Welfare

With all the talk of corporate bail-outs, I just have a few things to say about this issue.

Obviously, we shouldn’t let giant companies who employ millions of people go out of business. This would just raise unemployment, and push us even deeper into a recession. And of course, there have to be conditions attached to the assistance given to those companies by taxpayers. When executives show up on private jets to ask for a bailout, I agree that sends the wrong message. Here’s my take.

1. If you take money from the government, you shouldn’t be allowed to lay off more than 5% of your workforce over the next five years. You can re-organize, consolidate, re-assign labor, or whatever you have to do to stay afloat. But if the whole point of the bailout is to save jobs, you don’t get to take the money, then cut the jobs anyway.

2. No employee earns a salary more than twenty times what the lowest-paid employee earns. That doesn’t prohibit performance-pay contractual bonuses and so forth, but I don’t see why any executive could “deserve” more than TWENTY TIMES what their workers make without proving their worth.

3. Quitcherbitchin about taxes. Seriously. The next time I hear some corporate fat-cat pundit on Fox News blathering about socialism and welfare moms, I’m going to freak. The amount of money taxpayers are spending on corporate bailouts is so much more than we’ve ever spent on social programs for the poor. Just STFU already.

4. What about the middle class? We just sit here, working away, paying taxes, and driving the economy. Meanwhile, all the handouts go to the rich or the poor. Meanwhile, we walk a tightrope. If someone gets sick or laid off, there’s no help for us. They’ve even made bankruptcy nearly impossible. Where is our safety net?

Okay, that’s it for my rant. It just seems like the people who work the hardest, take the most risk, and pay the highest percentage of their income in taxes are forced to make it on their own, while they watch others reap the benefits.

Marriage

I just read Keith Olbermann’s very eloquent argument on the subject of marriage equality. I have posted a couple of passages below, but I strongly encourage you to read the full article. This is an issue that will become an embarrassment to our country.

Think back throughout the brief history of our nation. Every single time we challenge progress and support hate because we cannot face change, the change always wins in the end. Those who fight for change write the history books, and those who fight against it are always left behind. Always.

Link to original article

If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don’t want to deny you yours. They don’t want to take anything away from you. They want what you want—a chance to be a little less alone in the world.

Only now you are saying to them—no. You can’t have it on these terms. Maybe something similar. If they behave. If they don’t cause too much trouble. You’ll even give them all the same legal rights—even as you’re taking away the legal right, which they already had. A world around them, still anchored in love and marriage, and you are saying, no, you can’t marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn’t marry?

This part really does interest me. If you oppose the right for gay couples to marry, please help me understand why. I hear over and over again that it would “weaken” the institution of marriage. HOW!?

There are plenty of issues I don’t agree with. For example, I don’t support the Iraq war. But I would never dream of taking rights away from our troops. Yet, it seems that many of the same people who cry out against abuse of our troops are also waving signs of hate against “Adam and Steve”, just because they want to get married. I don’t understand.

I keep hearing this term “re-defining” marriage. If this country hadn’t re-defined marriage, black people still couldn’t marry white people. Sixteen states had laws on the books which made that illegal in 1967. 1967.

The parents of the President-Elect of the United States couldn’t have married in nearly one third of the states of the country their son grew up to lead. But it’s worse than that. If this country had not “re-defined” marriage, some black people still couldn’t marry black people. It is one of the most overlooked and cruelest parts of our sad story of slavery. Marriages were not legally recognized, if the people were slaves. Since slaves were property, they could not legally be husband and wife, or mother and child. Their marriage vows were different: not “Until Death, Do You Part,” but “Until Death or Distance, Do You Part.” Marriages among slaves were not legally recognized.

You know, just like marriages today in California are not legally recognized, if the people are gay.

I think this is one of those generational issues. Unfortunately, it seems there is only so much change that any single generation can tolerate. But this is a CHOICE. You have a choice to fight change, or to embrace it.

