This was shared with me at work today. Its an relatively old video by this point, but its humor I found worth archiving.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1888086
~David Morris~
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Friday, July 2, 2010
Following up on how I was an example of government waste...I regret to say that...I've suffered my first termination in my life.
I received the letter yesterday. The United States Census Bureau has terminated me from my position as a 2010 Enumerator. What have I ever done to deserve this? Woe is me. :(
Included in the census letter ironically, were instructions on how to obtain unemployment benefits. -_-
~David Morris~
I received the letter yesterday. The United States Census Bureau has terminated me from my position as a 2010 Enumerator. What have I ever done to deserve this? Woe is me. :(
Included in the census letter ironically, were instructions on how to obtain unemployment benefits. -_-
~David Morris~
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Palidrome of True Hope
When comparing myself to my elders, I realize that its always unfair due to age gap advantage. Hence, I routinely have a dream of the man I hope to be in 2036 (the year I turn 50 years old myself; a year in which my generation is firmly in charge of the world). In this vision includes a loving family, children whom I am most proud of, and a world in which the promises of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness continues to be delivered even more ideally than what the current middle-agers felt with Reagan.
By almighty God, I pray that I will make an impact on preserving the American Dream. I haven't met my kids yet (not even interested in looking for their mom as of right now), but I already know that I love them very much, and I already resent that which would threaten them. Especially as I now get to witness fascism with my own eyes.
So is the vision I have for my generation. That we reject the notion that we will be content with inferior living standards than the generation before us, and we will leave a superior legacy for the next.
~David Morris~
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Obama and the Oil Spill
We need to give Obama a chance with the oil spill. He's doing the best he can they say.
Really? You mean to tell me that this wouldn't be a past issue already, if anyone other than Obama was in the office? That Obama is pursuing the spill with all the tenacity that he gave to his pet project of healthcare reform?
As though Ronald Reagan wouldn't have been done with this after 58 days already?
Heck, take either of the Bush presidents or even Clinton. Any president that's demonstrated a modicum of competency would have long rallied a response that included declaring a state of emergency, the dispersion of troops, and the granting of federal permits to those states in the way of being most affected, into establishing sea bars. The damage wouldn't be over, but Americans would surely have confidence that the situation is contained. The only president I can think of who'd have been this incompetent would've been Carter. We're talking Carter levels incompetency here.
So why the slow deal? My theory on this is simple. Obama, reeling from the political fallout of a health care debate that he didn't "win" so much as "cheat the scorecard," rolled a political gamble and loss. A crisis is a terrible thing to waste afterall. In the same vein that FDR permitted Pearl Harbor to be unnecessarily tragic in order to morally justify a call to war, by permitting this catastrophe to happen as badly as its happened, Americans would rally behind a new environmentalist wave to cap and slash oil drilling.
Hence the calm, cold demeanor towards the crisis. Ever the demagogue, he expected us to look at the damage "evil enterprise" has done, and upon a knee-jerk emotional driven response, jump on a bandwagon of "never forget, never again" for domestic oil drilling, resulting in a new era of windmills! His miscalculation comes from two things:
1. The damage from the oil well was not immediate, leaving plenty of time to take preventive measures to minimize the damage. Preventative measures that local officials such as Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal was denied of.
2. This is not the 1930s, and we certainly are not all socialist now. Part of FDR's success was in his monopolistic control of the media. With an populous that is better educated in general thanks to having far more media outlets, Americans today are significantly less sheep-like than their 1930s counterparts. Translating to less patience with demagoguery. This is one of his central miscalculations in attempting to emulate FDR: That his audience is too ignorant to see through his attempts at camouflaging his ulterior motives.
The American Spirit is still center right (as has been ever since Carter/Nixon/Johnson created the backlash for big government that people like RR and Gingrich was able to climb upon). With the toxic mood generated by the accumulation of a "spendulus" bill, multiple near-miss terrorist attacks, apologetic foreign policy, delays and compromise over Afghanistan, no jobs, mounting debt, and generally no light at the end of the tunnel for a suffering economy, the ideology of the nation is only being pushed further to the right.
