Congressman Stupak Headline Correction

Here is an entry on Drudge Report covering how Congressman Stupak sold his vote on Health Care reform.

For me, the headline is all wrong in that a big part of the trade involved Stupak trading away the lives of unborn babies.

WASHINGTON, March 21 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Phyllis Schlafly, president and founder of the conservative grassroots public policy organization Eagle Forum, made the following remarks after the public announcement that formerly pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak (D-MI) will cast a "yes" vote for the Senate health care bill today in the House:

"It is naive for any elected official, especially one who describes himself as 'pro-life,' to expect that a promise to issue an Executive Order that reasserts the intentions of the Hyde Amendment will be fulfilled by the most pro-abortion president to ever sit in the White House. Perhaps Mr. Stupak and his fellow pro-life Democrats forget that President Obama's first Executive Order was the repeal of the Mexico City Policy to allow for international funding of abortion."

"Not only would an Executive Order be rendered meaningless in the face of Congress passing legislation which actively provides for the massive expansion and funding of abortion services, but anyone who doubts the abortion tsunami which awaits this bill becoming law lives in a fantasy world."

"Barack Obama has lined every existing federal agency with the most dedicated pro-abortion ideologues, and we know that he will continue this pattern of pro-abortion appointments when it comes time for him to fill the over-100 bureaucracies created to administer his socialized health care program."

"Any formerly pro-life Democrat who casts a 'Yes' vote for this Senate health care bill tonight will be forever remembered as being among the deciding votes which facilitated the largest expansion of abortion services since Roe v. Wade."

"Mr. Stupak and his Democrat followers have now clarified that you cannot be pro-life and be a Democrat. If abortion was truly their biggest issue, they wouldn't willfully align themselves with the Party of Death."

"This vote will expose the myth of the 'pro-life Democrat.' With this single vote, the Democratic Party will divide our nation into the Party of Death and the Party of Life, and future elections will never be the same."

CONTACT: Suzanne Bibby, (610) 608-6303

SOURCE Phyllis Schlafly - Yahoo News

As far as I am concerned, the President was able to sign this Health Care bill into law because Congressman Stupak enabled it's passage by selling out the lives of unborn babies. It is that plain and simple. Sure other votes were bought to get this bill passed, but he got paid off to drop his concern for the protection of unborn children. Concern like that should have no price.

This makes me wonder if he ever cared about this issue or simply knew that it was the best way to get a payoff. Turned out is was. I just wonder why he sold so cheap...

-------------------- --------------------

OBAMACARE - A Big F.U. to Everyone who Voted Against, and For Obama

A quick though about the horrendous ObamaCare health care reform that Congress just shoved down our throats last night. Looking at the situation, I truly think that not only did the Democrats and President Obama fuck over those against ObamaCare. He and the Democrats also fucked over his supporters. Here is why:

• First, this 'reform' will most likely only benefit those who would vote for Democrats no matter what they do or don't do for them. So it is hard to call it a payoff for supporters. However, the Democrats are sticking those who voted against them with a huge bill to pay for it. (Well, many who voted for them are getting a piece of the bill as well)


• Second, All of the voters who are excited that the Democrats did this for them and who believed that we had to act NOW! because people were dying, are certainly going to wonder come election time in November, 2010 when they realize that all of the people without coverage will still not be covered, even though this 'reform' promises coverage for the uninsured.


• Third, many of the current supporters are going to be outraged come Presidential Election time in 2012 when they realize that they are still not covered, even though this 'reform' promises coverage for the uninsured. And yet, they will still vote for Democrats because somehow the Republicans will still be evil.


• Fourth, how many Americans are still going to die because the Democrats had to lie by hiding just how expensive this 'reform' is really going to cost. You can bet though that we will no longer be hearing health care sob stories of those who will be ObamaCare delay victims. (Note: This is in addition to all the babies that are going to get aborted, thanks to a Government fund this 'reform' sets up.)

Congress could have enacted good health care reform. But instead they chose to enact some monstrosity. Shame on them. Eventually the truth will come out, but it is sad that we have to subject ourselves to this painful road of discovery. Which, I am sorry to say, will become ever more painful once the Democrats somehow find a way to legalize all the illegal aliens out there and let them flood our health care system with high demand patients.

Update:

Here is one example of the lie being pushed forward. No, the doctor is not going to see you now. He might in 2014, provided he has not given up care-giving by then...

