Integrity

So, I know it's been a while since I blogged, thank you to real-life for making things go upside-down and backwards...
For your reading pleasure, I have transcribed another essay that I wrote as a part of my Army career.

Integrity
Integrity is a word that one hears a great deal about in the Army. In the seven pages that follow, I will attempt to explain not only what integrity is, but also why it is important that members of the Army display this characteristic. Case studies, real and illustrative, will be provided as space allows.
First of all, one must define the value of integrity. The NCO Guide defines integrity as: “your personal set of values. It is the thread that weaves throughout the fabric of the professional Army ethic. Integrity means honesty, uprightness, the avoidance of deception, and steadfast adherence to standards of behavior.” It goes on to explain that, in essence, integrity is doing what is right, even if no-one is looking. The author always finds cliché suspect, and in this case, doubly so. To imply that integrity is possible when superiors are present is so much drivel. Doing the right thing with one’s superiors watching isn’t integrity. It is simply covering one’s own career. The author respectfully submits that integrity should be defined more accurately as “doing what is right because no-one is looking”. This definition implies not only the knowledge that one is trusted, but that one should be actively seeking to earn the trust accorded them. Especially in the Army aviation field, too many pieces are moving, tasks being accomplished, and demands made on maintainers, for every task on every aircraft be monitored by a supervisor at all times. Integrity, then, would mandate that the maintainer, with the knowledge that they are essentially on their own, seek to do every task to the best of their knowledge and ability, for the sole reason that someone, sooner or later, will be relying on their competence and integrity. This is true in aviation, ground maintenance, and support elements.
To illustrate, two illustrations are offered. First, one from an aviation perspective. A maintainer is tasked to replace a link in the ammunition handling system. Within this system, there are certain tolerances. The maintainer in question faces a decision at this point: Do the right thing, and replace the bent or broken carrier with a new carrier, or to simply delete that carrier in the chain by connecting the link before and after the broken one. With the knowledge that the deletion of the bent carrier will most likely not affect the operation of the system, and knowing that a supervisor would have to look quite closely to discover the omission, it is on the soldier to do the ‘right thing’ and replace the carrier, one for one.
But, a look at the possible consequences of the action provides a different outlook. The omission of the carrier could cause the system to have excessive tension. In the best case under these circumstances, this situation would lead to a system that would display error messages frequently, be hard to rotate, and could well cause failsafes within the system to shut it down prematurely. Again, ‘best case’, this could cause a failure during a support mission, when troops in contact would be relying on that fire support. Worst case, on the other hand, presents a very grim picture indeed. Assume that the system continues to work ‘normally’ while short a carrier. This leads to increased wear on parts, including the carriers, carrier guides, cannon, and other parts. Worst case, when the system is actioned in combat, one of the aforementioned parts fails catastrophically, possibly causing not only the failure of the system, but a release of the tension in the chain. This release of tension could conceivably cause a fuel leak, fuel tank rupture, loss of flight control, or even the immediate wounding of the flight crew. All because one maintainer didn’t want to change a carrier. Whether or not the incident could, or would, be traced back to that maintainer, is irrelevant. The point is that the maintainer needs to be aware of the possible consequences of their actions, always.
Second, an example from the support group. A unit is in the field, whether in combat or in garrison is irrelevant. The unit goes out on maneuvers, and the foodservice section is tasked to set up and run a Mobile Kitchen Tent, or MKT. One of the foodservice specialists omits one of the locking pins while setting up the MKT, on the assumption that ‘it’s only one, and it’s not in a critical location anyway’. With a battalion-sized unit in the field, upwards of 400 soldiers will be using that MKT, three times daily. Also, a crew of eight to ten foodservice specialists will be back and forth over that surface for ten to twelve hours in the course of a day. When Army engineers designed that piece of equipment, they indicated that every part of it was important. They designed the MKT so that it would be able to accommodate the above unit size with ease, but only if properly set up. Best case in this situation would see a premature fatigue and failure of the segments around the pin. Worst case, once again, would be a catastrophic failure of the Kitchen Tent, with the best result a lot of hungry troops, and the worst several injured. Once again, this means that it is critical on the part of the individual to have the integrity, the will to do right, not because they ‘could get in trouble’, but because nothing in the Army is taken for granted. The right way is the right way because it keeps soldiers from getting needlessly injured or killed.
Integrity is one of the seven Core Army Values. These are things that sound much like lofty ideals that most soldiers pay little attention to in daily life. Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage. These are not things that the average soldier will wake up in the morning and say to themselves ‘I want to be all these things today’. They should be, but especially in garrison, most soldiers wake up and say ‘I hope I get off on time so I can go back to doing what I want to do’. What most soldiers don’t realize is that, while the Army Values relate to the major decisions in their lives, most if not all major decisions are made up of small ones, things that they choose every day. Integrity is one of those guiding principles that one either has, of one doesn’t. If one doesn’t, then it cannot be required, no matter what the threat is. The soldier will continue to take their punishments, whether it be loss of privileges, time, money, rank, or whatever punishment is deemed appropriate by their superiors. Conversely, no amount of punishment, tedium, or abuse should be able to shake a soldier’s basic integrity. The soldier must desire, must strive for this value in their daily life.
Having explored both the consequences for lack of integrity, as well as the basic definition of integrity, it is necessary to also discuss what all of the above means to the average soldier, as well as NCOs. Integrity is something that must be striven for at all times, but it is something that is elusive as far as application. Soldiers fail in this value all the time, but unless something comes of it, then they will continue to do what they believe they can get away with. This applies to NCOs as well. If an NCO believes that they can use their rank and privilege to get away with something, and they are not called on it, they will continue to do so.
It is incumbent upon both NCOs and soldiers to not only assess their own actions, but also to bring up to their peers and subordinates observed failings in integrity. If a soldier observes a fellow soldier doing just what is necessary to ‘get by’, rather than doing the right thing, the soldier doing the observing is just as at fault for the lapse in judgment as the soldier lacking in integrity. Integrity is not just about doing the right thing, but standing up for the right thing as well. Sometimes this accountability of soldiers to their peers and chain of command is difficult, as when a soldier gets chastised for something that an NCO does with impunity, sometimes by the very NCO that the soldier is modeling themselves after. In this instance, it is on the soldier to, in a very tactful manner, remind the NCO that the soldier is just following an example. It is therefore the responsibility of all NCOs and soldiers to continually improve themselves, and their understanding of the Army values, both through formal classes like Common Task Training and NCODPs, as well as constant and thorough self-examination of their actions and motives.
If, for instance, an NCO and a soldier are working on a task, and the NCO takes a short-cut that is a ‘gray area’, this encourages the soldier to take the same short-cut, and risks treading outside that gray area into something that is wrong. If that NCO then punishes the soldier for doing the wrong thing, both the soldier and the NCO are failing in integrity. The soldier fails themselves and their NCO by neither asking their NCO for clarification, nor completing the task in the approved manner. The NCO fails by first setting a bad example in job performance, as well as not taking responsibility for their informal teaching of the wrong way to do things. This example shows quite clearly how small decisions make up larger ones. The NCO decided to do something borderline, especially in the presence of a subordinate. The subordinate decided not to question the NCO on their methods. The soldier then decided to use this borderline method without understanding either the pitfalls or possible consequences of such a method. And finally, the NCO chose to ignore their own shortcomings in teaching the soldier, and chastised the soldier for something that the NCO did. At any point in the previous decision tree, a change in decision would have changed the outcome.
The previous is not meant to imply that all NCOs do the wrong thing, nor that soldiers should question every move that an NCO makes. It is also not meant to say that the manual always has the best way to perform a task. What the NCO did is not necessarily wrong, on the face of the matter. They performed a task to the best of their ability. Where they erred was when they did not explain the risks of using that method to the soldier who was working with them. Some tasks in any manual can be improved upon. But changes in job performance should always be measured against the effort required to do the job ‘by the book’. The manual, no matter how time-consuming, should always have a safe and effective method to accomplish a task. It is dependant on the experience of the maintainer to say whether a short-cut risks causing more harm than good.
Everything in the Army is based on integrity, when it comes right down to it. Soldiers and NCOs rely on their chain of command to do the right thing when it comes to not only providing technical expertise, but to do the right thing when it comes to merit and discipline of soldiers. It is the responsibility of the senior leadership to see that their soldiers are properly trained and equipped to do the jobs asked of them, whether it is changing a tire on a vehicle, cooking a meal, or repairing a battle-damaged aircraft. It is also the responsibility of the senior leadership to see that soldiers are properly cared for, be it legal matters, finances, awards, or disciplinary action. The soldiers and junior NCOs are relying on those in senior leadership positions to do the right thing, whether it would be popular or not. No matter how much junior enlisted disagree with a fellow soldier being considered for an award, or early promotion, or even for disciplinary action, these decisions are dependant solely on the leadership’s fair, unbiased judgment of the merit of the soldier or NCO under consideration.
Conversely, it is incumbent upon the enlisted and junior NCOs to make the senior leadership aware of concerns, issues, and merit of their fellow soldiers. If a platoon leader is unaware that a soldier has an issue, then that platoon leader can do nothing to address that issue. In this case, it is on both the platoon leader to make themselves aware of what is occurring in their platoon, as well as the NCOs to ‘up-channel’ their issues and concerns for consideration. Unless issues are broached, they cannot be resolved. Any soldier that hides an issue from their leadership is failing in integrity, and has no recourse if the concern causes other issues that could have been avoided had their initial problem been resolved in a timely manner. While NCOs and leaders must do their best not to set soldiers up for failure, it is not possible for NCOs to be everywhere at once, so it is on the junior soldiers to make their concerns known before they become insurmountable.
Integrity is one of the foundations upon which this Army is built. It is doing the right thing, because no-one is watching, and always, the lowest level is the soldier. NCOs and leaders share the burden of a ‘do-right’ atmosphere, not only through checking on their soldiers, but by setting a ‘do as I do’ example. NCOs were enlisted once, and they are only human, but their goal needs to be a good example for soldiers.

