I can't tell you how awesome I felt on my run this morning!! I think I have to thank my awesome massage therapist guy for that. I have used him a couple of times now and I definitely notice a difference in what he can do for me. I have been running 8:30s and 9s for the most part, but this morning, I ran 6 and my last 3 were 7:30s. WOW! My running is finally starting to come around - I guess it just takes a little longer when you're 40 ;-)

So, tomorrow is my Muscle Mountain Mania ride! 50 Miles of North Georgia mountains - should be fun (the going down part anyway ;-)  Being my normal non-planning self, I waited until the last minute to make a decision on which of my 2 bikes I would ride. I have a 15 year-old Myata (Japanese bike) that I bought used for $150 several years ago. It was a steal as it had great components on it, but it is 15 years old. The reason I thought I'd use it is because it has a 27 cog gear on the back which will make going up steep mountains for miles and miles a little more palatable. My other bike - Trek 2300 - is much newer and lighter, but has a 23 on the back which makes for a long day in the hills (hard to believe those 4 cogs can make such a huge difference, but it does). So, yesterday while riding to work on the Myata - my normal commute bike - my rear rim broke. The spoke and nipple just pulled right through the rim - unrideable. So, I could by a new rim, but you usually have to order wheels which takes at least a couple of days. So, I thought I'd put a new cassette on my Trek with a 27. Brought it to the bike shop and the guy calls me later to tell me, he did NOT have one in stock - oops. Well, I got lucky and found one at an REI at 8pm last night and brought it to my bike guy this morning. Whew! So, I'm riding the Trek with my 12/27 cassette on the back and a shiny new chain!!

Once the ride is done, the family is headed for St. Simons Georgia for a little spring break R&R. Not sure if I'll have any time to blog or not, but we'll see. I'm sure I won't keep up with any real news.

Ride on!

It seems plausible that the protests around the country against any kind of legislation making it harder to immigrate illegally may be having the opposite of the intended affect. In reading and listening to new reports (which one always has to take with a grain of salt), it seems the protesters are either illegals themselves or the children of illegals. Further, a good portion of the LEGAL immigration community, even Hispanics, are madder than hell about these protests. Here's a link to Powerline about it (which then links to another site), but it is interesting that 60% to 80% are against ILLEGAL Immigration. With the backlash from this stunt, I suspect the American people will be LESS willing to accept any legislation that doesn't somehow punish illegals through fines, deportment, etc.

We will see...

I watched 1 segment of O'Reilly the other night - pretty rare considering I am usually doing something with the family at 8pm (I know, sounds just like the wife who doesn't watch Oprah, but starts most sentences with "On Oprah today..."). Anyway, the segment pitted a conservative, evangelical Christian group leader that is herding youths to fight against the immorality splattered across our cultural outlets such as Hollywood against a counter-protesting tin-foil hat wearing liberal pacifist.

The lib was basically protesting that the Christian group is pushing for a "theocracy" and of course her two main points which PROVE this are (quite predictably): abortion and gay marriage, with a little anti-Iraq War appeasement thrown in for good measure. While I've gone over abortion time and time again, I'll briefly cover her arguments which, I might add, she had - her "cherry-picked" facts - at the ready.

Abortion (I'm paraphrasing):

• "It is NOT a baby, it is a fetus. That is a scientific FACT." Call it whatever you want - scientifically speaking - but it is in FACT another separate life that is growing in side of a woman by her own choosing. To kill that baby\fetus 90% of the time in the name of convenience, not safety, but utter convenience, is SICK. Period. To brush it off by calling it a fetus to make it sound more like removing an appendix than a human life is ludicrous.
• I'm pretty sure I heard her say "women are not incubators". What kind of stupid ass statement is that? Biologically, a woman's role is to reproduce and that is, like it or not, how a baby is gestated. A man's role is to fertilize the egg so that it will become a fetus\baby. To use the "incubator" analogy only diminishes the beauty that human reproduction really is and is a poor attempt to reduce it to something cold and unemotional so as to legitimize killing.
• In response to O'Reilly's comment that "90% of AMA Doctors won't do an abortion." her assinine reply is that they are "all scared of being killed". Please. When is the last time any ultra-right wackos actually pulled off any violence? What's more, I doubt that even if some doctor's are frightened of consequences from performing abortions that they would answer in the negative purely from that risk on a questionnaire.
• In response to O'Reilly's statement that "several million baby\fetuses have been killed by abortion, her comeback is the Iraq War. Perfect non-sequitor. In response to fact, she answers with a question that has nothing to do with the topic, nor a position that her debate opponent has endorsed in any way.