From the LA Times:

WASHINGTON (AP) — When President Lyndon Johnson signed the Medicare law in 1965, seniors got their health insurance cards less than a year later.

When President Barack Obama finally gets to hold a signing ceremony for his health care overhaul, the major expansion of coverage for uninsured workers and their families won't come until 2014 — after the next presidential election.

Parts of the plan won't be fully phased in for a decade, but ultimately 94 percent of eligible Americans would have coverage. - LA Times

And just think, starting in 2011:

Requires employers to report the value of health care benefits on employees' W-2 tax statements. - LA Times

This move will cost workers thousands of dollars in higher income taxes. Add to that the real possibility of the Bush tax cuts expiring at the end of this year.

Update 23 March 2010:

Ace of Spades has posted 'We Can Repeal This' which backs up my claim that ObamaCare is a big F.U. to most everyone both Republican and Democrat:

This is not the sort of bill that becomes "unrepealable" as Social Security and Medicare would. Social Security and Medicare paid their benefits to everyone who became elderly; there was something in each program for everyone. Sure, there were a lot of people who did not get out of these programs what they paid into it, but they got something out of it. Even if some richer seniors only got 80% back or so, well, eight cents on the dollar isn't a deal you'd normally take but it's also not so horrible a deal you'll get riled up enough to change your political behavior.

That has always been the secret of how the progressives shift income from the middle class to the poor -- they establish programs which have benefits for the middle-class, too, even if those benefits are less than what the middle class actually pays into the system. The middle class at least feels like it's getting something out of the deal, and, well, if they're not quite getting out of the deal as much as they put in, they shrug it off in the interests of being nice and helping the needy and so on.

But this bill doesn't do that. There is, in fact, no benefit for the 85% of the country that have part of their salaries diverted into a third-party insurance plan. There is nothing for them but additional taxes and additional rationing of their care so that part of their salaries -- I am stressing, a health insurance plan is just a part of your salary -- can be paid to someone else.

On top of that, the plan will add trillions to the deficit, as even with all those new taxes and rationing of care and impounding people's salaries to give them to someone else, it still isn't paid for.

I just don't see this like Social Security or Medicare. Those benefited the middle class, and furthermore benefited everyone, eventually (assuming they didn't die earlier in their lives). This bill benefits only a discrete, easily-identifiable fraction of the population at the direct and unambiguous expense of everyone else.

I just don't see this plan ever becoming popular with those being forced to hand over larger and larger parts of each paycheck to perfect strangers. People are never going to be unsure whether or not they're the ones Taking or they're the ones being Taken From.

And the Taken From is 85% of the country. - Ace of Ace of Spaces Blog (Go read the whole post)

Of course it is the poor who are losing nothing in all of this, which is one reason why they are so excited about this. It just so happens to be that Health Care Christmas will be held in 2014 and not immediately. It is just that the rest of us need to start paying more immediately in order for the Government to have some money for the giveaway they are planning. I bet the excitement would be rather lacking if the poor had to contribute as well. Say by having a percentage of their unemployment or welfare payments taken as a fee for health care. I suspect their enthusiasm for health care would disappear with many rather risking having no insurance than losing any cash support..

-------------------- --------------------

Russia's New Gulag - The Sochi Olympic Site

Back in September, I posted about how Russia is home to slave labor camps stocked with North Koreans.

Now comes news that many workers at the Sochi Olympic site are basically being turned into forced laborers as they have not been paid for their work in months:

Hundreds of workers at an Olimpstroi-funded construction site in Sochi have not been paid in months, with some complaining that they are going hungry after giving up their passports as collateral to get food at grocery stores.

The scandal is the latest to hit Russia’s $13 billion effort to ready the Black Sea resort for the 2014 Winter Olympics. Residents displaced by construction for the games have complained that they are not being adequately compensated, while environmental activists say the work is blighting the region.

About 180 people were not working Friday, exasperated by months without pay and desperate for food, said Sergei Dykhalov, who was hired by general contractor Moskonversprom as the site’s crane operator for 36,000 rubles ($1,200) a month.

