The Best Point-of-View

Cutting the Cord and Dumping the Dish

2014-09-16T16:20:00.002-05:00

Since the SCOTUS decided that AEREO's approach to providing a cloud "ROKU accessed" DVR and two antennas to watch 'real time' television is illegal, I have looked for a decent alternative to Aereo after ditching DirecTV and cable for television for the streaming service. Sure we have Hulu, but Hulu itself isn't the answer. Hulu is great for binge watching. It's not so great for casual watching. Aereo wasn't perfect either.

The Linux based MythBuntu/MythTV is now our household DVR system. It is based on Ubuntu 14.04 and MythTV .27. MythTV is a full featured and a low cost system. After much experimenting, I thought I would post some of the things I have learned. This first introductory post addresses the basic television watching and recording capabilities. Additional posts will cover how it works and what makes it including tuners, metadata fetching, and streaming.

MythTV provides a DVR for broadcast television that has many features.

Auto skip of commercials. Tired of that 4 minute break when watching MasterChef? Too lazy to forward it yourself? This is a great feature!
Time adjust of playback. Speed up that show 1.1x, 1.2x, etc. Very useful if trying to get through a show before the kid's bedtime.
Bookmark a show in one room, resume playback in another room.

Where is that antenna? Well in our case of Dallas suburgatory, there are two antenna's required. This due to the fact I don't want to mount my antenna outside incurring the wrath of the HOA, so it's the attic. We have radiant barrier that not only blocks the sun's radiation, but television broadcast too. Fortunately, most stations in the Dallas market are UHF and penetrate just fine. WFAA, is VHF and does not. Operating at 180-186 mhz this VHF station requires some special effort.

GE/RCA UHF/VHF antenna filtered and amplified for UHF only

But what about the Dallas ABC affiliate WFAA operating on VHF? Meet the folded, half wave, dipole antenna. You can buy these, but why do that when you can easily make your own? You just need to know the frequencies you require and a calculator.

The best calculator I found for this is here --> FOLDED HALF WAVE CALCULATOR

Folded Dipole Calculator. There are many, but I found this one to be superior

Using half inch copper pipe stuffed with steel wool, a few screws, a block of wood, and a 300 ohm to 75 ohm coax transformer, I have my VHF antenna! Measured at about 22 inch length (55 total inches) This half wave, folded dipole VHF antenna is set for 183 mhz or dead center of the WFAA broadcast signal specification.

VHF Antenna at 55" total length taking up about 22x4 inches

What's next? Streaming internet radio through mythtv.

Getting tired of the politics, especially talking about energy independence?

2012-10-19T13:36:00.002-05:00

1. The US could pump all the oil it has control over and global demand is such as that would not keep pace with global supplies. Demand is growing at a rate you could not pump it fast enough to affect the global price. The notion of if only we would pump more oil, our gas prices would decrease is just plain wrong.

2. There is no home team advantage for having your own oil supply. The prices paid per barrel in Norway and Saudi Arabia are a global price. The only exception to this is where supplies cannot make it to the market creating a temporary excess local supply. For example, Tulsa, OK enjoyed a brief cost at the pump advantage because of a temporary glut due to a pipeline issue preventing transportation to the US gulf coast.

3. The government cannot dictate prices. If you are operating in a market and the government attempts to set a price less than the market can support either by direct price fixing or taxation policy, supplies will diminish creating a shortage. Ask Jimmy Carter about his 'windfall tax' policy and gas lines. At best, the government can help reduce demand by advocating alternatives. For example, a natural gas powered municipal power plant that charges a car during off peak hours reduce global demand and global dependence.

4. It is true that gas prices were cheaper in 2008. That is because demand slumped world wide. People drove less. People bought less. People used less energy.

5. Certain policies seemingly intent on reducing the foreign demand for oil actually increase it. For example, considering the US gulf coast is quite capable of growing more efficient sugar cane, corn based ethanol mandates not only increase the cost of the numerous food supplies that rely on corn, but also increase demand for the oil it is intending to replace in uses such as fertilizer, diesel fuel, and the direct production of ethanol itself.

Time Lapse on the Sea Shore - 3 hours into less than a minute

2012-10-19T12:57:00.001-05:00

The Marking of thy Beast?

2011-12-02T09:17:00.000-06:00

I saw this in my Pop Mechanics ad section. Not sure where to start. So many jokes, so little time.

1. If they added a 9, is this a hidden '666'?

2. I thought my social security number, my drivers license number, UPC labels, and my bank account were at one time declared the mark of the beast? Maybe BoA truly is a code for Beast of America?

3. Him is 'the' government? Theocracy is working well for Iran, why not here? But its going to be my specific flavor and version of the Christian bible which matters. After all, we all can't be right. Right?

4. Maybe Miami Ink is interested in developing a franchise for this? Maybe our economy can be tattoo based? I hope they need some IT services. It'll probably be outsourced to a place full of infidels, you know - like Utah.

5. Never under estimate our universe's capacity to make a better moron. You would think we would have evolved a bit. But keep in mind that evolution only requires successful adaptation to a changing environment which allows you to live long enough to reproduce, before dying more successfully than others.

6. If Noah had to gather animals two by two, did the ducks swim? Did they worry about invasive species like fire ants & zebra mussels?

Penn State: Joe the Criminal. Penn Fans the Criminals. Penn Administration the Criminals.

2011-11-14T10:53:00.002-06:00

Not much to say on this other than the obvious.

Joe is a criminal of the worst kind. He is worse than the alleged child rapist. He is an accessory. Regardless of the fact of the crime or just an allegation. He may as well held the boy down and watched. He was an indirect participant. He was informed of a crime and kept the child sexual predator on his staff. Forget that he reported the incident as he kept the child sexual predator on his staff. Forget that he reported the incident as he did not follow up after that report. Anyone with knowledge of the crime who did nothing should not only be fired - but charged and convicted as if they were an active participant. After all, silence speaks loudly. Did this alleged reporting allow Joe to put his head down on a pillow every night?

