March 27, 2004
Swords To Ploughshares
The Dallas Morning News had an article yesterday about something really cool that happened in the Iraqi town of Tikrit - Saddam's hometown.
Apparently the 4th ID talked to a local artist and paid him to take the melted down remains of a couple of Saddam statues (from Saddam's own palace gates no less) and create the work you see above, a memorial to those US soldiers who have died in the campaign to liberate Iraq.
I just love the whole circle of things involved. One of the artists for the Saddam statues reworks the same bronze to create a memorial to his liberators. In his lifetime he has worked the same bronze into the effigy of a tyrant and an image of liberation, thankfullness and consolation.
It is really quite a work and very well done, I must say.
Links To Kerry Questionables
This morning before I left with the other half and the kids to go to Rock Springs (you can also go here for more excellent pictures) for the afternoon, I was perusing the Free Republic message boards and came across a series of links to media stories about our good friend, John Kerry. I'm not going to show the whole list, as I think that a few of the points are somewhat irrelevant to the election at hand, but I did want to pass along a pretty good list of sites to search when questions arise.
Poor Decisions: Kerry On the Losing Side of History (quotes included) - Kerry comments on communism amongst other things.
Kerry Leads Senate in Special Interest Donations - But he's not going to be beholden to them.........Rigggggghhhhhhttttttttt.
Kerry's wife made killing from 'corporate inversion' - So the Kerry's never told their trust fund advisors to not invest in "Benedict Arnold" companies? Curious oversight, methinks...
Kerry Donors Include 'Benedict Arnolds': Candidate Decries Tax-Haven Firms While Accepting Executives' Aid - Well, that would explain the oversight in my last snide comment. Apparently his hypocrisy knows no bounds.
John Kerry Blasts Wal-Mart for "Destroying Communities" - Shhh. He Owns $1 Million in Wal-Mart Stock - OK, it's not John. It's really Theresa, but it just goes to show that hypocrisy seems to run pretty rampant in the Heinz-Kerry household.
Meet John Kerry - His Voting Record - and while we're at it let's look at it overall: Kerry Voting Record Analyzed as Most Liberal in US Senate by Democratic Group, his attendance to important votes, explaining his position on the Iraq war, and his stance on matters military.
While we're looking at his voting record, let's attempt to look at some of his positions: Multiple Votes Supporting Partial Birth Abortions, Terrorism Happening in America is "Exaggerated", Kerry Prepared to "End the War on Terror", Kerry Assures Jewish Groups He Supports the Wall of Israel - Tells Arab Group He's Against It, and Senator Kerry Emphasizes Direct Talks with Iran.
Of course, Iran isn't his only fling with evil regimes: John Kerry Courts Communist China Approval in Launching First Government Approved Campaign Site, Kerry's Soviet Rhetoric, and Kerry Boasts French Support.
And then finally we have the Kerry Vs. Kerry archives:
Oh yes, and let's not forget his heritage: Excuse me Senator ... but, you do not have Irish ancestors ...
March 26, 2004
Jobs, Pride & Unemployment
Over the last couple of years I've heard or read a number of people complaining, "I want to work, but I just can't find a job." I can't tell you when I last heard or saw one of these complaints - this post has been a while in the making - but think I've had my fill of them.
I'm not going to deny that there are some people out there who are truly chronically unemployed against their desires. Certainly there are some people who genuinely want work and for whatever reason can't find an employer to hire them (usually they are told they are "overqualified" for the position). But I believe that there is a large segment of people who are using the "jobless" recovery and the general feeling of there being a lack of a job market as a crutch to cover for some basic laziness or hubris.
I know because I was there.
A couple of years back, just when the economy was really finishing its tanking, I was let go from the brokerage firm I was working for. I was entering what really was a pretty dead job market with a business admin degree (just like the thousands of others out there) and my only practical experience being in sales or aircraft load planning. To say that the prospects of getting a job doing anything other than sales was bleak would be an understatement. Plus the job I was laid off from paid very well.
In my mind, I believed that I was underpaid while I was working there. I still do. However, most of the people at the same labor grade as me were generally paid more (seniority) and, in general, they did not justify the wage they were being paid.
In the end the company was doing everyone a great disservice by overpaying. I believed that I was worth more because I was outperforming more highly paid employees. They believed that they were worth the amount they were getting paid, in many cases, despite relatively poor performance in both metrics and customer service. And in the end, the company couldn't afford to keep paying out the amount they were for what we did.
It's taken me a long time to come around to accepting that I too was overpaid, despite my performance. It takes a lot of soul searching and philosophizing to accept that without completely destroying your self-esteem.
