|(courtesy of ABC TV/Jeopardy)|
Privateat Hill & Woodard, L.L.P.Location Dallas/Fort Worth AreaIndustry Legal Services
...at which time I realized that:
- I probably wasn't the only one who found her attractive/intelligent
- I also wasn't the only one who did a Google search on her
- Too many people a lot creepier than I am probably decided to contact her and she kind of had enough.
It's a shame Kimberly didn't actually win at Jeopardy because she clearly had a wealth of knowledge. She was shut-out by the reigning champion, unfortunately, and got the final Jeopardy question wrong (actually they all did). It was a hard question, to be sure, and the current champion (Christopher Short) played a really good game again and could not be caught.
Several other things have happened over the past few days that are less interesting and more worldly that require some commentary...
Just like most of you, I don't like to admit when I'm wrong but I'm afraid I need to do so. I previously penned two comments in this blog - one of them back in September, 2010 titled An Old-Fashioned Book Burning, and another in October, 2010 titled American Muslims. Both of these were meant to show some sensitivity toward those of the Muslim faith and I have been forced to think about what I wrote in a different light. To defend myself, I still feel many of my basic sentiments are valid and stand behind them, but I have been forced to re-think my opposition to burning copies of the Quran. A YouTube video done by Thunderf00t titled Burning Half a Million Korans (which I invite you to view) took the recent burning of the book by a pastor here in the USA and showed the reaction it caused. His question, in a nutshell, is whether the world should be held hostage by a group of people who are willing to resort to violence in response to the burning of a copy of their holy book. I realized Thunderf00t was exactly right. The US troops in the middle east are fighting, in part, to ensure people have the freedom to believe as they do. While I am sure there are are followers of Islam who are not quite as fundamentalist as others, I cannot condone a belief system (even in an attempt to be sensitive to some believers) that would react in such a violent way to the burning of a copy of a book.
After Thunderf00t's video and the latest 20/20 episode about the teachings in some IFB (Independent Fundamental Baptist) churches, I am further convinced that religion (and particularly organized religion) is nothing more than a cult. For every person it has comforted, for every charitable good it has achieved, it seems to produce some of the most atrocious abuses known to mankind. Makes me proud to be atheist.
Finally, it is time for me to write briefly about finances, budgets, taxes, and what it means to everyone, including corporations. A week or so ago, 60 Minutes did a segment on how US corporations are moving their corporate offices to foreign countries to avoid paying US corporate income taxes. The complaint from companies like Cisco Systems (don't even get me started about them!) was that they would pay 30% income tax in the USA, while paying half that amount in other countries, like Ireland. So, Cisco, you think paying 30% corporate income tax is high? How much do you think the rest of us have to pay? Did it ever occur to you that these other countries fund these lower corporate taxes by taxing the hell out of its own citizens? There are days that I'll defend corporations just like I'll defend the "little guy," but here is a clear abuse that must stop. If you're a US company, then pay your fair share. If you leave the USA, then it's time that we somehow send a message to these companies that we won't tolerate this behavior. Again, this goes back to the same discussion of penalizing US companies for outsourcing jobs, which I think needs to be done if we're to level the playing field again.
At the same time, I am sick and tired of people complaining about what the government should be spending money on, when they no longer have the money. "The rich are getting tax breaks - just tax the rich more!" Would someone please define for me what "rich" is? Let me help you a bit, "rich" is probably (in your eyes) defined as anyone who is making more money than you are. My next door neighbor defined rich today as any household making more than $200,000/year. He was shocked when I suggested that there are people who feel that rich is a household that makes half that amount. Taxing the "rich" isn't the way to fix the troubles here. I discovered recently that someone felt that "tax breaks for the rich" were defined as people making more money than they were getting the same tax breaks that they were. Uhhhh...yeah, well, why would you expect anything else? I recently suggested a flat tax on Facebook and got summarily booed off the stage (or, should I say, I got played off by Keyboard Cat?). I've grown more and more tired of listening to the tirades of people who have chosen to have children all of a sudden finding that the lifestyle actually costs a significant amount of money, then expecting that I have an obligation to give more of my salary to their lifestyle choice.
Here's a suggestion: If you have a favorite government social or other spending program that you wish to fund with money from someone else, why not start by giving-up your own money to that program. I am dead serious -- if you really feel the schools need more money, then take your own money and donate it to your local school district. What? You don't have any disposable cash to donate? Well, neither does anyone else. We're all tightening our belts and cutting discretionary spending because the cost of everything is going up, and most of us are lucky to see a salary increase at all (and definitely not one that is covering cost-of-living increases). Our savings are not earning any significant amount of interest, and our biggest investment (our homes) are dropping in value in many areas. That's what happens when the economy goes all to hell like it has been. I am all for making sure that we have the money to pay teachers and to fund education, but it is clear to me that what parents want is an education system that includes lots of extras that we cannot afford any longer. We all need to tighten our belts, the schools and other government spending included. "The Government" is not this god-like entity that magically can make funding appear from thin air and pay for things that you wouldn't, in your right mind, pay for on your own. For every government project or stimulus being funded, you and me and everyone else ends up paying for it. You know, "no such thing as a free lunch."
I mention this because I'm kind of tired of being robbed by this invisible bandit called "government" who steals from me at the direction of people who bitch about having no money for things because they have kids, or
want to save the world but don't have any money to do it.
In my case, I was frugal with my spending and anticipated a potential economic disaster (having experienced a layoff in my younger years). So don't get mad at me if I don't feel like giving-up my hard-earned income to your favorite project. Yeah, I'm doing okay, but I don't anticipate being that way forever, and would like to retire sometime. I also don't see government as a terribly efficient way to fund some of the ideas you have, and further don't feel like some of these ideas are grounded in any kind of reality, no matter how humanitarian you may seem to feel it is. So seriously, if you feel it is money well-spent, then go ahead and spend your money. You and the several other people you can find that have disposable income...
I'd like kids to take their iPhones, iPads, and other trendy computerized gadgets that they feel they need to have and actually do something productive with them (rather than send text messages to their friends) and learn how to create a budget and then teach their parents and government how to do the same. Yeahbut that'd be too practical...