DDG-1000, stealth destroyer.
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2013/10/skunk-at-big-z-party.html
Scroll way down for picture of ship floating.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Observations concerning a necessary event
There arrives a time in life when you should not sit on or in anything that places your knees above your waist. Like Neil Sadaka said, “Getting up is hard to do.”
Peter Ustinov knew, too. When he received word of pending knighthood, he was asked, “Can you kneel?” The question, he said, should have been, “Can you get up?”
Or, John Pinette’s response when a personal trainer mentioned situps: “I don’t do ups.”
All of that has to do with a rather unmannered subject: Bathroom facilities at my in-law’s house.
This happened more than twenty years ago, but the reality still exists.
For some reason, my in-laws decided anyone using the sit-down appliance should do so about 18 inches from the floor. I am 6-feet, 1½ inches tall. Placing the lower part of my body in a sitting position 18 inches from the floor is not comfortable.
Not content with lowering the height of the necessary facility, my in-laws also equipped their commodes with padded seats. And, the maker of those seats had decided an average American backside is 12 inches across. I say, Nay, nay.
When my wife decided to replace the sit-down facilities at our house, she chose the right size – waist level with knees and width to fit older Americans.
Distasteful, I know. But words of advice anyway.
Peter Ustinov knew, too. When he received word of pending knighthood, he was asked, “Can you kneel?” The question, he said, should have been, “Can you get up?”
Or, John Pinette’s response when a personal trainer mentioned situps: “I don’t do ups.”
All of that has to do with a rather unmannered subject: Bathroom facilities at my in-law’s house.
This happened more than twenty years ago, but the reality still exists.
For some reason, my in-laws decided anyone using the sit-down appliance should do so about 18 inches from the floor. I am 6-feet, 1½ inches tall. Placing the lower part of my body in a sitting position 18 inches from the floor is not comfortable.
Not content with lowering the height of the necessary facility, my in-laws also equipped their commodes with padded seats. And, the maker of those seats had decided an average American backside is 12 inches across. I say, Nay, nay.
When my wife decided to replace the sit-down facilities at our house, she chose the right size – waist level with knees and width to fit older Americans.
Distasteful, I know. But words of advice anyway.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Maybe we’ll stop doing it; we haven’t yet decided
‘US weighs ending spying on allied heads of state’
“WASHINGTON (AP) — Faced with a flood of revelations about U.S. spying practices, the White House is considering ending its eavesdropping on friendly foreign leaders, a senior administration official said.
“A final decision has not been made and the move is still under review, the official said.”
Sen. Diane Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, said “the White House” told her "collection on our allies will not continue." The “senior administration official” said Feinstein’s
statement “was not accurate.”
http://hosted2.ap.org/ARLID/a5050f4ad4f44dafab85bb41a15281cf/Article_2013-10-29-NSA%20Surveillance/id-b48116b19c0f4ffdbc6d705df7b6e0ab
(When caught with your hand in the cookie jar, you say: (1) I’m sorry. It won’t happen again; (2) I didn’t know I wasn’t supposed to get cookies; (3) What cookie jar?
(You do not say: Yeah, you caught me. Maybe I won’t do it again. I’m thinking about it.)
“WASHINGTON (AP) — Faced with a flood of revelations about U.S. spying practices, the White House is considering ending its eavesdropping on friendly foreign leaders, a senior administration official said.
“A final decision has not been made and the move is still under review, the official said.”
Sen. Diane Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, said “the White House” told her "collection on our allies will not continue." The “senior administration official” said Feinstein’s
statement “was not accurate.”
http://hosted2.ap.org/ARLID/a5050f4ad4f44dafab85bb41a15281cf/Article_2013-10-29-NSA%20Surveillance/id-b48116b19c0f4ffdbc6d705df7b6e0ab
(When caught with your hand in the cookie jar, you say: (1) I’m sorry. It won’t happen again; (2) I didn’t know I wasn’t supposed to get cookies; (3) What cookie jar?
