The news media is all a buzz about encrypted communications in the wake of the Paris terrorist attacks. I've seen multiple segments on it, and have heard about "going dark" on NPR on my ride home yesterday. Most news outlets (sans the New York Times) have been careful to note that the jury is still out on whether or not the Paris terrorists actually used any encrypted communications to plan and/or execute their attacks. However, they breathlessly listen to law enforcement or intelligence agency wonks on how they MUST have used encrypted communications in these attacks because the French and US intelligence agencies didn't hear a whisper about the attacks before they happened.
First, let's acknowledge that encryption is nothing new. PGP encryption was first published in 1991 by Phil Zimmerman. Sure, it was a bit cumbersome to use, what with all those encryption keys and digital certificates. But if you wanted to communicate securely without the government being able to listen in, you have been able to do that for the past 25 years.
Leaving the history aside, let's consider two scenarios. The first is that the terrorists have finally embraced this 25 year old technology to be able to communicate in a way that the law enforcement/intelligency agencies (LE/IA) types are now saying they are doing. The second scenario is that the LE/IA wonks fell down on the job and mucked this one up good. Now, considering the two scenarios, which do you think is more likely?
But that isn't my main point here. The bottom line is that either way, THEY DID THIS TO THEMSELVES. Either they were grossly incompetent, which proves my point above sufficiently, or they created the situation with encryption themselves!
Let's assume that the terrorists are using encryption, or at the very least, will use it going forward given how "scared" our LE/IA wonks are of it. Why is encryption so easy to use now?
Well, once upon a time, it was easy to listen in on secure communications. The feds required telecoms to help them do it. They co-located listening devices in all the switching centers the telcos had. They required the telcos to make modifications to their equipment so it would be easier to let the government listen in. When emails and IM came on the scene, the LE/IA types required the same thing of Internet Service Providers (ISP). Then they did the same thing, or at least tried to, with the cell phone service providers, AND the cell phone manufacturers.
They asked for, and got, kangaroo courts (I'm looking at you, FISA) where secret search warrants were issued to all of these players. And they had to spend more and more of their time servicing these warrants, which allowed the LE/IA types to suck up all kinds of data and metadata on who was communicating with who, and where possible, what they were saying. The CIA invented CARNIVORE and other software that would allow LE/IA to search huge databases of information instantly.
As the stories about these things broke, via Wikileaks and the various "traitors" who divulged the types of information being collected, people started demanding more and more secure communications. Worse, computer and cell phone companies began making their products encrypted as well, and even worse than that, they took themselves out of the business of having to service these warrants and such by not keeping the keys to their customer's data. It made sense... these companies were increasingly having to comply with more and more onerous demands of the LE/IA establishment, they could get out of it by not being physically able to do their bidding. This would allow them to "stick to their knitting" rather become an arm of the LE/IA cabal.
So now these whiny LE/IA types are all over the news, complaining that this "evil" encryption thingy is stopping them from preventing TERRORISM. It's all a ploy to get the government back into the business of your cell phone manufacturer, your cell phone service provider, your computer, which you pay for with YOUR money. Their target is your fear, they want you to want what they want, which is unfettered access to your private communications.
Don't fall for it.
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Friday, September 25, 2015
Rantings and Ravings
So I have a few rants and raves to share... hope you enjoy!
The Pope: The Pope seems like a good man, but frankly, I've had enough of his visit at this point. All channels seem to have changed to "The Pope" channel, all the news is about the Pope, whether he is a lefty or righty, when he arrives, when he departs, what he said here and there. I'm pooped!
Very soon is Back to the Future day. October 21, 2015 is the date that Marty McFly goes into the future, and we get to see Robert Zemenkis' promises for the future. So... where is my Hoverboard? Where are my self tying sneakers? And where is my damn FLYING CAR! I want my flying car! I was promised one from multiple people. Robert! Get me my flying car!
Donald Trump. 'Nuff said.
