Taking stock in my life

Things haven't gone well for me lately, or for some time, whichever way you want to look at it, and I figured I might as well take stock and see what is really going on. Sure, I graduated from law school, but not by the largest of margins at all. I failed the bar, but still passed half of it so I only have to pass the other half. I've got a great job, but its an unbelievably stressful job which pays me nothing in money and everything in satisfaction. Women are all around, but the one I want doesn't quite seem to want to be with me. The Seminoles are having a bad season, but there is hope; the Bucs are having a great season and there is hope for more. My life is definitely not in order, but there seems the possibility that it might in the near future.

I don't have what I want, yet I have mostly what I need. It seems the reoccurring theme here is that things seem that they will come together in the future, but not right now. I'm not satisfied. I know its best that I continually stay hungry to keep that drive within me going, but I don't think I'm getting that little taste to keep me fighting for more. I'm empty, and I'm not quite too pleased about it.

The Scourge of the Pork-Barreler

As the time grows near for the presidential elections, we hear more and more about different issues and the stances that the candidates have on these issues. On such issue that really plagues me is that of pork barreling and the need for the line item veto. I keep hearing different congressmen calling for the need of the line item veto because of the scourge of pork barreling. The funny thing is, its from Congress that we see pork barreling. It is these very congressmen who are passing bills laden with subsidies and grants to create museums honoring the crab grass of western Lechter County, Kentucky.

Yet instead of standing up and fighting this scourge within their own chambers, they are passing the buck to the president. Last time I checked, it was a scary and dangerous thing when one branch of government began delegating and abdicating its responsibilities and giving another branch the power to act upon its own duties. Even when its quite obvious the line item veto is unconstitutional, as the US Supreme Court has ruled.

These congressmen like to point out that practically all the states in the union allow for a line item veto that their governors use, but unfortunately these very congressmen failed civics class. The Federal Constitution is NOT the same as the states' constitutions and therefore what one state does is NOT the same as what the federal government itself can do.

If congressmen are so up in arms with pork barreling, its time to man up, be courageous, and fight back in your own chamber of Congress the way the Founding Fathers dreamed you would. Otherwise, step down from office and let someone with cajones who isn't afraid of saying no take office. The Constitution was created with specific things in mind, and a separation of government was one of those purposes. Congress passes budgets and the president either signs the bill or vetoes the bill. The president does NOT write the bill, and Congress should not be delegating that power to him. Otherwise, Congress will no longer have any real power.

We Closed at 5

An opinion article in the Dallas Morning News from October 2, 2007, addressing the cold hearted, blood thirsty "justice" system in the state of Texas.
Link to the Opinion article

What's 20 minutes to you? Two miles on the expressway during rush hour? Time to slurp a latte on the way back to the office? About the time it takes to scan the newspaper you're reading now? To Michael Richard, 20 minutes was probably the difference between life and death.

The Texas death-row inmate's lawyers petitioned for a stay of execution after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to review the constitutionality of lethal injection. Irving killer Carlton Akee Turner won a last-minute stay from the high court. Mr. Richard's lawyers were working on his petition when their computer crashed. They phoned the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, informed its personnel of the computer problems and asked them to stay open long enough to accept the paperwork.

Forget it, replied the court. Time thus ran out for Mr. Richard, who died on the gurney. A court official later said, "I advised the parties that called that we closed at 5." Just like that.

That is unconscionable.

You might not lose sleep over the fact that the court wouldn't stay open for 20 minutes to help a convicted rapist-murderer's attempt to evade the needle a bit longer. You should think again.

When the state takes the life of a condemned criminal, it must do so with a sense of sobriety commensurate with its grave responsibility. Hastening the death of a man, even a bad one, because office personnel couldn't be bothered to bend bureaucratic procedure was a breathtakingly petty act and evinced a relish for death that makes the blood of decent people run cold.

Link to the opinion article