In an environment whereas such an ideology is given prominence, allowing an oil spill to happen will not spark a socialist rally for more private sector punishment as he had hoped. Obama was likely hoping that that this would be his "Jungle*" rather than his Katrina. The big government catalyst effect of a propaganda victory this is not.
Cap this off with a health care bill that passes by a mere 7 votes out of a total of 431 representatives, whereas the only bi-partisanship is in opposition to the bill, and you do not have a formula for people viewing you as the hero squaring off against the demon of "private enterprise." President Clinton to his credit, would've known that this is a situation where you show some competency to reassert yourself as capable of the "3 am" call, any scorn generated by other issues be darned. Rather than take the street cred now, Obama gambled on having a wave of public outrage to ride on later. Problem is, he never expected it directed at him.
~David Morris~
*The 1906 propaganda novel by Upton Sinclair which "aimed for the heart and hit in the stomach," nonetheless paving the way for big government expansion over food and drug processing.
Really? You mean to tell me that this wouldn't be a past issue already, if anyone other than Obama was in the office? That Obama is pursuing the spill with all the tenacity that he gave to his pet project of healthcare reform?
As though Ronald Reagan wouldn't have been done with this after 58 days already?
Heck, take either of the Bush presidents or even Clinton. Any president that's demonstrated a modicum of competency would have long rallied a response that included declaring a state of emergency, the dispersion of troops, and the granting of federal permits to those states in the way of being most affected, into establishing sea bars. The damage wouldn't be over, but Americans would surely have confidence that the situation is contained. The only president I can think of who'd have been this incompetent would've been Carter. We're talking Carter levels incompetency here.
So why the slow deal? My theory on this is simple. Obama, reeling from the political fallout of a health care debate that he didn't "win" so much as "cheat the scorecard," rolled a political gamble and loss. A crisis is a terrible thing to waste afterall. In the same vein that FDR permitted Pearl Harbor to be unnecessarily tragic in order to morally justify a call to war, by permitting this catastrophe to happen as badly as its happened, Americans would rally behind a new environmentalist wave to cap and slash oil drilling.
Hence the calm, cold demeanor towards the crisis. Ever the demagogue, he expected us to look at the damage "evil enterprise" has done, and upon a knee-jerk emotional driven response, jump on a bandwagon of "never forget, never again" for domestic oil drilling, resulting in a new era of windmills! His miscalculation comes from two things:
1. The damage from the oil well was not immediate, leaving plenty of time to take preventive measures to minimize the damage. Preventative measures that local officials such as Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal was denied of.
2. This is not the 1930s, and we certainly are not all socialist now. Part of FDR's success was in his monopolistic control of the media. With an populous that is better educated in general thanks to having far more media outlets, Americans today are significantly less sheep-like than their 1930s counterparts. Translating to less patience with demagoguery. This is one of his central miscalculations in attempting to emulate FDR: That his audience is too ignorant to see through his attempts at camouflaging his ulterior motives.
The American Spirit is still center right (as has been ever since Carter/Nixon/Johnson created the backlash for big government that people like RR and Gingrich was able to climb upon). With the toxic mood generated by the accumulation of a "spendulus" bill, multiple near-miss terrorist attacks, apologetic foreign policy, delays and compromise over Afghanistan, no jobs, mounting debt, and generally no light at the end of the tunnel for a suffering economy, the ideology of the nation is only being pushed further to the right.
In an environment whereas such an ideology is given prominence, allowing an oil spill to happen will not spark a socialist rally for more private sector punishment as he had hoped. Obama was likely hoping that that this would be his "Jungle*" rather than his Katrina. The big government catalyst effect of a propaganda victory this is not.