Ultimately, she comes off as a big baby herself as if abortion is some super-important topic and any laws relating to it imply Theocracy. Her arguments are a joke as is her thesis.

The other topic in the debate to attempt to support her thesis is the Gay Marriage issue. This is even less important than the abortion issue. First, it is NOT illegal for gay people to get married. It is only not recognized by the state. When I was getting married, I didn't even know that I was supposed to sign state papers to recognize the marriage. I didn't care then and I still don't care whether or not the STATE thinks I'm married. In fact, I know a lot of people who don't get married to avoid being saddled with the income tax marriage penalty. The Gay Marriage debate is NOT ABOUT LOVE and it is NOT ABOUT CIVIL RIGHTS. Pure and simple, it is about getting attention and mainstream acceptance and sticking it in our damn faces and I'm sick of it. And once again, a gay marriage amendment, which I don't support, does NOT a theocracy make. You cannot argue that having laws consistent with the bible text somehow makes us a theocracy. That's like calling what happened in Iraq under Saddam a democracy because they held a sham election.

If you believe we are headed toward a theocracy, then compare for me where we were 10, 20, 50 years ago vs. today and tell me how we are closer than we were yesterday. Please, I'm ready for something rational.

p.s. I do have one small request. My state, Georgia, and the state I grew up in, Virginia, still have blue laws regarding the sale of alcohol on Sunday. Would someone please stand up and get rid of these stupid, antiquated law!!! I'm sick of loading my cart with a case of beer only to get to the checkout counter to be told "it's Sunday, sorry." What the FFFFF?!?!?!?

This is a big topic, but I read an article by Dennis Prager that was written in part due to the french riots (see my previous post) that made a few succint points:

"Socialism teaches its citizens to expect everything, even if they contribute nothing."

"Socialism teaches its citizens that they have a plethora of rights and few corresponding obligations -- except to be taxed."

"Under socialism, one is not only liberated from having to take care of oneself; one is also liberated from having to take care of others. The state will take care of me and of everybody else."

Ultimately, while the IDEA of socialism might sound altruistic, it makes it worse for everyone (except those in power making the rules, which BTW, they choose NOT to live by).

That is why I get really annoyed when some liberals suggest that conservatives are uncaring, selfish and greedy. On the whole, I think it is the opposite. I do care and I do donate time and money despite the fact that the government confiscates some of my wealth for that same purported purpose. Those that complain about the "evil rich" wanting tax breaks assume that that is bad for the poor, but nothing is further from the truth. I believe that if the federal government taxed us less and provided fewer programs for the poor, the poor would be better off. Sounds counter-intuitive I know but I believe that the long-term result would be that local communities would support those in need with far better results with far fewer wasted resources than the federal government. Those that ASSUME that the needy will be worse off with federal program cuts are assuming that the STATE (or should I say country) is responsible for people. That is the problem.

Read Prager's whole article. It won't change your mind, but if you haven't made it up yet, then perhaps there's hope.

If you follow the news, you probably know that thousands of students have been protesting in France for a week or more over a proposed law which would allow private enterprise a break in "employment for life" law so that you could actually fire a new hire within the first two years of employment. I find it outrageous that even France has such a law that so restricts private enterprise, but that's just me.

In reading the powerline post about this, I was struck by this quote:

""We are here for our children. We are very worried about what will happen to them," said Philippe Decrulle, an Air France flight attendant. "My son is 23, and he has no job. That is normal in France.""

So, it's normal for young people not to have jobs and they think that leaving the law as-is is going to HELP matters? Are they FRIED?

Perhaps these students need a lesson in Economics 101. Socialistic laws severely restricting private enterprise actually leads to less growth and less jobs. Or did they not figure that out from their 10% unemployment rate and meager GDP growth.

The future of France is not looking good at the moment:

• Crappy economy
• Islamic fundamentalism
• Birth rates that can't sustain the population
• reliance on immigrants to sustain social programs
• on the take with Oil-for-Food
• Napa eclipsing their wine dominance
• Lance Armstong retiring

It's all bad.