Doughnut Holes

Friday, September 29, 2006

An update on life

My last post was about a new job I took, back in August 2005. What a mistake that job was. I worked as a car salesman for 8 months. The hours were terrible and and working on 100% commission was very stressful. Plus, my wife hates car salespeople. So guess what, she wasn't that pleased with me. But I was somewhat good at selling cars. One month I was in the top 5 salespeople at the dealership!

I quit that job back in February and moved my family back to Utah. We ended up buying a house here too. I am now going back to school to earn a Master's degree in Elementary Education from Western Governors University (read more about my time at WGU in my other blog). The degree also includes a state certification. I am very excited about it. I have also started working as a substitute teacher in my local school district (read more about my teaching experiences in this other blog of mine).

I hope to get this blog back on track with daily and weekly posts. Stay tuned.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

My new job

After having worked at Qwest Communications for five years, I finally told my boss that enough was enough. Five years wasting away in a cubicle, not being rewarded for the great work that I doing drove me over the edge. And I did great work, my projects always gave me terrific evaluations. The problem is that Qwest is so close to going under and has been that way for five years.

So now I am back in sales. I was in sales years ago, before I become a journalist, which was before my desk job at Qwest. This time I am in the automotive industry. Yes, that's right, I am now a cars salesman. Yesterday was my second day on the job! So far its fun. I haven't sold a car yet, but I have done a couple test drives. I am still learning the business.

So if any of you are in the Denver, CO. area and are looking for a car, come see me, Mike, at Burt Toyota on Broadway. Make sure you get the correct Mike, there is another one working there. Mention this blog to make sure that you are talking with me. And I will hook you up with a great deal.

Anyways, enough with the shameless marketing plug. A lot has happened in the past month that I unfortunately missed out blogging about. Oh well, I will start with new information from here on out.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

Grand Openeing of Stop The ACLU.com

Jay Stephenson and Stop The ACLU.org announce that the Stop the ACLU blog at www.stoptheaclu.blogspot.com is now officially www.stoptheaclu.com.
We are devoted to exposing the radical agenda of the most dangerous organization in America, the ACLU. We are the official blog of Stop The ACLU.Org and we will do our best to keep you informed of the anti-American activities of the ACLU and their socialist agenda for America. First off all we would like to give a HUGE thank you to John from Xtreme Right Wing for all of the work he did in designing and putting this site together. We appreciate it soooo much.
Get involved with Stop The ACLU.com:
In order to further expose the ACLU we want YOU to get involved with us. We do a weekly blogburst every Thursday. Go here to join us. We have over 80 sites that blog with us every Thursday on the evils of the ACLU. We will also be featuring a blogburst of the week from which a blogburst of the month will be chosen. The blogburst of the month will win free stuff from our Bulldoze The ACLU Store.
Win a free t-shirt or another item from the Bulldoze The ACLU store:

Speaking of free stuff….In celebration of the grand opening of our new site we are holding a contest today! Our friendCao has been generous enough to sponsor today’s Caption Contest. The winner will recieve one item of their choice from our Bulldoze The ACLU Store. Here are the pics, leave your captions in the comments. Have fun!! Thank you all for the support, and welcome! Let us know what you think. So…I had several friends submit pictures to me for this thing. I wanted one to be ACLU related, but I could not resist posting this other one too. So double your fun. Caption both, or take your pick.

Thursday, June 23, 2005

Is burning a flag really free speech?

<-- Start Update (10:15pm) After reading and hearing more about this issue, I have decided to fully support the amendment to protect the American flag.
Jack Lewis has a terrific entry "Fiction and facts about flag-burning." This article is well worth your time and is very interesting.

Another great entry is from The Life And Times:

If one hates America they should have the right to write letters, give speeches, make phone calls, and in my opinion even burn maps of the U.S., let em burn what they want....but not the flag. You see the flag represents the very right they have to say and feel what they want. To burn the flag in a way seems counter to what they are trying to protray, it's like forfeiting the right to any freedoms at all that come with living in America...

What a beautiful country that allows open beliefs. Whatever you can dream up or imagine here, you can believe in it and follow it without fear of government restriction...Let's keep it that way by holding onto the respect for the flag and what it represents.

We live in a great country. Everyday I enjoy the freedoms that many have fought for and protected over the centuries. I spent my time living in another country for several years and there is nothing compared to what we have here.
End Update -->

The right to burn our nation's flag is a hot topic. The House passed a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw flag burning today with a vote of 286-130. Is burning a flag free speech? is flag burning protected under the First Amendment guaranteeing the freedom of speech? The First Amendment states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of; or abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Burning the flag is not freedom of speech, its an action. Talk all you want about the government, our officials, our laws, and our policies, but don't ever think that the First Amendment reserves your right to desecrate the American flag.

But I remain undecided on whether or not an amendment is necessary to protect our nation's flag. Here are some interesting takes on this issue.

From Gribbit at Gribbit's world:
Well as a Cold War Veteran, I am appalled every time I see the flag that I was willing to die for, desecrated by these liberal wackjobs that have the French mentality of capitulation to our enemies.

First off the symbolism of flag burning is related to the desire of the person or persons doing the burning of a wish that the same happen to the country whose flag is being burned. Think of it, who on an international scale burns our flag? Extremists who want to destroy America. Who burns Israel's flag? Islamic extremists who wish to exterminate Israel from the Earth.

So when one of our own citizens, burns our flag on the streets of a city in the United States, they are publicly calling for our destruction. And that angers me.

