The Death of America: aka Response to Marky Boy

While reading a recent post by Markadelphia at his blog 'Notes From The Front', I felt I needed to respond. Unfortunately, as I began to type my response, it quickly became obvious it should be it's own post rather than a comment. The article was titled "Reaching Out", and here is my response:

Marky Boy... the answer is you don't. There is no need. Your side has already won. Well, actually... we all have lost. I read a recent post elsewhere that discusses how the United Kingdoms reached the political state it has, as well as what is currently happening hear in the US. You see, all this hurling of who is right and wrong is quite meaningless. Many years ago, shortly after this country was first formed, there was an infiltration that began to take place. That infiltration has continued to this day on two fronts.

First, there was an infiltration into the government by those that wanted the power. But one person could not do it alone, as the constitution stood in their way. So over the years more and more individuals were recruited with a similar mind of the government taking the power from the people. Once there were enough of these individuals, they began to modify our constitution to take power away from the people and put it into their own hands... often under the guise of "helping" the people. This was easy since, as the country grew, so did the complexities of the problems that had to be addressed. All that had to be done was for those in government to step forward and tell the people, "We can fix this, we just need you to give us the power to fix it." Unfortunately the people did. Over and over and over again. And all for the promise of getting a better America if they did.

Second, once the power had been taken from the people by the government, then those with the power began to squabble over how best to rule. While those in power began to debate amongst themselves as how to guide the country as they saw fit, all those in power still managed to agree on one commonality... that they needed to keep the power to themselves.

If you don't believe these statements all it should take to convince you is to watch the ridiculous behaviors that come from both sides of those that run our country. These people that run our government get into arguments over whether there should be a Michael Jackson day or not... in the middle of trying to resolve how best to create a Health Care Bill very few of the actual citizens supported or wanted. These people no longer care about you, the citizen... they only care about doing things that make you think they care and keep them in power or meet the utopia of their own design. In they end... as long as they are in government they can do what they want when ever they want. One more clue as to the division between them and the common folk... they made sure that when they took the power they put in clauses that made them excluded from the effects of the laws they passed. I am willing to bet that if our federal government would be saddled with the same coverage the current Health Care Bill provides, the amount of individuals willing to vote it into being would drop significantly. As for which side they are on... it is all a mask. They are on neither side. It is all the costume they wear to appeal to the public that will put them in power. If the state is red, they dawn the red cape and profess to be a conservative... and likewise for a blue state. They make promises they may or may not ever fulfill, so long as they gain that groups support to give them the power.

In all honesty, at this point I am not even sure the United States should be united. Our country as a whole is divided by so many issues it isn't even funny. Look at the past 20 years of elections... the majority of major elections have all been within a 10% difference between the two major parties. Almost every major issue is torn 50% - 50% between those for and those against. What does this mean? It means that at any given election half the people loose the representation they had wanted. It means that 50% of the country is now being ruled by the other half, which leave half the country unhappy with those that won. In the end, as said before... no one wins, as most the promises made to the winning half will never be fulfilled anyway.

Perhaps we were never meant to get to where we now find ourselves. Perhaps the civil war ended incorrectly. The original concept of the founding fathers was for federal government to handle matters that crossed state boundaries, and for state government to handle individual state matters. And likewise the state would handle multi-city issues while the city governments would handle the truly local issues at hand. The idea being that this would provide the most local representation of the people in any one area. So the people living in a town in Virginia wouldn't have to follow the same law as someone in New York, as the situations were substantially different between the two locations. The civil war was a reaction by those living in the South to the federal government of the North dictating what they had to do and interfering in their way of life based on Northern conditions. Even then, the power had already been taken out of the peoples hands so much that they had determined it was necessary to violently revolt as there was no longer any means to achieve revolt within the confines of the government.

As we all know, the South lost and we remained a United States. A broken and divided United States. Proven time and again by those in one area reacting out against laws that made no sense to them by those that didn't even know the first thing of their local situation. And all under the guise of 'making things better for us all'.

Frankly, I am tired of the federal government 'making things better' for me. Part of the genius of the original constitution was that it put matters into your own hands. The hands of the individual citizens. It gave you freedom. Freedom to succeed and freedom to fail. It was up to us to decide. The answer is that we have failed. We gave our freedom away to our federal government, and now we simply elect those that we feel will placate to our illusions of freedom the most and denounce those that we feel represent the opposite of what we desire.

Can we the citizens get the power back? Yes and no... it all depends on what lengths we are willing to go. Can we get the power back by the same means as which we lost it? Unlikely, as those that would seek the positions of power that could give it back to the people would most likely succumb to the very power they were there to release. This leaves only the violent forms of revolution. Only a mass of citizens demanding the rights stripped of them at gun point will get them back at the tip of their own guns. This uprising will require a force that can exceed and topple that of police forces and military... a very unlikely quest. In the end, there are just far too many citizens that much rather settle for the scraps of freedom the government gives than fight for the freedom the constitution originally provided them.

What does this mean for you and me Marky Boy? It means that our debates and differences fall on deaf ears and achieves nothing more than making us feel better that we said our piece. In doing so, we can either choose to provoke or discuss in proper debate, but we must acknowledge that in the end it is all meaningless and will achieve nothing. Why is it meaningless? Because we do not have the power. Even if we were able to convert every reader to our side of the argument, how many do you think we will be able to convince to lay down their lives in hopes of regaining something so few even realize they have lost? As stated, most would rather settle for scraps... as the devil you know is better than the devil you don't.

But, should either of us be able to achieve in convert all others to our personal views... to the point they would go to war against their very government that rules them... only then would we achieve the ability to divide the country amongst those that wanted one thing and those that wanted something else. Then we would be truly free. Only then would we return to a society once promised by our constitution. Freedom to succeed or fail in "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Markadelphia and the Misfit Toys…

Since I began blogging you have no doubt noticed I continually reference my friend Kevin. I give him the second most credit in my conversion to conservatism (the first goes to my lovely HOA).

Kevin has told me so many stories of a particular individual that continues to follow his blog and, fortunately for Kevin and his readers, suffers from one of the worst cases of foot-in-mouth disease I have ever seen. This brave soul goes by the name Markadelphia and has his own blog 'Notes From the Front'.

In one of Kevin’s more recent posts, he brings up the subject of debate (all be it in the format of humor and a cartoon strip) that was titled ‘I WANT to Debate, But They Keep Running Away!’