(You do not say: Yeah, you caught me. Maybe I won’t do it again. I’m thinking about it.)
Monday, October 28, 2013
Air Force gives extra benefits to homosexuals
The Air Force has followed the Army in giving “administrative absence” to homosexuals who want to get married. Air Force homosexuals living in a state that does not allow men to marry men or women to marry women may get seven to 10 extra days absence from duty if “located more than 100 miles from a U.S. state, the District of Columbia or other jurisdictions that allows the couple to marry. According to the policy, if two servicemembers are part of a couple and desire to get married, both members may be granted an administrative absence if qualified. Members may be granted up to seven days if stationed in the continental United States, and up to 10 days if stationed overseas.”
An Air Force man who wishes to marry a woman or an Air Force woman who wishes to marry a man must take normal, charged leave.
Of course, neither the Army nor the Air Force gives or denies extra privileges based on heterosexuality or homosexuality. All Soldiers and Airmen are treated the same.
http://www.military.com/military-report/af-sets-same-sex-marriage-leave-policy
An Air Force man who wishes to marry a woman or an Air Force woman who wishes to marry a man must take normal, charged leave.
Of course, neither the Army nor the Air Force gives or denies extra privileges based on heterosexuality or homosexuality. All Soldiers and Airmen are treated the same.
http://www.military.com/military-report/af-sets-same-sex-marriage-leave-policy
‘Perks of the ruling class’
By MICHAEL F. CANNON
SPECIAL TO THE DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE
This article was published October 27, 2013 at 3:11 a.m.
America has a two-party system. But it’s not Republicans versus Democrats. It’s the ruling class-Republicans and Democrats-against everyone else. Consider how President Obama gave Congress its very own Obamacare waiver in August.
Obamacare includes a provision that should cost each member of Congress and each staffer $5,000 to $11,000 per year. Needless to say, the ruling class was not pleased.
Congress wasn’t about to try to exempt itself from this provision explicitly, though. If John Q. Congressman voted to give himself an Obamacare waiver that his constituents don’t get, he wouldn’t be John Q. Congressman much longer. What’s an aristocrat to do?
On July 30 I predicted that even though he had no authority to do so, President Obama would waive that provision at taxpayers’ expense. On August 1, he ignobly obliged the aristocracy by decreeing we peasants give each member and staffer $5,000 or $11,000, depending on whether they want self-only or family coverage. It’s good to be the king.
The president’s supporters, like courtesans of old, are trying to quell a peasant uprising by denying there were any special favors. These denials ring hollow.
Obamacare imposes two costs on members of Congress and their staff. First, it kicks them out of their current health plans, leaving them to buy coverage on Obamacare’s health-insurance exchanges. Second, it makes no provision for the federal government to keep paying $5,000 or $11,000 toward the cost of their insurance as the Treasury does today.
The second cost is by far the larger one; it amounts to a pay cut of $5,000 or $11,000. Many staffers were threatening to quit or retire early.
When the president’s supporters claim that Congress isn’t being exempted, they mean that Obama didn’t exempt them from Cost No. 1. Which is true. But he did exempt them from Cost No. 2.
Rescinding that pay cut may or may not have been the right thing to do.But it’s still a break that ordinary Americans like Kevin Pace, an adjunct music professor at Northern Virginia Community College, doesn’t get. To avoid penalties under Obamacare, his employer cut his hours-sticking Pace with an $8,000 pay cut.
Supporters say President Obama merely held Congress harmless. Exactly. Kevin Pace and countless others like him aren’t being held harmless, because they’re not members of Congress. As Pace put it,
“This isn’t right on any level.” Things would be unseemly enough if Congress’ Obamacare waiver was unquestionably legal.
But some experts say the president had no authority to grant it.
