A Potpourri Of Things

Wow, the start of 2007 has been a busy one for me, both professionally and personally. I haven't had time to even read in detail other blogs, let alone adding to mine. And by the time I thought about writing something, someone already beat me to the punch, and no one probably wants to read rehashed and regurgitate comments. My apologies to any faithful readers out there.

Last December Scott O'Brien suggested that for new years resolutions, Willy Nilly, Polly Peoria as well as myself should post more often. I kind of wanted to do the same and placed it as a pseudo-resolution (I never make resolutions because I'll never follow through). Current events had other plans for me.

I took today off in response to the winter weather we're getting and have some time to make an overdue post.


District 150
Do I have this straight? The district can find almost $900,000 to purchase a number of houses at a premium, without the knowledge of the public and other authorities to pursue building what is essentially an unpopular school. The district can find money within it's strained budget to provide a pay raise for the already 6-digit earning administrators and board members, yet, there is absolutely no money for to offer a rightful pay raise for teachers and educators. No wonder School District 150 is in such sorry shape and that people are racing for Dunlap and Germantown Hills.


The Grammys
Or should we call it The Justin Timberlake Show? I always thought the Grammys were irreverent. Sunday night's show proved it! The long-running award show really cheapened itself by holding a contest of who will sing along side Justin Timberlake. What is this, Grammy Idol? I have to admit, the girl who won this contest probably has more talent than Timberlake.

And it's interesting that there are very few people over the age of 45 in the place. I think these awards are voted upon like that of a high school popularity contest; it's whoever is "in" nowadays. When acts such as Debby Boone ("You Light Up My Life") and Milli Vanilli win over the likes of Bob Dylan, Led Zepplin or The Eagles, you know something's wrong. If I was in the business, I think I'd try to avoid winning a Grammy.


Global Warming
I think this topic is the most discussed, reported-on item recently. Many scientists claim they are 90% sure that mankind is mainly responsible for the build up of greenhouse gases which is causing the Earth to warm. You couldn't tell that today, or yesterday, or the day before that, etc.

Scientists are 90% sure; I've been 100% sure of somethings in the past and found I was 100% wrong. The Earth has been here for 4 billion years. We have roughly 120-130 years of data and research in constructing climate patterns well before that. Simply put, there's not enough data to make a solid conclusion. I would like to know where the grant money is coming from to those scientists, regardless of their conclusions. That will tell you something about what they are claiming.

I believe we need to wean ourselves off of oil and start developing clean, renewable energies. What we are doing is not good for the environment and we are contributing to the problem, regardless if mankind is mainly to blame or not.

I would commend Al Gore for bringing this problem to the attention our leaders and the public. But he stops just short of outright blaming Republicans and the wealthy for it. This is a people problem. Every person has wants and needs. They need to make a living, get to work or school, provide for their children, ect. Multiply that by 5 billion people, you got problems. It's interesting that the US is blamed the most for global warming, yet you never hear any outrage over places like China and India, countries each with a billion people, and have no laws or regulations on the output of pollution and greenhouse gases. It's said that Beijing and other populations in China are filled with smog so think at times that visibility is perhaps one city block.


Smoking Bans
From what I've seen in the Forum section of the Journal Star, it appears there are more people against a smoking ban than those who are for it. I read somewhere of one person's take on the situation, which make the most sense; mandate that businesses put up a sign of either "Smoking Allowed" or "No Smoking" and let the customer and business owner decide instead of the government. Finally, someone with some common sense!!!

Realistically, you have a tavern where the regular crowd all smoke. No non-smokers ever come into the place. The employees all smoke and are not bothered by it. It's very likely that non-smokers will never come into the place, whether there's a smoking ban or not.

Also of note, a large number of Peoria restaurants have already become smoke-free, all without government intervention because the business owner caters to what it's customers want, not what the government orders.

What's next; a smoking ban in your own home? Cut to the chase and make tobacco illegal; oops, the government won't do that as they get too much tax revenue off of tobacco.