As I began to scroll through the various comments, I came upon one by Kevin’s favorite nemesis… Markadelphia. Mark seems to think he knows why Kevin has issues in getting anyone to debate him…

Could it be that the reason why people don't often debate you, Kevin, is that they see there is no point? It's obvious to me that your mind is set on several concepts and simply won't let go. You have created a comfortable, pocket culture here in which this...

"Oh. You mean I might change their minds."

is eternally supported. People see this and realize that there is pretty much no point in debating you on most topics. In other words, you are simply not a very reasonable person when it comes to an issue like health care, for example. ANY government run system is bad. ANY information you put on this blog will be in support of this opinion. NO positive information regarding government run health care is allowed. You pretend it doesn't exist. If ANYONE disagrees with this they are a moron, fool, useful idiot blah blah blah and (hilariously) not grounded in the scientific methods and facts.

Yet you ignore this method and these facts in areas like health care, climate change, education, and fundamental international diplomacy. The people you invite to debate see this and realize it is a futile endeavor.

Personally, after reading this I now fully understand why Kevin loves to toy with Mark, and why Kevin’s readers also love to see Mark appear from time to time…. Much like watching a video of midget porn, it is pure comedy.

I think the underlying flaw to Mark’s logic is that he assumes that government is good. That if government was left to its own devices it would be OK, but with a little guidance it could be something really great. So… when government says they are going to fix health care, Mark thinks that this is good. And that if the right people put in their two cents worth and legislation is done well; it could be the greatest thing to happen for the American people.

The problem with this is that government (and not just our government, but all government) is bad. It is a necessary evil to a modern society, and the goal is to allow it to only be big enough to do the things that must be done and no more. The moment we let it into other things the price tag goes up and the quality goes down.

So when Mark talks about government ran health care as a good thing as it is the government that will be making it work, and that with the right nudging it can be something great… well, I kind of equate that to walking into a gay bar backwards and my naked ass in the air; and that, with a little nudging in the right direction, someone might offer a bottle of lubricant for the evening.

If Markadelphia wants to challenge Kevin’s debating abilities, I suggest he learn a little history of how ‘great’ our government has been to it’s citizens first. There have been rare occasions in which lubricant was offered, but vary few times it was ever actually used.

Just my opinion…

A Moment of Silence...

Even back in 1890, those that were paying attention were recognizing the Democratic Party’s ideals as something to fear. So much so that 2nd Liut. Col. N. Grigsby chose to get the final word in by having a statement to such inscribed upon his tombstone. He even made it a clause in his will that before any of his kin could inherit his estate that the inscription must be in place... naturally it was etched in stone immediately.

It also seems the New York Times picked up this story as well. However, rather than showing the photographs they chose to run a verbal "quote" of what had been etched in Liut. Co. Grigsby's tombstone. One small problem, they got it wrong! I thought a quote meant you gave the statement as you found it... not how you wanted it to be or how you felt it would least offend your readers... guess I was wrong about that too. Check out the NY Times version here. (Thanks Kevin for finding that for me.)

The One... and only...

It is a sad day in world history. I remember a time when the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for great accomplishments. Today it is awarded to anyone with hope and a desire for change. I thought the ‘Peace’ Prize was something awarded for great efforts in the strive for… well… peace! And I thought it was to memorialize the achievement in obtaining peace, even if those efforts are still on going. But obviously those beliefs have long been shattered and are slowly being replaced with the possibility that I too might one day win a Nobel Peace Prize.

You see… it has been a long-standing dream of mine to free all living creatures of the planet earth from the ruthless and demoralizing enslavement this planet has persecuted upon them for so long. I shall free the fish from the sea, the birds from the air and the ground dwellers from… well… the ground. How will I accomplish such a marvelous gesture you ask? I shall destroy the planet earth so all will be free of it’s bonds upon us. We will be free to float throughout the cosmos with no more cares or concerns of a toxic atmosphere or contaminated waterways. There will be no more worries of what poisons have been placed into the soil or just how many trees still remain after the deforestation and wild fires. We the people of the former planet earth, as well as all living creatures on it, will be free for all time. Together we can achieve this dream. With hope for a free future we can make these changes a reality…

Anyone buying this yet?

If not, here are my top three quotes from “Instapundit” on the audacity of “The One” receiving the Nobel Peace Prize:

1) “It’s a peace prize, not a peace peace prize.”

2) “How do you say ‘jump the shark’ in Norwegian?”

and finally….

3) “Let’s be fair…. He did pull off the Beer Summit.”

If the glove doesn't fit...

OK... so there I was, checking out my daily Yahoo! News when I came upon an article that caught my attention.

"Attorney: Oklahoma City bomb tapes appear edited"

In the article, it discusses how a Salt Lake City attorney named Jesse Trentadue has been privately investigating the April 19th, 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. Apparently he just received security camera tapes from the FBI and feels there is a problem...

The tapes turned over by the FBI came from security cameras various companies had mounted outside office buildings near the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. They are blank at points before 9:02 a.m., when a truck bomb carrying a 4,000 pound fertilizer-and-fuel-oil bomb detonated in front of the building, Trentadue said.

"Four cameras in four different locations going blank at basically the same time on the morning of April 19, 1995. There ain't no such thing as a coincidence," Trentadue said.

Apparently Jesse feels that the US Government is not being completely forth coming with the evidence it has, and has no problem shooting his mouth off about it...

He said government officials claim the security cameras did not record the minutes before the bombing because "they had run out of tape" or "the tape was being replaced."

"The interesting thing is they spring back on after 9:02," he said. "The absence of footage from these crucial time intervals is evidence that there is something there that the FBI doesn't want anybody to see."

He's not done yet...

FBI agents did not report finding any security tapes from the federal building itself.

The FBI in the past refused to release the security camera recordings, leading Trentadue and others to contend the government was hiding evidence that others were involved in the attack.

"It's taken a lawsuit and years to get the tapes," Trentadue said.

He received the latest batch of tapes over the summer in response to an April request for video from security cameras in 11 different locations. Nothing on the tapes was unexpected.

"The more important thing they show is what they don't show," Trentadue said. "These cameras would have shown the various roads and approaches to the Murrah Building."

The more important thing they show is what they don't show??? OK... I have had my fill of layer double talk. I realize our judicial system is a joke, but I am just not sure I can take any more. When the words "beyond a reasonable doubt" were coined, it was meant to make sure a jury was sure they were convicting the right person. And that, if they weren't certain this was the guy, they didn't convict him wrongly.