That didn’t stop even Republicans from praising him. Tin-eared Rep. Chris Stewart (R, Utah) gushed: “There’s no question it was the right thing to do. Not just for me, but for my staff. Heavens, I have staff who don’t make much money.This would be a really big bite for them.”
Congressman, you also have constituents who don’t make much money, and who can’t make it appear out of thin air. Enjoy your waiver.
How was I able to predict the president would grant illegal subsidies to members of Congress? He’s a repeat offender.
Obamacare kicked members of Congress out of their current health plans and imposed that $5,000 to $11,000 pay cut immediately upon enactment in 2010. But President Obama just ignored that part of the law. He let members and staff stay in their current health plans and kept the taxpayer money flowing in their direction.
I predicted President Obama would give legally dubious health-insurance subsidies to members of Congress because he is already in his fourth year of doing it.
Nearly all Americans can point to some part of Obamacare that they hate. Seniors hate the Independent Payment Advisory Board, which even Howard Dean calls “a health-care rationing body.”
Unions, teacher assistants, bus drivers, cafeteria workers, and other school employees hate how the law is cutting their pay. Private-sector unions despise the “Cadillac tax” that forces them to fund subsidies their members don’t receive.Young adults hate the penalties for not buying health insurance.
Okay, everybody hates those. In fact, a majority of Americans oppose the entire law.
But only Congress gets relief. Why?
Simple. President Obama doesn’t want Congress to re-open Obamacare. A significant share of congressional Democrats just voted to delay the individual mandate. With once-loyal Democrats now upset over how the law hurts them personally, who knows what else Congress would discard?
President Obama circumvented a potential legislative defeat by giving each member and staffer thousands of taxpayer dollars he had no authority to touch. He’s using taxpayer funds to quiet congressional opposition to Obamacare.
Michael F. Cannon is director of health-policy studies at the Cato Institute and co-editor of Replacing Obamacare. A version of this article originally appeared in nationalreview.com.
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2013/oct/27/perks-ruling-class-20131027/?f=opinion
SPECIAL TO THE DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE
This article was published October 27, 2013 at 3:11 a.m.
America has a two-party system. But it’s not Republicans versus Democrats. It’s the ruling class-Republicans and Democrats-against everyone else. Consider how President Obama gave Congress its very own Obamacare waiver in August.
Obamacare includes a provision that should cost each member of Congress and each staffer $5,000 to $11,000 per year. Needless to say, the ruling class was not pleased.
Congress wasn’t about to try to exempt itself from this provision explicitly, though. If John Q. Congressman voted to give himself an Obamacare waiver that his constituents don’t get, he wouldn’t be John Q. Congressman much longer. What’s an aristocrat to do?
On July 30 I predicted that even though he had no authority to do so, President Obama would waive that provision at taxpayers’ expense. On August 1, he ignobly obliged the aristocracy by decreeing we peasants give each member and staffer $5,000 or $11,000, depending on whether they want self-only or family coverage. It’s good to be the king.
The president’s supporters, like courtesans of old, are trying to quell a peasant uprising by denying there were any special favors. These denials ring hollow.
Obamacare imposes two costs on members of Congress and their staff. First, it kicks them out of their current health plans, leaving them to buy coverage on Obamacare’s health-insurance exchanges. Second, it makes no provision for the federal government to keep paying $5,000 or $11,000 toward the cost of their insurance as the Treasury does today.
The second cost is by far the larger one; it amounts to a pay cut of $5,000 or $11,000. Many staffers were threatening to quit or retire early.
When the president’s supporters claim that Congress isn’t being exempted, they mean that Obama didn’t exempt them from Cost No. 1. Which is true. But he did exempt them from Cost No. 2.
Rescinding that pay cut may or may not have been the right thing to do.But it’s still a break that ordinary Americans like Kevin Pace, an adjunct music professor at Northern Virginia Community College, doesn’t get. To avoid penalties under Obamacare, his employer cut his hours-sticking Pace with an $8,000 pay cut.
