PolarLava::Blog

I can't help but be disturbed by the television commercial I saw this morning by a local attorney.  It's not the first time I've seen it and surely it won't be the last.  But the basic premise of this commercial is to compel people who are in debt to declare bankruptcy.  Why?  Well, Congress is working to change the law to make it more difficult for you to declare bankrupcty.  Gasp!  So if you've been fiscally irresponsible you might want to act fast before you can be held accountable for your actions.  Or in more real world terms... If you've been stupid enough to dig a big hole using credit cards to live beyond your means, then you should be able to walk away from it and leave someone else (i.e. me and other responsible people) holding the bag.  This is just brilliant!  Welcome to America, where no one is responsible for their own actions.  I will agree, as pointed out in that last link, that the banks also shoulder a certain amount of responsibility.  Why are they giving credit to people who don't have the ability to pay their bills?  I think the answer is self evident...they don't want you to be able to pay for it.  Credit card debt is like crack in the banking industry.  Those high interest rates and low payoff rates guarantee them a steady flow of profits.  Just imagine what would happen to them if even 50% of those with outstanding balances paid them off.  The last thing they want is for you to be debt free.  But the bottomline is still the fact that if you used the credit, you're responsible for its repayment.  The government making it more difficult to declare bankruptcy isn't a disservice to those who have been irresponsible.  Quite the opposite.  It's an effort to save those of us who ARE responsible millions of dollars.  Because everytime someone declares bankruptcy, the banks don't just eat it as a loss, they simply pass it on in  the form of additional charges for the rest of us.  The only bankruptcy I see here, is the moral bankruptcy of those who are encouraging others that they don't have to be responsible for their actions.

eWeek has a pretty good article on the Deep Space Network entitled The 100-Million-Mile Network. This network is what is used to talk these two wonders as well as many other space probes.

Okay, maybe not quite infinity, but back to the moon and on to mars. At least that's what President Bush has proposed we do. And I have to say that I'm very much in favor of doing so. There's a lot to be learned for sure, but there would also be a lot of good technological spin-off that would come from the development program. Things that would benefit all of us. This will be a huge undertaking even if it's just to get back to the moon again. But the work required to get to Mars is nothing less than colossal. But an effort worth making.

And now for the sad economic reality. Even if the U.S. Congress were to find the extra $1 billion that President Bush is seeking, would they be willing to give it to NASA? I think the social "do gooders" would surely argue against it. Not that helping the less fortunate is a bad thing, but how much of that money would truely reach those in need? And then there simply would be demands for more without a doubt. And in all fairness, as there will be for the space program also. So my thought are to give it to the cause I find more appealing: space exploration. Maybe if we stopped marching around the world blowing apart and rebuilding countries we'd be able to help both causes. $87 billion for Iraq? How about $43.5 billion for social reforms and space exploration each? Likewise, we are surely spending billions of dollars on Homeland Defense and the War on Terror. Gee, you don't think any of that money is being misappropriated or simply wasted on something that's not going to do a damn bit of good, do you? Nah, me neither. Thus the bottom line is we are simply going in too many directions and spending too much money for this to likely become a reality. Pity.

Well, that's what I call it!  I found this image today while researching profanity filters for a webmail system at work.  I can't remember exactly what the page was about that I found this on or even how it related to what I was searching for at the time.  But it's being used as an avatar by someone who calls themselves Fjori on a site called That Forum.



Now surely some will be offended by such an image.  Me, well…I actually laughed when I saw it.  Is that disrespectful?  Sure is.  Is it blasphemous?  I'd say so.  But what you really have to ask yourself is "Is there not some truth here?"  I mean, at least here in the United States one has to admit that Christmas has become largely an orgy of commercialism.  Sure it's still about family and friends, but it's also a whole lot about "What'd ya get?"  For how many people is it all about the man on the cross?  Think about it…

I was sad to hear the news today that Cleveland Brown's great Otto Graham had died yesterday.

Graham played well before my time in 1946-1955, but I remember distinctly writing a book report on a book about his career when I was in about 4th or 5th grade. I don't remember much about that report, but I do remember I pick the book for two reasons. I was a big football fan, as I still am and flipping through the book I learned he was born in Waukegan, Illinois (December. 6, 1921 to be exact). And I remember thinking that was pretty neat because that was the small city near where I grew up, Gurnee, Illinois.

In that book I learned Otto was one of the greatest to every play the game. A man I knew little about until that time, I learned that somebody from a nowhere place like my backyard could achieve greatness.