Yesterday I found a bunch of deleted Hillary Clinton emails in the archive folder of my email client at work. They were a good read. You should see what she says about Bill behind his back!
Speaking of my work email client... I'm only allotted 5GB of space for my work emails. That might sound like a lot, but I have lots of emails that are larger than 5MB... the biggest one is over 50MB. So I have to spend a lot of time archiving old emails and deleting them from my client. It is a total waste of time. But here is the kicker... I'm currently using about 4GB of 15GB that Google gives me FOR FREE. I've never deleted an email from my personal account because I never go above 20% used. How is it I can get 15GB free, but work gives me one third of that space???
Why are we bringing back rotaries? People don't know how to use them, are too shy in entering them, and they fail under load.
What's the deal with the new Col. Sanders? First Darryl Hammond is him. Then Norm MacDonald is him. But he talks about being the REAL Colonel, but then fails the lie detector test. Does that mean Darryl Hammond is the real Col. Sanders? Even still... it's funny.
Why is it that Big Brother ends on the same day that Survivor starts? Can I get at least a 2 week break from this nonsense... It's almost as bad as baseball.
That's it for now...
The Pope: The Pope seems like a good man, but frankly, I've had enough of his visit at this point. All channels seem to have changed to "The Pope" channel, all the news is about the Pope, whether he is a lefty or righty, when he arrives, when he departs, what he said here and there. I'm pooped!
Very soon is Back to the Future day. October 21, 2015 is the date that Marty McFly goes into the future, and we get to see Robert Zemenkis' promises for the future. So... where is my Hoverboard? Where are my self tying sneakers? And where is my damn FLYING CAR! I want my flying car! I was promised one from multiple people. Robert! Get me my flying car!
Donald Trump. 'Nuff said.
Yesterday I found a bunch of deleted Hillary Clinton emails in the archive folder of my email client at work. They were a good read. You should see what she says about Bill behind his back!
Speaking of my work email client... I'm only allotted 5GB of space for my work emails. That might sound like a lot, but I have lots of emails that are larger than 5MB... the biggest one is over 50MB. So I have to spend a lot of time archiving old emails and deleting them from my client. It is a total waste of time. But here is the kicker... I'm currently using about 4GB of 15GB that Google gives me FOR FREE. I've never deleted an email from my personal account because I never go above 20% used. How is it I can get 15GB free, but work gives me one third of that space???
Why are we bringing back rotaries? People don't know how to use them, are too shy in entering them, and they fail under load.
What's the deal with the new Col. Sanders? First Darryl Hammond is him. Then Norm MacDonald is him. But he talks about being the REAL Colonel, but then fails the lie detector test. Does that mean Darryl Hammond is the real Col. Sanders? Even still... it's funny.
Why is it that Big Brother ends on the same day that Survivor starts? Can I get at least a 2 week break from this nonsense... It's almost as bad as baseball.
That's it for now...
Friday, July 24, 2015
Everybody's Favorite Subject: Abortion
Abortion is probably the most polarizing issue in our political landscape. This was masterfully represented in a Seinfeld episode, where various characters, including pizza makers, boyfriends, and customers in a restaurant all get hot and bothered by the issue. Seinfeld himself instigated most of the consternation by bring the topic up, knowing full well that there is seemingly no middle ground on the issue.
Well, I occupy that middle ground. And I think a lot of people do, just like me. So what am I? I'm Pro Choice. I'm also Pro Life. That's the way I see myself on the issue. But the Pro-lifers would never have me, nor would the Pro-choicers either.
See, for me, I'm Pro Life, because I think that at some point, that zygote/fetus/whatever becomes a human being with human rights. Example: I find partial birth abortion abhorrent, and I have not heard of any evidence that suggests that the procedure is needed other than for the mother to be free of the baby - yes BABY - at that point. This nonsense about this being a decision between a woman and her doctor is just that - nonsense. In such a case, they are leaving the unborn baby's rights out of the picture.