After a long absence...

... here I am again. Things have been kind of crazy in my personal life lately, including a move of my home and family, as well as some minor brushes with the local bureaucracy. We're still getting settled in the new place, so updates will continue to be spotty for a bit longer, at least until I can get a stable Internet connection, and get some kind of rhythm down in my life.

That's all on the negative side of the ledger. On the positive side, I've set up some interesting partnerships, some of which will be appearing on these pages in the near future. I've been in contact with an amazing artist (currently unsigned), who has agreed to allow me to post some of his work here on the blog, so stay tuned for that. I've also been in touch with some military folks, and they've put together some pretty impressive footage from overseas, which I'll be featuring in a post in the near future.

For now though, I thought that I'd share some of my writings from a past life. This particular piece was written as a 'disciplinary measure', but what I said was as true then as it is now. Hope you enjoy!

15 December 2004
Respect
Respect is a word that is heard often in the United States Army, but the concept seems to have gotten a little vague over the years and countless repetitions. It is this concept that I will attempt to bring back into focus in this report. Specifically, I will show how respect relates up and down the chain of command.
Let us start at the beginning. The definition of respect boils down to a very simple concept, but the words are not so simple. Respect is, in essence, the actions taken by a person or group of people that prevents offense from being taken by another person or group of people. While that is not the traditional definition, the definition most accurately describes the concept. To illustrate, a man (or woman) can give ‘respect’ to his (or her) superior, even though he (or she) hates that superior. The ‘respect’ concept comes in because the subordinate wishes to retain their job, and so will not openly offend the superior. This is not to say that all respect given is given this way, quite the contrary. In most cases, respect is given as a sign of deference and trust. So, in the situation discussed earlier, if the subordinate trusts their superior, ‘respect’ can be given to prevent offense being taken so that a positive relationship can be maintained. While the situations may appear similar from the outside, it can in fact be quite different.
It is in this way that the concept of respect has been distorted. When this very simple concept is divorced from a few other concepts, then it loses the meaning that it started with. In today’s American society, respect has really lost meaning. Instead, it is a buzzword that simply means that certain people, either self-designated or designated by society, need to be appeased, or things will go hard for the rest. Respect, throughout history, was not a threat, nor an abasing of oneself, but a way of life. In the feudal culture of China and Japan, men would rather die, literally commit suicide, rather than commit an act of disrespect. This applied not only to the ruling family, but also to those who were their neighbors, friends, family, and coworkers. To these people groups, respect was a code of conduct; a way of interacting that encompassed everyone. It was a concept that everyone understood, and everyone lived by.
Obviously, this concept has never taken hold as deeply in any Western culture as it did in those peoples in the East. The same theory should still apply, though. Summed up in a few words, it means that respect is a two-way street. If one expects respect, one should give it, and if one gives respect, it is not an unreasonable expectation to receive respect in return. It is in this respect that the American culture has fallen away. People expect to be respected, without conversely giving respect, often to the very people that they expect respect from. Obviously, in some cases, respect must be given based on seniority (for instance, a junior enlisted giving a sergeant respect, even though they’re not sure quite why), but that respect, once given, should be returned, even if society doesn’t demand that it be returned.
Now, having said that, let’s look at our specific case. In a given chain of command, there are several elements. The first, and lowest (always) are the junior enlisted soldiers. They seem to be expected to give the majority of the respect in a chain of command, because there are so many people above them, but they receive the least respect. The lower enlisted, according to the society in which they live, are the grunts, people who have no real purpose, nor even existence outside of the task or mission that they have been given. The society states that these people, the workforce of the people-group, are ‘volunteers’, and so have asked for the position they are in, if for no other reason than that they hope to progress to the next stage.
Second on the ladder are those that we call ‘Noncommissioned Officers’. Specifically, we will divide them up, for the sake of argument, into ‘lower NCOs’ and ‘senior NCOs’. We’ll call lower NCOs from Corporal (an NCO in name only) to Staff Sergeant. This group is a bit of an anachronism in a ‘ladder’ scenario, because, while they have only one group under them, they demand the most respect of any enlisted group. This, I feel, is because they interact on a daily basis with the most junior of soldiers, most of whom either don’t know any better, or are afraid of these NCOs. The lower NCOs are the most likely to have a problem with any apparent slight to their dignity, or ‘disrespect’. Mostly, it seems to be caused by the fact that this group has just ‘graduated’ from the junior enlisted grades, and is eager to begin ‘giving back’ the lack of respect that they received from those lower NCOs that were above them. The soldier culture demands nothing from this group towards those below them, and expects that not only the enlisted soldiers, but even the officer corps must respect them based on their accomplishments, whether real or imagined. Thus, an officer might come to a lower NCO seeking that NCO’s technical expertise, when in fact that NCO might have no idea what is being asked, nor what the answer might be.
Now, lower NCOs are expected to give respect to those above them, but those above this group are not only less likely to take offense, they are more likely to greet this group as compatriots, since they have ‘proven themselves’, or ‘paid their dues’. In many ways, this society is run like a high-school, or college environment, where the freshmen are hazed until they become sophomores or upperclassmen, and then are greeted as equals, even though they may not be.
Third on this ‘ladder of success’ is the senior NCOs. I will class this as senior Staff Sergeants, Sergeants First Class, Master Sergeants, and First Sergeants. You might find this an odd delineation, but it really does make sense. Sergeants Major (the next group) are pretty much a law unto themselves, and are therefore a different breed entirely. So on with the ‘senior NCO’ step. Senior NCOs will usually have come to the conclusion, through experience or trial and error, that it is worthwhile to respect the junior enlisted soldiers on account of the fact that it is the junior enlisted that bear the brunt of the duty in a unit, and the senior NCOs have come to respect that. They are entitled, by the rules of the society to respect from the two junior-most rungs, as well as from junior officers (to be discussed later). The senior NCO group usually has dealt with all of the unpleasantries that the soldier society has to offer, and understands how unpleasant these things can be. In trying to reconnect with the junior enlisted, to keep a unit running smoothly, they will tolerate, to a small degree, breeches of etiquette from the juniormost soldiers. This would equate, in our school comparison, to seniors that take pity on the freshmen, for the sake of peace in the school. Thus, respect is a more laid-back concept for this group than it is for those struggling to prove that they deserve respect.
Lastly on the enlisted side is the Sergeants Major. This group includes both Sergeants Major and Command Sergeants Major, in that in both cases, there is a phenomenally low saturation level, namely one per unit of action. While the designation is delineated that a Command Sergeant Major is senior to a Sergeant Major, there will always be only one in a given unit. Sergeants Major are a tricky group to deal with, because they perform a very specific, and very important role. Their role as the senior NCO in a unit is to be the enforcer of regulations, both the general societal rules, as well as unit-specific rules. Because of this, the society that they run makes them almost mystical figures. The Sergeant Major is someone that is due respect from almost everyone in a given unit, and in fact, a Sergeant Major can make rulings on not only their own unit, but the units of others, if such is warranted. In such as this group is in charge of enforcing rules, they brook no departure from those rules. This is important so that those junior enlisted soldiers, as well as the lower NCOs, do not stray into an arena that they are not prepared to deal with.
Sandwiched between the enlisted soldiers and the officer corps is a group that often appears to exist outside the ‘natural order’. This group is known as Warrant Officers, and I will group them all together, for the sake of simplicity. The reason I can do this is because, from the lowest WOJG to the most senior CW5, every Warrant Officer is a professional first, and an officer second. There is, like in every other facet of this society, a demarcation of rank, in this case to provide a structure based on true seniority, as 95+% of warrant officers are promoted on their first look, the first time that they are eligible for promotion. This group is due respect in several different ways, and the Army society has done things to make that very clear to everyone involved by calling them Officers. Warrant Officers are professionals, as has been stated before, and so are subject matter experts in their chosen field. A senior Warrant Aviator can be reasonably expected to know nearly everything about the aircraft that they pilot, down to the make and model of components that they might be flying with on a given airframe, given only the aircraft’s tail number designation. It is for this technical aptitude that the Army society has elevated this group to ‘officer’ designation, enabling the Warrant Officer Corps to hold positions that were previously available only to commissioned officers. The Warrant Officer creates a bridge of sorts between the enlisted ranks and the commissioned officer corps. Thusly, they are to be respected throughout a unit. Conversely, it is a Warrant Officer’s job to maintain proficiency in their craft, and they are instructed that there is no reason to discount a source of information simply because of rank. In this way, a Warrant will respect someone who works with a system everyday for the simple fact that the maintainer does nothing else other than deal with a specific area all the time, whereas the Warrant must know not only the maintenance side, but also the operations side of a system.
Next, there are junior Commissioned Officers, which I will designate as Second Lieutenant and First Lieutenant. These ranks are the commissioned equivalent of the junior enlisted personnel on the other ‘side of the house’, and as such receive very little respect from above. As they are, in fact, commissioned, they are due (by the rules of the society) respect from all of the enlisted ranks, but often the senior enlisted soldiers will correct a junior officer with impunity, from the point of view that no amount of schooling or testing is a match for real-world experience. Even (and some would say especially) for graduates of the Army’s Academy at West Point (USMA), where the focus is on tactical and strategic proficiency, it is also made clear to students that experience is not to be scorned on any level. So if a junior officer finds a particularly proficient person, be they junior enlisted or senior NCO, they will respect the knowledge there.
