A few weeks ago I went to the doctor for a check up. This was brought on by a sudden and disconcerting series of very severe headaches that ultimately ended up with me being diagnosed with a migraine.
Shortly after suffering these headaches, as I was removing one of my socks, I realized that the outer portion of my left foot was numb. The numbness radiated from my heel to my toes along the entire outer part of my left foot. This was a real concern for me since I am all to familiar with the effects of diabetes and the history of diabetes in my family. So I made an appointment to be seen for this condition. As part of that appointment, which ended up being a pinched nerve in my ankle, I was asked to take a blood test. And the results were astonishing.
As has been my history all of the results of the blood test were normal. With the exception of one, that is. That one exception was my blood sugar. My blood sugar (glucose, fasting) level this time was 142. It is supposed to be under 100. And that concerned me. So I decided that I needed to make a change.
I'm not one for making long, gradual changes that take forever and end up not making any difference. So I pretty much removed all raw sugars and sweets from my diet. I also began to become very cognizant of the amount of sugar in many of the foods I eat and have tried to stay away from those or eat them only in moderation and in small amounts. To that end, some of the things I have done are:
Stopped putting sugar in my coffee
Stopped drinking coke and pepsi (I still drink diet coke)
Stopped eating candies (unless they are sugar free)
Stopped eating pastries and other baked goodies
Started eating a lot more unsweetened whole grain cereals
Minimized consumption of pastas, breads and white rice
Increased my water intake dramatically
There are some other things that I am working on right now, too, as I try to learn the best ways to minimize my sugars. I am also limiting my caffeine and sodium intake as well because, as I found out in my most recent exam, my blood pressure is a little high, too. My doctor is not totally worried about it. He says that most of what I am going through could easily be controlled with proper eating and exercise (which is something else I have started doing a little more).
So for now the sweet life, for me, is on hold in favor of the unsweet life. I have seen the effects of diabetes on several of my family members in the past and I have to say, since I have control over it, I am going to exercise that control. I refuse to end up like some of my family members. And I refuse to give my kids the horrible experience of seeing me waste away to a disease that I not only can, but will, control.
Yesterday on my way to work I was unavoidably made tardy by the wonderful folks at BART. Apparently they had a hard time keeping their own schedule yesterday. This resulted in the train I take to Oakland not meeting up with the train I take from Oakland to get to Concord. The best part of it is though that we actually did meet our train. But were not able to keep up with it through the three transfer stations.
This is how it transpired... as we approached 12th street the operator began his message about transfers and the what not. Then he said "Pittsburg/Bay Point riders please stay on this train and transfer at MacArthur". Seemed reasonable enough at the time, but as we began to leave the station the transfer train showed up. So our train stopped and the operator broadcast "Um, I don't know what they are telling me." Then the transfer train, which usually waits a little while, closed its doors and left. So we did the same thing.
At 19th street, the second of the transfer stations on my trip, as we arrived, the transfer train was taking off. Still not the end of the world I thought, since there is always MacArthur. But...
When we got to MacArthur there was no transfer train. It had just left. And now I had to wait 15 minutes for the next train.
So BART, is there just the tiniest chance that somewhere in your grand grid of schedules and the what not that something went mildly wrong today? Just asking, seeing as you cost me a lot more than just 15 minutes.
In about an hour the California Supreme Court will render its ruling on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the state ballot measure that amended the California Constitution to clearly define marriage as being between a man and a woman. The history of this topic goes back a long way, but the voting history of this issue is still relatively young, having first appeared as Proposition 22 in the 2000 election. In that election the state of California voted almost 2-1 in favor of defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.
After several lawsuits and lengthy court battles the California Supreme Court, seven justices to be exact, ruled that the vote of the people wasn't sufficient and invalidated the vote stating the results of the measure were unconstitutional. Within a matter of months the exact same ballot measure was on the ballot again, this time as an amendment to the California constitution, in the form of Proposition 8. And again the state of California passed the measure.
No sooner had the state spoken on the matter of homosexual marriage for the second time than the opponents to Prop 8 has the legal filings ready. Literally the day after voting day law suits were being filed on the matter. Ultimately the issue was taken up again with the Supreme Court and today the results of the deliberations of the arguments for and against Proposition 8 will be made public. At stake are whether Proposition 8 is legal based on its status as an amendment AND whether all of the marriages performed during the few months when Prop 22 was reversed will still be recognized by the state of California as legal marriages.