Right after I joined the job hunter army in 2002, I spent the first two or three months of unemployment honestly believing that I could only accept a job that paid at least 90% of my previous salary. Understand, I was worth at least that. To accept less would be to sell myself short.
So for a couple of months, I collected unemployment, looked for jobs that were nearly impossible to find around here, and basically forgot about that whole figuring out how to make ends meet stuff. I kept figuring that I would be back raking in the big bucks again soon, so if a bill went a little past due, it was no big deal - I'd just make sure it was one of the first to get paid off when I got that new job.
By the middle of July, I was starting to get concerned, as were some of my creditors. The nice cushy job I was sure was coming just wasn't there. Three months and I hadn't even gotten so much as an offer. So I decided to lower my standard. I would take 75% of my pre-layoff salary, so long as I had benefits.
Three months later, the unemployment was running out and I still didn't have even a single offer of employment. I eventually ended up taking a job as office manager for a design firm owned by a friend of the family. I was making less than 50% of my previous salary - and had no benefits at all. But it let me stop the financial hemorrhaging and to at least maintain a status quo (which wasn't a real appealing prospect at the time. I was glad when the phone was turned off because it stopped the phone calls from the bill collectors, although it ticked a bunch of them off).
Less than 50% of my previous salary and a financial disaster. That was my price for irrational pride - pride that was induced by being overpaid in my previous job. The only thing that saved me from bankruptcy was that I had based my debt load on a ratio of no more than 40% of my salary. It meant that with my new job I could pay the bills, but stuff like getting food or gas or anything that might be fun was difficult. The only reason my website stuck around was because I ran a couple of sales and sold enough extra to cover the domain name and hosting expenses.
Once I took the job as office manager, I started to plan my new attack. I went in with the understanding that the job was going to be temporary until I found something better. But I started developing a plan to build resumé buzzword skills and threw myself into doing the best job I could.
And a little over a year later, after having begun a plan to get my debt under control, I began looking for another job again. The job market wasn't really much better, but I had a big advantage that was missing the first time 'round - I was employed.
What I started to discover was that, like my mother and father always used to tell me, employers really do put a big importance on a candidate being currently employed. Finding a job was still tough (it took almost five months from when I started looking before I found a new job), but there were more real opportunities. People actually started calling back. Interview requests started coming in. Things were looking somewhat up.
I began the application to employment process with my current employer way back in November. At the same time, I got an offer from the billiard's store to come sell pool tables, for several thousand a year more than what I was making. So I moved on and took that job. Along the way, I was also offered (and accepted) a part-time job working in the food service industry.
Come the end of February, my current employer finally got all the paperwork through, the "i"s were dotted, and the "t"s crossed and they made an offer, one that actually gets me up over 90% of my pre-2002 layoff salary again. But this time, I'm one of the lowest paid employees at this company and I know from history that they can afford to sustain this level of pay without it becoming an issue.
After two years, I'm finally back to what I assumed was rightfully mine two years ago. But this time, I have no illusions about being underpaid. To the contrary, I am grateful for what I have and am busting my ass to try to earn more.
But I also truly believe that I would not be in this position had I not taken the job that was "beneath" me back in late '02.
I believe that prospective employers look at current employment as a tacit endorsement of your employability. Someone else was willing to take a chance on you, so they feel more comfortable doing the same. If you're unemployed, it opens up the question of why. Why is this person sitting here, with no job? Why hasn't somebody else taken the initial risk in hiring him? Why? The "whys?" will kill an otherwise outstandingly qualified candidate.
I see these posts or overhear these people talking about how they've been looking for however long and they just can't seem to find anything. I listen to them and listen to the jobs that they describe as what they want. I get reminded of when I was unemployed and applied for the job as CEO of a small publicly traded company (I really did. I'm still waiting to hear back from them.).
I understand the want for a good job. That want drove me for nearly two years (it is satisfied now. Now I'm driven to want to excel in the job I have). But when you've been unemployed for six months to a year, it's time to change expectations.
The best things in life are earned. Good jobs don't just fall into your lap (the late '90s were an aberration in that regards). People say they can't find a job, yet they won't look at the ones that are out there.
People offering low paying jobs know that they're low paying. They don't expect that you're going to make a career of it. To a large extent, they expect you to use their job as a stepping stone to something better.
What a lot of people forget is that some income is better than no income. They sit there an complain about having no income, yet they won't accept the job at the store down the street that would get them some income - and more importantly that all important tacit approval needed when looking for a job.
It also destroys the appearance of being a prima donna. The person who accepts the low paying job and makes a plan to move up is a person who puts performance ahead of pride. The one who sits and bitches that they aren't being offered the perfect job, well why would you want to hire someone so arrogant, conceited, and full of themselves?