Moving on, there are the mid-level Commissioned Officer Corps, which I will designate as Captain to newly promoted Lieutenant Colonel. In this group, respect is a very large deal, mostly because this group of officers is to be put in direct command of a unit of soldiers, sometimes in combat. The reasoning is that a unit does not respect their commander, they will not obey under fire, thus causing a situation in which people die that would not have to if they had followed orders. This is incumbent on not only the soldiers on the bottom though; it is also a responsibility of the officer in command to cultivate that positive relationship with their soldiers. So, in all actuality, this group finds that they need to relate to all ranks, both to their superiors, and their subordinates. Thus they create a conduit from the higher command to the junior soldiers that will act as buffer in both directions, keeping the enlisted from feeling the full effect of a commander’s anger, and keeping the commander from being bothered by trivialities. For this, the mid-level officers are to respected, both by edict of the culture, and by all common sense.
The last group that I am going to address is the Unit Command level, which is usually a senior Lieutenant Colonel, or a full Colonel. Like the Sergeant Major on the enlisted side, the Unit Commander has that uniqueness in the unit, as they are the only one in a given unit. The unit commander, according to this society, is the one responsible for making the decisions, and handing out the rules. According to the Army, the unit commander has a role somewhat akin to God, in that there is no other person within that unit that can override that unit commander. Respect for the unit commander is taken as a right, but that does not stop the commander from trying to earn the respect of their troops by keeping them in mind. Especially at this level, the rules of the society do not dictate that a commander must be liked by their troops, but many commanders take it as a mark of their prowess that not only do they accomplish their given mission, they do so with a high level of unit morale. There is a term for this kind of unit integrity, it is called espirit de corps, and it is taken as an indicator of the amount of respect at all levels.
There are higher levels of command, obviously, but they do not really pertain to this essay, as they do not occur on a daily basis. Needless to say, respect to those higher levels of command is another one of the automatic reflexes that is required by the society in question. The levels described herein will be more than adequate to discuss the next part of this essay, which is to application of these definitions to everyday life within this society.
The import of all these levels and chains and lines of respect is of great value to soldiers at every level, and it goes beyond the buzzword ‘respect’ that is chanted at the lower enlisted day in and day out. Like everything that is imparted by rote, it loses meaning over time. It becomes reflex, but especially in this case, a reflex action is worse than nothing at all. The interconnecting web of respect and dignity should provide a reference point, telling everyone who can see where, exactly, a particular person stands. This is the everyday application of respect for an NCO, at least in theory. This is the reason that NCOs make such a huge deal about respect, especially to the lower enlisted. That’s the way it would be in a perfect world, anyway.
While my views on this issue are skewed a bit, I am not so blind that I do not know what is expected of me, especially in light of the last few days. So, I will expound for a bit on the merits of this ‘respect system’ to provide a personal referent in this society. The purpose of this respect system is so that if someone walks in, it is immediately apparent where said person should be able to go for assistance, insight, or explanation, depending on said visitor’s needs. In a perfect world, a querent would be able to walk into, say, the Armament shop, and be able to explain a situation no more than twice before getting an answer. This is how it would work: the querent (let’s say that they’re a Warrant Officer with a maintenance issue) walks in and explains their situation to the first person that they see. This person, since they have respect for the Warrant Officer in question, as well as their NCO, will either answer the question, or direct the querent to the next level of this ‘respect ladder’ that should be able to answer the question. Now, obviously, this system breaks down in several ways, but it is a good illustration. Understanding that a subject matter expert is not always available, and understanding that certain questions require a third opinion, there remains the crux of this system. The crucial element is that the junior enlisted soldier has enough respect for everyone involved that they will recommend someone that should be able to solve the issue.
In another instance, say that there is a new soldier just arriving at a unit. While the unit, and the shop that they are going to, don’t know this new soldier, they should have the respect both for themselves and their shop to direct the soldier to the proper places. The NCO or officer that the new soldier is sent to is also indicative of a goodly amount of respect toward that NCO or officer, because it shows that the residents of the shop know that the superior in question can and will take care of the needs of the new soldier. This is another indicator of unit morale, in that if a soldier is not directed anywhere in particular, the unit’s soldiers have no respect for either the unit’s ability to meet needs, or that they don’t have respect enough for themselves to learn the answers, so that they might be able to better direct a new soldier in the things that they would have to do. I feel that a thorough working knowledge of a unit, even outside of one’s own job tasking, shows that you have a respect for the work being done around you, even if you can’t participate or assist. If you can point someone at the right answer, even if you don’t have the answer, you are showing respect for the person that you’re pointing, and the person that you’re pointing at.
In a third example, let’s say that an NCO is totally out of their depth on something, some item of paperwork that they have never come up against before. If they know who they need to see, or if they know that a resource is available in the form of a platoon leader or platoon sergeant, or whomever, they are respected enough to have been given that information, and they respect the resource enough to approach the superior in an appropriate manner.
So, now that the uses of the respect system have been discussed, let us look at what happens when the respect system breaks down. If, for instance, an NCO, intentionally or unintentionally, demonstrates a lack of respect for the abilities of a junior enlisted soldier, even though the soldier society does not mandate that an NCO acknowledge said abilities, the NCO will still lose the resource that the junior enlisted soldier may have provided, whether it have been on technical knowledge, or common sense solutions in a bewildering problem. If situations like that continue to occur, then the NCO has not only disrespected the soldier, but they have disrespected their coworkers, because that resource will be gradually denied the entire shop, as the soldier feels more and more like they are not being heard. This would manifest in the form of a poor attitude on the part of the soldier, as well as alienation of the soldier in question as word got around about the fact that the soldier was being ignored. This would create a downward spiral where the soldier would shut themselves off in greater and greater degrees, then the NCO would be more and more inclined to ignore the soldier, and the degree of alienation from the peer-group would increase. Eventually this pattern could result in violence, as the soldier would eventually reach their breaking point.
Conversely, if a soldier demonstrates a lack of respect for an NCO, either intentionally or unintentionally, then the NCO could easily take offense (as per the definition), and make life for the junior enlisted soldier quite unpleasant. Now, whether the lack of respect would be intentional or not, that would be unimportant, due to the concept that it is the impact, rather than the intent, that creates the most impression. This situation could also cause an unacceptable outcome, alienating the soldier in question, and starting the cycle described above.
Respect, once lost, is very hard to earn back. Especially if the person that a person is attempting to earn respect from has cultivated a level of apathy toward that someone, it becomes very difficult indeed to re-earn respect, and an order of magnitude more difficult to get issues addressed in the interim. There is no sure way to garner respect from a given person, as each person’s attitudes dictate the requirements for earning respect. The most difficult thing to do in most cases is to ask what is required to earn the renewed respect of especially a superior. And conversely, it is quite difficult for a superior who has lost the trust and respect of their subordinates to regain that respect.
Respect and dignity are two sides of the same coin, and both have to be considered in any interaction between to people, or people groups. When the dignity of a person or people group is considered, then that person or people group is truly respected. In the case of the Army society, personal dignity is something that sometimes must be set aside for the accomplishment of a mission, but it should always be in the minds of the chain of command, both from the top down, and the bottom up. Subject a subordinate to enough affronts to their dignity, either real or imagined, and they will begin to lose respect for the chain of command.
In the same way, if a subordinate creates enough embarrassing or undignified situations for their chain of command, then the subordinate will lose whatever respect that they had earned from that chain of command. Often this is a hard series of events to reverse, as neither side feels that they can do anything about it. The subordinate may try harder, but if the tasks become more and more trivial and demeaning, then there will come a point where that subordinate just gives up and either cannot or will not try any more. The chain of command will look at the situation and see that the subordinate is not attempting to excel, or ‘has a poor attitude’, and will put the subordinate in increasingly trivial and demeaning situations. The solution may not be that one side or the other has to give, but maybe that a kind of truce should be reached, allowing the soldier to regain some kind of standing on a probationary basis, allowing for a kind of clean slate. This would require respect on each side for the other. If some kind of agreement can not be reached then the level of performance from this subordinate will continue to deteriorate to the point where they will become either totally useless to the mission, or will become disgruntled and may start acting out against people or groups. This is obviously a totally unacceptable situation, and may result in a higher command stepping in and taking control of the situation.
Having taken a look at the causes and effects of respect on the daily lives of the Army soldier, I believe that this should demonstrate sufficient knowledge of the subject matter that a reoccurrence of the unfortunate incident that necessitated the creation of this essay.