At the end of day all I can muster up on this subject now is that regardless of the outcome I will still hold fast to my belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. I know that this line of thinking is not popular in today's world and that conservative political views being broadcast over liberal media channels like television, radio and the Internet generally leads to bashing, slamming and the attacking of liberals asking the question "how can you think that way?". And while I could easily ask that question of my liberal friends who believe homosexual marriage is perfectly acceptable, I won't.
They have their reasons for believing the way they do and I have mine. I don't hold their opinions or beliefs against them and I don't find it cause enough to call them names like "closed-minded", "intolerant" or "ignorant". No, in fact I value differences of opinion between mine and others. It stimulates conversation and opens the door to communication between people of differing beliefs.
I have stated more than once my opposition to homosexual marriage. That hasn't changed. I don't believe it is about equality or there would be a stronger push for marriage rights for children, inter-familial marriages and marriages among people already married. I don't believe sexual preference should be the basis for minority status any more than religious belief should so the case that denying the observance of homosexual marriage is discriminatory really doesn't make sense to me (though legally it does since California does see homosexuals as a minority). No, I think this has more to do with a group of people wanting something that someone told them they couldn't have and as a result that group of people have done all they can to get what they feel they deserve. More power to them. If I wanted something that someone said I couldn't have I would probably go crazy trying to get it anyway I could, too.
Perhaps one day when crazy Christians, Jews, Muslims and Scientologists fight for their status as a minority and start trying to get laws passed specifically for their minority group it will become clear what some people that oppose homosexual marriage feel. Perhaps not. But as I have said before, I will not hate you or condemn you for your belief. To the contrary, I welcome your opinion and hope that it can open a dialog between opposing sides, opposing view points and opposing political beliefs so that we as a people can be brought together, even in opposition, rather than being torn asunder because of our beliefs.
I took my kids to my sister's house to today to celebrate my nephew's birthday. As is usually the case, the kids have a tendency to run about the house playing and the adults mingle around the living room, the kitchen or the garage talking, drinking and otherwise being adults.
During the adult talks the subject of my cheapness and my waiting a few extra weeks between haircuts came up. Sure enough I discovered that I have a barber in my family. My cousin Nick, while not formally trained, has been cutting the cousins' hair for a while now and offered to cut my hair for me for free. I thought seriously about his offer since $11 for my haircut and $9 for my son's haircut is such a huge price to pay but was a tad hesitant after smelling the alcohol that was floating in his very large cup. I told him I would think about it and paid no more attention to it.
A little bit before I was ready to leave my brother-in-law and my cousin set up the barber shop for me without telling anyone. Soon afterward the taunting and teasing and peer pressure kicked in and it wasn't long before both my son and I went under the blade of my cousin's crafty hand. The end result for me? Have a look:
Man I wanted to barbecue today. I have been waiting all week to get my grill on and when the morning came I got all kinds of excited at the prospect of eating seared and seasoned beef cooked over an open fire. Apparently the weather had different plans.
The day started out gloomy and cold, but I have seen that before and was holding out hope that I could actually end up BBQing later in the day. But the stupid fog bank never lifted and I ended up spending the entire day wanting grilled meat and getting nothing at all resembling grilled meat. Crap.
And no, I can't grill tomorrow because I will be at a party all day for my nephew. So Monday better be my day for grilling because Memorial Day weekend just isn't the same without some fired up meat.
For a long while now the kids have been really leaning on me to get a dog. For the same amount of time I have loudly voiced my opposition to this idea. It is my opinion that before we bring another life into our family our entire family needs to learn how to be responsible enough to handle the things that we already have.
That means making sure to put stuff away when we are done using them, doing homework on time, going to sleep and waking up on time, treating others with respect and being obedient. And this is something that has, for the time they have wanted a dog, been a severe stumbling block for them. So getting a dog has remained pretty well out of reach for our family.
Until now. It seems that my wife has gotten the puppy bug pretty bad over the last month or so and has been pushing on the kids to get a grip on their responsibilities. And over the last month the notion of us getting a puppy has moved from being just a notion to being a full on possibility because mom is behind it now.
And me being the husband that I am, the awesome husband that I am, and wanting to give my wife everything she wants under the sun, have also taken a position in this quest to get a dog. So I am cranking up my efforts to bring awareness to the family what it is exactly that it will take for us to get a dog. Because I also want my kids to have what they want while at the same time giving them what they need. I think as a husband it is important to see the things that your wife wants and try to find a way to make it happen. And I think as a father that finding that place between giving your kids something to enjoy AND something to be responsible for is crucial to helping your kids develop.
