Today I looked at a house that would have been mostly promising. The price is definitely right, the repairs seem pretty standard, the location isn’t awful (not fantastic, either). But, and this is huge, it seems clear that the neighbors have decided that the easiest way to clean up after their dogs is to fling the crap over the wall*, onto the roof of the storage shed in this home’s backyard. This was evidenced by the barking dogs, the enormous pile of poo between the shed and the wall**, and the straggling bits still stuck on the roof.

Eeeww!

I am looking to put renters in there. I have no desire to put people into a home when I know they have neighbors like THAT. They don’t want the headache. I don’t want the headache.

* When walking my dogs through our neighborhood, I found there is a Rottweiler owner who tosses the gigantic poops from his pets over the wall into the alley. Disgusting! I feel for the poor saps who drive through and end up at their destination with the lingering stench of RottyPoo on their tires.

** The major flaw in their plan is the crap is still in close proximity to their own yard. The smell was wafting, so I am sure it still affects them. The flies will hardly keep to only one side of the wall.

Possibly Related Posts:

1. Principles Over Party
2. Make Everybody Happy

We can skip the idiocy of claiming moms don’t work. Certainly a Democrat strategist should know better, and deserves to called out for disrespecting a woman’s choices – isn’t that what they claim to be all about?

But let’s get to the info that caused her slip; Mitt Romney said his wife is out there traveling, campaigning, meeting voters. He said that Ann tells him what she is hearing from women on the campaign trail, and what she is hearing is that they are concerned about jobs & the economy.

Romney never said his wife was suffering in this economy. He didn’t say she had ever had money concerns (though I do understand they were living in a basement apartment while starting their family, not exactly cushy) He said she was talking & listening to other women who have those concerns.*

And rather than address the very real question of whether the Democrats’ ideas help those concerned about jobs, or the fact that unemployment seems to be hitting women harder than men – Hilary Rosen chose to go right for class warfare…insulting mothers in the process. **

Not only did Rosen make a huge error, not only was it an unforced error – it was a complete error of comprehension. Really, for a “PR professional” who was brought in specifically to prevent gaffes by DNC’s Wasserman Schultz, this was a giant misstep. Not content with the initial mistake, Rosen decided to walk that rhetoric all the way over the edge of a cliff.

Almost everyone in this administration has gone out of their way to distance themselves from Rosen’s comments, and Jay Carney has been left in the embarrassing position of pretending he has no idea who she is because he knows so many women named Hilary Rosen.
 

And now people who knew little of Ann Romney have had occasion to learn about just what a remarkable woman she is, and those who knew Ann Romney have had occasion to come together in her defense.

Coming at the end of a contentious GOP primary season that saw a fractured Republican base and lack of enthusiasm for the presumed nominee, Rosen’s comments have been the perfect lodestar to focus the Right on the upcoming general election.

I have to imagine Rosen’s time with the DNC is coming to an abrupt end.

* Even if he had said she was the one concerned about how women are faring in this economy, why would she not be able to speak to the issue? A point I had a small amount of fun with on Twitter

** You know that this is not the first time she made that remark. They probably made the same joke several times in their offices and since everyone in her little bubble laughed, she was completely unprepared for the real world response. Note to Dems – step out of the echo chamber once in a while.

This morning, though, he was covering the Mega-Millions lottery – and I have just a quick thought. Because I think he is wrong about something, and it is a mistake I nearly made in a post myself this weekend. Maybe you will say I am wrong..let’s see.

He said: If you buy more than one ticket, you haven’t increased your odds. Your odds are still the same 1:176 million.

I had that thought Saturday, but then I thought it through a bit more. Let’s dissect.

• If you buy one ticket, with the numbers 1-3-4-5-6 (7), your odds are approx 1:176 million

• If your friend buys a ticket with the numbers 2-4-5-6-7 (8), their odds are approx 1:176 million

Each ticket has the same odds, therefore:

• If you bought both of those tickets, each ticket would have odds of approx 1:176 million
• However, YOU would have increased your odds to approx 2:176 million because you now have TWO of the possible combinations.
• If you had the money, and you bought 176 million tickets, each ticket would be 1:176 million, but the group of tickets would have reduced your odds to basically 1:1 (176,000,000:176,000,000, reduced) – because you ARE going to win (though there is no guarantee you will win alone, so it is still a gamble to try that, even when the prize is so great).

