I wrote this message before leaving and set a delayed publish date. By now I should be at my destination enjoying the sunshine.

(more…)

A few moments ago I witnessed stupidity on television. The local news was coving a story about the smoking ban in Monona. The Mayor of Monona agreed to a compromise with a special interest group about moving up the start date of the smoking ban. A committee and the council must approve the compromise however. A woman from the special interest group, Breath Free Monona, was interviewed about the compromise. She talked about children with asthma and said that the current ban start date of 2010 was too far away. Congratulations for being a total idiot. This is a smoking ban in bars. What does that have to do with children? I’m absolutely against the smoking ban, but I don’t make up crap ass reasons why. I believe in property rights and a smoking ban infringes on those rights. What next, a law banning the use of ground beef that has more than 10% fat at restaurants because fatty diets may lead to heart disease?

If you don’t like smoking, then don’t go places that have smoking. There were non-smoking bars in Madison before the ban. Some tried operating as non-smoking, but couldn’t get enough business and decided to allow smoking in order to stay in business. The anti-smoking groups claimed that many people avoided the bars due to smoking and if smoking were banned, business would increase. We now have a ban and that didn’t happen. Interestingly though, anti-smoking groups are running advertisements in cities without smoking bans that claim the ban in Madison has been a huge success for business. The anti-smoking groups use creative statistical interpretation of liquor license applications and some other select factors because not many bar owners or employees support those claims. I was at a bar for lunch earlier this month and the bar owner was being interviewed for a different reason, but they asked him how the ban has impacted his business. He said he’s seen a major decrease in business. I have no reason to doubt him since other than the two people that came with me, there was one other customer. Face the fact that the vast majority of people that enjoy going to bars also enjoy smoking. Most of the bars that have benefited from the ban are either outside the city limits or have dining areas that appeal to families. The straight up average neighborhood bars with menus the size of a napkin has been severely hurt.

Instead of a smoking ban, a program should have created to give incentives to non-smoking establishments. I have no problem with that. I believe in the free market, but sometimes there need to be minor government interventions to make it profitable for businesses to market a product that appeals to a minority of consumers. It’s too late for that of course. The anti-smoking groups won and they’ll never compromise. In the end, the bar owners and employees are the one’s that lose. The smokers will either stay home or take their business elsewhere. Either way, the local economy is negatively impacted. The anti-smoking groups don’t care about that though. It is only about anti-smoking and not for the health reasons they claim. They just don’t like smoking. That’s fine, but don’t force your choices upon others, especially when it causes them to lose their business or jobs.

I’m so sick of all these groups that want to regulate exactly how you may live your life, use your property or run a business. What happened to the basic rule that a person has the freedom to do whatever they choose, so long as it does not infringe on another persons rights? We’re turning into a society that is regulating freedom, choice and individuality into extinction.

I’m now down to the last week before I leave. In approximately 172 hours I’ll be on my way. There’s so much left to do. I just need to keep my wits about me so I don’t forget something important. I picked up a supply of tea that should last the duration of the trip. Why am I bringing tea? The coffee at the chow hall is unbearable. It’s most likely Folgers and the person preparing it just knows to put the stuff from the green can in one machine and the red can for the other machine. Fantastic! Going to war is no reason to become a savage. I’m bringing a few selections of black tea and I should be able to arrange some hot water. There has to be at least a microwave. If only I could pack enough food for the duration.

For no reason whatsoever, I bring you The Flight of the Conchords.

These guys are hilarious. And remember, Steve did tell you that.

Lately I’ve been watching a lot of the television show Eli Stone. The show has an interesting concept to say the least. I don’t consider myself spiritual, but I believe there is an unknowable reason why we must be good to each other. It would be nice if we were guided by signs to do what is right, but I don’t believe that happens. You’re left to your own wits to find the way and manage the consequences.

Rumor is the show will be back for a second season. That would be nice, but I hope they refine the writing. The second to last episode was poorly written. They reached too far by having The Big One hit San Francisco, destroying the Golden Gate Bridge. The show was more interesting when he was helping individuals. Saving the city is a storyline for a character that wears a cape and tights.

The first episode I saw nearly turned me off from the series forever. It was the third episode and the premise was stupid. In case you haven’t seen the show, here’s the concept. Eli is guided by visions supposedly from God to use his position as a lawyer to do good and help people. In the third episode, a married woman who is in the National Guard is trying to get sole custody of her son. There’s a bit more storyline, but basically the woman, her husband and son work together to create the perception that while the mother was deployed the father beat the son. This is all for the purpose of her not having to go back to Iraq, because she’s afraid she may die. In the end the father is arrested and presumably goes to prison for child abuse. Eli figures out the scheme after he wins full custody for the mother and asks her why they did this. Their rationale is that the father will get out of prison, but she may never come back from Iraq.

I understand the writers are basically protesting the war in Iraq, but if you’re writing a legal drama/comedy, get the law straight. She didn’t have to go back and she didn’t need to use some scheme to avoid her sworn obligation. She could have chose to disobey orders. No member of the military can be forced to deploy. There is a choice and with each choice comes consequences. She chose the dishonest choice. If she didn’t want to go back, she should have refused and she’d be court-martialed. She would likely serve time in prison, but the alternative the writers concocted resulted in the father wrongfully going to prison. If the show is going to based upon doing good and “the right thing”, why have a storyline that is based upon sanctifying dishonest actions?

By chance I was flipping through channels one day and caught another episode that was much better. It’s pathetic when writers get so focused on sending a message that they lose sight of the concept or make wild leaps beyond fact.