He said he hadn’t his salary since December. - La Russophobe

I find this pretty shocking given that Russia is so eager to show off Russia to the world. Just what kind of Olympics site are they planning to build without spending any money and starving the workers expected to build it? Even discounting the suffering that they are putting the local residents through and the workers, just how do they plan to overcome the inevitable negative publicity this will eventually generate? The whole point of hosting the Olympics in Sochi was to show off Russia. Well, that will happen, but not as they plan it to. So that leaves making money for a select few. I wonder how successful Putin will be at fleecing the Games given that money has to be thrown at it first. Might he be planning to blackmail Russian and International companies operating in Russia to contribute? I wouldn't doubt it. But why would he bother to use the Olympics to generate more cash? He has easier ways to do it than trashing the Olympics and a city in the process.

This is yet one more example of why Russia should no longer be considered a world power. The main stumbling block of kicking the country to the curb is it's veto on the UN Security Council.

Previous:
Russia's New Gulag - Powered by North Koreans - Sept 2009

-------------------- --------------------

Aggressive Illegal Aliens Loitering at Falls Church, VA U-Haul

As mentioned before I am moving to a new house later this month. So we have made a few trips to the local U-Haul to pickup supplies. Each time there has been a good-sized gang of illegal aliens loitering on the sidewalk in front of the U-Haul and on the other side of their driveway and even across the street.

Seeing a large group of illegals is nothing new given how long they have been hovering around Home Depot lots. However at U-Haul, while they are kept off the property like at Home Depot, they are right on the sidewalk that borders the entrance and unlike at Home Depot, they are actively trying to proposition for work.

This put me in the odd position of how to react to their shouts for work. My initial reaction was to do what I normally do when I see large gatherings of illegals, which is to ignore them. Since they were asking for work I wondered if I should reply and that is when I got annoyed at being put in this situation. Because where are we going to draw the line? If I start saying no thank you, is it just going to encourage them to spread their services? What next? Local hardware stores? How about at the supermarket? How about if they start freelancing at self-service gas stations for tips? Some of these suggestions are silly, but the point is that this is going to get worse before it gets better.

And don't kid yourself, hiring illegal alien day laborers is a felony:

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization or local government) commits a federal felony when he:

• assists an alien whom he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him to obtain employment,
• encourages that alien to remain in the U.S., by referring him to an employer, by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
• knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.

Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime.

Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief. - Link

When I moved back in 2005 I got a bunch of friends to help me. This time around, despite having friends offer to help, I have hired a professional firm to help with the move. I figured that I could save at most $400 using illegal laborers, provided that they worked as fast as the team that I have hired. At the professionals are bringing things with them, like a large truck, and moving tools, and insurance and the need to protect a good reputation. What am I getting when I hire illegal aliens? Sure I might be saving money. But am I opening myself to a greater risk of theft or breakage? Am I opening myself to being targeted for a home robbery in the future? What if they think they are cheated at the end of the day or decide to threaten me for more money? With hiring professionals, the salary is not an issue. I do plan to make sure these guys have refreshments and food during the day and plan to tip them. I plan on being generous, especially if they make this a pleasant experience.

And one more thing. I am the one who has to go to U-Haul because my wife does not want to go there with all these aggressive men hanging around. I call that a public safety issue. Of course the Government does not see it that way. No, instead, they are going to legalize what is going on. Keep that in mind, they are not going to just let illegals stay here legally, they are going to legalize their behavior, unless of course they plan on giving illegals unemployment and welfare... And once they are legalized, you are going to see them everywhere.

Update:
Two more thoughts:

• - I expect that you'll start seeing illegals going house to house looking for work in some areas, This is regardless of whether they are legalized or not.
  
• - With all the dirty tricks playing out in Congress at the moment on the lies about how this Health Care reform is going to save us money, just wait until they legalize all the illegal aliens and then give them free health care...

Links:
Explanation: 'Universal' Health Care First - Then Mass Amnesty

I Told You So: 'Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care'

"Even though I do not believe we can extend coverage to those who are here illegally, I also don't simply believe we can simply ignore the fact that our immigration system is broken," Mr. Obama said Wednesday evening in a speech to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. "That's why I strongly support making sure folks who are here legally have access to affordable, quality health insurance under this plan, just like everybody else.

Mr. Obama added, "If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all." - Fred Fry, 27 June

-------------------- --------------------

Solo Fisherman Caught in His Own Net! (Accident Investigation Report)

Here is an investigation report covering an accident where a fisherman alone on his fishing vessel managed to get caught in his fishing gear and it took a navy boarding team to set him free.