Is it just me or have the attorneys of today decided the best defense is to create reasonable doubt? Reasonable doubt was never meant to be 'created', it was simply meant to either be present or not. When did it go from, "As this man's defense attorney, I present you this evidence that my client is Innocent and could not have possibly been the man who committed the crime" to "As this man's defense attorney, here are 100 other possibilities that are meant to confuse and distract you from the fact my client committed the crime."

And now... we have this 'do gooder' lawyer in salt lake that is making the same argument about the Oklahoma City Bombing evidence. Essentially he is saying that, because I wasn't given the evidence, the evidence must be missing rather than non-existent. I will admit that he has two things going for him... 1) it is rather coincidental that 4 cameras did seem to mis-function at the worst possible moment that would have provided much needed evidence, and 2) our federal government seems to be less than forth coming with evidence to the public.

Which leads me to my second half of my rant (the first being about lawyers, the bums)... why is our government so secretive with it's own people? I understand they can not give out every detail, but all to often they seem to hide even the simplest of details. I will chose one of the most contested 'conspiracies' as my example.... JFK. Personally, I believe there was a cover-up. What all it covers, I am not certain. But from the evidence I have seen, it appears to me that there was more than a single shooter. But yet, our government emphatically denies any conspiracy and that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman. Why? If they have fool proof evidence that he was, then why don't they release it? Instead they have classified documents, mis-placed evidence and (in my opinion) made a joke of themselves in how obvious information has been withheld... and all in the interest of public safety. Safety from what?

Why does our government repeatedly cover up things or hide information from us? Now, I am not suggesting they start sending out mailers with the nuclear codes on them... I realize some secrets are needed and most would pertain to military. But why couldn't it simply open to the public all evidence of the JFK assassination? Who would it hurt (besides those that covered anything up to begin with)? And think of what would be achieved politically by the president that did such an act. He/She would be a god!

Picture if you will... Obama sitting at his desk in the oval office giving a public address to the nation (OK nothing new there)... "My fellow Americans, tonight I sit before you humbled as your leader and must admit that our government has been part of a massive conspiracy against it's own people. For 40 years now secrets have been kept and hidden from you the people, secrets that should have been available for all to see. As of this moment the secrecy ends. (President hold up a black binder with the presidential seal on it) This is a presidential decree in which I am lifting any withholding of information in regards to the assassination of our former president John F. Kennedy. For all those that have wanted access to the evidence, you shall now have it. (Opens binder and signs the document). I have appointed a Czar (couldn't help myself) to oversee all other 'classified' documents that should also be released to the public. By this I mean all documentation regarding Roswell NM, Big Foot, the chupacabra, etc. Provided there is no information contained within that would otherwise compromise our military or law enforcement agencies, you shall have full transparency into what your government has previously hid from you. You are the people of the United States, and you deserve to know the truth. Thank you, and God bless the United States."

If this ever happened, the man would be untouchable and go down in history of one of the greatest presidents ever! He could completely botch Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Korea, etc. The people would applaud his forth coming and honesty above any other failure. So why doesn't the government step up to the plate? Why can it not be honest... even with itself? I mean of course... why other than the fact that government and honesty are complete polar opposites. I guess my question is.... why does government feel it must be dishonest with the citizens that elected it? And why, as the citizen, do we tolerate it?

I have a theory... I think it is because uncertainty is more powerful than truth. If the government gave us truth, we the citizens probably wouldn't know what to do. Obviously those that agreed would go along, and those that disagreed would abstain. But, by keeping all of us confused and uncertain, we all just 'go along' since we don't have hard evidence one way or the other. Our suspicions are just that, suspicions. If we know a politician is lying to us, we wont vote for him. Likewise, if we think he is telling the truth... we will. But if none of us are sure what he is saying is true or not... we might assume he is lying as all politicians do, but still vote for him since we are unsure.

So... to come full circle, is it any wonder that our government it now ran by lawyers? The same people that like to confuse a jury with 'reasonable doubt' are the same people that would like to keep us in the dark and confused as citizens. We are more controllable that way. And thus why we keep electing them, and they keep hiding the truth from us.

Food For Thought...

The way we grow, process and eat our food in this world has come under fire recently in the not-so-mainstream media. Many are advocating a better field-to-plate than what we currently have, and I for one would agree that we could do better. A clip comes to mind from the trailer for "Food Inc." in which a chicken farmer makes a comment regarding the development time of his chickens. He asks the question that if you can have a chicken that grows in 49 days (hormone fed I assume) why would you want one that grows in 3 months (natural growth rate). Has capitalism gone to far? I would actually ask this question of many things... Wall Street, Health Care, etc.

Regardless of how you feel about the field-to-plate process, I do question the way such subjects are now being debated. Well... maybe debated is the wrong word in this case. It seems that a University in Madison, WI has taken the matter into its own hands. They have distributed a book too all students and faculty, and have urged the faculty to use and reference the book throughout the semester... and they have done it free of charge. The book is titled "In Defense of Food" by Michael Pollan. While I am sure Pollan makes some good arguments, as does the film (and book) "Food Inc.", I still must question why a University would feel the need to distribute such literature to all its students and faculty. If this is not a case of indoctrination, then what exactly is it? Tell me what you think?

Late Again...

Hello to all... to all... to all... (note the echo in the room). I swear I can almost hear the digital crickets chirping.

Again my apologies to those that actually looked to my blog for a post and never found one. I had promised a post due by a week ago and here I find myself a week behind and still no post. For those that have started to read my blog (if you still come by to read), you will note that I tend to wax a bit on any subject I write about. My complains that I like to talk to much... go figure. I guess I feel I have a lot to say, and especially on a subject that I feel any sort of passion for I tend to go on more than I should. I think that I have been trying to say to much about too many things recently. I have several major posts I have been working on piece by piece, but I never seem to complete them and get them posted... mainly because I feel they are still incomplete. That being said, I think this post shall be a small taste of the various subjects I am currently researching and writing about... and will eventually complete and post. Until then, these one-paragraph highlights will leave room for comments, questions and further dialog on the development of said subjects.