Serving some time to rethink right vs. wrong with some "direct" prison experience might serve as a warning to others tempted to cast a blind eye in the future. Anyone who threatens the whistle blower should receive the same consideration. I am pretty sure that prison would be comparatively safe and comfortable if this happened to my family not only to the direct predator, but those that condoned and rewarded the sexual predator. Any fan with misguided loyalty to the institution of college football needs to pause and think about the crime committed and about the message of their own tacit approval.

SMU was suspended from playing for a minor infraction of paying players to play while Penn State's sexual predatory practices are ignored. Does the NCAA have any regulations against raping a 10 year old boy in a locker room? It is disgusting they apparently need such a rule to immediately suspend a team as it is demonstratively clear that NCAA objectives take priority over blatant crimes of the worst kind. Widespread public condoning of this magnitude brings such a crime to a breathtakingly sick level.

Evidence for Genesis: Adam

2011-11-07T10:09:00.023-06:00

Click above for Evidences

Sometimes you just have call people on their bullshit.

I just came across your article on Adam. http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/adam.html It is mix of unintended humor and bizarre thinking. It is scary that people like you vote or have any influence on *anyone*. First of all, you are ignorant of facts and well understood theory. I suspect you are ignorant of the word ignorant, so I'll explain. It means unaware of or not informed of. It does not mean stupid. I do not know you, so I cannot say you are stupid. However, this document does provide evidence you are either clearly ignorant or deliberately trying to make other people ignorant. However, more evidence is required to know if you are truly stupid, plain ignorant, an evidence denier, or if you are just deliberately misleading people. See how I used the word evidence?

First of all:

1. Evidences? It is evidence. In science, there is never a single piece of evidence. It is a bunch of observations that can be verified that suggest "supporting" evidence. Evidence that refutes a theory breaks the theory. Simple. But, I doubt you even understand the word theory. It does not mean "belief" or "hunch". Think of it is an idea that can be proposed which can either refuted or supported. An idea which requires an answer through observation, indirect observation, experimentation, and is repeatable without any magical thinking or supernatural explanation. Repeatable mean repeatable by others. Did you know that 'gravity' is a theory with limited supported evidence as we are just scratching the surface? We only have 'indirect' evidence of gravity. Sometimes it takes a long time for the answer to arrive. Sometimes the means available to understand is limited.

2. Science does not get into God. Why do some religions insist of getting into science (or attempt to).

You wrote:

Now if one assumes that the "microcephalin variant could have arisen anywhere from 14,000 to 60,000 years ago", possibly could correspond to the "Big Bang"

Where to begin? Who would assume this? You are off on your dates by a about 14 billion years, give or take. Do you think that perhaps there could be another possibility of what happened about 14,000 years ago besides your bogus argument of its either "big bang" or "God"? Do you know that it started with eating a high protein shellfish diet vs. lower protein vegetarian diet? It did not happen quickly. Again, your timing is off as are off by about 4-5 million years.

4. Its hard to be rational with the irrational. Irrational meaning that you are of the mindset to not see a particular story of the bible as a metaphor or parable that fit the time so that it could be understood to educate, or by changing the names and circumstances one can make a statement about something which may get one killed if suggested directly. Do you do not understand the notion that language predates writing? Do you believe geologic, biologic, astronomic, etc "evidence" is suspect because it causes doubt or discomfort and was placed here to test your belief?

Why must people like you say anything about anything when you have no idea what you are talking about? If you are of the mindset that to reject something written (in the accepted 'books' of the bible), you are rejecting all? In science it is perfectly ok to say I do not know if there is lack of evidence to explain an observation. It does not mean, I do not know, and because I do not know, no one can ever know.

5. Lastly, why don't you do a google search microcephalin variant. You will find the studies suggest the brain is still changing (evolving). Perhaps you would also do yourself a favor if you actually researched terms like evolution, science, theory, big bang, etc. You may want to consider not forming a conclusion and searching for evidence to back it up and ignoring anything which refutes your conclusions. Try letting evidence take you where it does. Evidence does not lie or mislead. Evidence is information waiting to be discovered and understood. That understanding gets refined, improved, and updated continuously.

Go learn something. There is wonder and amazement in understanding. God does not like slovenly behavior. Perhaps one day you will understand that ignorance is one such deadly sin.

Socialized Medicine and the Workplace

2011-10-21T12:34:00.005-05:00

I (somehow) received a summons, which after translation, illustrates why socialized anything can and usually does go wrong. In this case, this particular central government requires any company whether local or global to enforce a medical law. Failure to comply may have consequences impacting continued employment and physical access. This is quite an extrapolation of concepts such as requiring vaccinations to attend a public school. The operative word being public. This company is not public. It is unfortunate that the citizens of this particular country choose to delegate personal responsibility to their centralized government. Not shown is the distribution list this was sent to - complete with employee names and identification numbers. I wonder what type of screening will be next. Blonde hair with blue eyes?

The Creation of the Solar System

2011-05-14T13:31:00.003-05:00

Check out the video on Jupiter in the preview. This is breathtakingly, incredibly wrong and absent of any merit. The insane conjectures in this video series are too many to mention in detail. But here is an example: lack of craters do not suggest a planet or moon is 'young' but rather that there is a mechanism to resurface the world. Their conclusion is that a lack of craters implies young planet. The concept of tidal stress to heat up a core is intentionally discarded. Another fun item was the spin rate of Jupiter and conclusions drawn on the energy required to spin it so fast.

Their use of the word evolution illustrates their misunderstanding of the most basic science. It is almost intended as dirty word. We make predictions and refine theory based on found evidence. That is great thing about science.

