May 15, 2008
It’s not all About Politics
I’ve had two people in the last two days reference this blog with these particular comments: “When are you going to have some pictures of Cooper?” & “This is Jay’s blog, its mainly about politics.” So, Kim & Gordon, here’s a little update on the family & something other than politics.
Our businesses had the Small Business Expo yesterday and I think it was the best in 3 years (at least for our booth). Holly had an interesting strategy this year, and since she is the smartest person I know, we went with it. She had noticed a trend that businesses are not handing out as much freebies as in previous years so we decided to accelerate this trend and not give any novelties away this year. Plus, it really helped with the budget. Instead, we created a good number of displays for the practice & spa and handed out a ton of info. The result: I sent out 18 new patient packets this morning. Instead of having the “standing at the door”, bloodthirsty crowds come and enact their “Scorched Earth” policy towards the Expo’s Dollar Store treasures, we only had truly interested people come up and talk to us. I really must commend Holly on her amazing gamble. Hopefully that will carry over to next week when we go on our cruise (we’ll get to that…). But as a result, we might get as many new patients as we get in a month for one day’s work. We really tried to promote the pediatrics portion of our practice as well as their children’s health fair scheduled for May 29th from 5-7pm at our office (Shameless promotion continues….). It worked well and they had a lot of interest. Probably helped out by the free hand massages that the spa was handing out next door. Thats about enough about the expo, but if you’re in the Sanford area, check out WBFT TV-46 each night this week for footage from the event (as well as interviews with Angie Western from our Peds department & Holly for the spa!).
So, Cooper started visiting his new class this week. He’s already 3 months away from being 2 years old, but there has been a delay in getting him into the 18 month olds class (the logjam occurs when the 2 yr old class members don’t catch on the potty quick enough). So Monday & Tuesday he spent a couple of hours there, yesterday he had lunch with them, and today he is napping with them… or so THEY think. tomorrow is the big day, please add an extra prayer for Coop, he’s spending his first full day in his new class. And then he shows up in his new class… without his parents.
Yep, thats right, The Riley’s are going on VACAY! Holly & I are leaving Saturday for Charleston, see some the many Sanfordians living there, and then catch a boat to Bermuda. We’ll be gone for the week and Coop is staying with Papa & Cece. We have no doubt that will be an easy transition, but the changing classes might be a little difficult. So, if you see Coop around town, at church, or at teh office, tell him you love him. Most likely he’ll look at you and say, “I La La”. Very endearing.
On a sad note, last week I was asked to join our Shepherd program at church. Its a program where an officer of the church adopts members of our congregation (”sheep”) to stay in contact with them and take a special interest in them. Holly compares it to a year long “Secret Santa”… without the secret part, I guess. Well I haven’t gotten my list yet, but I found out this morning that one of sheep passed away this week. Mr. Dull had been sick for awhile and will be dearly missed. I wish I had better circumstances to call his wife and family to introduce myself, but I bet there is no better time to have extra company around. Please pray for the Dull family has they deal with their loss.
So, thats about all thats going on. We’ll have plenty of pictures & stories when we get back.
Also: While we are gone, please check out Tuesday night’s “Live @ 9″ on TV-46 with Dwayne-Wayne & Woody Seymore as our Children’s Health & Fun Fair will be highlighted the first half-hour. If you miss it, I’ll make plenty of DVD copies for spread around.
May 6, 2008
The Keys To The Castle
I was talking with my wife before the return started coming in tonight, and I mentioned to her that I will never understand why North Carolina always votes for the Republican nominee for President, but then votes a Democrat into the Governor’s Mansion. Now, an exception could very easily be made this year, but the rule usually sticks. I half-jokingly said, “I bet the voters of Lee County reject the sales tax increase, but on the same ballot re-elect the school board members that made it their platform to pass the sales tax increase.”
Well, I should have played the lottery tonight… (unfortunately, I pay my “stupid tax” in other ways during the fiscal year). Lee County voters overwhelmingly voted against even more taxation in this time of economic uncertainty, and also re-elected all 3 incumbents that filed for re-election. The only incumbent that was not re-elected was a late entry write-in candidate (and he probably would have been re-elected if his Chairman had talked him into it earlier).
So the question should be asked: “Why do we vote incumbents back into office, but reject their prime objective of the campaign?” Is this some sort of second chance? A shot over the bow? A chance for all three candidates to take a mulligan on the same hole?
Now, I admit, I hardly ever vote an incumbent back in office. Most times the reason is the opposition is just a worse choice. Some times though… its that the candidate was able to deliver on a majority of the goals he was elected to achieve. This time, however, I voted for an incumbent based on his ability to lead his board. He exhibited unrelenting leadership in guiding the board to their goal. While I disagree with him on this issue (the sales tax), I do agree with him on many other issues, so I would take him on my team any day.
What it comes down to is that primaries can split an organized party into many factions, sometimes just two (Exhibit A-current bloodbath heading for Denver). But, you have got to get back together with your “like-minded” brethren before November. Otherwise, you might as well just give the other guys the keys to the castle.
Addendum: I still do not condone voting a straight party ticket. Look at each individual candidate independently (especially judicial candidates). Try and avoid looking at endorsements. Bill Horner said in his blog today that he had one candidate that even asked him NOT to endorse him. Please look at the issues that concern you and your loved ones. And, always follow the golden rule: “Stay away from one-issue candidates”. Right, Bill Graham?
