Sorry for not posting yesterday, but it was my friend Phillip's 21st birthday, and we were having his party at my house, so I had to prepare, but it got me thinking about today's post.
So what is it about age that suddenly makes us responsible. For some reason at midnight at on our 21st birthday, we suddenly become responsible enough to by alcohol. What is it that changes in our brain chemistry at the one sudden moment that makes us different. Is it suddenly we are responsible? Or is it that it gives us control over the masses?
Is it the same with sex? We teach our children from the earliest ages that they have the right to say no to someone touching them where they don't want to be touched. We teach them the difference between good touch and bad touch, but while we give them the right to say no, we don't give them the right to say yes. We tell them that until they are 18, or whatever the age is in that state, that they don't know the difference, and that they should say no to everyone. We tell them that they don't know what good touch is.
And while I agree that we should teach our children about sex, if we are going to give them rights over their body, then we need to give them rights. Now, I am in no way approving of molesting children, and I hope you are not getting that idea. What I am saying is that every person is different. I have met people in their 20's that cannot distinguish between good sex and bad sex. So why can there not be teenagers that have the maturity to distinguish between good sex and bad sex. I will say, I do not know the answer to this one. I don't know how we change our laws to give all citizens, no matter their age, the inherit rights that all people should have. Or at least, that's as I see it now.....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Comments are Welcome
So I see by my stats, that there are at least a couple of people reading this. And I would like to think that I am making you think. So I have a couple of favors to ask you.
Number one is please make comments. I would like to hear what you are thinking, and if I am making sense. I would like to hear your ideas and thoughts. But most of all, I would like to know that you are enjoying reading this.
Number two is to tell other people about it. I am pretty sure everyone know at least one other person that would enjoy reading this political stuff. And I would really appreciate the readership.
A word about paypal, I put that in if you wish. There is absolutely no requirement for you to pay to read this, but if you do, I appreciate it.
So that is the blog for today. Tomorrow we will get back to something political.
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Number one is please make comments. I would like to hear what you are thinking, and if I am making sense. I would like to hear your ideas and thoughts. But most of all, I would like to know that you are enjoying reading this.
Number two is to tell other people about it. I am pretty sure everyone know at least one other person that would enjoy reading this political stuff. And I would really appreciate the readership.
A word about paypal, I put that in if you wish. There is absolutely no requirement for you to pay to read this, but if you do, I appreciate it.
So that is the blog for today. Tomorrow we will get back to something political.
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
The Internet and Politics
So, how has politics changed over the last few years. I get several emails daily from my father, a died in the wool republican who thinks that Obama is the devil incarnate. But, I have to wonder why he feels this way.
All of these emails he gets are from the republican party. There is every lie in the book coming into his email, and since he gets these from "reputable" source so they must be true. He thinks that every email that comes his way is the absolute truth. He thinks that Pelosi told the government that she had to have this better plane to fly back and forth, when the truth is, the Secret Service told her that she had to have this plane because she had to be able to fly without stopping for fuel, and this is the only plane that could do that. But the republican party says otherwise, so that is what he believes.
Obama doesn't have a birth certificate, unless it serves their purpose, then all the sudden there is a birth certificate that says he was born in Hawaii. And why does he think this, because he gets it in his email.
So what is the change I am talking about. All the sudden the American public has access to all the propaganda of both parties. There is suddenly an influx of information coming straight to their inboxes with no contradictions to show their inaccuracy so the public believes it all. Now I am not saying that we need to have a public blocking of all information. But I do think we as the people who gets this information has the responsibility to see it for what it is. It is our responsibility to look at this information and see it for what it is, and not spread it all over the globe. Or at least that is as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
All of these emails he gets are from the republican party. There is every lie in the book coming into his email, and since he gets these from "reputable" source so they must be true. He thinks that every email that comes his way is the absolute truth. He thinks that Pelosi told the government that she had to have this better plane to fly back and forth, when the truth is, the Secret Service told her that she had to have this plane because she had to be able to fly without stopping for fuel, and this is the only plane that could do that. But the republican party says otherwise, so that is what he believes.
Obama doesn't have a birth certificate, unless it serves their purpose, then all the sudden there is a birth certificate that says he was born in Hawaii. And why does he think this, because he gets it in his email.
So what is the change I am talking about. All the sudden the American public has access to all the propaganda of both parties. There is suddenly an influx of information coming straight to their inboxes with no contradictions to show their inaccuracy so the public believes it all. Now I am not saying that we need to have a public blocking of all information. But I do think we as the people who gets this information has the responsibility to see it for what it is. It is our responsibility to look at this information and see it for what it is, and not spread it all over the globe. Or at least that is as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Monday, February 21, 2011
President's Day
Here we are in the United States of America celebrating President's Day. The day we actually celebrate the lives of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
Let's look at these men and see what we can learn. First George Washington.
On April 30, 1789, George Washington, standing on the balcony of Federal Hall on Wall Street in New York, took his oath of office as the first President of the United States. "As the first of every thing, in our situation will serve to establish a Precedent," he wrote James Madison, "it is devoutly wished on my part, that these precedents may be fixed on true principles." He was also actually opposed to the party system of government. According to the White House Biography, "To his disappointment, two parties were developing by the end of his first term. Wearied of politics, feeling old, he retired at the end of his second. In his Farewell Address, he urged his countrymen to forswear excessive party spirit and geographical distinctions. In foreign affairs, he warned against long-term alliances." I wish we had learned from this man, and swore off excessive party spirit.
And now for Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln never let the world forget that the Civil War involved an even larger issue. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg: "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Well, we seem to be losing that government of the people, by the people, We are now government of the party, by the party until the next party wins.
So here we are celebrating the lives of two men that had great expectations for this country. And let me say, I have great expectations for this Country too. I talk a lot about the bad things that are happening in this country, but I do love it. I do think we have a great thing going. But we do need to make some changes. We need to follow the words of George Washington and look out for the party system. We need to heed the words of Abraham Lincoln when he called this government of the people, by the people and for the people. Then and only then can we once again become the great nation we once were, and get back on track. Or at least that is I see it now.....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Let's look at these men and see what we can learn. First George Washington.