As you see the video, you hear the bible had been rejected. This is in fact is even misleading. Science, no matter what field, does not consult the bible to either support or reject theory. Of course there are unknowns. It does not weigh in on the matter of religion. This is why we discover evidence and support theories or reject them, and allowing theories evolve. However, the creationists here are abandoning well understood science to deliberately mislead others and to support their conclusions required in biblical faith.

Anger Managment

2011-04-04T14:50:00.000-05:00

Let me get this straight: The clerics drum up their people over burning of the Koran by some Florida hillbilly minister but consider human life so cheap they seem not to care about about actual US sanctioned 'Kill Teams'?

Our 'continuing' mission: We are to win their hearts and minds? Why would we want to? None of this makes any sense. Read the link to the Rolling Stone article HERE for some appalling conduct. See the pictures HERE.

We are not 5th century people nor can we really relate to 5th century people. Why must we act like 5th century people?

In the end, we end up with well trained, immoral killing machines that come home. These veterans (young men) are expected to reintegrate into US society? Where is the press on this? All but silent it seems - at least until one comes back to wreak havoc here.

O'Brother, O'Brien and Obama

2010-10-12T13:29:00.001-05:00

A friend of mine made the above graphic. I find it a refreshing less than subtle reference to the warning of a certain Mr. George Orwell made about dangers of soft tyranny of a big government resulting from seemingly small steps towards eventual totalitarianism. Of course I refer to the book 1984. In this book, reductions in 'rations' are referred to increases. "Spin" became the primary exported product. Enemies we war with today are allies tomorrow and again enemies the following year, but in all this never really acknowledging motivation or providing true rationale. Do not question the party was the clear message. Such novels scared the hell of me as high school student with its warning that nothing is for free. Freedom allows for failure or success. It is indifferent.

Unfortunately, where are the options for someone who wants a limited, constitutional based republic that has little if any implied power, but only those expressly provided to it? The Tea Party? The GoP? Unfortunately, these parties miss the mark too. Government intrusion whether socialistic in nature, where everyone suffers equally under stagnation or if that government consists of religiously infused anti science 'social conservative' will suffer intellectual hypocrisy and become equally destructive. In the end, as Mr. Smith found out in the novel, both lead to same place - a 'nanny state' of social tyranny of neighbors reporting on neighbors and citizens losing even the most basic self sufficiency, including such as where to eat, whom to date, what 'words' are acceptable to speak. It is a high price to pay to relegate responsibility from the local and state level to the federal.

It is going to take a while to work this out. Power corrupts and those who have it tend to like to keep it that way.

Give Peace Some Peace

2010-09-28T13:03:00.004-05:00

The Answer is A and C!

I came across a peace symbol in an advertisement. I had always been curious about symbols, their origin, and how people will interpret them and how some people will advocate that interpretation over any other fact to push a point of view. It fascinates me how symbols can change over time and how any narrative can be forged regardless of facts. The peace symbol, after all this time has made a comeback. The children love them and they seem to understand the original idea behind it.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Two Links with information I find very interesting:

The first is a classic example of creative interpretation without any substantive reasoning. Any facts will be burdened with hyperbole and selective inclusion. Perception is Reality to the subscriber of this viewpoint. It is hard to fathom. Perhaps they know better. Perhaps they are less ignorant they their writing suggests. Perhaps they are willfully misleading the reader.

WWJD do with Nukes?

Read more on The Peace Sign and Satanism

Is Spock the Devil?

The second is as good as any explanation for the actual history behind the modern peace symbol. This very brief writeup has some historical context to support interpretation of the era and the era being the late 1950s to support Nuclear Disarmament. Whether the iconic peace symbol is satanic, anti-christian, pro-Star Trek, left wing, free masonry, or a contrivance of the communist sympathizer is not substantiated. Nor is it horribly relevant. It is the creation of Gerald Holtom in 1958 when he was commissioned by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament by Betrand Russell, noted philosopher, pacifist and socialist.

So what? Is the idea of peace so horrific it must be aligned with satanic ritual? Did not our beloved Ronald Reagan share such ideas to reduce nuclear arms in 1982? Granted, he was into Astrology, but I wouldn't refer to him as a left wing or a communist sympathizer. How does the evangelical reconcile all this?

Bundle This!

2010-06-04T16:47:00.002-05:00

Have you ever tried to unbundle a service from Verizon? It is not possible. At least Verizon does not make this easy. After waiting on hold for what seems an eternity, the customer service represent is determined to have me keep the telephone service I no longer had use for. My logic was that because in fact, I never did use for it, so why have it? Doing what seems to make sense to one person is lost revenue for unused services by another. I am being told that should I remove a service I do not need, the other services such as Internet access and television will have their contract extended by another 24 months from today, but only reduce the entire bill by about $20 for only the phone portion of service currently costing me $50 before taxes. On top of the the extension, if that was not bad enough a $179 disconnection fee would be charged. The best possible outcome is for to wait until October when the contract expires and cancel EVERYTHING and move to someone one else.

Which I will!

Watch FOX News or Else!

2010-06-03T15:00:00.005-05:00

I was sent the above graphic that advocates a certain point of view. One which enforces the belief that those who watch Fox News viewers are not only not-smart, but paranoid, and confused. Their tag line says Fair and Balanced. Yet, to be balanced would they have to be extremely right wing by their repeated condemnation of the mainstream drive-by media as being left wing and in the pocket of liberals? To regain some credibility and to be logical would this necessitate FOX News to remove the word fair as well? It seems FOX News has no interest in promoting a fair and balanced news source. The motivations are clearly to offer substitute news for a specific consumer much in the same way thatMSNBC does with its own newsertainment programming such as Rachel Maddow. Yet, does MSNBC pretend to be something it is not? No. Since FOX News demonstrativelyis so intellectually inconsistent is own tag line, how can a reasonable person put this in perspective? One idea is to read, listen, and watch a variety of sources. Just like socialism is bad because it eradicates choice and options in favor of monopolies which otherwise could not be competitive. Those who consume FOX News exclusively may be self-imposing the equivalent of a vitamin deficiency from exclusively consuming an unbalanced diet of only same food product. It is really easy to dismiss the FOX News viewer as under-educated, non-informed, teabagger. The issue is they do manage come together and believe otherwise.