It is funny because the guy lived to tell about it. (He was seriously injured which is not funny.) That said, there are important safety lessons to be learned here and thankfully the entire report is only one page as copied below. So it is a simple matter of just taking five minutes to read it.

Division for Investigation of Maritime Accidents - Denmark

Occupational accident - MARIE - 9.12.2009

Summary

The accident occurred on 9 December 2009 at approx. 1230. The fishing skipper, who was alone on board, was about to heave the trawl after the first haul when he was caught by a bridle and pulled up onto the net roller. The fishing skipper was caught on the net roller in approx. 6 hours before he was relieved by the Navy and a rescue helicopter. The fishing skipper was seriously injured in the accident.

Analysis and conclusion

Immediate causes (6.1)

Unsafe acts

The fishing skipper was alone on board and was caught by a bridle and was trapped because he worked right at the net roller, while it was turning.

Unsafe surroundings

It is the assessment of The Division for Investigation of Maritime Accidents that control levers which are hindered in or do not automatically return to neutral position pose a significant safety risk when using net roller equipment.

Contributing causes (6.2)

Persons involved

The fishing skipper was aware that it was unsafe to stay in close vicinity of the net roller during operation.

Safety System

It is the assessment of The Division for Investigation of Maritime Accidents that it is totally irresponsible to operate the net roller, and then work with the lines, when you are alone on board. It is the assessment of The Division for Investigation of Maritime Accidents that the task by the net roller was conducted without any sort of safety precaution and that the risk was unacceptably high.

Safety Culture (6.3)

It is the assessment of The Division for Investigation of Maritime Accidents that the circumstances of the accident and the poor state of maintenance on board demonstrated that there has been insufficient attention to safety on board.

Recommendations

The Division for Investigation of Maritime Accidents recommend all owners of fishing vessels and fishing skippers, to pay special attention to proper maintenance of control handles, which must go to stop when released, so they will not pose a safety risk. - Danish Maritime Authority

There is no word on whether he had a knife with him nor if having one might have permitted him a way of escaping.

-------------------- --------------------

Palestinians Building New Homes in Jewish Settlement

So President Obama has decided to wade into the Israeli settlement issue, creating a huge mess in the process.

The United States condemned Israel's plan to build 1,600 new homes for Jews in Ramat Shlomo, a religious settlement within the Israeli-designated borders of Jerusalem, whose future status is at the heart of the Middle East conflict.

Israel's announcement of the project during a visit last week by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden embarrassed the White House. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in unusually blunt remarks, called it an insult.

The Palestinians, who had just agreed to begin indirect peace talks under U.S. mediation, have said they will not go ahead unless the plan is scrapped.

Israeli media said Clinton last week demanded a reversal of the decision to build in Ramat Shlomo. Netanyahu's comments appeared to signal to Washington that he believed he had political backing at home to withstand U.S. pressure.

Israel has said construction at the site will not begin for several years.

The U.S. criticism of Israel prompted a backlash on Monday from U.S. lawmakers and pro-Israel lobby groups who urged the Obama administration to tone down its rhetoric. - Yahoo News

On the surface of things, it appears that any new building in Israel would create conflict with the Palestinians. Which makes it all the more amazing that the photos used to illustrate the story are of Palestinian workers who are working at the very building site causing all the controversy.

Palestinian laborers work on a construction site in the east Jerusalem settlement of Ramat Shlomo, on March 11. The Obama administration pledged Monday that Israel remained a US ally as congressional rivals rallied behind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a feud over the construction of settlements.

(AFP/File/Gali Tibbon) - Yahoo News

Palestinian labourers work on the roof of a house under construction in Ramat Shlomo, a religious Jewish settlement in an area of the West Bank annexed to Jerusalem by Israel, March 10, 2010.

REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun - Yahoo News

How is it possible that Palestinians are involved in expanding a settlement that is supposed to be inflaming their fellow Palestinians? My guess is that the normal Palestinians don't care and are more concerned with the jobs that the project is creating for them. So how interesting it will be if the result of President Obama stopping expansion of this settlement is more Palestinians losing their jobs.

Clearly, if these guys can work on this project, the whole issue is being overblown by the Obama Administration. No surprise there. I guess you can call this another example of 'Smart Power'.