Where Has All The Money Gone? - This particular post idea came when I started thinking further about the bailouts and when I watched a trailer for the upcoming Michael Moore film "Capitalism: A Love Story". There is a seen in which he approaches on of the major recipients of government bail-out funds with a money sack looking for them to return the 10 billion they received and commenting that they would probably need more sacks as it probably wouldn't all fit in one. Laughingly I thought to myself that obviously they would never give him the money, and definitely not in cash. If anything it would be a check and even then... it probably would most likely be a wire transfer. But then this got me thinking... how did the government give the stimulus money to these various businesses in the first place? It was doubtful there was a check of any kind... it all had to be electronic. Which made me start to thinking about where all the money had gone. And even if you had cold, hard cash... what made it worth anything to begin with? Our dollars used to follow the gold standard and were backed by a physical commodity, but that long since has gone away. Now the dollar bill is only worth what a digital computer printout says it is worth. If I had a million dollars in my local bank account, would I be able to go down and close that account and be handed cash? I doubt it... it would probably be a check. And why? Because the bank doesn't have it. I am willing to bet that the majority of actual cash is in the pockets of most Americans or in the registers and safes of many of the daily businesses we patronize. As for the banks and the financial institutions... all they own are 1's and 0's in a computer system that says they have so much. Which leads me to ask... Where has all the money gone?

Capitalism vs Communism vs Anarchy vs etc. - For this post, I have been reviewing the various government designs... and discovering they are not all that different. I know some of you would completely disagree, but in reality... well, do the research. The idea came from one of Kevin's posts in which he was talking about "Restoring the Lost Constitution". He had also references various other blogs discussing the idea as well, all of which raised two primary thoughts... 1) is it possible to restore the constitution able to be restored? and 2) was the original constitution flawed and thus the results we have are what would only repeat? The later was really my primary inspiration. I got to thinking that, while our constitution does lay out the ground work for a republic, in fact all government doctrines whether they be capitalistic or communist, are actually a form of anarchy to some degree. While anarchy would say that no organised government would rule the society and that society would rule itself... in fact, is that not what the constitution outlines? We the people... a government for the people by the people.... yes... it is an organised governing body, but one of the people. Also... one of the flaws that even I have pointed out to a former friend about anarchy is that it requires all the members of the society to think the same to a certain degree, else be cast out of that society... well, doesn't the Constitution ask the same? Does it not ask that all the people that follow that document to agree to the same common governing concept?

Former Friend Ronn Redux - As for some of you, you may have already read a posting I wrote a while back... The Price of Your Beliefs. In this post I discussed a difference of opinion between a friend of mine, Ronn, and I. I had copied both mine and his emails back and forth, all with the intent of giving Ronn a fair shake in his arguments. Well... needless to say, Ronn was less than appreciative. We have exchanged several more emails, but to no avail. He refuses to explain his stance politically and seems only intent on continuing the ridicule of my new found conservatism. He has even threatened legal action for having posted his emails. I had originally planned to post the following emails, again with the interest in giving Ronn his fair shake... wouldn't want to be accused of paraphrasing his position, but then I thought paraphrasing might actually be more fun. Hopefully, when read in conjunction with the first posting, you will understand my paraphrasing in know way diminishes his position and/or comments. As a final note, I think that Ronn and I most likely will not be seeing each other again... Ronn, old buddy... if you are out there, consider this a fond farewell. Hope you find more happiness on the other side!

AS you can see... I seem to lack the ability to keep it short. But now at least, you have a taste of what is brewing in posts to come. Hope to hear from some of you on the listed subjects, perhaps some further references and links to aid in the development of these posts would be nice. Hope to have one of them up by next weekend at the latest... but I think it safer if I not make that a promise this time. Keep reading and checking back from time to time... will try to get more up in the near future.

ObamaCARE's "Gold For Grandpa"

Hello to all and my apologies for the 10-day hiatus. My wife and I took a week to travel and see just what a liberal government can do to a society… in other words we went to California.

Now that we have returned, I felt I should get a post up ASAP. Thankfully, material seems to be flowing in from all directions. As a change of pace from my typical rant or review, I thought I would try to provide a bit of humor to this returning post.

If only it were true… I have two grandparents and two parents all over the age of 65. I could rake in a quite a bit of cash under this plan.

But seriously… is this where we are headed? I mean, just how bad can Obama’s healthcare plan really be?

During our trip to California, our first stop was at my cousin and his wife’s house. As it turns out, my cousin’s wife has worked for Keiser Permanente for the past 30 years. Needless to say she has plenty to talk about when it comes to a government plan verses a capitalistic system and the current health plans available. Her opinion is pretty simple… leave it the hell alone! It works fine as is. She admits that it has a few flaws, but… like most things in a capitalistic environment, they are working themselves out. Supply and demand regulates what is and isn’t offered and how much it will cost. She went on to explain that it had been the government’s fault that most of the current problems exist in healthcare, due to their meddling in the system to begin with. The government is the one that mandated that certain items offered in one state must also be offered in other states as well… even if no one there uses it. Thus your coverage costs increased for something you never wanted to begin with… all thanks to our own government. And now they want to take over the industry to fix their previous mistakes? Hello? Does anyone with half a brain think this sounds like a good idea? Well… neither do I…and I have a whole brain (although my friend Ronn may not agree… see my previous post for the reference).

But what can we do? We elected those that currently represent us in Washington. The only thing I see that may save us from this egregious mistake is that those currently in power want to stay in power. And they also know that if they don’t appease the masses that elected them to begin with, that the masses may elect them out of power. So I suggest we all speak up and speak loudly if we do not want this Obama-nation of a healthcare system voted into place!

The Price of Your Beliefs...

(uber-post warning)
Where to begin… First, my apologies for missing a day of blogging. I have been busy with a great deal of things and the post I plan to give is taking some time to develop. The reason being is that it may in fact cause the loss of a dear friend I have had for many years now. And all due to my new found views of the world.

My friend Ronn is a fantastic and brilliant individual. I first met the man when I was earning my first degree in the Arts. I was required to take a variety of art courses that would give me a full perspective of the Arts as a whole before I could proceed into my chosen specific disciplines of art. So there I was, awaiting my instructor to arrive to class when a moderate statured and lanky male boasting a cowboy hat, worn black T-shirt, jeans and cowboy boots strides to the desk at the front of the classroom. He sets a shoulder bag down and looks about the classroom briefly as he begins to unpack his satchel and prepare to start the class. I still remember how he opened the class… maybe not in the exact words, but close enough for quotes:

“Welcome to Beginning Graphic Design. My name is Ronn ______ (left out for privacy) and I am going to be working your ass of this semester. For those of you who took this class thinking it would be an easy grade, the door is over there… I suggest you leave now.” After a moment of pause and no one had left the room, he continued.

