Just a Great Email

  Once in a while, we get things that just is an interesting bit. This one is an email that really does not take place in Louisville, but the “victim” mentality that is the motivation behind it occurs within the heart of many, if not all people, from time to time. If not, it is just another great email:

  “

Stella Awards

It’s time again for the annual ‘Stella Awards’! For those  unfamiliar with these awards, they are named after 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued the McDonald’s in New Mexico , where she purchased coffee. You remember, she took the lid off the coffee and put it between her knees while she was driving. Who would ever think one could get  burned doing that, right? That’ s right; these are awards for the most outlandish lawsuits and verdicts in the U.S. You know, the kinds of cases that make you scratch your head. So keep your head scratcher handy.

 

 

 

Here are the Stellas for the past year:

 

 

 

*SEVENTH PLACE* 

Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas was awarded $80,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The store owners were understandably surprised by the verdict, considering the running toddler was her own son. 

Start scratching! 

* SIXTH PLACE * 

Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles , California won $74,000 plus medical expenses when his neighbour ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Truman apparently didn’t notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbour’s hubcaps. 

Scratch some more… 

* FIFTH PLACE * 

Terrence Dickson, of Bristol , Pennsylvania , who was leaving a house he had just burglarized by way of the garage. Unfortunately for Dickson, the automatic garage door opener malfunctioned and he could not get the garage door to open. Worse, he couldn’t re-enter the house because the door connecting the garage to the house locked when Dickson pulled it shut. Forced to sit for eight, count ‘em, EIGHT days and survive on a case of Pepsi and a large bag of dry dog food, he sued the homeowner’s insurance company claiming undue mental Anguish. Amazingly, the jury said the insurance company must pay Dickson $500,000 for his anguish. We should all have this kind of anguish. Keep scratching. There are more…… 

Double hand scratching after this one… 

*FOURTH PLACE* 

Jerry Williams, of Little Rock, Arkansas, garnered 4th Place in the Stella’s when he was awarded $14,500 plus medical expenses after being bitten on the butt by his next door neighbour’s beagle – even though the beagle was on a chain in its owner’s fenced yard. Williams did not get as much as he asked for because the jury believed the beagle might have been provoked at the time of the butt bite because Williams had climbed over the fence into the yard and repeatedly shot the dog with a pellet gun. 

Pick a new spot to scratch, you’re getting a bald spot.. 

* THIRD PLACE * 

Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania because a jury ordered a Philadelphia restaurant to pay her $113,500 after she slipped on a spilled soft drink and broke her tailbone. The reason the soft drink was on the floor: Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument. What ever happened to people being responsible for their own actions? 

Only two more so ease up o n the scratching…. 

*SECOND PLACE* 

Kara Walton, of Claymont , Delaware sued the owner of a night club in a nearby city because she fell from the bathroom window to the floor, knocking out her two front teeth. Even though Ms. Walton was trying to sneak through the ladies room window to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge, the jury said the night club had to pay her $12,000….oh, yeah, plus dental expenses. Go figure. 

 

Ok. Here we go!!

* FIRST PLACE * 

This year’s runaway First Place Stella Award winner was:  Mrs. Merv Grazinski, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, who purchased new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, from an OU football game, having driven on to the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver’s seat to go to the back of the Winnebago to make herself a sandwich. Not surprisingly, the motor home left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Also not surprisingly, Mrs. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not putting in the owner’s manual that she couldn’t actually leave the driver’s seat while the cruise control was set. The Oklahoma jury awarded her, are you sitting down? 
$1,750,000 PLUS a new motor home. Winnebago actually changed their manuals as a result of this suit, just in case Mrs. Grazinski has any relatives who might also buy a motor home.

 

 

 

Are we, as a society, getting more stupid….

 

or are more members of Congress serving on juries these days?

 

Hello, Council? Yes, We Would Like A Strong Ethics Bill…

  Louisville Metro Council has yet to  pass an ordinance that ensures that all metro employees be governed by strong ethic legislation. This failure to produce such legislation has been perplexing and troubling to various people throughout the area.