-------------------- --------------------

Obama Theatre of the Absurd: 'Let's Ban Recreational Fishing'

I am not writing about today's story about how the Obama Administration has put recreational fishing in their sights as something else to attack:

The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters…

Consequently, unless anglers speak up and convince their Congressional representatives to stop this bureaucratic freight train, it appears that the task force will issue a final report for “marine spatial planning” by late March, with President Barack Obama then issuing an Executive Order to implement its recommendations — whatever they may be.

Led by NOAA’s Jane Lubchenco, the task force has shown no overt dislike of recreational angling, but its indifference to the economic, social and biological value of the sport has been deafening…

As ESPN previously reported, WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and others produced a document entitled “Transition Green” shortly after Obama was elected in 2008. What has happened since suggests that the task force has been in lockstep with that position paper…

“With what’s being created, the same principles could apply inland as apply to the oceans,” he said. “Under the guise of ‘marine spatial planning’ entire watersheds could be shut down, even 2,000 miles up a river drainage from the ocean.

“Every angler needs to be aware because if it’s not happening in your backyard today or tomorrow, it will be eventually. - ESPN Via Hot Air and all via Drudge...

I am writing about this issue simply because it is a perfect example of how this country is now being run by complete idiots. Really, imagine how in less than a year, the Obama Administration has been so incompetent that ideas like this, which by all rights should be dismissed out of hand as ludicrous, now seem plausible. At least plausible enough to have to seriously reason away.

That bit about “balance” is an official Barack Obama campaign promise, baby, which means you can take it to the bank. Seriously, though: Given the backlash British pols faced a few years ago when they banned fox hunting (the sport has since flourished and the Tories say they want to repeal it) and given the deep but as yet unfounded suspicions about The One’s designs on guns, why would he pick a completely needless fight with rural voters? Explain to me how this makes sense for him. - Allah at Hot Air

AllahPundit asks a good question. Then again, common sense had nothing to do with the Obama Administration declaring CO2 a pollutant. Maybe this is an example of 'Smart Power'? I also don't think that they are going to ban fishing. I do however think that they will seriously consider some sort of restrictions. Given that they have ignored how badly their health care legislation is polling, I would think that this issue is trivial in their eyes and might even be a simple way for them to score points with their supporters. So watch out. Obama has not gone after guns, yet., mostly thanks to the 2nd Amendment. But there is no mention of a right to fish anywhere in the Bill of Rights...

ESPN: Obama may ban recreational fishing or something - Hot Air

-------------------- --------------------

French Navy Catches 22 Pirates & Mothership - Photos

The French Navy has gone and caught more Somali pirates this week. Here is Google's decent attempt at a translation:

Thursday, March 4, 2010, the Beautemps-Beaupre repulsed an attack by pirates off the Somali coast.

In national mission in the Indian Ocean on building hydro-ocean sailing 180 nautical east of Mogadishu when he spotted three suspicious vessels. While their mothership stood at a distance, two fast skiffs have set sail on the French ship to address.

Beautemps-Beaupre has made the customary warnings, radio, audio and visual means, before the team embarked Protection (EPA) should not proceed to fire warning shots to repel hackers determined to board at 'using sliding scales.

Given the reaction of the crew of Beautemps-Beaupré and the EPA, the pirates gave up and returned to their mothership. An alert was immediately sent by the French ship to all browsers and international forces patrolling the coast of Somalia.

Upon receipt of the alert, the staff of the operation Atalante ordered the frigate Nivose, which patrol a 150 nautical area, to proceed to the scene of the attack. The immediate response of the Panther helicopter on board has to score and to track the two skiffs and their mother ship until joining the frigate.

On March 5 in the morning, the combined actions of the Panther and two speedboats used by the teams visit Nivôse determined the surrender of the pirates. 11 personnes ont été transférées à bord du Nivôse. 11 people were transferred aboard Nivôse.

Later in the day, the frigate received orders to join another area, 90 nautical first, where pirates have also been reported. Arriving on site, the Nivôse offset three vessels operating in the same configuration as those intercepted in the morning - a mother ship and two skiffs assault - and captured 11 individuals who were paid on board. - French Naval Forces (Translated from French)

Here is one stroy in the English press although on an Iranian news site:

In one incident on Friday, six pirates attacked a French fishing boat although a French military detachment onboard fired warning shots at them. The ship then approached the skiff and collided with it, sinking the skiff and throwing the pirates into the water. Four were rescued, but two others went missing.