Over the course of the semester, I got to know Ronn well. Even after the semester, several of us from that Beginning Graphics class returned on a regular basis to discuss new work with Ronn, as he had proven himself to clearly be the most knowledgeable of all the instructors in the Graphics Department… despite only being an adjunct professor. Two semesters after I had taken his class, the rest of the department ousted him from the university due to this very reason.

Ronn and I had become very good friends though, neigh I say best friends. Despite a move to Dallas on my part, we stayed in touch and would visit any time I returned to Tucson to see friends and family. Often I wanted to see Ronn and my friends more than family, but if you knew my family… you would understand (for all my family that might be reading… love you all, don’t take it personally. I am talking about the rest of the family and not you specifically). Years later when I would return to Tucson, I would later move into a small group of Artists’ Lofts that would include Ronn as my across-the-courtyard neighbor. This brought on many evenings of talking over tea or the occasional venture out for a bite to eat. We became quite close friends and shared many of the same views.

I still revere Ronn as one of the most intellectual people I know. He is exceptionally well read and informed. He knows something about almost everything (intellectually speaking… he couldn’t rebuild a carburetor if he tried), and if he didn’t know he would usually try to learn by the next time it came up. But Ronn is an artist. He has always been an artist and always has felt a distain towards the rest of society. That most people out there were idiots and troglodytes not worthy of his time, as “they just didn’t get it”. This was the subject of a great deal of our debates. In particular when it came to the subject of art. Self admittedly I know very little about the history of art. I took three art history courses while in college and can’t remember much from any of them. And I never learned much about the history of Photography, one of my specific disciplines. But to this day I still hold my opinion on art… that it is a viewer's opinion that matters and not the art critic’s or even the artist’s. If an artist is intending to convey something through his work, it should be done in such a way that ANY viewer could walk up and look at the piece and understand what was intended. One should not be required to understand the nature of tribal upheaval during an African war from the 1600’s (completely fictitious for the sake of example) to get why a poorly taken photograph of an African American Man is significant. Why create art for only other artists that might or might not know what you are talking about? Art is for the world to see, not for artists to boost their egos among other artists! I doubt I will ever change this opinion.

But I digress… So recently (after several days of my initial blog posting), I sent an email to my friends Ronn. In my email I apologized for having not asked first, but mentioned I had added links to his and his girlfriend’s art websites to my blog page. And, that if they would like, they could have me leave them up or take them down after they had seen the blog. This was the first response:

“I'd prefer you take the links down ASAP. We're revamping our site and have asked everyone who has linked to it to drop the connection.We don't want people coming to the site right now. When we're done we'll give you a heads up. Got to deal with (for sake of privacy the name has been removed) right now. More later...”

A reasonable request… and as I mentioned I had failed to ask permission first. An error I have most definitely learned from. However, Ronn’s comments did not end there. He continued to send several more emails, each more heated than the next. The next came with the subject line “take us off!”, and the attack had just begun:

“Oh, sweet Jesus. I just read part of your rant and some snippets of Kevin's. I DEFINITELY don't want to be associated with anything that perpetuates this asinine, narrow-minded right vs. left malarkey. I think Kevin is nuts and you're both woefully misinformed. PLEASE take our names off this jive. Blake (Ronn’s girlfriend) and I are trying to stay out of the coming civil war and watch you teabaggers and jelly-wristed liberals SLAUGHTER each other. The less I hear from either side, the better off we'll be. Tribalism, received opinion and skewed versions of American history do NOT interest me.”

Frankly, I was a little shocked by this as Ronn has always been anti-government and more for the individual rights. He despised Bush for the choices he made as a president, but felt Obama was no better. He felt Obama was a sell-out the moment he threw his friend Rev. Wright under the bus for his ill timed comments during the campaign and would not support him from that point forward. And, for the most part, he agreed with Rev. Wright and what he had said. And he felt Obama should have stood tall with his friend verses doing the politically wise thing and distancing himself.

But the attack had not come to an end. It came again in the form of a third email. This one had a subject line of simply “NO!”. It read as follows:

“Mother of God. I read even more of both blogs. PLEASE TAKE OUR NAMES DOWN ASAP. This ignorant, incendiary, illiterate, piggish Know-Nothing codswallop is the very thing I've spent my entire life refuting. Even if the political stuff wasn't preposterous and vapid enough, the attention to bad movies and crap culture would be enough to make me run screaming into the night. REMOVE OUR NAMES”

At this point, I was beginning to think that my friend was taking this blogging thing as if it was intentionally aimed at him. It wasn’t (until now)! I had received these three emails over the course of a single night and before I had the chance to remove the links or respond to the emails. Upon reading all three, I promptly removed the links as requested, but also responded to the emails directly as well. My response:

“As requested, I have taken the links to both websites down. Sorry you feel that this is something you wish to not be associated with.

If you could, please explain your views and why they are so opposed to someone like myself (or Kevin) for holding the views we do? Since we have begun having these discussions, you have always taken a stance of towards-the-middle and of lesser government. I understand your dislike for the film reviews, but it was something I have wanted to do for some time... this gave me an outlet for it. However, the political commentaries are the direction in which I find myself heading. Isn't our government running away without its citizens? Are they not abusing the powers that were given to them, and even executing powers never granted to them?

" Blake and I are trying to stay out of the coming civil war " - this is something that even Kevin agrees is coming... as do most of his readers. I have always thought there was something that could be done... all I have done is come to the conclusion the only place I thought that could do it was actually the one causing most of the problems.

You seem to be taking the stance of the innocent bystander... however, I believe you were the one that said there are no innocents. We all play our roll. I would agree that some (and maybe many) of the teabaggers may be the radical right, but a good portion of them are citizens that have finally had enough of big government and fear that the recent and future actions may actually be the nails in the coffin of our country. If they can do something to stop it, they will.

Frankly, I do not feel I am promoting any such "codswallop". Rather, I am freely expressing my new found insight of where I feel this country is headed. I have not posted anything I have not researched first. I link references to the things I discuss. And frankly... one of my few remaining rights as a US citizen is free speech... whether it be accurate or not. I have not entered this un-informed or light-hearted. I have seen things in a new light and this IS how I feel, and this IS how I have chosen to express it.