So the next time this issue comes up on a ballot, please don’t vote for hate. Please don’t become obsolete. Please don’t become an embarrassment to history. Support marriage equality.

Heroes

I am starting to wonder if Heroes should have continued after the first season. I really enjoyed the first season, and the second season was okay. After seeing the DVD, I think it would have made a LOT more sense if they could have followed the original story arc. Stupid writers’ strike. But I digress.

This season just has me alternately yawning, and saying “WTF” repeatedly. I’m kind of wondering if the writers have run out of ideas, or if they have any clue where they’re taking all this in the long run. If there is a long run… I mean, the show is getting its ass kicked in the ratings by Dancing With the Stars. Seriously.

ZOMG SPOILERZ!

If you’ve never watched Heroes, then by all means, don’t read the following rant. It will give away every plot device detail ever used by the series ever.

Something “really bad” is going to happen, which may or may not be the fault of someone with or without “abilities”. These abilities are the result of evolution, unless they were artificially created. Anyway, the good guys have to stop the bad something, while the bad guys try to convince them that the bad something is actually a good something. Someone travels through time and/or has a vision of the future or past that changes everything.

The bad people turn out to be good people, and the good people just turn out to be regular people. The person you thought was in charge turns out to be manipulated by someone even more powerful than the last season. Then, there is an eclipse or something, and all the good guys and bad guys and everyone gets together to thwart whatever plan the newest most powerful person had in mind. Then, they get a few months, or sometimes just a few minutes until the next powerful dude reveals he or she has actually been pulling the strings all along.

So, yeah… the show is not only repeating itself, but keeps re-inventing itself all the time in quest of that next big “revolution” that will get people to stop watching washed up stars ballroom dancing and talking about Heroes again. I’m really trying to remain a die-hard fan, but throw me a bone here.

This show started out with a cool idea — that super heroes could just be regular people, and if they were, what would they do? I think the show would be a lot more interesting if they stopped trying to be so epic all the time, dialed back the destiny bullsh*t, and got back to telling stories about the people. People are cool.

Fun

I have now worked my way through the first third or so of Rock Band guitar solo mode on Hard. Somewhere in Seattle, I remembered to have fun! The game really is quite enjoyable, once you get the hang of things. Fortunately, there’s a song every now and again that pops in just to remind you this game is supposed to be hard work.

I just hit a solid brick wall on Gimme Shelter by the Rolling Stones. I managed to get through it in practice mode on 50% speed, and it’s actually got some fun parts in it. There’s just not many passages you can “bluff” your way through in that one. So, it’s going to take me at least an hour to practice before I can “play” it well enough to pass, and I was planning to go to bed half an hour ago.

See you tomorrow, Rock Band!

I Did It!

After a short practice session today, I beat Mississippi Queen at 84% with four stars.

Hand Cramps

Well, I used up my extra hour (Daylight Savings Time) by playing Rock Band until way too late. Justin and I got it out earlier today, and he played drums, while I played guitar. Several months ago, I had worked my way through the solo tour on both Easy and Medium, but had to re-learn everything this afternoon. It comes back pretty quick, though. Justin had a blast on the drums, and caught on fast.

So, I figured it was high time I tried Hard. It turns out, Hard isn’t as hard as I thought it would be. Granted, I thought it would be impossible. I had seen people play before, and I have always idolized their immaculate fretting. I used to play the viola (way back when), and position changing was… you know… hard. But I had sheet music, so I could mark in the changes. In Rock Band, you don’t get sheet music. You pretty much have to sight read everything. And sight reading is… hard.

But yeah, it wasn’t as hard as I thought. I bluffed my way through the first three songs on the solo tour, then I met my nemesis: Mississippi Queen. That song is f*cking impossible. I practiced it for two hours in chunks, and at various speeds, and I still can’t play the darned thing. I even skipped ahead one song, and got through that one okay. But I can’t go any further until I beat Mississippi.

Now I have hand cramps, so I am going to bed. I will tackle this beast again in the morning! Any advice from seasoned shredders out there?