Father's Day 2009

Well all, it's that time again, when we pay homage to those that contributed half of our DNA. So in the spirit thereof, I'd like to tell you all about two men that shaped my life, my father, and his father.

My father is, by any standard that matters, a brilliant man. I can't even begin to recall the number of nights that we stayed up until 11pm working on algebra, geometry, science of all sorts (he was my 'lab safety' for many years of science fairs), and all the weekends that we spent working on this or that project. I still have a bunch of the model airplanes that my father and I made together. We are still slowly working on an RC aircraft (we'll get to it Dad, I PROMISE!). But more than the 'stuff' that we did together, was the stuff that we talked about. My parents and I have sat up nights talking about everything from women, to nuclear fusion as a realistic power source. My dad has a unique and very well-researched opinion on just about anything, and had no problem working me through them, no matter how long it took me to get the concept. He's been there through every woman, every job, every life experience, and I think it's just amazing, looking back. He may not have experienced everything I did, but he has always been there as a sounding board, if nothing else. Even when conversations got heated (I was a hellion as a teen), he always attempted to get me to see reason, or at least calm down long enough to find answers for myself. Thank you Dad, from the bottom of my heart.

The second man that I want to talk about is my Dad's dad, my grandfather. He is, and always will be, a genuine United States HERO. Born 1917 to German parents in Pennsylvania, he was drafted into the Army for WWII. He would have volunteered, for the Army, but his draft number was something retardedly low, like 17 or somesuch. He completed Basic Training, and was trained as a Military Policeman, eventually assigned to the 44th Infantry Division, Atlantic Theatre. He, along with the 33 MP's under his direction, assaulted Omaha Beach on D-Day. Of the 33, 3 survived. I have had the great honor to speak with 2 of them, and they both were adamant that if anyone else had lead them that day, they would have all died on that beach. His unit was assigned to guard Buckingham Palace in London, and on two separate occasions, he saved the life of Queen Elizabeth (yes, THAT Queen Elizabeth). He applied to push the Germans back into their homeland, and was denied due to his 'German heritage'. After the war, he returned to his job as a machinist, part-timing as a barber. He married his sweetheart, and in 1947, my father (first of two) was born. I didn't know my Grandfather as well as I wish I would have, but he was directly responsible for my choice to join the military, and to join the Army. The man I remember (he went back to God 2 Jan 2006, 3 days after I arrived in Iraq) was kind, caring, with a core of steel. He took no flak from anyone. Period. He was an avid mechanic, often fixing 4 or 5 lawnmowers at a time, even well into his 80s. The war took a good portion of his hearing, and that was hard on all of us, but it didn't change his outlook on life. Before my Grandmother died December 29 1999, they celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary, which proves to me that no matter what, love soldiers on. I miss you Granddad, for all the stories that you never told, all the time we didn't get to spend together. But God is good, and we'll see each other again, I'm certain.

I encourage you all to go out, and at least thank your fathers. Without them, you wouldn't be here. They may have left you behind or done you wrong, but that made you strong. They may have been there for you, and for that there is nothing that you could possibly do to repay them. But remember your fathers, and surrogate fathers, stepfathers (they CHOSE to stick around), and grandfathers. Pray for them if they're still with us, and remember them if they have gone home.

Until Next Time!

HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!

New Stuff

Really quickly, just wanted to mention a couple things.

I'm still messing around with the layout for this blog, so bear with me. Like it, hate it, tell me all about it.

The article-types poll closed with a whopping 2 votes, split between Philosophy/Rants and Science/Technology. We'll see where we go with that.

New poll should be up soon, voting on which direction I should take the music... EBM/Background like Wumpscut, Classic Rock like Led Zeppelin, Modern Rock like Nine Inch Nails, or Instrumental like Andy McKee? Each of these artists can be heard on the current playlist, so take a couple minutes, and vote on your favorite.

News For The Day - 18 Jun 2009 pt 2

Here's an interesting item from the aviation sector:

Continental flight captain dies in flight, jet lands safely.

OK, let me preface this: I think that the flight crew acted with exceptional aplomb, and did their job to perfection. They landed the plane, safely, at the flight's destination, on time, without causing passenger panic.

That being said, what is this, a bad remake of Airplane? As an aviation enthusiast myself, this boggles my mind. Pilots, no matter if they have a Private license, single-engine helo license, all the way up to Multi-Engine Turbine Passenger/Cargo license (and yes, there are several licenses I didn't mention in between), EVERYONE has to get an FAA-approved flight physical every 24 months, some pilots more often. Not to mention, when any major surgery is performed, or life-changing condition diagnosed, pilots have to submit the doctor's findings to a certified Flight Surgeon. You CANNOT tell me that this condition (high blood pressure, high cholesterol, whatever) just 'snuck up'. It didn't 'come out of the blue', he wasn't touched by the Hand of God. The captain needed to have been grounded about 6 months prior to this. If he had 32 years as a Continental pilot, he had retirement coming. He was 60, good for him that he could keep flying. That's awesome. But the fact still remains, that day, he was in no condition to be flying 247 passengers, or one of the most modern jets in the commercial fleet. I can only imagine the scene in the flight deck (which is the PC term for 'cockpit') when this happened. Did the copilots just strap him to the seat and hope? The whole thing seriously borders on the ridiculous. Not to mention that the doctor that was paged from the passenger compartment couldn't've had his medical bag with him (thank you TSA), so even if the doc might've been able to do something to help, he was hampered by lack of applicable tools. I predict that this event will be documented in an aviation medical journal somewhere, and will lead to yet more stringent regulation on even getting pilots' licenses in the first place, let alone keeping it after age 55. I know a pilot that's into his 70's, and is healthy as the proverbial horse, but he was told to hang up his wings because he was 'too old'. So now what? Get out of the military at 35, work for the airlines for 20 years, and 'see ya later'? What is going to happen when aircraft get faster (technologies are on the horizon that could increase the speed of passenger liners up to threefold)? Personally, I think that pilots of certain ratings (passenger carriers in particular) need to be vetted by a Flight Surgeon EVERY time they fly. Every major airport has medical staff on the premises at all times, how difficult would it be to give pilots a quick once-over before they board? This could be the subject for a blog in and of itself, if there's interest.

Until Next Time!

Public Service Announcement #3

A.K.A. Commercial Blogging on PayingPost.com

As most of my readership already knows, this continuing online rant is not just for my personal amusement (though I do get a kick out of it on occasion), but also has a commercial purpose, namely, interspersed in the completely original content, I throw in some of these 'Public Service Announcements', which are generally paid advertisements. My primary sponsor to date is a site called PayingPost.com, which is an online advertising brokerage firm. Check them out here.

Heres my interpretation of how 'paid blogging' works, and some steps to get anyone started.

1) Have a blog/start a blog - Myspace blogs, while widely-read, have VERY restrictive HTML code requirements, and generally frowns on paid blogging, due to the fact that Myspace administrators have already made their deals with online advertisers (i.e. the ads on your homepage). So, if you have a blog outside of Myspace/Facebook/Twitter already, you can use that, or start a new blog if you don't.

2) Post some content. - Figure out a topic that you have some interest in, or knowledge of, and start posting. Studies have shown that the average blog-reader has about a 1-page attention span, so unless you're Shakespeare or Poe, keep the posts down in size. Rants and technical articles are the exception, as with the first, it's your own word-vomit, and the second, a too-thorough article causes less of a problem than a too-sparse article that omits some valuable steps.

3) Get your blog indexed. - I put this before signing on with a sponsor, because most sponsors will reject your blog, and possibly suspend or cancel your account, if your blog isn't indexed with a major service. Getting your blog indexed can be really easy, or a real pain in the butt. Blogspot (which is run by Google) has an 'instant index' option under Webmaster Tools that allows you to index your site almost as soon as you put it up. Indexing is simply allowing search engines to 'see' your website when looking for search results. Other 'blog directory' services are available as well, some free, some with a paid subscription. The ultimate goal is to get listed with DMOZ, which, as far as I can tell, is the central repository of all blogs and related material on the Internet. This process can take some time, and definitely some effort on your part. There are several good articles on the subject already online, so I'm not going to duplicate the effort here. A thorough writeup can be found here, called Getting Into Google

4) Hang out your shingle. - In the digital age, this is probably the easiest step, as it generally involves simply signing up with brokerage site(s), and waiting for assignments to roll in. Before signing up, there are some things to consider. Did you follow all the steps above? If not, some sponsors won't pick up your blog at all. Do you have sufficient content? The general rule for most sponsors is 2 unpaid posts for every 1 paid post, so you need to keep YOUR content coming, or your paid posts may get rejected. Is your blog of sufficient age? Age of a blog, like age of the author, is only an issue to a point. Some sponsors don't care, some want 30 days, and some want 90 days since creation. Some are flexible about their age rules, some are not. Several sponsor sites that I pitched when I started this blog turned me down, but several saw promise and told me 'keep blogging, and check back with us periodically'. I like PayingPost because they actually pay for content like this, which is enough for most bloggers to get their feet wet. You can also get ad sponsors who will pay (in small amounts) just to have their ad on your page (often called banner ads, pay-per-click ads, or page-impression ads).

5) Pay attention to sponsor requirements. Once you have an assignment, it's just that... an assignment. It's work, with rules and deadlines. Sponsors will generally give you a brief, which will include things like minimum word count, minimum link count, and obviously, a subject. Sometimes sponsors will request a certain 'spin' on a product or service, so if you don't agree, don't take the job. Sometimes the sponsor will give you a weblink, tell you to look at a product, and write your honest thoughts. If you don't know what the product is, you may not be the best reviewer.

6) Last but not least, branch out. For example, once this blog gets going, expect 'daughter' blogs to be born, which will allow for more specific blogging. Whereas now everything is kind of lumped together, eventually I'd like to have one blog for rants and philosophy, one for computer topics, one for automotive topics, and one for household repair, and maybe one for the corporate world. Keep all your blogs interlinked (using a 'quicklinks' gadget in your blog makes this MUCH easier). But, don't bite off more than you can chew. Each 'daughter' blog needs periodic fresh material (sponsors generally see daughter blogs as seperate entities), as well as your main 'landing page' (i.e. thanatos0446.blogspot.com for me).

Hope this has given you a direction, or at least a springboard!

Happy Blogging!

Until Next Time...

News For The Day - 13 Jun 2009 pt 3

Unrest Over Disputed Iran Election

Here we go again folks. Hardline Iranian 'President' Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (or Mahmoud Im-a-nutjob) claims a landslide victory in a staged 'election'. The challenger's supporters cry foul, and clash with police and officials in Tehran.

Um, is anyone surprised by this? Imanutjob has the entire government, down to city dogcatcher (if there is such in Iran) under his thumb one way or another. "Support or death" as a campaign slogan has a pretty definitive ring to it, especially when he climbed to power on a mountain of dead bodies.

This story is so ridiculous as to be almost funny. Not funny like 'ha ha', but funny like 'no shit? Here's your sign'. The incumbent has ruled with an iron fist for 20 years, and the international community expects him to 'softly and silently vanish away'? Wow, bunch of optimists here. Get serious folks. He's so drunk on power, he will do literally anything to keep it. I predict (if it's not happening already) under-the-table trading between North Korea and Iran. Iran gets nukes, and North Korea gets food and fuel oil. Terrorist WIN! Once again, cut the head off. I know, I'm a bit blood-thirsty, but I'm tired of worrying about my brothers-in-arms getting shot and/or killed in places with WAY too much sand. Rather than take the country over, and spend the next 10 years rebuilding it, my solution involves using Special Operations teams the way they were meant to be used, and offing the offending heads of state. Kim Jong Il, this Mahmoud character, and honestly, anyone else threatening to unleash World War III on the planet, would look infinitely better with a bloody hole in their heads.

But, no-one listens to me, so I guess the best we can do is hunker down and wait for this to blow over.