On the other hand, I'm Pro Choice, because I can't agree that "life" begins at conception. I don't believe that a 4 or 8 or 4096 celled zygote is a human life, any more than a billion cell cancer tumor is. Example: a morning after pill that prevents a fertilized egg from implanting is not much different than a fertilized egg not implanting and being removed from the body by the, forgive the expression, monthly wash.
As a result, neither the Pro Life nor the Pro Choice movements would claim me as a member. No "Pro" group speaks for me.
Of course, these are the ends of the spectrum. The hard part is where to draw the line in the middle somewhere. Our courts have used "viability" as the yard stick, and I think that is a good start. However, medical advances continue to pare down the number of weeks viability "happens" and certainly, late term abortions happen with viability a receding dot in the rear view mirror. I've been told that 20 weeks is possible. 24 weeks is almost assuredly viability with the correct natal care. And none of this takes into account the mother's responsibility in this regard... is 4-5 months enough time to give the mother the chance to decide whether she wants an abortion? Is 8 months enough? How about 9?
But here is the critical point I want to speak to today. I've shown that both groups are extremists. Pro Choice people want unrestricted abortion, and would prefer to make it available on demand, and at government expense. Pro Life people want nothing to stop a pregnancy, not even an RU486 pill, and will coerce, or kill, medical providers that offer them. Rereading that, I realize I really don't want to be a part of either of those groups!
However, Pro Lifers have become much more clever. Instead of killing abortion doctors and giving public sympathy to the Pro Choice folks, they have hired actors and bought hidden cameras to expose the excesses of the Pro Choice crowd. Namely Planned Parenthood. They've show horrific video of the "behind the scenes" activities of Planned Parenthood. Public sympathy is with the Pro Lifers today.
Beware Pro Choice movement! The excesses are what will destroy you. Remember ACORN? If Planned Parenthood doesn't get its act together, and fast, they will end up in the same place.
I have been a Planned Parenthood supporter in the past. They provide contraception for young people so they DON'T get pregnant. They provide breast cancer screening. They provide STD services. I really don't want to see them go down the tubes. On the other hand, I've had to hold my nose on the abortions they perform. Partial Birth abortions are called "Late Term Abortions" by PP. Here's what a "Late Term Abortion" means: A baby is delivered vaginally until the head is outside the mother's body. The baby's head is then opened surgically and their brains are removed. This effectively kills the baby. The corpse is then delivered naturally, and discarded. I'm sorry to have to call it what it is, that that is it in a nutshell. Barbaric. The type of thing Dr. Mengle would have though of.
So I want to help because I think Planned Parenthood could continue its work and even continue to do abortions if it simply did the following:
And even with all this sound advice, I don't expect the Pro Life movement to thank me, much less invite me to join their ranks. I have no doubt I'm an apostate to them.
Well, I occupy that middle ground. And I think a lot of people do, just like me. So what am I? I'm Pro Choice. I'm also Pro Life. That's the way I see myself on the issue. But the Pro-lifers would never have me, nor would the Pro-choicers either.
See, for me, I'm Pro Life, because I think that at some point, that zygote/fetus/whatever becomes a human being with human rights. Example: I find partial birth abortion abhorrent, and I have not heard of any evidence that suggests that the procedure is needed other than for the mother to be free of the baby - yes BABY - at that point. This nonsense about this being a decision between a woman and her doctor is just that - nonsense. In such a case, they are leaving the unborn baby's rights out of the picture.
On the other hand, I'm Pro Choice, because I can't agree that "life" begins at conception. I don't believe that a 4 or 8 or 4096 celled zygote is a human life, any more than a billion cell cancer tumor is. Example: a morning after pill that prevents a fertilized egg from implanting is not much different than a fertilized egg not implanting and being removed from the body by the, forgive the expression, monthly wash.
As a result, neither the Pro Life nor the Pro Choice movements would claim me as a member. No "Pro" group speaks for me.