On April 30, 1789, George Washington, standing on the balcony of Federal Hall on Wall Street in New York, took his oath of office as the first President of the United States. "As the first of every thing, in our situation will serve to establish a Precedent," he wrote James Madison, "it is devoutly wished on my part, that these precedents may be fixed on true principles." He was also actually opposed to the party system of government. According to the White House Biography, "To his disappointment, two parties were developing by the end of his first term. Wearied of politics, feeling old, he retired at the end of his second. In his Farewell Address, he urged his countrymen to forswear excessive party spirit and geographical distinctions. In foreign affairs, he warned against long-term alliances." I wish we had learned from this man, and swore off excessive party spirit.
And now for Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln never let the world forget that the Civil War involved an even larger issue. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg: "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Well, we seem to be losing that government of the people, by the people, We are now government of the party, by the party until the next party wins.
So here we are celebrating the lives of two men that had great expectations for this country. And let me say, I have great expectations for this Country too. I talk a lot about the bad things that are happening in this country, but I do love it. I do think we have a great thing going. But we do need to make some changes. We need to follow the words of George Washington and look out for the party system. We need to heed the words of Abraham Lincoln when he called this government of the people, by the people and for the people. Then and only then can we once again become the great nation we once were, and get back on track. Or at least that is I see it now.....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Thursday, February 17, 2011
We're throwing our rights away
I have long been a proponent of constitutional rights, and feel that our rights should be protected above all else. Even when I worked in the public defenders office in New Mexico, part of my job was helping to find reasons to get obviously guilty people off on reasons that their rights were violated. And I did that gladly. If there was a search that didn't follow the rules, then the evidence should be thrown out. I faced a lot of criticism because of that. Especially when it was known that I helped get drug dealers off because the police didn't do something as simple as call the judge and ask for an extended search warrant. Now what I read in the Colorado law, really irks that wish for the rights to be protected.
Apparently in Colorado, if there is a case of unlawful sexual contact of a child, the hearsay rule is thrown out. What this means, is that if there is a child that has been touched inappropriately, and they tell Joe that daddy touched me there, then Joe can go to the Courts and testify that the child said that daddy touched me there, and it will stand. Now I am not saying, and please don't read this to mean that I think that child ought to be abused, but I feel that we have made laws to protect everyone for reasons, and that if we start making exceptions like this, we are on a slippery slope, that leads to the destruction of our country.
Don't get me wrong, I am not just against laws that affect sex offenders. We have something in this country that was passed under the great tutelage of George Bush called the patriot act. The patriot act says in part that if you are suspected of being a terrorist, the government can come pick you up, take you into custody and hold you there until they see fit to do something with you. All of your constitutional rights are thrown out the door. The right to a speedy trial, the right to fair and reasonable punishment, all of it is thrown out the door. They also have the right to monitor your phone without any intervention from anyone. Even though, there is a special court already set up for them to go to request a wiretap. The government at that time felt that was too much trouble, they just want to do the wiretaps without telling anyone. Oh, and these were finally repealed recently.
Anyway, the whole point of this post is that we as a country need to protect our freedoms. We need to guard against the government saying that we don't deserve those protections. or at least that is as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Apparently in Colorado, if there is a case of unlawful sexual contact of a child, the hearsay rule is thrown out. What this means, is that if there is a child that has been touched inappropriately, and they tell Joe that daddy touched me there, then Joe can go to the Courts and testify that the child said that daddy touched me there, and it will stand. Now I am not saying, and please don't read this to mean that I think that child ought to be abused, but I feel that we have made laws to protect everyone for reasons, and that if we start making exceptions like this, we are on a slippery slope, that leads to the destruction of our country.
Don't get me wrong, I am not just against laws that affect sex offenders. We have something in this country that was passed under the great tutelage of George Bush called the patriot act. The patriot act says in part that if you are suspected of being a terrorist, the government can come pick you up, take you into custody and hold you there until they see fit to do something with you. All of your constitutional rights are thrown out the door. The right to a speedy trial, the right to fair and reasonable punishment, all of it is thrown out the door. They also have the right to monitor your phone without any intervention from anyone. Even though, there is a special court already set up for them to go to request a wiretap. The government at that time felt that was too much trouble, they just want to do the wiretaps without telling anyone. Oh, and these were finally repealed recently.
Anyway, the whole point of this post is that we as a country need to protect our freedoms. We need to guard against the government saying that we don't deserve those protections. or at least that is as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
I wanna be rich
I was sitting today watching "The Social Network" which is about Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of facebook. And I was immediately drawn to the story. I was impressed how he took a simple idea, and has since made it into a 25 Billion dollar industry. As a matter of fact, I bet everyone either has a facebook, or at least knows someone who has a facebook. That's a lot of people. But that isn't where it stops.
Let's look at Microsoft. Microsoft is now a multi-billion dollar industry. Most Americans have access to at least 2 computers running a microsoft product. I say at least 2 because we all have computers at home, and probably at work. And that computer at work is probably connected to another computer running a microsoft product or two. Let's see, we have windows and office on most computers, and internet explorer. And people get mad at Bill Gates, they say he is running a monopoly, but is he really. First of all, there is no requirement that we have a computer. And if we do have a computer, there is no requirement that it run windows. As a matter of fact, a lot of people I know would rather run something like Linux on their system. And we can do that, we can run Linux if we want to. So why does it seem that everyone runs windows? Because it is simpler. Because Bill Gates had the foresight to have his developers make something that my father can use. And he used that to his advantage. I don't think he runs a monopoly, I think he is probably the smartest marketer in the USA. I don't want to bad mouth Bill Gates, I want to be Bill Gates.