So, did I get it right – or did Dennis?

(BTW: I still don’t think it is a smart way to plan for your retirement)

6 Reasons Why to Teach Kids to Be Grateful

1. Better Attitudes:
Children who practice grateful thinking have more positive attitudes toward school and their families (Froh, Sefick, Emmons, 2008).
2. Better Achieve Personal Goals:
Participants who kept gratitude lists were more likely to have made progress toward important personal goals (academic, interpersonal and health-based) over a two-month period compared to subjects in the other experimental conditions.
3. Closer Relationships, Greater Happiness:
Professor Froh infused middle–school classes with a small dose of gratitude—and found that it made students feel more connected to their friends, family, and their school:
“By the follow–up three weeks later, students who had been instructed to count their blessings showed more gratitude toward people who had helped them, which led to more gratitude in general. Expressing gratitude was not only associated with appreciating close relationships; it was also related to feeling better about life and school. Indeed, compared with students in the hassles and control groups, students who counted blessings reported greater satisfaction with school both immediately after the two–week exercise and at the three–week follow–up.”
4. Better Grades:
Gratitude in children: 6-7th graders who kept a gratitude journal for only three weeks, had an increased grade point average over the course of a year.
5. Greater Energy, Attentiveness, Enthusiasm:
A daily gratitude intervention (self-guided exercises) with young adults resulted in higher reported levels of the positive states of alertness, enthusiasm, determination, attentiveness and energy compared to a focus on hassles or a downward social comparison (ways in which participants thought they were better off than others).
6. Greater Sensitivity:
Children who kept gratitude journals were more sensitive to situations where they themselves can be helpful, altruistic, generous, compassionate, and less destructive, more positive social behaviors, and less destructive, negative social behaviors…
“Gratitude is good for the giver, and good for the receiver,” Professor Emmons said. “This has been documented in friendships, romantic partners and spouses. One study showed that the mere expression of thanks more than doubled the likelihood that helpers would provide assistance again.”
And if We Don’t Practice Gratitude?
On the other hand, research shows that youth who are ungrateful are “less satisfied with their lives and are more apt to be aggressive and engage in risk-taking behaviors, such as early or frequent promiscuous activities, substance use, poor eating habits, physical inactivity, and poor academic performance.”

Research from: Thanks!: How the New Science of Gratitude Can Make You Happier

Possibly Related Posts:

1. An Attitude of Gratitude
2. Things I Love – 20
3. High Standards?

1. O’Keefe’s, 2. Gift Calendars, 3. Fuzz, 4. Simplicity, 5. Curiosity, 6. Convenience, 7. Unexpected Laughs, 8. Love, 9. Movies That Lift the Heart, 10. Focus, 11. Bloom, 12. Freckles, 13. Pens, 14. Daisies, 15. Coca Cola, 16. Cats & Dogs, Living Together, 17. Rescued Barbie Dolls, 18. Him, 19. Copper, 20. Creamy / Spicy, 21. Steam, 22. Connection, 23. The Greatest System, This Grand Experiment, 24. Spring, 25. Sweetness, 26. Frivolity

Possibly Related Posts:

1. Things I Love – 14
2. Things I Love – 27
3. Things I Love – 5

I know he is a Republican. I know he is tough on border security. I know he has been doing good work trying to shine a light on Operation Fast & Furious. And I know Paul Babeu has poor judgment. Why?

Because this picture exists.

No one with a functioning judgment chip takes these type of pictures, let alone expecting them to remain private. I don’t care who he intended the pic for. If a photo like this of Mitt Romney* surfaced and he told us it was a private picture intended only for his wife of 42 years, I would say it was proof that Romney lacked judgment. I would believe he meant it only for his wife – but I would still say it was a HUGE blunder.

The New Slimes article proves little of import. We learned that he is gay, something that is of no consequence. We learned he had a bad break-up with an impulsive, vindictive person. We learned that, given the opportunity to respond, the Babeu office prevaricated and stalled.