FOX News has elements of being anti-education, anti-science, and self deluding. Consider Mr. Glenn Beck, who's education is limited to what he chose to learn when not performing as a shock jock. Mr. Beck suggested that an education such as his is due to the good fortune of having access to a Public Library and is the equivalent of a publicly provided secondary education, but at a much better price. He believes the books there are free. A book is a tool. Selective reading does not necessarily make one educated, nor does it allow for perspective. I seriously doubt he was challenged to consider much that fell outside his comfort and concepts put forth not to necessarily agree with, but to at least understand. The idea of education is lost on him. The promotion of ignorance is a terrible thing, yet, he promotes it. It allows him to form a belief based on narrow information and provide a forum to promote his belief. For example, one example that if the USA continues to expand from the center by adopting a so-called liberal agenda, we will end up much like the former USSR or North Korea. What his education disallows for his pondering of what would happen if we moved to far to right? Where we could end up with theocracies not unlike Iran. For those of you in Rio Linda, that is 'religious' run dictatorships. He fails to discuss this aspect, does he consider himself to be unfair? No. quite the opposite and that should scare most people.

Unsolicited Evangelicals

2010-06-02T17:32:00.004-05:00

Below is snippets of a message I received. I am not sure why someone would have the need to send something so provocative as well as being so intellectually dishonest. At the end of the message is what the constitution says on the matter, not anyone's particular opinion. The law. I am glad we have something to prevent mob rule such as our constitution.

Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established Orthodox churches in the colonies..

Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of Interpreting the law would begin making law an oligarchy the rule of few over many.

How then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 220 years in this Country is now suddenly wrong and Unconstitutional?

Lets put it around the world and let the world see and remember what this great country was Built on

I was asked to send this on if I agreed or

Delete if I didn't. Now it is your turn. ..

It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, it is very hard to understand why there is such a mess about having the Ten Commandments on display or 'In God We Trust' on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Why don't we just tell the other 14% to Sit Down and SHUT UP!!!

If you agree, pass this on

___________________________________________

The law disagrees. No bogus polls, just the law:

Otherwise known as the establishment clause in the First Amendment

Article [I.]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

and this little notion from the constitution

Article. VI.

Clause 3: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

The Inside Voice

2010-05-28T12:53:00.020-05:00

While sitting in the comfy chairs at Starbucks this morning, my oldest son and I had our conversation involuntarily altered by injecting a lot of what did you say? and can you repeat? Across the room sat a lady who apparently was capable of using her inside voice to converse with her companion suddenly deemed it essential that she needed to speak loudly on her cell phone. Really loudly. It is doubtful that this person ever realizes that her speaking volume is no way associated to her hearing volume? I was reminded of days of those nice Koss stereo headphones my less astute family members would use while attempting to talk resulting only in raising their own voice apparently for my benefit. A curious reaction to music in their own ears. So is loud cell use an involuntary reflex of sensory bombardment or simple rude behaviour of the person perhaps presuming that no one cares about being forced to hear their side of a conversation? There may be something else. That is habit.

Often times the excitement of the conversation is driving this need to be louder than what is is considered customary or reasonable for the immediate environment. The person engaged in this one half of conversation is unaware of their action because the other half of the conversation is not there to provide real time visual feedback. Since cell phone technology is digital, it does not make the signal any better if you are almost yelling or holding it like Captain Kirk talking but without the ability to hear. A bad connection full of incomplete words cannot be remedied by this technique.

Maybe the solution to break this bad habit for the benefit of everyone in earshot is to simply look at the person and clue the clueless by your sudden notice. If that fails, there is always the option to relocate your conversation to their proximity, increase your own volume, and work in the subject of human behaviour and civility. Of course, one could get up and just walk away. But why impact yourself unnecessarily from the burden imposed by others? One could ask who are you to do this to just confront a social bully? Well, Captain Kirk would argue Who do I have to be? I think the key to civility is expectations and managing these appropriately. If the offender get mad, you can always say, What? in your loudest non-yell voice.

Of course, you could end up with hot coffee in your face if you live in Brooklyn for making such demands on a person, so there are risks. Ah...stereotypes and archetypes. Where would we be without them!

A New Standard in Bias

2010-05-26T13:15:00.035-05:00

I came across the headline of the pending changes to the Texas educational standards and ended up frustrated, mad and confused. All this had to be an exaggeration, conjecture, or something I just misunderstood. The simple fact is, the absurdity is understated. A quick reading of the actual draft left me perplexed and concerned. A more careful read made me angry. The neat thing about a draft is the changes and evolution of the document just pop out leaving little to imagination about the intent of the author.

Read the draft HERE.

So these non-educated, non-historians, nonsensical board members have done their work. It's quite interesting to see how their thoughts come together. What they decide to leave in, what they decide to leave out speaks volumes. Their choice of words speak much as well as the context which they are used. Words such as imperialism, expansionism, and aggression are used with deliberation.

What is driving all this? Members of board would suggest their objective was to move things to the center from the left. The center? What about historical facts? Apparently the impact of the telegraph or vaccines is considered left wing. One could ask if Bill Clinton's sex scandal truly warrants to be considered an incident or scandal, as the draft revision puts it, but there is no mention of Oliver North and Ronald Reagan's involvement with the Iran-Contra affair. The former being incorrectly characterized as an impeachment, when it was technically did not ever make to a senate vote and the latter being technically high treason. If you read the draft you may consider the implications on how New Deal creations like the FDIC and the SEC affect your daily life, but the Patriot Act simply has a role in your life. It does not get the same suggested concern and is made to sound more benign than the SEC or the FDIC? The board believes George Wallace worthy of discussion but Thomas Jefferson is removed as not being relevant to enlightenment? We cannot reasonably expect that any person has zero bias, but what is so extraordinary here is that the bias is so blatant.