  Louisville has long been desirous to show the nation that it can compete with larger, more dominant cities. The perception that we are a strong, idealistic, and capable peoples has been attempted to be displayed in the past years by obtaining professional basketball teams- and we failed. We have a mayor who has attempted to re-interpret studies in effort to make Louisville look good, only to receive reports by research groups that show things such as Louisville being a pit for pornography gawkers. We have even attempted to utilize religion by stating such facts as Louisville has the larges dominant black congregation in all of Kentucky at St. Stephen’s Baptist Church, and Louisville is also host to the largest church in Kentucky, and fifteenth largest in the United States, found at Southeast Christian Church. This is undermined by the fact that the murders increase every year in Louisville, as do the accusations of various public officials and entities committing questionable acts.

  How do we rectify these issues? These issues are, oddly enough, symptoms of a problem; not the problem itself. These symptoms are evidence of something anyone, should they choose to be honest, must confess. These symptoms are evidence that man’s heart is wicked, that man is corrupt, and in need of repair. Since government can not, or will not, turn to the correct entity in effort to repair their own hearts, in is absolutely necessary to ensure a strong ethical legislation to keep them from acting in inethical manner.

  Strong ethical legislation will benefit the city in two major ways:

1) It keeps employees from acting inethically towards themselves, each other, and the community.

2) It keeps the community, and other workers from making baseless accusations regarding questionable acts. With strong ethical legislation, there are no questionable acts, there are only those that are correct, and those that are not.

  Sadly, here in Louisville, compromise is the norm, much to the chagrin of the public. Officials here continually desire to compromise ethics based upon politics, not policy. It is, and has been various individuals in both parties that have weakened the legislation by demanding that they be heard. Who will hear Louisvillians?

  It is absolutely essential that Louisville have a strong ordinance on ethics. A strong, ethical government  precedes a stonger, more stable community. By showing restraint from certain actions, responsibility for actions, and accountability for err in actions, this ordinance can bring about the change that this city has been longing for. With every verbal shot that shoots from the mouth of politicians amongst each other, there is a shot that rings out through our city streets that kills another citizen. A government that governs without restraint is exemplified by a people who continually refuse to exhibit restraint. With every delay to enact an ordinance that this community needs is the very evidence that these leaders are more concerned with their own politics, instead of understanding the urgency within the community.

  Hello, Council? Yes, we would like a strong ethics bill- NOW!

Ethics Issues…

  All of Louisville, and much of Kentucky, is now aware of the various ethical issues that plague many within the Louisville Metro Government, but few citizens are aware of the lack of progress regarding a strong Ethics Ordinance.

  Three days ago, Tony Hyatt, the Director of Communications of The Majority Caucus of Louisville Metro Council released the following statement:

  “

 

Louisville – Councilwoman Tina Ward-Pugh (D-9) has announced the meeting of the Ethics Work Group of the Government Accountability Committee will be at 4:00pm on Monday November 9^th.

            The group will gold regular meetings every Monday at 4:00pm with the exception of Monday, November 16^th. That meeting will be at 5:30pm.

            The Ethics Work Group is in the process of reviewing two proposed ethics ordinances for Metro Government. One is sponsored by Council members Marianne Butler (D-15) and Jon Ackerson (R-18). The other is sponsored by Councilman Ken Fleming (R-7).

            The Ethics Work Group meeting will be carried live on Metro TV, Insight Cable Channel 25 and will be streamed live on the Metro Council home page at www.louivilleky.gov/metrocouncil.”

  Though there was a workgroup meeting, the purpose of the group is not exactly accurate, though it is “technically”. The fact is that the workgroup was forced to occur because of a meltdown in the process by Brent Ackerson, (Democrat-26th District). Sources state that the Democrats in Council are pushing hard against the bill brought to the council by Ken Fleming for various reasons including the “accountability” issue, and the fact that it would allow more light to be shone on issues that have, and are currently occurring in various government departments. According to the same sources, mayor Jerry Abramson is not supportive of Fleming’s bill, though it reflects many aspects of examples throughout the nation. Many individuals are stating that Councilman Jim King is attempting to push a vote through, or the bill out of council so that he can continue to do well in his bid for mayor.

  Further complications are that Republican Jon Ackerson has co-sponsored the bill with Marianne Butler. This relationship has been brought about because, in an email from Jon Ackerson, Councilman Ken Fleming, whose ordinance was first co-sponsored by Council President David Tandy, (Democrat- 4th District), did not allow an item from Ackerson to be admitted in the ordinance. According to sources close to Fleming, the ordinance was prepared and had already received a co-sponsor long before Ackerson approached Fleming.