Swallowing your pride is difficult, I know. I have trouble with it almost all the time. But sometimes, pride can be your worst enemy.
I get so frustrated with hearing the "I can't find a job" refrain anymore because I believe that the person complaining isn't being honest. They can find a job, especially if they're here in Orlando where tourism service jobs abound, they just can't find the one that makes them all warm and fuzzy inside.
I don't want to hear the "I can't find a job" routine anymore. I don't believe it. If you want to be honest and tell me you can't find a job to your liking, that's fine. I'll listen because you're at least being honest.
But I was in that same position. But I found that once I was willing to do something I didn't want, I quickly ended up in a position where I am fending off the offers. Besides the job I currently have, I still work the occasional odd hour at the pool table store; I still occasionally work at the food service job; I routinely turn on my cell phone after work to find a message from a guy who wants me to come back into the brokerage industry and just yesterday, I had an insurance agency send me a letter asking me to apply. The jobs are out there.
It's just that sometimes you have to do something you don't want to, to get to something you want.
A Government Agency Held Accountable? How Can It Be?!?
Right after 9/11, one of the very actions that government strove to undertake was the creation of a new huge bureaucracy charged with protecting our transportation infrastructure. At the time, there were the cries of "But this bureaucracy will be different!," even as some lawmakers were expressing misgivings about such a bloated government endeavor. In the end, public pressure won out and the Transportation Security Administration was created.
Over the last few years, TSA has attempted to get its act together. It has subjected us to grandmothers being stripped searched, women being forced to consume their own breast milk, and the confiscation of untold thousands of nail clippers. We have been regaled with tales of the difficulties the TSA has had in finding quality personnel to man the checkpoints. We have witnessed TSA firing employees because they were hired without proper due diligence being conducted. We have stood there in line, holding our shoes instead of wearing them, wondering why TSA wasn't using some sort of profiling scheme. But most of all we fumed, because this time - despite the promises and assurances, things were the same.
But lawmakers, probably unintentionally, left us an out. Beginning November 19, three years to the day from the foundation of our newest bloated bureaucracy, airports can apply to opt out of government provided screeners.
The airports would have to hire in their own private security, supervised by TSA, of course. But in return they would have the freedom to staff as needed, when needed. No longer would the airline passengers be forced to adjust their schedule to the vagaries of government agency staffing plans. No longer would there be two screening stations open at 7 am and ten at 11 am (7 am is usually the big morning push, 11 is usually dead, awaiting the 12:30 arrivals). Instead, the airport could require the dictate to the screeners the right staffing for the flight schedule, rather than scheduling staff around the most convenient times for the employees.
The government and the unions have got to be starting to scramble, trying to figure out how they're going to stop the madness. For an airport like Melbourne, FL to go private is one thing - most people will never notice the difference, as they'll never go to Melbourne. But imagine if an Atlanta, a New York, or a Chicago goes private (don't expect to see Boston on that list until the very, very last moment, when John Kerry declares that he's been for security privatization ever since the day after he last voted for federalization). Start showing large segments of the traveling public the benefits of privatization and the game' up.
I'm guessing that when November 19 comes and the applications start rolling in, we'll probably see the unions cut a deal with the TSA to keep the big airports federalized. Some smaller airports will be privatized as a sop to the people, but the government will maintain its hold on the biggies.
And for most people, we'll hear the same refrain "But this time it will be different!"
And once again, nothing will fundamentally change. Accountability will still be a foreign concept to government agencies.
March 24, 2004
This Is A Pretty Cool Site
Just as I was getting ready to shut the computer off for the night I went over and took a look at my referrer logs. In them I found a really cool new (for me at least) site: the World as a Blog.
It shows the location (for geolocated blogs) of the latest posts to weblogs.com. It's fascinating to just sit there and watch the little blips coming up from all over as new posts are made.
It looks like it could be quite the interesting timewaster. Go over and take a look!
Blogging Advice
The evil, subversive Commissar of the Politboro Diktat has developed a new Unified Theory of Blogging.
As usual, the commissar does an excellent job of summing things up by pointing out such points as you can drive traffic by using words such as Paris Hilton, rack, Janet Jackson, sex, or porn (images also work well for this last one).
If you're less inclined to take such drastic measures, he also has some good advice for the intellectual bloggers.
Well worth the time to go and read if you're interested, although I do have to take exception to "sex sells": I still have yet to get a single Google, Yahoo, or MSN Search hit for "Turkish lesbian," even though I mentioned the phrase couple of weeks ago. You would think that someone would have had some kind of weird fetish by now....