Of course, these are the ends of the spectrum. The hard part is where to draw the line in the middle somewhere. Our courts have used "viability" as the yard stick, and I think that is a good start. However, medical advances continue to pare down the number of weeks viability "happens" and certainly, late term abortions happen with viability a receding dot in the rear view mirror. I've been told that 20 weeks is possible. 24 weeks is almost assuredly viability with the correct natal care. And none of this takes into account the mother's responsibility in this regard... is 4-5 months enough time to give the mother the chance to decide whether she wants an abortion? Is 8 months enough? How about 9?
But here is the critical point I want to speak to today. I've shown that both groups are extremists. Pro Choice people want unrestricted abortion, and would prefer to make it available on demand, and at government expense. Pro Life people want nothing to stop a pregnancy, not even an RU486 pill, and will coerce, or kill, medical providers that offer them. Rereading that, I realize I really don't want to be a part of either of those groups!
However, Pro Lifers have become much more clever. Instead of killing abortion doctors and giving public sympathy to the Pro Choice folks, they have hired actors and bought hidden cameras to expose the excesses of the Pro Choice crowd. Namely Planned Parenthood. They've show horrific video of the "behind the scenes" activities of Planned Parenthood. Public sympathy is with the Pro Lifers today.
Beware Pro Choice movement! The excesses are what will destroy you. Remember ACORN? If Planned Parenthood doesn't get its act together, and fast, they will end up in the same place.
I have been a Planned Parenthood supporter in the past. They provide contraception for young people so they DON'T get pregnant. They provide breast cancer screening. They provide STD services. I really don't want to see them go down the tubes. On the other hand, I've had to hold my nose on the abortions they perform. Partial Birth abortions are called "Late Term Abortions" by PP. Here's what a "Late Term Abortion" means: A baby is delivered vaginally until the head is outside the mother's body. The baby's head is then opened surgically and their brains are removed. This effectively kills the baby. The corpse is then delivered naturally, and discarded. I'm sorry to have to call it what it is, that that is it in a nutshell. Barbaric. The type of thing Dr. Mengle would have though of.
So I want to help because I think Planned Parenthood could continue its work and even continue to do abortions if it simply did the following:
- Fire the people on the videos. They will find other jobs.
- Change their abortion practices to declare that they will not perform "late term abortions"
- Offer to refer patients who wish to have one to a qualified medical professional, not affiliated with Planned Parenthood
- Provide counseling services - discuss adoption, and other possible courses of action that might meet the patient's needs
- Refer them to service providers based on their feedback
- Limit political coordination with the Pro Life movement
- Limit their body parts business to early and middle term abortions, and to only donate what naturally becomes available, rather than customizing abortion procedures to recipient desires
And even with all this sound advice, I don't expect the Pro Life movement to thank me, much less invite me to join their ranks. I have no doubt I'm an apostate to them.
Thursday, June 11, 2015
Dan... What Can I Say?
Where do I start? I guess I'll start with Dan Malloy himself...
Dan, when you first ran for Governor, I listened to you on NPR. My thoughts at the time were that you were saying mostly the right things, and it seemed for the right reasons. You had been Mayor of Stamford, and I thought that perhaps during your tenure there, you might have been listening to, perhaps even understanding the business community. Your priorities seemed right. The only thing you had going against you was that you were a Democrat, and that brought up the question of whether or not I could trust you.
Could I trust you to keep the well-being of Connecticut as a whole as your main priority, or would you fall into the trap of becoming a pawn of the unions, particularly the government employee unions? You seemed sincere about the former, and I had hopes that the latter would not come to pass. I didn't vote for you, I'll say that up front. But I didn't vote for your opponent either. I knew that you would win, as the Republicans had become a hollowed out shell, that could not mount a serious competitor for Governor. So I crossed my fingers, and hoped.
Those hopes were soon dashed. Leaving aside the asinine stance and process that took many of our 2nd Amendment rights from us, you went on to pass the largest tax increase in Connecticut history. Most of this money went for government employee compensation, thus cementing your base - dare I say, your constituents. Good people in the state rolled their eyes and thought of the cliche that you just validated. $2.5 BILLION. A lot of scratch.