  In light of the recent happenings with Metro Animal Services, many are seeing the need for a strong ethics ordinance, and various individuals, such as Democrat Tina Ward-Pugh, are attempting to assist in providing a bill that would be benefiical to the people of Louisville.

  Then, there is that “accountability” thing. Many democrats have hinged upon the “accountability” that is necessary to those issuing complaints, particularly false complaints. The problem with this theory is that from the genesis of this country, our nation’s Founding Fathers held that it was the public that was to hold the government accountable. The ordinance proposed by Butler does not allow the citizens to do such.

  Various individuals in government have stated that they believe that Butler’s ordinance will ensure that people file only claims that are “true” but her bill also has such a heavy fee attached to it that it could, according to others, keep people from reporting truth thinking that they may be punished to do so.

  Both sides are asking the public to step up and to speak out regarding the ethics bill. Recently one individual spoke in front of the Council regarding corruption in government. Many citizens speak out about the corruption, but the government here in Louisville are working very slowly and could possibly ensure that corruption is a thing of the “norm”.

No M.A.S.!

 Through recent developments, it is no wonder why Dr. Gilles Maloche would desire to resign at this time. A recent federal lawsuit, and a sexual harrassment suit slapped against him and various other government officials  would cause anyone to resign- if they had placed themselves into the predicament that Dr. Maloche has. The problem with Dr. Maloche, or dare I state that one of the many problems with Dr. Maloche is the connections that he has to the mayor. Both Dr. Maloche, and the soon to be interim director, Wayne Zalinsky have been, and currently are backed by Mayor Jerry Abramson.

  When asked if he was going to fire Maloche amidst all of the allegations, Jerry Abramson stated that he was not given the opportunity. That is indeed a lie. The sexual harrassment complaint by Dawn Simpson ended in January, AND it was substantiated. If the mayor does not find the opportunity to be rid of this hinderance which has defined the Metro Animal Services within nine months, then it is because the mayor does not desire to be rid of him. Further is the fact that Wayne Zalinsky, who is also mentioned in the lawsuit as he was Dawn Simpson’s attorney, is also proving to have a controversial reputation.

  All the mayors men in M.A.S seem to remain unlinked to the mayor, for now. The problem is that all major links will sooner or later come home to roost. Until it does, all the kings horses and men will continue to fall, and the reputation of the city could be what breaks from it.

  Then again, more is to come in the story…

Accepting Obama & Yarmuth’s Challenge

I openly and gladly accept President Barak Obama’s and Representative John Yarmuth’s challenge to have an open, honest, sincere, and intelligent dialogue regarding the Healthcare “reform” that Obama wishes to rush through Congress. All I ask is that while I am doing so, President Obama and Representative Yarmuth agree to utilize the same adjectives to describe themselves as many members of their party have utilized to describe individuals such as myself who disagree with their rush to “reform”. I would particularly appreciate that they call themselves “un-American”, (courtesy of Nancy Pelosi- Yarmuth’s boss),  uninterested (based on Yarmuth’s statement in the Courier Journal this morning),  “political terrorists” (Representative Baron Hill,  a Democrat from Indiana),  who show a “lack of civility and lack of meaningful dialogue” (Representative Ben Chandler, a Democrat from Kentucky), partisans (Yarmuth), who are “mislead” (Obama), and who “scare and mislead the American people” (Obama). That noted: here is the first in a series of questions that I have for President Obama, John Yarmuth, Baron Hill, Ben Chandler, Arlen Specter, Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Randall, Barbara Boxer, and anyone else who would like to tell the American people that the healthcare “reform” bill is a bad deal for America. These questions, together with your answers, (or lack of them), will be enough to allow Americans to come to their own conclusions regarding the bill, and your competency as their representatives.

  Please note two things before I begin my initial questions in what will be a series of questions:

1)      This is a bill, despite President Obama’s earlier assertion that it was not. It was introduced as a bill in the House, thus making it a bill.

2)      I am reading all of the bill, over 1,000 pages of it, and I am reading the bill that Kennedy wrote as well. During these questions, I will refer to the page and line of the Act in which I will offer direct quotes, then proceed to ask the question.