Supporters say President Obama merely held Congress harmless. Exactly. Kevin Pace and countless others like him aren’t being held harmless, because they’re not members of Congress. As Pace put it,
“This isn’t right on any level.” Things would be unseemly enough if Congress’ Obamacare waiver was unquestionably legal.
But some experts say the president had no authority to grant it.
That didn’t stop even Republicans from praising him. Tin-eared Rep. Chris Stewart (R, Utah) gushed: “There’s no question it was the right thing to do. Not just for me, but for my staff. Heavens, I have staff who don’t make much money.This would be a really big bite for them.”
Congressman, you also have constituents who don’t make much money, and who can’t make it appear out of thin air. Enjoy your waiver.
How was I able to predict the president would grant illegal subsidies to members of Congress? He’s a repeat offender.
Obamacare kicked members of Congress out of their current health plans and imposed that $5,000 to $11,000 pay cut immediately upon enactment in 2010. But President Obama just ignored that part of the law. He let members and staff stay in their current health plans and kept the taxpayer money flowing in their direction.
I predicted President Obama would give legally dubious health-insurance subsidies to members of Congress because he is already in his fourth year of doing it.
Nearly all Americans can point to some part of Obamacare that they hate. Seniors hate the Independent Payment Advisory Board, which even Howard Dean calls “a health-care rationing body.”
Unions, teacher assistants, bus drivers, cafeteria workers, and other school employees hate how the law is cutting their pay. Private-sector unions despise the “Cadillac tax” that forces them to fund subsidies their members don’t receive.Young adults hate the penalties for not buying health insurance.
Okay, everybody hates those. In fact, a majority of Americans oppose the entire law.
But only Congress gets relief. Why?
Simple. President Obama doesn’t want Congress to re-open Obamacare. A significant share of congressional Democrats just voted to delay the individual mandate. With once-loyal Democrats now upset over how the law hurts them personally, who knows what else Congress would discard?
President Obama circumvented a potential legislative defeat by giving each member and staffer thousands of taxpayer dollars he had no authority to touch. He’s using taxpayer funds to quiet congressional opposition to Obamacare.
Michael F. Cannon is director of health-policy studies at the Cato Institute and co-editor of Replacing Obamacare. A version of this article originally appeared in nationalreview.com.
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2013/oct/27/perks-ruling-class-20131027/?f=opinion
More Civil War research
On Oct. 2, I posted:
“In 1862, H.H. Johnston, my wife’s great-great-great-grandfather, walked from Fort Worth, Texas, to Little Rock. That is 321 miles straight-line, 353 miles by today’s highway.”
I was wrong. It was Pvt. M.H. Johnston, 10th Texas Infantry, and he did not walk from near Fort Worth to Little Rock. Johnston was from the Parker County/Tarrant County area when he enlisted in Co. E, 10th Texas. Co. E walked from the enlistment area to Millican, Texas, in Brazos County and then to Shreveport, La. From Shreveport, the regiment traveled “by water to their destination.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20070312033104/http://members.aol.com/SMckay1234/campnelson.htm
I assume the water route was down the Red River to the Mississippi and then to the Arkansas River and upstream to the Little Rock area. That’s just a guess, though, based on today’s roads and riverways.
Pvt. Martin H. Johnston died in September 1862 in the Little Rock area.
“In 1862, H.H. Johnston, my wife’s great-great-great-grandfather, walked from Fort Worth, Texas, to Little Rock. That is 321 miles straight-line, 353 miles by today’s highway.”
I was wrong. It was Pvt. M.H. Johnston, 10th Texas Infantry, and he did not walk from near Fort Worth to Little Rock. Johnston was from the Parker County/Tarrant County area when he enlisted in Co. E, 10th Texas. Co. E walked from the enlistment area to Millican, Texas, in Brazos County and then to Shreveport, La. From Shreveport, the regiment traveled “by water to their destination.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20070312033104/http://members.aol.com/SMckay1234/campnelson.htm
I assume the water route was down the Red River to the Mississippi and then to the Arkansas River and upstream to the Little Rock area. That’s just a guess, though, based on today’s roads and riverways.