So now it seems that we are working our tails off as a family to make sure we handle our responsibilities to prove that we can actually take on the added responsibility of a dog. I hope this pans out, for all our sakes. I know my family can do it. Maybe now with Sandi behind this we might see what my family can actually do when we really want something.
Just about anyone that knows me knows that I tend to lean toward a conservative/independent political point of view in most of my thinking. I have had a dissatisfaction with our government and government policies for a while, though more recently I have grown increasingly vocal about it because of the glaring opposition I have toward president Obama's political views.
However there are times that I see things that were implemented under previous administrations that incense me as much as, if not more than, the current administrations decisions. Yesterday I got an email from Campaign for Liberty, an organization that supports Ron Paul and his political philosophies. They are more American Independent oriented politically and I do not necessarily agree with everything they preach, but in the case of the events mentioned in this email I could only be left with disgust toward the Bush administration for the implementation of policies that have affected good old American citizens who have been identified as displaying "terrorist" tendencies.
Campaign for Liberty’s very own Steve Bierfeldt has become an unexpected Internet sensation -- and the latest target of over-reaching federal government agents.
You see, Steve was detained by Airport Police and TSA officials shortly after the Campaign for Liberty regional conference in St. Louis.
The officials rudely berated and harassed Steve for 30 minutes in a secluded room at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport. Fortunately, Steve was able to record nearly all of the interrogation with his cell phone.
Steve’s alleged “crime”? Carrying $4,700 in checks and cash from Campaign for Liberty, along with various other materials from our conference.
The local and Federal agents harassed Steve. They were belligerent, cursing and using insulting language. They threatened to turn Steve over to the DEA and the FBI, all the while refusing to inform him of his legal rights or explain how cash and checks threatened airplane or airport security.
Throughout the interrogation, Steve remained polite but resolute and declined to answer the invasive questions without an adequate explanation from these federal and local agents as to why they needed to be answered. Without telling Steve what law he was accused of breaking, they continued their harassment.
Although they grew increasingly frustrated that he remained committed to exercising his rights, intervention from another officer eventually led the police to reluctantly release Steve.
Last Wednesday, Steve appeared on Judge Napolitano’s Freedom Watch to discuss the flagrant violation of his rights and to promote the importance of each of us defending our civil liberties.
Here is the video clip. Listen to the recording that is played during this video and how well Steve handled the interrogation he was put through. The TSA had absolutely no right to treat him the way they did. And the thought that he was detained simply because he had a few thousand dollars in cash and checks on him makes me even angrier. Imagine if you had money on you while trying to board a plane and were treated like a terrorist because of it. What the crap?
I wonder what it is going to take to keep this crap from happening anymore. No American citizen should be treated the way Steve was just because they are carrying cash and checks, especially when there is absolutely no cause for it. There were no reports of theft locally and no reports of criminal activity in which the suspect resembled Steve (at least none mentioned in the report of the story). I am amazed that the TSA and airport police have this level of authority to carry out actions of this nature without being under the scrutiny of some type of oversight agency. This freaks me out.
But more than anything it makes me yearn for change. I hope president Obama has something on his list of things to change that covers this.
A little over a week ago a news story broke in which an eight year old girl had gone missing in Tracy, California. Sandra Cantu, the eight year old girl, was last seen leaving a friends house and walking back to her home in a trailer park in Tracy. She was not seen after that.
Within four hours the missing persons report was filed and the police began investigating. The media began to report it and the community rallied around her and became hopeful that she would be found. It was a touching story and one that served to bring awareness to all families that no matter where you live you need to teach your children how to defend themselves, who to trust and what to do in situations that could result in their harm, abduction or worst of all, their death.
Well yesterday the worst of all possible scenarios was broadcast all over the central valley and bay area. Sandra Cantu, the eight year old girl who had gone missing just 10 days ago, was found dead in a suitcase in an irrigation pond on a farm just two miles away from Sandra Cantu's home.
As the father of five kids, four of whom are daughters and one of whom is eight, I was rattled by the news. Entirely too many children die each year for the stupidest of reasons. It sickens me and angers me when I hear that any kid has been violated in any way. Even worse is hearing about kids whose lives have been snuffed out because of someone with a penchant for causing harm to a child. I still get confused by acts like these, cowardly, selfish acts for which there is no logical explanation.
As a parent I feel it is my responsibility to make sure my kids are safe as much as possible. Doing that sometimes requires shock and awe tactics. Like relating to my kids that at any time, anyone that seeks to do them harm could very well present themselves in a way that appeals to my kids. My wife and I train up our children as best we can. And sometimes the best course of action is to let them in to stories like that of Sandra Cantu.