So as the title of this blog says, I wanna be rich, and I don't apologize for that. While I realize that money cannot buy happiness, or so we are told, I do know that money can buy a lot of the things that buy happiness. And while being rich isn't everything, being poor sucks. I used to say that I really didn't want to be rich as much as I just wanted to pay my bills. I see the futility of that now, and fully admit, if I could come up with an idea that would make me a billionaire, then you better believe I would do it. As the popular song goes, I wana be a billionaire, so freaking bad. I wanna buy cars like Bentley's and Aston Martins. I wanna live in a mansion, and I wanna provide an exceptional life for my two boyfriends, and my pet. And while I don't see a lot of socio-political ramifications in this post, I just want you guys to know this. Watch for me on the cover of Time magazine sometime in the future. Or at least, that's as I HOPE to see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yaho.com
Let's look at Microsoft. Microsoft is now a multi-billion dollar industry. Most Americans have access to at least 2 computers running a microsoft product. I say at least 2 because we all have computers at home, and probably at work. And that computer at work is probably connected to another computer running a microsoft product or two. Let's see, we have windows and office on most computers, and internet explorer. And people get mad at Bill Gates, they say he is running a monopoly, but is he really. First of all, there is no requirement that we have a computer. And if we do have a computer, there is no requirement that it run windows. As a matter of fact, a lot of people I know would rather run something like Linux on their system. And we can do that, we can run Linux if we want to. So why does it seem that everyone runs windows? Because it is simpler. Because Bill Gates had the foresight to have his developers make something that my father can use. And he used that to his advantage. I don't think he runs a monopoly, I think he is probably the smartest marketer in the USA. I don't want to bad mouth Bill Gates, I want to be Bill Gates.
So as the title of this blog says, I wanna be rich, and I don't apologize for that. While I realize that money cannot buy happiness, or so we are told, I do know that money can buy a lot of the things that buy happiness. And while being rich isn't everything, being poor sucks. I used to say that I really didn't want to be rich as much as I just wanted to pay my bills. I see the futility of that now, and fully admit, if I could come up with an idea that would make me a billionaire, then you better believe I would do it. As the popular song goes, I wana be a billionaire, so freaking bad. I wanna buy cars like Bentley's and Aston Martins. I wanna live in a mansion, and I wanna provide an exceptional life for my two boyfriends, and my pet. And while I don't see a lot of socio-political ramifications in this post, I just want you guys to know this. Watch for me on the cover of Time magazine sometime in the future. Or at least, that's as I HOPE to see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yaho.com
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Crime and Punishment in the USA
So, one of the founding principles of our society is the punishment of those that go against our morals and beliefs. We also believe that our citizens should be protected against excess punishment, and that the punishment should match the crime. Well I have several ideas that would help in the punishment area.
First of all, I think that all general intent crimes should immediately be made un-constitutional. Why you may ask. I don't think you should be punished for a crime that you didn't have the criminal mind to commit. So I think we should have two basic levels of criminals. Those who intend to commit a crime, and thus know that they are going to have a punishment for it. Say, murder in the first, or well any murder, assault battery, you know things where you know you are hurting someone else, and don't care. And maybe criminal history should play a part, but it should be looked at in the whole picture. So take my case for example. Yes, I have a criminal history, but was 19 years ago, and has absolutely no bearing on the present case.
So I think that punishment should match the crime, and that crimes should have a specific intent, and that if you can't form specific intent for what ever reason, then you shouldn't be held as a criminal. Or at least, that's as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
First of all, I think that all general intent crimes should immediately be made un-constitutional. Why you may ask. I don't think you should be punished for a crime that you didn't have the criminal mind to commit. So I think we should have two basic levels of criminals. Those who intend to commit a crime, and thus know that they are going to have a punishment for it. Say, murder in the first, or well any murder, assault battery, you know things where you know you are hurting someone else, and don't care. And maybe criminal history should play a part, but it should be looked at in the whole picture. So take my case for example. Yes, I have a criminal history, but was 19 years ago, and has absolutely no bearing on the present case.
So I think that punishment should match the crime, and that crimes should have a specific intent, and that if you can't form specific intent for what ever reason, then you shouldn't be held as a criminal. Or at least, that's as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Monday, February 14, 2011
Another Fun Day in Court
So, I went to court today, and once again, I was bullied by the prosecutor. Let me explain.
Original ticket, excuse me, tickets, was careless driving, illegal crossing of a median, failure to provide insurance on one ticket and resisting arrest and obstructing an officer on the other ticket. The prosecutor said he would drop the careless driving on the one ticket and the resisting arrest on the other ticket. No jail time, but 8 points on my license, fine and probation. Yes, they want to put me on probation. And he said, if I didn't agree today, then he would fine the charge for leaving the scene of an accident, and add it. That would be a 12 point fine. So, for having a bout of viral meningitis, I am facing 24 points on my license. I have not had so much as a parking ticket in over 7 years.
Now the main reason the prosecutor did not want to drop the obstruction was because he didn't think I was sick, and because I have a criminal history. My criminal history is over 19 years old. So, how does that have an effect. So I came home and looked up the statute for obstructing an officer. It reads, and this is for Westminster, "6-5-5: OBSTRUCTING A POLICE OFFICER:
(A) It shall be unlawful for any person, by using or threatening to use violence, force, physical interference, or obstacle, to knowingly obstruct, impair or hinder the enforcement of the penal law or the preservation of the peace, or the placement or attempted placement of a person into custody for purposes of his own safety and welfare or the safety and welfare of others, by a police officer, or any person duly empowered with police authority. (1224 2001 2031)
(B) It is no defense to a prosecution under this Section that the police officer, or any person duly empowered with police authority, was acting in an illegal manner, if he was acting in the regular course of assigned duties and in good faith based upon surrounding facts and circumstances. (1224)
(C) It shall be unlawful for any person to refuse to reveal their correct name, address and date of birth when requested to do so by a police officer, or any person duly empowered with police authority, engaged in the investigation of any violation of law, traffic accident, disaster or other event. (1224)
(D) Obstructing a police officer is a criminal offense, punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both, as provided in Section 1-8-1 of this Code. (2001)"
There was no violence, there was no lieing to the officer, as a matter of fact, I could not even speak intelligently, so I don't see how I could have withheld evidence. So, where exactly do I fit in the obstruction statute. And the fact that I had viral meningitis should have some bearing. And if I wasn't sick, then why was I put in the back of an ambulance and not the back of a police car? Yes, I feel like I am being bullied to get his win ratio up. Oh, and I also found this in the Westminster statutes...