In a separate attack, again on a French vessel, eleven pirates were taken into custody by the EU Naval Force. - PressTV

Great job French Navy!
-------------------- --------------------

A Better Solution than Citizenship for Illegal Aliens

Here we go again. The President wants to restart the process of turning illegal aliens into US Citizens:

In the session, Obama and members of his Domestic Policy Council outlined ways to resuscitate the effort in a White House meeting with two senators -- Democrat Charles E. Schumer of New York and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina -- who have spent months trying to craft a bill.

According to a person familiar with the meeting, the White House may ask Schumer and Graham to at least produce a blueprint that could be turned into legislative language.

The basis of a bill would include a path toward citizenship for the 10.8 million people living in the U.S. illegally. Citizenship would not be granted lightly, the White House said. Undocumented workers would need to register, pay taxes and pay a penalty for violating the law. Failure to comply might result in deportation. - LA Times

I find the conversation that our politicians have concerning how to deal with America's illegal alien problem pretty simple and disappointing.

They all seem to paint this as an either/or issue

• Either they remain illegal aliens or we offer them Full Citizenship.

I can see discussing whether or not to grant illegal aliens legal residence. That is one thing. It is a completely different issue whether or not to permit them a path to citizenship.

If Citizenship is what illegal aliens are coming to this country for, then it makes no sense to give it to them. It will only bring more illegal aliens to this country. In fact, as we all know, any concession given to the illegal aliens is going to bring more illegal aliens. The only two things that seem to deter people from being in the US illegally are a lack of jobs and constant efforts to capture and deport those who are already here, including job site raids. This would be my preference, stepping up efforts to catch those here illegally.

However, let's say that the only real practical solution to the current problem is to legalize those already here. Fine, if that is what has to be done, then how about taking the middle road and give them Green Cards but deny them the right to Citizenship as punishment for breaking US Immigration rules.

Personally, I think most all of the 10 million plus illegal aliens would be very happy with such a solution. They can enter society and end hiding. They can find legitimate work and make their lives more stable. They can travel and be able to visit relatives back home with the ability to legitimately cross the US Border.

The one thing they would not be able to do under this solution call themselves Americans or vote. My guess is that they will be happy to do without that right. This however causes a problem with those most interested in legalizing them. After all, the payoff for the Democrats in legalizing illegal aliens with Citizenship is the windfall in votes for Democrats these newly-minted Americans will deliver. This is why they only talk about a path to citizenship for illegal aliens and not a path to residency.

If the Republicans were smart, they would present such a solution. I have doubts that it would pass, but it would certainly kill off any competing ideas of giving away citizenship to people who do not deserve it. the illegals would push for the Republican plan, putting Democrats into the position of having to defend why they want to give them more than what is needed to 'solve' the problem.

Note: Click on the Illegal Aliens tag for related posts.

-------------------- --------------------

We are buying a house in Northern Virginia

I have not been so active here because we have been busy looking for a house to buy since getting back from Christmas vacation in Finland.

Our goal was to find a house within our budget not too far away from my work. That was a little tricky given that I currently live less than five miles from the office, so every house we looked at was going to result in a longer commute than I have now.

One thing that we learned pretty quickly is that despite all the news on how bad the housing market is, all real estate is local and the local market in Northern Virginia is pretty competitive, especially in the more affordable range. Just how competitive:

• Many of the houses that we were interested in were on and then off the market within a day. A couple of times we would see a house come on the market and immediately send the details to our agent only for him to come back that there were multiple offers on the property already, sight-unseen.
• House flippers are still working the market. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing as they are taking a $200,000 - $300,000 dump and turning it into a $350,000 - $450,000 renovated home.
• Renovated homes don't spend much time on the market.
• There are many short sale homes on the market. This is a problem given that you have to wait for the bank to accept any offer acceptable to the seller. We tried to avoid short sales and would limit that to only short sales where there was only one lender. This was after considering looking at one home but found out that there were three lenders against the property and it took six months for the first lender to approve the sale.
• Houses priced over $400,000 are in a different market than those under $400,000. I think this has lots to do with people not being able to borrow whatever the house costs instead of now only being able to borrow what they can afford.
  

We made two offers on homes, both inside the Capital Beltway. For the first house we offered the asking price and asked for nothing in return. No payment of costs, no fixing anything. There ended up being three offers on the property with the two others offering more than we did. Apparently that house went for around $20,000 over the asking price.

