made us a great society.

Life isn't about me and what I want, it's about what we've earned by our own efforts. It's about raising responsible citizens who are willing to work together towards common goals that benefit all. Instead we have people resorting to guns and killing innocent people because they're angry that they haven't been "given" everything they want. And how did they arrive at the idea that life worked like that? We raised them to blame their misfortune on everything else instead of accepting their own responsibility for their plight and doing something constructive about it.

We can't legislate behavior, proper behavior must be taught. We no longer teach, we rant about what's wrong. We take sides based on misinformation and fight to bury the positive in a world of gloom and doom. Then we look to legislation to change what we ourselves could change by altering our own behavior.

Teaching An Old Dog New Tricks

I know that I need to eat healthy, high fiber foods. I also know that Hubby needs healthy low fiber foods. Finding what I need is much easier than finding foods that fit Hubby's need simply because low fiber foods are high in simple carbohydrates. Which makes them somewhat less than healthy. I also have a limited food budget so it's not possible for me to buy the high fiber foods for myself along with the low fiber foods for him.

To give you an idea of what I'm up against. If I decided to include a treat like brownies or ice cream just to break the monotony, Hub can't eat chocolate or high fat dairy. If I decided on strawberries or another fresh fruit, Hub can't have those either. Hub can eat turkey, chicken, grilled fish, or limited amounts of beef. He's sick of poultry, won't eat grilled fish and that leaves me with beef which he can't have more than once a week.

When my doctor offered a a seminar in Self Mastery with emphasis on making the correct food choices, I jumped at the chance to attend. I was doing so great losing weight eating the kind of foods found in a  Mediterranean Diet plan that it shocked me to learn that plan may have contributed to Hubby's very serious problem. So, for the past 6 months I've been eating the Low Residue diet provided by the hospital and I'm gaining weight. Which, of course, has elevated my blood pressure again. Not by much but I am again slightly above the borderline.

So, this seminar, I thought, would be a great idea. It would help me make wiser choices for both of us and allow me to make sure Hub is getting enough calories in order to maintain his weight. Crohns Disease is a nasty, painful problem. I've managed to feed him in ways that haven't put him into a painful flare, but he is bored with his choices and I need to find something to overcome that boredom. Especially since those choices aren't helping me at all.

First session was about how to form new healthier habits to replace the older unhealthy ones. It involves making one change at a time and doing that change daily, preferably at the same time each day for 21 days. The second session involved learning why the healthy foods are so important to being in health. I was impressed with the information on how high fiber foods control cholesterol. Made me realize that on the low residue diet plan Hubby is in serious danger of getting high cholesterol so cutting his consumption of fats has become important. Too bad turkey burgers don't taste more like beef. *sigh*

Today is how to plan a weeks worth of meals. I suspect that planning will involve major work in the kitchen. I know I need to go through my freezer, and pantry cabinet to get rid of all the things we shouldn't be eating so I can stock the right kinds of food. When I get the money, IF I get the money. I already know I have a chicken in the freezer that I don't remember buying. How do you forget something like that? I obviously won't be cooking it since it may be older than I care to think about.

I'm going to have to learn to date things I put in my freezer. That way I won't be running the risk of food poisoning. Hopefully this seminar and the new habits I'll form will aid me in cutting down the cost of wasted foods. On the bright side, at least since I won't be buying ground beef, I won't have to worry about pink slime.

I've begun to realize that this seminar may not be what I needed, exactly. I do think it's a step in the right direction. There are 6 sessions, total cost was $60. If I get nothing out of it beyond how to form new, better habits, and how to plan meals, I think I'm ahead of the game.