But do go over and take a look. The Commissar has do a great service for the blogging community.
Freeloading: A Universal Trait
After having spent most of the last six years dealing with one freeloader or another begging my other half for "help" it is nice to see that someone else has a similar problem, albeit on a larger scale.
One overstayer, Muhammad Tam from Nigeria, told Okaz newspaper recently that he had stayed in the Kingdom after Umrah to wait for Haj."It is very expensive for me to travel back home and back again to Saudi Arabia to perform Haj," he said.
Now that Haj season has ended, Tam wants the Kingdom to fork out for his trip home as he is currently broke. "I want to go back but I don’t have the money," he said. "I wish they would send me at their cost."
"I wish they would send me at their cost." That is priceless. Poor me crying leeches do exist everywhere, not just around my little neighborhood.
I feel so much better now.
The Effectiveness Of Appeasement
The French have been less than enthusiastic about standing up to the Islamic extremists in recent times, preferring a policy of appeasement to confrontation.
It doesn't matter. They are now reaping the fruits of their labors.
The Dane-Geld comes to mind, yes it does....
UPDATE:
It doesn't look like the German's have done any better with their brand of neo-appeasement. If appeasement can't save you from assassination, what good would it be?
Unrighteous Indignation
Your 16 year old brother gets sent off to blow himself up. When you find out, how do you respond? Do you rail at the handlers who attempted to murder your kin? Do you express outrage and horror at the attempted act? Not if you're Palestinian.
In that case, you rail at the handlers: "The ones who sent him are stupid, because the army will give him two slaps and he will tell them who sent him."
Ah, yes, that wonderful expression of unrighteous indignation.
Never mind that the kid was seduced into attempted suicide: "Abdu told soldiers of his dream of receiving 70 virgins in heaven, which his dispatchers had promised him, and said that he had been tempted by the promise of sexual relations with the virgins."
Never mind that he was paid the handsome sum of 100 NIS (approx US$23). Never mind the sickness in believing that this would make him "a hero."
Nope, nothing wrong there! No if you're brother Hosni, you get pissed because they took your gullible brother who "has the intelligence of a 12 year old."
Given Hosni's response, I am having a little trouble completely buying Mom's indignation:
"Hussam left home this morning to school, and this was the first we hear of what happened," Tamam Abdu told Reuters from the family home in Nablus, just north of Hawara. "This is shocking. To use a child like this is irresponsible, forbidden."
I really want to believe that she is saying it is irresponsible to blow her child up, but at the same time I have to wonder if she didn't mean that it was irresponsible to send him out with a vest that wasn't remotely detonated. Given the warped minds possessed by quite a few, it raises some doubt about the veracity of the statement.
I will be interested to see how the Palestinians react to this latest setback to their cause. This is now the second child who has attempted to hit this checkpoint - and the second one to have failed.
Is there any question as to whether or not the handlers will decide to take care of things themselves? Will they decide that it's just not working to send a child to do a "man's job" (as if suicide terrorism can be called a "man's job")?
Does anyone actually believe that they would even consider self-immolation? Especially when it's that comfy sitting around sending others off to their untimely deaths?
Sorry, but I don't believe that to be in the murderous mindset.
Unfortunately, so long as the bombers families get more upset that the handlers chose the family idiot than the fact that they were murdering your brother/sister/child/parent/etc., I don't really think that anything will change.
Unrighteous indignation is just wrong.
March 23, 2004
And We Were Worried About Just A Missile...
A few days ago I briefly touched on the events surrounding the damaging of the nose cone on a Trident missile as it was being removed from the USS Georgia. Now I thought that was a bad situation, even though there was never a risk of detonation or even a radiation leak.
But the Russians have taken this all to a new level. Forget damaging a nuclear missile, the Russians are warning that The Pyotr Veliky is in such condition that it may explode. The ship carries two reactors and as many as 10 nuclear missiles (bearing in mind that the Russians were never as big on nuclear safety as we are to begin with).
If this thing decides to go "boom" there could potentially be quite a bit of fallout, both politically and physically.
The Russians need to make a real, arms length assessment of the ship, if for no other reason than for the PR value gained in doing so. If the ship is truly safe, they should have no problem demostrating such. If it is unsafe, it would give them an opportunity to remedy the situation before they lose their Northern Fleet flagship.
Just as the American people deserve a report on the events surrounding the USS Georgia incident, the Russian people deserve an explaination as to the true state of The Pyotr Veliky.
A representative government, which is what Moscow still claims to be, owes its people no less.