6-2-13: OBSTRUCTION OF THE SEEKING OF EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE: (3119)
(A) It shall be unlawful for a person to knowingly obstruct or otherwise interfere with anyone who is seeking medical, police, fire or other emergency assistance from any person or agency, public or private.
(B) Obstruction of the seeking of emergency assistance is a criminal offense, punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both, as provided in section 1-8-1 of this code.
So, if I was seeking emergency care, then why isn't the officer charged with obstructing me seeking emergency care. Oh wait, he is a police officer, and he doesn't have any reason to help me seek emergency care. All he needs to do is arrest me, and get his ratio up.
Am I little biased here? Well probably. But I hate being rail roaded into a guilty verdict when I am not guilty. There is something in the legal industry called mens rea. It means the guilty mind, or the ability to form a criminal intent. Since I could not even speak intelligently, how the hell could I form the criminal intent. The Officer says that all I said to him was "I can't get in trouble, I can't get in trouble" Now, you have been reading my blog for a while now, so I ask you.... Do I seem like the type of person that when talking to an officer would only tell him "I can't get in trouble" As a matter of fact, I asked the prosecutor that same question, and all he could tell me is he is no judge of normal. If he is no judge of normal, then why the hell is he a prosecutor. If most of our law is based on the presumptions of what would a normal person do, then shouldn't he be a judge of what is normal or not normal. Or at least that is how I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Original ticket, excuse me, tickets, was careless driving, illegal crossing of a median, failure to provide insurance on one ticket and resisting arrest and obstructing an officer on the other ticket. The prosecutor said he would drop the careless driving on the one ticket and the resisting arrest on the other ticket. No jail time, but 8 points on my license, fine and probation. Yes, they want to put me on probation. And he said, if I didn't agree today, then he would fine the charge for leaving the scene of an accident, and add it. That would be a 12 point fine. So, for having a bout of viral meningitis, I am facing 24 points on my license. I have not had so much as a parking ticket in over 7 years.
Now the main reason the prosecutor did not want to drop the obstruction was because he didn't think I was sick, and because I have a criminal history. My criminal history is over 19 years old. So, how does that have an effect. So I came home and looked up the statute for obstructing an officer. It reads, and this is for Westminster, "6-5-5: OBSTRUCTING A POLICE OFFICER:
(A) It shall be unlawful for any person, by using or threatening to use violence, force, physical interference, or obstacle, to knowingly obstruct, impair or hinder the enforcement of the penal law or the preservation of the peace, or the placement or attempted placement of a person into custody for purposes of his own safety and welfare or the safety and welfare of others, by a police officer, or any person duly empowered with police authority. (1224 2001 2031)
(B) It is no defense to a prosecution under this Section that the police officer, or any person duly empowered with police authority, was acting in an illegal manner, if he was acting in the regular course of assigned duties and in good faith based upon surrounding facts and circumstances. (1224)
(C) It shall be unlawful for any person to refuse to reveal their correct name, address and date of birth when requested to do so by a police officer, or any person duly empowered with police authority, engaged in the investigation of any violation of law, traffic accident, disaster or other event. (1224)
(D) Obstructing a police officer is a criminal offense, punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both, as provided in Section 1-8-1 of this Code. (2001)"
There was no violence, there was no lieing to the officer, as a matter of fact, I could not even speak intelligently, so I don't see how I could have withheld evidence. So, where exactly do I fit in the obstruction statute. And the fact that I had viral meningitis should have some bearing. And if I wasn't sick, then why was I put in the back of an ambulance and not the back of a police car? Yes, I feel like I am being bullied to get his win ratio up. Oh, and I also found this in the Westminster statutes...
6-2-13: OBSTRUCTION OF THE SEEKING OF EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE: (3119)
(A) It shall be unlawful for a person to knowingly obstruct or otherwise interfere with anyone who is seeking medical, police, fire or other emergency assistance from any person or agency, public or private.
(B) Obstruction of the seeking of emergency assistance is a criminal offense, punishable by a fine or imprisonment, or both, as provided in section 1-8-1 of this code.
So, if I was seeking emergency care, then why isn't the officer charged with obstructing me seeking emergency care. Oh wait, he is a police officer, and he doesn't have any reason to help me seek emergency care. All he needs to do is arrest me, and get his ratio up.
Am I little biased here? Well probably. But I hate being rail roaded into a guilty verdict when I am not guilty. There is something in the legal industry called mens rea. It means the guilty mind, or the ability to form a criminal intent. Since I could not even speak intelligently, how the hell could I form the criminal intent. The Officer says that all I said to him was "I can't get in trouble, I can't get in trouble" Now, you have been reading my blog for a while now, so I ask you.... Do I seem like the type of person that when talking to an officer would only tell him "I can't get in trouble" As a matter of fact, I asked the prosecutor that same question, and all he could tell me is he is no judge of normal. If he is no judge of normal, then why the hell is he a prosecutor. If most of our law is based on the presumptions of what would a normal person do, then shouldn't he be a judge of what is normal or not normal. Or at least that is how I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Friday, February 11, 2011
It's Friday again
Well here it is Friday. The end of the week. My God, are the weeks getting shorter or not? Sometimes they feel like they are, and sometimes not.
One of our roommates moved out this week. I wish him all the best. He is trying to get back into the Army after don't ask don't tell. We'll see how that goes. I personally think that gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Now, before you get all huffy and say "But what if they watch me in the shower, or want to fondle my man bits"? Well they didn't watch you in the shower or fondle your man bits before they were allowed to be open, so you guess.