For the second house we took the same strategy of offering the asking price and asking for nothing in return. Again there were multiple offers on the house. However, this time our offer was selected.

Now we are in the middle of going through the motions of buying the house. Our home inspection resulted in a second inspection by a structural engineer. We came up with two issues that will cost about $10,000 - $12,000 to repair. As far as the seller is concerned, they are not interested in doing anything or compensating for anything flat out saying that they would simply go with another offer, because they can.

So, despite all the wheeling and dealing you see on 'Property Virgins' and the other real estate shows, don't think that you are going to experience the same in your search. In the end, we have decided to bite the bullet and purchase this house. Looking at the market here, this house is still a good deal. As a bonus, since making the offer on this place we have yet to see another house come on the market within our price range.

-------------------- --------------------

Finnish Schools - Forced Vegetarianism

Here is a nice example of what happens when you give a special interest group an inch as to how they will go to try and take a mile.

From Finland comes news that the school system is considering moving to a vegetarian-only day:

Educational institutions of the City of Helsinki could soon get a weekly day of vegetarian food, after the City Board voted in favour of such a move 13-1.

A weekly non-meat day has also been considered in Vantaa, but the initiative has moved forward slowly. Espoo’s City Council rejected a proposal on the matter at its Monday meeting.

Vegetarian meals have been a daily option at schools in Helsinki since the autumn of 2007, and it will remain an option in Espoo as well.

If the measure is implemented, the vegetarian food day will come alongside a weekly fish day, which Helsinki already has. - Helsingin Sanomat

This is being pushed by the vegetarian movement. Of course they would ban the eating of meat if they could, but since they can't, they will force students to change their eating habits in the name of 'education'. After all, this has nothing to do with vegetarians as the schools already offer a vegetarian meal each day. This is all about forcing others to be like vegetarians.

“What it is about is that the mission of a school is to educate people on eating habits. It is important to show that good and high-quality vegetarian food is available”, said Elina Moisio (Green), who had put forward the proposal. - Helsingin Sanomat

Hell, if education is the answer, then there should be a meat-only day as well. It is not like eating meat one day a week is going to kill a vegetarian. Surely they need to be educated as to just how awesome a good hamburger tastes. And as a side benefit, expose them to a great source of protein.

Vegetarian meals are available at most restaurants. Good luck getting a non-vegetarian meal at a vegetarian restaurant. Should a vegetarian restaurant serve meat dishes? I don't think so. That would be as wrong as forcing people to eat there. Just as wrong as removing meals from the school lunch menu simply because they contain meat.

One more thing. School lunch programs are pushed as such wonderful things for a child's development. What they don't tell you is that these programs also give leftists a chance to indoctrinate children their way, as if exposing them to activist teachers all day was not enough already.

Helsinki schools could get weekly vegetarian food day - Helsingin Sanomat

-------------------- --------------------

Maritime Monday Breaks 200 Editions!

The weekly Maritime blog series that I created in March of 2006, Maritime Monday, has today published it's 201st edition over at gCaptain.

I stopped my involvement a couple months ago and I am happy to see that a great replacement author has taken my place.

So head over and enjoy this week's edition:



-------------------- --------------------

DC: "It's not legal in the District to save a parking space in public space, with chairs or cones, etc."

One issue after a big snowfall is digging out your car and making sure that you have a space to park it when you return at the end of the day. In many places, people will 'reserve' the space they dug out with a garbage can or whatever. However, the DC Government made it clear after these storms that the practice is illegal:

Chevy Chase, DC: My street has already been plowed three times. Thank you, DDOT.

Do you have advice on etiquette for saving parking spots we have shoveled? Boston rules? Anybody can grab it?

John Lisle: That's one of the most contentious issues, pitting neighbor against neighbor. It's not legal in the District to save a parking space in public space, with chairs or cones, etc. It would be preferable if neighbors pulled together to clear multiple spaces for everyone. - Washington Post

OK, the suggestion is a joke. We lived in DC for the 2003 February blizzard and we were the only ones digging out our car. then for the next week, each day after work I had to dig out a new space because someone would take mine.