What seems likely from the article – as well as the pictures and screen caps – is that Babeu was posting on various websites looking for hook-ups. Again, whether those hook-ups were with men or women is irrelevant. The fact that a man serving in public office, and running for an even higher one, would exhibit such behavior shows horrible judgment. The type of behavior that sets a person up for blackmail – or an exposé in a sleazy local journal.

What is alleged but not proven: That Babeu’s lover was an illegal alien, that during that relationship Babeu continued to solicit casual hook-ups with others, that Babeu or his attorney threatened the lover with deportation after the break-up.

What was mentioned in a different article is that Jose left one of those inflammatory comments on eNewsAZ. After deleting it they contacted the Sheriff’s office for a comment and were told that Babeu has a mentally ill sister who has been leaving those comments. If that is true, it means the sheriff was willing to throw his sister under the bus despite knowing who was really behind the offensive comments.

To have any understanding of the internet and still take and post those pictures is political suicide. If you pay any attention to the news, which I expect elected officials to do, you could not have missed the careers that have previously been derailed by just such pics. (Chris Lee, Anthony Weiner,….) It would take a serious bit of self delusion to convince yourself that YOU are so different.

As I said earlier, tell the truth about your relationships. Tell the truth about your behavior. Your constituents don’t care if you’re gay, but they sure as heck care if you are a liar. They care if you have good judgment. They care if you own up to your mistakes.

And, if they are anything like me, they care if you are trawling the internet for random sexual encounters.

* I chose Mitt Romney because he was the most clean-cut, non-undie-pic politician I could think of

It’s time again for 28 29 Things I Love in February

It is a great project that will give you a real attitude adjustment. Whether you formally participate or not, I recommend you spending a few weeks looking for the good things in your day. You’ll be surprised at what just a slight change in your focus can accomplish.

Possibly Related Posts:

1. Know Your Opponent…

In this instance, the business that previously occupied this building was Planned Parenthood. Every time I drive past and see that “AVAILABLE” sign, I feel a bit of pleasant satisfaction.

They will definitely not be missed in the neighborhood.

Possibly Related Posts:

1. Make Everybody Happy
2. This Is A Muslim Community Center
3. Let’s Make It A Coffee Date

He should learn that sometimes simple is better, as Congressman Jeff Flake showed us with this statement:

On the one-year anniversary of the Tucson shooting, we mourn those who were lost, continue to pray for those who were wounded, and take solace in the fact that out of tragedy, our spirit as a community, a state, and a nation has been made stronger.

Montini might have learned not to condemn as complicit individuals who had no connection to the event what-so-ever. He chooses instead to refocus the blame on political ads, which is exactly the muddy thinking that lead to Sarah Palin being demonized as making Gabriel Giffords a target. Instead, despite the preponderance of evidence that has come forward to show Jared Loughner was neither politically motivated nor aware of Palin’s “target map”, Montini chooses to stick with the meme that fits his political agenda. An agenda that finds any words of disagreement from the Right to be “inflamatory”, and the most vile and threatening words & images from the Left to simply represent “impassioned speech”

He might have learned that in the name of civil rights, we have failed the mentally disturbed and those who may eventually fall victim to them. Instead he dismisses Loughner’s illness and points instead to the “ugly discourse over immigration”, something that had no bearing on the shooter or his life.

He might have learned that public officials, particularly those who try to have an open communion with their constituency, would be well served by some sort of personal protection*.

He might have learned that when law enforcement is tasked with being the only line of defense, a Sheriff who fails to act despite repeated warnings & inquiries needs to be removed from his post. Particularly when the sherrif then proceeds to also blame rhetoric and newly minted laws, despite knowing that his office had willfully dropped the ball on stopping Loughner BEFORE he took 6 lives and altered so many more.

He might have learned that, when a person has shown an undue & uncomfortable fascination with another human (whether ‘famous’ or not), we do them no favors by brushing it off. Better Gifford’s staff had reacted to his letters & videos rather than believe him to be harmless.

Gabriel Giffords was shot for the same reason Rebecca Schaeffer was shot, some screwed up kid from Tucson got fixated on her.

In Giffords’ case, though the fixation was not romantic, the trigger was the same. He reacted violently when she did not respond as he hoped to his perceived relationship with her. He felt she disrespected him and made her pay.