Turning Up The Heat
As if the events of yesterday weren't quite enough...now Israel is going right along with the escalation of tensions between themselves and the terrorists. I'm not terribly surprised at the escalation on the part of Hamas - can't really expect any less from such a "charitable" organization. But did we really need Israeli tanks rolling through Palestinian streets already? Preemption is a good thing, but this might be too much of a good thing....
I did see one escalation of pressure that I believe is long overdue. Arafat and his ilk have needed to be on notice that their brand of terrorism won't be tolerated. In going after Yassin, Arafat, Saddam, and Osama it may seem as though everyone is targeting the Old and Infirm Martyr's Brigade, but you can best kill an organism by decapitation. Taking out the leadership is an excellent move as the lower levels of the organization seem to have a self destructive property about them. Get rid of the top and there is no truly capable underlings to take over. Sure there are some folks that have some sense, but the quantity and quality is lacking on the whole.
The next few weeks and months should be interesting as this whole situation plays out. Hopefully this time will be one of the last.
March 22, 2004
Rhetoric Threatening To Spill Over Into Suicide
Israel did something bad today. They eliminated a problem to their nation, Sheik Ahmed Yassin, but they did it in a very public and violent manner. Hamas, the Palestinians, and Al Qaeda (the usual suspects) are somewhat understandably upset.
This is not to say that the Israelis were completely out of line in removing Yassin as a threat. To the contrary, I believe that based on his previous history, he was a legitimate leadership target in a war that neither side seems to want to really fight in. Three missiles might have been a bit much, but once you're dead, what does it matter if it's once, twice, or three times as dead?
Hamas has come out quite expectedly and announced that they will ratchet up the pressure on Israel, threatening to "get revenge for every drop of blood that spilled." As much as I believe that the death of Yassin will not be a bad thing for the world in the long term, I can understand the degree of anger on the part of the group. Yassin was their founder. He was an important figure in their organizational history. Despite my feelings about Yassin, I believe that Hamas does have a solid grounding for emotional venting.
So long as it stays emotional venting. But that won't happen. Hell, it's already progressed beyond that point. Violent outbursts have already begun and will continue for the foreseeable future.
This, of course, is nothing out of the ordinary in the Israeli/Palestinian civil war. I normally don't believe in the whole "cycle-of-violence" stuff, but I'm beginning to believe that it describes the Middle East situation pretty well. Hamas sets of a bomb; Israel retaliates with three well aimed missiles; the Palestinian people go off on a suicidal rampage. And so the civil war continues.
Except that this time, Hamas seems to be wanting expand at least the rhetorical fight. No longer content with just verbally assaulting Israel, they have now taken their war of the words into battle against the US.
Threatening to attack the US is one thing and not a very bright one. Remember, this is an organization that claims to be a charity. How often do you see the Red Cross or the United Way threatening calling on all philanthropists to join in retaliation against a group they don't like? Calling for death doesn't seem very charitable now does it?
But it is one thing to talk stupid; it is entirely another to act it.
It Hamas carries through on their threats, or they enlist the help of Al Qaeda they will only then realize that they don't have a clue as to what it is like when the Gates of Hell open. To actually carry through on the acts that they are proposing would be to invite Death over for dinner.
If they think that the Israelis came to us asking for permission to execute the attack on Yassin, imagine what it would be like if the US told Israel that it was free to eliminate the terrorist threat in its territories. Hamas, the Al Asqa Brigade, the Palestinian Authority - all would cease to exist in a matter of days. Arafat wouldn't have worry about hiding out like a Saddam wannabe - eating Snickers and leading his head lice (assuming they don't revolt). It's kind of hard to hide in a pile of rubble - at least not while you're alive.
Hamas and the Palestinians have a right to be upset about the death of Yassin. An unnatural death - I wouldn't go so far as to call it untimely - is always cause for despair. Certainly, meeting your end at the hands of three personally targeted gunship missiles can be called unnatural. Mourning and anger are perfectly reasonable and acceptable emotions.
It is only when those emotions boil over into rages of hate that it becomes a problem.
If Hamas keeps fanning the flames and they pour over, it will be a case of suicide by stupidity, or stupicide.
(Also, if anyone can dig up the answer, I'm curious as to what kind of missile exactly was used in the attack. For some reason the idea of "(blank), the ultimate in anti-wheelchair weaponry" just strikes me as morbidly humorous. I must be too tired...)
March 21, 2004
The Sign Said "Dead End!"
Courtesy of Dean Esmay.
This is too funny to watch until you realize just how much force there was at impact and that the wall didn't break.
I can just hear the driver, "I know it said 'dead end' but trust me. I know a shortcut this way. We just speed along this road and...uh, oh. This is gonna hurt...."
-Best
-Good
-So-so
-Not good
-Terrible