Also, I am going to the doctor today. No, I am not dieing. I have asthma, and have had it for many many years. Now they are telling me that I am using too much ventolin and that obviously my asthma is uncontrolled. Well that may be, but I am also unemployed, and uninsured, and now have to pay my doctor 75.00, or more appropriately my physician's assistant 75.00 just so they can give me more prescriptions I can't afford and renew the ventolin which I can afford 1 can a week, and that is about what I use. So now I have to pay more and more money that I can't afford, for a cure that is not going to work, but it is the only way I can keep the medicine that can work. Go figure.
So, maybe this hasn't been the most intelligent blog I have put out, but it is the things I am feeling right now, or at least that's as I see it now....
Paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
One of our roommates moved out this week. I wish him all the best. He is trying to get back into the Army after don't ask don't tell. We'll see how that goes. I personally think that gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Now, before you get all huffy and say "But what if they watch me in the shower, or want to fondle my man bits"? Well they didn't watch you in the shower or fondle your man bits before they were allowed to be open, so you guess.
Also, I am going to the doctor today. No, I am not dieing. I have asthma, and have had it for many many years. Now they are telling me that I am using too much ventolin and that obviously my asthma is uncontrolled. Well that may be, but I am also unemployed, and uninsured, and now have to pay my doctor 75.00, or more appropriately my physician's assistant 75.00 just so they can give me more prescriptions I can't afford and renew the ventolin which I can afford 1 can a week, and that is about what I use. So now I have to pay more and more money that I can't afford, for a cure that is not going to work, but it is the only way I can keep the medicine that can work. Go figure.
So, maybe this hasn't been the most intelligent blog I have put out, but it is the things I am feeling right now, or at least that's as I see it now....
Paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Thursday, February 10, 2011
As Courts Go....
This one wasn't too bad. The judge found that I was in compliance so finally my property is clean enough for Arvada. I still find it wierd that the city can tell me how clean my backyard is supposed to be. But let's look at other laws where they invade our privacy and maybe we'll see the pattern.
One of my favorites is the seatbelt law. If I drive a vehicle or ride in the passenger seat, I am required by law to wear a seatbelt. And if I don't, I can get a ticket. And they pull me over just because they don't see a seatbelt. Now don't get me wrong, I believe in wearing seatbelts. I think they save lives. But I also believe I have the right not to have my life saved if I don't want it saved. And on the same note, if I ride a motorcycle, I am required to wear a helmet. Now again I think helmets save lives, and I would never dream of riding a motorcycle without a helmet. But, once again, I must save, if I don't want my life saved, then what the hell type of government do we have that can trample all over my rights as an individual and tell me that I have to do things that are going to save my life.
I am sure if we looked closer at several laws we would find that several of them don't pass the constitutional muster. And what do we do? We simply roll over and say well if our government says so, it must be right. We don't dare question the authority. I say it's time to look closely at what our government is telling us, and tell them that we want laws that protect us, not break us. Or at least, that's as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
One of my favorites is the seatbelt law. If I drive a vehicle or ride in the passenger seat, I am required by law to wear a seatbelt. And if I don't, I can get a ticket. And they pull me over just because they don't see a seatbelt. Now don't get me wrong, I believe in wearing seatbelts. I think they save lives. But I also believe I have the right not to have my life saved if I don't want it saved. And on the same note, if I ride a motorcycle, I am required to wear a helmet. Now again I think helmets save lives, and I would never dream of riding a motorcycle without a helmet. But, once again, I must save, if I don't want my life saved, then what the hell type of government do we have that can trample all over my rights as an individual and tell me that I have to do things that are going to save my life.
I am sure if we looked closer at several laws we would find that several of them don't pass the constitutional muster. And what do we do? We simply roll over and say well if our government says so, it must be right. We don't dare question the authority. I say it's time to look closely at what our government is telling us, and tell them that we want laws that protect us, not break us. Or at least, that's as I see it now....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Monday, February 7, 2011
Is it my property or not
So tomorrow afternoon I have to appear in Arvada Municipal court to show cause why I should not be charged the rest of the fine in my code violation case for not cleaning my yard up as soon as they wanted me too.
So let's get this straight. They want to charge me 600.00 for having an axle in my back yard and some weeds. Not a lot of weeds, just a couple growing in the back yard. So now the City of Arvada is allowed to come into my back yard, which should be an extension of my private property, and tell me what I can have laying around, and what I can't. It was bad enough that they could tell me I can't have vehicles on my property that are not licensed, now I can't have parts in my enclosed back yard, because that violates the code.
Oh, and to even make it more reprehensible, the code enforcement nazi told me that if I have a flat tire on my care, she can immediately tow it away as a non-operable vehicle. I have to make sure my tires have air in them every morning, or I won't have a vehicle, and I will then have to pay to get it out of impound and brought back to my house. What utter shit is this, pardon the language.
What is next? Are they going to be allowed to come into my house and tell me I have to clean my kitchen up. Oh wait, there are clothes on the bedroom floor, I guess they will be able to tell me I have to pick them up, or I will be liable for the city to come into my house and pick up my clothes for me. I have to ask myself, if they can come and look into my back yard and tell me I have to clean this up and that up, then what is to stop them from coming into my house. That same property rights that say my house is mine, also says my backyard is mine, and yet they are allowed to tell me how to keep it.
I think it is about time that we as a city, county, state, and nation tell our elected officials that they need to keep their noses out of our property, and start taking care of our other needs, or we need to get rid of them. Oh and btw, we are also required in Arvada to shovel the snow off our sidewalks. This morning when I was walking to the bus stop, I had to walk through the snow all the way that should have been the city's responsibility to shovel, and yet they didn't. Shouldn't they be required to follow the same rules that they make us follow? I wonder if I went to the city maintenance yard, how many non-operable vehicles I would find there, and yet, they are allowed to stay there. It just doesn't seem fair, or at least, that is as I see it now.....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
So let's get this straight. They want to charge me 600.00 for having an axle in my back yard and some weeds. Not a lot of weeds, just a couple growing in the back yard. So now the City of Arvada is allowed to come into my back yard, which should be an extension of my private property, and tell me what I can have laying around, and what I can't. It was bad enough that they could tell me I can't have vehicles on my property that are not licensed, now I can't have parts in my enclosed back yard, because that violates the code.