 

Here are the initial questions:

 

1)      Congressman John Dingell (Democrat from Michigan’s 15^th District) is the individual that wrote and presented the bill. He has since stated that he has not read all of it, nor does he understand all of it. Why should the American people believe that you have read/understand the “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009”?

2)      Division A entitled “Affordable Health Care Choices” Sec. 100, page five lines 11-14 states “initiates shared responsibility among workers, employers, and the government; so that all Americans have coverage of essential health benefits. Please define American. Will this definition include all individuals within our borders and properties owned by this nation, or will it be to those who are legal citizens of this country?

3)      In the same lines referenced above is the mentioning of “essential health benefits”. What are “essential health benefits”? Is that a basic check-up, or does it include expensive and extensive procedures- including those, such as abortions, that are controversial? Who determines what these benefits are, and how is that individual held accountable?

4)      Page 9, lines 4-6 gives the definition of “Dependent” according to this act. It states that a dependent “has the meaning given such term by the Commissioner and includes a spouse.” Who else does it include? Who does it exclude?

5)      Page 10, lines 7 & 8 gives the definition of the family according to this act. This definition is as follows: “The term ‘family’ means an individual and includes the individual’s independents.” This is a very broad definition, and it really does not differentiate between traditional families and homosexual “marriages”. Will this act allow the inclusion of partners of individuals who choose to participate in relationships outside of the understanding of traditional marriage?

6)      Page 15, lines 7& 8 refer to two subtitles: Subtitle B and Subtitle C. Subtitle B is “relating to affordable coverage”, and subtitle C is “relating to essential benefits”. Who determines affordability? What is the “sliding scale” based on- minimal pay, or fair charge? Who is responsible for ensuring that only the “essential benefits” (whatever those are), are met and not excessive practices?

 

  If you do not mind answering these questions today, I will send you more again tomorrow. Until then, please feel free to note that I have taken your challenge, but I will not allow you to step away from the questions without accountability; nor will I tolerate your name-calling and disgraceful treatment of my fellow Americans.

Courier-Journal Article Validates Earlier Post

  Yesterday’s post “Help the Economy- Own Something!” was validated by this morning’s edition of the Courier-Journal. In the article “‘Clunker’ cash lifts automakers, dealers” writer Jere Downs writes of the joy that auto dealers have found in the program “Cash for Clunkers”. As was posted in yesterdays post here, the auto industry as a whole, from the auto makers to the sellers are benefitting greatly from the program brought on by the Obama administration.

  Mr. Downs also validates the fact that the motivation behind the program is the economy. The governement desires that it’s citizens purchase and drive vehicles that have more miles per gallon before. These are not necessarily automobiles that are better constructed, or cheaper to fix. They are just more desired by the government. Also, the fact that these vehicles cause less polution is extremely helpful.

  The program, the article reports, “surprises” Ford. It is doubtful that it will be as much as a shocker for Ford as it will be for the American people when the taxes rise. They most certainly will have to rise, because in order to save 156 million dollars, the government has caused a trillion dollar deficit.

  With numbers like that, the article refuses to validate another truth that was in the post yesterday: The American people will not be able to help the economy by going further in debt and spending money that they do not have, any more than the government can continue spending money on programs with money they do not have.  The best way to help the economy is to own something. Until then, we as Americans are gripping at sand, and treating our money and rights much the same way.

  To read the article at the Courier-Journal by Jere Downs, go to http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20090803/BUSINESS/908030345/‘Clunker++cash+lifts+automakers++dealers.

  To write to Jere Downs, email him at jdowns@courier-journal.com

Help the Economy- Own Something!

  Various economists have predicted that the “Cash for Clunkers” fad initiated by the Obama administration will cause more harm than good in the long term. The reason it will, they are speculating, is because it is the government installing billions of dollars that they do not have into a program that allows citizens to purchase new vehicles at extremely high trade in rates and owe money while doing so.

  It is best explained like this… You have an old vehicle that is a gas guzzler. Obviously the government wants that boat off the road, because you are destroying the atmosphere everytime you crank it over. So, in order to get you to abide by their wishes, they are willing to pay auto dealers money to ensure that you get “great deal” on your trade in earth killer. In return, that helps you get a “great deal” on purchasing a new car- which you will make payments on for at least five years. This will help the business get the money that they need to stay in business, the government to get your polluting rear-end out of your “clunker”, and you to get a vehicle that you enjoy. Sounds great, right?