March 4, 2008
Bar Stool Economics
I’ve heard the following story told many different ways (dinner at a restaurant, etc.), but I thought I would share the latest incarnate with you, for those that have never had the eye-opening experience this story many give you.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers?
How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so now:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings)
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings)
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings)
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings)
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings)
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings)
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’
‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’
‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’
‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists, college professors, fellow workers is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction.
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
February 27, 2008
Saying Goodbye….
I saw this morning the news of William F. Buckley’s death and it didn’t seem real. His accomplishments are immeasurable. George Will once said, “Before there was Ronald Reagan there was Barry Goldwater, before there was Goldwater there was National Review, and before there was National Review there was William F. Buckley”.
His passing brings some issues to light that we deal with today. , National Review did not endorse a candidate for president in 1956, correctly concluding that Dwight Eisenhower was not a conservative, however great a military leader that he was. Nor would National Review endorse liberal Republican Richard Nixon. In 1964 NR was able to finally support a candidate for president,Barry Goldwater, though he had no chance of winning. But this candidacy did lay the groundwork for Reagan to propel the conservative movement into the White House. Buckley was quoted once referring to Reagan’s intelligence saying, “Of course, he will always tend to reach first for an anecdote. But then, so does the New Testament.”
He also showed that it was acceptable to vote for someone who wasn’t a Republican… even a Democrat. With liberal Republicans still elected afterReagan, Buckley used Hillary’s “kitchen sink?” idea before she even thought of it against liberal Republican Sen. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. Buckley started a PAC to support Lieberman, explaining, “We want to pass the word that it’s OK to vote for the other guy or stay at home.”
Some of my favorite WFB quotes….
“I would rather be governed by the first 400 names in the Boston phone book than by the 400 members of the faculty of Harvard University.”
“Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.”
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
“The purpose of an open mind is to close it, on particular subjects. If you never do — you’ve simply abdicated the responsibility to think.”
… and my favorite:
When asked if he had “referred to Jesse Jackson as an ignoramus,” Buckley said, “If I didn’t, I should have.”
RIP WFB
February 10, 2008
McCain?
Are we really this desperate?
Republicans are frustrated by the success of the anti-Bush coalition, they think they can swindle some independents this time around by putting on the ballot an open-borders, anti-tax cut, anti-free speech, global-warming hysteric, populist “Republican.”
In other words, a Democrat.
Let’s take a look at the issues one by one:
1) He labeled Samuel Alito as too “conservative”.
2) He created amnesty for 20 million illegal immigrants.
3) He limited citizens’ free speech with McCain-Feingold.
4) He opposes waterboarding terrorists and wants to shut down Gitmo.
5) He denounced the Swift Boat movement against John Kerry’s record.
6) He opposes ANWR and is a card-carrying member of the Church of Gore.
McCain uses the rallying call of all Republicans in saying he will appoint “strict constructionists.” This is SUPPOSED to end all discussion of the courts. But if he’s nominating strict constructionists, he will have to appoint judges who will commit to overturning his 1st place pig at the fair, McCain-Feingold.
As part of the “Gang of 14,” McCain opposed allowing the VP to break a tie on judicial nominations. Allowing such action (as dictated by the Constitution), McCain said, “would be a terrible precedent.” Yes, if members of Congress actually read the Constitution, they might realize McCain-Feingold is actually unconstitutional.
f Hillary is elected president, we’ll have a four-year disaster, with Republicans ferociously opposing her, followed by Republicans zooming back into power, as we did in 1980 and 1994, and 2000. (I also predict more Oval Office incidents with female interns.)
Of course, back in 2004, McCain was considering running on a presidential ticket with John Kerry. Realizing that this would not help his chances to run as a Republican in 2008, when he would be a mere 120 years old, McCain quickly withdrew his interest in being on Kerry’s ticket.
If Hillary is elected president, we’ll have a four-year train wreck, with Republicans ferociously opposing her, followed by Republicans zooming back into power, as we did in 1980 and 1994, and 2000. (Remember, we needed Carter to get Reagan.)
If McCain is elected president, we’ll have a four-year train wreck, with the Republicans in Congress co-opted by “our” president, followed by 30 years of Democratic rule.
You choose.
February 4, 2008
Dad found this while looking for something else….
…. probably his glasses
I was remembering that event and how much fun we had.
Chairman of the NCSU College Repubs, Hal Lusk, was next to me and you can see Rachel Collins (now, Suffern) on the edge. We had a great crew that year.
Now, as to why I am doing my best impression of Rodin’s Thinker…
On stage that evening there was:
Richard Vinroot, Patrick Ballentine, Bill Cobey, George Little, Fern Shubert, Dan Barrett, & one other fella.
His name was Timothy Cook.
Timothy Cook was a chemist & a Davie County Commissioner who very obviously was WAY out of his league. His answers really showed everyone present what the GOOBER in Gubernatorial Debate really stood for. Not much organization other than the 10-12 people he had statewide working for him with the “Badge-O-Matics” that he had provided to them free of charge.
So I was looking at this gentleman, and he seemed to leaning back in his chair (while on stage) and I was thinking to myself, “Just a little farther… a little farther…. that’s it.”
Thats when I got my picture taken & Timothy Cook fell on his butt.
He later dropped out of the race and decided instead to run for Lt. Governor unsuccessfully.
It shows not only that having a great candidate & having great organization is key… but making sure you listen to your mother and don’t lean back in your chair.