Below is my imagined meeting notes:

Refer to it as Bill Clinton's impeachment as if it were fact. But as far as any other incidents similar to this - make that scandals - leave it to just Watergate and Teapot Dome. Let's leave the names out. For crying out loud, do not refer to the Iran-Contra affair, ever!
McCarthy was vindicated by history. We have some letters to prove it, even though we still cannot find the names he was naming as those papers were blank sheets. So what if the reality of his committee was a witch hunt. The ends do justify the means and there were at least a couple of spies. Understood?
Some unnamed groups in the 1960s simply wanted to keep the "status quo" on civil rights. That's all. Nothing wrong with the status quo. No need for specifics on events, who these groups are, or even what that really means. It is not racism. It's the status quo and emphasise that change is scary.
Geography and geographic factors are to INCLUDE Panama Canal and the failed levies in New Orleans. Really. these are geographical. The dust bowl and great plains are geographical as well. Even though it was likely I was taught only the great plains were 'geographical'. The canal and levies were 'made' constructs, but so what. The Dust Bowl was just an era of bad climate and bad policy of ripping of topsoil and god knows we cannot bring up bad farm policies or admit the effects of climate change.
When it comes to society and resources, let's remove the notion of conservation. Instead, let's ONLY talk about the Fed taking your property. Really! Teddy Roosevelt was wrong to do this stuff.
Rock and Roll is the term used in describing mainstream pop culture along with some other forms of music such as country and western. I know its not 1955 people, but quite frankly I don't care. Let's not bring up jazz or any great American composers though as their influence must be minimal. But at the same time, let's study 'some literature' but let's remove anything specific on Grapes of Wrath and such. Maybe Grapes is covered in geography when discussing the Dust Bowl?
Upton Sinclair's The Jungle need not be considered any more. It might make people question their food supply once again. Just do not talk about it and no one will even consider how the food gets there. Whatever you do, no references to George Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984.
America's expansion no longer refers to America actually increasing its size or expanding through immigration and acquisition of territory. It refers to external threats such as Hawaii, Guam, and Cuba.
Social Darwinism? Is that what we renamed Evolutionary Psychology? Well, let's talk about this in the context of Prohibition, Red Scare, race relations, and the changing roles of females. I do not exactly understand what it is meant by Social Darwinism in the context with the others subjects, but I'll make something up as it sounds really good.
Please refer to the Battle of Midway as an 'issue' in WWII. Consider contextual discussion as Holocaust and Japanese Internment 'issues'. We'll discuss 'military events' such as the Bataan Death March, the invasion of Normandy, and 'military advancement' in another section. Make sure there is nothing too provocative that may suggest or interferes with us be portrayed as the protagonist.
Use the term home front when referring to the US in WWII. I had no idea the Germans and Japanese had standing armies here. Must have been how New Braunfel's was founded. Really, though - it sounds a lot better than suggesting we exclusively went off to war some 'place' no one today can even find on a map. The last thing we need is the kids thinking globally.
Was it American Indian Code Talkers? I am not sure on this. I will leave it there and we'll fix it later when we get our story straight on how we want this topic discussed, if at all.
The US expanded after WWII. The USSR was the aggressor. They did not expand. Get it? By the way, make sure you talk about JFK's role in the Cuban Missile thing. He is to be referenced by name. Other events post WWII? We'll just talk about some of the events, no need to get into names here. I am sure there were reasons, but let's keep it consistent with our narrative? OK?

There is the USA and there are other Foreign countries. Not other countries. Other sovereign nations can only be sovereign if we set up the regime so they fall in line and will NEVER give us issues. Let's be honest here, why would we would ever get involved if they were sovereign to begin with? Maybe if they had oil, gold, or diamonds, but I would have some doubts. Let's take the time to make this clear, righteous sounding, and simple. Never mind if sounds a little ominous, these kids won't appreciate the nuance and might help with recruitment.
Don't forget the Social Gospel. We'll discuss this one in detail later at our meeting on wedge issues to fight those sciency people by teaching the controversy. Maybe we can mix in to discussion on urbanisation or some social discussion on intelligent design?

Also, a hat tip the folks who managed to get military oriented short films in the elementary schools as well as visits to the elementary school by currently surviving service personnel on leave. Without any expectation of our wars ending or a clear purpose there is little point in wasting a decade or so before we hit the high school students with marketing 'service' as their best option. It is not like the standards we are setting will prepare anyone for college or the job market. A decade ago I would not have imagined we'd have such material as this available to our youngest students. Well done!

All the above notes could be true!

Proposed Revisions to 19 TAC Chapter 113

2010-05-26T13:05:00.004-05:00

Blindsided

2009-11-24T09:17:00.020-06:00

Before the previews for what is supposed to be a feel good movie, my family was exposed to what I consider an insidious, dangerous, and an immoral uninvited attempt of trying to tap into the young fresh minds of those among the audience. From those that brought us the Patriot Act, which makes it a felony to exercise your rights of liberty. Yes - euphemisms are fun. It's not Global Warming, it's Climate Change. But I digress. There on the big screen was an advertisement for the National Guard. It was slick. Dramatically showing how in the darkest of nights, during a bad storm - perhaps after a hurricane, the National Guard could use you. If you have what it takes. Once there, perhaps YOU could be there to rescue that kitten still hiding. Maybe you will find that wedding picture album only gently touched by rain among the heaps of wreckage and gently hand it to the grieving family. You will see words on the screen talking of citizenship reminiscent of Starship Troopers taken out of the context and of course, for the wrong reasons. You will hear music that makes it sound glorious, rewarding, and honorable.