Cap this off with a health care bill that passes by a mere 7 votes out of a total of 431 representatives, whereas the only bi-partisanship is in opposition to the bill, and you do not have a formula for people viewing you as the hero squaring off against the demon of "private enterprise." President Clinton to his credit, would've known that this is a situation where you show some competency to reassert yourself as capable of the "3 am" call, any scorn generated by other issues be darned. Rather than take the street cred now, Obama gambled on having a wave of public outrage to ride on later. Problem is, he never expected it directed at him.
~David Morris~
*The 1906 propaganda novel by Upton Sinclair which "aimed for the heart and hit in the stomach," nonetheless paving the way for big government expansion over food and drug processing.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
A Personal Epiphany: The Waste. Its Real.
As of yesterday, I've been shocked by a mighty epiphany.
As I await my summer internship with the Cato Institute, I've been maintaining expenses with two different types of work:
One is at a Macy Retail Store.
The other is as an enumerator for the United States Census Bureau.
---
At Macy's, I must be on time. I start to get paid from the moment I punch into a computer, which records my time on the company clock down to the very second when I punch out, and I get paid me accordingly to their wage rate with precision.
At Macy's I must spend 8 hours a day on my feet, continuously moving, continuously provided exceptional service to consumers whose patronage is purely voluntary.
At Macy's, there is oversight. More than merely relying on my work ethic, pressure not to shirk is present in the form of various management staff to increase the probability that during the whole of 8-hour period, I am actually being productive.
I go home on sore feet on these nights, and for all this I get paid...$8.75 per hour.
Then there is the Census Bureau...
---
At the Census Bureau, they want me to estimate for myself when I began on the clock, starting from the moment I get in my vehicle, and ending on the very moment I am back home. They are assuming that my estimate is going to be perfectly honest, though they naturally do not expect it to be precise.
Most of my "work" has been training. At the training, the first two hours is spent merely waiting for our crew leader to do the paperwork of our timesheets. Rather than moving about, we sit on our rears as he goes through the necessary protocol of reading the training manual to us. We also spend time getting our fingerprints done. This goes on for three days for 8 hours. On the day we finished early, we are encouraged to log in the missing time anyway.
Two days are actually spent "working", after the obligatory time waste waiting for timesheets to be processed, we drive to an area to look for homeless people without actually stepping out of our vehicles. Since this enumeration happens at night, we get paid extra apparently.
I go home with nothing sore other than my rear end. For this I get paid....$18 per hour. Plus 50 cents for each mile I drive.
...
Where I produce, I get $8.75.
Where I produce nothing, I get $18.
...
I am an example of government waste.
~David Morris~
As I await my summer internship with the Cato Institute, I've been maintaining expenses with two different types of work:
One is at a Macy Retail Store.
The other is as an enumerator for the United States Census Bureau.
---
At Macy's, I must be on time. I start to get paid from the moment I punch into a computer, which records my time on the company clock down to the very second when I punch out, and I get paid me accordingly to their wage rate with precision.
At Macy's I must spend 8 hours a day on my feet, continuously moving, continuously provided exceptional service to consumers whose patronage is purely voluntary.
At Macy's, there is oversight. More than merely relying on my work ethic, pressure not to shirk is present in the form of various management staff to increase the probability that during the whole of 8-hour period, I am actually being productive.
I go home on sore feet on these nights, and for all this I get paid...$8.75 per hour.
Then there is the Census Bureau...
---
At the Census Bureau, they want me to estimate for myself when I began on the clock, starting from the moment I get in my vehicle, and ending on the very moment I am back home. They are assuming that my estimate is going to be perfectly honest, though they naturally do not expect it to be precise.
Most of my "work" has been training. At the training, the first two hours is spent merely waiting for our crew leader to do the paperwork of our timesheets. Rather than moving about, we sit on our rears as he goes through the necessary protocol of reading the training manual to us. We also spend time getting our fingerprints done. This goes on for three days for 8 hours. On the day we finished early, we are encouraged to log in the missing time anyway.
Two days are actually spent "working", after the obligatory time waste waiting for timesheets to be processed, we drive to an area to look for homeless people without actually stepping out of our vehicles. Since this enumeration happens at night, we get paid extra apparently.