Until Next Time!

News For The Day - 13 Jun 2009 pt 2

North Korea Vows To "Weaponize" Stored Plutonium

Associated Press apparently has a stake in keeping the world's collective blood pressure up too. The long and short of this story is this: North Korea continues to 'feel threatened' by the United Nations, and with enough refined plutonium for 6 bombs, and enough uranium to refine into material for at least one more, have vowed to 'react with a decisive military response' if new UN sanctions are enforced.

Anyone else feel like we have a child with a gun running off at the mouth to a bunch of adults? The weapon is dangerous, yes, but more dangerous is the mind behind it. In this international game of one-up-manship, we all lose. The UN asks for nuclear disarmament from North Korea as the one major condition to withdrawing the sanctions that are starving the North Korean people. Instead of dropping their nuclear program, the North Korean government accelerates their plans, while basically giving the finger to the US, UK, Russia, and China (wow, sounds like a good idea, no?). So the UN, namely the countries mentioned previously, impose more, and more stringent, sanctions. What started out as 'put the gun down' has turned into 'put the gun down, and clean the whole house, you're grounded'. I feel like it's a grander scale of the scene that plays out at my house. While there are no guns at my house, I do tend to go rounds with my six-year-old on a regular basis as he 'tests the boundaries'. Taking the analogy further, I think that the only way the United Nations is going to end this stand-off is with 'decisive action' against the North Korean government. I know it sounds bad, and it will (once again) earn the condemnation of countries like France and Belgium, it needs to be done. Excise the head, and the serpent will die (granted, some post-mortem thrashing can be expected).
Kim Jong Il is dying. I can foresee that the international response is going to involve a 'sit and wait' until the new dictator is installed, but what if he's no better than his father? What if he's like Saddam's sons, more cruel, more vicious, and more unbalanced than his parent? This whole thing just reeks of bad ideas.

Until Next Time!

News For The Day - 13 Jun 2009 pt 1

Lots of news today, apparently the news services don't believe in giving the public the weekend off, but have to keep our collective blood pressure elevated until we go back to work on Monday for ungrateful supervisors. Let's get started.

AIG Balks at Claims From Jet Ditching in the Hudson

We all remember this story, US Airways flight 1549 collides with some mutant seagull, and ditches in the Hudson shortly after take-off from JFK. Only the quick thinking and cool head of the former-military pilot ensures that everyone survives.

Everyone survived, no major injuries, US Airways is sitting pretty, mostly. Every passenger was advanced $5000 by US Airways for the 'inconvenience', based on the assumption that the air carrier's insurance would pick up the tab. And the kicker... US Airways' insurance underwriter is none other than the first bailout recipient, AIG.

Now AIG is riding the 'feel-good' vibe from this crash, namely that everyone survived, and basically telling the survivors that their medical bills are their own problem, any property that was lost is the problem of the property's owner, not to mention lost time, lost income, etc. Like most insurance companies, if they HAVE to pay out, they're trying to settle for minimum possible. One businessperson on that flight has received the $5k from US Airways, $5k from AIG, and is being offered $10k more to sign a waiver of liability. In this person's case, the $20k total would probably be sufficient (assuming no delayed-diagnosis injuries). But what about the mother with her two young children? Mom ended up with some pretty substantial stress injuries (whiplash etc), not to mention the fact that she and her children are in therapy for PTSD-type symptoms. $20k MAYBE for years of therapy, lost time, and soft-tissue injuries that may plague her for the rest of her life? Not likely.

Is this what we can expect from the companies that our wonderful government is bailing out? Seriously? What's next? The banks that the government's bailed out are going to jack up ARM rates again? Random fees on retiree's savings accounts? I would poke fun at Chrysler here, but they're screwing themselves pretty thoroughly already.

In my opinion, the companies that received the bailout money, as a general rule, should have been allowed to fail. Like natural selection, the weak will fall, and the strong survive. National and international banking has become a lumbering dinosaur, with customers referred to as numbers, instead of names. Give the opportunity for growth to smaller regional banks that have a solid investment strategy. Make corporations re-evaluate their insurance packages. This country is in desperate need of a shakeup. What better place than here, what better time than now.

Until Next Time!

Memory (RAM) Tutorial

I got linked to an online publishing-house today, and I saw an article that I felt I should share with my readers. Find the original article here. The article title is General Rules for Memory Installation. After perusing the article, I had a pretty good laugh. For a 'tutorial', this article is neither a 'how-to', nor overly informative about any facet of RAM; selection, pricing, installation, debugging, or overclocking. So, I'll go out on a limb, and give a short primer on modern computer memory.

First, what IS RAM? RAM, short for Random Access Memory, is something akin to a worktable for your computer processor. Just like humans need space to spread out a project, a computer processor needs digital storage to spread out it's processes, or 'threads'. The larger the 'sticks' (i.e. 1Gb vs 512Mb) the larger the 'work surface', and the higher the 'clock speed' (say PC6400 vs PC2700), the more accessible the 'work surface' is.

When selecting RAM, it is most effective to purchase the largest amount, and highest clock speed, that your system will support. As a general rule, most 32-bit operating systems (Windows Vista back to Windows NT) will support no more than 4Gb of RAM, regardless of the maximum supported by the motherboard. 64-bit operating systems (Windows XP 64, Windows Vista 64, and the upcoming Windows 7) have no such restriction, as there is not currently a motherboard that will support RAM to the operating system's maximum capacity. So, to future-proof a new system, I personally recommend going all-out on RAM. It's inexpensive (as low as $30 for 2Gb), and with processors getting ever-faster, you don't want a bottleneck in the workspace you give your processor.

Another note on RAM selection, not related to quantity or speed, is RAM type. With PC components in a continual state of flux, RAM is often outclassed before it even hits the shelves. For example, there are, right now, a minimum of 3 different, currently supported, 'cutting-edge' types of RAM. Those being DDR, DDR2, and DDR3. Once you factor in ALL the different possibilities (i.e. single vs dual-channel, clock-speed, SIMM, DIMM, SODIMM, graphics-enabled, etc) it can REALLY make your head hurt.

My best recommendation is to make a plan to a goal, and buy what you need (or can afford) to attain that goal. For example, I'm planning a new system to play current-generation games, as well as doing CAD and web design. So, I'm choosing an AMD Phenom 3-core processor, a compatible motherboard, and 4-8Gb of the fastest RAM that the motherboard and processor will support. This way, I don't have to worry about my RAM not keeping up with the processor, or the program. Why have 8Gb of RAM if the operating system only supports 4Gb? I'm not going to be running Windows XP forever, and if the extra space is there, it's one less trip into my computer case.

Installation of RAM is kind of a no-brainer, especially if you understood the selection section without stopping. RAM modules, or 'sticks' are keyed, and should only fit into the motherboard one way. The only thing that MAY be tricky is whether the modules have to be installed in pairs, or if you can add single sticks. I ALWAYS recommend installing in pairs, as this eliminates the possibility of a hardware incompatibility (paired RAM is the convention going all the way back to the IBM 8086, and is near-universal as a fallback architecture). Push the RAM module down until you feel it seat, then hook the retention tabs to the edges of the module. If you choose to use a RAM heat-sink, I recommend that you install one stick, then the heat-sink, then move on to the next stick. This gives you maximum 'wiggle-room', and reduces the number of times you have to get in-between two sticks.

Hope this has been helpful!

Until Next Time!

News For The Day - 12 Jun 2009

I went out of my way today, trying to find something newsworthy. Slow Friday, I know. The one headline that leaped out at me was "Obama Won't Rule Out Releasing Gitmo prisoners into US". HOLY SHITBALLS BATMAN! What kind of drunken, stupified MORON would do this? I had my doubts about this president, but now, I KNOW that he's lost it (if he ever had it, that is). Why? Read on.

First, a little history. Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is a relic of the Cold War (starting right around the Korean Conflict, circa 1954). It was originally 'negotiated' between the US and Cuba as a treaty condition. That conversation went something like this:

USA: Castro, do you like your country?
Cuba: Yes, I like it very much.
USA: Would you like to see your country bombed into rubble?
Cuba: No, why?
USA: Because having a Socialist country that close to Florida makes the Defense Department nervous. We (the State Department) calmed them down, told them that it's not a good idea to turn you into rubble. BUT, we have these prisoners that we don't want here. You have some spare land, over there on the far side of the island.
Cuba: How about you put your prison over there on that piece of land, and you don't bomb us back to the Stone Age?

That was all paraphrased and oversimplified, but you get the gist. Cuba remained a viable country, the US got surveillance of Cuba, and a place to put prisoners who could be expected to cause serious national harm if released or escaped.

Fast forward half a century or so, to the present-day. For roughly 50 years now, we have been using Gitmo as a storehouse for a certain class of prisoners. Political? Sort of. Treasonous? No. You cannot commit treason against a country to which you have no loyalty. Terrorist? Most are suspected or known to be. In short, these prisoners are the baddest of the bad. While I can't speak of every inmate there, I'd say a great majority are there for a reason.

So corralled in this off-shore bad-boy-camp we have a bunch of folks that are not overly happy about the American people, and the US Government. Even if 45% of inmates were the international equivalent of 19-year-olds jailed for possession of pot, or shoplifting, what you end up with is exactly the same as the referenced 19-year-old; someone who bears no love or respect for their jailers, and who have learned 'bad habits' from those that were incarcerated for greater crimes. If you didn't have a problem with them before, you will now.

And our illustrious President wants to release these characters into the very population that they have the most reason to dislike. Doesn't this sound like a fantastic idea?

Rather than releasing these inmates into the US, I have a better idea. Make them each stand trial, and here are the options:
1) Found innocent - Repatriation to the country of their choice
2) Guilty, time served equal or greater than sentance - Repatriation to either home country, or country to be determined by lottery (if inmate claims US as homeland). Revoke US passport, and 'black-list' inmate from ever being granted passage into the US.
3) Guilty - Country of repatriation to be determined by the judging body using the following guidelines: Consider inmate's heritage, religion, and sociopolitical stance, then send them to a country where one or more of those criteria could cause a problem... i.e. Palestinian prisoner, locked up for sabotage of US or Israeli forces; give them an outfit with a sign on it (something to the effect of Israeli-killer in Hebrew), and drop them off with the Mossad.