Then you had to run for reelection. Many of my friends could not conceive of you actually being reelected after such actions. They thought that you had handed the Governorship over to the Republicans. Many were conservatives and independents. Some where Democrats. I told them all the same thing. Watch. Just wait and see.
You then promised not to raise taxes again. And this time, the Republicans put a serious candidate up against you. The race was close, and I dare say that some of the votes you got were from people who believed (or at least, wanted to believe) your campaign promise of not raising taxes again. But your base was cemented in your favor. Exactly one person knocked on my door asking me to vote for you. He was wearing a union t-shirt. I asked him if any union might support the other guy. He told me that all the unions were supporting you. So I took the literature, thanked the man for stopping by, and then threw your pamphlets in the trash.
Now here we are in 2015, and the General Assembly has passed a $1.5 BILLION tax increase. You have not yet signed the bill. However, you've said two things. One is that you'll probably sign it. The other is that you didn't break your campaign promise because you proposed a budget that would not have raised taxes. Unfortunately, if you do sign this bill, you will have raised taxes and you can't palm off that broken promise on Republicans, or a Democratically controlled General Assembly. It's crunch time, Dan. And we both know what you're going to do.
Now there is a big dust up because GE is looking at leaving the state. Aetna and Travelers are also thinking in those terms. And your comment for them is that you're not aware of any significant taxes that GE has paid to the state. Or did you word that such that it only looks at the income taxes that they paid? Either way, apparently the sales taxes they paid on data processing services, which at least doubles in this proposed budget, doesn't count. Apparently property taxes GE pays to Fairfield doesn't count either. Nor do the income taxes that the highly compensated employees of GE pay. I could go on and on... the State imposes a myriad of taxes and GE pays many of them, and has done so for years. And your response is a cynical one, essentially an argument that GE was planning on moving its headquarters anyway, and that this is all cover for that. Sure Dan, the grapes were probably sour anyway. Of course, that doesn't explain why GE wouldn't just stay silent through this process, and just move their HQ anyway... what incentive do they have for taking the shot at you? All agree that the CEO of GE typically does not make statements like these. So something motivated him. Occums Razor: The simplest answer is usually the right one.
You'll tell me that this budget is good for me. Like the half percent of sales tax revenue going to my town. Sure... that's great. Will my property taxes go down? Please. They will spend it just like the state does. And they will sell the increase as something like "boy, it would have been bigger if not for the sales tax money." You'll tell me the infrastructure improvements will benefit me. Sure. Like I hadn't been paying that all along with some of the countries largest gas taxes, most of which got swept into the general fund when politicos like you and your friends in the GA couldn't bring yourselves to lay off a single employee. Hey, I get it. You can't fire your constituents!
Dan, I'm not a CEO. I'm not a government employee and I don't pay union dues. I am a middle manager in an insurance company not named above. I make a good living. I pay more than my fair share of taxes. But I'm not rich, or at least, not by rich people's standards. I have lived in Connecticut my whole life. My late brother did as well. Our parents were transplants but made a home for themselves here. I have two girls, one who attends Uconn and is studying to be a teacher, like her mom. She doesn't intend to settle in Connecticut. My other daughter is about to start at UHart, and she doesn't intend to settle here either. I work in Hartford, and I will be continuing to do so as long as it takes to get my kids on their way. I'm paying for their education, but alas, I get nothing from either the Federal or State governments in terms of help in affording it. I've tried to be a good citizen. I am an Eagle Scout. I have volunteered my time in Scouting for over 30 years now. I served for 9 years on my local Board of Education. I raised my children to honorable adulthood. Why tell you all this?