I worry. It seems to me the person who is responsible still has yet been held legally responsible. Where is the justice? The moron who got us into mess did not need to concern himself with being sent overseas to defend another contrived boondoggle that Ike himself would not support. This person did not uphold the Constitution and put the country as risk, morally, and fiduciary. His own experience? That war, the one Ike would not support? That was the other one that dragged on. He hid out in then what was exclusively the National Guard and when sober (not necessarily from drinking) he showed up. He played it 'safe'. I just wonder, If Nixon had decided to send the National Guard to Vietnam, would he had made the same choices? Would he even remember after bender lasting that long? By comparison - Nixon knew where his authority ended.

Today, we have a new President. Our chickens are roosting. Face it. Just one of them - Bin Laden was not a chicken. He was a rooster of our own making because we were having a dust up with the former USSR and when they bailed, we did too. That particular rooster did not like that much. Yet, we silence those who would embrace the true American way of decency on truth? Now we have ads to deal with these chickens to recruit via trickery? Shame. They were roosting while our poster child for attention deficit disorder in chief focused on nonsense in Operation Contrived War on Iraq and created more terrorists, more debt, and more chickens. Cause and effect.

Yet, W. is gone and here we are with slick ads pandering to young adults which I doubt the SEC will be investigating these types of ads for false or being misleading. What is the likelihood the target audience of the 18 year kid would actually be doing National Guard duty as portrayed? There was not disclaimer saying Results not Typical. At least they should change the name and call it International Guard. That's the danger of a single source, single payer, single anything. Maybe they should have a voice over of likelihood causes of death, including poor policy? Congress declares war. Something we have seemed to have forgotten.

Yet, the movie left the audience with an important message as the hero sought to write his final high school essay about Courage and Honor. He found that one can have courage and die a pointless death, one without meaning. But to have honor when doing so gives courage meaning. One can only hope that our leaders have honor and we know our previous leadership were in short supply of this. We should not be so complacent. We should question our leadership. That is distinctively American.

Update on Texas Board of Education

2009-10-06T12:00:00.015-05:00

Our elected school board chairperson responds to email query on Neil Armstrong with suggestion to take it up with the teachers. Considering that certain members from the Houston area on the board consider public education an abomination to God and ironically are on the board to only support only home schooling and the majority would be more comfortable in a private school where truth is let us say, more malleable, I find it incredible the current chair person - who succeeds the guy who uttered the phrase Someone needs to stand up to these experts! in the context of the science in the classroom debate vs. creationism in the classroom can suggest without a giggle to take it up with the teachers that bring ideas to the board by way of the TEA? I wonder if I were to ask any given teacher about who sets content of the textbooks and curriculum? You cannot have it both ways. Leadership is sometimes about leading. People in responsible positions need to behave responsibly. Period. Not sneaking your craptastic agenda into the public domain. You see no one should have to debate this nor should we need to have a discussion on this type of topic. We still have a Constitution?

Meanwhile, my follow-up response went answered. I expect nothing less from such cowards who try to indoctrinate with dogma incessantly. If one path fails, find a proxy to seek another to method to succeed with a thinly veiled agenda. It's a sad day for Texans and liberty.

Hi Gail,

We have not met in person. However, I have had the opportunity to speak to you on a few occasions regarding the science in the class room vs. faith is a private issue best left out of a science class room. As the board did have basic confusion over the essential meaning of the word 'theory' in that specific case, the board has demonstrated that it has lack of understanding of the basics of science. If we do have teachers in our system making such Orwellian suggestions on revising historical context, well - that is truly terrible. If you do not know, the central character in the novel, 1984 had a job. This job was to take historical figures and turn them into 'unpersons' by removing them from any documents or literature because they conflicted with the 'party' agenda. The board should be objective and balanced. It should also have the scruples to discern between nonsense and legitimacy. For that very reason, instead of entertaining such nonsense, the person(s) who suggested it should have been challenged on whom else fails to meet 'these standards' and by what exactly are these? Then apply them universally. Followed up by a review of their own credentials. There has to be some merit. There has to be some standard. I believe the Texas public education received when I exited the system is far stronger than one being offered today and I am in my mid 40s. That should not be the case. We have better tools, better information available, yet our system is falling down. You do have a leadership position on the board? We were taught critical thinking skills. If our teachers and board lack this basic skill - what hope do we have? I expect more. Our kids deserve more. We cannot be forever importing talent into the state while our recently educated students best hope is to get jobs at Wal*Mart because they were ill prepared and non-competitive, beyond being overly prepped on TAKs because our system failed them due to our board being busy with obscure nonsense right out of a fictional book. But it does make sense if your proposing teacher is teaching to the test. Remove info and facts and have a smaller test.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:42 AM,
SBOESUPPORT <sboesupport@tea.state.tx.us>
wrote:

Mr. Best:

I'm not sure we've met before, although you seem quick to blame me for the removal of Neil Armstrong from the social studies curriculum standards. A panel of classroom teachers that was named by the Texas Education Agency to review our standards has recommended the removal of Neil Armstrong, apparently because he is not a "scientist." The State Board of Education has instructed the review panel that we believe Armstrong should remain in our history standards, as his walk on the moon marked a significant contribution to American space exploration. The issue will come back to us for further discussion in November. You might have to ask the teachers of Texas to stop making such embarrassing recommendations to the elected board.

Gail Lowe State Board of Education

Just too Damn Funny: ACORN Sues Hidden-camera Filmmakers

2009-09-24T15:35:00.015-05:00

Just when it could not get any funnier, the group somewhat known creating their own bit of distress is actually suing for emotional distress imposed on them? Even the IRS has severed ties with Acorn. I do not know if this is baffling, stunning, or the height of self importance. However, it would be fun to be the rational judge and hear this case. To say the words: Now let me get this straight. Followed up by orders to make them pay court costs. Interesting how if your bias is certain way, it is public service and free speech, regardless of the fact it is disruptive or personal in nature. This is not even playing by your rule book Acorn. The apparent distress here is you were caught on tape and lost a tactic.