Pvt. Martin H. Johnston died in September 1862 in the Little Rock area.
The last war veterans
In The Guns at Last Light, Rick Atkinison says: “Of the 16,112,566 Americans in uniform during the Second World War, the number still living was expected to decline to one million by late 2014, and, a decade later, 2024, to dip below a hundred thousand. By the year 2036, U.S. government demographers estimated, fewer than four hundred would remain alive, less than half the strength of an infantry battalion.”
I wondered, when did the last veterans of the Civil War, Spanish-American War and World War I die?
I thought the answers would be clear. I thought wrong.
“Last Union veteran, Albert Woolson, died 8/2/56, age 109.
“The last authenticated Confederate veteran was Pleasant Crump, who was 104 when he died on December 31, 1951.
“There is controversy over the Confederate one but Mr. Crump is the ONLY one whos (sic) age AND participation in the war are confirmable.”
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/137887#ixzz2j30Wjep8
But, see the monument for “Walter Washington Williams who was recognized by the government of the United States as the last surviving Confederate Veteran died 1959 at the age of 117 years.”
http://www.confederatedigest.com/2010/08/walter-washington-williams-last.html
Now, those folks who insist on paper documentation, are they saying Johnny Horton was a liar when he wrote the song for Mr. Williams?
“You fought all the way Johnny Reb, Johnny Reb,
“You fought all the way Johnny Reb.”
The last Spanish-American War veteran was Nathan Edward Cook, Navy, who died in 1992, or maybe Jones Morgan, 9th Cavalry, who died in 1993.
http://genealogytrails.com/main/lastveteranobits.html#morgan
Frank Buckles, corporal, World War I, and captured in the Philippines in 1942, died in February 2011. He was 110. No one questions Mr. Buckles. Not yet, anyway.
I remember newspaper and TV stories about Walter Washington Williams, and at the time (1959), no one challenged the old man.
But today, given the great number of phony Vietnam veterans and SEALs and Army Special Forces and Army Rangers … Sometimes, you just don’t know.
I wondered, when did the last veterans of the Civil War, Spanish-American War and World War I die?
I thought the answers would be clear. I thought wrong.
“Last Union veteran, Albert Woolson, died 8/2/56, age 109.
“The last authenticated Confederate veteran was Pleasant Crump, who was 104 when he died on December 31, 1951.
“There is controversy over the Confederate one but Mr. Crump is the ONLY one whos (sic) age AND participation in the war are confirmable.”
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/137887#ixzz2j30Wjep8
But, see the monument for “Walter Washington Williams who was recognized by the government of the United States as the last surviving Confederate Veteran died 1959 at the age of 117 years.”
http://www.confederatedigest.com/2010/08/walter-washington-williams-last.html
Now, those folks who insist on paper documentation, are they saying Johnny Horton was a liar when he wrote the song for Mr. Williams?
“You fought all the way Johnny Reb, Johnny Reb,
“You fought all the way Johnny Reb.”
The last Spanish-American War veteran was Nathan Edward Cook, Navy, who died in 1992, or maybe Jones Morgan, 9th Cavalry, who died in 1993.
http://genealogytrails.com/main/lastveteranobits.html#morgan
Frank Buckles, corporal, World War I, and captured in the Philippines in 1942, died in February 2011. He was 110. No one questions Mr. Buckles. Not yet, anyway.
I remember newspaper and TV stories about Walter Washington Williams, and at the time (1959), no one challenged the old man.
But today, given the great number of phony Vietnam veterans and SEALs and Army Special Forces and Army Rangers … Sometimes, you just don’t know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