For the first time my friend, I am taking a firm stance against your opinion. For the first time I am going to flat out state that you are wrong on your judgment. You are entitled to your opinion, but I feel that you have thrown an unfair accusation at this. I can understand that someone of your age and health would not want to get involved, but I cannot help to think that these movements are quite similar to the reactions that took place during the 60's (that he had taken part in). The only difference is that the right is leading the charge this time. The 60's did amazing damage to this country, both educationally and politically. It also produced some good at the time. But for every bit of good that came from the movements of your time... we now face the damage left behind and are trying to navigate the ripples left behind by many of those actions. But then, I cannot truly blame everything on the 60's. The problems had started much earlier... about the turn of the century. At least in terms of education. We were no longer educating the public to keep them informed of what government was and was not allowed to do... mainly because government had decided that this country needed more drones for their factories. They did not need thinkers on the assembly lines that were being developed. The 60's was simply the complete and utter take-over of the educational system by the liberals. Peace and harmony became the status quo. Is this starting to sound familiar?

For now... I have found my new opinion. I have found my own voice, and I have found my platform from which to speak. It is no longer for you or me to judge whether it is right or wrong, but that of the public that reads it and gives it merit. You once told me that art unseen was not really art, as art is intended for an audience. Well... this is going before an audience. We will see what they have to say from here.”

Naturally, this did not end here. Ronn felt the obligation to respond. His attacks became more critical and poignant. While I admit to having a week “writer’s touch” at the moment, I am just getting warmed up. Give me time and I am sure my eloquence will begin to bloom. Ronn’s email came under the subject line “Retitle your blog ‘Me Like, Me Don’t Like’”. He writes:

“Let me make it simple for you:

You can't write. At all. You have no facility for it. Your prose is like reading the INGREDIENTS list on a tube of toothpaste--but less engaging and infinitely less informative.

At best you come across as a simpleton. Most of the time you sound like a a bloviating, egomaniacal twit. There are so many oxymoronic inconsistencies, tautologies, half-truths and appalling misrepresentations of history in your screed it would take 24 skilled linguists 6 months to decode it. But why bother? No serious person would waste their time and I won't, either. Not any more. I don't want to interfere with your "transformation" into a full-blown jerk.

It's excruciatingly painful to see somebody, like yourself, so willing to humiliate himself in a public forum. Your ignorance, your lack of empathy and compassion, your greed, your insufficient education and your embarrassingly bad taste are no longer just a few people's little secret. Now the whole world knows you're a pompous lummox. Congratulations.

Concerning your opinions--they are not an inalienable right. You earn them. Sitting on your couch watching TV for 30-odd years doesn't qualify you to have more than one--"Cheetos or Doritos?"

You remain, your own worst enemy. At least you're as consistent as you are ridiculous."

I might note that, despite my request for his “views and why they are so opposed to someone like myself (or Kevin)…” he did not respond. I since have replied once more requesting his stance on his views and opinions, but feel I will not get a response.

I regret that a friend that was so close to me would react in such a hostile manner to my changing views. Even if we find ourselves on opposite sides of the political spectrum, I would have hoped that our friendship would have been able to withstand such differences. In the end, perhaps he was not the friend I thought he was… I hope I am wrong. But do I not have the right to express myself in this manner? To post my opinions to the digital ether and see what responses result? How is this in any way being a “bloviating, egomaniacal twit”?

What I find interesting as a result of all this is that I feel more confident in what I have come to believe and understand. Before, as a liberal, I was always easily swayed from one liberal opinion to another… but not I feel more cemented in this ideal. I feel less discouraged but such criticism. Possibly as I came to this realization on my own and was not handed the opinions from which to choose to believe in, as I was when I was a liberal. My views now make more practical sense to me, and they seem more tangible and real.

It is an interesting and new time for me. As for my friend (I hope) Ronn… only time will tell. I would hate to loose a friend over a difference in ideology, but I think that I have to follow my beliefs and not the drivels of a person unable to define his position.

“Where are we going, and what are we doing in this hand basket?”

As a recent convert from liberalism to conservatism, I must say… you all are so much more fun and entertaining! I truly wish I could have come to my senses sooner!

But now I find myself in this very strange place of conversion. I still hold some of my more liberal thoughts, but now find myself reviewing them from a firmer stance in reality. As my dear friend Kevin would probably phrase it, “You must have gotten tired of sniffing the Unicorn Farts!”

With this newfound light to the world, I also have a new view of where this illustrious country of ours is headed… and frankly it scares the crap out of me. I used to blind myself by saying, “We can make it better, we just need to try harder and come up with better solutions.” Something that I now have found out is very closely related to the Democratic motto when a plan of theirs goes wrong, “The philosophy can’t be wrong, the idea is sound… we just have to do it again, only harder!” Ah… to be free of the shackles of delusion.

“This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill, the story ends. You wake up in your bed and you believe what ever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in wonderland.” “Remember, all I am offering is the truth. Nothing more.” – The Matrix, 1999

Well… I have taken the red pill and am seeing the world through new eyes. I now find myself in a country that no longer truly represents me. A country that is slowly dismantling the very core of what I have come to believe in as my inalienable rights. A country that has systematically stolen the power from the people in return for “more bread and circuses.” (Thank you Kevin, for all your wonderful colloquialisms.)

Kevin also turned me onto an interesting piece by Peggy Noonan from a WSJ Archives titled “A Separate Piece” in which she quotes Christopher Lawford:

Do people fear the wheels are coming off the trolley? Is this fear widespread? A few weeks ago I was reading Christopher Lawford's lovely, candid and affectionate remembrance of growing up in a particular time and place with a particular family, the Kennedys, circa roughly 1950-2000. It's called "Symptoms of Withdrawal." At the end he quotes his Uncle Teddy. Christopher, Ted Kennedy and a few family members had gathered one night and were having a drink in Mr. Lawford's mother's apartment in Manhattan. Teddy was expansive. If he hadn't gone into politics he would have been an opera singer, he told them, and visited small Italian villages and had pasta every day for lunch. "Singing at la Scala in front of three thousand people throwing flowers at you. Then going out for dinner and having more pasta." Everyone was laughing. Then, writes Mr. Lawford, Teddy "took a long, slow gulp of his vodka and tonic, thought for a moment, and changed tack. 'I'm glad I'm not going to be around when you guys are my age.' I asked him why, and he said, 'Because when you guys are my age, the whole thing is going to fall apart.' "

Mr. Lawford continued, "The statement hung there, suspended in the realm of 'maybe we shouldn't go there.' Nobody wanted to touch it. After a few moments of heavy silence, my uncle moved on."