BALTIMORE (AP) - Community activist group ACORN is suing the makers of a hidden-camera video that showed employees of its Baltimore office giving tax advice to a man posing as a pimp and a woman posing as a prostitute. The liberal group contends that the audio portion of the video was obtained illegally because Maryland requires two-party consent to create sound recordings. The two employees seen in the video were fired after it was posted online. The lawsuit says the employees, Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams, suffered "extreme emotional distress." The multimillion-dollar lawsuit seeks damages from James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, who played the pimp and prostitute in the videos, and from conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart, who posted the videos on his Web site.

Texas Bored of Edukation - Houston Problem? Duh?

2009-09-23T10:11:00.023-05:00

These religious nut cases are at it again. Apparently not ever satisfied until everyone subscribes to their ideas of what makes a good society are once again blurring the lines with confusion over whom should be in a 5th grade social studies book regarding the topic of science and scientists. Yes, these are the same mindful people who wanted to be the deciders on what should be in a science book and tackled [once] again the issue of evolution vs. creationism. Never really paying attention to one was science and the other one, well was a belief system and not a science. So now, they want to remove Neil Armstrong from mention because he technically was not a scientist. Well, by that measure neither was Thomas Edison, depending how you define scientist. Are these people to be taken serious? How can we tolerate that our elected officials allow Texas to be the source of ridicule to the rest of the nation and the world? It is just embarrassing. Below is an excerpt from SciGuy Eric Berger.

As part of the process a Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills review team composed of parents and teachers has suggested removing Neil Armstrong from a "science strand" in a 5th grade social studies book. Effectively this would remove the mention of Armstrong has a figure of historical significance from 5th grade textbooks. I asked board spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe why this change was made and she explained: The team said they made this proposal because he was not a scientist. The State Board of Education has not voted for or against that proposal yet. It won't vote on the social studies proposal until January.

I did write a letter to to Gail Lowe. Whom I have spoken to many times. I requested them to stop this nonsense. I suggested they really need to read [or re-read] 1984 and Fahrenheit 451. I also enquired if these two books are still available or if they have banned them? Perhaps, too few members of the board are smarter than a fifth grader? For those of you in Rio Linda, in the book 1984, the government strives to reduce the amount of words available to be used in an effort to force everyone to be politically correct. We would not want these fresh young minds to get dangerous ideas at tender young ages, would we? Freedom is Slavery after all. Plus, just as in 1984, our Board of Education is acting as the Winston Smith character who's job was defined to rewrite actual events to fit the [interpreted] historical narrative to serve the party.

I really laugh at these so-called family values social conservatives. The only difference between them and [social] conservatives in the middle east seems to be attire and geography. The ideology is strikingly similar. Both would be perfectly happy doing a reset of the clock by about 5000 years.

By the way, George Washington said, In no way is the is the United States founded upon the Christian doctrine. Besides, I do not recall Christianity ever proposing or endorsing willful ignorance. That is an invention of foolish men with less than selfless agendas. Get over it.

Today's NEA: LBJ Would Be Proud!

2009-09-22T11:50:00.027-05:00

Most people who know LBJ, know he was successful [at getting his way] because he managed through intimation. We often hear about a new era of FDR and JFK. I believe there is the shadow of LBJ, not JFK nor FDR taking shape here. However, I wonder how LBJ would have liked the idea of using his NEA as a tool? The NEA? Always, a curious observation, many of us in this county kick and scream when we see tyranny and abuse of power. An old cliche comes to mind: The ends justify the means. Too often, the problem is people only consider the opposing side tyrannical. They cannot fathom the idea that their own action may itself be an abuse of power. When President George W. Bush reduced the liberties afforded by the Constitution, which is the law, there was outcry by some. There was indifference by others. Some people would trade security for liberty. Ben Franklin suggested that if you gave up the first, you deserved neither. However, these safety minded soccer moms could sleep knowing Big Brother was protecting them from evil doers. Whether or not this was actually true or not, or whether one could actually determine this, or if one could even ask was beside the point. One simply felt better and that was all that mattered. Today, in our current administration, we are building and establishing of state owned enterprises, state sponsorships, and even state owned student loans. Irritate the government and risk your entitlement and future. It's a damn slippery slope. We have the current administration with two standards. One for their own outreach of information and one that will investigate those that will oppose it. Equal and fair enforcement of the law is not occurring. Ironic. However, under the previous administration in 2003, congress did make changes to Medicare for prescription drugs, which are unfunded to the tune of something in the neighborhood $725 billion for 10 years, depending on who's numbers are to believed. Ten Years. How will we cut costs and increase benefits simultaneously? Yet this administration is investigating Humana for scaring seniors? Perhaps more than seniors should be outraged rather than scared for not being leveled with in the first place? At least the insurance companies, such as Humana are compelled by law to set aside cash reserves to pay for their obligations. Does the treasury do this for Medicare? Who will pay for these programs and how? But on to the truth police and the dispensing of information and how best to do it. There was this conference call and some things were said.

Consider Buffy Wicks — former Obama campaign activist, now White House staffer:

We won and that’s exciting and now we have to take all that energy and make it really meaningful. I’m in the White House now and what I’ve learned is that change doesn't come easy, but now that I’m actually in the White House and working towards furthering this agenda, this very aggressive agenda, I’m really realizing that… we’re going to need your help, and we’re going to come at you with some specific asks here.

We wanted folks to connect with local nonprofit organizations in their community. We wanted them to connect with local city council members or local elected officials. We wanted them to connect with federal agencies, with labor unions, progressive groups, face groups, women’s groups, you name it.

Then we have Yosi Sergant, the NEA offical who is perfectly in sync with our President's pledge of no lobbyists. If this is not illegal, it is at least sleazy. But he was apparently the sacrificed lamb so to speak, and as a result of this call? Well, he got re-assigned. You can read this link. All that effective work doing community outreach with MoveOn, RockTheVote - gone. Apparently over a conference call. Makes you wonder who is not corrupt. Those means are being justified.