* There was a mention after this shooting that Pamela Gorman, at that time a Phoenix area politician who made national news with a volunteer produced YouTube video showing her firing a plethora of firearms, would not likely have been the victim of such an act. Though there is no doubt a working knowledge of firearms goes a long way to protecting life in the event of threat, sometimes there is no time to act.

From the accounts I heard at the time, Lougher approached Giffords with the gun under his coat. When he was in very close proximity, he pulled it out and fired, first at her head, then at the rest of the crowd. When he ran out of bullets and attempted to reload, he was tackled and subdued. Had that exact scenario played out at a Gorman event, neither she not her constituents would have had time to act prior to that first shot.

What would surely have been different is what happened next, as her crowd would more likely be armed – and more likely practiced with their weapons. No one is suggesting a bunch of folks would have, or should have, started firing at Loughner immediately. That sort of reaction might have made an already chaotic situation even worse. However, responsible gun owners who carry for self-defense practice scenarios that require an intelligent assessment of the environment – for instance, in the midst of a crowd.

What likely would have been different is the ability of an armed man to get through the crowd and close to the candidate. A group of 2nd Amendment enthusiasts would also be more likely to be aware of their surroundings, more likely to be alert for threats, more likely to notice a gun, and more likely to be willing to act to stop someone before the day turns deadly.

{Still need to find some links for the facts in this post, if you have ‘em handy, drop them in the comments}

UPDATE: Warner Todd Huston takes NPR to task for the same offense: Falsely Blaming Giffords’ Shooting on Uncivil Political Rhetoric

Possibly Related Posts:

1. Seven Falls, Tucson

Taken into Custody: The War Against Fatherhood, Marriage, and the Family is a book I have not yet read, but I have heard the author speak in interviews and I know his story well.

By allowing the “State” to determine the rules of marriage, you also grant them control of divorce. By allowing the “State” to determine the rules of divorce, you are guaranteeing that profit, power & control will take precedence over common sense and expediency…and decency.

So called Family Courts have become instead anti-Family courts. A divorce proceeding can be brought by anyone (in a majority of cases, the wife) for any reason (or no reason at all). Divorces are always granted, there is no chance of contesting the action anymore. “No Fault” has increased the incidence of divorce exponentially. The unwitting victim, who may have been blindsided by the action, is then at the mercy of a court system with very few checks OR balances.

Many a man has had his children ripped away from him, had his income garnished, thrown out of his home, even been thrown in jail. Is there any other court system in the U.S. where a person can have everything taken from them without ever even having a wrong alleged?

Should a woman desire to inflict even greater pain and hardship on her former mate, she need only claim abuse; of her children, of herself, of the most heinous kind. Should the father have the resources to fight such allegations, he may eventually clear his name – but there is NO penalty to the woman for making such claims. The big winner is a court system that has collected outrageous fees requiring an innocent man to prove his innocence against unsupported charges brought by a woman with literally nothing to lose by smearing her husband. Too often anger and greed lead these women to ignore the pain they inflict on their children and a man they once at least claimed to love, and the anti-family court system rewards them for it.

We are at a point where the reasons for matrimony and procreation being sponsored by the state have evaporated. Women no longer need to be protected by the corrupt and bloated bureaucracy, men are no longer the sole bread-winners, both parents should be given equal consideration in custody arrangements.

I have written extensively in the past about the scourge of paternity fraud, a problem exacerbated by the circus that we refer to as “Family Court”. No support agreement should ever be entered into without a paternity test – or an informed decision by the father to waive such proof. The court should not be bankrupting men to pay for children that aren’t theirs, born to women they may not have even met.

I have written about the need for any couple considering marriage to execute a pre-nuptial agreement. Other than enforcing that or a standard nuptial contract, the government should NOT be involved when a couple decides to enter Holy matrimony.

We don’t need a Constitutional amendment to “protect” traditional marriage, we need only to remove the government and their profit motive from the equation altogether. If churches want to marry a couple of consenting adults, let them – but don’t expect or require consent from the state. If a couple of consenting adults want to enter into a civil contract of commitment, let them – but don’t expect or require consent from the state.

In short, the state should no longer participate in the forming or dissolution of any marital union in any of its forms. I’m sure the divorce lawyers can find some other specialty that will require their special skill-set.

Possibly Related Posts:

1. Love & Marriage…and Your Wallet