Oh, and to even make it more reprehensible, the code enforcement nazi told me that if I have a flat tire on my care, she can immediately tow it away as a non-operable vehicle. I have to make sure my tires have air in them every morning, or I won't have a vehicle, and I will then have to pay to get it out of impound and brought back to my house. What utter shit is this, pardon the language.
What is next? Are they going to be allowed to come into my house and tell me I have to clean my kitchen up. Oh wait, there are clothes on the bedroom floor, I guess they will be able to tell me I have to pick them up, or I will be liable for the city to come into my house and pick up my clothes for me. I have to ask myself, if they can come and look into my back yard and tell me I have to clean this up and that up, then what is to stop them from coming into my house. That same property rights that say my house is mine, also says my backyard is mine, and yet they are allowed to tell me how to keep it.
I think it is about time that we as a city, county, state, and nation tell our elected officials that they need to keep their noses out of our property, and start taking care of our other needs, or we need to get rid of them. Oh and btw, we are also required in Arvada to shovel the snow off our sidewalks. This morning when I was walking to the bus stop, I had to walk through the snow all the way that should have been the city's responsibility to shovel, and yet they didn't. Shouldn't they be required to follow the same rules that they make us follow? I wonder if I went to the city maintenance yard, how many non-operable vehicles I would find there, and yet, they are allowed to stay there. It just doesn't seem fair, or at least, that is as I see it now.....
paypal kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Friday, February 4, 2011
Thank God It's Friday
Well, here we are at the end of a week. And what a week it has been. We got all the way down to negative 18. Wow that's cold for this desert boy. There wasn't a lot of snow, but there was enough. Schools closed for a couple of days, and people were told to stay inside if at all possible. And that is what I did. I stayed inside. All of this on the very week that Punxsutawney Phil came out of the ground, and did not see his shadow, thus predicting an early spring. Negative freaking 18 degrees, and he predicts an early spring....
I also found out that Westminster, the city in which I got my tickets for among other things resisting arrest and obstructing an officer, was probably the worst city I could have got the ticket in, as if it had been a Denver officer, which don't get me wrong, I don't really like Denver cops either, but if it had been in Denver, I would have probably been able to plea to putting slugs in a parking meter, a non-moving violation which carries a 100.00 fine, and been done with this. Not that I think I should have any fines or points, or necessarily plea to anything, but come on, you make it worth my while, and I will be glad to forget the whole thing. I also found out that they forgot to tell me one important piece of information. If I want a jury trial, which believe me, may be the only way I am going to get any justice in this trial, I have to pay a 25.00 jury fee within 20 days of my first court appearance. Well as it would turn out, my next appearance is over 20 days after my first appearance. If I don't go in before then, I am not going to be able to have my jury. Don't you think, the judge, or bailiff, or someone should have mentioned that before I left the court room? Now the prosecutor was nice enough to tell me he wasn't going to be seeking jail time. Isn't that big of him?
Couple that with the Arvada code officer making me her personal vendetta bitch, and it's going to be a really interesting month. I have three court appearances in 2 weeks. I feel like I am going to be living in the court rooms.
We couple that with my basic disappointment in the economy. I looked back at craiglist and there has been less than 30 computer type jobs posted in Denver this week. My God, how in the hell is anyone supposed to find a job, if that is all the jobs that are being posted. Now, I know there were more in Dice and Monster, but craigslist is a good indication of what is going on. That, and I went to apply for foodstamps today. Would you believe that on unemployment, I make too much money per month by a good 500.00 a month to get food stamps. I mean really, it's not like I am getting rich on this. I do get more than I would get on a minimum wage job, but still it's not enough to really live on. I don't have a working car, and I have a mortgage, but they don't even take that into consideration.
So, yeah, with the weather and court an economy, it's been an interesting week... or at least that's as I see it now.
Remember paypal is kendal_emery@yahoo.com
I also found out that Westminster, the city in which I got my tickets for among other things resisting arrest and obstructing an officer, was probably the worst city I could have got the ticket in, as if it had been a Denver officer, which don't get me wrong, I don't really like Denver cops either, but if it had been in Denver, I would have probably been able to plea to putting slugs in a parking meter, a non-moving violation which carries a 100.00 fine, and been done with this. Not that I think I should have any fines or points, or necessarily plea to anything, but come on, you make it worth my while, and I will be glad to forget the whole thing. I also found out that they forgot to tell me one important piece of information. If I want a jury trial, which believe me, may be the only way I am going to get any justice in this trial, I have to pay a 25.00 jury fee within 20 days of my first court appearance. Well as it would turn out, my next appearance is over 20 days after my first appearance. If I don't go in before then, I am not going to be able to have my jury. Don't you think, the judge, or bailiff, or someone should have mentioned that before I left the court room? Now the prosecutor was nice enough to tell me he wasn't going to be seeking jail time. Isn't that big of him?
Couple that with the Arvada code officer making me her personal vendetta bitch, and it's going to be a really interesting month. I have three court appearances in 2 weeks. I feel like I am going to be living in the court rooms.
We couple that with my basic disappointment in the economy. I looked back at craiglist and there has been less than 30 computer type jobs posted in Denver this week. My God, how in the hell is anyone supposed to find a job, if that is all the jobs that are being posted. Now, I know there were more in Dice and Monster, but craigslist is a good indication of what is going on. That, and I went to apply for foodstamps today. Would you believe that on unemployment, I make too much money per month by a good 500.00 a month to get food stamps. I mean really, it's not like I am getting rich on this. I do get more than I would get on a minimum wage job, but still it's not enough to really live on. I don't have a working car, and I have a mortgage, but they don't even take that into consideration.