Lawford thought his uncle might be referring to their family--that it might "fall apart." But reading, one gets the strong impression Teddy Kennedy was not talking about his family but about . . . the whole ball of wax, the impossible nature of everything, the realities so daunting it seems the very system is off the tracks.

And--forgive me--I thought: If even Teddy knows . . .

If even Ted Kennedy accepts this as truth, how much more proof do we need that we are all screwed?!?!

Peggy continues on in her article about the elites and their reaction to the problems this country is facing, but towards the end she writes:

I suspect that history, including great historical novelists of the future, will look back and see that many of our elites simply decided to enjoy their lives while they waited for the next chapter of trouble. And that they consciously, or unconsciously, took grim comfort in this thought: I got mine. Which is what the separate peace comes down to, "I got mine, you get yours."

This got me to thinking about one of the issues I have always struggled with, which are the uber-rich. As a liberal I admit to having thoughts of they should pay more to help “balance” society, but I now see that taxing a person more simply because they make more is no more reasonable than a poor man telling a rich man he must buy him a house while doing nothing to earn it. It was much easier to rationalize these thoughts when I had a big federal government that was a buffer between the two entities and would solve all the details of who was entitled to what. But now I realize that was simply utter insanity. Since when has our government done anything well. “Government does two things really well… Nothing and over-react!” (Thanks again Kevin, great T-shirt btw)

So where does this leave us? And by us, I am referring to the normal every day individuals that don’t have millions in the bank. I finally get it! I now understand the position of the uber-rich! THEY SIMPLY DON’T CARE! It is all a game to them because, in the end, they can go anywhere they want to at any time. Who got affected the most by the recent housing collapse? Who suffers the most due to the Wall Street’s debacles? Is it the wealthy CEOs and businessmen and women that make ridiculous salaries? Of course not! They can make all the bad decisions they want to because it isn’t their money at risk. It isn’t their homes on the line. It isn’t their lives that will be destroyed by failures on the part of the businesses they run. Their job is much more self-motivated. Make as much as you can… as fast as you can… and move on to the next position that will make you even more. These people are going beyond Capitalism… at least capitalism is private enterprise, but not here… this is corporate. And if this country fails, the uber-rich will simply take their money and move to the next place of business. Or maybe they will retire on their private islands in which they have to answer to no one. Not that they are answering to anyone now…

So what am I saying… frankly, I don’t know. I don’t have a solution… I only see a problem. I know that things cannot continue the way they are, but I don’t know the better method of how things should be done. In discussion with Kevin, we talked about how this country was founded. And that, when George Washington was preparing to step down after his second term as president, the King of England said that if he went through with it, he would be the greatest man on earth. To have the power of a country at his disposal, George did indeed step down. This means the system worked. So why is it now failing? I am lead to two thoughts on the matter… the original design was flawed and/or we found ways to fuck it up! How do we fix it? I am not sure there is a way. Kevin refers to it as entropy, while I look at it as more of a one-way street. I think my choice is a bit more hopeful; at least a one-way street can change direction. If it doesn’t soon, we will most definitely hit the brick wall we are speeding towards.

Does Size Matter...

OK... enough fun and games. I saw the previous post's video clip and felt I had to share... maybe I just have a twisted since of humor.

Any way, the new topic of the day is... Does Size Matter? And no, we are not going to be talking about the male anatomy. Nor will we be discussing the weight of those of us that fall into the fluffy category. Follow me with this and I will explain...

For those of you who read my first posting "The Hypocrisy of Good Finance" you might remember that my wife and I bought our first home back in December of 2008. Well, not sure if it was a good thing or not, but the home does belong to a HOA. It is this very fact that truly thrusted me down the path of conservatism.... much to the joy and amusement of my friend and co-worker Kevin. You see, I now found myself in a community of about 3600 homes all governed by a Board of Directors, various committees and a management team. What more could one ask for in terms of a working demonstration of how government works. I quickly learned that the dues paid each month were the taxes, and that these committees, board members and management were spending my money on things that I either was not going to use or had no interest in. The example I have come to use so often to illustrate my new understanding is as follows: If I purchase a home in this HOA that has a personal pool in it's back yard, I must still pay dues to the management team to cover the costs of maintaining two community pools that I do not use. My money pays for someone else to use a pool that I have no intention of using... as I pay ore out of my own pocket to maintain my own pool as well. Why is this fair to me? Why should I pay for someone else's pool? Why shouldn't those that want a community pool pay for it and those that don't are not obligated to do so. And we all know the answer to this... "because it wouldn't be fair"... I can almost here one of those whiny little bastards complaining. They probably aren't even paying their dues... but manage to still get in and use the pool. So worse off I am now paying for someone else to use a pool I pay for and they don't.

Needless to say, it was this small scale version of government that really began to open my eyes to the hypocrisy of a liberal society. I used to be of the mind set that taxes should be sloped so that the uber-wealthy payed 50% in tax while the guy making $20k only paid 2%. The reason being I thought was because the wealthy could afford it. After all, what can you do with 100 million you can't do with 50 mil. I now realize that, just because you have the millions doesn't mean you should have to give up half your income simply because you can. And especially you should not have to just to pay for all the things our government now spends on that benefit those that do not pay at all. When is the last time you say a millionaire collecting a welfare check or food stamps? Why should he/she be allowed to do so? After all, they paid for it... didn't they? The government took the rich man's money and gave it to the poor man... gee... sounds a lot like socialism. Again... I didn't get it until I was the guy paying for a pool that others that had not were now using. it really chapped my ass! And let me tell you... that's a lot of real estate to chap!

But yet... I look at my 3600 strong HOA and then I compare it to our federal government and the 300 million (give or take) they have to manage. Like the HOA they have a covenant... the constitution. They have committees and such... and they determine how to solve the problems our country faces. I realize that the HOA has problems, but nothing in comparison to the run away government we now seem to be saddled with. If the HOA board tried to pull half the things the federal government has pulled, they would have literally been tarred and feathered in public. In fact, this HOA was so bad that just over a year ago, the people joined together and unanimously voted out the entire board. Why can't we do this with our federally elected officials?

So I raise the question.... Does size matter? For the HOA there are clear and simple solutions that, once reached, make sense to most everyone discussing the matter. So... should it be this simple for our federal government? If not, then why not? What makes running 300 million so much more complicated than running 3600. Why can't things simply be scaled and still work?