Dan, I'm tired. I'm tired of our state deciding what I am allowed to do and what I'm not allowed to do. Every time I turn around, the GA is meddling in my affairs. I'm tired of paying higher and higher taxes. I'm tired of a state run by people who apparently laugh off major corporate flight, while giving welfare to other companies at the same time. I'm tired of watching my state's anemic growth while thumbing their nose at corporations that might help turn that around and see Connecticut become an economic powerhouse. I'm tired of watching huge tax increases, while my children's mother's pension is funded at the lowest levels in the nation. In short, I'm tired of living in this state. I want to leave, but can't do so for another 5 years. So I'm stuck here. Made my bed, so to speak.
Dan, perhaps you'll be able to convince people that you won't raise taxes during your next campaign. Me? I'm a fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me kind of guy. But it is increasingly clear to me that Connecticut either doesn't know, or doesn't care about that old adage. Either way is fine with me. The state is in a death spiral, but we won't auger in for at least 5 years. I mean, hey, it is a nice place to live. So is Hawaii. But both places are too damn expensive. So I'll endure the worker's paradise for a while longer, and then I'll sell the house, pack up my guns, and get the hell out of Dodge. Where will I go? Someplace warmer, where the politicians haven't yet gone insane. I'll probably try and spend summer in New Hampshire. Love the Live Free Or Die state. Love the notion of the guy who stamps those out, day after day, behind bars. We could be like them, you know. Nah... forget it. Your constituents wouldn't like that.
Anyway, that's the score, Dan. You can just chalk me up as someone who was gonna leave anyway (I wasn't) and that I taste just like those GE sour grapes. Connecticut will be better off without me. Who needs people like me anyway?
Dan, when you first ran for Governor, I listened to you on NPR. My thoughts at the time were that you were saying mostly the right things, and it seemed for the right reasons. You had been Mayor of Stamford, and I thought that perhaps during your tenure there, you might have been listening to, perhaps even understanding the business community. Your priorities seemed right. The only thing you had going against you was that you were a Democrat, and that brought up the question of whether or not I could trust you.
Could I trust you to keep the well-being of Connecticut as a whole as your main priority, or would you fall into the trap of becoming a pawn of the unions, particularly the government employee unions? You seemed sincere about the former, and I had hopes that the latter would not come to pass. I didn't vote for you, I'll say that up front. But I didn't vote for your opponent either. I knew that you would win, as the Republicans had become a hollowed out shell, that could not mount a serious competitor for Governor. So I crossed my fingers, and hoped.
Those hopes were soon dashed. Leaving aside the asinine stance and process that took many of our 2nd Amendment rights from us, you went on to pass the largest tax increase in Connecticut history. Most of this money went for government employee compensation, thus cementing your base - dare I say, your constituents. Good people in the state rolled their eyes and thought of the cliche that you just validated. $2.5 BILLION. A lot of scratch.
Then you had to run for reelection. Many of my friends could not conceive of you actually being reelected after such actions. They thought that you had handed the Governorship over to the Republicans. Many were conservatives and independents. Some where Democrats. I told them all the same thing. Watch. Just wait and see.
You then promised not to raise taxes again. And this time, the Republicans put a serious candidate up against you. The race was close, and I dare say that some of the votes you got were from people who believed (or at least, wanted to believe) your campaign promise of not raising taxes again. But your base was cemented in your favor. Exactly one person knocked on my door asking me to vote for you. He was wearing a union t-shirt. I asked him if any union might support the other guy. He told me that all the unions were supporting you. So I took the literature, thanked the man for stopping by, and then threw your pamphlets in the trash.
Now here we are in 2015, and the General Assembly has passed a $1.5 BILLION tax increase. You have not yet signed the bill. However, you've said two things. One is that you'll probably sign it. The other is that you didn't break your campaign promise because you proposed a budget that would not have raised taxes. Unfortunately, if you do sign this bill, you will have raised taxes and you can't palm off that broken promise on Republicans, or a Democratically controlled General Assembly. It's crunch time, Dan. And we both know what you're going to do.