So, yeah, with the weather and court an economy, it's been an interesting week... or at least that's as I see it now.
Remember paypal is kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Economy in America
So, I was reading the news this morning. I know, will miracles never cease, but as I was reading the news, I saw that the economy in America is on the rise. The Dow Jones is on the rise, Corporate profits are on the rise. They even tell us that unemployment rates are down. All is well on the western front. Well if all is well on the western front, then why do I know so many people that are still unemployed. Why are there not a flood of jobs out there? Why are there such a flood of foreclosures. Why are people still struggling to make ends meet. Well I have a philosophy.
IF our leaders tell us that the economy is approving, then we feel better about them. You see, our economic feel good, makes us feel our leaders are doing a good job. But are they? Are we really doing good or is it just a smoke screen? They tell us that there are fewer people on unemployment than there were last year. Is that because people have found jobs, or because people have come to the end their unemployment and now have no money coming in?
I say we tell our leaders that we want clear and concise numbers. We want to know how many people are actually unemployed, and how many people got jobs. How many new companies are out there, and how much we financed for them to get started. How many people have lost their houses because they were not able to find meaningful employment?
Let's also talk about the health care part of this. Obamacare is now passed, and fairly soon we are told that we have to have health care, and that if our employers cannot or will not provide that healthcare, then we have to provide it for ourselves. Now let's think about this, we have hundreds of thousands of unemployed people, that may not even be able to provide the very basics of life, food, shelter, clothing for very much longer, and now, they have, not need, have to provide for their own healthcare. What kind of idiots do we have that think that this could be on the top of our to-do list. Yes, we need healthcare, but how the bloody hell do we put that above our food and housing?
Let's get the numbers straight, and lets provide for the basic necessities that make our lives livable, then we can say our economy is on the upswing.... or at least that's as I see it now.
paypal is kendal_emery@yahoo.com
IF our leaders tell us that the economy is approving, then we feel better about them. You see, our economic feel good, makes us feel our leaders are doing a good job. But are they? Are we really doing good or is it just a smoke screen? They tell us that there are fewer people on unemployment than there were last year. Is that because people have found jobs, or because people have come to the end their unemployment and now have no money coming in?
I say we tell our leaders that we want clear and concise numbers. We want to know how many people are actually unemployed, and how many people got jobs. How many new companies are out there, and how much we financed for them to get started. How many people have lost their houses because they were not able to find meaningful employment?
Let's also talk about the health care part of this. Obamacare is now passed, and fairly soon we are told that we have to have health care, and that if our employers cannot or will not provide that healthcare, then we have to provide it for ourselves. Now let's think about this, we have hundreds of thousands of unemployed people, that may not even be able to provide the very basics of life, food, shelter, clothing for very much longer, and now, they have, not need, have to provide for their own healthcare. What kind of idiots do we have that think that this could be on the top of our to-do list. Yes, we need healthcare, but how the bloody hell do we put that above our food and housing?
Let's get the numbers straight, and lets provide for the basic necessities that make our lives livable, then we can say our economy is on the upswing.... or at least that's as I see it now.
paypal is kendal_emery@yahoo.com
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Psychiatric Care in America
Hello Campers, it's once again time for us to take on that huge business in America called Psychiatric care. Now, I know what you are thinking, what could possibly be wrong with the shrinks. Well, this may not be what is wrong with them, but more, what we feel is wrong, and how we should be reacting.
So, I have noticed that a lot of times, when people are diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder, they are put on different medicines. Let's take example A, we'll call him Andy. Andy goes to a psychologist, and they diagnose him with Bi-Polar disorder. They put him on Abilify, which is an anti-psychotic medicine. He takes the dosage as ordered, and lo and behold, three weeks later he is not any better, but is showing every side effect that is in the book. So then he is taken off abilify, and put on Lithium. Lithium seems to do a partial job. It evens out his mood swings, but unfortunately, it evens them out at a low level. So, they add in lamotrogene. Lamotrogene pulls the level up to a more even level, so it seems to be a good combination. Things work out.
Now we move on to example B, we'll call him George. George also is diagnosed with bi-polar disorder. George is also put on abilify to start with, and lo and behold, three weeks later, he is much better. His mood swings have stabilized and he is on an even keel. So, what is the difference. No two people have the exact same brain chemistry. So while it seems that psychiatry is a duck shoot. That they just throw medicine at the patient in hopes that it works, well that is kind of what happens. But it is not because the doctors don't know any better. It's because no one knows any better.
And let's talk about the sessions where they ask you to talk. Do those really do any good? Well, while chemical in-balance has a lot to do with psychiatric care, there are also prior actions that play on our emotions, and our psyche. So, if in talking out what has happened in our past, we may be able to get past the medicines and get our lives back in order. And then sometimes, it takes both. Medicine to help stabilize, and talking to help us deal with our past trauma's. Or at least, that's as I see it now.
If you are enjoying these blogs.... send me a beer :)
kendal_emery@yahoo.com is the paypal address.
So, I have noticed that a lot of times, when people are diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder, they are put on different medicines. Let's take example A, we'll call him Andy. Andy goes to a psychologist, and they diagnose him with Bi-Polar disorder. They put him on Abilify, which is an anti-psychotic medicine. He takes the dosage as ordered, and lo and behold, three weeks later he is not any better, but is showing every side effect that is in the book. So then he is taken off abilify, and put on Lithium. Lithium seems to do a partial job. It evens out his mood swings, but unfortunately, it evens them out at a low level. So, they add in lamotrogene. Lamotrogene pulls the level up to a more even level, so it seems to be a good combination. Things work out.
Now we move on to example B, we'll call him George. George also is diagnosed with bi-polar disorder. George is also put on abilify to start with, and lo and behold, three weeks later, he is much better. His mood swings have stabilized and he is on an even keel. So, what is the difference. No two people have the exact same brain chemistry. So while it seems that psychiatry is a duck shoot. That they just throw medicine at the patient in hopes that it works, well that is kind of what happens. But it is not because the doctors don't know any better. It's because no one knows any better.