Cruel and unusual? I'll allow unusual, but you NEED unusual to make the punishment something to be feared. Cruel? Meh. A punishment can only be 'cruel' if it abrogates the rights of citizens. In my mind, you commit treason, actively work against the United States, you have forfeited any claim to be a US citizen.

Until Next Time!

Links Page

Along with 'paid postings', I will attempt to maintain a page of links to places that have supported, and are supporting, this blog. This list will be updated as needed.

Listing Services:
BlogHub


Blogville
blog directory

Advertising agents/brokers:

Blogvertise
Smorty
PayingPost

New Feature!

I was messing around with some ideas this afternoon, to make the content a little better here on the site, and I stumbled on a 'gadget' that allowed me to apply a Project Playlist (http://www.playlist.com) song-list to the play while you're on the site. So, I'm asking for your feedback. Hear something you like? Tell me! Something you don't? Tell me! Not hear something that you'd like to? You get the picture.

Thanks, and

Until Next Time!

2500hp street car... what will they think of next?

I was reading an article on MotorTrend the other day that I thought was worthy of commentary. The original article can be found here:http://wot.motortrend.com/6540260/tuners/550-hp-mosler-too-weak-try-iads-2500-hp-twin-turbo-land-shark/index.html

The article details a 'tuner' version of the Mosler supercar, the MT900S, which comes from the factory with 550bhp, and super-car-worthy stats. The 'tuner' version, of course, changes all that. The 'stock' engine is pulled, and replaced with a 2500bhp twin-turbo monster, based on an innovative concept (more on that in a bit). The pricetag for this carbon-fiber monstrosity ensures that I'll never own one, but we can all dream, right?

The innovation behind the 'Land Shark' twin-turbo version of the MT900S is something that I discussed with a very intelligent engineer that I've known for roughly 26 years, my father. We started discussing the possibility of a 'full-roller' internal-combustion engine back in the early '90s, when I was about 10 years old. My father's original intent was to start with either a 428SCJ or a Corvette 427, and build from there. I had him convinced, at one point, to try this with either a 5.6L Mercedes engine (M119) or a Ford OHC motor (4.6/5.4 Modular motor), but apparently we've been beaten to the punch by the folks at IAD (Intense Auto Design), who used a GM LSx-series engine as a starting point. Kudos to IAD for doing it, but my father and I still think that they're not using the technology to it's fullest potential. A 'full-roller' motor, i.e. if roller-type bearings (instead of the more typical bushing setup) are used throughout the engine, several things would happen, all stemming from the fact that the RPM limit for such a motor would easily be in the 20-30,000rpm range under load. The valvetrain on this hypothetical motor would either have to have an unholy stress-rating (high seat-pressure, extremely durable components, etc), or a completely new technology would have to be devised to actuate the valves, due to the fact that the motor (and thus the valve events) is spinning at 3 to 5 times the maximum RPM of a 'typical' V-8. We felt that the reduced valvetrain mass of an Overhead Cam (OHC) arrangement would alleviate some of that, but my father and I have been tossing around other ideas as well (which I'm not going to go into specifics until they are patented). In short, he and I saw this 'proof-of-concept' engine, and our interest is renewed in making 'our' engine a reality.

Food for thought!

Until Next Time!

News For The Day - 11 Jun 2009

Today's news comes from an AP article that was pointed out to me... the World Center For Disease Control has declared 'swine flu' a 'pandemic'. I have a couple of thoughts on this subject...

First, what IS it with naming all these quasi-horrible diseases after animals? Bird flu, swine flu, West Nile virus (named after the carrier, the West Nile mosquito), whooping cough (after the whooping crane), I mean seriously, what's next? The lemur flu? The Emerald Beetle virus? Let's get serious folks, if it's really all that important, calling it by some cutesy name isn't going to change anything. If anything, it's going to make the CDC look like it's being run by some mentally challenged pre-teens.

Which brings me to my next point. The H2N 'swine flu' is NOT a serious threat. 36,000 people die every year of the 'regular'flu (influenza virus), so why is it such a big honking deal if 400 people die of this 'rare and malignant form of the flu'? Don't get me wrong, it's always sad when someone succumbs to an illness that could have been prevented, but the raw numbers just don't justify the media hype. Is the CDC budget hurting so badly that they'll make up a new disease every week, just to stay in the news?

Speaking of news and language... what exactly is a 'pandemic'? 'Pan' Greek for multiple (more than a few, less than a multitude) 'dem' meaning illness, disease, or affliction. Sounds like another quasi-intellectual buzzword from where I'm sitting. When did this word (which is simply three Greek roots stuffed together) come into use, and why are we using it to label everything from fevers to the fact that we as a nation are fat? This 'pandemic' word doesn't scare me, no matter how often some knucklehead newswriter uses it. Tell me that there's a fat 'pandemic', or a flu 'pandemic', or a pandemic 'pandemic', I'm somehow just not scared.

So, my tip of the day to avoid THE SWINE FLU PANDEMIC is simple. Take care of yourself, keep warm during cold hours, and cool during warm hours. Drink plenty of water. If you can't keep down solids or liquids for 12 hours, go see a doctor or hospital. Swine flu, like most influenza strains, is most harmful to children under 2, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems.

News For The Day - 10 Jun 2009

So I woke up this morning, sat down at my computer to check my e-mail, and there it was, splattered all over my homepage "Fiat Buys Chrysler Assets". So the whore that is Mopar gets bought again. Here's a little history lesson: Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep used to all be separate companies, along with Eagle (anyone else REMEMBER Eagle?). Chrysler bought all these assets, lock, stock, and two smoking barrels (of garbage). Then, in the late '90s, the Chrysler Group was in trouble. They offered a merger with Daimler-Benz, manufacturers of Mercedes Benz and Maybach. The 'deal' was that Daimler-Benz would captain the combined company, and that in exchange for their help and world exposure, Chrysler plants would produce the Mercedes C- and M-Classes in US plants (thus, these models would not be considered 'imports' as defined by law). This worked(ish) for about 3 years, then it started to fall apart. Quality issues on the M-Class caused sales of that line to plummet. In 2005, the Daimler-Benz Corporation cut the Chrysler Group loose, due to high cost, low return, and a lack of quality control/quality assurance. Ownership of the Chrysler passed from Daimler-Benz to an employee consortium after Benz couldn't sell the group to any other manufacturer.

Now let's take a brief look at Fiat, the buying side of this transaction... For the last 20 or so years, Fiat has been majority owned by the Italian government. In Italy, majority ownership DOES mean control (unlike here, where even though the US government owns 50-some-odd-percent of GM's debt, 'we don't want to own GM'). So follow me here: The Italian government owns Fiat. Fiat owns Chrysler. QED, the Italian government owns Chrysler. IS ANYONE ELSE SEEING THIS?! I understand that Fiat doesn't get full ownership for X years, and that Fiat is supposed to start manufacturing something like 6 of their models here in the US (we saw how well that went before, no?), and all that jazz, but here's the bottom line: Fiat is BUYING Chrysler. This means that when the deal goes through, and AS SOON AS the deal goes through, Fiat starts CONTROLLING Chrysler. Puppet strings, smoke, and mirrors. Folks, this is NOT A GOOD THING. Personally, and I appreciate American cars as well as American industry, I'd rather see Chrysler fail completely than be owned by a foreign government. I can see it happen... Fiat buys Chrysler, then the US government contracts with Chrysler's husk to manufacture US military ground vehicles (trucks, transports, cars, etc), funnelling money DIRECTLY to the Italian government (which, last I checked, wasn't too overly fond of the US). Nostradamus I'm not, but this is just a little too obvious.

News For The Day - 9 Jun 2009

Hello all!

I'm going to try something new today. It may be a recurring thing, it may not, depending on reaction, my mood, and world news.

Today's News: Slim Jim Factory Explodes, Kills 2.

Anyone else feel like they're stuck in bad SNL sketch? I mean seriously, this is a bad joke waiting to happen. Manufacturers of a meat stick (a.k.a. heart-attack sticks) have a plant explosion... Apparently, someones cholesterol literally did go 'through the roof'. Don't get me wrong, it's a sad and tragic thing that there were fatalities, but I feel like this is a setup.
In other news, Slim Jim corporate execs have announced price hikes in retail meat-stick prices amounting to a 300%-400% increase (they're taking pointers from the petroleum industry). Before you run out to stock up on Slim Jims folks, please remember: keep it civil; there is NO NEED to riot! Stay in line, and no tackling old ladies to get your favorite meat-treats. Eventually, they WILL MAKE MORE.

Until Next Time!

Public Service Announcement #1

Ok folks, after word-vomiting several thousand words in my first day of blogging, I'm going to put out a (hopefully) brief PSA. While this blog IS here for a purpose, I'm trying to make a positive impact as well. If there is a subject that you would like to see commented on, a question that you have, or whatever, please feel free to leave me a comment. I'll try to respond to anything that I feel qualified to answer in relatively short order.

Also, this blog DOES have a commercial purpose, so stay tuned for product/service reviews, as well as my rambling rants. If you'd like to have me review YOUR product/service, please sign up here.

All reviews will be headed "Public Service Announcement #x", and responses to requests will be headed appropriately, something like "Request Line: XXXX"

My 'commerical disclaimer' runs like this: This blogger may accept commercial assignments and may post paid entries from time to time, based on what's available.
Until Next Time!

Nuclear cars and other frivolous ideas

a.k.a. Why Hybrids Are Bad For The Environment


Welcome (back)!