We fought for a chance to be at the table and not only at the table but we’re setting the table. And now [we're setting] the official rule of the National Endowment for the Arts, as director of communication and say, we here at the NEA are extremely proud to participate in the president’s United We Serve initiative.

This is a chance to partner with the White House. … This is just the beginning. … We are just now leaning how to really bring this community together to speak with the government. What this looks like legally, we’re still trying to figure out the laws...

Whether it is an Evangelical christian visiting the White House for prayer or an artist receiving funding and being shaken down, there has to be limits. There is right from wrong after all? Where have our standards gone?

You can read the transcript here.

The Return of Jimmy Carter

2009-09-18T10:44:00.017-05:00

It did not work out for the Chinese Navy Long ago. They built a nice modern Navy. They sent it out to sea and burned it only to escape into a self imposed world of protectionism and isolationism. Jimmy Carter tried it too. He did it a little more figuratively. He tried price controls and punitive budgets. He tried windfall profits taxes and budgets that punished a generation. He tried lousy taxation policy which led to double digit inflation. He is a smart man. He meant well. He was an educated man. Yet, he had no basic concept of economics. He had insufficient understanding of supply and demand and equilibrium. Surprising for someone who had a clear understanding of Nuclear physics and peanut farming. The basic concept is if you force the price lower than the market demands, supplies dwindle. Just as if there excess supplies, prices drop. The item, whatever it is, is yesterday's news. It's human nature. Get over it. But it was beyond his grasp. It seems we are at the the there we go again, phase to paraphrase a certain B movie actor, who seemed to grasp certain concepts better than others.

Now, in an effort to pander to steel workers, a 35% wholesale tariff (a tax) is being imposed on tires being imported from China. This supposed to give US tire companies an advantage by encouraging the purchasing of US made steel, produced by US steel workers. Who does this help? Who does this hurt? China will retaliate with their own tariffs on items we wish to sell them, such as food. Plus, we need their products and their money. Generally, poor to middle class people are purchasing Chinese made tires, so it clearly hurts them. Not to mention, by punishing China does anyone actually believe this makes US Steel more competitive than any other place in the global workplace? Global or US based tire companies will simply source from India or other countries with lower labor rates, so the tarriff will not restore or create any jobs on idled plants, perhaps at best - shift them from China. The only option would be reduce the labor rate and the operational costs of doing business within this country. That would be taxes, labor cost, and insurance. Tariffs, protectionism, and isolationism can only lead to bad things. More. The short term advantage of courting union support for election purposes is short sighted and bad for this country. It took China 500 years to recover from such mistakes and they are just now rebuilding that burned down Navy.

Ironically - though President Obama seems to have no issue subsidizing GM, which does direct business with China in terms of manufacturing and parts sourcing. Yet - I keep coming back to NASA and Constellation. He cannot afford that and the American jobs and American contractors associated with the program - or the tires.

ISP Diagnosis: The Cisco Phone Burned Out the Router

2009-09-16T11:22:00.009-05:00

Working for an Internet Service Provider has to be easiest job on the face of the Earth. It seems you need not actually do any work. You simply must lay blame elsewhere, come up with excuses, and clear your board of tickets. There once was the day the excuse had to be at least plausible. Now, it is just plain silliness. This is a prime example of the dangers protectionism and a little too much job security. Here, in the comfy confines of ISPville there is apparent little concern of the consequences of losing a customer due to the monopoly power of the workforce and the monopoly power of the provider. The threat of "Gee, if do not do a good job, someone else may do it better" does not necessarily occur to members in the Communication Workers of Amerika union. Is it any wonder those of us who still want to keep a job, have to fight the outsource urge of management?

Obama's "Hope" For NASA? More Russian Rockets

2009-09-14T09:57:00.022-05:00

I am skeptical of expert panels. Ever since I heard of the Warren Commission and the theory of a magical bullet. I do not understand why we go through the pretense of objectivity when the outcome seems to be a foregone conclusion. If these people are experts, why are they not actually directly involved in the effort they are called upon to examine? Maybe they were once were and are simply longing for their glory days? A more cynical view might consider they are just fulfilling a pre-determined need and playing an already cast role.

Consider this tidbit of news from a year ago which I found on a UK source. Our own nation's media does not seem to consider the importance of such programs or their status as newsworthy. Our own media does not grasp that such programs are actually job bills. Consider what was said.

Mr Obama's transition team is demanding spending cuts to the Constellation Project, the successor to the Space Shuttle, which is supposed to create to a permanent manned base on the Moon by 2020 before a mission to Mars.

The president-elect's team is developing plans to scrap the new Ares rocket, designed to blast a new generation of astronauts into space, NASA advisers said.

This decision seems to have been made a year ago, yet announced just last week!

The article goes on to say:

On the campaign trail, Mr Obama first called for cuts and delays to the Constellation programme to fund his education policies but then later pledged to increase NASA's $17-billion budget by $2 billion, a move apparently calculated to win votes in the Florida and Texas primary elections, where NASA has its two main bases.

But that was before the economic meltdown.

An aerospace contractor who advises NASA told The Sunday Telegraph: "Constellation ought to be the kind of thing that would appeal to Obama in restoring American pride but he's been blowing hot and cold.

Before the meltdown? It's not like we did not know this already, as we saw that train coming. This is government spending with tangible benefits. Why is this on the target for a cut, when we can spending literally budget and spend for the stimulus program for unspecified programs which cannot be demonstrated to create or preserve one job? This is shovel ready after all. Do these people believe the only people believed are those at NASA? Is it possible, or even likely this more about control rather than money? So they need more money. So what. It is money with at least a probable return.

How about we hold each and every program to the same standard?

Net Jobs created
Net college applicants created
Net GNP contribution