Now there is a big dust up because GE is looking at leaving the state. Aetna and Travelers are also thinking in those terms. And your comment for them is that you're not aware of any significant taxes that GE has paid to the state. Or did you word that such that it only looks at the income taxes that they paid? Either way, apparently the sales taxes they paid on data processing services, which at least doubles in this proposed budget, doesn't count. Apparently property taxes GE pays to Fairfield doesn't count either. Nor do the income taxes that the highly compensated employees of GE pay. I could go on and on... the State imposes a myriad of taxes and GE pays many of them, and has done so for years. And your response is a cynical one, essentially an argument that GE was planning on moving its headquarters anyway, and that this is all cover for that. Sure Dan, the grapes were probably sour anyway. Of course, that doesn't explain why GE wouldn't just stay silent through this process, and just move their HQ anyway... what incentive do they have for taking the shot at you? All agree that the CEO of GE typically does not make statements like these. So something motivated him. Occums Razor: The simplest answer is usually the right one.
You'll tell me that this budget is good for me. Like the half percent of sales tax revenue going to my town. Sure... that's great. Will my property taxes go down? Please. They will spend it just like the state does. And they will sell the increase as something like "boy, it would have been bigger if not for the sales tax money." You'll tell me the infrastructure improvements will benefit me. Sure. Like I hadn't been paying that all along with some of the countries largest gas taxes, most of which got swept into the general fund when politicos like you and your friends in the GA couldn't bring yourselves to lay off a single employee. Hey, I get it. You can't fire your constituents!
Dan, I'm not a CEO. I'm not a government employee and I don't pay union dues. I am a middle manager in an insurance company not named above. I make a good living. I pay more than my fair share of taxes. But I'm not rich, or at least, not by rich people's standards. I have lived in Connecticut my whole life. My late brother did as well. Our parents were transplants but made a home for themselves here. I have two girls, one who attends Uconn and is studying to be a teacher, like her mom. She doesn't intend to settle in Connecticut. My other daughter is about to start at UHart, and she doesn't intend to settle here either. I work in Hartford, and I will be continuing to do so as long as it takes to get my kids on their way. I'm paying for their education, but alas, I get nothing from either the Federal or State governments in terms of help in affording it. I've tried to be a good citizen. I am an Eagle Scout. I have volunteered my time in Scouting for over 30 years now. I served for 9 years on my local Board of Education. I raised my children to honorable adulthood. Why tell you all this?
Dan, I'm tired. I'm tired of our state deciding what I am allowed to do and what I'm not allowed to do. Every time I turn around, the GA is meddling in my affairs. I'm tired of paying higher and higher taxes. I'm tired of a state run by people who apparently laugh off major corporate flight, while giving welfare to other companies at the same time. I'm tired of watching my state's anemic growth while thumbing their nose at corporations that might help turn that around and see Connecticut become an economic powerhouse. I'm tired of watching huge tax increases, while my children's mother's pension is funded at the lowest levels in the nation. In short, I'm tired of living in this state. I want to leave, but can't do so for another 5 years. So I'm stuck here. Made my bed, so to speak.
Dan, perhaps you'll be able to convince people that you won't raise taxes during your next campaign. Me? I'm a fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me kind of guy. But it is increasingly clear to me that Connecticut either doesn't know, or doesn't care about that old adage. Either way is fine with me. The state is in a death spiral, but we won't auger in for at least 5 years. I mean, hey, it is a nice place to live. So is Hawaii. But both places are too damn expensive. So I'll endure the worker's paradise for a while longer, and then I'll sell the house, pack up my guns, and get the hell out of Dodge. Where will I go? Someplace warmer, where the politicians haven't yet gone insane. I'll probably try and spend summer in New Hampshire. Love the Live Free Or Die state. Love the notion of the guy who stamps those out, day after day, behind bars. We could be like them, you know. Nah... forget it. Your constituents wouldn't like that.
Anyway, that's the score, Dan. You can just chalk me up as someone who was gonna leave anyway (I wasn't) and that I taste just like those GE sour grapes. Connecticut will be better off without me. Who needs people like me anyway?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)