I go home with nothing sore other than my rear end. For this I get paid....$18 per hour. Plus 50 cents for each mile I drive.
...
Where I produce, I get $8.75.
Where I produce nothing, I get $18.
...
I am an example of government waste.
~David Morris~
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
The Massachuets Election - Voter Scorn Strikes Obama
63 Years. 63 years.
Incredible.
63 years, the voters of Massachuets were content to elect the democrat party to be their represenatives. Yet after 1 year of the Obama administration, the backlash against his approach to governance has resulted in the famously liberal state to vote republican.
Clearly, Barack Obama underestimated the full effect pushing unpopular policy at the cost of instigating voter scorn, so much so that his decisions are bringing ruin to his own party.
It is here that I hold pity for the democrats, as I ponder how things may have been were the Clintons once again in control. For all their arguable faults, the Clinton's did have a redeemable value in that they knew of and greatly respected the potential of public opinion. Their presidency was successful in part of the fact that they, like many politicians, were incensed by their own probabilities of re-election, and formed policy likely to take themselves (and their party) in such a direction. Overall, this resulted in mostly non-intrusive government during the Clinton years, as the former president was willing to do what it took to maintain consistent pole ratings above 60%. From stepping back and leaving "Wall Street" to the competent hands of Greenspan, to the elimination of trade barriers via the NAFTA agreement (as well as avoiding new barriers via the Kyoto Protocol), from learning to compromise with Newt Gringrich for truly bipartisan policy.
Clinton, whatever his personal ideology may had been, would not be blinded it. Though he may be remembered by many as flawed on a individual level, credit must be given due to his sensitivity in doing that with which a maximum amount of constituents (be they democrat, republican, or independent) would be satisfied with, leaving it no wonder why he would leave office with some of the highest job approval ratings in several decades.
The would-be return of Team Clinton, this time with Hilary at the helm, would have likely been a repeat of the same policies that defined the first Clinton administration, in which public opinion held a strong influence in their decisions. A concept that the Democrats appeared to have lost under Obama's leadership. Barrack Obama it would seem, appears to be a visionary who is too focused on his personal dream of "remaking America" than to react to the will of the people, as we now see what many were concerned with when they accused Mr. Obama of "inexperience." With only a prior two-year term in the senate, the current president appears to have yet learned the number one lesson of public policy - that one will not run policy that is overwhelmingly against the will of the public.
Where the concept of rational ignorance does not exist, it is unwise to pursue any form of policy that is counter to the constituency, and perhaps the upsetting new election will sound a wake up call for Mr. Obama. The future has yet to fully unfold, and the possiblity for learning from one's mistakes is always present. Nevertheless, the Clinton's would have already been familiar with this concept had they stepped into office in '08, and I for one would be regretting the decision to have made him the presidential canidate were I currently Martha Coakley.
Whatever happens, the debate on health-care will truly be remembered as a classic case study on distrusted government reform in a political environment of wide-spread voter scorn. How the recent Supreme Court decision to lift spending caps from corporate entities will surely serve to further the intriguing quality behind the matter matter.
~David Morris~
Incredible.
63 years, the voters of Massachuets were content to elect the democrat party to be their represenatives. Yet after 1 year of the Obama administration, the backlash against his approach to governance has resulted in the famously liberal state to vote republican.
Clearly, Barack Obama underestimated the full effect pushing unpopular policy at the cost of instigating voter scorn, so much so that his decisions are bringing ruin to his own party.
It is here that I hold pity for the democrats, as I ponder how things may have been were the Clintons once again in control. For all their arguable faults, the Clinton's did have a redeemable value in that they knew of and greatly respected the potential of public opinion. Their presidency was successful in part of the fact that they, like many politicians, were incensed by their own probabilities of re-election, and formed policy likely to take themselves (and their party) in such a direction. Overall, this resulted in mostly non-intrusive government during the Clinton years, as the former president was willing to do what it took to maintain consistent pole ratings above 60%. From stepping back and leaving "Wall Street" to the competent hands of Greenspan, to the elimination of trade barriers via the NAFTA agreement (as well as avoiding new barriers via the Kyoto Protocol), from learning to compromise with Newt Gringrich for truly bipartisan policy.