From Pirate's Cove:

But is an Amendment necessary? I say no. Arson and violence are already crimes. People who burn the Flag should be arrested. While what flag burners do is certainly worse in my eyes then standard mayhem, let's apply existing laws. It is not against the law to kill a Bald Eagle because they are a national symbol. It is against the law because they are endangered.

What we need are courts that will uphold the First Amendment, not rewrite it for their own Liberal purposes. We do not need an Amendment, but regular laws that protect it, like we used to have in 48 States before the liberal courts shot them down, over-ruling the Will of the People.

I am offended every time I watch (on TV) someone burn the American flag. I don't want anyone to burn this symbol of freedom, a symbol of patriotism. Yes, I want something to protect the American flag, what that something is, I am not sure of yet...beit an amendment or new laws.

Tuesday, June 21, 2005

It's “Free John Kerry's 180” Tuesday

Questions still remain with John Kerry's 180. Yes, Kerry did file the 180, but only authorized three people to receive the files, Glen Johnson (the AP), Steve Braun (the LA Times), and Michael Kranish (the Boston Globe). Powerline has copies of the 180s, thanks to one of their readers who obtained them through a Freedom of Information Act request. And Powerline raises some interesting questions:
Did the reporters discuss their role with Kerry or his representative before they were designated to receive the records? Were they required to agree not to make the records public, but only to report on them? What other discussions did they have with Kerry or his representatives? Are they willing to release the records, or at a minimum give us an inventory of what they received so that we can assess the completeness of the disclosure?
As always, Cao's Blog has an interesting take on John Kerry's 180:
We understand that this French-looking Taxachusetts native might be a wee leary of distributing more information from his records, given that little, um, factoid that slipped out about his sub-presidential academic achievements at Yale. But, really, we simply want the truth, dear Senator. That to which even Boy Scouts aspire.

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Sorry Nevada, no beach front property yet

A tsunami warning was issued ,then lifted, after a 7.0-magnitude quake hit 80 miles off the coast of northern California tonight.

It's “Free John Kerry's 180” Tuesday

Yes, John Kerry did sign the 180, but how much did he allow to be released? Many bloggers, including myself, are asking “where's the rest of it?” Form 180 gives you the option to get a “deleted” copy, which leaves out the reasons for separation and reenlistment eligibility code.

From Cao's blog:

For those of you who keep wondering why we’re pursuing this, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect someone who’s been a Senator for 20 years to tell the truth, and especially someone who ran for president on the platform that he is a war hero so he was “reporting for doody”. Even General Eisenhower didn’t do that.

I urge you all, write to Kerry, fax to kerry, protest his faux “release” and keep blogging away and use the “OHB” standard to beat the hell out of press and media outlets for shirking their responsibilities and thus further erode what little trust remains of an otherwise noble craft called journalism. I, for one, am not going to let this go. Civil servants own the public trust and should be worthy of it–they’re getting paid with our tax dollars. Traits like honesty should be the least of what we get from this–and we shouldn’t allow him to get away with this without a lot of noise in the blogosphere.

Check out Cao's blog for more information about Kerry's 180, why this is an issue and how to get involved.

My political profile?

What's my political profile? No surprise here.

Your Political Profile

Overall: 90% Conservative, 10% Liberal
Social Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Personal Responsibility: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Ethics: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal
Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
How Liberal / Conservative Are You?

Take the test! Its fun, fast and easy and see where you land.

Monday, June 13, 2005

No death penalty for cop killer

Cop killer Raul Gomez-Garcia was charged with one account of murder in the second degree for the death of police officer Detective Donald Young, that will land him in prison from 32 to 96 years, but with the possibility of parole.

Denver District Attorney Mitch Morrissey is presenting the Mexican government with this bargain to extradite Garcia after talking with Detective John Bishop, who survived the shooting, and the wife of the late Detective Young.

Mexican Attorney General Daniel Cabeza de Vaca Hernandez told Colorado U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar that “those behind the extradition of Garcia-Gomez should consider Mexico's laws and not seek capital punishment or life in prison without parole,” according to a Rocky Mountain News article.

Hernandez has got to be joking! Garcia-Gomez held himself accountable to US laws when he entered this country. Every person here, beit they enter legally or illegally, is held to the standards of US law. Gomez and other killers that flee this country have to be held accountable just like everyone else in this country according to federal and state laws.

"(The crime is) upon your people, your court, your authority," Mexican Consul General Juan Marcos Gutierrez-Gonzalez, in another Rocky Mountain News article. "We want justice to be done."

Justice? Only if it fits your laws where the offense did not even take place. That's what you want, right?

Yes, we all want justice to be done! But let us do it with accordance to our laws and punishments. Let our people, our courts, and our authority find the appropriate punishment for cop killer Garcia.

Mexico does not support the death penalty and does not want any Mexican national in the US to be given the death penalty.

If Garcia is given the maximum sentence, 96 years, he will be required to serve 75 percent of that time before being eligible for parole. Lets hope that Morrissey tacks on every possible offense to keep this killer in prison even longer. This is possible, as long as none of them carry a life sentence or the death penalty, part of the bargain.

Its terrible that we are made to bargain with other countries in order to uphold our laws to their greatest extent, which we aren't able to do in this case.

I have traveled around the world several times. I even lived in Mexico City, Mexico for a couple years. It doesn't matter where I go, I know that I am bound by the laws of the country that I am visiting.