  Well. maybe in that light, it does. When one looks at the facts, however, the problems with the deal may not look so appealing. You, as a consumer, now have a mortgage payment to keep up with, your usual electricity bills, and even though the government now states you will save more money in gas than what your car payment is, (which really makes me wonder if the politicians are utilizing fuel properly themselves), you are left with a car payment that you did not have before, and with that new car comes new insurance rates. All this in an ever growing jobless rate. To really provide encouragement, pay no attention to the fact that most of the utility companies in the country are stating that utilities will rise.

  The best way to help the economy is not to buy something big off of borrowed money, but to own something. We, as Americans, have become indebted with our vehicles, homes, furniture, clothing, that we really do not own anything. Foreclosures, bankruptcies, and ruined lives are all throughout the country, and the government’s way of dealing with those issues is to bring us into more debt, both personally, and as a nation.

  Keep your clunker. Utilize the payment that you are saving to pay off your mortgage. Then you can save to buy a less expensive vehicle that does not kill off your neighbors.

  We all make stupid decisions when it comes to finances. I know that I have made my fair share, and probably yours as well. The point is, if we continue to purchase big things on little income, the expense will be more than we thought. You want to help the economy- own something.

The Forgotten Graduate

On Friday, May 15, 2009 at Gheen’s Auditorium on the campus of Male High School, Jefferson County Public Schools Adult Education Systems held it’s 32^nd General Education Diploma graduation ceremony. This ceremony was not announced in newspapers, on websites, nor on television, but it was one that every one in attendance would not have missed. This was the day, the hour, and the minute that so many individuals were looking forward for, sometimes for many years of their lives.

  While many individuals considered to be “graduating” would have been fresh out of high school or college, these students were 20-50 years of age. They came from a variety of backgrounds, but all were united at one school that they never finished, and some had never attended, for one chance to do what they had never done before.

  There were family members in the audience, willing participants to the party that was bound to happen. Some had waited for decades to witness this event. Some had come with flowers, some with cards, some with babies, but they had come to celebrate.

  After a few short speeches, the names were called. Since there had not been a “rehearsal” as there is in “traditional” graduations; the graduates handed little 3” x 5” index cards to the Master of Ceremony to read their name. Beaming, they walked, strutted, and danced across the stage. Some had tears as they walked down the front of the stage- all possessed smiles of some sort.

  The audience was willing participants to the celebration. Few stayed in their seats. Many ran forward to the edge of the stage to cheer, high five, and snap as many photos as they could. The screams of nicknames, “I love you”, and celebratory yells resonated through the auditorium.

    Finally, it came to the end, and the moment was coming for me, as I saw my wife of ten years- my beautiful bride- walk across the stage. Pregnant with our fourth child, her gown was unable to be zipped. She almost did not walk. She almost did not enjoy her few seconds of notoriety. Thankfully, she did; all because amongst this group of unnoticed graduates, there was one forgotten graduate who helped make a difference.

  I do not recall his name. He was the last person to walk across the stage. His body type was “frumpy”, and his gown was unzipped as well. His hair was cut, or rather shaven, to where the scalp was easily viewed. When he walked across the stage, few clapped. He grabbed his diploma and sat down. When the even closed, he left. He was unnoticed; he was forgotten.

  On the way to the restaurant that night, my wife informed me that he had seen her crying in frustration that night at the thought that she was to big to wear a gown. She wanted to leave and informed those around her that she was leaving. She was reduced to tears when he asked to speak to her.

  “You have a reason to be big” he said. “Me, my reason is that I like to eat.” “You have a family here,” he continued, “and I thought that I would not walk because my family does not want me to be here, they do not even care to be here. But I worked hard for this, and you worked hard for this. You need to walk across that stage and get that diploma. You earned it. It’s yours. Go get it”.

 

  I do not know his name. I do not recall his identity. That night, however, the forgotten graduate that night made a big difference in the life of my family. I now see the Adult Education Program as quite possibly the program we the public should not only endorse, but celebrate. That night, the forgotten graduate became someone worth noticing in a group of unnoticed graduates- unnoticed from public view, but the view from the public is often skewed, and perhaps, in need of drastic change by those we have forgotten.