Clinton, whatever his personal ideology may had been, would not be blinded it. Though he may be remembered by many as flawed on a individual level, credit must be given due to his sensitivity in doing that with which a maximum amount of constituents (be they democrat, republican, or independent) would be satisfied with, leaving it no wonder why he would leave office with some of the highest job approval ratings in several decades.
The would-be return of Team Clinton, this time with Hilary at the helm, would have likely been a repeat of the same policies that defined the first Clinton administration, in which public opinion held a strong influence in their decisions. A concept that the Democrats appeared to have lost under Obama's leadership. Barrack Obama it would seem, appears to be a visionary who is too focused on his personal dream of "remaking America" than to react to the will of the people, as we now see what many were concerned with when they accused Mr. Obama of "inexperience." With only a prior two-year term in the senate, the current president appears to have yet learned the number one lesson of public policy - that one will not run policy that is overwhelmingly against the will of the public.
Where the concept of rational ignorance does not exist, it is unwise to pursue any form of policy that is counter to the constituency, and perhaps the upsetting new election will sound a wake up call for Mr. Obama. The future has yet to fully unfold, and the possiblity for learning from one's mistakes is always present. Nevertheless, the Clinton's would have already been familiar with this concept had they stepped into office in '08, and I for one would be regretting the decision to have made him the presidential canidate were I currently Martha Coakley.
Whatever happens, the debate on health-care will truly be remembered as a classic case study on distrusted government reform in a political environment of wide-spread voter scorn. How the recent Supreme Court decision to lift spending caps from corporate entities will surely serve to further the intriguing quality behind the matter matter.
~David Morris~
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Rustici Prediction
People have spoken. Over 60% of the American people oppose the purely democrat owned health care proposition. Still they attempt to ram it through via nuclear option. Should it pass, opponents of the package have until 2013 to stop it once and for all before its, and what amounts to arguably one of the worse nationalized medicine schema ever devised will suppress American prosperity for generations to come, as this new form of mandatory spending burdens the future.
Having recently spoken to Professor Thomas C. Rustici of George Mason University about the present political situation, an intriguing prediction was made under assumption that Democrats successfully push the thing through (of which he predicts that they will). As well as his own political strategy of how to roll it back.
In short, if this bill passes via nuclear option, then starting 2010 under the new congress led by perhaps Micheal Steele, republicans are going to have to nuclear option Obama right back.
The first point Professor Rustici raises, is that if this bill passes, then the Democrat party may as well be considered extinct considering the anger it will incite. Seniors are already aligned against him and what this bill will do to their medicare payments, the young who supported Obama grow ever more disillusioned as they struggle most of all to find work, and everyone else between will be insulted as their taxes are automatically raised (in a climate of heavy recession and inflation no less) courtesy of the soon-expired Bush cuts.
"Obama promised hope yet delivered fear..." cites the professor, especially with this health bill . And from the 60% disapproval of the democrat proposals, Rustici predicts a public outrage and disapproval rate for these so called "reforms" to peak upwards of 70%.
In other words, the Republicans will have overwhelming majority support to stop a successfully forced healthcare proposal before the cement drys. Over 100 seats between the House and Senate will be lost by the Dems in 2010, and Obama will be forced into a no-win situation as the final conspirator left unpunished in the eyes of the American people. Were he Micheal Steele says Prof. Rustici, he'd then use his position over the budget to completely shut down the federal government, until Barack Obama signed a bill annulling the launch of universal health care. Completely.
No federal funding for anything. At all. Not until Obama signs an annulment. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Nothing at all.