So here we are. Hydrogen, electric, and hybrid-powered vehicles are all the rage now, especially in heavily-pollution-controlled states (yes, California, I'm looking at you!). Along with these, the newest trend in internal-combustion engines is variable valve timing, along with smaller engines and steeper gearing. Let's take a look at these concepts one at a time.

Alternative Fuels

OK. You may have noticed on the roads of your local metropolis all these awesome 'alternative fuel' vehicles. Hydrogen- or electric-powered cars, propane-powered buses, E-85 vehicles of all sorts, and all the eco-conscious folks driving them. The good: lower per-mile emissions and lower refuel costs (especially for hybrid vehicles). The bad: larger production footprint (fitting a hydrogen or propane fuel cell is orders of magnitude more complex than fitting a fuel tank), bad mileage on the highways/expressways, and LONG time to reconcile fuel savings vs increased vehicle cost. Here's how it works out for Joe Consumer: Joe buys a Flex-Fuel or alternative fuel vehicle, at an additional premium ranging from $8000 to $12000. Since 'alternative fuels' don't have the infrastructure, Joe spends additional fuel to go to a station that has his fuel, and pays roughly 10% less than a full fill-up of gasoline. Doing the math, cost-effectiveness for this method takes roughly 10 years to make up the difference. This is not taking into account related maintenance costs (go ahead, figure out the cost to replace a hydrogen fuel cell or an electric cell, either of which are reported to be good for roughly 5 years). So based on fuel costs alone, it really isn't effective unless you own the vehicle for at least 15 years. Once you start including maintenance costs, and the fact that you really can't work on them yourself (or contract an independant mechanic), the problem gets exponentially worse.
All these problems pale in the grand scheme of the environment due to the fact that the carbon footprint of a hydrogen or electric car is (as I've said before) orders of magnitude greater than an equivelant IC vehicle. It would take, on average, 20 years of continuous use (with no part failure) to make the vehicles worthwhile. This is aside from the fact that the fuel production footprint is MUCH higher than an equivalent gasoline or diesel vehicle (refining pressurized hydrogen takes a LOT of electricity).

E-85 a.k.a. the Corn fuel

One of the new rages in alternative fuels is E-85. This fuel is, in truth, 85% ethanol, which is refined from plants, specifically corn. The other 15% of this fuel is generally Diesel 1 (car diesel). Herein lies the problem with E-85... namely the fact that E-85 has a lower specific heat (combustion potential) than refined gasoline. The difference works out to ~15%-20% lower fuel mileage than a similar IC engine. Once you add in the up-front premium (usually at least $4000), you're again looking at a LONG repayment period, especially last winter, when gasoline and E-85 had a seperation of less than 10% in price in the Midwest. Flex-fuel or E-85 retrofit kits CAN be cost-effective, due to the fact that E-85 has an octane rating of roughly 110 (compared to 91 to 93 octane for high-octane gasoline). They become especially effective for high-performance cars (think road-course or drag-race cars) and trucks where the higher octane rating is required, but mileage isn't as important. In the end though, E-85 for passenger cars and trucks isn't really cost-effective due to the fact that a) the mileage doesn't justify the cost, and b) Flex-fuel/E-85 vehicles don't have the infrastructure outside the Midwest. They generally burn cleaner, but you definitely pay for it in refill frequency.

Hybrid Vehicles

Then we have the gasoline/electric hybrid vehicles, especially cars like the Toyota Prius, the Chevrolet Aveo, and Honda Insight. All these vehicles suffer from the maintenance headaches associated with alternative-fuel vehicles (increased production footprint, higher fuel footprint, reduced infrastructure) and have a HUGE weakness: they have serious issues reaching highway/expressway speeds. For example, the Toyota Prius gets its best mileage in 'mixed driving', which is generally city, with speeds not to exceed 45mph, and relatively long periods of stop/idle. Once you get it on the highway, on the other hand, the 1.2L gasoline engine doesn't have the power (namely torque) to propel it to average highway speeds (65mph in IL)in a reasonable time (from stop to 65mph off of an on-ramp is unheard-of). A few hybrids break this mold by offering a larger gasoline engine, or steeper gearing between the engine and wheels inside the transmission or transaxle. The Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan Hybrids, for example, use a larger gasoline engine, which translates to shorter 'gas on' times in-town, and enough 'oomph' to make highway cruising fun again. But once again, you're still looking at higher-upfront costs, and long repayment times, which are fine if you intend to keep the car for it's full service life, but not so great if you trade in your car every few years.

Internal Combustion/Diesel and Variable Valve Timing

The best current solution, in my mind, is some of the new gasoline and turbo-diesel offerings from manufacturers like Ford, VW, and a few Chevrolet cars and trucks. Let's look at the new TD's first. Diesel has been used to power passenger cars since at least the 70's (Mercedes, BMW, and VW pioneered some pretty advanced systems during this timeperiod). Diesel was cheaper than gasoline, due to the fact that it was less refined, and the parts used were pretty much run-of-the-mill (forged, or all-steel, pistons were still standard). It was really the best of all worlds. Add a turbocharger, and the diesel offerings could compete with the gasoline offerings. Not to mention, diesels, for all their sulfur emissions, could still knock down in excess of 30mpg. IN THE 70'S. This was during the tail-end of the HorsePower Wars, when 10-15mpg was normal, and no-one thought anything of it. Now, turbodiesel offerings from companys like VW can compete with even hybrid cars, putting up 40mpg out of a relatively stock motor, and are still fun to drive.
The other technology that's showing promise is Variable Valve Timing from companies like Ford. Different than Honda's VTEC, in that VVT is more concentrated on fuel economy/torque production than raising horsepower, VVT is engineered to actually change the physical alignment of the camshaft relative to the rotating assembly under different load conditions. The mechanics are involved, yes (I could spend a whole 'nother blog talking about them), but the system itself is pretty simple, relying on increasing oil pressure to force the cam do to what the engineers want it to do. Upshot? Lower consumption during low-load/idle conditions, a broader powerband (which is good for the passing lane), and higher peak horsepower and torque numbers.

Future Technology a.k.a. Where Do We Go From Here?

asdasd So thus far, I've managed to alienate the Prius crowd, lambast those working on alternative energy, and I generally sound like your typical gearhead. Typical, right? Not really. Do the alternative fuels/hybrid cars show promise? Absolutely. BUT, to be truly cost-effective, we need better and less expensive ways to manufacture the components, increased infrastructure, and a 'green lane' where today's hybrids can stay in their efficiency band. Now, the title of the article mentions 'nuclear cars', right? Nuclear power is one of the cleanest-burning, simplest forms of energy that exists today. 20,000 miles between 'fill-ups', no emissions to be worried about, and a literal 1 in 1,000,000 failure rate for the powerplant. If science can find a way to shrink a nuclear pile down to something that can fit in a car, we'd be looking at a completely new era in automobiling. Until then, here's a few things that we CAN look forward to:

Running on garbage - There is a functional proof-of-concept for a generator/incinerator that uses basically a lightning bolt to turn any material into an ultra-fine ash, and due to radiation collectors, actually produces more electricity than it uses. This could be the new age of power generation, since you can put literally any material into it's 'tank', and end up with a power surplus. Problem is, it's currently the size of a 72-passenger bus. Steps are being taken to shrink it down, maybe one day it will sit in your garage, and provide the power for your electric car, or even better, sit in the trunk of the car and provide power on demand.

Blowin' in the wind - renewable sources of energy (wind, water, and solar power) are taking leaps and bounds of progress from where they were even a few years ago. Increased efficiency solar cells may one day be the 'skin' of your new car, providing charge for an electric car, and while it's parked, high-efficency windmills would generate enough power to recharge your vehicle in case of bad weather.

The "Z" engine - and odd-ball concept, this motor intrinsically creates it's own pressurized atmosphere (think supercharger), creating a massively efficient combustion process. Proof-of-concepts exist... in 1-cylinder formats. The problem currently is tooling that will allow for the odd machining of 2 cylinder bores for every one combustion cylinder. It's worth taking a look at, but as of right now, it's just a concept.

Along with ever-improving techniques for current technologies (better and cheaper hydrogen and electric cells, more efficient components, lower replacement costs, and better infrastructure), alternative fuels are gaining ground. Maybe one day you will have the option of a hydrogen car that costs the same as an IC car, with a home-based hydrogen-seperation chamber that uses no more power than your water heater. We can only look ahead.

Ultra-Grand Theft

a.k.a. The Rich Get Richer, And The Poor Get Hosed

Hello again!

This will hopefully be my last "rant" entry for a while, maybe actually start posting some useful information.

So, let's jump right in.