And let's talk about the sessions where they ask you to talk. Do those really do any good? Well, while chemical in-balance has a lot to do with psychiatric care, there are also prior actions that play on our emotions, and our psyche. So, if in talking out what has happened in our past, we may be able to get past the medicines and get our lives back in order. And then sometimes, it takes both. Medicine to help stabilize, and talking to help us deal with our past trauma's. Or at least, that's as I see it now.
If you are enjoying these blogs.... send me a beer :)
kendal_emery@yahoo.com is the paypal address.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Afraid of Cops
So, I was talking with my very good friend the other day, and we were talking about cops, and how they wield soooo much power these days, and he said something that just pretty much blew me away. It is a bad thing when our society has to be afraid of cops. The reason this blew me away, is that he was 100% right. In our society today, we are afraid of cops. Let me explain....
First of all, I have friends that like to open carry. One of them came to visit me the other day, and we went out to eat at subway. Now, I am not a big gun fan anyway, but I do believe in people's rights, so I didn't say anything about him carrying. Also he is going into the navy, so there is a little bit of military background there. Anyway, as I figured, Arvada PD showed up and very roughly escorted him out of the subway, and then discussed his right to carry. Now, the fear of cops that this article is about shows up as this. I would not open carry. I don't want the cops to show up and hassle me, even if it is my damn right to carry the damn gun. I don't want to deal with the cops if I absolutely don't have to. I believe this is a bad thing. I should not have to fear that the cops will show up, and ask me questions about why there is a sidearm on my waist, but I do.
My friend talked about the fact that he likes to go out walking at 3:00AM. He is pretty much a night owl anyway, so he is usually up at that time. He said he is constantly being stopped by the police, and being asked all sorts of questions, and instead of just saying, you know, it is my right to be out here, anytime of the day or night that I feel like walking, he gives them ID, and answers their questions. Again, he does this, because he knows, that if he asserts his rights, they will hassle him, and probably end up taking him down to jail, to at least bother him for a bit of his night. He is afraid that the cops will be bullies. That should not happen in our society, and yet it does every day.
I have said before in this little online forum, that there was a time in our society, when cops were respected. Go back to the days of the Andy Griffith show. Yes, I know it was just a TV show, but people did actually respect police officers back then, and police officers treated people with respect. I think that is what we lost. The police don't respect the citizens anymore, and as such, the citizens have lost their respect for the police. Let's take for example, when I had my little bout with viral meningitis. I was pretty mentally incapable of doing anything. I was driving down the road, making absolutely no sense on the telephone, and had an accident. Finally figuring out that there was something wrong, I tried to get to urgent care, so they could take care of me. The officer, came up behind, and threw me to the ground. He didn't try to ascertain whether there was anything wrong with me, he just wanted me in cuffs. Andy Griffith wouldn't have done that. Now I do understand that we live in a little different society all around, and that there are a lot of dangerous people out there, but it shouldn't have taken the man the 10 minutes it took him to get me to the ground, to figure out that I was having a mental break down, not some dangerous criminal. And then to charge me with resisting arrest and obstructing an officer.... Well let's just say, I don't have any respect for that officer, and that's the problem. Or at least, that's as I see it now....
btw, if you would like to make a contribution to me, send me an email at kahukilairu@gmail.com and I will gladly send you my paypal address.
First of all, I have friends that like to open carry. One of them came to visit me the other day, and we went out to eat at subway. Now, I am not a big gun fan anyway, but I do believe in people's rights, so I didn't say anything about him carrying. Also he is going into the navy, so there is a little bit of military background there. Anyway, as I figured, Arvada PD showed up and very roughly escorted him out of the subway, and then discussed his right to carry. Now, the fear of cops that this article is about shows up as this. I would not open carry. I don't want the cops to show up and hassle me, even if it is my damn right to carry the damn gun. I don't want to deal with the cops if I absolutely don't have to. I believe this is a bad thing. I should not have to fear that the cops will show up, and ask me questions about why there is a sidearm on my waist, but I do.
My friend talked about the fact that he likes to go out walking at 3:00AM. He is pretty much a night owl anyway, so he is usually up at that time. He said he is constantly being stopped by the police, and being asked all sorts of questions, and instead of just saying, you know, it is my right to be out here, anytime of the day or night that I feel like walking, he gives them ID, and answers their questions. Again, he does this, because he knows, that if he asserts his rights, they will hassle him, and probably end up taking him down to jail, to at least bother him for a bit of his night. He is afraid that the cops will be bullies. That should not happen in our society, and yet it does every day.
I have said before in this little online forum, that there was a time in our society, when cops were respected. Go back to the days of the Andy Griffith show. Yes, I know it was just a TV show, but people did actually respect police officers back then, and police officers treated people with respect. I think that is what we lost. The police don't respect the citizens anymore, and as such, the citizens have lost their respect for the police. Let's take for example, when I had my little bout with viral meningitis. I was pretty mentally incapable of doing anything. I was driving down the road, making absolutely no sense on the telephone, and had an accident. Finally figuring out that there was something wrong, I tried to get to urgent care, so they could take care of me. The officer, came up behind, and threw me to the ground. He didn't try to ascertain whether there was anything wrong with me, he just wanted me in cuffs. Andy Griffith wouldn't have done that. Now I do understand that we live in a little different society all around, and that there are a lot of dangerous people out there, but it shouldn't have taken the man the 10 minutes it took him to get me to the ground, to figure out that I was having a mental break down, not some dangerous criminal. And then to charge me with resisting arrest and obstructing an officer.... Well let's just say, I don't have any respect for that officer, and that's the problem. Or at least, that's as I see it now....
btw, if you would like to make a contribution to me, send me an email at kahukilairu@gmail.com and I will gladly send you my paypal address.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)