Personally, i think that one could scale things larger and make it work on a federal level... the only problem is that our federal government has become so large that it can not even govern itself, let alone the people it is supposed to be working for. How often have we heard of one group not knowing anything about what the other group had done... when they were supposed to be working on the same thing.

I used to believe the reason government had to be as big as it was, was in order to handle the larger problems this country faces on a daily basis. But now I think they are just there to confuse the public in regards to an issue just to cover the fact they have no idea how to SOLVE the issue. I think that our elected officials have now become so concerned with maintaining the power of their position, that they forget what they are there to do in the first place.

So.... does size matter? Are the problems of the country so big that it requires big government to solve them? Or can the simple solutions good enough for 3600 be good enough, if scaled, for 300 million? I am curious to hear from all of you. Please let me know your opinions.

Letter to the President...

Dear Mr. President,

During your campaign and since you have taken office, you have spoken many times about transparency in our federal government. Where then is your transparency? To date, you have been one of the most secretive figures in our nations capital. You have fed Congress numerous 1000+ page bills that they must then vote on within hours without having read them. Had they not been to busy kissing your... well, maybe that is going to far. My point is that we as American citizens would like the transparency we were promised by you. In order to help improve your understanding of transparency, I have included a video clip that may better represent what I am explaining.

Many thanks,
Your Concerned Constituent




P.S. This may be a good tip for Michelle as well, you might want to forward this on to her also.

The Hypocrisy of Good Finance

Hello to all and welcome to the blog. I have been wanting to create this blog for some time. I have always loved the cinema and seem to find myself reviewing the films I see to friends and co-workers. I figure, "Why make them so special... the world deserves to hear what I have to say!" Also, my wife and I love to try new restaurants and explore various foodie venues... I figure I can report on this as well. As for my rants, I seem to be achieving the age where I seem to have an opinion on almost anything any more... and I feel the world deserves to know how I feel.

For those of you who plan to stick around and maybe come back to see what my next set of thoughts might be.... this sight will mostly be dedicated to the food and movie review platform. However, don't be surprised when I through a tangent subject in the mix. This first post will be just such a rant.

Let the hypocrisy begin:

Thanks to hard work and good financial planning on the part of my wife and myself we purchased our first home at the end of last year. Nothing special, but a nice home just for the two of us. We shopped the market well and found a very good deal, and the interest rates were quite low. Our first mortgage was sold within a month of purchase to Chase Bank. Their online payment system was a little odd, but once you got used to it there were some nice features.

About 4 months ago, interest rates had fallen even more than before when we had purchased. My wife and I refinanced our home and were happy to achieve an extra percent lower than before. This time, the loan was sold to Bank of America. My wife and I, at the time, thought it was a good thing as our checking and savings accounts were also at B of A. We figured we would be able to easily link our checking and mortgage accounts, much like Chase had done for us before with our Chase Checking account (they also gave us a really nice account with free checks and all... since we now owed them a lot of money). My friends... the illusion is, I am sad to say, over at Bank of America.

During the original purchase and also during the refinancing, my wife and I learned a great deal about how mortgages work. In particular, we learned how various payment plans can drastically effect the term and total interest paid over the life of your loan. For example: if you make a single 13th payment every year to your mortgage, you can actually shorten the length of your loan by nearly 7 years and save yourself nearly $50,000.00 in interest (give or take based on your interest rate). Not only this, but based on your payment plan (i.e. monthly, bi-monthly, every two weeks or weekly) you can also achieve pretty drastic results as well. While it may not seem like a lot, if you were to break apart your monthly mortgage payment into 4 pieces and pay once a week. Your interest will then be recalculated weekly rather than monthly, as the principle is being adjusted weekly. We are talking pennies to dollars different (depending on the size of your mortgage), but it will actually result in almost a 9 year reduction in the length of your loan.

As you can tell... my wife and I have done our homework. We learned the system and how to work the system in our favor. If you are going to make this big of a purchase, you really should educate yourself on this... it will make such a huge difference if you actually fully understand where these lending institutions are sticking it to you. And once you get mad at how they all seem to find some way of taking advantage of you... you begin to find the ways of reducing the pain of these violations... or at least dowsing them with lubricant to make it more enjoyable (I kid).

But back to our friends at Band of America. My wife and I were discussing our finances and had decided it was time to initiate a more fruitful payment plan. Currently we had been paying our mortgage online at B of A's website. We had made the first two payments manually, but I had also just signed up for the 12 payments a year plan as a temporary plan until we decided which payment plan would be the best to go with. I might mention now that any other payment plan other than the manual and 12/year plan comes with a "per transaction" fee... so they must be better, right? (Ha, ha... whimper... think again)

As I explained, paying more often should reduce your interest, and thus increasing your principal payment. This, in turn, reduces total interest paid and length of the loan. However, Bank of America feels that most Americans don't understand good finance... unfortunately, this is true. So... will you get any of these benefits if you go with their 24-payments/year, 26-payments/year or 52-payments/year plans? No. Instead, B of A will hold that money that you have paid them and wait till the end of the month and make your monthly payment for you. This, of course, will not reduce any amount of interest you pay and will not shorten the length of your loan in any way. The only thing it will do will cause you to incur an extra "per transaction" fee charged to you for B of A providing the service of holding your money till the end of the month for you.... but then, I thought that was what checking and savings accounts were for.

OK... so there automated (and fee ladened) plans don't help. So what about the manual method you ask? Well... it turns out that Bank of America thought fast and screwed you here as well. While they will allow you to pay as many manual payments as you want.... only one will be applied to your monthly statement. If that one payment is not the monthly minimum, you will be failing to meet the terms of your mortgage... even if the sum of all your payments for that month exceeds your total monthly payment. The reason being is each "partial payment" will be applied directly to principal only. So yes, your total interest will be reduced, but at no savings due to multiple payments, but rather because you are paying more than you monthly minimum... as you have to have that one payment each month that matches or exceeds your monthly payment.

So... if your mortgage falls into the hands of Bank of America, be thankful. They are there to think for you because, after all, we are all to stupid to think for ourselves. And for those of us smart enough to see through B of A's BS.... there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. If you want to reduce the life of your loan or save yourself some interest, you are going to have to do it the old fashioned way.... simply pay them more money faster. And thus the Hypocrisy of Good Finance.

Tell me what you think America... my door is open and the Doctor is in.