My first beef is with the petroleum industry. I know more about this industry than my education would suggest, since both of my parents have worked in the petrol industry for many years. Let me be recorded as saying, right now, that the gas prices seen nation (and even world) wide are absolute bunk. In the US in particular, the prices being placed on a gallon of fuel (gasoline, Diesel 1, Diesel 2, E-85, etc) are 100% controlled by the petrol consortium. Here's some startling facts and figures (please note, I take no responsibility for absolute veracity of my data, as most is at least a few years old). With OPEC nations 'making the rules' as far as the price of a barrel of crude, where do you believe that the majority of the United States' crude oil comes from? The Middle East? Wow. Good try, but completely wrong. Almost 80% of the United States' crude oil comes from odd places like Canada, South America, and deep-ocean drilling off our own shores. Less than 10% of our oil comes from the Middle East, and the majority of that portion comes from places like Kuwait and Israel. Hmm... So why are we still listening to OPEC? Damn good question. There's some UN legislation squirreled away somewhere that says that OPEC is the final authority. Why should the US and her allies be the only ones to follow UN conventions, when places like North Korea openly insult the UN? Meh, I guess only because if we flouted the UN, we'd be no better than the pocket dictators of Africa, the Middle East, and certain parts of Asia. It royally sucks to be 'the good guys'. BUT, coming back to the price of petrol... Why is it, when the price per barrel (ppb) of crude was as low as it's been for 35 years (about a year ago), the price of a gallon of fuel was reaching epic heights? HA! This one is a fantastic bit of sleight-of-hand if I've ever seen one. Check this out... The fuel-processing companies (Exxon-Mobil, BP-Amoco, Royal Dutch Shell, etc) were absolutely out of their minds, whining 'our refineries in Louisiana, they were all destroyed by Hurricane Katrina, and we need to fund rebuilding' etc etc etc, you all remember that, yes? OK. Complete and utter horseturds. Here's another interesting statistic for you... in 2000 (I believe, I'll check the date), the US EPA passed legislation intended to lower 'greenhouse gas emissions' from oil refineries, which had the following effect: some 50% of the oil refineries in the United States either shut down completely, or slowed down production (emissions are calculated as a per-year total, so if emissions had to go down 50%, the same equipment could only run 50% of the time). Since that legislation passed, NOT A SINGLE US OIL REFINERY HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE. Compliance being the ability to run a particular refining process at 100% capacity. In this legislation, new safety measures were to be implemented, and environmental impact abatement measures were to be put into place (i.e. lining spill-drains, improving integrity of holding tanks and processing equipment, all kinds of measures of that nature). Your corner gas station has complied, but NOT A SINGLE REFINERY HAS. Why not? Because, for the oil companies, it's much easier to sit back, wring their hands, and point fingers at the government... something to the effect of 'the EPA handicapped our productivity, and we're trying to pick up enough extra revenue and production to be able to shut down a plant, but it's a Catch-22!' Whine whine, complain complain. Here's the real story... the processors are looking for an incentive package from the government, basically 'shut-up money'. They're looking to have our tax dollars pay for the retrofitting of their plants, so that they can make yet more money off of us.
So here's the short form:
High gas prices = low efficiency plants + EPA restrictions + Processor hand-wringing
It's like the petrol company executives have forgotten that they live here too, and if all their neighbors go broke trying to buy gas, it hurts everyone. I have some ideas about how to hit the petrol companies where it hurts, please see 'Nuclear cars and other frivolities'

My second beef for this entry is the Great and Powerful Media Machine. This encompasses movies, music, print media (books and magazines) and especially Web publishing. Sheesh. What a gigantic mess. Since the advent of the recordable 8-track in the mid-70's, music 'piracy' has existed. Then we had the dual-deck VCR in the 80's, and comgratulations, the video media was no longer sacred (this is, of course, discounting sneaky post-production folks that used the studios' own equipment to reproduce media for personal gain). Then again in the mid-90's, CD-R's broke the previously 'uncopyable' CD format. It's all kinda gone downhill since then, with the widespread acceptance of the Internet, we no longer need to physically exchange media, now it's encoded in a bunch of 0's and 1's, sent at high speeds over copper and fiber lines across the street and around the world.
Now, realizing how widespread this 'piracy' is, let's look at the other side of the coin... 1970, a record was a few dollars, if that. 8-tracks and early tapes retailed at $3-$5 in 1985. In 1995, a 'new' CD cost ~$13. Now, most CD's retail at $16-$25, and you can 'buy' a digital copy of your favorite tracks for an oh-so-reasonable $1.50 PER TRACK! FOR A DIGITAL COPY! Holy SHIT! Assuming 12 tracks on an average CD, that's STILL $20, and you don't even have a REAL CD! Not to mention, music and movie production studios have gotten ever-more-aggressive with protective 'software' to prevent the copying and redistribution of their material. There was a lawsuit against one of the major music studios recently, accusing them of using destructive methods to protect their 'intellectual property'. Basically, the software embedded in the CD, if the software detected that it was being copied, it would create a fatal feedback loop in the computer's processor, causing, at the least, a reboot situation, and at worst, it had been known to literally fry computer components (processors, CD drives, etc).
Now, my beef is that the media producers around the country are, like everyone else, getting greedy. They spend record amounts on production, whether it's exotic locations, the 'best and brightest' in CG effects, the best equipment, not to mention that actors and actresses now are the highest-paid in the history of the industry as are the people working behind the camera or microphone. Watch Entertainment Tonight some Tuesday or Wendsday. New movies, even for all their production costs, are bringing in the highest opening-weekend revenues of any time period EVER. Seems like every movie that comes out during the summer is 'the biggest box-office hit EVER!!!!!!!!!!!11111" Record earnings of over half a BILLION dollars in a single weekend are not uncommon anymore. But with all this, it's still not enough. Rather than blithely ignoring the 'criminal fringe' of folks that make copies of movies or music FOR PERSONAL USE (I make a HUGE distinction between those that download for themselves versus people that do it for money), movie studios and music promoters are cracking down HARD, the most focused anti-piracy push in the history of mass-distributed media. WTF guys? The economy is the worst it's been since the 1920's, and NOW is the time that you choose to go berzerk over what generally amounts to pennies on the dollar? It's like everyone, from businesses to the government, is SQUEEEEEEEZING the little guy from all directions. Prices have never been higher, working hours have never been longer, and skilled wages have made a drastic and disturbing reversal, so it's almost better to work overtime at an unskilled job than to take a 40-hour skilled trade (based on non-union rates).

Until Next Time!

If Monkeys Ran The Zoo

a.k.a My Political Views and Political Rant

Hoo boy. Before we start this, let me go ahead and put my flamesuit on, as my political views are not real popular at the moment. Please feel free to 'flame on', but know that any negative comments will be read, and probably deleted. Constructive criticism, ok, but if you're just being a troll, I don't have time or energy.

My Beatitudes (a.k.a. What Do You Believe):

1. 95% of conspiracies are complete and utter bullshit. 9-11 an inside job? You're buzzed. Iraq war for oil? Nah. 1969 Moon landing a fake? Wow, what planet are YOU living on? Some shadowy Illuminati running the world? You're joking right? Government coverup of UFOs? Sheesh.

2. The President of the United States is NOT infallible. They're human, and prone to human errors. I cut the government slack until they have proven themselves incompetent.

3. My views are MY VIEWS. If you don't like it, well, there are other blogs to read. I respect other peoples' opinions, realizing that their views are theirs.

These statements are subject to change, addition, deletion, or revision for content or grammatical correction at any time, without warning or notification. And now, to the fun stuff:

My social views:

My social views are relatively simple, to me anyway. I firmly believe that any person, or group of people, is fully entitled to their views, beliefs, and quirks, and I have no right to interfere... UNTIL those views, beliefs, and quirks affect ME. For example: If you choose not to own a gun because of some social belief or a religious conviction, good for you. That's great, it's your choice. But if you tell me that you believe it unethical/immoral/unlawful for ME to own a gun, I WILL take exception to it. I take that stance on many social issues, with a few exceptions. Domestic violence, abuse in any form (child, spouse, drug, etc), and the like, I feel to be in the public domain. The abuser forfeited their right to privacy when they started adversely affecting someone else.

My financial views:

I find myself agreeing with both sides of the line here, but my focus is generally more conservative. The answer to all social/economic problems IS NOT to throw more money at it. For example: Inner city schools have the lowest test scores, lowest graduation rate, etc etc etc. The answer is NOT to throw billions of dollars at the school system. PERIOD. No 'efficacy studies', no 'pilot programs', NO. Does it take money to figure out where all the money went? Yes. BUT, a 10-year study that costs $15mil per year to fund (and all of it comes out of the district's funding) is NOT the way to go. Assign some small group locally (preferably a CPA firm), go through the financial records of the schools in question. Teachers making pennies while the administrators are driving Jags? There's your answer. Then, once that imbalance has been corrected (by LOWERING THE ADMINISTRATOR'S SALARIES), the next step can be taken. Where are the schools deficient? No textbooks? Instead of giving the district money to purchase books, have the governing body (state or federal government) purchase the texts in the required quantites for the districts. This accomplishes two things: 1) No opportunity for misappropriation of funds 2) standardization of textbooks throughout the area. Next, look at the appropriation of funds in specific schools. School can't turn out a decent class, but the sports teams are fantastic? Hmm... There's a problem here. Sports are great, yes, BUT the function of a school is to TEACH, not to entertain. Less than .1% of all high-school athletes will get a college scholarship to play sports. Less that 10% of college athletes will make a professional team. BUT, 100% of high-school students need to be able to read, write, and do basic math to function in society. So where are the priorities, really?
Moving on, the rest of my financial views pretty much follow that pattern: eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse. My major beefs with that system are twofold: petroleum processors, and Hollywood. Please find my comments about them in my rant titled "Ultra-Grand Theft".

My view on politicians:

Oh brother. In short, our once-proud governing system is so corrupt at this point, I honestly don't believe that it can be saved in it's current form. We are no longer a nation of Americans, but a huge collection of special-interest groups: the Environmentalists, Capitalists, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, Pro-Gun, Pro-Safety, whites, blacks, Hispanics. Even the illegal aliens have a special-interest group! Somewhere along the line, the United States populous has been brainwashed into believing that 'me first, me last, me always' really does work. We have been duped into thinking that instead of working to better oneself, demand that your 'voice on Capital Hill' pass legislation benefitting you, often at the expense of others. When did this become OK? Not to mention, as a single white male, I'm SCREWED. I'm ineligible for ANY racial minority, gender-equality program, NOTHING. I have no nation-wide network of pro-bono attorneys, no grassroots movement to 'free whitey', no special support of any kind.
So in short, our political system is junk. It's going to take a massive crisis of some sort to shake the American people out of their torpor, and make them realize that everyone is not in the same situation, nor is 100% equality, regardless of qualification, an acceptable solution. This goes back to my social views. Do what you want, until it affects me. Changing people's viewpoint is not accomplished through legislation, but through education. You want me to 'save the environment?' cool. Why? How is slapping yet another 'emissions-control device' on my Mustang (or on future iterations) going to help? Be prepared for rebuttals, and instead of resorting to mudslinging (i.e. the last Presidential election), come up with some actual, unbiased, science-based proof. If my facts are better than yours, sit down and table it.

Until next time!