If you have kids I hope you take the time tonight to tell them just how much you love them. Make it a point to discuss this case with them and the importance of not trusting anyone they don't know. And make sure you take some time to pray for the family of Sandra Cantu. I cannot even imagine what they must be going through right now
Monday always come faster than it should. It usually comes with a headache or some form of crankiness that can only be washed away with lots of coffee or nice words from a friend or coworker. Sometimes it comes cold and dreary in a way that makes you wish it wasn't there so you didn't have to experience the drab of that particular Monday. And sometimes it comes bright, shiny and warm in a way that makes you wish that you could have had that Monday two days earlier when you didn't have to go to work or to school or whatever.
Mine, today, came with no fanfare. In fact, it just came, almost as if Friday birthed it itself. What the crap? Where did my weekend go?
It might not look right or even sound right, the words "Obama administration fires GM CEO Rick Wagoner" but that is, in effect, what happened. And if you know anything about me you know that I have a resolved and absolute dissatisfaction with Barack Obama as a president.
So it goes without saying that I am shocked and upset by this move, announced over the weekend and discussed by Mr. Obama this morning at a press conference he held to bring forward news of the government's plans and actions toward the failing American automotive industry. The first question I have to ask is how can a government flex that much muscle that it can ouster a corporate officer of one of the largest companies in American history, a company they have no stake in, in such a short period of time when it took a court order and a subpoena to get the names of the recipients of the bonuses awarded to AIG executives, a company that the government owns 80% of?
Let me be clear about one thing: I am not saying that CEO Rick Wagoner should not have been fired. To the contrary, given his performance and lack of strength exhibited over his tenure at the helm of GM it makes sense that the company should seek to replace him. But that is the company's own prerogative, not that of the US government. Just because the government is lending GM (in total) about $20 billion does not mean that they can reach into the corporation and start shifting the organization around.
No, in fact I would have expected that in the case of banks and financial institutions that have been pissing away the hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money that was used to nationalize those banks. The government took ownership of the bulk of the companies and should, in effect, have ownership rights to that company, including making organization decisions. Why we didn't exercise those ownership rights still blows me away as I watch the financial sector continue to retain people that brought our country to its knees by paying them the same amounts of money, if not more, to do the same thing. Where are the bank CEOs' heads? Where are the calls for resignations of Mr. Liddy from AIG? Where is the government muscle in that industry?
Instead GM, who does need the money - there is no doubt about that, is told their plan for looking forward and righting their ship was not sufficient in the eyes of the government and that, in order for them to be in a place where the government will trust them with more, must bounce their CEO. Chrysler was not given that same decision? Why not?
Now GM has another 60 days to revise their plan so that they can borrow more money from the government. And Chrysler has 30 days to get their merger/partnership deal with Fiat put together in a way that is adequate to the government so that the government can give them another $6 billion. Oh, and if the deal with Fiat falls through then Chrysler will receive no more money from the government. But that's fine because Mr. Obama has a plan for that.
See, if it doesn't work out for Chrysler then Mr. Obama has suggested that using American bankruptcy laws might be a potential solution for Chrysler as a means to release their liability for older, heavier debt that they can't seem to get themselves out from under as a corporation. Um, Mr. President? If bankruptcy were an option for them why the hell didn't we let them file two months ago instead of giving them money just so they could ask for more two months later?
It would seem the only smart company of the big 3 was Ford who elected not to take any government bailout funds. So while the government is firing CEOs and forcing partnerships Ford can sit back and look like the only stable company of the three. Way to go Ford. I have not really ever liked anything about you, but this little gesture of yours... top class.
Too bad the weakening auto industry will have a catastrophic domino effect on the entire economy if it does fail. Vendors and suppliers that supply GM and Chrysler more than likely supply other automotive manufacturers. And since the manufacturers have forced suppliers to scant profit margins, at best, if a supplier loses a contract like GM they could very well go out of business. Meaning Toyota, Honda, Mitsubishi and many other manufacturers not in the news for failure will be directly affected by GM and Chrysler's inability to manage their business.
When will the auto industry learn from Toyota? When will they take what Toyota has done seriously and implement the principles of kaizen, hoshin kanri and 5S? That is perhaps for a different discussion.
For now I am still a little flabbergasted by the way our new presidential administration has failed to act like business owners for businesses we own while acting like a corporate boards toward companies we have no ownership interest in at all. If they fired Wagoner, they could have very easily fired all the idiots at all the banks that have brought our economy into the toilet and gotten rid of their bad business decisions before giving them billions of dollars to make more bad decisions with.