While they are so busy 'redistributing' snow removal labor via the law, how about also passing a law requiring car owners to own a shovel? It was amazing how many people in my apartment complex did not own a shovel of any kind as we all dug out of this storm. At least most people did dig their cars out. It was a huge difference between the attitude of DC residents and the people that live around me in Northern Virginia. At the moment there is lots of complaints against the DC Government about the poor progress of snow removed. However, the last bit of work, actually freeing the car, needs to be done by the car owners. And to do that, they need a shovel.

One more think, illegal or not, what kind of person moves a trash car or chair or whatever and takes another person's spot? Personally I would not do that, simply out of fear that the person who reserved that spot might damage my car or block me in. You can never tell about other people.

Here is a little more on the subject:

Washington's long history of relatively mild winters has left residents without a common sense of snow etiquette to help answer that question.

Boston has codified its citizens' right to benefit from their backbreaking snow-clearing labor; a city law says that if you dig out your car in a snow emergency, a lawn chair or trash can renders the spot yours for at least two days while you're away at work. In Chicago, blocking a parking spot is illegal, but city officials acknowledge an informal rule of dibs if you've done the digging.

"I know this is public property, but if you spent hours laboring, I mean, come on, I think you have the right to say that is my spot," said Tanya Barbour, who spent two hours Sunday shoveling free her silver Ford Expedition in the 1500 block of T Street NW. "If someone had clearly taken the time to shovel it out, I would not take that spot because I would not want that done to me."

Across the District and in the Maryland suburbs Monday, many were not relying on Barbour's honor system. Some used Boston-style markers -- lawn chairs, recycling bins, orange cones, a mattress, even two bar stools with a Swiffer on top -- to try to save spots along residential streets.

Keith Green, 37, said he's heard too many scary stories to slip into a spot someone has blocked off. After the 1996 storm, a man was killed outside New York after a dispute over a shoveled parking spot. In Philadelphia in 2000, it happened again. In South Boston, a handful of assaults, slashed tires and other cases of vandalism end up in District Court each year after drivers are perceived to have broken the code. - Washington Post

Not for anything, but the problem would not be as great if DC let home owners park in their own driveways:

Driveways in D.C. Now a No-Parking Zone -
April 24, 2009 - 1:07am

Beverly Anderson is mad as hell. She just started to get tickets for parking in her own driveway.

That's right. The District of Columbia is ticketing people who park their cars in their own driveways.

"This is clearly an attempt by the city to extort money out of property owners," Anderson tells WTOP.

Anderson has received two of the $20 tickets in the past month. Anderson has owned the Capitol Hill house (and the driveway, so she thought) for more than ten years and has never gotten a ticket. And she's not alone.

It seems Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton has also been breaking the law in the eyes of the D.C. Department of Public Works.

"Not only has the Congresswoman been ticketed in her own driveway, she has received a towing ticket on her car parked in her driveway," writes Sonsyrea Tate Montgomery, a spokesperson for Norton. "She did what any other Member would do -and any resident. She contacted her Council Member, Tommy Wells, who assured her the Council will take care of this problem even if it means passing a new law."

D.C. Councilmember Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) says he's been getting lots of complaints.

"For the first time in anyone's memory," Wells says. "People are starting to get ticketed in their own driveways. This is ridiculous and we're going to get to the bottom of it."

To that end, Wells called the Director of the Department of Public Works, Bill Howland, to find out why his agency was issuing these tickets.

"I asked him what's going on," Wells said, "Is this some kind of revenue raising or policy change? He said he'd get back to me."

Wells said he asked Howland if his department would start issuing warnings for first time offenders.

"He said "No, we don't do that'," Wells said. "If the government is going to be unreasonable about this then we're going to have to look at changing the law."

So what does the law say?

"Any area between the property line and the building restriction line shall be considered as private property set aside and treated as public space under the care and maintenance of the property owner."

Basically what that means is most property owners in the District don't own the land between their front door and the sidewalk, but they are responsible for taking care of it. It's why you can get a ticket for drinking beer on your front porch in the Nation's Capital. You're technically on public space. It's also why the city can ticket you for parking in your own driveway if you don't pull your car deep enough into the driveway beyond the façade of your house or building. - WTOP

Go read the whole story. In this case, the city again has a ridiculous suggestion to solve this problem, rent back the property you own from the city. Only then can you park in your driveway.

This is just one reason (of many) why we have not considered looking at any houses in DC as we look for a new place to live.

B.T.W. Here is a picture of my car almost dug out after the first blizzard a week ago.

-------------------- --------------------