No federal funding for social security payments. No federal funding for student loans. No federal funding for further, "shovel-ready" porkulus projects. No federal grants. No federal subsidies. Not even the military, said Professor Rustici. Nothing budgeted to NORAD, FBI, CIA, the Army, etc.
Nothing. At all. Period. With it made very loud, and very, very clear, that the new Republicans will continue their nuclear winter of the federal government, until Obama is ready to sign the annulment of his nuclear rammed Health Care bill. After all, who'll care about a national defense when the greatest threat to liberty in the entirety of U.S. History has already been launched by the (and by this point, defunct) Democrat party? No terrorist attack, no external invasion is poised to ruin as many lives as this bill is set to do, should it be allowed to fully hatch in 2013.
Given the current public outrage and terror over the possibilties of a the rammed healthcare bill, it will be Obama left with the bag. According to Rustici, It will be Obama left with the blame, come what may from the republican controlled federal freeze. A line must be drawn says the Professor. An ultimatum must be set. The American people will be in overwhelming support of this courageous stand, and no amount of media spin will shake the polls in support of a conservative Congress's action. Micheal Steele must force an annulment out of Barrack Hussein Obama. Just as he would have originally forced his unpopular agenda against we, the American people.
~David Morris~
Having recently spoken to Professor Thomas C. Rustici of George Mason University about the present political situation, an intriguing prediction was made under assumption that Democrats successfully push the thing through (of which he predicts that they will). As well as his own political strategy of how to roll it back.
In short, if this bill passes via nuclear option, then starting 2010 under the new congress led by perhaps Micheal Steele, republicans are going to have to nuclear option Obama right back.
The first point Professor Rustici raises, is that if this bill passes, then the Democrat party may as well be considered extinct considering the anger it will incite. Seniors are already aligned against him and what this bill will do to their medicare payments, the young who supported Obama grow ever more disillusioned as they struggle most of all to find work, and everyone else between will be insulted as their taxes are automatically raised (in a climate of heavy recession and inflation no less) courtesy of the soon-expired Bush cuts.
"Obama promised hope yet delivered fear..." cites the professor, especially with this health bill . And from the 60% disapproval of the democrat proposals, Rustici predicts a public outrage and disapproval rate for these so called "reforms" to peak upwards of 70%.
In other words, the Republicans will have overwhelming majority support to stop a successfully forced healthcare proposal before the cement drys. Over 100 seats between the House and Senate will be lost by the Dems in 2010, and Obama will be forced into a no-win situation as the final conspirator left unpunished in the eyes of the American people. Were he Micheal Steele says Prof. Rustici, he'd then use his position over the budget to completely shut down the federal government, until Barack Obama signed a bill annulling the launch of universal health care. Completely.
No federal funding for anything. At all. Not until Obama signs an annulment. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Nothing at all.
No federal funding for social security payments. No federal funding for student loans. No federal funding for further, "shovel-ready" porkulus projects. No federal grants. No federal subsidies. Not even the military, said Professor Rustici. Nothing budgeted to NORAD, FBI, CIA, the Army, etc.
Nothing. At all. Period. With it made very loud, and very, very clear, that the new Republicans will continue their nuclear winter of the federal government, until Obama is ready to sign the annulment of his nuclear rammed Health Care bill. After all, who'll care about a national defense when the greatest threat to liberty in the entirety of U.S. History has already been launched by the (and by this point, defunct) Democrat party? No terrorist attack, no external invasion is poised to ruin as many lives as this bill is set to do, should it be allowed to fully hatch in 2013.
Given the current public outrage and terror over the possibilties of a the rammed healthcare bill, it will be Obama left with the bag. According to Rustici, It will be Obama left with the blame, come what may from the republican controlled federal freeze. A line must be drawn says the Professor. An ultimatum must be set. The American people will be in overwhelming support of this courageous stand, and no amount of media spin will shake the polls in support of a conservative Congress's action. Micheal Steele must force an annulment out of Barrack Hussein Obama. Just as he would have originally forced his unpopular agenda against we, the American people.
~David Morris~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)